Mahon Tribunal Transcripts June 2006
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Mahon Tribunal Transcripts June 2006 as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 687,843
- Pages: 2,036
09:54:25
10:36:13
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
2ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
9 10:36:17 10
Mr. Sean Haughey, please.
11 12 13 MR. SEAN HAUGHEY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
14
AS FOLLOWS BY MS DILLON.:
10:36:22 15
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Haughey.
19 10:36:46 20
Q. 1
21
MS. DILLON:
Good morning Mr. Haughey, you are presently a member of the
current Dail; isn't that correct?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 2
And you were previously a member of Dublin County Council and indeed were Lord
24 10:36:55 25
26
Mayor at one stage; isn't that the position? A.
Well, I would say Dublin City Council and I was Lord Mayor of Dublin yes.
Q. 3
You were never a member of Dublin County Council and therefore had no
27
involvement in the planning decisions made in connection with the Cherrywood
28
lands; isn't that the position?
29 10:37:07 30
A.
That's the position.
Q. 4
Now, I think the Tribunal wrote to you on 7th of March 2006. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
At page 1068,
10:37:13
10:37:35
2 1
please.
2
narrative statement from you.
3
matters that you were asked to address included at paragraph 1, any contacts or
4
meetings you had had with any servants or agents of Monarch Properties Limited
5
Monarch Properties Services Limited, or any company in the Monarch group. 2,
6
any contacts or meetings you had with the late Mr. Phil Monahan, Mr. Richard
7
Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeny, Mr. Dominic Linane, Mr. Philip Reilly Mr. Frank Dunlop,
8
or any individual or company associated with Monaghan or the Monarch Group,
9
whether a servant, agent, or otherwise.
10:37:54 10
And the Tribunal asked you a number of questions and sought a And at 1068, please.
You will see that the
3, any payment or benefit you may
have received from, or on behalf of, listed at 1 or 2.
And also any payment
11
or benefit you may have received from Frank Dunlop & Associates or Shefran
12
Limited, when such payments or benefits were made and the reasons therefore.
13
And then you were asked some further questions.
14 10:38:07 15
And I think you provided a reply to the Tribunal.
At page 1070.
16 17
Through your solicitors Frank Ward & Co.
18
had never had any involvement with lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin and
19
therefore I'm not in a position to assist you or provide a statement in the
10:38:25 20
manner as sought.
You advised the Tribunal that you
Isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 5
Now, if we go back to the questions you were asked, Mr. Haughey.
At 1068.
23
And can I ask you, was there any part of that request from the Tribunal that
24
you didn't understand?
10:38:37 25
26
A.
No, I understood the letter.
Q. 6
Yes.
And you note that you were asked to provide details of any payments or
27
benefits you had received from the Monarch Group, or anybody associated with
28
the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
29 10:38:55 30
A.
That's right.
I did consult with my solicitors and the letter that I sent,
dated March 10th, arose out of that.
I understood that any payments made to
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:39:00
10:39:11
3 1
me were sought in the context of rezoning at Cherrywood.
2
misunderstanding.
3
Q. 7
Certainly the letter on its face, Mr. Haughey, is quite clear.
Maybe that was a
You are asked
4
to provide to the Tribunal information in relation to your contacts with
5
certain named people, certain companies and any payments or political donations
6
you might have received from them.
7
A.
That's what's stated in the letter.
Isn't that what's stated in the letter?
To be honest with you, I relied very much
8
on the first paragraph of the letter, where it states, arising out of same the
9
Tribunal now requests you to provide a detailed narrative statement regarding
10:39:30 10
any involvement that you had with the lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin.
11
Once I answered no to that I didn't think that the rest of the letter was
12
relevant to me.
13
Q. 8
You didn't consider then the balance of the request, which stated your
14
statement should include but not be limited to, any contacts you had had with
10:39:45 15
certain people and then in a separate category, any payments or benefits you
16
might have received from companies and parties identified.
17
position?
Is that the
18
A.
That's the position, yes.
19
Q. 9
So that in fact, if the Tribunal had relied upon the letter that you had sent
10:39:58 20
it, at 1070, the Tribunal would have understood from that, that you had no
21
contact with anybody associated with the Monarch Group and that you hadn't
22
received any payments from it them.
23
A.
24
Well I regret that very much.
Isn't that the position?
But as I said, having consulted with my
solicitors and taken legal advice on it, on the basis that I never heard of
10:40:21 25
Cherrywood, I didn't believe the letter in relation to payments by the -- by
26
the Monarch Properties, was relevant to me.
27
for that to the Tribunal.
28 29 10:40:45 30
Q. 10
And I regret that and I apologise
Because the position isn't I think, Mr. Haughey, and you now accept and I believe this morning you have provided supporting documentation, that you did receive payments from the Monarch Group; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:40:47
10:41:10
4 1
A.
2 3
Yes, I have very careful records of all payments received.
So there was
never -Q. 11
I'm going to come to talk to you it about your careful records in a moment.
4
The Tribunal received a letter on 29th of May 2006 from your solicitor, at
5
8496.
6 7
And you will note here, in the second paragraph, where the Tribunal is recorded
8
as outlining through its solicitor to Mr. Liam Guiera, yesterday, three
9
donations which Monarch Properties made to you, namely, June 1989 1,000 pounds.
10:41:21 10
May 1991, 300 pounds.
11
And November 1992, 750 pounds.
My client has checked
his own records and can confirm the same.
12 13
So the sequence of events then Mr. Haughey is as follows.
14
information from the Tribunal.
10:41:38 15
16
You provided no information; isn't that the
position A.
17
No, that's not the position.
I provided information to the effect that I
never had any dealings with Cherrywood.
18
Q. 12
Yes.
19
A.
I misunderstood the second part of your letter.
Q. 13
Yes.
10:41:48 20
21 22 23
You were asked for
But you --
But you did not disclose any payments you received from Monarch
Properties or anybody associated with it isn't that the position? A.
That's the position.
But I understood that that was an order.
Obviously, it
was not.
24 10:42:00 25
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, could you put back up the letter that went to Mr. Haughey.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
Certainly, Sir.
It's at page 1068.
28 29 10:42:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:42:30
10:42:52
5 1
CHAIRMAN:
I just want to read, I think possibly the second paragraph is
2
capable of an interpretation.
3
intention was to get information in relation to payments.
4
people who have received a letter in these terms have responded in that way.
I know this has arisen before.
I know the
And I think most
5 6
But it is possible, I suppose, to interpret the letter as meaning only payments
7
relating to Cherrywood.
8 9
I mean, it's just -- I know that wasn't the intention but it's certainly
10:43:10 10
capable of that interpretation.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
13 14
In any event, at 8496, Mr. Haughey.
10:43:20 15
Your solicitor is informed of the
payments that are contained in the documentation, which with which you've been
16
supplied; isn't that right
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 14
And your solicitor then confirms on your behalf of the receipt of those
19 10:43:30 20
payments by you? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 15
And you indicate in that documentation that you have records isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 16
Now, you have this morning provided records and these are not yet on the
24
system, but they will be in the system.
10:43:43 25
But the 1989 document is headed, list
of subscribers to Sean's election campaign, 1989; isn't that the position?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 17
And identified on that as one of the donaes, is Mr. Philip Monaghan of Monarch
28 29 10:43:55 30
Properties Services Limited. A.
Yes.
Q. 18
Now, I'll hand to the Tribunal a copy of this documentation, because it's not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:43:59
10:44:12
6 1
yet in the system.
(document circulated).
2 3
So you would have had this documentation freely available to you, Mr. Haughey,
4
when you got the original request from the Tribunal; isn't that right?
5
A.
6 7
out. Q. 19
8 9 10:44:29 10
Well if it was in my office certainly yes, it would have taken a bit of rooting I always have them on hand in this Tribunal era.
And in -- certainly for the second payment then in the Local Elections of 1991, you attribute a sum of 300 pounds to Mr. Philip Reilly?
A.
Yes.
Q. 20
He was one of the people, I think that was listed on the original letter that
11
you received.
Yes.
From the Tribunal.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 21
Isn't that right? And I think then also in relation to the third payment which
14
is the election fund in 1992.
10:44:49 15
Again, it's Mr. Philip Monaghan, a sum of 750
pounds.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 22
So you had available to you, when you received the information, the request for
18
information from the Tribunal, documentation that would have confirmed to you
19
that you had been in receipt of payments from named individuals within the
10:45:03 20
21
Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
I had it available to me, but I didn't consult it on the basis that I never had
22
any involvement in Cherrywood.
23
that you -- arising out of subsequent correspondence that you needed further
24
clarification, then I consulted my records.
10:45:20 25
Q. 23
Yes.
It was only when it subsequently became clear
And certainly the documentation that you've been supplied with by the
26
Tribunal.
And indeed, from your own records, record that you did receive
27
1,000 pounds in June of 1989; isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 24
And that that was sent to your brother I think, Mr. Ciaran Haughey.
10:45:41 30
Mr. From Mr. Philip Monaghan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
286 5,
10:45:42
10:45:52
7 1
A.
No, I'm not sure where you got that from.
2
Q. 25
2865?
3
A.
I never saw that document.
4
Q. 26
You have been circulated in the brief of documents which you have been
5 6
circulated? A.
7 8
Unfortunately it's not going to me.
It's going to a relative in error.
Sean
Haughey, of a similar name, I only discovered that this week. Q. 27
9
That's to be regretted. documentation.
10:46:14 10
This letter would have been included in that
If you want to take a moment to consider it.
That was
supplied to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties Services Limited and again
11
confirms from the Monarch Properties side, that a sum of 1,000 pounds was paid
12
to you in June of 1989, which mirrors your own records isn't that right?
13
A.
14 10:46:27 15
Yes, yes, I hadn't realised my brother was involved in the collection of that subscription.
Q. 28
16
But now I accept that, yes.
That would appear to be the position, if this is an accurate record isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, yes.
18
Q. 29
I think in relation to the payment in May of 1991.
19
don't dispute this.
10:46:45 20
It's mirrored in your own records at 3251.
Monarch Properties.
22
3944.
23
beneath -- sorry.
24
Whelan.
26
Sean Haughey 300 pounds.
The fifth
On 19th of November at page -- sorry. 3923.
And I think again in 1992 at
3923.
Just slightly
Just slightly beneath half way under the name Jack
And then beneath that the Barkly Court Senator, Sean Haughey.
A.
Yes.
Q. 30
And I think in fact a copy of that cheque is available at 3946.
27
And that's a
cheque drawn on the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
28
A.
Yes, so all of the records coincide.
29
Q. 31
Yes.
10:47:40 30
Again, you
name down on that list, which is an extract from the cheque payments book from
21
10:47:19 25
At 3251.
And there is a note.
An internal note that you will probably not have
seen, Mr. Haughey, at 3943.
And this appears to be the request for 750
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:47:48
10:48:06
8 1
pounds.
2
Lynn signs that and it appears he is authorising the payment of 750 pounds.
3
Did you know Mr. Richard Lynn?
4
A.
And it's I think it's sanctioned, Sean Haughey, 750 pounds.
No, but I am at a disadvantage here.
5
me.
6
acting for another Sean Haughey.
7
here.
Mr.
In that the documentation never came to
All of this documentation never came to me.
It went to the solicitors
So I'm really, sort of, doing this on spec
No, I never heard of a Mr. Lynn.
8
Q. 32
You didn't deal with Mr. Lynn?
9
A.
No.
10:48:21 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
Mr. Haughey, if you want time to.
I know you
12
are under pressure and the other TDs are under pressure here today.
13
you want time to consider the documentation, that it was intended that you get,
14
that you should get and didn't apparently get.
But if
10:48:39 15
16
You can certainly either stand down briefly and look at it and we'll deal with
17
another short witness.
18
and come back some day next week if that suits you.
19
No, I think it's straight forward enough, I'd like to continue.
Or alternatively, you can look at it over the weekend
10:48:58 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
Thank you.
If you do have a problem we can facilitate you
23 24 10:49:07 25
MS. DILLON:
Would you have met Mr. Philip Reilly?
A.
Not to my knowledge, no.
26
Q. 33
Would you have known or met Mr. Phil Monahan, that's the late Mr. Monahan?
27
A.
I have no recollection of ever meeting him.
28
Q. 34
Do you know in what circumstances Mr. Philip Monaghan became a political
29 10:49:22 30
supporter of your's, Mr. Haughey? A.
I certainly never sought a donation from him personally. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
It's possible that a
10:49:30
10:49:50
9 1
family member may have.
2
brother or a sister wrote to him seeking a contribution, in the context of
3
three specific election campaigns.
4
Q. 35
5
So the donations were either unsolicited, or else a
So you yourself have never had any contact with anybody from Monarch Properties.
Is that the position?
6
A.
That's the position.
7
Q. 36
And you were therefore never asked by anybody in Monarch Properties to support,
8
or seek support in respect of the Cherrywood lands.
9
wouldn't it?
10:50:00 10
11
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 37
And just to drew to your attention.
That would also follow
Again, you won't have seen this.
But
12
Mr. Eddie Sweeney in his statement to the Tribunal, at 2191.
13
Identifies a list of political representatives with whom he had contact.
14
the second page at 2192, he identifies you, councillor Sean Haughey Dublin
10:50:26 15
Corporation Mayor.
You will see that.
16
page on that page.
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 38
As having met you.
19 10:50:39 20
And 2192.
It's the longest entry across the
Is it your position that you haven't met Mr. Edward
Sweeney? A.
I can't say that I know Mr. Edward Sweeney.
I have no recollection of ever
21
meeting him.
22
Perhaps I bumped into him at a reception or something.
23
of ever meeting with him to discuss any business or anything like that.
24
Q. 39
10:51:02 25
It maybe in the context of me being Lord Mayor of Dublin? I have no recollection
And it's your position, is it, Mr. Haughey, that you regret the misinterpretation of the letter that the Tribunal sent to you seeking
26
information.
27
connection to you by Monarch Properties?
You have now provided all information that you have in
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 40
Thank you very much, Mr. Haughey.
10:51:14 30
On
If you answer any questions that anybody
else may have. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:51:15
10:51:20
10 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
4 5
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
6 7 8
MS. DILLON:
From Frank Fahy, please.
9 10:51:25 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:51:25
10:51:52
11 1
MR. FRANK FAHY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Fahy.
6 7
Q. 41
8 9 10:51:59 10
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Fahy, you were never a member of any local authority for
Dublin; isn't that the position A.
Yes.
Q. 42
And I think you, similarly to Mr. Sean Haughey, received a letter from the
11
Tribunal in connection with the lands at Cherrywood and you were asked the same
12
questions, at page 611 as the last witness, Mr. Haughey?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 43
And you I think similarly to Mr. Haughey at page 615, provided information to
10:52:18 15
the Tribunal, that you, from your best recollection, that you could not say
16
that you had any involvement with the contacts or companies named in the
17
letter?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 44
Is that factually correct Mr. Fahy?
A.
That is correct.
10:52:27 20
That was the response I gave at the time and it's only when
21
I had a communication from the Tribunal last week, that I became aware that I
22
may have received a cheque for 250 pounds.
23
Q. 45
24
At 8340, Mr. Haughey.
It might assist you in deciding whether in fact you did
or did not receive the cheque.
10:52:56 25
Fahy TD.
This is a copy of a cheque, made out to Frank
I think at 8341.
26 27
From Monarch Properties Services Limited.
28
that it was lodged to Bank of Ireland.
29 10:53:18 30
A.
Yes.
The reverse of the cheque shows
Does that assist you?
Well, as I say, when I responded to the letter I received I had no
recollection of any communication with any of the people involved, or I didn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:53:24
10:53:49
12 1
even know where Cherrywood was.
2
from Monarch Properties.
3
solicitor for the Tribunal and he mentioned that I had received a cheque for
4
250 pounds, that I can vaguely remember following a meeting socially with
5
Philip Monahan, that I did receive a cheque.
6
that.
7
Q. 46
8 9 10:54:06 10
I had no recollection of receiving a cheque
And it was only last week when I talked with the
But I just vaguely remember
And you don't dispute, therefore, now that you've seen the documentation. 8340, please.
At
That you did in fact receive this cheque?
A.
No, I don't dispute that.
Q. 47
And you say that that was following a social meeting with Mr. Philip Monaghan,
11
the late Mr. Philip Monaghan, is that the position?
12
A.
That's my recollection, it's a hazy recollection.
13
Q. 48
Did you ever have any contact or communication with Mr. Richard Lynn, or Eddie
14 10:54:20 15
Sweeney? A.
No.
16
Q. 49
Mr. Dominic Linane?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 50
Mr. Frank Dunlop?
19
A.
No.
Q. 51
Have you never met Frank Dunlop?
A.
Oh I've met Frank Dunlop, but never in the context of this planning or zoning
10:54:25 20
21 22
in Dublin.
23
Q. 52
Would you have met Mr. Frank Dunlop in 1993?
24
A.
I may have done, but I never had is any involvement with him, in regard to
10:54:38 25
26
Cherrywood or anything else. Q. 53
There are a number of entries in Mr. Dunlop's diaries that appear to relate for
27
completeness, Mr. Fahey, I will show them to you and ask you to comment on
28
them.
29 10:54:49 30
At 4045.
This is the 11th of March 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And if we could increase the entry
10:54:57
10:55:12
13 1
at three o'clock on the 11th of March 1993, please.
2
entry for F Fahy, at the show house.
3
you?
4
A.
No, that's not me.
5
Q. 54
All right.
6
Do you think that that's likely to be
At 4117 on the 31st of March 1993.
Frank Fahy.
That appears to be an
There is an entry for senator
Were you a senator in 1993, Mr. Fahy?
7
A.
I was, yes.
8
Q. 55
And do you see the telephone number that's there? Is that your telephone
9 10:55:29 10
number at 11.25? A.
11 12
the time, yes. Q. 56
13 14 10:55:44 15
I wouldn't be able to recall, but it must be if I was senator Frank Fahey at
Can you recollect what business you would have had with Mr. Frank Dunlop in March of 1993?
A.
No, I can't recall any communication with him.
Q. 57
And again in March of 1996.
At 5773, on the 24th of March 1996.
There is an
16
entry at 9:30 LL with Frank Fahy and F D.
17
reference to LL is a reference to the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
18
any business that you would have had with Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Lawlor, in March
19
of 1996?
10:56:13 20
A.
21
Absolutely not.
And it's understood that that
And that doesn't refer to me.
Can you recollect
That's not my -- that's not
me.
22
Q. 58
It's not you?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 59
Are you aware of another Frank Fahy, whom it could be?
A.
No, I'm not.
Q. 60
Did you ever have occasion to meet Mr. Willie Murray or any of the planners in
10:56:28 25
26 27
Dun Laoghaire County Council?
28
A.
Never.
29
Q. 61
Never.
10:56:41 30
Thank you very much, Mr. Fahy.
Would you answer any questions that
anybody else might have. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:56:44
10:56:48
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Mr. Fahy.
3 4 5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9 10:56:50 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. David Andrews, please.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:57:05
10:57:21
15 1
MR. DAVID ANDREWS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE:.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Andrews.
5
MR. McCABE:
Chairman, if I may apply for limited representation for
6
Mr. Andrews.
I am with Mr. Quigley, instructed by Kent Carty & Co.
7
Solicitors.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Granted.
10:57:35 10
11
RORY McCABE:
12
Minister and member of the Dail, isn't that correct?
13
That is correct.
14
Member of the Dail for Dun Laoghaire as well; isn't that correct?
10:57:41 15
16
Good morning Mr. Andrews, I believe you're a former Government
A.
Yes, I was there for some 38 years.
Q. 62
Mr. Andrews, I think on the 1st of February 2006 a letter was written to you
17
requesting any information that you might have regarding the Cherrywood lands
18
And I think on 12th of January 2006 you have written to us and -- advising us
19
that you weren't aware of any details regarding Cherrywood?
10:58:02 20
21
A.
That's correct.
Q. 63
I think that on May 30th 2006 at 8489, please.
22 23
I think you wrote a statement, a letter to us by way of statement, in relation
24
to your recollection of certain events regarding the Cherrywood lands?
10:58:17 25
A.
Yes. I do beg your pardon.
What happened there was that having studied the
26
files and -- received in the boxes and the various bundles of papers, my legal
27
team and myself, discovered a number of references to myself, arising from the
28
receipt of two cheques.
29
1992.
10:58:47 30
One was when I was Minister for Foreign Affairs in
I visited Somalia, on my own for the first occasion and the President
of Ireland accompanied me.
Or I should say that I accompanied her to Somalia
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:58:51
10:59:10
16 1
on the second occasion, in the same year.
2
country that contribution should be made to Somalia and clearly I received a
3
number of these contributions which I passed on to non-governmental
4
organisations.
5
cheque, in the sum of 2,000.
6
Q. 64
7
All right.
And there was a feeling in the
But again, I have no recollections of receiving a particular
I'll be very brief.
But you can be certain it went to an N G O. I'll Just to take you through those
payments, vis-a-vis your statement to the Tribunal?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 65
30th of May last?
A.
Yes.
Q. 66
I think in your statement as I says at 8489 you say that you received two
10:59:23 10
11 12
cheques one in '93 I think you say, was for 276 pounds and as you've stated
13
that was as a result of the Somalia...
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 67
And I think...
16
A.
Looking for support for Somalia at that time.
17
Q. 68
Page 1048.
10:59:42 15
18 19 10:59:55 20
21
That appears in Monarch Properties Services Limited in one of
their ledgers? A.
Yes.
Q. 69
You can see there that its David Andrews Somalia appeal?
A.
Yes, I didn't look for that cheque of course it was sent to me as a donation
22
purely as a Minister and probably my private secretary handled the situation.
23
Q. 70
Did you acknowledge the payment?
24
A.
I can't recall.
Q. 71
All right.
A.
But you can be certain that the cheque went to an N G O, I would have thought
11:00:09 25
26 27 28 29 11:00:35 30
probably GOAL. Q. 72
I have great respect for to John O'Shea and still have.
I think that at 4354.
Cherrywood development report, at appendix H, Monarch
Properties services Limited, have attributed this payment and it's stated there D C Andrews Somalia appeal 23rd 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:00:41
11:00:51
17 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 73
They attributed that cost to sponsorship regarding Dun Laoghaire mixed use
3
development costs. Have you any idea why they might have attributed... ?
4
A.
I have no idea.
5
Q. 74
There was, there seems to be a payment of either ten pounds or 100 pounds.
6
And if we could have page 3835.
7
for Somalia, on 30th of September 1992.
8
there in that document there's a number of documents there.
9
there was a fundraiser, as you've said again, you were obviously raising funds
11:01:19 10
at the time for Somalia.
There was a cheese and wine night. There's a payment.
Again,
You can see In particular
At 3836 there's a signed memo, Richard M Lynn.
And
11
it states the following you can see that, I shall be obliged to receive a
12
cheque for 100 made payable to David Andrews TD Dail Eireann, payment for
13
tickets received for cheese and wine night.
14
that?
11:01:40 15
16
A.
Well I don't no.
Q. 75
Very good.
Have you any recollection of
And then I think just going back to your statement again.
I
17
think you say it's in or around 1996 you received 1,000 pounds; isn't that
18
correct?
19 11:01:58 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 76
And I think in your statement, you attribute it to monies towards funding for a
21
researcher for the...
22
A.
That's correct, yes.
23
Q. 77
Isn't that correct? And I think at page 6109 we have record of that payment
24
there.
11:02:20 25
You can see just second from the bottom there October 25th Andrews TD
1, 000, in relation to that.
26
And there is a cheque at 6112.
And that is
made out to yourself, in the sum of 1,000 pounds.
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 78
And again, were you ever approached in relation to the Cherrywood lands by Mr.
29 11:02:41 30
Lynn, Mr. Monaghan, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Glennane or any of the parties associated? A.
No, I was never on a local authority.
Absolutely nothing to do with the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:02:46
11:02:56
18 1
Cherrywood lands, nothing what ever.
2
Q. 79
And I think in fairness to you, you weren't County Councillor at any stage?
3
A.
I was never a County Councillors, no.
4
Q. 80
Thank you very much, Mr. Andrews, you might answer any questions.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much, Mr. Andrews
Thank you:
8 9
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
11:02:59 10
11 12 13 14
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Ardagh ah, please.
11:03:21 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:03:43
11:03:50
19 1
MR. SEAN ARDAGH, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY BY MS. FOLEY.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Ardagh.
MS. FOLEY:
Good morning, Mr. Ardagh.
5 6 7 8
Q. 81
9 11:03:59 10
Mr. Ardagh, I think you were first elected to Dublin County Council in 1985; is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
11
Q. 82
And again in 1991?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 83
And then from January 1994 you were with South Dublin County Council; is that
14 11:04:09 15
16
correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 84
And at that point you would have had no further involvement with Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council; is that correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 85
And you were a member of are you a member of the Fianna Fail party?
A.
I am.
Q. 86
Mr. Ardagh, I think the Tribunal wrote to you.
11:04:25 20
21 22
Could I have page 40, please,
on the 1st of February, 2006.
23 24 11:04:39 25
And at the second paragraph there asking you to provide a detailed narrative statement regarding any involvement that you had with the lands at Cherrywood
26
County Dublin from January '90 to 31st of December '94.
Your statement
27
should be limited to but include but not limited to any context, or meetings
28
you had with agents of Monarch.
29 11:04:54 30
And then at the third paragraph, any payment or benefit you may have received Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:04:57
11:05:11
20 1
from, or on behalf of, agents of Monarch listed above.
2 3
I think at page 42 your letter of reply indicates I am not aware of having any
4
involvement in the lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin from the 1st of January
5
1990 to 31st of December '94 or at any other time.
6 7
Is that still your position, Mr. Ardagh?
8
A.
That is still my answer to the letter that was sent on the 1st of February.
9
Q. 87
Is it -- would it be correct to say that you had no involvement with these
11:05:27 10
lands?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 88
Were you not a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council at the time of
13 14
the voting on these lands took place? A.
No.
Q. 89
Or Dublin County Council, sorry Mr. Ardagh.?
16
A.
I understand from the records that were presented that I was.
17
Q. 90
So in fact you would have been voting on motions that effect the these lands?
18
A.
The evidence appears to be to so.
19
Q. 91
Is that -- do you not recollect?
A.
No.
Q. 92
On the 7th of March 2006 the Tribunal wrote to you a further letter asking for
11:05:35 15
11:05:59 20
21 22
a statement and details of any payments from the 1st of January 1989 to date.
23
And the Tribunal received your reply, dated 8th of March 2006.
24
page 44, please.
Could I have
11:06:30 25
26
You will see in this letter, Mr. Ardagh, you listed a number of donations
27
received from the parties post, December 1994?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 93
The first payment being in April 1996 in the amount of 250 pounds.
11:06:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:06:56
11:07:16
21 1
Could I please have page 1581.
2 3
This is a list of donations from Monarch's records.
And you will see about
4
maybe 15 or so from the end, 13th of June 1991 S Ardagh, F F local elections
5
expenses, 300 pounds?
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 94
And it appears from their records that their cheque journal that, at 3197, on
8
13th of June was written to you, Sean Ardagh FF.
9
cleared on 19th of June 1991.
11:07:38 10
cheque No 3691, which then
Do you believe you may have received this
cheque?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 95
But you have no recollection of it?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 96
Is that the reason it wasn't included then in the letter?
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 97
Monarch have told the Tribunal that all of the contributions are believed to
11:07:46 15
16 17
have arisen on foot of requests for assistance.
18
would have requested assistance from an agent of Monarch for this donation?
19
Would you believe that you
A.
Which donation?
Q. 98
The 300 pounds in 1991.
21
A.
No, I would not because -- no.
22
Q. 99
At that point Mr. Ardagh, did you have contact with any of the agents of
11:08:04 20
23
Monarch, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Gillane, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray,
24
Mr. Monaghan?
11:08:18 25
A.
I'd have to be informed when The Square in Tallaght was actually built and when
26
it was opened.
27
functions and they were turning the sod and there was the foundation stone and
28
the roof was put on and every possible occasion I think that there was some
29
form of is ceremony to mark it.
11:08:46 30
Because around that time there was, at numerous social
And I would have been invited to those so
that's ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:08:47
11:09:02
22 1
Q. 100
I think those events did take place before the June '91 elections, Mr. Ardagh?
2
A.
Then I would be I would acknowledge I would have met some of the people
3 4
involved. Q. 101
Mr. Sean Gilbride has given evidence to the Tribunal that around the time
5
shortly after the Local Elections when the new council was formed.
6
came up at a meeting, at a council meeting, that a number of councillors had
7
received donations from Monarch.
8
meeting, discussing donations from Monarch?
9 11:09:25 10
That it
Do you recollect any such conversation or
A.
No.
Q. 102
I think the next payment, as per your own statement, is of April 1996, is 250
11
pounds.
12 13
Could I have page 5803, please.
14 11:09:35 15
16
A.
Sorry, I'm lost.
17
Q. 103
Annette Foley.
18
A.
Thank you very much, Ms. Foley.
19
Q. 104
Sorry.
11:09:48 20
I don't know your name.
The 12th of April 1996.
Monarch's records also indicate 250 pounds
payment for a lunch fundraiser in respect of yourself, Mr. Ardagh.
21
have also disclosed that to the Tribunal.
Do you
At 5800, please.
22 23
This is a letter -- I see that it's signed Sean, but I believe that may not be
24
yourself, I believe that may be a member of the committee
11:10:11 25
26
A.
That looks like my signature.
Q. 105
The letter is addressed to Mr. Richard Lynn.
And reads.
27 28
A letter seeking assistance for your general election campaign, which is coming
29
up the following year
11:10:22 30
A.
Yes.
This was a mail merge letter, that was sent to a number of people so... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:10:30
11:10:49
23 1
Q. 106
And how would Mr. Lynne have gotten on the list for the mail merge Mr. Ardagh?
2
A.
What date was that?
3
Q. 107
April 1996.?
4
A.
There were a number of people on -- friends of Sean Ardagh, who actually
5
organised the fundraiser. And there would have been a trawl through people's
6
minds and records of all of the potential contributors to a fundraising lunch
7
and who might attend.
8
relatives, friends, business acquaintances, professional colleagues, of all
9
descriptions.
11:11:20 10
Mr. Lynn was included on that, along with many of my
Any person that I may have met, anybody who I felt that would
be likely to contribute to the democratic process.
11
It was just a general
trawl of er...
12
Q. 108
But the list would have been confirmed or approved by yourself?
13
A.
Well.
14
Q. 109
So it's your friends and people that you know and the final list would be
11:11:38 15
16
approved by yourself? A.
17
The list would have been approved by me, yes.
Insofar as I wouldn't have sent
a request to somebody that I didn't want to get a request.
18
Q. 110
Yes.
19
A.
That would be very few and far between, now.
Q. 111
If I could just look at the top of that page there, there's a handwritten note?
A.
Uh-huh.
11:11:52 20
21
You'll have to read it to me.
Oh, yeah two tickets.
22
Yes, sorry it says I think, recommend that we take two tickets S Ardagh is (and
23
was) first to vote.
24
Mr. Lynn.
11:12:17 25
This seems to be a note by the agent of Monarch, possibly
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 112
Can you say what significance that would have?
27
A.
Well, first of all, obviously it was a lunch.
28
tickets were.
29
250.
11:12:38 30
And I don't know how much the
You'd have to go back to the letter, probably 125 if it was
So there were two tickets and the cost of the lunch and that would
probably be about 50 or 60.
So the net amount of the contribution would be
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:12:44
11:13:07
24 1
about 130 pounds.
2
Dublin County Council, at the time, were done on an alphabetical basis.
3
the first person to vote at all times, if I was present.
4
surname started with A, I think I was the only -- I was the first at all times,
5
yeah.
6
Q. 113
7
Sean Ardagh, is and was, the first to vote.
All votes in I was
And because my
And why would that do you think -- that would have been notable by the author of the note?
8
A.
No idea.
9
Q. 114
Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that the list, being alphabetical, the person
11:13:20 10
who was called first called a vote that his wording was that the domino effect
11
would begin, that people would, he was suggesting I think that people might
12
have a tendency to follow the first person to vote.
13
ever been made to you before, or would you have been aware of any such
14
tendency?
11:13:42 15
A.
Not particularly.
Would this comment have
But I can see where if there was a tendency for people to,
16
as has been suggested, that if I voted in one way.
17
have said in some way that if it was a political vote that they would have
18
followed me.
19
purposes, I don't see any reason.
11:14:22 20
for others.
21
If it was a Fianna Fail political vote.
Well then people would
But on a general
I mean, it would be a lazy way of voting
I don't know how other people voted in relation to it or what
their reasons for voting were.
I was first to vote always.
22
Q. 115
And do you think that --
23
A.
The domino effect, I can't really make any comment on it.
24
Q. 116
Do you think people of your own party would have been inclined to follow you?
A.
Well, in politics generally, if it is a political question then the first
11:14:40 25
I really can't.
26
person has got to be more aware of what way the party, as such, is voting on
27
it.
28
TD.
29
confidence to some extent, that if I voted in a particular way that it was the
11:15:19 30
And I am a Fianna Fail, I was Fianna Fail councillor, I am a Fianna Fail And the people would have -- I'm not saying that they would have
way that people that might be of a like mind would vote. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And they might feel
11:15:24
11:15:46
25 1
safe in voting that way.
2
votes in the County Councils and the Dail and every where else.
3
Q. 117
You know, that's the way it happens.
When you say the political vote.
The council meetings, the special meetings
4
would have been on zonings and maps and those kind of things.
5
deal -- would that still follow?
6
A.
I don't know whether it would follow with.
7
vote.
8
other people that voted had a vote.
9
Q. 118
11:16:09 10
If somebody
Would that
As you say, I was the first to
So I could speak for myself, I could only speak for myself.
The only
I can't speak for them.
The Tribunal has heard evidence that before council meetings there would be more informal meetings, conducted among the different political parties,
11
perhaps, in the council chamber, perhaps in Conways.
12
evidence that from councillor Geraghty that everybody would vote as a block and
13
the decision was already made before?
14
And they have heard
A.
Yeah.
Q. 119
The members went into the council chamber?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 120
What is your view on that?
18
A.
Um.
19
Q. 121
Would that be your recollection?
A.
I wasn't able to attend a lot of those meetings, because at that time I was
11:16:25 15
11:16:33 20
21
very busy in my business and I wasn't a frequent attender at those meetings pre
22
council meetings.
So I couldn't confirm that.
23
Q. 122
So in instance where you hadn't attended the meeting beforehand.
24
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 123
And it was in an area that you weren't familiar with.
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 124
As you say yourself, you were the first to vote.
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 125
How would you form a view on how to vote?
A.
Well, it was always a little more difficult for me, than it would be for others
11:17:08 25
11:17:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:17:23
11:17:49
26 1
because I'd have to form a view, Ms. Foley.
2
it would be on a sort of a consensus basis.
3
for how the councillors, in the area generally, thought about it.
4
to what the Manager might have to say in relation to it.
5
think that, certainly in the early '80s when I started in the council, there
6
was a lot of investment going over to London at the time and that it wasn't
7
fashionable to put money into Ireland.
8
investment, for job creation, for houses and for that.
9
that-- that ethos, sort of, played a role in the way that I voted.
11:18:27 10
It would be basically I would -You would have to get a feeling Listening
Whether the -- I
So there was a need always for And that type of -And I
consistently voted over the period a of time that I was in the council.
So,
11
taking all of those things together, I made up my mind which way that I wanted
12
to vote and I voted on it.
13
say that I would have been informed of the discussion in the pre council
14
discussion.
11:19:01 15
favour of, or opposed to, the development. Q. 126
18 19
Would you be more inclined to listen to your colleagues within the Fianna Fail party?
A.
11:19:29 20
21
I would be aware of the general thrust of how the majority of the
councillors and Fianna Fail would be -- would have -- whether they were in
16 17
That would be -- I certainly would have -- I would
No.
It would be a combination of all of those matters that I have mentioned
to you. Q. 127
I think that I would have been bound to take everything into account.
I think also one of the people that were named in the statement, the request
22
for a statement and the request for details of any benefits received, was Frank
23
Dunlop and Frank Dunlop & Associates.
24 11:19:39 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 128
And I think that you informed the Fianna Fail Inquiry that in 1996 you received
26
a donation for a fundraising lunch from Frank Dunlop & Associates.
27
omitted that from the letter that you sent to the Tribunal.?
28
A.
29 11:20:08 30
I didn't.
I think that I've already said in the letter to the Tribunal that
I've already informed the Tribunal of contributions from Mr. Dunlop. Q. 129
But you
Could I have page 6177, please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:20:13
11:20:26
27 1 2
The next payment you received as per your own statement, was in February 1997.
3
In the amount of 250 pounds.
4
I have page 6179, please.
That again was a fundraising lunch.
And could
5 6
And it appears not to dissimilar to the previous year in that
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 130
Is that the same letter, same style of letter?
9
A.
That's right. I don't know how the committee were deleted from the previous
11:20:46 10
11
letter. Q. 131
But obviously the way it was copied.
Uh-huh.
And then the next donation is in February 1998, as to the sum of 250
12
pounds which you disclosed to the Tribunal.
13
services.
14
Ewart.
11:21:15 15
16
The 1997, the Monarch lands and Monarch, were taken over by Dunloe
At that point you seem to have been aware to address your requests to
Dunloe Ewart. A.
That was from Dunloe management
Is this because Mr. Richard Lynn would have been your contact?
Yes, Richard Lynn was my contact.
And it's probable, that as a result of the,
17
this February '97 letter, it may have been that the response came on a Dunloe
18
Ewart slip or something, so I'm not ....
19
Q. 132
11:21:40 20
And can you recall Mr. Lynn ever speaking to you about the Cherrywood lands during the period before you joined Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
21
A.
No, I can't.
22
Q. 133
Could I have page 6752, please.
23 24
Item No. 9 there is further payment 25th of February 1999 of 400 pounds.
11:22:02 25
payment wasn't disclosed in your statement to the Tribunal Mr. Ardagh.
26
A.
Sorry, where is that now?
27
Q. 134
It's No. 9.
28
A.
No. 9.
29
Q. 135
Do you believe that may be an error on behalf of Mr. Lynn that you received
11:22:20 30
And ...
this payment, or do you believe that it may have been an oversight on your Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
This
11:22:24
11:22:47
28 1 2
part? A.
Well, any cheque that came from or that arrived in The Friends of Sean Ardagh
3
would have been lodged to the account that is listed on my -- so I can't
4
confirm or deny.
But, you know, there is a trail that is possible there that
5
you can sort out.
I can't confirm it or I can't deny it.
6
that it's material anyway.
7
Q. 136
But I don't think
And then a further payment in the 10th of March of 2000, of 250 pounds.
8
Again, The Friends of Sean Ardagh committee a fundraising dinner.
9
also disclosed in your own letter.?
11:23:08 10
A.
11 12
11:23:27 15
It's the same time of the year that I
had these fundraisers. Q. 137
13 14
It's likely that No. 9 was February.
And then in March 2001 another fundraising dinner payment of 500 pounds. Mr. Sweeney who worked with Monarch?
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 138
Up until 1996.
Has told the Tribunal that it would have been a general policy
16
in Monarch to give donations to those politicians or parties that made
17
representations.
18
assistance, you weren't ever refused?
19
Would it have been your experience that when you sought
A.
From Richard Lynn or Monarch and...
Q. 139
Yes.
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 140
Moving on to the planning now, Mr. Ardagh.
11:23:48 20
This is
23
Page 7021, please.
This is the
first public display, which took place in September to December 1991.
24 11:24:12 25
So this is the first -- your first involvement, with the Cherrywood lands, if I
26
might use that word.
27
A.
Okay.
28
Q. 141
And the history is that in 1983 the lands were zoned agriculture and A,
29 11:24:31 30
residential. A.
AS 1, one house to the acre per septic tank?
Okay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:24:32
11:24:44
29 1
Q. 142
2
And the line, I think if you can see a line through the lands there a sort of a blue line, dividing the yellow from the white. Do you see that?
3
A.
I don't know which line.
4
Q. 143
The Monarch lands are outlined in red?
5
A.
Oh, in red, okay.
6
Q. 144
And then there's the line that divides the yellow from the white.
7
That was
the old line of the south eastern Motorway?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 145
But at the time of the first public display was a decision to move the line of
11:24:57 10
the South eastern Motorway, but it was not yet fixed as to where it was going
11
to be.
In 1990 there had been a motion limiting development to the east of
12
the south eastern Motorway?
13
A.
I see.
14
Q. 146
Which meant that the line at the south eastern Motorway had a purpose.
A.
Oh I see. Okay.
Q. 147
There was a council meeting on 13th of May 1992, at which you weren't present.
11:25:14 15
16 17
Where the Manager introduced a further map, map No. 92/44.
18
page 7203, please.
DP92/44.
It's at
19 11:25:37 20
The map was discussed at this meeting of the 13th and then voted upon at a
21
meeting subsequently, at which you were present.
22
after the first public display.
23
Plan for the residential zoning, which would mean that there wouldn't be a
24
limit on the density at this point.
11:25:59 25
The Manager is proposing
What he was indicating was an area Action
The agricultural land to be turned to
residential and a retail element, to be included, but not specifically located.
26
So this was completely different as you can see to the map on the first public
27
display.
28 29 11:26:16 30
And then in May 1992, this is the first council meeting. maps.
And you were present at this meeting. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Voting on these
The first vote that came up was
11:26:21
11:26:42
30 1
a vote proposed by Councillors Lydon and McGrath.
Recommending that this map
2
be approved.
3
number of other votes to reduce density on the lands from the Manager's map.
4
And these you voted consistently against any reduction in density.
5
there was a motion proposed by Councillor Barrett which was successful to
6
reduce the density to one house per acre.
This vote was unsuccessful but you voted for it.
There was a
At the end
You voted against this motion.
7 8
Would it be correct to say that it was your view that these lands should be
9
developed?
11:26:57 10
A.
11 12
It would -- I was always in favour of development and it would have followed through to these lands as well, yeah.
Q. 148
At this point, it has been indicated by Mr. Dunlop, that this was prior to his
13
own involvement with the lands, that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were often around
14
the premises of Dublin County Council.
But you say you don't --
11:27:24 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Lynn.
18
MS. FOLEY:
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, sorry, Mr. Ardagh, were often in the
19
environs of Dublin County Council talking to councillors.
17
11:27:35 20
21
Do you recall
meeting either of them at this time? A.
Yes, I remember them being around that -- well I'm not saying at this time.
22
But in the period that I was in Dublin County Council, I do remember Mr. Lynn
23
and now that you mention Mr. Reilly, I have a vague recollection of his face
24
being around at some stage.
11:27:55 25
Q. 149
Mr. Dunlop has also told the Tribunal that senator Don Lydon was considered by
26
Mr. Lynn as the main access to the Fianna Fail support for the Cherrywood
27
proposal.
28
about these lands?
29 11:28:19 30
Would you have any recollection of Senator Lydon speaking to you
A.
No, no.
Q. 150
The next important meeting at which the lands were discussed was on the 11th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:28:24
11:28:34
31 1
November 1993, again, Mr. Ardagh, you were present.
2
reduce the density, you were consistently against.
Again, any motions to
3 4
There is one particular motion I would like to draw your particular attention
5
to.
Page 7226, please.
And 7227 side by side.
6 7
This is a motion proposed by councillors Marren and Coffey and signed by
8
councillors Marren, Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and Ormonde. And at this point in
9
the meeting the vote to confirm change three, in other words to reduce the
11:28:54 10
lands to one to the acre, had not succeeded and other votes to reduce the
11
density to one per acre had not succeeded.
12 13
At this point the motion that is proposed is a motion, as you can see there, to
14
delete the 1993 amendment i.e. this would have been the vote proposed by
11:29:13 15
Councillor Barrett which reduced them to one to the acre, in respect of the
16
lands outlined in red.
17
lands, the Monarch lands.
18
particular lands would have been singled out for an increase in density and the
19
remaining lands to remain at one per acre, as is indicated on the motion?
11:29:36 20
21
The lands outlined in red are in fact the Cherrywood Can you explain to the Tribunal why these
A.
No.
Q. 151
I have no further questions, Mr. Ardagh.
22
If anybody else would like to ask
you questions.
23 24
Q. 152
11:29:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
So could I just ask you, Mr. Ardagh.
You said that Mr. Lynn, you
couldn't recall him ever talking to you about Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 153
CHAIRMAN:
27 28 29 11:30:19 30
Clearly, you knew him over the years and he occasionally gave you
donations, for -- or at least political donations.
Do you recall him ever
talking to you about any other development, any other Monarch development or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:30:19
11:30:36
32 1 2
lands? A.
Can I first of all say, Chairman, that the question of political donations.
I
3
think that it is important that the actual donations are recognised as the net
4
amount after the costs of the...
5 6
Q. 154
CHAIRMAN:
7
A.
Of the lunch.
Oh, yes. Because there has been a tendency for the amounts to be added
8
up without taking into account the costs involved.
9
that is the actual donation.
So it is the net amount
11:30:49 10
11
Q. 155
CHAIRMAN:
12
A.
Which reduces the 250 or the 300 to 100 and something.
13
All right. Okay.
So I just want
to make that point.
14 11:30:59 15
Q. 156
CHAIRMAN:
Given that Mr. Lynn did occasionally over the years make
16
contributions to you.
17
talk to.
18
recollection of him talking to you about Cherrywood.
19
developments going through the system during these years.
11:31:29 20
21
So clearly you'd have known him, to see and possibly to
Can you recall -- you say he didn't mention.
You have no But Monarch had other Can you recall if
he ever mentioned those to you, or lobbied you, or asked you for support? A.
Mr. Lynn I know very well.
23
Q. 157
CHAIRMAN:
24
A.
I always operated with any person lobbying in a very professional manner.
22
11:31:52 25
26
Uh-huh. And
Mr. Lynn, I always felt, I know that other people have different comments. But I always felt that he operated in a very professional way.
27 28
As regards specific developments.
29
that he lobbied me on.
11:32:14 30
I cannot remember any specific developments
We would have been very cordial in our relationships,
in our relationship to each other.
And I am sure that most of the time that I
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:32:21
11:32:35
33 1
talked to him was on a social how are you? How is the weather? And that type
2
of arrangement.
3 4
I never got involved in signing motions or seconding motions throughout my
5
period of -- in the County Council.
6
as being of great professional humble and, you know, would under no
7
circumstances do anything that was untoward.
So -- and I was always, I think, regarded
8 9
Q. 158
11:33:00 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
But, I mean, we know from many witnesses that there was a lot of
lobbying going on by... A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 159
CHAIRMAN:
14
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 160
CHAIRMAN:
17
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 161
CHAIRMAN:
12 A number of people.
11:33:04 15
Which is in itself a perfectly legitimate exercise.
18 19 11:33:15 20
legitimately for support in -- of any other lands besides Cherrywood? Before
21 22
And it was just, I mean -- do you recall Mr. Lynn lobbying you
votes? A.
Could I just suggest an analogy, Chairman.
23
and Supreme Court matters.
24
Section 4s and motions and rezonings.
11:33:41 25
It's like District Court matters
Planning was -- there were so many different That it was done like a District Court.
It was summarily just dealt with in the Supreme Court there would be written
26
judgements and reasons and explanations.
So I certainly do not -- I do not
27
remember any specific lobbying in relation to Cherrywood or any other
28
specific -- any other lobbying.
29
lobbied on by Mr. Lynn.
Any other area that I was specifically
I don't.
11:34:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:34:09
11:34:20
34 1
Q. 162
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 163
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
But you would you remember him as a lobbiest? Yes.
3 4
Just on that point, Mr. Ardagh.
Would you be surprised now?
5
I mean obviously you have been here this morning, I can understand that.
6
the records would show.
7
to have been rather meticulous in how he documented things and how he went
8
throughout his job as lobbiest for Monarch.
9
councillors, who encountered Mr. Lynn.
11:34:46 10
But
The documentation from Monarch, that Mr. Lynn seemed
Indeed some witnesses, some
We have yet to hear from Mr. Lynn.
So I'm only if you like summarising what some councillors have said.
And he
11
has been variously described as being aggressive in his approach as to lobbying
12
down to being consistently around the County Council chambers.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 164
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 11:35:00 15
16 17
I just want to ask you.
In retrospect, I mean, that was Mr.
Lynn's job A.
Yes.
Q. 165
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18 19 11:35:14 20
Would it not seem strange that he wouldn't lobby every single
councillor because he is documenting down to, it seems to me, the cost of
21
either phoning people or meeting people down in the County Council chambers and
22
elsewhere.
23
seems to have any specific recollection, save in vague terms, as to -- nobody
24
has told us yet.
11:35:44 25
26
His time for the benefit of Monarch.
That -- because nobody
I suppose it may be long-winded, that Mr. Lynn sat them down
and said look, this is -- I want a good proposal. A.
Yeah.
First of all, the question of Mr. Lynn's aggression.
I didn't --
28
Q. 166
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
A.
I found that he operated in a very professional manner at times.
27 I'm not calling it aggression.
11:36:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:36:03
11:36:15
35 1
Q. 167
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I said variously people described him at various times, one
councillor, that he was certainly forth right in his approach. A.
4
Yeah.
I felt that I would take the opportunity to take the contrary point of
view.
5 6
Q. 168
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Absolutely.
7
A.
With regard to -- I think that I've already told Ms. Foley, that I was very
8
much in favour of development generally, on the basis of investment, the jobs,
9
providing houses.
11:36:40 10
And I wasn't -- I'm not a professional planner.
I'm
not -- I felt that it was very much, as I said earlier, like a District Court
11
matter.
Just come in, you do it, that's it.
You go ahead on the route that
12
you want to go.
13
the type of detail that a judge would go into in a particular case.
I think that, whether it was right or wrong, I didn't go into
14 11:37:05 15
16
Q. 169
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
So I didn't need to.
Uh-huh. Or I didn't want to get the full details of -- and all
17
of the environmental and physical infrastructural reasons why and wherefore.
18
That wasn't my -- I wasn't a professional in that way.
19
I was a County Councillor. I was there to vote for to push forward development
11:37:29 20
I was a politician.
to try and improve the economic well-being of the country.
And that was the
21
way that I looked at it.
And I think that people recognised that that was the
22
approach that I adopted.
23
understand that Sean Ardagh has a particular point of view and that there isn't
24
the need to lobby him in the way that there may be, that other people may be...
And it may be that people felt well, you know, we
11:37:57 25
26
Q. 170
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's fair enough.
27
Mr. Ardagh.
28
display for these lands.
29
the largest tract of undeveloped land.
11:38:15 30
Back in '92 I think.
Can I just ask you on that point,
We know that the plan went out the first
And these were the, I think it was described here as These lands were all zoned or most of
them, the Cherrywood area within the Carrickmines Valley. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:38:17
11:38:27
36 1
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 171
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2 3 4 5
And that the Carrickmines Valley certainly in South County
Dublin as I understand it was what was going to be proposed to be developed. A.
Right.
Q. 172
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6 7
We heard of the various proposals by the Manager in 1990 that
8
were shot down.
9
displays first and the Manager had been saying and it was agreed because it
11:38:41 10
happened.
11 12
But in 1992 certainly -- when they went out on the first
That these should be low density, four houses to the acre.
And
that went out on the first plan A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 173
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13 14 11:38:51 15
We know that when it comes back in to the council again in
1992, there's is if you like, what happens is that the Manager in fact has a
16
slightly more ambitious proposals than in fact what went out on the first
17
display
18
A.
Yeah.
Q. 174
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19 11:39:05 20
That he still wanted the four houses to the acre on piped
21
sewage, but with an area Action Plan.
22
density.
23
residential he wanted to put further south.
24
that map you put up on the day.
11:39:26 25
26
He was still described that as low
He wanted to extend the area, in fact, of what would be zoned And then you had obviously -- and
I think the record shows that you voted for
that A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 175
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 11:39:36 30
That you thought obviously -- you said there earlier that you
weren't a planner indeed wouldn't be going into it in the ins and outs.
The
Manager as was his job and being paid to do presumably, was to put in proposal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:39:43
11:39:56
37 1
form the certain pros and cons of -- that was the job of the planners and you
2
would listen to the planners presumably.
3
A.
4
Judge Faherty you certainly have become an expert on it the way you are explaining things.
5 6
Q. 176
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I don't know about that.
7
A.
What you are saying has gone over my head already.
Q. 177
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's speaking honestly.
8 9 11:40:08 10
11
clear.
That's fair enough.
Maybe I'm not making myself terribly
I'm just talking about your voting record, Mr. Ardagh
A.
Yeah.
Q. 178
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12 13 14
He says still
four houses to the acre on piped sewage area Action Plan but extend the
11:40:19 15
16
In 1992 You support the Manager's proposal.
residential zoning.
And you vote for that.
A.
That motion is lost?
18
Q. 179
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
A.
Yeah.
21
Q. 180
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
A.
Okay.
Q. 181
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That motion is lost.
17 Yes, indeed, by a majority.
11:40:27 20
That was the first motion on the day
23 24 11:40:42 25
one house to the acre.
And that happens.
A.
Okay.
Q. 182
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
So it was one house to the acre?
That actually...
28 29 11:40:46 30
They
propose -- there was a series of other motions for it to go back to one acre,
26 27
And then Mr. Sean Barrett and some other councillor.
Is the result of the May '92 meeting.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:40:48
11:40:59
38 1 2
Q. 183
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
It goes out on the second display I am coming to this question
in a very long-winded way. A.
Okay.
Q. 184
JUDGE FAHERTY:
As you said, it's a long time ago.
5 6
I just want to put it into context for you, it goes out on
7
second display then and it's one house to the acre.
8
finally comes around for consideration again.
9
A.
We have then -- When it
It's November 1993.
Uh-huh.
11:41:11 10
11
Q. 185
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And the Manager comes back.
He is recommending that it goes
12
back to what more or less, what the position had been in 1992 or 1991.
13
wants to go back basically, four houses to the acre, in a nutshell
14
A.
Uh-huh.
16
Q. 186
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
A.
Okay.
Q. 187
JUDGE FAHERTY:
He
11:41:25 15
And he wants to delete the change, that was made on the map.
18 19 11:41:37 20
21
And Ms -- Ms. Coffey and Mr. Marren propose a motion that's
before the council, that you vote on. A.
Right.
Q. 188
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24 11:41:45 25
And they were also in agreement that the lands should go back
to four houses to the acre. A.
Okay.
Q. 189
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27 28 29
But they are limiting, if you like, the lands to go back to
actually, to the Monarch lands. A.
Okay.
11:41:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:41:52
11:41:57
39 1
Q. 190
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Not the lands that had been zoned four houses to the acre in
the '91. A.
Okay.
Q. 191
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4 5
The tranche of lands that had already been zoned since '83.
6
Indeed, I'm just about to ask you, when you were pro investment and pro
7
development and wanted houses...
8
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 192
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9 11:42:11 10
Why there wasn't, if you can recall, maybe you can't, any
11
debate as to why it should just be this tract of lands as opposed to the area
12
that had been ear marked as far back as 1983, for zoning in this particular
13
area?
14
A.
11:42:39 15
I don't know.
What I voted on and what came before the council were those
motions that were proposed and seconded.
So I was thinking about this and it
16
probably shows to some extent now, the value of having a lobbiest.
17
the owners or the people who owned the other land, wished to have it rezoned,
18
then I'm sure that if they went through the process, that Monarch went through,
19
that there would have been no difficulty in their land also being rezoned.
11:43:16 20
But it depends on who takes the action and if the action is taken.
Because if
So if the
21
action isn't taken, you can't do anything about it if there's no motion there
22
if --
23 24
Q. 193
11:43:29 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You see this wasn't a motion for zoning this was a a motion
about density, housing density.
And there already had been proposals and
26
expert recommendations by the Manager, as to why it could be four houses to the
27
acre, which was still I think considered low density zoning.
28
A.
Yeah.
Q. 194
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29 11:43:42 30
I'm just wondering why it would have to fall to -- the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:43:47
11:43:57
40 1
planners have told us in other modules, maybe as well in this Module.
2
the council didn't approach the question of what was best for the county in
3
terms of who owned what tract of land.
4
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 195
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
A.
Yeah.
Q. 196
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That
5 You understand?
8 9 11:44:05 10
debate as to with -- why this tract should not -- only this tract should go
11 12
I'm just wondering why, within the council, there wasn't
back to four houses to the acre. A.
I would also suggest that if Councillor Coffey and Councillor Marren signed a
13
motion, two people that we would have great respect for, that we would support
14
the proposal on a political basis.
11:44:27 15
16
Q. 197
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
And what was your ward, just as a matter of interest
in South Dublin County Council? A.
My ward was Terenure.
Where there wasn't a blade of grass to be rezoned.
19 11:44:37 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Ardagh.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Sir.
11:44:42 25
26
There is one small correction to the transcript if you permit me to do it now.
27 28
And I think then there is one further witness.
29 11:44:49 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Ardagh is finished.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:44:51
11:44:54
41 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Mr. Ardagh.
3 4 5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9 11:44:55 10
11
MS. DILLON:
12
a letter from the estate of Mr. Larkin.
13
641.
14
of June 1 3. And what is recorded is the 30th. 3 0.
11:45:14 15
16
There is an error on one transcript.
The page is 94 and it's line 2.
The Tribunal has received
The Late Mr. Larkin. The day is day And the date recorded should be 13th
their point of view that it's accurately recorded.
And it's important from
If that correction could
be made to that transcript.
17 18
There is one witness left, Mr. Helen Keogh.
Would you like to take the?
19 11:45:29 20
CHAIRMAN:
Well maybe.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
I would anticipate really if you were to sit straight through
23
that you should be finished just before lunch, or very shortly into the lunch.
24 11:45:34 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
We might just take a very short break and then sit to finish
Ms. Keogh.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
All right.
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you.
29 11:45:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:45:48
11:46:02
42 1 2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
5
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
6 7
Doyle:
Ms. Helen Keogh, please.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:57:14
11:57:42
43 1
MS. HELEN KEOGH, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE.:
3 4 5
Q. 198
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Ms. Keogh.
MR. DOYLE:
Miss Keogh, I believe you were a County Councillor for Dublin
6
County Council and latterly from '94 for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council
7
;isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yeah.
9
Q. 199
And that was I think you are presently a County Councillor is that right?
A.
No.
11
Q. 200
You're not.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 201
For the Progressive Democrats?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 202
What I plan to do is just take you through your statements and thereafter
11:57:57 10
11:58:05 15
I think you were previously a TD for Dun Laoghaire?
16
dealing with one or two matters arising.
17
any aspects regarding payments as well?
And then deal with the planning and
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 203
Now, there is a screen in front of you and the documents will be coming up on
11:58:20 20
that screen.
21 22
Now, I believe the Tribunal wrote you a letter requesting, in 2002, by way of
23
request for details regarding lands in Carrickmines and other related lands.
24
And you replied on the 26th of August 2002 by way of letter.
11:58:36 25
26
Could we have page 1133, please.
27 28
This is your replying letter to the letter sent by the Tribunal.
29
fairness to you, I believe that you dealt largely in the first part of the
11:59:01 30
And in
letter in relation to the Jackson Way lands, the Carrickmines Jackson Way Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:59:05
11:59:17
44 1
lands?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 204
And the second part of the letter, that's at 1135.
4
You deal with general
matters regarding the development and strategies and lobbying etc...
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 205
In relation to planning.
And I think that you say, you'll see 3 A.
This is
7
in reply to the Tribunal's letter.
As you may be called to give evidence to
8
the Tribunal furnishing written statements Tribunal in relation to all requests
9
for representations in relation to any Development Plan or planning matter.
11:59:40 10
11
And I think you responded as saying, 3 A, B and C.
12
down there you state that some representations were made to me personally in
13
relation to various matters.
14
And you say that this was not in relation to the Carrickmines lands, or the
11:59:58 15
Jackson Way lands.
If you will see half way
You met representatives of Monarch Properties.
I was not approached by any person in relation to those
16
lands and made no requests or representations.
And you finish off by saying
17
that you have no knowledge of who the owners of the lands were.
18 19 12:00:16 20
On the 7th of March 2006, more recently, you were written to specifically in relation to the subject lands Cherrywood.
And you were asked in relation to
21
any contacts with Monarch Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services
22
Limited or companies in the Monarch Group and whether or not you had any
23
meetings with various persons associated with the Monarch lands.
24 12:00:32 25
You replied at page 1138.
10th of March 2006.
And you say that I met from
26
time to time, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Philip Reilly during the course of the
27
discussion with the Development Plan.
28
involvement with Monarch Properties.
29
landowners sometimes lobbied in relation to their specific projects.
12:00:57 30
And you say you knew of their Your developers and their agents and
say that they provided some documentation in relation to same. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And you
12:01:01
12:01:18
45 1 2
If I could just in relation to that.
3
ever lobbied by Mr. Lynn or in any way advised in relation to any vote or how a
4
vote might best proceed?
5
A.
And Mr. Lynn in particular.
Were you
I would have been lobbied on a number of times by Mr. Lynn during the course of
6
the Development Plan.
And certainly that would include, asking to vote for
7
their particular project.
It wouldn't be unusual.
8
Q. 206
If I could have page 1414.
This is statement of Mr. Richard Lynn.
9 12:01:45 10
At one there you will see that he states having met most members of Dublin and
11
latterly Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown.
12
on, 6th of October 1992 which he has placed a tick against those members that
13
I recall having met in the context of Cherrywood, the reasons for the various
14
meetings was to inform the respective member of and elicit support for the
12:02:07 15
And he provides an extract from a meeting
Cherrywood project.
16 17
You can see that at page 1416.
18
tick beside your name.
19
eliciting support from you for this and other occasions?
12:02:28 20
A.
21 22
That's a copy of the meeting and there is a
Do you recall having been elicited -- Mr. Lynn
I wouldn't remember the actual date.
I can certainly confirm that he would
have been looking for support for the project on a number of occasions. Q. 207
I think further going back to your statement at 1138.
23
with Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Philip Reilly.
24
Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
12:02:49 25
A.
26 27 28
Q. 208
And there is no mention of
Do you remember meeting Eddie Sweeney?
I don't remember meeting him. company.
You refer to a meeting
I mean, it's possible that he was in the
But I don't remember meeting him particularly.
Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
In his statement to the Tribunal.
If we could have,
please, page 2191, please.
29 12:03:07 30
He states there in the second paragraph I specifically recall having had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:03:11
12:03:27
46 1
contact sometime or other with the following political representatives, at the
2
bottom of the page you will see yourself, senator Helen Keogh.
3
A.
4
That's possible.
I don't remember an individual appointment or anything.
He
may have been in the company of others and I just don't recollect him.
5
Q. 209
You say, you go on to say that you never had any discussions with Frank Dunlop?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 210
Your second last paragraph, you say, on page 1138.
I received no payments
8
from any of the individuals companies you have listed.
9
did receive in 1992 a cheque for 500, which I believe you cancelled.
12:03:47 10
A.
I returned it.
11
Q. 211
It was cancelled.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 212
And I think that payment.
And you say that you
You returned it.
If we could have page 3866, please.
14 12:04:17 15
In the note there about half way down that page there's reference on the 17th
16
of November '92 reference to 500 pounds.
17
document.
And that's a Monarch generated
Monarch Properties document.
18 19
Again, at 3865.
12:04:46 20
3865 half way down again there's a line through it 500.
In
fairness to you
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 213
At 3868 there is top November 13th it says at top a bank reconciliation
23
statement 13th of March 1993 Monarch Properties Services Limited document and
24
500 pounds cancelled.
12:05:05 25
You see that at the top of the page there you'll see
it?
26
A.
Yes, I see it.
27
Q. 214
Now, you say that was the only one as far as you can recollect, that you
28
received from Monarch Properties. The only personal donation that I ever
29
received.
12:05:14 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:05:14
12:05:43
47 1
Q. 215
Would you have elicited, would you have sought or solicited that donation?
2
A.
No, I never sought any personal donations.
3
Q. 216
There was a statement in to the Tribunal from Mr. Phil Monahan.
4
1579.
5
request for assistance to defray Local Election expenses.
6
number of lists in that.
7
from him?
In which he refers to payments and contributions that arise on foot of
8
A.
No, I don't believe I did.
9
Q. 217
Very good.
12:06:12 10
1991.
And page
And he refers to a
You are saying that you never sought any payment
Now, Ms. Keogh, could I just going to -- your election was in June
You were elected on 27th of June?
11
A.
County Council elections.
12
Q. 218
To the County Council elections?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 219
And I think prior to that I think you received a payment of 300 pounds from
12:06:25 15
16
Monarch. A.
Do you recall that?
I don't recall receiving a payment directly to me.
I know that from time to
17
time Monarch would have contributed towards events in the constituency.
18
don't recall a direct payment to me.
19
Q. 220
But I
Maybe --
Page 3241, please.
12:06:49 20
21
And you can see there, again it's about half way down the page.
22
H Keogh Local Elections expenses 300
11th of June
23
A.
I'm afraid I just didn't.
24
Q. 221
And could you have sought that payment?
A.
I didn't think so.
26
Q. 222
You weren't --
27
A.
Individually.
I mean, things may have been done on behalf of the constituency
28
at that time.
I wouldn't have directly been involved in that perhaps.
29
have no recollection of it anyway.
12:07:11 25
12:07:32 30
Q. 223
All right.
I have no recollection of that at all.
I don't remember us seeking donations.
And have you any recollection of speaking -- have you any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
I
12:07:36
12:07:48
48 1
recollection of speaking with anybody in relation to this prior to -- in
2
relation to Cherrywood Monarch Properties or any of the individuals prior to
3
the election in June?
4
A.
No, I don't.
5
Q. 224
1991?
6
A.
No, I don't, no.
7
Q. 225
Now, in relation to the 500 pounds that you say is the only donation that you
8
can recollect and you returned that.
9
might have returned that?
12:08:03 10
A.
Could you tell the Tribunal why you
Well the whole process of the Development Plan was ongoing.
And I just was a
11
bit uneasy about accepting a personal donation.
12
period of time I would have sought, on behalf of the party, to have donations.
13
But this was addressed specifically to me.
14
accepting a personal donation knowing that, you know, that there would be a lot
12:08:29 15
16
I mean, I know that over a
And I just was a bit uneasy about
of debate about the ongoing planning issues and so on. Q. 226
This was the cheque of course for 500 was in '92.
Going back to' 91, page
17
3181.
18
This shows the payment of 300 pounds, the debiting of 300 pounds from the
19
account of Monarch.
12:08:58 20
This is an AIB bank statement for Monarch Properties Services Limited.
On cheque 3646.
And if we could have document 3180,
please.
21 22
And about 12 from the top there it has H K PD, 11.6.91 cheque No. 3646, 300
23
pounds.
That cheque is the cheque made out to you.
24
lodged.
Do you recall or would you have any idea why you would not have sent
12:09:28 25
26
And that cheque was
that payment back? A.
Well all I can imagine is that went to defray local expenses and it wasn't
27
personally to me.
28
mean, that's only an assumption I'm making at this stage.
29 12:09:44 30
I don't remember one way or the other.
But that's, I
Q. 227
Yes?
A.
And also perhaps because -- I suppose really that knowing that there was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:09:51
12:10:10
49 1
ongoing payments, that one wouldn't like to feel personally beholden to people.
2
But, no, I couldn't tell you now at this stage.
3
Q. 228
4
Now, and you are aware that it doesn't say Progressive Democrats.
It's H K,
it's attributed to you and not the Progressive Democrats?
5
A.
It has PD after it.
6
Q. 229
It does, indeed.
7
A.
No, I don't.
You have no recollection in any event?
I didn't tend to handle the finances within the constituency.
8
And I tried to ensure that they were all separate.
9
don't remember it or got it and immediately passed it on, which would be the
12:10:30 10
normal circumstance within the constituency.
11
Q. 230
All right.
12
A.
Remember accurately on that I'm afraid.
13
Q. 231
All right.
14 12:10:49 15
But I couldn't ...
Now, just moving back to the planning.
elected in June 1991.
So I either got it and
Now, when you were
There had been agreement for the first public display
of map 27, effecting the subject lands.
16 17
If we could have page 7020, please.
18 19
Now, you can see from that map there that the Monarch lands were outlined in
12:11:04 20
red, as you can see.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 232
And the subject lands there Cherrywood in yellow.
Now, this was map 7021.
23
It was the first public display from September '91 to December '91.
24
recall that map and the matter of the public display?
12:11:21 25
26
Do you
A.
Well I can just about recall it at this stage, yes.
Q. 233
And you will see that from that map that there was a number of discussions and
27
in May '91 before you were elected of course to the council.
28
of those discussions this map shows residential development east of the South
29
eastern Motorway.
12:11:42 30
A.
You will see the line going through?
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And as a result
12:11:43
12:12:01
50 1
Q. 234
2
Residential zoning was changed from AS 1 to AP, that is from one house per acre on septic tank to four houses on piped sewage.
3
A.
Piped drainage, yeah.
4
Q. 235
And you can see that there is a slight potential revising of the line of the
5 6
South eastern Motorway and that's the black dotted line? A.
7 8
Yeah.
I think there was some discussion about the line of the motorway that
the time. Q. 236
Now, I believe that if we could look at page 3337, please.
9 12:12:13 10
Now, this is a note of a meeting and present at the meeting you can see from
11
the top there it's dated 11th of September.
12
page.
13
Lafferty, Reilly, Murray and Cassidy were in attendance.
14
written by Michael Cassidy.
12:12:45 15
good.
We'll deal with that in a moment.
I can sell you from the following
It's a meeting which Mr. Sweeney, And the note is
And in, you can see in the top there progress is
Notes on meeting held in Monarch House. One, progress is good. Public
16
relations aspects to be explored as soon as possible, as soon as a deposit is
17
paid. And then there is a number of people's names with the initials it would
18
seem beside them with the initials of members of Monarch Group.
19
Helen Keogh and beside that is PR, possibly Phil Reilly
12:13:09 20
21
And your name
A.
Yeah.
Q. 237
And have you any explanation as to why your name would appear on such a
22
document?
23
A.
I'm not exactly sure what the purpose of this document is, sorry.
24
Q. 238
Public relations aspects to be explored.
It seems that there is a list of
people on this, on this documentation.
And underneath the heading which is
26
public relations aspects to be explored.
Have you any reason to understand
27
why your name might appear on the document such as that?
12:13:28 25
28
A.
No, except it seems to be quite a number of the members of the council.
29
Q. 239
Yes.
12:13:54 30
I think in total about 18 members of the council on that.
All right.
I think in November 1991 a number of representations were received by the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:14:00
12:14:29
51 1
council in relation to the map No. 27.
2
from Monarch.
3
As well as certain other matters regarding density.
4
'92 you are aware that hearings had concluded and a number of representations
5
and objections of representations regarding the first public display on map No.
6
27?
7
A.
8 9
And in particular representation 1117
And that sought change in the zoning densities of the land.
Yeah, I'm quite sure I did.
And by the 10th of April
I don't have a very vivid recollection at this
stage of it. Q. 240
12:14:44 10
I think there was a meeting at which you were at on the 13th of May. that's 7192.
That was at this meeting.
7192.
And
That the Manager reported to
11
the council regarding the various reports and objections, representations
12
received.
13
that is DP92/44.
And he also proposed certain amendments to map 27.
Arising out of
And that's at 7203, please.
14 12:15:10 15
16
Now, do you recall seeing this map and having this map circulated to you? A.
I'm sure that that map was circulated.
As I say, at this stage my
17
recollection isn't very vivid but I do remember maps being circulated that the
18
time, yeah.
19
Q. 241
And you can see that there's a number of changes to the map in relation to the
12:15:39 20
subject lands.
21
from A to A1?
And that change in density.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 242
It's four houses per hectare.
24
You can see there in the map
And that's on the subject lands.
rezoning of B, that is agricultural lands to A1P.
12:15:55 25
of the South eastern Motorway.
26
And also a
And they are on lands west
You can see that just below the large black
line that goes through the subject lands?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 243
And there is also again, you see a possible re alignment of the Southeastern
29 12:16:13 30
Motorway and a number of other proposed changes. Nothing turns on that.
Now, the important meeting.
The meeting didn't make any decision.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
No vote taken.
12:16:17
12:16:40
52 1
On 27th of May 1992.
At 7205, please.
2 3
Now, at this meeting there was a number of motions had been received, as I've
4
stated, in relation to, as you would be aware, the public display.
5
number of these motions were dealt with, 11 in all, at this meeting.
And a
6 7
And in particular, DP 90/44 was considered.
8
relation to same 7207, please.
And there was a motion in
From Mr. Lydon and Mr. McGrath.
9 12:17:00 10
And that was, this motion sought to adopt the changes, that is in the zoning
11
densities re alignment of Southeastern Motorway etc..
12
and lost.
13
motion? I can tell you that you voted against.
14
A.
12:17:23 15
16
And that motion was put
Do you remember that motion? Do you remember voting on that
Yeah, I would imagine that I would have voted against it yeah.
Actually, I
mean, I should say that I remember that occurring. Q. 244
And I think then there was a motion, 7211, please.
17 18
And that's as you can see there's -- this is in relation to your own motion,
19
Mr. Lohan and yourself were responsible for putting in a motion.
12:17:56 20
motion 3 1 A 5.
That's
That's at page 7155, if we could have that, please.
21 22 23 24 12:18:07 25
And 7156.
And at 7157.
7157.
26
and your name is written in there.
27
that motion?
Now, on that you can see the subject lands Do you recall having signed your name to
28
A.
I must have, yeah.
29
Q. 245
And I think your motion was seeking to have two houses per acre on the subject
12:18:40 30
I'm not exactly sure what the motion was.
lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Can you ...?
12:18:41
12:19:10
53 1
A.
2 3
Oh, I think, yeah, it was a, designed as a sort of a compromise or whatever suggested but I don't think it received any support.
Q. 246
4
You lost that motion was lost and there were two subsequent motions. Mr. Eamonn Gilmore and O'Callaghan.
One by
And that's at 7214, please.
5 6
And that was motion 3189.
That was seeking a district centre, or what's known
7
as objective C, district centre, on the lands.
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 247
Now, you abstained in that vote.
A.
I wasn't convinced that that was the right way to go but I didn't particularly
12:19:22 10
11 12
want to vote against it. Q. 248
13 14
You weren't ...?
Page 7216.
This was the motion by Barrett and Dockrell.
3 1 A 11.
This
motion was sought to reduce the residential density to one house an acre? A.
Yeah.
Q. 249
And you voted for this?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 250
You voted to have the lands not as DP92/44 would have had with a higher
12:19:41 15
18
density.
19
acre?
12:19:53 20
21
But you voted for Mr. Barrett's motion seeking to have one house per
A.
Yeah, I think following discussion we decided that we would support that.
Q. 251
Why did you vote for that as opposed to the motion for Lydon and McGrath; which
22
was the higher density?
23
A.
I think it was on the recommendation of the hang Manager at the time.
24
Q. 252
No, the Manager's recommendation was for DP 90/44 which would have allowed for
12:20:17 25
26
o four houses per acre? A.
I'd say it was then on foot of the debate that occurred there.
Because that's
27
what I usually based my decisions upon was mostly the advice of the Manager
28
and/or the advice and discussions that took place.
29
exact content of that.
12:20:37 30
Q. 253
Now, I don't remember the
But that would have been my general approach.
You see your own motion sought for a higher density? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
So ...
12:20:40
12:20:58
54 1
A.
Yeah.
But it lost.
We weren't looking for a high density.
2
to the acre.
So this is one to the acre.
3
was -- I thought that that was a better solution.
So I suppose we thought that that
4
Q. 254
The lower density was a better solution?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 255
All right.?
7
A.
I don't know that the services were available at the time.
8 9
now. Q. 256
12:21:12 10
It was only two
I can't recollect
But that may have been one of the reasons.
Well I believe as a result of the Manager's representations on the 30th of May. He recommended in fact a higher density as a result of the area Action Plan and
11
piped sewage?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 257
So I think he was envisaging?
14
A.
That that would be viable.
12:21:24 15
We thought that wouldn't be there in time.
think there was also a little bit of debate about progress and so on.
I
I mean,
16
I don't remember exactly.
I wouldn't have seen a huge difference between the
17
one and the two per acre.
I think we were trying to arrive at some kind of
18
compromise, which wasn't very successful.
19
Q. 258
12:21:45 20
All right.
Now, again, on the 17th of November '92.
500 pounds.
This is the payment for
This is the cheque you say you sent back.
Indeed it seems to
21
have been cancelled by Monarch Properties.
22
saying was because you were uncomfortable with the cheque being sent to you
23
directly.
24 12:22:03 25
A.
Yeah.
Q. 259
Okay.
26
And you say that your reasons for
Is that correct?
And on the 23rd of June 1993.
At page 4018, please.
Do you see
there, Ms. Keogh, 23rd of June ticket fundraiser 100 pounds?
27
A.
That would have gone directly to the party.
28
Q. 260
Do you remember receiving that?
29
A.
I know that certainly when we were doing fundraising for the party that we
12:22:32 30
It wouldn't have gone to me.
would have sent out letters to, you know, all and sundry really. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Unless they
12:22:37
12:23:03
55 1
were people that we really didn't want to deal with.
2
that's -- tickets fundraiser.
3
auction or something like that.
4
Q. 261
8398, please.
That might have been something like a dream I'm not exactly sure now.
This is the cheque it's cheque No. 8269.
5
clearest but it's dated 23rd of June '93.
6
You'll see that PD?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 262
Made out for 100 pounds.
9 12:23:21 10
signature.
But so I would say that
It's written to you.
Helen Keogh.
And I think you've endorsed it on the back.
Your
At 8399, please.?
A.
Yeah, that would mean that I endorsed it for the party.
11
Q. 263
For the party?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 264
I think that was cashed.
14
And it's not the
If we could have 4262.
That's an AIB account for
Monarch Properties services limited bank statement.
And you'll see one-third
12:23:35 15
down the page 8269, 100 pounds debited.
4262.
16
93 and under that third down 100 pounds.
You didn't feel it necessary to
17
return that cheque?
18
A.
It wasn't to me.
19
Q. 265
Well it was written out.
A.
I've noted that a few times.
12:24:06 20
You will see there 26 of July
I mean. You'll see the cheque? I didn't have the opportunity to trawl through
21
all of the documentation.
22
actually -- that maybe cheques were written out to me.
23
endorsed them immediately and passed them on.
24 12:24:26 25
26 27
But I was quite surprised to see that things were But I would have
And I really don't recall --
Q. 266
But you will accept that this cheque was written out to you?
A.
Oh, absolutely.
Q. 267
And cashed.
Now, I think the second public display was July to August 1993.
And that was map 27.
7217, please.
28 29 12:24:51 30
And you can see that the change No. 3 and No. 4. motions the previous May.
And this would reflect the
The Barrett motion and the O'Callaghan Gilmore
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:25:01
12:25:21
56 1
motions.
If you can see the map there.
You'll see that again the Monarch
2
lands are outlined in red.
3
the map.
4
That is the agricultural land to C and some of the residential land to C, town
5
centre also.
6
council that there below density on the subject lands and that there be a town
7
centre.
You can see that there's change No. 3 written on
That's density one house per acre.
And also there's change No. 4.
And in other words, this map is reflecting the views of the
Can you follow that? You can see it on the map
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 268
Again, I have to ask you do you remember this map?
A.
I remember the process, you know, I may not remember each individual map
12:25:39 10
11 12
because there were many of them but yeah, I certainly remember the process. Q. 269
On the 11th of November 1993, 7258, please.
There's another meeting of the
13
council.
14
meeting which came to discuss the changes on the map 27.
12:26:22 15
Again, you were present at this meeting.
the Manager proposed deletion of change No. 3.
And this meeting was the And at this meeting
And it was Mr. Barrett's.
16
to delete the very low density of one house per acre.
17
motions at this meeting.
So
And there were two
7224, please.
18 19 12:26:45 20
Now, this motion sought to confirm the change No. 3. there would be very low density on these lands.
21
confirm Mr. Barrett's motion from May of '92.
22
motion.
That is to confirm that
The one house per acre to
Now, you voted against that
23 24
At 7262, please.
12:27:01 25
26
If you will see the motion proposed by Councillor Gilmore and a O'Callaghan
27
resulted in for 26 and the motion was lost and against 44.
28 29
At 7263, please.
12:27:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:27:20
12:27:38
57 1
You will see there against and your name is recorded as having voted against,
2
confirming the low density on the lands.
3
A.
Right.
4
Q. 270
Now, there was a subsequent motion.
That was the motion of Marren and Coffey.
5
And that was to delete change No. 3.
On the subject lands only.
6
been dealt with this morning, you would have heard evidence.
This has
7 8
At 7226, please.
9
And at 7263 you will see that you voted for.
12:28:19 10
And 27.
That motion seeks to delete that change three. Again, you can see that
following the motion proposed by Councillor Marren and seconded by councillor
11
motion.
For the motion was won and you voted for that?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 271
If we could go back, please, to 7226, please.
14 12:28:34 15
And you can see, if we could highlight please what the top of the motion what
16
it seeks.
You can see that Dublin County Council hereby resolves to accept
17
the County Manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of
18
the lands outlined in red and attached map.
19 12:28:58 20
And also there's an amendment to that.
21
And that seeks to have the remaining
lands that is the non-monarch lands at two houses per hectare.
22
A.
Right.
23
Q. 272
Now, the 18 months, Ms. Keogh, from May '92 to November '93 there seems to have
24
been a significant change.
12:29:25 25
have voted against keeping the change that you had previously voted for, 18
26
months before.
27
against 18 months before.?
28 29 12:29:49 30
Could you advise the Tribunal as to why you would
A.
Yeah.
And voted for a change in the density that you had voted
I think that's down to the fact that sometimes we sought compromise
that didn't work.
And then time went on and generally speaking we would have
tried to follow the Manager's advice.
And then if we thought that perhaps
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:29:53
12:30:06
58 1
with amendment the manager's advice would be taken.
2 3
I don't remember the exact.
4
that's, you know, probably what I would do.
5
reasonable and achieving the best results that we could at the time.
6
would have been my general approach.
7
individual motion at this stage obviously but that would have been my general
8
approach
9
Q. 273
12:30:21 10
I'm just saying that's a general approach.
So
Trying to be, I suppose, That
I don't specifically remember each
And this, you would accept, the approach was completely in contract to your earlier view in regards to low density?
11
A.
Well, you know, the densities aren't hugely different, you know.
12
Q. 274
Well one house per acre versus four would be significant if you were attempting
13 14
In fact.
to develop the lands; wouldn't you agree? A.
12:30:42 15
Well I think there was a view at the time.
That was, I don't want to go into
sort of some of the kind of speculation that there was.
But, you know,
16
terribly wealthy people would have an acre a ground and this sort of stuff.
17
There was a lot of speculation and discussion.
18
would have done is try to get the best result possible at that time.
19
Generally speaking what I
Q. 275
Were you approached by any?
A.
No.
21
Q. 276
Parties?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 277
Anybody at all in relation to these votes?
24
A.
No, definitely not.
Q. 278
Or advised any way in relation to these votes?
26
A.
No, no.
27
Q. 279
The change then resulted in the Monarch lands having a zoning of four to the
12:31:02 20
12:31:09 25
28
acre and ten to the hectare.
29
have voted specifically for the Monarch lands only having this zoning density
12:31:38 30
Now, have you any understanding why you would
and not the other lands? In other words, if I might put it to you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
The
12:31:43
12:32:03
59 1
Monarch lands were to have this significantly, I would suggest to you, zoning
2
advantage of four houses to the acre with the balance of the lands as a result
3
of this motion having only two houses per hectare.
4
A.
Now...
Well, I would imagine, as I say, I don't remember each and every motion that
5
was put forward, because goodness knows there were very many.
6
would imagine, and I'm speculating now because I don't recall exactly, that I
7
would have, in all circumstances, tried to get the best result on the advice of
8
the Manager and following the discussion that took place.
9
was not concerned who owned what land.
12:32:28 10
relation to the planning.
11
land.
I would have rather not even know who owned the
Because I thought that that --
Q. 280
Were you aware who owned the land?
13
A.
Oh, I probably was aware.
14
Q. 281
That would suggest that you?
A.
Yeah, I mean, but that wasn't of major concern to me.
16 Q. 282
Now, you say you would have followed the Manager's --
18
A.
Insofar as possible.
19
Q. 283
You hadn't in '92.
A.
I would say that was following the debate at the time.
Q. 284
All right.
21
My concern would have
been to try to get the best result possible within the county.
17
12:32:59 20
And I didn't -- I
And I didn't like that approach in
12
12:32:39 15
But I think, I
You had gone against the Manager's recommendation?
You say that you weren't -- a few moments ago you said that you
22
wouldn't have been happy with notion of very wealthy people on one house per
23
acre?
24
A.
12:33:15 25
wouldn't take that fairly seriously.
26 27
That's part of the kind of stuff that was being talked about at the time.
I
But I think, you know, there would have
been some talk about that. Q. 285
Could we have 7217, please.
28 29 12:33:37 30
Now, you can see these again.
The subject lands.
There is the balance of
the lands now, which you can see from the map, is a significant portion of land Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:33:45
12:34:04
60 1
is and remains as a result of this motion, which you voted for, remains this
2
two houses per hectare.
3
any way? Did you discuss it with anybody that it might have struck you as
4
unusual?
5
A.
Was that not -- did that not strike you as unusual in
I don't remember particularly discussing it.
I think generally speaking I
6
don't know that we would have been focussing on that.
7
focussing on, you know, the authority of the proposals and so on.
8
particularly remember discussing it.
9
Q. 286
12:34:26 10
Now, returning to the meeting.
We would have been I don't
There were a number of other motions in
particular a motion by Mr. Smith and that sought to change the zoning that
11
change four A back to B.
12
lands back to agriculture be changed for the town centre.
13
map there.
14
sorts from the subject lands.
12:34:53 15
As will see in the
Four A is at the bottom of that map where there is a square of
centre lands.
16
That is the change that part of the agricultural
That's the town centre.
The proposed town
This motion sought to have that part of the zoned town centre
lands put back as agricultural.
And do you remember that motion?
17
A.
Not particularly.
18
Q. 287
Would you remember that you voted against changing that land back to
19 12:35:14 20
21
agricultural? A.
Well I wouldn't be surprised if I had.
Q. 288
All right.
Now, I think that there was again a motion to affirm the changes,
22
that is the changes regarding town centre on those lands again in that box you
23
can see.
24
Lohan.
12:35:42 25
And that was from Counselor Marren and your colleague councillor And that vote was taken.
on a show of hands.
That's 7267, please.
That vote was taken
So, in other words, this was a vote to affirm the changes
26
4 A and 4 B notwithstanding that on foot of the Manager's recommendation the re
27
tailed space was to be limited to enable retail size.
Do you remember that?
28
A.
I don't specifically remember that.
29
Q. 289
And do you remember how you might have voted? It say as show of hands.
12:36:10 30
there's no record of the vote.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
So
12:36:12
12:36:34
61 1
A.
2 3
I don't particularly.
I don't specifically remember.
I may have voted for
it but I couldn't be definite about that. Q. 290
All right.
Now, arising out of that.
4
Development Plan was adapted.
5
highlight the subject lands.
On 10th of December 1993 the County
That's 7278.
And that's 7278.
If we can
6 7
The map now shows that on the subject of Monarch lands, and they are in green.
8
They should be, it's not a very good coloured map.
9
zoning on part of the subject lands is ten houses per hectare.
12:36:55 10
town district centre.
But in any event, the
You can see the purple box there.
There is also
And below or west
11
of the Southeastern Motorway you can see what is blue, of sorts.
12
can you follow the map there? The town centre is the squarish area, that's the
13
town centre area.
14 12:37:16 15
A.
Yeah.
Q. 291
And then you can see that.
16
lands.
And then just north of that is blue agricultural
You can see that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 292
Anyway.
19
If you can,
Arising out of that.
This was the situation in 1993.
And I think
in 1994 the council's or the County Council in Dublin was split up; isn't that
12:37:39 20
correct?
21
A.
That's correct, yeah.
22
Q. 293
And I think the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council of which you were a
23 24 12:37:44 25
member? A.
Yeah.
Q. 294
And if I could just page 4941, please.
Now, this is February 1st 1994.
26
this is now indeed it says Progressive Democrats PDs 2,000.
27
fund raiser interest free loan hello Keogh?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 295
Do you recall having received this money?
A.
Not at all! I saw this and I was quite surprised.
12:38:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And
You see that says
I think at the time the
12:38:22
12:38:39
62 1
Progressive Democrats had a system of fundraising by seeking interest free
2
loans of a period of time.
3
nothing to do with me personally.
And that's what that must have.
Certainly it's
4
Q. 296
Did you seek this funding from Monarch?
5
A.
I don't know that I actually did myself because I think it may have been done
6
through the party.
7
asked to, sort of, do this through the constituencies or whether it came
8
through headquarters.
9
was note for me.
12:39:01 10
Q. 297
All right. cheque.
12
relation to that.
13
free? A.
12:39:22 15
I don't remember.
And then at 4961.
11
14
But I don't specifically remember now whether we were
But it certainly very definitely
We can see there's there outlined is the
Again, in the sum of 2,000 pounds.
And interest free.
Just in
What was -- why would they be described it as interest
Well I think at the time the party was badly in need of funds and this was seen as a way of ...
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
MR. DOYLE: That's right
19
It's definitely not me.
12:39:39 20
Q. 298
5065, please.
The cheque -- the name of that cheque is Progressive Democrats.
The name on the cheque is Progressive Democrats.
And again, this is a -- an expenses claim form of Richard
21
Lynn's.
22
can see the bottom of the writing there you have your name is written there
23
Helen Keogh 82 pounds.?
24 12:40:11 25
There's something in front of that I can't quite make it out.
Q. 299
It's something review.
Development review or something.
review it would seem.
And it has H Keogh.?
A.
28 29 12:40:35 30
22nd of April '94.
A.
26 27
And you can see it's dated April '94.
I have no idea what that is.
You
Development Plan
I can't he can't seen spell my name right I
notice. Q. 300
H Larkin.
Have you any recollection of meeting Mr. Lynn around this time for
a lunch or for a dinner in relation to the Development Plan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:40:42
12:41:08
63 1
A.
2
No.
No.
I mean, unless there was some sort of function on or something like
that.
3
Q. 301
Because it would be --
4
A.
It seems to be something else there as well.
5
Q. 302
Larkin I think?
6
A.
I certainly didn't have.
7
Q. 303
All right.
I don't know anybody called Larkin.
But you have no recollection of that meeting.
You see, in May
8
'94 I think the council came to seek a variation of the 1993 plan.
9
a draft area Action Plan.
12:41:24 10
that.
7294, please.
That's map P L 94/39.
By way of You can see
And there was a meeting on 23rd of May '94 of the planning development
11
and tourism committee to discuss this area Action Plan.
12
Gilmore sought agreement from the County Council that they would review zoning
13
for the '93 plan for a science and technology park?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 304
Do you remember discussions in relation to that?
16
A.
I remember there were discussions, yeah.
17
Q. 305
And if we could see page 83156, please.
12:41:43 15
I think Mr. Eamonn
18 19 12:42:10 20
Now, this is a document, a memo of sorts, from Richard Lynn. Cherrywood political strategy.
And you can see
The next planning meeting at which Cherrywood
21
may be debated is on Wednesday 29th June 1994, at which meeting Eamonn
22
Gilmore's motion is to be clarified as regards the siting of science and
23
technology park.
24
members to move a motion from the floor in the context of the area Action Plan.
29th of June 1994 meeting may offer an opportunity for
12:42:30 25
26
And at the bottom it says action specific members should be approached on the
27
basis of moving and supporting such a motion from the floor.
28 29
8316, please.
12:42:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:42:41
12:42:54
64 1
Support of the following members must be obtained.
2
there second from the bottom, Helen Keogh
And you can see your name
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 306
Now, do you remember being approached by Mr. Lynn?
5
A.
I don't specifically remember being approached by Mr. Lynn.
But obviously I
6
knew of their involvement in that so it wouldn't be a surprise, surprising if
7
he had.
8
remember it.
9
Q. 307
12:43:15 10
I would be very surprised if he hadn't actually.
But I don't really
And he -- so you have no recollection of him approaching you in relation to this?
11
A.
No but I wouldn't be surprised if he had.
12
Q. 308
Do you accept that -- all right.
13
1994.
Now, I think the meeting on the 29th of June
2363, please.
14 12:43:24 15
This is a meeting of the planning development and tourism committee.
16
were reporting on the Cherrywood Action Plan.
17
at this meeting.
18
in relation to the Action Plan.
And they
Now, I believe you were absent
And it was at this meeting that certain matters were agreed
19 12:43:47 20
There was a subsequent meeting on the 14th of November 1994.
21
I believe you
were present at that meeting.
22 23
And it was at that meeting that on the 14th of November 1994 that management
24
presented to the councillors proposed variation to the 93 Development Plan to
12:44:10 25
provide for a science and technology park.
And he also advised regarding
26
certain agreements had been entered into between Monarch GRE and Dun
27
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
28
at it?
29 12:44:34 30
A.
Do you recall that meeting.
were present
Well, I know that I was present at meetings where those things were discussed. But as to the precise dates and meetings, I don't have, as I said before, a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:44:39
12:44:53
65 1
vivid recollection.
2
meetings.
3
Q. 309
4
But I can remember these being discussed at various
And do you remember the Manager proposing the science and technology park and reciting the town centre north of the relief road?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 310
You remember that?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 311
And also rezoning part of the agriculture lands?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 312
You remember that?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 313
Could we have 7284, please.
12:44:58 10
13 14
Again, you can see from this map here that what is proposed is a science and
12:45:12 15
technology park south of the district town centre.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 314
The proposed link road being moved, if you can see, northwards, with the town
18
centre moving proportionately as well.
19
the subject lands, being rezoned 16 houses to the hectare.
12:45:37 20
And lands north of that, in blue on Now, in relation
to the science and technology park and the proposed variation to the plan.
21
Both proposed changes were proposed by councillors Coffey and Butler by way of
22
a show of hands.
Both were passed.
Do you recall how you voted?
23
A.
I don't actually, no.
24
Q. 315
And would you have any idea in relation to the changes -- you have no idea how
12:46:06 25
you voted on this or what your views would have been or any discussions you
26 27
would have had? A.
I think if the Manager was in favour of it I know that we had a lot of
28
discussion about this.
29
having the science and technology park and how good that would be for Dun
12:46:23 30
And, you know, there was a lot of discussion about
Laoghaire/Rathdown and so on and so forth. I would imagine if the Manager was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:46:27
12:46:50
66 1 2
in favour of it that it was good proposal, that I would have supported it. Q. 316
And again, we have the subject lands in relation to the rezoning of
3
agricultural land on the subject lands from agricultural to 16 houses per
4
hectare.
5
of November '94 to 10th of March '95.
The area Action Plan you might remember was put on display from 13th Do you remember -- at 7563, please.
6 7
Again, this is almost a duplicate of the map that's just been on the screen and
8
the relevant proposed amendments or changes are there.
9 12:47:11 10
Now, on the 26th of January 1995.
If I could have page 5529, please.
11 12
You write a letter to Mr. Richard Lynn regarding a national draw for the
13
Progressive Democrats.
14
that, this document came as a result of discovery from Monarch Properties that
12:47:44 15
the writing on the bottom of this is seeking to have a cheque for 200 made out
And that's dated 19th of January 1995.
16
for the Progressive Democrats.
17
seeking?
18
A.
19 12:48:05 20
Written on
Do you remember writing this letter and
I'm sure that I would have written to Monarch looking for, asking them to buy tickets in the Progressive Democrats.
Q. 317
All right.
21 22
Now, on foot of that, back to the planning and public changes to the map.
23
24th of April 1995 there was another meeting.
24
meeting in fact.
12:48:29 25
26
On
You were absent again at this
And I was at this meeting that the Manager discussed various
representations and objections that had been received on foot of the public display.
27 28
And there was a change in relation to this.
29
were confirmed in the lands.
2428, please.
12:48:43 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
The changes, all of the changes
12:48:43
12:49:05
67 1
Sorry.
That's the wrong page.
7284, please.
2 3
7281.
4 5
Now, again, you can see this is a map of the lands where the zoning earlier
6
zoning had been ten house per acre.
7
At map 7283.
8
the lands are now zoned agricultural -- all residential either ten to the
9
hectare or 16 to the hectare.
12:49:33 10
Part agriculture and part town centre.
This was the final map that was confirmed in April '95.
Where
E1 science and technology park and town centre.
All Monarch lands as are outlined in this map.
You will see all Monarch lands
11
are now zoned some form of development there's no agricultural lands left in
12
the Monarch lands.
13 14
Do you remember this map at the time? You weren't at the meeting I accept.
12:49:48 15
16
Did you have discussions with anybody regarding this? A.
17 18
this, yeah. Q. 318
19 12:50:06 20
I'm sure there would have been a lot of discussion obviously at council about
Do you remember any specific -- do you remember being approached from anybody from Monarch or being approached by any interested party?
A.
Oh, I'm sure that myself along with other councillors were approached by
21
representatives of Monarch in relation to this.
22
present in the public gallery and so on from time to time.
23
Q. 319
24
Very well.
I remember that they were
Now, the review of the 1993 Development Plan.
place from 1996.
Ultimately took
However, in April 1996, 6027, please.
12:50:37 25
26
Now, this is a note generated by Richard Lynn.
27
dated it seems 12th of April.
28
Again, it states in writing please let me have a cheque for 100 pounds in
29
favour of Helen Keogh.
12:51:06 30
A.
I think it's for a ticket.
And you will see that it is
It could be 12th of March it's not very clear.
Do you remember receiving this 100 pounds Or a lunch or something.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
As I said, any monies
12:51:13
12:51:32
68 1
like that, if they were made out to me personally I endorsed them.
My usual
2
practice would be to, well I hope my constant practice would have been to
3
endorse them for the constituency.
4
Q. 320
Do you remember soliciting these funds or ...?
5
A.
Oh, I'm sure, that like, in general fund-raising terms, you know, we would have
6 7
sent out considerable number of letters and so on. Q. 321
5815, please.
8 9
Again, this is now a letter written by you to Mr. Lynn.
12:51:54 10
this letter, indeed you are seeking monies for.
And you are again in
We are organising a business
11
lunch on Friday 3rd of May 1996 at the Doyle Tara Hotel.
12
is a letter generated by Monarch.
13
I have a cheque in the sum of 500 pounds.
14
A.
12:52:25 15
Do you remember writing this letter
Yeah, I remember that we were fundraising and as you can see, the personal
Although I wrote the letter that was on behalf of the party obviously. Q. 322
18 19
Again, at the bottom of this similar could
contact is actually the people who are the treasurers in the constituency.
16 17
At the bottom this
And the figure written by Mr. Lynn on the bottom says 500 pounds.
Do you
remember receiving 500 pounds? A.
12:52:45 20
Well I don't think I would have received it myself.
Or if I, you know, if it
was received by one of the people mentioned there in my name they would have
21
asked me to endorse it.
22
Q. 323
And you don't recall receiving it?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 324
Could I have page -- sorry.
12:53:06 25
I think the May '96, the review of the '93
Development Plan was put by way of position papers prepared by the council
26
officials and presented to members?
27
A.
Uh-huh.
28
Q. 325
Do you remember being presented with these and circulated with these documents?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 326
And I think on 27th of May '96 there was a report by the Manager in relation to
12:53:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:53:23
12:53:30
69 1
the proposed changes?
2
A.
There would have been, yes.
3
Q. 327
And 6023, please.
4 5
This is a letter again from you.
6
this is again seeking national fund-raising draws and making this personal
7
appeal to you.
8
will see by Mr. Lynn it would seem, please let me have a cheque for 200.
9
you see that?
12:53:57 10
24th of June 1996.
To Richard Lynn.
Now,
Again, at the bottom of the letter is written in hand and you
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 328
Again, do you remember writing this?
12
A.
Yes, it was a fundraiser for the party.
13
Q. 329
And could I have page 5803, please.
Do
14 12:54:07 15
And you will see thereabout a third from the bottom up 27th of June Helen Keogh
16
PD lunch 200.
17
A.
Yeah, a fundraising lunch.
18
Q. 330
If we could have 8320, please.
19 12:54:35 20
And this is a cheque writ earn on 27th of the
6th 96 in the sum of 200 pounds.
This is made out to yourself personally.?
A.
Progressive Democrat on it as well.
21
Q. 331
That's right but it's Helen Keogh Progressive Democrat?
22
A.
I assume that that's endorsed and given to the treasurers of the fundraiser.
23
Q. 332
Right.
24 12:54:59 25
Unfortunately, I'm not able to assist you either on that.? A.
26 27 28
Well there's no copy of the reverse side of this cheque.
Well I can tell you, you know, I would be very surprised -- it should be certainly.
Q. 333
All right.
At 7659.
We can see that the said cheque was debited on 20th of
August 1996.
29 12:55:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:55:22
12:55:51
70 1
Q. 334
Now, in December 1996 the draft map and statement were prepared and furnished,
2
as I said, in advance of January '97 meeting.
3
the members proposed review of the '93 Development Plan.
4
2545, please.
5
1997 was a further meeting discussing the proposed changes.
6
This is map 10.
7
provides no density limits in relation to the subject lands.
8
receiving this map? I accept you weren't at either the meeting on the 29th of
9
January or 4th of February '97.
12:56:29 10
A.
11 12
Q. 335
And this is 2728, please.
Again, on 4th of February
This is map 10.
2549.
At 2728.
And this map Do you remember
I'm quite sure that I would have received all of those, all of that
Would you have made any representation to your party colleague or other councillors in relation to same?
A.
12:56:44 15
16
Again, you were absent for this.
At 2549, please.
documentation.
13 14
And this was to certainly to
I don't believe so, no.
I may have discussed it but I wouldn't have made any
representations. Q. 336
17
I think that on this there was no vote taken on this occasion on 4th of February.
The matter was put back.
If we could have 6186, please.
18 19
This is a letter from you to Mr. Richard Lynn.
12:57:13 20
And it's dated February 1997.
National need to finance our upcoming campaign.
Generously supported us in
21
the past and I would be very grateful if you would attend.
22
dinner Michael McDoole spokesperson on finance would be attending.
23
head or 500 per table.
24
see by Mr. Lynn and dated February '97.
12:57:39 25
A fundraising 60 per
At the bottom again there is a note written you will Please let me have a cheque for 500.
Do you remember sending that letter
26
A.
Yeah, as part of our fundraising drive, I did.
27
Q. 337
And did you acknowledge this payment do you remember by way of letter or
28 29 12:57:58 30
otherwise? A.
I'd imagine that we would have.
Q. 338
All right.
6184, please.
This again is a Monarch generated document.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
It
12:58:06
12:58:17
71 1
shows February 28th Helen Keogh PD 500 for lunch draw.
2
A.
The same applies.
3
Q. 339
And the same applies?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 340
And the same was cash 6214 AIB bank statement. 6190.
The same sum was cashed in
6
March '97.
There's a cheque made out to you Helen Keogh 500.
7
Indeed, you endorsed it on the back we can see there?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 341
Now, can I have 6322, please.
12:58:57 10
This is the 14th of March.
councillor Helen Keogh sum of 100 pounds PDs.
11
And again, it's to
You can see that.
That's six
from the top.?
12
A.
More party fundraising, I'm afraid.
13
Q. 342
More party fundraising.
14
And again you can see that at 6213, sixth from the
bottom there H Keogh Helen Keogh 100 pounds.
12:59:25 15
And this is a document that is
generated by Dunloe management services limited.
And I think that this is in
16
relation to the -- I think Dunloe Ewart or one of their other companies at this
17
stage had taken over the development of the subject lands?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 343
All right.
12:59:53 20
Now, you accept that these sums were either sought or not sought
but were received by you and/or the party?
21
A.
Yeah, by me on behalf of the party.
22
Q. 344
All right, Ms. Keogh.
On 2nd of April '97 again there was another meeting of
23
the County Council regarding the proposed changes to the -- you weren't, again,
24
you weren't at this map -- at this meeting.
13:00:17 25
26
proposed changes to the lands. confirmed.
But at this meeting indeed the
That is changes 1, 13 and 14 and 4 and 5 were
7465, please.
27 28
And this map here shows that the -- there is no residential density on the
29
subject lands at 1, 13 and 14.
13:00:44 30
on the map.
And you can see the numbers 13 and 14, there
If we could enlarge that, please
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:00:46
13:01:01
72 1
A.
I see that, yeah.
2
Q. 345
And 13 and 14 are Monarch lands.
And then change 4 and, 5 is an extension
3
south of the science and technology park.
And you can see that.
4
purple and grey striped area moving south?
That's the
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 346
Again, we can see the motorway south of that?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 347
Now, do you recall notwithstanding your absence, do you recall discussing this
9
or in any way advising anybody or discussing how people might vote, your
13:01:13 10
11
colleague or other councillors, in relation to this meeting? A.
12 13
I'm sure I discussed it.
But I don't remember giving advice to anybody or
making representations. Q. 348
14
On the -- this map then.
7470, please.
statutory display period to August 1997.
13:01:41 15
to enlarge the area, please.
Was put on public display.
Again, you can see that there's now,
Now zoning E1, D, C and residential.
16
and technology park, town centre and no density residential.
17
seeing this map? Do you remember?
18
A.
Yes, I do.
19
Q. 349
Yes.
13:02:08 20
All right.
were present at.
The 31
Now, on the 21st of January 1998.
Science
Do you remember
This is a meeting you
That is 2617, please.
21 22
It was at this meeting that there was a number of motions.
23
motions discussed in relation to the subject lands.
A large number of
And the said map.
24 13:02:32 25
The Manager recommended no change in density in relation to these.
And there
26
were a number of motions.
27
accept that.
28
in relation to the changes on the lands were by way of show of hands.
29
remember how you might have voted at this meeting on 21 of January 19 #- 8. I
13:03:00 30
You weren't involved in any of the motions and I
However, you were present in relation to same.
And the votes
don't specifically remember but I think I would have voted with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Do you
13:03:05
13:03:27
73 1
recommendation of the Manager at the time.
2
meeting.
3
Q. 350
All right.
But I don't remember the specific
And I think you will see the -- page 2730, please.
This was the
4
second public display of the maps.
5
were passed in January '98 there are now a number of changes on the lands.
6
And that is at page 2730.
7
Now, this proposal shows an increase at change 5 of the district centre albeit
8
with a cap on the size of retail development.
9
area.
13:04:00 10
Arising out of the various motion that is
Can we enlarge the subject lands there, please.
5 is marked out in black.
You can see that in the orange
Below that, that is west of that, southwest
of that, is the increased science and technology park.
11
We can see that as
well?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 351
And again, the science and technology bark has moved also south of the subject
14
lands.
13:04:29 15
Encompassing a very large area.
the 16th of June 1998.
2643, please.
Now, again, there was a meeting on
And you were at this meeting which
16
there was a motion seeking to change or rescind change No. 4, that is to
17
rescind the densities on residential -- the lateral residential density on
18
these lands.
19 13:05:00 20
Do you remember that motion?
A.
Not specifically.
Q. 352
You were present at the meeting.
21
rescinding the change to the map.
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 353
All right.
24
I can tell you that you voted against Do you remember that?
(laughter) I think I'm getting confused at this stage. Basically, at the end of this process, there are the subject lands
are now -- there are no agricultural lands, as previously said.
13:05:23 25
and technology park has been increased.
The town centre, albeit with a cap on
26
retail, has been almost doubled in size.
27
residential density restrictions in relation to the lands?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 354
Could we have a look at 1374, please.
The science
There is, as I say, there is no
13:05:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:05:45
13:06:17
74 1
Now, this is document generated on foot of statements received.
2
A.
Christmas card list.
3
Q. 355
Yes.
From Mr. Lynn I believe.
And in 1998.
You can see there on the
4
document it's about.
Sorry it's small.
5
centre Helen Keogh.
This is donations unspecified provided by Mr. Lynn.?
6
A.
Sorry, what's the date of this?
7
Q. 356
It's a Christmas list, yes.
8 9 13:06:38 10
11
A.
Christmas cards or something like that.
Q. 357
Do you remember seeking anything?
A.
I got a Christmas card, yeah.
16
I'm incorrect in
I did, yeah.
I don't think I sent one back
but maybe I did. Q. 358
14 13:06:50 15
Yes, it's not donations.
saying donations?
12 13
But it's about 15 from the bottom
All right.
And there was something similar in 1999 as well.
Do you remember
that? A.
Oh, I'm sure I did.
Q. 359
At page 137 5, please.
17 18
This is a document also generated by Mr. Lynn.
19
fundraising draw tickets for Progressive Democrats.
13:07:07 20
At No. 13.
National
Donated 15th of March
1999, following request from Mary Harney TD, senator, Helen Keogh.
21 22
Do you remember seeking... ?
23
A.
More fundraising, yeah, I'm afraid so.
24
Q. 360
All right.
13:07:29 25
And again at 1377, please.
At 47 there.
document generated by Mr. Richard Lynn.
26
Keogh.
27
that?
600 contributed in October '99.
28
A.
Oh, yeah, yes.
29
Q. 361
Did you seek that support?
A.
Oh, yeah we sent out the letters, we did.
13:07:42 30
Again, this is the
Organised through senator Helen Do you have any recollection of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:07:44
13:08:05
75 1
Q. 362
All right.
Okay.
If I might, Ms. Keogh, bring you back to your statement
2
where we started off.
Very briefly, you say at the second last paragraph I
3
received no payments from any of the individuals, or companies you have
4
listed.
5
unsolicited personal donation by cheque from Monarch Properties for 500, which
6
I returned.
I did receive, during the course of 1992 General Election an
7 8 9
Do you wish to change your statement in relation to what has just been added? A.
13:08:17 10
No, I think it's obvious that any monies that I received were for party fundraising.
I'm sorry.
I assume that any monies received for the '91 Local
11
Elections, that would have just been passed on.
12
that.
13
don't know that it was a personal contribution or not.
Certainly, I didn't seek any contribution.
And I had no recollection of And when I see it there, I
14 13:08:40 15
Generally speaking, if I got a contribution like that, I would just endorse it.
16 17
But I couldn't be absolutely definite about that. Q. 363
Yes.
Now, again, in relation to your earlier evidence.
18
interview that you gave to the Tribunal.
19
personal cheques.
13:09:05 20
21
And I believe an
You believed you were easy accepting
That is cheques with your name written on them?
A.
During the election campaign, yes.
Q. 364
That is the reason you gave both in your statement and here today.
22
The reason
you sent back the 500 cheque?
23
A.
It was to me personally.
24
Q. 365
We have dealt with 12, possibly 13 or 14 payments that would seem to indicate
13:09:22 25
that monies were provided to you.
26 27
And in certain circumstances cheques were
written out to you personally? A.
Yeah well they -- I think it's a little different to receive a cheque that's,
28
you know, unsolicited to you personally as opposed to a fundraising campaign
29
for the party, which all of those were.
13:09:45 30
And I sincerely hope and believe that
all of those payments by cheque would have been endorsed by me and given Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:09:49
13:10:09
76 1 2
straight over to the party. Q. 366
Right.
I believe that they all were.
And I think that you clarified that by saying certainly not during
3
Development Plan process.
Now, during this whole period, as has been outlined
4
here today, there was Development Plans were continually being reviewed or
5
revised right up to 1998?
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 367
During the whole of this process?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 368
There are some solicited and some unsolicited?
A.
Payments for the party.
11
Q. 369
To you?
12
A.
For the party.
13
Q. 370
To the party?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 371
Indeed, some of which are written out by way of cheque personally to yourself?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 372
One of which you returned.?
18
A.
No, no.
13:10:19 10
13:10:22 15
19
Let's be clear about this.
The cheque that I returned was an
unsolicited cheque that came during the election campaign.
13:10:41 20
for contributions.
We hadn't looked
It came and as it wasn't part of a sort of fundraising
21
drive or anything like that, and because I was a little bit uneasy knowing that
22
I didn't in any sense want to be compromised.
23
would have been compromised.
24
returned it.
Like any other politician, you know, we were involved in party
13:11:07 25
fundraising.
And I think that's a very different issue.
26
Q. 373
Yes.
Not that I believe that I ever
But that I just felt uneasy about it so I
Following from that, I think that if your stance is that notwithstanding
27
the practicalities as you've outlined in relation to fundraising and election
28
expenses.
29
your direct evidence here today.
13:11:39 30
If your view as advised in writing to the Tribunal and again in Was that you didn't or you felt uneasy
accepting monies personally made out to yourself, cheques personally made tout Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:11:46
13:12:05
77 1
yourself from a developer during a Development Plan.
2
would suggest at no stage should you receive or seek monies at any time from
3
any developer involved in lands for which you as a councillor were going to be
4
voting on?
5
A.
6 7
The logic of that I
Well, I mean, I just felt uneasy at the time about getting a personal donation. And I hadn't solicited anything specific for myself soy sent it back.
Q. 374
But isn't -- again, if the principle is set out initially regarding the 500
8
pounds that you sent back.
9
advised view, that should have been consistent throughout.
13:12:31 10
11
If that was your view at the time and presently And I suggest to
you it wasn't. A.
No, because they were two different things.
12
me, I believed.
13
campaigns that were organised through the constituency or through national head
14
office.
13:13:01 15
And so I sent it back.
That was a personal donation to
And the others were, you know,
And I could -- you may not see a difference but I did at the time.
Q. 375
Thank you, Ms. Keogh.?
16
A.
Thank you very much.
17
Q. 376
You might answer any questions anybody might have.?
18
A.
Of course.
Q. 377
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19 13:13:08 20
Just one small thing.
Obviously, could I ask you -- was
21
there ever within the party a discussion as to who would, if you like, look for
22
fundraising.
23
member of that in '94, it was a much smaller body than the County Council?
24
Obviously in Dun Laoghaire County Council, when you became a
A.
Yes.
Q. 378
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13:13:29 25
26
And I know you've answered the questions put to you by Counsel
27
for the Tribunal.
28
suppose given that you were in Dun Laoghaire County Council.
29
putting your name to letters seeking, albeit for the party -- I'm just asking
13:13:52 30
Did you ever have any qualms about being the person I That you were
this in the context that in this fund raiding drive for various things, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:13:58
13:14:21
78 1
obviously over a number of years especially '94 '95.
2
would be obviously keen to have development on their lands.
3
obviously and I know you can't speak for them.
4
pattern if you like.
5
where the four houses to the acre.
6
I'm just wondering.
7
drive.
8
being asked to do this at a time when, indeed, they may have to make decisions
9
about, in respect of lands, owned by people to whom the party was targeting as
13:14:52 10
11
Obviously Monarch who They would have
But I've seen your voting
Particularly the vote on the confirmation back in '93 You know, they got the increased density.
Obviously you were selected or asked to do a fundraising
Within the PDs was there any ever any discussion about councillors
businesses? A.
Well, I think, first of all.
13
Q. 379
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
A.
No, I understand exactly what you're getting at.
12
13:15:02 15
That's a very long-winded question. I don't think any of us
liked -- none of us would like as we say going around with a begging bowl.
16
knew, you know, in order to run political campaign it is had to be done.
17
I didn't particularly like doing it.
18
certainly within the party and certainly my own view was that I would take
19
decisions based on the best evidence put in front of me.
13:15:31 20
And I don't believe
21 Q. 380
CHAIRMAN:
23
A.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you very much.
24 13:15:40 25
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
26 27 28
MS. DILLON:
That concludes the business of the Tribunal today.
29 13:15:43 30
And
Now, I would say that there was
I ever deviated from that.
22
We
I understand that we are sitting at eleven o'clock on Tuesday next. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:15:48
13:15:51
79 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Eleven o'clock.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
May it please you.
5 6 7 8 9
13:40:55 10
11
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, TUESDAY, 6TH JUNE, 2006, AT 11:00 A.M.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
09:27:57
10:05:51
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
7TH JUNE 2006, AT 10 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Morning sir. Mr. Finbarr Hanrahan please.
7 FINBARR HANRAHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
8 9
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
10:06:04 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. Hanrahan
12
Morning Chairman.
13
Q. 1
Good morning Mr. Hanrahan.
14
A.
Morning.
Q. 2
You were elected to Dublin County Council in 1985 and in 1994 you became a
10:06:38 15
16
member of South Dublin County Council, is that correct?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 3
Therefore your involvement with the Cherrywood lands, insofar as you had an
19
input into the zoning or planning of those lands, occurred between the years
10:06:54 20
1990 and ended in the end of 1993, December 1993, is that correct?
21
A.
I guess so, I wouldn't remember it in detail but I guess so, yes.
22
Q. 4
I will show you the documents. I believe you were elected as member of Fianna
23 24 10:07:09 25
Fail, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 5
Can I ask you first of all whether or not you recollect the members of Fianna
26
Fail having pre council meetings upstairs in Conway's pub?
27
A.
Yes we had pre council meetings, yes.
28
Q. 6
And the Tribunal has been told that in general the party tended to go through
29 10:07:28 30
the matters that were on the agenda for the meeting, do you agree with that? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:07:29
10:07:48
2 1
Q. 7
2 3
Would the local councillors concerned with the lands that were on the agenda give their opinion on what should happen with the lands?
A.
Sometimes, yes, sometimes no. Sometimes it wouldn't necessarily be a local
4
councillor, but we'd generally debate the agenda, it was considered to be good
5
practice to have the agenda looked at and considered by ourselves before we go
6
into the Council. Because the Council was a very big Council, 77 members, and
7
it was a bit chaotic at general Council meetings so that as our party was the
8
biggest party, we always found it a good idea to have a look at the agenda
9
before we go inside.
10:08:10 10
Q. 8
And the Tribunal has been told that, by some members of your party,
11
Mr. Geraghty and Mr. Madigan in particular, that effectively a decision was
12
made by the Fianna Fail party at that meeting before you you went into the
13
Council Chamber, do you agree with that?
14 10:08:27 15
A.
I do not agree with that.
Q. 9
The Tribunal has also been told that in general the Fianna Fail party tended to
16 17
present a united front at the Council meetings, would you agree with that? A.
No I never considered myself voting in terms of a united front with the Fianna
18
Fail party. If I felt that something should be voted on and if my party voted
19
in the same way, then you can call it that we all voted the same way, but there
10:08:50 20
were times when councillors voted freely and according to their own decision.
21
And there was never a situation where the party actually decided inside of the
22
meetings in Conway's, that we'd all vote in a particular way outside.
23
Q. 10
Do you remember the late Mr. Pat Dunne?
24
A.
I do.
Q. 11
And Mr. Dunne has been described to the Tribunal as the whip of the Fianna Fail
10:09:07 25
26
party during a particular period of time in Dublin County Council, do you agree
27
with that?
28
A.
He was the whip, yes.
29
Q. 12
And the Tribunal has also been told that it was, it appeared to be, part of
10:09:20 30
Mr. Dunne's function to get numbers into the chamber for particular votes, do Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:09:24
10:09:40
3 1 2
you agree with that? A.
Well I believe its the function of all whips, in all organisations, to get
3
people into the chamber, people of their own party, into a particular chamber
4
in order to do the business of the, in our case the business of the County
5
Council.
6
Q. 13
The Tribunal has also been told that on occasion Mr. Dunne would give the nod
7
to the Chairman and matters would be moved up or down the agenda depending on
8
the numbers that were in the chamber, do you ever recollect anything like that
9
happening?
10:09:53 10
11
A.
No, I do not, no.
Q. 14
Now I think the Tribunal wrote to you in connection with the lands at
12
Cherrywood and you replied, I think by letter, of the 16 March 2006, at 984
13
please and you provided a narrative statement to the Tribunal, in which you
14
said the only involvement you had with the lands at Cherrywood was when you
10:10:12 15
voted in support of the Cherrywood Development when it came before Dublin
16
County Council in the early 1990s. You said the only interaction you had with
17
either the servants or agents of Monarch Properties, or any of the individuals
18
listed in part 2 or part 4 of your correspondence, was with Mr. Richard Lynn.
19 10:10:27 20
And you said that you believe that had in relation to part 3 of the inquiry you
21
received a cheque in the post from Monarch Properties for 300 or 400 Punts as a
22
donation towards the local election in 1991. And a similar contribution was
23
also made in the general election of the 1992. And those monies were used in
24
the general day to day expenditure of the election campaigns. Is that your
10:10:47 25
statement?
26
A.
That is correct yes.
27
Q. 15
Do you confirm the contents of that Mr. Hanrahan to be true?
28
A.
Well in the meantime you have sent me documentation which suggests that in fact
29 10:10:58 30
my figures were wrong. Q. 16
Yes. From the documentation that you have been provided with Mr. Hanrahan, by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:11:04
10:11:18
4 1
the Tribunal, it would appear that you received three political payments, isn't
2
that right, from Monarch Properties?
3
A.
It would appear to be so yes, I presume the figures Monarch Properties gave you
4
are correct, but I wouldn't have -- my memory is this, the statement that I
5
gave.
6
Q. 17
Yes your memory in relation to the 1991 payment was 300 or 400 punts and
7
according to Monarch Properties, at 3241 please, and you will see just slightly
8
above halfway down on that, that you were recorded as receiving 600 pounds on
9
the 6th June 1991 and at 3252, seven from the bottom, a cheque payments book of
10:11:47 10
Monarch records you as receiving 600 pounds. Do you see that?
11
A.
Yes I do.
12
Q. 18
Do you dispute that record Mr. Hanrahan?
13
A.
Well I have no records of my own, so I can't dispute their records if I have no
14
records of my own. So I am accepting it as, I presume that the Tribunal has
10:12:06 15
well and truly checked their details already and I believe it may be true all
16
right, yes.
17
Q. 19
I mean your own recollection was that you had received money in 1991?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 20
But you put it at 300 or 400 pounds an not 600, is that right?
A.
That's true.
Q. 21
The records you have also been provided with by the Tribunal at page 3809,
10:12:23 20
21 22
record a contribution in November 1992 of 1,000 pounds, and that's just
23
slightly above halfway down on that document, do you see, F Hanrahan, Fianna
24
Fail, general election expenses?
10:12:41 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 22
13th November 1992. And you had no recollection or sorry, you did not in your
27
statement to the Tribunal provide any information in relation to that payment,
28
isn't that correct?
29 10:12:58 30
A.
Oh I do. I did tell the Tribunal that I got a similar amount, I couldn't remember the actual amount, so in my letter that you had on the screen just a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:13:02
10:13:18
5 1
moment ago, I actually said in '92 I got a similar amount, but because I
2
couldn't remember the amount, I called it a similar amount. I trusted that you
3
would probably find the correct amount from Monarch Properties as in fact they
4
did send out cheques anyway.
5
Q. 23
Sorry, I obviously didn't make myself clear, what I had said to you
6
Mr. Hanrahan was you didn't tell the Tribunal in your letter to the Tribunal of
7
the 16th March 2006 that you had received a thousand pounds, in November of
8
1992, isn't that the position?
9 10:13:39 10
A.
Sorry, I didn't tell the Tribunal -- when?
Q. 24
In your letter, what you said to the Tribunal was a similar contribution of 300
11 12
or 400 pounds was received for the general election in 1992, isn't that right? A.
13 14
No its not. I said a similar contribution, but I didn't say a similar contribution of 300 or 400 pounds.
Q. 25
10:14:01 15
Very well, we'll just look at the letter, 984 please. Do you agree first of all that in your letter you disclose two donations?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 26
The first is a payment of 300 or 400 pounds in 1991?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 27
The second is described as "A similar contribution was made for the general
10:14:15 20
election of 1992", by the words a similar contribution, was the Tribunal to
21 22
understand that you were saying you had received 300 or 400 pounds in 1992? A.
No, the reason I actually said a similar contribution was, that I couldn't
23
recall what the contribution was. But I did recall that I got a contribution
24
and since I couldn't actually put a figure on it I called a similar
10:14:39 25
contribution.
26
Q. 28
Similar to what?
27
A.
Similar to the contribution that I received in '91.
28
Q. 29
Which was 300 or 400 pounds.
29
A.
But I didn't mean it to be the same.
Q. 30
I see. In any event...
10:14:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:14:53
10:15:03
6 1
A.
2 3
If I actually wanted to say it was the same, I would have said the same contribution was made in '92.
Q. 31
4
But you weren't aware of the precise amount you received in 1991 either, isn't that the position?
5
A.
No, in fact that's true.
6
Q. 32
I think you were provided with a cheque, at 8346, this is a copy of a cheque in
7
the sum of 1,000 pounds in favour of yourself dated 13th of November 1992,
8
isn't that correct?
9 10:15:19 10
A.
Yes, I see it.
Q. 33
Now can you recollect having any contact with anybody in Monarch Properties
11
leading up to the receipt of that cheque?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 34
Can I show you a document of 4655 Mr. Hanrahan. And you will have seen this in
14
the brief of documents, with which you were furnished and these are expenses
10:15:42 15
sheets provided to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties and this one is made out
16
in the name of Mr. Richard Lynn and its for the weekend of the 12th November
17
1993, and you will see there that you -- sorry I beg your pardon its 1993 so
18
its not relevant to the point that I was making, I beg your pardon.
19 10:16:02 20
21
The next payment I think Mr. Hanrahan is 1997, is that right? A.
22 23
records that in fact it was made. Q. 35
24
At 6322 you will note some seven or eight from the bottom of the 3rd of June 1997, an election contribution of 495 pounds, do you accept that that's a
10:16:28 25
26
So you tell me, I had no memory of it myself, but I accept if its in the
payment that was made to you? A.
I accept that that's what's in the records. I don't have any memory of getting
27
it at all, but obviously if it was sent out, if its recorded properly and if
28
you have checked it out properly, I will accept that I must have received it.
29 10:16:46 30
Q. 36
Well according to the cheque payments book of Monarch Properties which records the cheques that are written by Monarch properties, at 6335, you will see on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:16:58
10:17:13
7 1
that page, in the top half of that page, there are a series of payments that
2
are political payments, commencing with Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour Party,
3
Democratic Left, Fine Gael Dun Laoghaire, Fine Gael -- and then Finbarr
4
Hanrahan, Fianna Fail and beneath that Michael Joe Cosgrave?
5
A.
Yes, I see that, yeah.
6
Q. 37
That is a record of payments made by Monarch Properties in 1997. And would you
7
accept that it is likely that you received a sum of 495 pounds in 1997?
8
A.
It is quite likely, but I have no memory of it at all.
9
Q. 38
Yes. Who did you deal within Monarch Properties, or did you deal with anybody
10:17:36 10
11
in Monarch Properties Mr. Hanrahan, in connection with those payments? A.
Well, I wouldn't really call it dealing with anybody. I met Mr. Richard Lynn
12
who was actually, a person who was actually promoting their proposals,
13
generally, and I met him probably on a number of occasions actually. I don't
14
recall meeting others, but I may have.
10:18:05 15
Q. 39
16
Were you aware that Mr. Lynn was lobbying for support for the development at Cherrywood?
17
A.
Absolutely, yes.
18
Q. 40
And would Mr. Lynn and did Mr. Lynn seek your support in connection with the
19 10:18:17 20
Cherrywood Development? A.
Oh he would have, yes. I mean we wouldn't have been -- we wouldn't have been
21
talking about yesterday's race meeting, obviously if Mr. Lynn sought me out it
22
would be to discuss Cherrywood, I expect.
23
Q. 41
24 10:18:38 25
26
And Cherrywood wouldn't have been situate in your constituency, isn't that right Mr. Hanrahan?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 42
You are the other side of the county, you are west Dublin, isn't that the
27
position?
28
A.
That's correct yeah.
29
Q. 43
Would you have had any experience or knowledge of these lands yourself?
A.
No personal knowledge, no.
10:18:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:18:47
10:19:03
8 1
Q. 44
And did you discuss with any of your colleagues on Dublin County Council, the
2
zoning of these lands, or changes that were proposed to be made to these lands
3
in the review of the Development Plan?
4
A.
Well, it may have been discussed at one of our Fianna Fail meetings for
5
instance and I may very well have heard discussions or been involved in
6
discussions but, I can't remember them now.
7
Q. 45
The record records Mr. Hanrahan, that you voted in favour of the Manager's
8
report in May of 1992, at 7207, if I can show you first a map at 7203, now the
9
lands outlined in red are the Cherrywood lands that were owned by Monarch
10:19:34 10
Properties, would you have been shown any maps or documents by Mr. Lynn?
11
A.
I probably would, but I can't recall at this stage.
12
Q. 46
And the Manager was proposing in May of 1992, that the residential density
13
would be changed to Action Area Plan and that the extent of the residential
14
lands owned by Monarch would increased, and that was reflected on the map
10:19:58 15
that's on screen, do you see that?
16
A.
I see the map on the screen.
17
Q. 47
Well do you see where it says A to A1?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 48
And the first A with the P is, residential zoning on piped sewerage, isn't that
10:20:14 20
right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 49
And the second, A1P, is residential zoning on Action Area Plan, isn't that
23 24 10:20:21 25
right? A.
Correct.
Q. 50
So what the Manager is suggesting insofar as the words A to A1, is a change in
26
the density, from residential on piped sewerage, to Action Area Plan, isn't
27
that right?
28
A.
Correct yes.
29
Q. 51
And included in an Action Area Plan would be provision for schools and
10:20:45 30
provision for retail, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:20:45
10:20:53
9 1
A.
That's correct yeah.
2
Q. 52
And the Manager is also showing on that map a change in zoning from B to A1P,
3
do you see that?
4
A.
I do, yes.
5
Q. 53
And that's a change from agriculture to residential Action Area Plan?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 54
So now having considered the map, do you agree that the Manager was proposing a
8
change in the residential density on the lands, together with an increase in
9
the residentially zoned area?
10:21:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 55
Now that map came before the meeting of the Dublin County Council on the 27th
12
of May, 1992 and it was proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded by Councillor
13
McGrath, at 7207 please. Now Councillor Lydon and Councillor McGrath proposed
14
that the Manager's report, DP 92/44 be adopted and approved by the Council, do
10:21:38 15
you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 56
And you voted in favour of that, isn't that right?
18
A.
That's correct, yes.
19
Q. 57
Now would you outline to the Tribunal having looked at the map, the reasons why
10:21:48 20
21
you would have voted in favour of that? A.
Well, we are going back a very long time now. Any vote I made in the County
22
Council was as a result of listening to arguments in favour of, or against a
23
particular proposal, over a period of time. Not necessarily in a short few
24
moments inside at that particular council meeting. I would have listened to
10:22:11 25
the various arguments and I would have come to the conclusion that that was the
26 27
correct way for me to vote. Q. 58
28 29 10:22:31 30
Yes and that was a very close meeting in May of 1992, 35 against and 33 for, with no abstentions, isn't that right?
A.
Yeah I see that now, I would have no memory of that, but I can see it now, yes.
Q. 59
Is it likely that these, this map and these lands were discussed by the Fianna Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:22:34
10:22:50
10 1
Fail party at their meeting in Conway's pub in advance of the full Council
2
meeting?
3
A.
It is probably likely, yes, we may have discussed it, I am not sure, we didn't
4
always have meeting before every meeting of the County Council by the way, so I
5
have no memory of the meeting I couldn't say, we mightn't have a meeting at
6
all. By the way you keep saying in Conway's, we did have meetings in other
7
venues besides Conways, it just happens I might stress about the Conway's
8
situation, we had very small office in the County Council offices in O'Connell
9
Street, to accommodate our very large numbers, it was a room that would be very
10:23:14 10
small for ten councillors and we were a membership of, I think we were 37
11
members, Fianna Fail members, who had to use that room and normally you'd have
12
your group meetings in your own -- in your actual party room, but it was so
13
small that we had to repair to other places to have our meetings. And that's
14
why one of the venues we attended frequently was Conways, because there was
10:23:39 15
enough space for us and it was convenient to the County Council as well, I just
16
thought I might point that out because you keep mentioning meetings in Conways
17
all the time, I feel that's its important to perhaps people should know why we
18
were meeting in Conway's and not the County Council itself, we just didn't have
19
the accommodation.
10:23:59 20
Q. 60
21
I think the Tribunal has heard evidence from your other of your colleagues also as to the lack of accommodation in Dublin County Council?
22
A.
Well I wasn't aware of that.
23
Q. 61
I think in fact Mr. Kitt described the Council facilities as being inadequate.
24
And I think other members, not limited to Fianna Fail, have given similar
10:24:18 25
evidence to the Tribunal?
26
A.
Yes I agree totally with Minister Kitt.
27
Q. 62
On the 27th of May 1992 there was a second vote at which you voted, which was
28
the one to put a town centre zoning on the lands at 7215, and this was a motion
29
by Councillor Gilmore, seconded by Councillor O'Callaghan, to provide a C
10:24:46 30
zoning on a portion of the lands and the land in question are the Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:24:50
10:25:14
11 1
Property lands at Cherrywood -- sorry 7214, I beg your pardon. 7214, you will
2
see there there is a motion by Councillor Gilmore, seconded by councillor
3
O'Callaghan, to put a C zoning on a portion of the lands?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 63
And you will see that you vote in favour of that motion?
6
A.
Yes, I see that.
7
Q. 64
Right. And again can you outline to the Tribunal the reasons why you would
8 9
have voted in favour of that motion? A.
10:25:33 10
to the various arguments for and against and I would have come to the
11 12
I wouldn't remember the actual detail again, but in fact I would have listened
conclusion, obviously, in that particular case, to vote for. Q. 65
There were also a number of motions, you will have seen in the records
13
Mr. Hanrahan, that took place on that date, including a motion by councillor
14
Sean Barrett, which had the effect of reducing the residential density to one
10:25:53 15
per acre, do you remember that happening?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 66
You voted against all of the low density motions, including voting against
18
Councillor Barrett's motion at 7216, but Councillor Barrett's motion was in
19
fact passed.
10:26:11 20
21
A.
Okay.
Q. 67
Now the effect of that at 7217. 7217 please, this is the map that went out on
22
the second public display and the yellow lands are the residentially zoned
23
lands in the Carrickmines Valley and the lands within the red outline are the
24
Monarch lands. And the cut out portion at the centre of the Monarch lands is
10:26:41 25
the new town centre zoning?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 68
It should have been coloured pink, the effect of Councillor Barrett's motion,
28
was to change the density from four per acre, to one per acre for all of the
29
yellow lands, which are the residential lands, including Monarch's lands. You
10:27:01 30
will have seen that in the documentation Mr. Hanrahan, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:27:04
10:27:14
12 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 69
And the effect of that was to reduce the density for Monarch from four per acre
3
to one per acre, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 70
Now the matter came back before the Council in December, in November of 1993
6
for the confirming meeting, and the Manager had recommended that that change be
7
deleted, in other words that the density go back to four per acre and a motion
8
was brought, on the 11th of December 1993, seeking to confirm the change at one
9
per acre, at 7262 please. And this is the vote, on seeking to confirm
10:27:53 10
Councillor Barrett's motion and you vote against that, in other words you vote
11
against low density, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 71
Now what happened after that -- can I ask you Mr. Hanrahan when that happened
14
and the Council voted against confirming change 3 or against Councillor
10:28:11 15
Barrett's proposed change, did it automatically revert to the previous map, the
16
map that had gone out on the first public display?
17
A.
I'm not sure, it may have.
18
Q. 72
Well you were the councillor Mr. Hanrahan, you were there?
19
A.
Yes but we are talking about a long time ago, I'm afraid.
Q. 73
You are still a councillor?
21
A.
No I am not.
22
Q. 74
When did you retire?
23
A.
99.
24
Q. 75
Now let's go to - take it up to recent times, if a motion was brought to, in a
10:28:27 20
10:28:39 25
Development Plan, seeking to confirm a change, and it was lost, what was the
26
effect of that?
27
A.
Yeah, you go back to the original.
28
Q. 76
The map that had been displayed previously?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 77
So that if the map that had been displayed previously was four to the acre and
10:28:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:28:55
10:29:09
13 1
the change was one to the acre and the motion sought to confirm one to the acre
2
and was lost, automatically would it have reverted to four to the acre?
3
A.
It would yes, I should imagine, yes.
4
Q. 78
The next motion that was brought, on the same date, was a motion by Councillor
5
Marren and Coffey at 7263. Now this motion is in connection with the Monarch
6
lands, I am going to get you to the map attached to the motion, but the map
7
attached to the motion is at 7227, and this relates only to the Monarch lands,
8
it's the same outline Mr. Hanrahan, you can see that?
9 10:29:40 10
A.
All right yes.
Q. 79
If you go back to 7263 and the record of the meeting, Councillor Marren and
11
Coffey propose a motion that, to accept the Manager's report, insofar as it
12
relates to the Monarch lands, do you see the motion that's on screen straight
13
in front of you?
14 10:30:02 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 80
So what Councillor Marren and Coffey were proposing, was delete the amendment,
16
insofar as the Monarch lands are concerned and confirm it in relation to the
17
balance of the lands?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 81
The effect of that if it was passed was that Monarch's density would be four
10:30:18 20
houses to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands in the
21
Carrickmines Valley would be one house to the acre, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 82
That motion was passed by 44 to 27 and you voted in favour of it?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 83
Now can I ask you Mr. Hanrahan, if that motion hadn't been brought, in view of
10:30:33 25
26
the fact that the previous motion was lost, if that motion hadn't been
27
proceeded with, the effect would have been that all of the residentially zoned
28
lands would have reverted to four to the acre?
29 10:30:54 30
A.
I'm not absolutely certain but --
Q. 84
Well subject to anything -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:30:55
10:31:09
14 1
A.
I can't definitively say that, I would need some advice on that myself.
2
Q. 85
It would seem --
3
A.
I'd need professional advice on it.
4
Q. 86
Yes. But it would seem logical, that if the change was defeated, the
5
confirming change was defeated as happened here, the density on the lands had
6
to be some density, it had to revert to something isn't that right? It would
7
have had to have gone back to what was on the previous map?
8
A.
9
I'm afraid I would have had to have -- I would have had to have the advice of management in the County Council, or the advice of a town planner, to help me
10:31:29 10
in my deliberations on that particular issue.
11
Q. 87
How long were you a councillor Mr. Hanrahan?
12
A.
14 years.
13
Q. 88
In that 14 years you are not in a position to assist the Tribunal and tell the
14
Tribunal what would happen to a Development Plan map or a zoning on a
10:31:43 15
Development Plan map, in the event that the confirming motion was unsuccessful?
16
A.
It would normally revert to the original motion.
17
Q. 89
Isn't that the point. That's what would normally happen?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 90
In those circumstances, can you think of any reason as to why anybody would
10:31:58 20
have proceeded with the motion, that would have had the effect of giving four
21
houses to the acre to the Monarch lands only and leaving the balance at one to
22
the acre.
23
A.
24 10:32:17 25
The motion in question, only refers to the Monarch lands, it doesn't refer to the other lands at all.
Q. 91
26
Well with respect, it does, because it says that the balance of the lands will remain at two per hectare, isn't that right?
27
A.
It does yes.
28
Q. 92
Isn't that right, so that this motion is dealing with all of the residentially
29 10:32:32 30
zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley isn't that the position? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:32:32
10:32:46
15 1
Q. 93
2
As a result of the defeat of the prefers motion these lands would automatically have reverted to four to the acre, isn't that likely?
3
A.
Likely, but I am not absolutely certain.
4
Q. 94
The effect of this motion was to ensure, four to the acre for the Monarch lands
5
and one to the acre for the balance of the lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
It would appear to be the case, yes.
7
Q. 95
Can you give any reason to the Tribunal as to why that would be so?
8
A.
No its quite a long time ago now at this stage, all I can imagine is that the
9
lands immediately around the town centre, you know to make the town centre more
10:33:07 10
viable, the immediate lands around it would probably, would probably give a
11
better service to the town centre, if the zoning was higher, but I can't recall
12
it myself now at this stage, I don't know if that was the reason why I voted
13
for, I would have taken all the various arguments into consideration, I would
14
have listened to everybody speaking, local councillors and councillors from
10:33:26 15
outside as well, because everybody was entitled to their opinion and at the end
16
of the day I was entitled to vote for, against, or abstain and I ended up
17
voting in this particular case, I voted for.
18
Q. 96
19
Can you see any reason as to why the decision was made to zone the Monarch
10:33:57 20
lands at four to the acre and the balance of the Carrickmines residentially
21 22
And looking back at it now Mr. Hanrahan and looking back at the map, at 7217.
zoned lands at one to the acre? A.
I am sure the proposers at the time and the others who spoke in favour of it
23
would have outlined very good reasons why they proposed that particular
24
proposal in that particular end result and I voted in favour of that particular
10:34:18 25
26
end result. Q. 97
Yes obviously I didn't make myself clear Mr. Hanrahan, looking at the map can
27
you give the Tribunal any reason as to why the Monarch lands would have been
28
zoned at four to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands at
29
one to the acre?
10:34:35 30
A.
Are you asking me to give an opinion, 15 or 16 years later, I have no opinion Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:34:41
10:34:51
16 1 2
to give on that. Q. 98
3 4
I'm asking to you give the Tribunal a reason as to why you voted the way you did Mr. Hanrahan?
A.
I already told you. I listened to all the arguments in favour of that
5
particular motion and would have paid very strict attention to what people said
6
at the time and at the end of the debate, when the vote was called, my duty was
7
to vote for, or against, or abstain. And I voted for the motion having
8
listened attentively to all the various arguments and I am sure I may have
9
heard arguments about the other lands as well at the time, but I can't recall
10:35:17 10
it at this stage, and I wouldn't be in a position to give an opinion now, just
11
looking at a map that's come up from many years ago. I'm not in a position to
12
give it, I just wouldn't be able to.
13
Q. 99
Yes.
14
A.
To suggest anything --
Q. 100
Just to confirm, did you receive all the documents from the Tribunal is that
10:35:29 15
16
right?
17
A.
Oh I did yes.
18
Q. 101
Thank you very much Mr. Hanrahan would you answer any question that is anybody
19 10:35:38 20
else might have? A.
Thank you.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
Mr. Hanrahan, could I just ask you, in 1992 approximately what was the biggest
24
or political payment or political donation you received outside of your family?
10:35:57 25
A.
26
Anybody here who wishes to ask Mr. Hanrahan questions?
Chairman, I -- 1992 was the one where the cheque for Monarch was for a thousand pounds?
27 28
Q. 102
CHAIRMAN: For a thousand, yes.
29
A.
That was the biggest, I didn't even recall that, but that --
10:36:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:36:09
10:36:21
17 1
Q. 103
CHAIRMAN:
Would it have been the biggest by far? Can you recollect?
2
A.
I don't know, but the biggest anyway.
Q. 104
CHAIRMAN:
3 4 5 6
And surely that would have helped you to recall it when you were
providing the information to the Tribunal. A.
Honestly Chairman I couldn't remember that. I thought, I didn't have legal
7
advice now when I was writing my letter, I wrote the letter in all serious --
8
you know, gave it full consideration and tried to recall as best I could. I
9
gave you the answer that I was capable of and only that, otherwise if I had
10:36:47 10
remembered that I received a thousand pounds, I would have no problem actually
11
informing the Tribunal.
12 13
Q. 105
14 10:37:04 15
CHAIRMAN:
And up to 1999 when you left the council would that have remained
the single largest donation? A.
It would yeah.
Q. 106
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16 17
Just one thing Mr. Hanrahan, on the 11th November, the first
18
substantive motion that's put, that was a motion I think, I have forgotten who
19
brought it now, but it was to confirm change 3 simplisitor, change 3 was where
10:37:22 20
21
the zoning had gone back from four houses to the acre, to one to the acre. A.
Yes.
Q. 107
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24 10:37:35 25
The first motion, substantive motion put to the floor on the
11th November is to confirm that, and you vote against that? A.
That's correct.
Q. 108
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27
And that would appear consistent with your earlier vote back
28
in 1992 where you were voting for the Manager's proposals, because he wanted
29
four to the acre, low density four to the acre, on an Action Plan?
10:37:51 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:37:52
10:38:05
18 1 2
Q. 109
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That would appear, certainly your vote against the confirming
of the one house to the acre, would appear consistent. A.
Yes. That's correct yeah.
Q. 110
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5 6
And from what you have said to the Tribunal, you would have
7
considered, you say, not just what would happen on the day, but all matters,
8
and presumably including all documents you would have received as a councillor,
9
in advance of the votes?
10:38:21 10
A.
Absolutely, yes, yes Chair moon, yes.
Q. 111
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12 13 14
And can I just ask you, I'm taking it from that, that when you
voted against confirming change 3, you didn't agree with change 3? A.
Yes, I mustn't have.
Q. 112
JUDGE FAHERTY:
10:38:38 15
16
And it would appear you didn't agree with change 3 regarding
17
all of the yellow lands that's on the map that's before you there, I think
18
that's the same map, 7217?
19
A.
I think it is yeah.
Q. 113
JUDGE FAHERTY:
10:38:49 20
21
But leaving aside the issue of what would happen or what
22
happened legally if you like, because you say you can't answer that, but a
23
little while later, there is a motion brought for the Monarch lands and you
24
vote in favour of that -- and for four houses to the acre for Monarch, but for
10:39:13 25
26
only one house to the acre for the balance of the lands? A.
Yes.
Q. 114
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 10:39:37 30
And can you explain at all, why you would have taken, taken
that stance, having, if you like, voted against a motion to confirm change 3 at the same meeting? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:39:40
10:40:03
19 1
A.
Well, as I said, its a long time ago now, and I guess there would have been
2
various arguments for and against a particular motion at the time and
3
notwithstanding whether there was another motion earlier or not, the arguments
4
on that particular one -- I can't actually recall why people would have argued
5
against four to the acre for the other lands but this was the motion that was
6
before us, and if the owners of the other lands had a proposal for four to the
7
acre later on I might very well have voted for or I might not have voted for
8
it. I would have listened again how they put their case and what I felt was
9
good planning for the area. But at the time the motion in question, I believed
10:40:28 10
it was in the interests of good planning for the county, to have actually
11
supported that particular motion.
12 13
Q. 115
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And did you, when you were voting on that the words of the
14
motion, I think they are on page 7263, it mentions the lands outlined in red
10:40:45 15
on the map and the balance then, at one to the acre, did you know that they
16 17
were the Monarch lands Mr. Hanrahan? A.
I might have, I probably did actually but --
Q. 116
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Well there was quite a considerable amount of lobbying, of course, going on and
18 19 10:41:03 20
And how would you have known they were the Monarch lands?
21
these maps were actually posted to us, if not handed to councillors and to
22
officials as well of course and to other interested parties. So I would have
23
known at that stage I'm sure, but at this stage I don't recall it so well, but
24
I would have known at the time, yes.
10:41:25 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Right. Thanks very much.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Right thank you very much Mr. Hanrahan.
29 10:41:29 30
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:41:38
10:41:57
20 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Bill O'Herlihy please.
3 4
MR. O'HIGGINS: I should say sir I appear for Mr. O'Herlihy, instructed by
5
Martin E Marren solicitors.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Okay we grant representation.
8 9 10:42:05 10
MR. O'HIGGINS: I think representation was granted last week, or the week before.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:42:05
10:42:19
21 1
BILL O'HERLIHY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. O'Herlihy.
5
A.
Good morning.
6
Q. 117
Good morning Mr. O'Herlihy, I think that at some date, probably towards the
7
late, latter part of 1991 you were retained by Monarch Properties as a public
8
relations consultant, is that right?
9 10:42:34 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 118
Can you outline to the Tribunal first of all who you met in Monarch Properties
11 12
and the brief as you understood it? A.
The person who worked most closely with was Richard Lynn, and the brief that I
13
was -- there were quite a few, the very first meeting had quite a few Monarch
14
executives, I can't remember who they were offhand at this stage to be
10:42:59 15
truthful. The name escapes me, but the principle person was a Scots man.
16
Q. 119
Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
Exactly. Eddie Sweeney, exactly. Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn were the two
18
people I worked most closely with. My brief essentially was to create a
19
climate of opinion where the Cherrywood project would be appealing, first of
10:43:25 20
all to the community, secondly to the -- that there would be positive media
21
response to it and thirdly that the councillors, particularly the councillors
22
of the area, but generally speaking, the councillors of Dublin County Council
23
would be supportive of the project. That was the brief.
24 10:43:43 25
My function then was to actually develop a strategy and to actually talk to and
26
bring the Monarch people on board in the context of how they themselves would
27
fully represent that strategy, rather than me, because the function of public
28
relations, is to stay in the background.
29 10:44:03 30
Q. 120
And can I ask you Mr. O'Herlihy, prior to your involvement with the Monarch Group, did you have any experience in any particular aspect of lobbying that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:44:08
10:44:23
22 1
would be associated with the Development Plan, or making of a Development Plan
2
in Dublin County Council?
3
A.
Oh not at all. But lobbying with respect is a bit of an emotive word, because
4
what I was involved in, was asking the members of Dublin County Council to view
5
the plans and to view the model that had been made, I wasn't lobbying in the
6
sense of asking them to vote for it or anything like that, that was not my
7
function.
8
Q. 121
9
But insofar as the making of a Development Plan was concerned, or as the Tribunal is concerned, with the changes that happened to these lands in the
10:44:42 10
making of the Development Plan, prior to being engaged by Monarch had you
11
engaged in any other similar exercise?
12
A.
Oh no.
13
Q. 122
So was this your first introduction?
14
A.
This was my first and only association ever with the construction industry.
Q. 123
Was there any particular reason why you were sought out by Monarch to bring
10:44:55 15
16 17
your expertise to bear on this particular project? A.
I would like to think talent came into it for a start, I'd say principally
18
let's be honest about it was I had an association in those days, a fairly
19
strong association, with the Fine Gael parliamentary party and with Garrett
10:45:14 20
Fitzgerald and people at that level and presumably the thinking of Monarch was
21
that I was a person that could make contact with, positively, with the Fine
22
Gael councillors particularly, I'd say that's the primary reason I was taken on
23
board.
24
Q. 124
10:45:30 25
Was there any particular Fine Gael councillor who would be seen of particular importance, in that area?
26
A.
Oh yeah.
27
Q. 125
Who was that?
28
A.
Absolutely. The most important person emphasised to me in the course of my
29 10:45:44 30
dealings with Monarch was Sean Barrett. Now they put a huge weight on Sean Barrett's opinion, because Sean Barrett was highly influential, he had been in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:45:47
10:46:07
23 1
the previous Fine Gael coalition administration and presumably was ear marked
2
again for office, if they ever got back into power, which they did and he
3
became a Government Minister, he was considered to immensely influential and I
4
was asked specifically to get him to view the plans and to meet with the
5
Monarch people, which he agreed to do in their headquarters in Harcourt Street.
6 7
He made it very clear to me from the word go that he was opposed to it, he felt
8
it wasn't right environmentally and felt it wasn't right commercially, as far
9
as the area was concerned.
10:46:22 10
11
He told me that we not be voting for it, but because I was a friend of his he
12
certainly come along and view the plans.
13 14
He came along, viewed the plans, thought they were extremely good, but
10:46:34 15
indicated at that meeting, which would have been attended by Richard Lynn and
16
by Eddie Sweeney and maybe Noel was there as well, I'm not quite certain who
17
else, there would have been more than two anyway and he indicated he was not
18
going to vote for it and he was consistent all the way.
19
Q. 126
10:46:56 20
discuss with you, or did they tell you, what the zoning was on the lands at
21 22
And when you were retained by Monarch initially, Mr. O'Herlihy, did they
that time and what they hoped to achieve? A.
I don't have any recollection of such a conversation. I think its important to
23
make the point that I thought Monarch were a highly professional operation, I
24
thought they were extremely good, they knew exactly what they were going up to
10:47:15 25
do, what they wanted to achieve. They had been involved of course as well in
26
Tallaght, the team was a very strong powerful team, who knew exactly what they
27
wanted to get.
28 29 10:47:33 30
My role I suppose if I was to define forensically was almost a bit tangental to the whole thing, it was a media role as much as anything else, it was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:47:39
10:47:48
24 1
essentially to deal with communications, I wasn't ever involved in the planning
2
side of it or anything like that.
3
Q. 127
But you would --
4
A.
Because there was a series of people within the company who were experts in
5 6
that area. Q. 128
7 8
anxious to put a lot of houses on the lands? A.
9
terrific project all the way through, so presumably I was told that, I can't
11
remember it, but I am sure I was. Q. 129
13 14 10:48:22 15
I suppose the answer is yes. I can't be specific, but I mean I thought personally, I was enthusiastic about the project, because I thought it was a
10:48:05 10
12
But would you have known in general terms, Mr. O'Herlihy, that they were
And did you bring out a free sheet edition called The Valley News, on behalf of Monarch property?
A.
Cherrywood News, yeah we did, which was distributed locally.
Q. 130
Can I just show you a page of that document I don't seem to have a Tribunal
16
reference for it, at 7765. Is this part of the document that you put out?
17
A.
I can't remember honestly.
18
Q. 131
And on the document that you prepared, Mr. O'Herlihy, would you have included
19 10:48:53 20
maps, or sorry, drawings of what they wanted to achieve? A.
Again I can't remember, but I would certainly say that if we were putting out a
21
free sheet that was being dropped into all the homes in the area, you certainly
22
would want to give them a fair idea of what was happening, but specifically I
23
can't remember.
24
Q. 132
10:49:12 25
But certainly if Monarch wanted to put 950 houses, or thereabouts, on a portion of the lands that's something that you would have informed or they would, the
26
local people community would have been informed about?
27
A.
I would imagine so, yeah.
28
Q. 133
And if I can take you through some documents then Mr. O'Herlihy, that might be
29 10:49:29 30
relevant, and ask you to comment on them, at 3375, this is an extract from Mr. Sean Barrett's diary and on Monday the 18th of November, 1991 he records a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:49:36
10:49:49
25 1
meeting with you.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 134
And I just want to draw to your attention that on the 22nd November 1991 you
4
also had a meeting with Monarch Properties, so can I ask you do you think its
5
likely that that meeting might have been in connection with the Cherrywood
6
Development?
7
A.
Sorry I am a bit confused would you go back on that again please.
8
Q. 135
This is 3375?
9
A.
Yeah the meeting with Sean Barrett.
Q. 136
This is Mr. Barrett's diary.
11
A.
Yeah and what does it say?
12
Q. 137
It records on the 18th Bill O'Herlihy 3 pm.
13
A.
Yeah. In his office is it?
14
Q. 138
I can't tell you that because I don't -- it just records in his diary.
A.
Well my recollection, for what its worth, after so many years, is that I only
10:50:00 10
10:50:12 15
16
met him once and that was, that my conversation with him was by telephone and
17
that I met him, that I met him then in the Monarch offices, but if I had a
18
previous meeting and its so recorded, I can't deny it obviously.
19
Q. 139
10:50:36 20
No I don't suggest that that meeting is in connection with Cherrywood Mr. O'Herlihy, I am asking you do you think in view of the fact that on, within
21
two or three days of that on the 22nd, you had a meeting with Monarch people,
22
that it may have had something to do with Cherrywood?
23
A.
24
to me, its possible. But I don't recall that, there was such a meeting but I'm
10:51:05 25
26
It may have had yeah. Could I have been reflecting the views that he expressed
not going to contradict you. Q. 140
27
Certainly there are other documents Mr. O'Herlihy that we will come to look at that indicate a longer meeting with Mr. Barrett at the offices of Monarch?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 141
At 3383 this is an extract from a diary of Mr. Dominic Glennane, who was one of
10:51:16 30
the people in Monarch, and it records on the 22nd of November Bill O'Herlihy at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:51:23
10:51:34
26 1
Monarch re Cabinteely?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 142
That's the first recorded document in the Monarch documentation that records a
4
contact with you?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 143
And based on that is it likely that it was around November 1991 that you were
7 8
retained? A.
9
Probably, I would imagine so, yeah. I mean there were, there was a whole series of meetings. I mean the normal public relations practice would be that
10:51:48 10
if you were dealing with a client on a short-term basis, as I was, over a
11
period of about eight months, you would have extremely regular meetings. They
12
to be kept up to date, they to look at how the strategy was unfolding whether
13
it was successful or unsuccessful. I would imagine I had a meeting at least
14
once a week probably twice a week with Monarch.
10:52:07 15
Q. 144
16
Certainly the records seem to indicate that you did have a number of meetings with Monarch on an ongoing basis?
17
A.
Did I absolutely.
18
Q. 145
When you were retained was there also another public relations company retained
19 10:52:19 20
at the same time? A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 146
Pembroke PR?
22
A.
Oh yeah, I saw that in the papers that I was sent, but I had no contact with
23
them at all. I don't know whether they were employed before me and were just
24
being phased out, or whether they continued to be employed on a different
10:52:33 25
26
basis, do I not know, or for a different project. Q. 147
If I could have page 3521, I think in fact they were in connection with the
27
same project, this is another extract from Mr. Sean Barrett's diary, you will
28
see on 2nd of December 1991, it records a meeting at 12 o'clock with Bill
29
O'Herlihy?
10:52:52 30
A.
Mm. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:52:53
10:53:12
27 1
Q. 148
And if we go to 7768 Mr. O'Herlihy and this is part of an invoice submitted by
2
you to Monarch Properties, you will see that you record meeting Mr. Sean
3
Barrett for one and a half hours on the second of December, do you see that?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 149
Is that the meeting that you were thinking about earlier on, when you mentioned
6 7
that you had met with Mr. Barrett? A.
8 9
Well I mean if its there in black and white and I'm billing them for it, I obviously had the meeting.
Q. 150
10:53:30 10
Yes the actual invoice is 7767 and you will have seen that in the documentation and attached to that doc -- that invoice was the document at 7768 where you set
11
out the meetings that you had had?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 151
And on that --
14
A.
Well John Butterly now was Pembroke PR, I see there on December 3rd, so
10:53:46 15
16
presumably they were still involved, in what role I do not know. Q. 152
17
And you will note also there that you had a meeting with Mr. Alan shatter and a meeting with Mr. Michael Keating?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 153
And would they have been members of Fine Gael at that time?
A.
Yes they were indeed, yeah. They were both TDs I think at the time.
Q. 154
And Mr. Keating has told the Tribunal that he remembers you speaking to him in
10:53:58 20
21 22
connection with the Cherrywood Development. Now what was the purpose of these
23
meetings Mr. O'Herlihy, was it to seek the support of these people for the
24
project?
10:54:14 25
26
A.
It would have been, yeah, yeah.
Q. 155
And again I think in January of 1992. At 7770. You also put in another
27
invoice, in respect of the fee -- work that you had done in the intervening
28
period, so you were working throughout December and into January for Monarch,
29
is that right?
10:54:40 30
A.
I'm sure it is yeah. If it's billed it's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:54:43
10:55:02
28 1
Q. 156
Now did you meet Mr. Frank Dunlop at any stage in connection...
2
A.
No, he was not involved at all.
3
Q. 157
Well I want to show you 7771. Which is a document that's attached to this
4
invoice Mr. O'Herlihy and I want to draw to your attention the entry 7/18
5
January, phone calls, briefing discussions, meeting Frank Dunlop, do you see
6
that?
7
A.
I do indeed yeah.
8
Q. 158
That's your document as provided to Monarch Properties as I understand it?
9
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 159
Can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why you would have been meeting
10:55:13 10
11 12
Mr. Dunlop sometime in early January of 1991? A.
Haven't a notion. It may have followed out of some discussions that had taken
13
place or something like that, it may have been a follow-up call, do I not know
14
honestly. I can't remember. Because to my honest recollection he was never
10:55:33 15
involved at all in the period I was involved.
16
Q. 160
But did you know Mr. Dunlop, as a lobbyist in Dublin County Council?
17
A.
I knew Frank Dunlop very well from working in RTE in the first instance, he was
18
a northern correspondent and then I knew him when he was the special advisor to
19
John Boland, when he was Minister for Public Service and I knew Frank very
10:55:55 20
21
well. Q. 161
But did you know that he was a lobbyist to councillors in Dublin County
22
Council, did you know that Mr. Dunlop had a business that involved seeking the
23
changes of zoning of lands?
24
A.
10:56:14 25
26
I suppose it would be naive of me to say I didn't, but I can't remember to be honest, I don't know.
Q. 162
27
What I'm asking is it possible you might have gone, in view of the fact this was your first job in connection with the Development Plan?
28
A.
And asked for his advice is it?
29
Q. 163
Exactly.
A.
I don't know.
10:56:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:56:24
10:56:39
29 1
Q. 164
Do you think its possible you might have met him about that?
2
A.
I honestly can't remember.
3
Q. 165
Again on that document at 7771 Mr. O'Herlihy, you set out there certain phone
4
discussions with East Coast Radio, organising a newspaper and certain meetings
5
with Monarch, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 166
And was the newspaper you were organising this free sheet?
8
A.
That would be the Cherrywood News.
9
Q. 167
That was going to be sent out to the all of the houses in the area?
A.
Correct, correct.
Q. 168
Now I think that again in February of 1992, at 7772, you furnished an invoice
10:56:50 10
11 12
in connection with the provision of a copy of the special edition of The Valley
13
News, you gave a break down of that at 7773?
14 10:57:13 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 169
Again I think you would accept that its likely that you would have put in
16
information in relation to what Monarch wanted in that document, that was the
17
whole purpose that have isn't that right?
18
A.
O, yeah, yeah.
19
Q. 170
So it was to provide information about the development, to the local community?
A.
Mm-hmm.
21
Q. 171
And that would have been given to everybody, is that right?
22
A.
Sorry what would have been given to everybody?
23
Q. 172
24
A.
Oh, yes, dropped into the houses, yeah.
Q. 173
Now obviously what Monarch were seeking had to be different to what they
10:57:24 20
10:57:35 25
To the local community -- the free sheet.
26
already had in the Development Plan, isn't that right Mr. O'Herlihy, they were
27
seeking to change the status of their lands?
28
A.
29 10:57:52 30
Yeah, they were more than anything else they were seeking from my perspective to change the climate of opinion towards it.
Q. 174
And that was based in the community and also with councillors? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:57:56
10:58:16
30 1
A.
Well Monarch had the belief that this was a very very good project and that it
2
was a project that was going to materially benefit the area and they wanted to
3
convey that information by The Cherrywood News and they wanted to convey it
4
through the media generally and we also developed a television documentary as
5
it were, which was used for community meetings.
6
Q. 175
7
But in order for Monarch to put 950 houses on that land Mr. O'Herlihy, they had to change the zoning density on their lands in the Development Plan?
8
A.
Mm-hmm.
9
Q. 176
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah well obviously yeah.
Q. 177
In your meetings with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney, you would have been made aware,
10:58:30 10
11 12
I assume, that they made a submission to Dublin County Council seeking to
13
change the density on their lands?
14 10:58:45 15
A.
I'm sure I was, yeah.
Q. 178
Because you became aware of the fact that, there would be a vote in Dublin
16
County Council, which was regarded by Monarch as important, isn't that right?
17
A.
Absolutely, sure that was the whole point in it yeah.
18
Q. 179
Wasn't the entire exercise in which you were engaged with Mr. Lynn and
19
Mr. Sweeney and the other Monarch personnel geared towards changing the climate
10:59:03 20
so that there would be support for the changes Monarch wanted?
21
A.
That's correct, that's correct.
22
Q. 180
So the whole thrust of the PR campaign and submissions that were made by the
23
professional people on behalf of Monarch, was to change the status of the
24
lands?
10:59:14 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 181
Because Monarch couldn't built on what they wanted to build on it, with the
27
zoning that they had on the lands isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 182
So everything was going to end up on the floor of Dublin County Council?
A.
Absolutely.
10:59:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:59:26
10:59:39
31 1
Q. 183
And you would have known, as did everybody else involved in the exercise, that
2
at the end of the day the people who were going to make the decision on this
3
were the councillors?
4
A.
Yeah and there was a belief also that politicians were influenced by climate
5
and if the climate of opinion was very supportive towards it, that that in turn
6
would actually be something that would support Monarch.
7
Q. 184
And the -- you had gone and you had spoken to Mr. Barrett but Mr. Barrett had
8
made his position absolutely clear that he was not going to support what
9
Monarch wanted?
10:59:57 10
11
A.
Correct, that's right.
Q. 185
Did he in anyway resile, or change from that, from the time that you were
12 13
involved in the exercise? A.
14
plans and viewed the model he said he wasn't going to vote for it, he thought
11:00:11 15
16
Not at all, not at all. Even at the meeting with Monarch when we viewed the
it was wrong for the area. Q. 186
And therefore whatever influence was perceived with in Monarch rested with
17
Mr. Barrett, it could not be brought to the assistance of the project, isn't
18
that right, because he never supported the project as far as you were aware.
19 11:00:24 20
A.
No no.
Q. 187
So that created an added urgency to the get the balance of support elsewhere,
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
I presume so, yeah.
23
Q. 188
Because what you were told the Tribunal earlier is Mr. Barrett was regarded as
24 11:00:35 25
26
influential. A.
Oh yeah, yeah.
Q. 189
When you couldn't bring Mr. Barrett to the table, as it were, to support this
27
project you had to get that support elsewhere?
28
A.
When you say you now, you mean Monarch.
29
Q. 190
Mean Monarch Properties and yourself as part of the team.
A.
Yeah but I wasn't canvassing support in the sense that you are implying it.
11:00:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:00:53
11:01:09
32 1
Q. 191
Well were you meeting with councillors?
2
A.
I had very -- obviously from some of the documentation you have provided I had
3
some meetings with them, but it was very few. My essential contact was by
4
telephone and what I -- what I did primarily was to set up meetings for
5
Monarch, so that I would ring whatever councillor was involved and I'd say look
6
we'd like to you look at the plans, this is a very good development or whatever
7
I'd say something to that effect and the plans will be on view in the Royal
8
Dublin Hotel or in the Monarch headquarters and we'd like to you come along and
9
see them, and they'd come along and view them, I had practically no
11:01:31 10
relationship with them at all, in fact I wasn't at most of those meetings
11 12
because it wasn't my function to make the presentation to them. Q. 192
Certainly in February of 1992, at 7776 Mr. O'Herlihy, you provide another
13
invoice and again you provide back up details at, 7777 and on the 11th February
14
you record a meeting with Monarch or meeting Monarch and Senator Lydon two
11:01:59 15
hours, do you see that?
16
A.
Do I yeah.
17
Q. 193
Do you have any recollection of that meeting and what it involved?
18
A.
I have no recollection whatever of it. I'm just wondering though whether or
19
not, they were meetings that I attended, or if that could well be a meeting I
11:02:18 20
21
set up as it were, but didn't necessarily attend. Q. 194
22
If you just look at the top of the document Mr. O'Herlihy it says executive time Mr. O'Herlihy isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 195
And then it details set out, under meetings that took place and the duration of
11:02:33 25
the meetings, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 196
And that would suggest that what you are itemising there, if you go to 7778
28 29 11:02:45 30
please, it says total executive time Bill O'Herlihy 18 hours? A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 197
That would suggest if you go back to 7777 subject to anything you have to say Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:02:50
11:03:00
33 1
yourself Mr. O'Herlihy, that the meeting of two hours involving Mr. Lydon
2
involved yourself?
3
A.
4 5
interpretation. Q. 198
6 7
That's a reasonable interpretation, I don't remember it but that's a reasonable
And can you recollect anything that would have brought you to meet with Mr. Lydon, in connection with Monarch Properties?
A.
Nothing specific, I would have thought that as far as I was concerned that
8
Senator Lydon would have been just, one of the senior members of Fianna Fail
9
and he would have been viewing the plans and that would be it, I would imagine
11:03:25 10
that the meeting with Monarch would have been to go through the plans and go
11 12
through the model, same as other people as well. Q. 199
13 14 11:03:45 15
And I think again at 7779, I think this document is part of the other document, this details the involvement of Mr. Ian Sherwin who I think worked with you?
A.
He did yeah that's correct.
Q. 200
And what's set out on this document is what Mr. Sherwin was doing and he was
16
setting up meetings in local community schools and matters such as that sort?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 201
I think part of the PR campaign involved what has been described as road show?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 202
Where you would have had drawings and a scale model of the development and you
11:04:01 20
21
brought it around to the community?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 203
And that appeared to have been Mr. Sherwin's function?
24
A.
That's correct.
Q. 204
Your function seems to have been a more senior dealing with senior Monarch
11:04:10 25
26
personnel and indeed on occasion some councillors?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 205
Now were you made aware of the when the vote was coming up in the were
29 11:04:25 30
important vote in Dublin could County Council? A.
Was I made aware of it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:04:27
11:04:41
34 1
Q. 206
Yeah.
2
A.
Oh indeed I was. I was actually I went for the very first time in my life into
3
the Dublin County Council Chamber, prior to the meeting starting, because I had
4
never been at a Dublin County Council meeting of any sort I said my myself as
5
the vote is coming up today I'd like to see what the setup is, I spent about
6
three or four minutes in there and that was it.
7
Q. 207
8 9 11:04:57 10
I suggest to you Mr. O'Herlihy that that meeting is likely to have been a meeting on the 27th May 1992 which, where Monarch lost --
A.
Yeah that's correct.
Q. 208
They lost by two votes in fact, what they sought and they ended up with their
11
lands zoned at one house to the acre as a result of a motion by Councillor
12
Barrett?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 209
Now was that your first and only time in the offices of Dublin County Council?
A.
First and only time, yeah. Never since.
Q. 210
And were you going that meeting because you were made aware of the importance
11:05:09 15
16 17 18
of that meeting from the zoning point of view of Monarch? A.
19
No, I was going -- I went to the meeting first of all because professionally I was interested in seeing whether or not the campaign was going to be successful
11:05:28 20
and the ultimate determination of success was whether we got the motion through
21
or not. So I was extremely interested because I had worked very closely with
22
Richard Lynn and worked very closely with Monarch I was very impressed by
23
Richard Lynn, I thought he was a really good professional operator and I was
24
impressed by the whole Monarch set up, so it would have been completely I think
11:05:51 25
illogical for me to actually miss out on something like that, so -- but I was
26
there for as I said about three or four minutes before it started and I spent
27
the rest of the time in the Royal Dublin Hotel.
28
Q. 211
Who was in the Royal Dublin Hotel with you Mr. O'Herlihy?
29
A.
Well definitively I can say Richard Lynn was with me, others may have come and
11:06:11 30
gone, Noel Murray may have come and gone, I am not certain. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:06:14
11:06:26
35 1
Q. 212
2
Now as far as you were aware who was dealing with the matters on behalf of Monarch in the chamber, did you know?
3
A.
I have no idea.
4
Q. 213
And who was handling that part of the exercise, the motions and matters such as
5
that sort?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 214
Did you ever see any motion on behalf of Monarch, a motion that would be
8 9 11:06:40 10
brought before the Council in order to change the zoning on the lands? A.
I have no recollection, honestly.
Q. 215
But you did know that the meeting of the 27th of May 1992 was regarded by
11
Monarch as a critical?
12
A.
Absolutely, of course I did yeah.
13
Q. 216
Everything you had been engaged on up to this point in time, was leading to
14 11:06:52 15
that position? A.
Correct.
16
Q. 217
Right. When you were -- did you go to the hotel in order to await the results?
17
A.
Oh yes.
18
Q. 218
Who was going to bring the results to yourself and to Mr. Lynn?
19
A.
I can't remember, I can't remember. It was felt that would take about two
11:07:11 20
hours before the decision would come through, that could be because they were
21
other motions on the agenda, but we were anticipating a delay of about two
22
hours and we were there from whatever time the Council started, which was
23
around 11 o'clock I think and then I think we got the result sometime and 12.30
24
am -- p.m. I mean.
11:07:29 25
Q. 219
26
In the course of your meeting with Mr. Lynn did you have a conversation with Mr. Lynn about how to achieve zoning changes in Dublin?
27
A.
I did.
28
Q. 220
Can you outline to the Tribunal the content of that conversation as you
29 11:07:44 30
recollect it now Mr. O'Herlihy? A.
I will. We were waiting for the result, I'd say fairly late into the day, in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:07:51
11:08:12
36 1
The sense that the result would have been coming maybe within half an hour or
2
thereabouts, and I said to him, I said to Richard, well I said, I hope the
3
Council will see the merits of this and recognise the quality of the
4
development that's proposed and he said to me are you joking me? I said what
5
do you mean? He said the councillors never recognise quality and merit, it has
6
nothing whatever to do with it, he said if you want to get a planning change or
7
a material contravention through, you have to buy it and he said that planning
8
changes and material contraventions were worth, in his judgement, about 50,000
9
a year into the back pocket of the councillors, if they cooperated with the
11:08:36 10
developers.
11 12
So frankly, because I had never been involved, with any building company or any
13
development like this in my life, I was absolutely staggered at this, to be
14
truthful and I said well how does it work? And I was told that you -- he told
11:08:56 15
me that you develop a lead councillor and you deal with him and he deals with
16
all the other councillors and he determines what exactly is required to
17
actually get the votes required to pass a particular planning approval or
18
motion.
19 11:09:17 20
So I said did you, did Monarch pay money for this? And he said yes. And again
21
I was, to be honest I was staggered and he said -- I said how much? And he
22
said, to the best of my knowledge he said a hundred thousand. Now I don't know
23
whether he was talking about generally, or whether, on that particular project,
24
but my question related to the project.
11:09:43 25
26
Now I want to say and its very important that I say this, in all my dealings
27
with Monarch money never came up, there was never any question of anything
28
untoward whatsoever in my dealings with Monarch. I found them a company of
29
extreme probity, all the way through. Therefore what was said to me was
11:10:01 30
completely out of character with the whole development and programme that I was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:10:04
11:10:17
37 1
involved in and the whole campaign.
2 3
I have no idea and its very important that I make this point, I have no idea
4
whether what he said to me was true or not, or the context in which he said. I
5
have no idea of the no evidence whatsoever to back up the claim he made,
6
because money never ever came into any discussion that I was part of in, with
7
Monarch.
8 9
And it was extremely, as I said a company of great probity all the way through
11:10:35 10
and they were highly professional in the approach to the campaign. I was not
11
involved in providing financial inducements or bribes, I was never asked to
12
offer them, I was never -- there was never any discussion on that, it never
13
came up whatsoever. Therefore when that point was made to me, I was to be
14
honest about it, I was gob smacked.
11:10:57 15
16
Now I don't know whether he was talking about, he might have been talking, to
17
be honest, in fairness to him, he could have been talking about the way things
18
happened generally. But unquestionably I asked the question very specifically.
19 11:11:11 20
Q. 221
You asked him had Monarch paid monies?
A.
I think I may have said have you paid monies, like I was talking -- it was
21
clearly understood it was Monarch I was talking about yeah.
22
Q. 222
And he said yes?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 223
And did you ask him did they have a lead councillor, did Monarch have a lead
11:11:25 25
councillor?
26
A.
Yes I did.
27
Q. 224
And did Mr. Lynn indicate to you who the lead councillor was?
28
A.
Yes he did.
29
Q. 225
Who did he tell you who the lead councillor was?
A.
I have a problem with that now Chairman because the evidence I am offering here
11:11:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:11:36
11:11:45
38 1
is entirely anecdotal and completely out of character with the whole campaign.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
assessing evidence?
5
Yeah but sorry excuse me, my difficulty is I don't want to be naming a person
6
who might be completely innocent of the allegation, let me put it that way, if
7
I am being asked to actually name publicly a person without any evidence
8
whatsoever to back up that claim I think its very unfair, so the best -- sorry
9
what I'd like to do is give it to you privately write down the name and you can
11:12:07 10
We appreciate that and we take that into account when we are
do whatever you want thereafter.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
The Councillor in question is on notice first of all and is here and is
14
represented and this is part of this Module, it wasn't mentioned in the opening
11:12:18 15
Yes we can --
out of deference --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
Yes.
Is that person aware that --
19 11:12:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
That this evidence is going to be given.
Yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
we take it on the basis that its not, if you like, direct evidence on your
11:12:34 25
26
Well from those circumstances we must ask you to name the name, but
part, that this person did anything wrong? Absolutely.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
That's right. Completely hearsay, it could be entirely untrue, so may I give
11:12:46 30
Simply evidence of what you were told by another individual?
it to you then under protest. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:12:47
11:12:56
39 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
Okay. Senator Lydon.
4
Q. 226
5
Absolutely?
You asked the question, who was the lead councillor? Is that right Mr. Herlihy?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 227
And the answer you got to the best of your recollection from Mr. Lynn, is that
8 9 11:13:03 10
11
it was Senator Don Lydon? A.
Yeah.
Q. 228
Were you shocked by that?
A.
Of course I was shocked, because I was one of the people at the time who
12
believed in the, that things were decided on merit. I had no idea that there
13
was corruption in the planning system at all, or that money came into it, or
14
financial inducements, I had no idea in the wide world, as I said I had never
11:13:22 15
ever been involved in any of that, that aspect of Irish life at all, so of
16 17
course I was shocked. Q. 229
If I understand you correctly Mr. O'Herlihy, you had an absolutely professional
18
relationship with Monarch and its employees and personnel up to this point in
19
time?
11:13:40 20
21
A.
Absolutely they were terrific.
Q. 230
You had never heard any suggestion of money for votes, or matters such as that
22 23
sort, up to this particular time? A.
24 11:13:53 25
Not at all and if I had I wouldn't have stayed with the campaign let me tell you.
Q. 231
And on the of May 1992 the date of the critical vote for Monarch you are having
26
a conversation with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lynn volunteers this information to you,
27
is that what happened?
28 29 11:14:15 30
A.
Yeah, yeah. Well it was, it follows directly on the first question I asked him about -- it flowed out of his response to my question of a decision being taken, both on the merits and quality of the proposition. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:14:17
11:14:31
40 1
Q. 232
2
And you were impressed if I understand you correctly and taken with both the merits and quality of the project that Monarch were proposing?
3
A.
I was yeah I thought it was very good.
4
Q. 233
You were an enthusiastic supporter of it, on its merits?
5
A.
I would have been.
6
Q. 234
It was in that context you raised with Mr. Lynn the question it should get by
7
on merit, as I understand it?
8
A.
Absolutely.
9
Q. 235
It was in that context Mr. Lynn made the response you have outlined to the
11:14:45 10
Tribunal?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 236
Which as I understand it and correct me if I'm wrong, which is that, merit had
13
nothing whatsoever to do with it, did had all to do with the purchase of votes,
14
is that right?
11:14:51 15
A.
That was my understanding of it yeah.
16
Q. 237
Were you taken aback, blown away by this Mr. O'Herlihy?
17
A.
Well I had no -- I had no experience of how the planning system worked at all,
18
I had no idea how the council system responded to the planning motions, so I
19
was completely surprised and shocked, and to be honest about it I was disgusted
11:15:15 20
21
as well. Q. 238
22
And you then asked him how the system worked effectively and Mr. Lynn explained to you about the lead councillor?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 239
To that point in time had you ever heard anything that have nature before?
A.
No, nothing, nothing.
Q. 240
By lead councillor did you understand Mr. Lynn mean you needed a lead
11:15:27 25
26 27 28 29 11:15:42 30
councillor in each party? A.
That I'm not sure, I couldn't tell you, because for some reason or other which is I suppose as I think I made the point to John Gallagher against my inquisitive nature, I never pursued the discussion and the reason I may not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:15:47
11:16:03
41 1
have was because we could have been interrupted, I can't remember, but I'm not
2
sure whether or not he would have been the -- there was a lead councillor would
3
have been somebody who represented the company in relation to all parties, or a
4
specific party, I do not know.
5
Q. 241
6
But you then proceeded to ask the question about who effectively was Monarch's lead councillor?
7
A.
I did.
8
Q. 242
You were given the name, you recollect, of Senator Lydon?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 243
Was any amount of money mentioned in connection with any payment that was made
11:16:12 10
11 12
to the lead councillor, that you can recollect? A.
13
that went to him now necessarily, that was money, as I understood it, was to be
14 11:16:30 15
A figure was mentioned of a hundred thousand but that wasn't necessarily money
distributed, if its true and it may not be true at all. Q. 244
And in your explanation that was provided to you by Mr. Lynn, of what the lead
16
councillor did, did you understand it that the lead councillor would make
17
disbursements to other councillors?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 245
So if you just outline in your own words how Mr. Lynn explained to you how this
11:16:47 20
21
system of the lead councillor worked? A.
Well my recollection going back these 15 years would be that what he said to
22
me -- I can still visualise the scene, inside in the bar of the Royal Dublin
23
Hotel, we were drinking coffee if I remember correctly, because it was only
24
about quarter past 12, and when he mention it had, he said what happened was
11:17:11 25
that you would appoint a councillor, a lead councillor he called him, who would
26
be your point man as it were, in the, in terms of the councillors at large, and
27
that he would determine, you know, how money would be distributed to buy the
28
votes on the basis of whatever the requirement would be to get the motion
29
through. Now that was my understanding of it.
11:17:36 30
Q. 246
And this was volunteered to you by Mr. Lynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:17:38
11:17:50
42 1
A.
It was yeah, yeah.
2
Q. 247
And that followed on your initial question about the councillors approaching
3 4
this matter on merit? A.
5
Oh, yes, that was the -- I mean if I had never mentioned that there would never have been any discussion about it at all.
6
Q. 248
And was this your last involvement with Monarch Mr. O'Herlihy?
7
A.
Oh yeah it was. Now its important to recognise that my -- my appointment was
8
not in indeterminate one, it was a finite one for a specific project and the
9
project was over once the vote came through, they said thank you and good bye.
11:18:14 10
And that was the end of me.
11
Q. 249
Monarch lost the vote?
12
A.
They did by two votes if I remember correctly.
13
Q. 250
On that date and that was the meeting of the 27th of May 1992 and I think that
14
after that, I think you put in a final fee note of the 29th of May, at 3731.
11:18:33 15
And this covers the period 13 of April to 29 of May 1992 and that is your last
16
fee note?
17
A.
Yeah, yeah.
18
Q. 251
So that would indicate that you concluded your business with Monarch in or
19 11:18:45 20
21
around the 29 of May of 1992? A.
That's correct.
Q. 252
So that would appear to agree with the documents that we have looked at, you
22
were retained to change public opinion coming up to the important vote in May
23
of 1992?
24
A.
Correct.
Q. 253
That vote was lost?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 254
And they didn't continue with you thereafter?
28
A.
No, nor did I expect them to either.
29
Q. 255
Yeah. And in that meeting you had with Mr. Lynn would he have seen from your
11:18:55 25
11:19:09 30
demeanour that you were shocked by what you were hearing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:19:11
11:19:32
43 1
A.
I don't know. He may have thought me a complete innocent, I don't know or
2
he -- I can't remember, I certainly was shocked whether he recognised it is
3
another matter, I don't know.
4
Q. 256
Do you remember ever discussing any, leaving aside what happened with Mr. Lynn
5
at the meeting of the 27th of May, did you ever have any discussion with
6
Mr. Lynn about the importance of individual councillors, or maybe councillors
7
changing their attitude in relation to Monarch?
8
A.
9
No. Now you see Mr. Lynn was the person who -- Mr. Lynn was a highly professional operator in my judgement and he had years of experience in
11:19:53 10
operating the Monarch what would you call it, or in developing the Monarch
11
Properties and indeed going about achieving what was to be achieved, both with
12
the Council and people like that, he also made a point I think that he didn't
13
necessarily see the value of public relations, because he was a very very good
14
operator.
11:20:15 15
16 17
Having said all that now I have forgotten what you asked me. Q. 257
18 19
Did Mr. Lynn ever mention the importance of any other particular individual councillor, or changing their position in relation to Monarch?
A.
No, because sorry to go back to the point I was about to make or that I should
11:20:29 20
have made, Mr. Lynn was dealing with, dealt with, the Council pretty well all
21
the time, the councillors themselves all the time, he had loads of experience
22
it have, my involvement was kind of marshalling them into meetings but I had
23
very little part in the meetings myself, that wasn't my function.
24
Q. 258
11:20:49 25
Insofar as presentations were made to councillors or matters such as that sort that was dealt with by the Monarch people?
26
A.
Yes correct.
27
Q. 259
And were you surprised when he identified Senator Lydon as being the person who
28 29 11:21:08 30
he said was the lead person for Monarch? A.
I'd have to say yes, but I don't honestly remember. But I would have been surprised all right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:21:11
11:21:24
44 1
Q. 260
Was there any discussion before the meeting took place in Dublin County Council
2
of the numbers, of how many votes they had or how many numbers were in place or
3
anything such as that sort?
4
A.
5
There probably would have been a discussion, like a casual discussion as to how many votes we need.
6
Q. 261
Yes.
7
A.
Whether or not they weren't through it in a forensic sense and said we had X
8 9
number against Y, I can't remember. Q. 262
11:21:39 10
11
In the PR strategy committee or the unit that was in place to get this job done, who was the person who was dealing with getting the numbers?
A.
Well Richard Lynn would have been the project man basically, Eddie Sweeney and
12
himself, but Richard was the guy, as it were, who was on the road and who was
13
dealing with most aspects of it.
14
Q. 263
11:21:58 15
effectively, was there a post mortem, did anybody sit down and analyse where it
16 17
And when the result came through and you were told that Monarch had lost
had gone wrong? A.
I don't recall it to be honest, I don't recall that that there was a post
18
mortem. I think there was a general recognition, if there was a post mortem
19
there might have been a casual discussion in the Royal Dublin Hotel afterwards,
11:22:17 20
which would indicate that they would have to go back to the drawing board, but
21 22
that's as far as I can recall it, the most that would have happened. Q. 264
23 24 11:22:37 25
And would it be fair to say that Monarch wouldn't have regarded that setback as the end of the road, as far as they were concerned?
A.
Probably not, they knew the system better than I did so probably not.
Q. 265
Did any of the councillors come into the Royal Dublin afterwards, can you
26
remember?
27
A.
I can't remember.
28
Q. 266
When Mr. Lynn told you about the lead councillor and about the fact that the
29 11:22:56 30
matters had to be paid for, material contraventions or zoning, was it your understanding from what you were hearing, that Monarch had themselves paid in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:22:59
11:23:05
45 1
order to achieve rezoning?
2
A.
In this particular instance.
3
Q. 267
Yes?
4
A.
Yeah, that was my understanding.
5
Q. 268
Thank you very much --
6
A.
But again, with no evidence whatsoever. No evidence, purely based on anecdotal
7
information given to me, no evidence whatsoever to back it out and everything
8
that I had -- I think its hugely important to say, all the dealings I had with
9
Monarch were contradicted by that particular statement that was made, so
11:23:26 10
11
whether it was factual or not I do not know. Q. 269
12
I understand that Mr. Lynn will say that no such conversation took place, I assume that you would disagree with that?
13
A.
Yeah, the conversation took place.
14
Q. 270
And you are absolutely satisfied the conversation took place?
A.
Absolutely. What is in it for me to come in and here and make up a
11:23:39 15
16 17 18
conversation? Q. 271
Thank you very much Mr. O'Herlihy, would you answer any questions that anybody else might have.
19 11:23:48 20
CHAIRMAN:
Just before that happens I think we'll take a ten minute break now
21
and you might return then after ten minutes and hopefully you won't be here too
22
long.
23 24 11:24:40 25
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK, AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
26 27 28 29 11:41:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:41:27
11:41:31
46 1
CHAIRMAN:
Now.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
I don't know whether the order has been agreed.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well who would like to start the.
6 7
MR SANFEY: Chairman I'm Mark Sanfey, I am senior counsel and I represent among
8
others Mr. Lynn, my other clients are Monarch Properties Limited, Paul Monahan,
9
Dominic Glennane, Noel Murray, Philip Reilly and estate of Philip Monahan. I
11:41:53 10
think you were told previously Mr. Mohan would be here, but in fact it's myself
11
Chairman.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
All right we can live with that. Would you like to cross examine?
14 11:42:03 15
MR SANFEY: Yes.
16 17
THE WITNESS WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR SANFEY:
18 19 11:42:08 20
Q. 272
MR SANFEY: Mr. O'Herlihy, as I said, my name is Mark Sanfey I'm senior counsel and for today's purposes I represent Richard Lynn. I should say Chairman
21
before I commence questioning Mr. O'Herlihy, that I did wish to refer to the
22
notes of the private session that Mr. O'Herlihy had and I take it that there is
23
no objection to that, my solicitor wrote in formally during the week...
24 11:42:27 25
CHAIRMAN:
No you can do that certainly, if you have the page number.
26 27
COUNSEL: My difficulty is that our copy of the private session doesn't have
28
the usual four digit number at the top, so I may require some assistance, I do
29
obviously have the internal pagination, which I hope to refer to.
11:42:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:42:44
11:43:02
47 1 2
CHAIRMAN: Q. 273
If you use that then we can see that it goes up on the screen.
Very good. Thank you.
3 4
Mr. O'Herlihy, leaving the conversation with Mr. Lynn aside for a moment, in
5
your private interview, which took place on the 6th July 2000 and in fact today
6
I think its fair to say, you have nothing but praise for Monarch Properties and
7
its operatives in general is that right?
8
A.
9
company. I thought Richard Lynn was a highly professional operator, I was
11:43:22 10
delighted to be working with him, because he was apart from being professional
11 12
Oh that's absolutely correct I thought they were a very very professional
he was good humoured, he was a pleasure to work with. Q. 274
In fact I am instructed that my clients will say equally that you were also a
13
pleasure to work with and extremely professional and they had no difficulties
14
and while they didn't achieve the result they wanted, they had no problem with
11:43:41 15
your work.
16
A.
That's nice to know, thank you.
17
Q. 275
Just given the seriousness of what you have said about the conversation with
18
Mr. Lynn, I would like to go back through your notes and just see exactly what
19
you said about Monarch or Mr. Lynn in those notes, I wonder if those could be
11:43:58 20
put up on the screen, this is an interview you did with Mr. Gallagher Senior
21
Counsel for the Tribunal on the 6th July 2000, I understand that they are part
22
of the brief.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
is there a page number.
11:44:11 25
26
MR SANFEY: We don't have a page number on our copy unfortunately.
27 28 29 11:44:27 30
CHAIRMAN: Q. 276
Is there any page number on it?
MR SANFEY: There are two sets of pagination, I am going to refer to the one of the top right hand corner and I'd like to begin with page 18. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:44:38
11:44:55
48 1 2 3
MS. DILLON: Q. 277
7996.
Thank you. The first answer there, in fact we don't see the first part of that
4
answer, but just the last sentence that was, the Monarch people that made the
5
presentation and the people who did it were professional. And I think you were
6
referring to the presentation that this taken place in the Royal Dublin Hotel
7
in that?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 278
All right. Page 22.
11:45:08 10
11 12
MS. DILLON: Q. 279
8000.
The question is "Had you been asked by anybody for money or had it been
13
suggested to you that money should be offered? Answer: Oh not at all. There
14
was never any discussion that the entire relationship between Monarch and me
11:45:25 15
was entirely kosher, there was no suggestion of money there was no suggestion
16
of anything other than a campaign, that was of the highest integrity, there was
17
no question of anything untoward ever mentioned, money was never mentioned in
18
terms of buying votes and there was never any suggestion that I should actually
19
make contact with councillors by any means to achieve anything like that, there
11:45:42 20
was never any question of anything like that." I take you stand over that?
21
A.
Absolutely.
22
Q. 280
Would you have a look at page 24 please.
23 24 11:45:53 25
MS. DILLON: Q. 281
8002.
You were asked about the possibility of money changing hands and as you will
26
see at the very top of the page you said the standards were the very highest in
27
the dealings that I had between Monarch and myself. There was never any
28
question.
29 11:46:07 30
And if you move on to page 32. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:46:11
11:46:23
49 1 2 3
MS. DILLON: Q. 282
8010.
Now once again you are being asked about the conversation with Mr. Lynn here
4
and at the end of the page you say "It was entirely, the conversation was
5
entirely anecdotal in the sense that it could have been a fellow boasting in a
6
bar for all I know. There was no evidence whatsoever in my dealings with
7
Monarch at any stage that suggested that this was part and parcel of the way
8
that they did business" and I take it you stand over that as well?
9 11:46:39 10
A.
Oh absolutely yeah.
Q. 283
On page 34.
11 12 13
MS. DILLON: Q. 284
14
8012.
In the second paragraph you say, the whole question of money as a means of getting planning permission was raised you say "There was no sign of it any
11:46:55 15
dealings that I had or it was never mentioned. Nobody ever asked me for money
16
and the councillors never asked me for money, there was no suggestion by
17
Monarch that I should consider offering money." you go on to say that if that
18
had been said, you would have left the project immediately, because that's not
19
the way I do business, I would have been shocked if anybody did business that
11:47:12 20
way, which makes me very innocent. Then you say but their entire dealings with
21
me at all stages were entirely of the highest standards. I take it you stand
22
over that?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 285
On the next page, page 35, its a short page but you say simply "There was never
11:47:30 25
26
any evidence shown to me or employed in anyway that suggested that that was the way to do business, that was the one and only example."
27 28
And at page 42.
29 11:47:41 30
MS. DILLON:
8020.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:47:49
11:48:08
50 1
Q. 286
You refer to your finishing your involvement with the project and Mr. Gallagher
2
asked you when they lost and you said "Yes when they lost and I never had any
3
contact with Monarch thereafter. I mean I found Monarch very good to deal
4
with, they were very nice guys, very decent people I thought". Do you have
5
any --
6
A.
No I agree with that.
7
Q. 287
Any reason to resile from that?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 288
And finally, if we look at page 46.
11:48:16 10
11 12
MS. DILLON: Q. 289
8024.
You were asked a general question by Mr. Gallagher in relation to having
13
anything else to say about the project, in the second paragraph of your answer
14
you said "At no stage in any conversations at that took place involving Phil, I
11:48:30 15
assume that should be Monahan, or any of his executives, or right up to the
16
conversation that I told about there in the bar in the hotel, there was never
17
ever, ever, ever any suggestion that their normal practice was to buy anything,
18
there was never any snide comments, or there was never any kind of subtextual
19
comments that is gave you the impression that this was only all a charade and
11:48:51 20
that the work was really going on underneath the surface. There was never
21
anything like that.
22 23
I got the impression all the time that that was a campaign that was what it
24
looked like, that it was entirely an up front campaign and I got that
11:49:02 25
impression all the way through" do you stand over that?
26
A.
I stand over that.
27
Q. 290
In that answer you seem to be suggesting that not only was it not said that
28
there was any question of giving money to politicians, but that there was no
29
means to infer. That...
11:49:15 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:49:17
11:49:31
51 1
Q. 291
That there was --
2
A.
If somebody had dropped in from Mars and sat at any of the Monarch strategy
3
meetings, not for one minute would they imagine that it was anything other than
4
the campaign that was being mounted and presented.
5
Q. 292
Right. I think you intimated in your evidence this morning that the
6
conversation with Mr. Lynn was out of character, in the sense of going against
7
all of that, all of your dealings with Monarch?
8
A.
9
That's what shocked me the most, because it was completely out of character. As I said I haven't the slightest idea whether it was accurate or inaccurate,
11:49:49 10
whether he was reflecting on my naivete or whatever it was, but it certainly
11
was not in character in any sense what ever with what had gone before for the
12
six or eight months.
13
Q. 293
14 11:50:10 15
All right. Would you agree that if the conversation did take place, that it has very serious implications for Mr. Lynn's honesty and integrity?
A.
I'd have to say first of all the conversation did take place it, wouldn't
16
profit me for a minute to come here and as I said, make up a conversation,
17
there is no gain in it for me, its the last thing I need to be in front of a
18
Tribunal. So I wouldn't dream of making up something like that its too
19
serious, I understand precisely what you are saying, it is a very very serious
11:50:30 20
allegation, but what I am really reporting is simply a conversation, I am not
21
saying that its a factual conversation, or that the conversation represents a
22
fact. I'm not saying that for one minute because I have no evidence to that
23
effect, I am simply saying the conversation took part, if he was taking -- he
24
could have been taking the Mickey out of me, I don't know whether he was or he
11:50:52 25
wasn't, there was no evidence or subsequently that I saw to justify what was
26
said, but nonetheless, I am saying and I have sworn before God for this, it
27
took place.
28
Q. 294
There is no possibility that you could be mistaken?
29
A.
No, I'm sorry, there isn't.
Q. 295
Yes.
11:51:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:51:08
11:51:22
52 1
A.
2 3
I say that with a heavy heart because I have an awful lot of time for Richard Lynn, he was a very good guy to work with. But it was said.
Q. 296
4
You are aware from what Ms. Dillon said that Mr. Lynn utterly denies that the conversation took place?
5
A.
I'm aware of that.
6
Q. 297
In fact he will go further, not only does he deny the conversation took place,
7
but it was an impossibility for it to have taken place, because he wasn't in
8
the Royal Dublin Hotel that day?
9
A.
Of course he was. He was there with me.
Q. 298
He will say that he was not?
11
A.
We were waiting for the result of the vote.
12
Q. 299
All right. I will come back to that Mr. O'Herlihy, can I ask you a couple of
11:51:35 10
13
questions about your general involvement, could we look at page 14 of your
14
private session interview? That's 8005 apparently.
11:51:57 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Page 14 is 7992.
17 18
MR SANFEY: I'd just like to ask you one or two questions about your
19
involvement, prior to the 27 of May 1992, you say on the third paragraph down
11:52:15 20
on that page "Thereafter I was asked to set up a series of meetings in the
21
Royal Dublin Hotel with various councillors, who would have included Greens,
22
who would have included Fine Gael councillors. I don't know if they included
23
Fianna Fail or Labour, I just don't know, I can't remember" would you stand
24
over that statement now that you were asked to set up a series of meetings in
11:52:35 25
26
the Royal Dublin Hotel? A.
I would in the sense that -- I don't understand why you are asking me that
27
question in the first place, so maybe you might like to tell me why you are
28
asking the question.
29 11:52:53 30
Q. 300
I'd like an answer to the question Mr. O'Herlihy, you said in the statement you were asked to set up a series of the meetings in the Royal Dublin Hotel, did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:52:56
11:53:12
53 1 2
you or did you not? A.
Oh I did, the series of meetings was set up by telephone, it was a question of
3
ringing councillors, saying the plans and the model would be available in the
4
Royal Dublin Hotel, which was adjacent to the Council offices and presumably
5
the councillors would have been going in and out for different reasons and I
6
was asked to set up the meetings and I set up the meetings.
7
Q. 301
Well did you attend any of those meetings?
8
A.
I would have attended a couple, but not all.
9
Q. 302
Do you recall the dates of those meetings?
A.
Oh no I don't.
Q. 303
So you have just a general recollection of having gone to a couple of these
11:53:25 10
11 12
meetings which you set up?
13
A.
Yeah, yeah.
14
Q. 304
My clients can only recall one meeting, they recall one meeting which was taken
11:53:35 15
in a break in the Council activities and they refer to it colloquially as the
16
goulash meeting, because they recall that the hotel served Hungarian goulash to
17
the councillors, when they came in to see the project, but they can't trace any
18
reference in their records to any more than one meeting. I'm just wondering do
19
you have any more detail...
11:53:56 20
A.
Well, a series of meetings doesn't imply they all took place on different days,
21
it means a as series of meetings with various councillors, that could have
22
taken place and probably did take place on one day, but that I cannot remember.
23
Q. 305
Which are we talking about, a lot of meetings on the one day?
24
A.
Well certainly, what I have in my mind would be a series of, a series of
11:54:17 25
meetings with different councillors on the one day, but whether there was more
26
than one day I can't remember. You see there were meetings that took place in
27
Monarch and there were meetings that took place in the Royal Dublin and as I
28
said, my function was to actually make sure that, or to work with Richard to
29
make sure that people saw the plans and saw the model, so they saw the scale
11:54:39 30
and quality of the project. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:54:41
11:54:51
54 1
Q. 306
2
All right. A page 21 of the private session interview there is an answer to a question --
3 4
MS. DILLON:
5
Can you remember the vote in Dublin County Council and the circumstances
6
surrounding it and you say "Yes. Well as I said, we were working quite a lot
7
in the Royal Dublin Hotel which was next to the Council chambers and we had,
8
obviously there were full meetings in the council or committee meetings of the
9
council which made the hotel a very convenient place next door to the Council
11:55:10 10
7999.
offices to have these presentations. But I had never been to the Council
11
offices I had never been to the Council chamber in my life." would you agree
12
with me Mr. O'Herlihy that that would tend to suggest that you were of the view
13
when you gave this interview that there were presentations on different days
14
and that you had been there on a number of occasions?
11:55:26 15
A.
Yeah that is a reasonable assumption yeah.
16
Q. 307
Which is it then were there a lot of meetings on the one day?
17
A.
I can't remember. I would have thought if I had to be definitive about it I
18 19 11:55:40 20
21
would have thought there were a series of meetings. Q. 308
On the same day?
A.
No, that there was more than one, but I am open to being corrected on that.
Q. 309
Well my clients can only recall one meeting on one day, you have no reason to
22 23
gain say that have you? A.
24 11:55:57 25
No but I have no reason to say that there were meetings that didn't take place either, you know.
Q. 310
Okay. All right. At page 14.
26 27 28 29 11:56:17 30
MS. DILLON: Q. 311
7992.
Just the very last question on that page, can you remember any of the councillors who actually attended? You said I can't. The question was you genuinely can't? No. And you went on to say that you weren't involved in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:56:23
11:56:39
55 1
construction industry and you were never involved in planning before or since.
2
You can't remember any of the councillors you met?
3
A.
Well from the documentation that's been presented, I obviously met Sean Barrett
4
and I met Alan Shatter and I met Michael Keating, that's obvious from the
5
documentation I presented to Monarch, I remember there was a Green councillor
6
but I can't remember -- I think it was a woman if I recall and I can't remember
7
her name. I honestly don't know, I would be -- I just don't know, I can't
8
remember.
9 11:56:58 10
11
Q. 312
Why didn't you give those names to Mr. Gallagher when he asked you?
A.
Because I couldn't remember then either.
Q. 313
But you have just given us a few names there, why didn't you give those names
12 13
to Mr. Gallagher? A.
14
very obvious in the course of the documentation, as far as the Michael Keating
11:57:15 15
and Alan Shatter, my memory has been jogged by the invoices I sent up -- that
16 17
To be honest about it, well Barrett's name I certainly gave, because that's
have been shown this morning. Q. 314
All right. Obviously in preparing for today you have had a chance to look at
18
some of the documentation and so on, would you have had the chance to look at
19
the documentation prior to this interview with Mr. Gallagher?
11:57:33 20
A.
No, not at all. You see, you must -- you must take into account that I am
21
nearly 35 years in the business of public relations, that was a period of about
22
six or search or eight months I don't have the files. I got rid of the files,
23
I don't have any diaries, I have no information whatever. As far as I was
24
concerned that was only a short-term project, that I never figured out at the
11:57:55 25
end of the day was going to end up in a Tribunal.
26
Q. 315
Yes?
27
A.
So I didn't keep anything. So there was nothing to, nothing to jog my memory,
28 29 11:58:07 30
as it were. Q. 316
I am just trying to get a feel for the state of your recollection Mr. O'Herlihy, obviously the famous meeting of May 27th 1992, was some eight Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:58:12
11:58:23
56 1
years prior to this interview and some 14 yours prior to today?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 317
So I just want to get a feel for...
4
A.
That's the conversation with Richard Lynn, is that what you are saying?
5
Q. 318
Which took place in May 1992.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 319
And your interview with Mr. Gallagher took place on July 6, 2000.
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 320
I am just trying to get a feel for what your recall of your involvement was in
11:58:36 10
11
July, which was some eight years after the events you have described. A.
I think if you read the documentation of Mr. Gallagher's interview you see
12
there are a lot of things I don't remember, but the interview with Mr. Lynn or
13
the discussion with Mr. Lynn I do remember because it was so, as you said out
14
of character. It was as far as I was concerned, so extraordinary.
11:58:55 15
Q. 321
Are all right. Would you look at page 20 of your interview please.
16 17 18
MS. DILLON: Q. 322
19
7998.
You will see down towards the end of that page, question 28 "Did you have local presentations in the area, in the Dun Laoghaire area?" and your answer was "I
11:59:19 20
can't remember. I really genuinely can't remember. I would be surprised if we
21
hadn't but it wouldn't have necessarily followed that had I would have been
22
present at them at all?"
23
A.
At them all.
24
Q. 323
Sorry I beg your pardon "At them all", now I am just wondering why, given that
11:59:38 25
you would have been very involved with the local presentations at that time
26 27
your memory of what did you wasn't a bit better? A.
Well you will recall from the documentation presented this morning, that there
28
were three people working on the account and in the context of presentations
29
two other names were mentioned, so I wouldn't necessarily have been present at
12:00:00 30
that, at those presentations, but other members of my staff would have been. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:00:04
12:00:14
57 1
Q. 324
2
But you have described this morning to the Tribunal, that what you were trying to do was to create a climate.
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 325
Whereby this development would become acceptable to the local people?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 326
Am I right in thinking that the main component of that campaign as regards the
7
people, as opposed to councillors, was a road show, which took place on 14
8
weekends, I am instructed on a Friday night from 6 o'clock to 10 o'clock and
9
Saturday from 10 o'clock to 6 o'clock in the evening, in local schools and
12:00:37 10
halls, over that 14 week period, throughout the area, and in addition there
11
were radio and TV adds, newspapers, leaflet drops, a video and so on, do you
12
not recall that road show?
13
A.
14 12:00:55 15
different question. Q. 327
16 17
Do I of course, but I wasn't necessarily present at all of them, which is a
You were asked did you have local presentation in the area, local Dun Laoghaire area and you said, I can't remember.
A.
Well if I said I can't remember at the time, I couldn't remember at the time,
18
and obviously let's be Frank about it, my memory has been jogged between then
19
and now.
12:01:14 20
Q. 328
But you worked on this project from November 91 until the end of May '92 a
21
period of some 7 months is that right? And this would have been fairly intense
22
high profile project for you during that time would it?
23 24 12:01:40 25
A.
I it would be, but the nature of my business wouldn't have meant that, and if you look at the fees that I was charging, it wouldn't have meant that I was working exclusively on the Monarch project, I would be working on many other
26
projects, which would have been on a retainer basis, over a period of a lot
27
longer than six or seven months, so for that reason I would have been diverted
28
into other things and other people on the staff -- you see my function at the
29
start was to actually create a strategy, the implementation of the strategy
12:02:01 30
could have been done by other people within my company and primarily, let's be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:02:05
12:02:21
58 1 2
Frank about it, was done by Richard Lynn who was an outstanding operator. Q. 329
3
But if you remembered anything at all about this campaign, Mr. O'Herlihy, surely you would have remembered the local presentations?
4
A.
Even Homer nods.
5
Q. 330
Okay. Now can I just ask you about your involvement on the 27th of May, which
6
you have described for the Tribunal this morning, if you want to refresh your
7
memory of what you said in 2000 you can look at page 26 and you will see that,
8
you say that you went to see the council chamber --
9 12:02:47 10
11
MS. DILLON: Q. 331
8004.
And you described yourself as an open mouthed observer, somebody who had never
12
been there before, was wandering around to see how it worked and so on. I take
13
it from what you said here as well, that you went to the hotel around 11
14
o'clock?
12:03:04 15
A.
Well obviously once it started, I don't know whether or not the public goes
16
into these meetings, but I didn't go into the meeting, nor did anybody with me
17
go into the meeting, so we went into the hotel and waited. We had a couple of
18
cups of coffee.
19
Q. 332
12:03:23 20
Yes I am just looking at your paragraph just over halfway "And I remember we were in there not longer than a maximum would have been around, roughly would
21
have been 11 o'clock and we stayed in the hotel and that have wouldn't about I
22
would imagine roughly around 11 o'clock and we stayed in the hotel until we got
23
the results, which would put us after the vote, which was I would say maybe
24
between half 12 and 1 o'clock" I take it you stand over that, you went to the
12:03:45 25
hotel around 11 and got the result sometime around half 12?
26
A.
That's very approximate.
27
Q. 333
Did I understand you putting the vote earlier this morning?
28
A.
I don't know I can't remember.
29 12:03:56 30
CHAIRMAN:
Half 12 he said this morning. Approximately.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:03:58
12:04:11
59 1
A.
I don't know precisely when the vote came in.
2
Q. 334
Well it's of some importance Mr. O'Herlihy, my solicitor has a note of 12.15,
3
my own recollection was the same as the Chairman, would you like to plump for
4
a time?
5
A.
6
If I was to plump for a time, I would say around 12.30, but I am open to contradiction.
7
Q. 335
All right. Now can you remember who was with you between 11 o'clock and 12.30?
8
A.
Richard Lynn was certainly with me, I would suspect but I can't -- you see I
9
don't want to be definitive about these things, I just don't remember, but I
12:04:32 10
would be surprised if Noel Murray didn't come in and out as well you know
11
because he was the marketing man, but I don't know that for an absolute fact.
12
I remember Richard Lynn because there was so much riding on it from Monarch's
13
point of view, he was there.
14
Q. 336
Right. And at page 32.
12:04:52 15
16 17
MS. DILLON: Q. 337
sorry, page 2?
32.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:05:05 20
8010 -- Sorry we have handed a copy containing the page numbers
to my friend Mr. Sanfey if he could use that, it would probably speed the
21
process up.
22 23
Mr. O'Herlihy you will see the second paragraph there "As it transpired they
24
were beaten by one vote and I remember it was a desperate disappointment and
12:05:20 25
when the vote came through we drowned our sorrows for a while", who was with
26
you when you were, when the vote came through?
27
A.
Richard Lynn was with me.
28
Q. 338
He is the only one you remember?
29
A.
He is the only one I remember.
Q. 339
When you say we drowned or sore owes?
12:05:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:05:34
12:05:46
60 1
A.
2
That's figurative, it probably was a cup of coffee, I don't think which were drinking at that hour of the day.
3
Q. 340
I think drowning our sorrows would normally refer to having a few drinks.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 341
But you think it was coffee?
6
A.
I think so, it was too early to take a jar, I am not a heavy drinker anyway.
7
Q. 342
But when you say drowning sorrows, how long did it go on for?
8
A.
I don't know, I couldn't tell you. When I say drowning sorrows I'm referring
9
to the fact it was acutely disappointing to Monarch, they put a lot of work,
12:06:07 10
very professionally, into the campaign and they lost the vote, therefore we in
11
a figurative sense we drowned or sorrows in the sense that we expressed a huge
12
level of disappointment and we probably had another cup of coffee and looked
13
forward to the future, but the future didn't include me.
14
Q. 343
12:06:29 15
drinking coffee after that, how long would you say, would you put it at an
16 17
hour, an hour and a half less? A.
18 19 12:06:42 20
21
If the vote came through at half 12 and a certain amount of time was spent
I don't know. I honestly can't remember, but I would imagine the very maximum would be an hour, but I don't know.
Q. 344
So there wasn't a long coffee drinking session?
A.
It wasn't a long session no.
Q. 345
Now Mr. Lynn, as you are aware, was effectively the project leader in relation
22
to this?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 346
He was the one coordinating the entire project in terms of getting rezoning and
12:07:04 25
liaising with councillor, liaising with you, liaising with the professions so
26
on, you agree with that?
27
A.
Oh absolutely.
28
Q. 347
Now Mr. Lynn will say that in relation to every single meeting that Dublin
29
County Council had in relation to the Cherrywood Development, he entered the
12:07:24 30
chamber and remained in the gallery, adjacent to the chamber, watching every Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:07:29
12:07:41
61 1
minute of the meeting and that in none of those meetings did he step outside
2
the chamber, or leave the gallery and that that invariable practice also
3
applied on May 27th 1992.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
I thought my friend had said that Mr. Lynn wasn't present on the
6
27th of May 1992.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Wasn't present -- well at the meeting or --
9 12:07:50 10
MS. DILLON:
That's my understanding maybe my friend will clarify that.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
mean simply at the meeting, in the hotel, or in the chamber.
14
Q. 348
12:08:11 15
We understood you to say that he wasn't present, now whether you
Well I'm glad to have the chance to clarify that Chairman. I haven't begun to spoke about Mr. Lynn's involvement with the County Council, if I said that he
16
wasn't present at the meting I refer purely to the meeting at which the
17
conversation is alleged by Mr. O'Herlihy to take place, he wasn't in the Royal
18
Dublin Hotel, for that conversation.
19 12:08:27 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 349
But you said he was in the chamber that day?
Yes. You are clear on that Mr. O'Herlihy? That what I am saying is that
22
Mr. Lynn will say that he was present in the gallery, which is adjacent to the
23
chamber, because non councillors are not allowed into the chamber itself and
24
was there attending on the meeting from the time it started, in fact before
12:08:55 25
that until, five past ten two when the minutes say that it ended and that he
26
did not go to the Royal Dublin Hotel at any time between those times?
27
A.
That's not my recollection.
28
Q. 350
You see, Mr. Lynn has gone back over his movements as closely as he could, and
29 12:09:14 30
what he will say is this, he will say that he arrived in the County Council hall, between 10.15 and 10.30 and the reason he did this was because the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:09:20
12:09:42
62 1
meeting was scheduled to start at 10.30 am, you have to get a member to sign
2
you into the public gallery, which is behind the chamber and there is limited
3
seating, so if you don't get there early, you don't get a seat. And he says
4
that the meeting would have commenced at 11 am at the latest, he will say that
5
he stayed with the meeting for the entire time. The Manager's report was the
6
first matter voted on and I wonder if we can have page 3720?
7 8
Now that is a page of the minutes of the meeting produced by the council,
9
Mr. O'Herlihy, and on the previous page it says that it was agreed that the
12:10:27 10
Manager's report and the amendments to the draft plan and the motions were to
11
be discussed together, but voted on separately. And then at page 490, there,
12
you see it says "Following discussion to which Councillors Lydon, Hand, Gordon,
13
Fitzgerald, Dillon-Byrne, Breathnach, Smith, Lohan, Gilmore, O'Callaghan, C
14
Breathnach, Barrett, Dockrell, Coffey, Mitchell, Butler, Cass, Marren, Higgins,
12:10:54 15
contributed, the Manager replied to queries raised by the members" so I'm not
16
sure quite how many that is, but its perhaps about 15 different councillors got
17
up and spoke to the motion on one side or the other, and it was then proposed
18
by Councillor Lydon and seconded by Councillor McGrath that the Manager's
19
report recommended and shown therein be adopted, it was put to a vote and the
12:11:19 20
motion was lost.
21 22
And Mr. Lynn will say that he was present for all of that. And Mr. Lynn will
23
say that he had to be present for all of that, because as the point man, as it
24
were, for Monarch Properties there was no question of anybody else being at
12:11:40 25
that meeting and that he could co not leave the meeting and if anybody had a
26
point they wanted to ask him about the development, he had to be there to
27
answer it and he had to be there to monitor developments and he says that he
28
did not leave that meeting at all until the entire meeting ended. Do you have
29
any comment to make on that?
12:12:00 30
A.
That's not my recollection. I'm not suggesting that he wouldn't have been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:12:04
12:12:43
63 1
there for part of the meeting, but he was certainly in the Royal Dublin Hotel
2
with me.
3
Q. 351
Now I wonder could we refer to page 588? I want to refer you to something
4
Mr. Dunlop has said, now this relates to Mr. Lynn's involvement, so I would
5
just like you to have a look at this Mr. O'Herlihy, at question 58 there, there
6
was talk of a motion and they are trying to fish for the date that that motion
7
took place --
8 9 12:12:54 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 352
Is this Mr. Dunlop's evidence?
It's Mr. Dunlop. The answer to 58 he says, three lines down "Remember that a
11
lot of the motions fell, or were withdrawn on the basis that the case could not
12
be made, or that people did the figures in the room and said, withdraw that
13
immediately because its not going to run" and Mr. Dunlop was asked were you
14
present on those occasions he said I would have been present, yes. Was
12:13:18 15
Mr. Lynn present and the answer is "Always, always present. Not Phil Reilly,
16
not always, but Richard Lynn, always" he is then asked who would make a
17
decision that a particular motion should be withdrawn? And the answer is "I
18
remember on one particular occasion Richard Lynn signalling Don Lydon to come
19
out of the chamber after he had made a disastrous speech in relation to why you
12:13:41 20
this was required, and not required and he came back in and withdrew.
21
Question: Withdrew the motion? Answer: The motion." and then there is some
22
debate as to when that motion actually took place, but if you go forward to
23
page 596, now you see just below short discussion off the record Mr. O'Herlihy?
24 12:14:07 25
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 353
Mr. Gallagher for the Tribunal said "What year is that, it looks like December
26
is it? It is the special meeting of 27 May 1992? Answer: Yes, that could be
27
one of them. A special meeting of the councillors, in other words a
28
Development Plan meeting. Question: It was a Development Plan meeting.
29
Question yes. Answer: Yes. Question: Councillor Mitchell it say here, she
12:14:32 30
had no interest in the lands. The Manager reading to the words, to propose Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:14:33
12:14:51
64 1
amendments where in etcetera: Then question 100 "Lydon withdrew the motion
2
Answer: That motion Question: Having spoken outside the chamber with Richard
3
Lynn having been called out of the chamber by Richard Lynn, is that correct
4
Answer: Yes."
5 6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: Q. 354
What page is that?
Page 600 Chairman. Sorry Chairman I didn't go consecutively there, question 100 on page 600 up on the screen.
9 12:15:04 10
And at question -- in question 102 Mr. Dunlop says "I have to admit that's its
11
earlier than I would have anticipated, it is earlier in 1992 than I would have
12
anticipated it, but I do vividly recollect and I have on a number occasions
13
mentioned the fact that a compromise motion was proposed by Sean Barrett, so
14
that if that was the day that the motion was proposed that is it. Question:
12:15:32 15
The motion that was withdrawn was one proposed by Councillor Lydon, seconded by
16
Councillor Hand and it proposed that the lands at Cherrywood be rezoned
17
residential within a density not exceeding an average of 12 houses per hectare
18
with the parks taken into account, or in any event to be provided for, not more
19
than 956 housing units. It is a lengthy motion. Is that the motion that you
12:15:53 20
21
were referring? It is referred to at page 492 of the minutes of Dublin County Council, of 27 May of 1992".
22 23
So we see there Mr. O'Herlihy, that Mr. Dunlop is identifying the motion which
24
was withdrawn by Mr. Lydon as the one that occurred on the 27th of May of 1992
12:16:24 25
and he refers to a confab held between Mr. Lydon and Mr. Lynn, in relation to
26
that, I think Mr. Lynn might take some issue with the characterisation of that
27
by Mr. Dunlop, but that shows that Mr. Lynn was available to the councillors at
28
the time when that motion was withdrawn.
29 12:16:46 30
MR. O'HIGGINS: Just to interject for a moment on behalf of the witness, this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:16:49
12:17:09
65 1
is of course potentially legitimate material to put to Mr. O'Herlihy, but
2
Mr. O'Herlihy has been circulated with none of the material which is now being
3
put to him, nor has it ever been suggested, in any of the material circulated
4
to Mr. O'Herlihy that Mr. Lynn would say of the things which are now being put
5
by Mr. Sanfey so Mr. O'Herlihy, so that to the extent that he is being asked to
6
comment on evidence given it appears several years ago, by Mr. Dunlop, which he
7
hasn't had an opportunity to consider or address, he may have very reasonable
8
difficulties in recalling this, on the hoof, so to speak, I'd just like to make
9
it clear, as I say none of this material has been circulated nor has any
12:17:35 10
statement suggesting that this approach would be taken by Mr. Lynn being
11
circulated to him either.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
whether, having heard your account as read from the transcript, does he in
12:17:53 15
Well I suppose Mr. Sanfey all you can really put to O'Herlihy is
anyway change the evidence or wish to change the evidence or consider the
16
evidence, that he has given, in relation to the fact that the conversation he
17
says the fact that the conversation took place. This is Mr -- this, at the end
18
of the day this is Mr. Dunlop's account as to what he recalls, I mean its not
19
something that Mr, that Mr. O'Herlihy has any direct knowledge of.
12:18:25 20
Q. 355
Precisely Chairman, you are absolutely right, I wasn't expecting Mr. O'Herlihy
21
to have a view on whether what Mr. Dunlop said was true or untrue, I didn't
22
want to be subject to the criticism that I didn't put to Mr. O'Herlihy that
23
there is evidence to suggest, from other parties, that Mr. Lynn was in the
24
chamber until after the vote took place, because as we know from the minutes
12:18:47 25
Mr. Lydon's motion was withdrawn after the vote on the Manager's report.
26 27
So I literally wanted to just put that to him, you are quite right, all I
28
really wanted to say to Mr. O'Herlihy was not to comment on what Mr. Dunlop
29
said, but just to say does that give him any reason to suspect his recollection
12:19:07 30
may not be correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:19:08
12:19:28
66 1
A.
My recollection of the conversation is absolutely correct. The only thing at
2
issue from what you have raised would be the timing, the time, my time and the,
3
that I have put forward at around 12.30 might be wrong, that's all I can say,
4
but the conversation took place.
5
Q. 356
Well Mr. O'Herlihy, isn't it true that the conversation with Mr. Lynn in the
6
way that you described it in your interview took place while you were waiting
7
for the vote?
8
A.
Yeah, that's my recollection.
9
Q. 357
Now if Mr. Dunlop is correct, and once again you can't have a view on this, but
12:19:47 10
let's say assume for a moment he is correct, Mr. Lynn is put in the gallery of
11
the chamber, after the vote has been taken and in fact when Mr. Lydon, Senator
12
Lydon was considering whether or not to persevere with his motion?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 358
So the time something fairly crucial from Mr. Lynn's point of view isn't it?
A.
Well I think its a red herring to be honest. Because it seems to me that the
12:20:05 15
16
point at issue is, did the conversation take place? That's far more important
17
than the time in which the conversation took place. If I am completely wrong
18
in my timing, that doesn't mean the conversation didn't take place, it simply
19
took place at a later time than I have indicated at 12.30, but the conversation
12:20:30 20
21
took place. Q. 359
But Mr. O'Herlihy you have said and you have had a chance to think about it,
22
that the conversation took place at 12.30 while you were waiting for the vote
23
to come through?
24 12:20:41 25
A.
That's right that's my understanding.
Q. 360
And in fact it was asked in a that context, how do you think the vote is going
26
to go?
27
A.
That's right.
28
Q. 361
So its not just a matter of timing is it, if this evidence from other people
29 12:20:53 30
tends to suggest that Mr. Lynn, was in fact in the chamber until long after the vote was taken, in fact when Senator Lydon's motion was considering then you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:20:59
12:21:13
67 1 2
are quite wrong aren't you? A.
I'm not wrong in what I am saying, I am wrong in my timing if everybody else
3
can say he was there until 2 o'clock, then the conversation took place after 2
4
o'clock, but it took place. And I'm not going to yield on that, it took place.
5
Q. 362
I appreciate that Mr. O'Herlihy, but you would be wrong in saying that it took
6
place at 12.30. You would be wrong in placing it in the context of a
7
discussion of waiting the vote?
8
A.
Yeah that's right.
9
Q. 363
And wondering how it was going to go, isn't that right?
A.
Obviously if the other indication of time is correct, I'm wrong in that.
11
Q. 364
Right, right.
12
A.
Yeah but I'm not wrong, you see the material point is the conversation took
12:21:26 10
13 14
place. Q. 365
12:21:43 15
Yes but I mean you have couched that conversation in a context where you were waiting for the vote to come through?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 366
And you are asking Richard Lynn, how do you think its going go? And you get
18 19 12:21:53 20
this very cynical response from Mr. Lynn. A.
Yeah and that's my understanding.
Q. 367
But if that conversation took place at 2 o'clock, when you knew the vote, it
21
couldn't have happened in that way is that right?
22
A.
That's true, yeah.
23
Q. 368
Now just to finish this, Mr. Lynn will say that he remained, for all of the
24 12:22:13 25
motions, as you know there were a number of motions and all of them were voted on and so on, and that Mr. Lynn, as is his normal practice, waited in the hall
26
way, thanking members for their support, in fact he specifically remembers
27
shaking hands with Mr. Sean Barrett, on the footpath outside, because Mr. Lynn
28
and Mr. Barrett were then approached by RTE to do an interview and they agreed
29
do the interview and it was switched to the Fine Gael room, because the noise
12:22:44 30
outside made interviewing impossible. And Mr. Lynn duly did that interview and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:22:49
12:23:01
68 1
in fact we have a tape of it, if you want to see it --
2 3
MS. DILLON:
4
heading back into the territory of people producing evidence or documentation
5
or information to the Tribunal which has not been provided before today so we
6
haven't been in a position to circulate it to Mr. O'Herlihy, or indeed to
7
anybody else, we are unaware of any suggestion of an interview with anybody for
8
any purpose, at any particular date or time and in fairness to Mr. O'Herlihy
9
and indeed anybody else, including Mr. Lydon who might be affected by this
12:23:23 10
Sorry before question is finally put to Mr. O'Herlihy, we are
before any further reference can be made the matter will have to be circulated.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
tape, or viewing of the tape, to go into evidence and to be referred to in
14
cross-examination of witnesses you will have to submit it to the Tribunal and
12:23:44 15
If you want the Tribunal to consider permitting the content of the
if the Tribunal believe it appropriate to do so, it will then be circulated.
16
If necessary Mr. O'Herlihy can be recalled to deal with anything that might
17
arise as a result of the tape, but what you can't do is refer to a tape which
18
nobody has seen but yourself.
19
Q. 369
12:24:08 20
Well Chairman, I will be glad to turnover the tape, but absolutely nothing turns on it.
21 22 23 24 12:24:19 25
CHAIRMAN: Q. 370
Well that's fine.
I am not going to refer to the content of the tape or anything like that, I simply want to establish that an interview did take place, I have no reason to believe that Mr. O'Herlihy will gain say that, or have any opinion on it in
26
anyway, if he did or wanted to see the tape there is no difficulty in
27
circulating the tape.
28 29 12:24:32 30
CHAIRMAN:
We would be anxious to see the tape, if its going to be referred to
in evidence because its been, if you like opened by you on the basis that it in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:24:40
12:25:04
69 1
some way supports your client's case, that he was in attendance until a certain
2
time or until the conclusion of the meeting or whatever, so whatever --
3
whatever evidential value it has, obviously we would have to have it, if its
4
appropriate to do so, to have it circulated.
5 6
Q. 371
Chairman we have no difficulty what so ever in making the tape available, I think you may well conclude that it doesn't have much evidential --
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
All right well then its of no relevance to your cross-examination
9
of Mr. O'Herlihy.
12:25:20 10
11
MR. O'HIGGINS: Chairman on behalf of Mr. O'Herlihy here could I just say for a
12
moment while Mr. O'Herlihy is quite happy I think to answer any of the
13
questions which are put to him now, I am slightly concerned that there may be
14
material which I was meant to have received and haven't. Now I am not sure
12:25:34 15
because certainly I am in position possession of many statements by Mr. Lynn,
16
but none which even makes reference to the question of a meeting, or the
17
absence of a meeting, between Mr. Lynn and Mr. O'Herlihy, I am just somewhat
18
concerned before I go on, whether through my inadvertence or anyone else's,
19
that there has been a failure to provide me with documents in which Mr. Lynn
12:26:04 20
21
gives some alternative account of what was meant to have happened on the 27th of May.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
24
Mr. Lynn, we do not have any further statement from Mr. Lynn detailing,
12:26:19 25
26
No my friend Mr. O'Higgins has all of the documentation from
following his receipt of Mr. O'Herlihy's statement, detailing any further material or information in relation to that matter.
27 28
MR. O'HIGGINS: I am grateful sir, because what does concern me is and I note
29
this and I don't make any criticism in doing so, that it was indicated in the
12:26:36 30
opening of the Module, at which time I hadn't looked at all the documents that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:26:43
12:27:03
70 1
Mr. Lynn denied the conversation with Mr. O'Herlihy, but I have to say that
2
none of the materials with which I have been circulated, even includes a denial
3
of the fact of the conversation, and I ask there for no reason other than if
4
there is some document I don't have I would be anxious to have it and if there
5
isn't then I don't press the matter any further.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Where did we get the information.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
I understand it was indicated in telephone conversation by the
12:27:12 10
solicitors, with solicitor for the Tribunal, that Mr. Lynn would be denying
11
that the conversation took place, but the Tribunal has no statement from
12
Mr. Lynn detailing his version of the meeting, or any of the other material
13
that Mr. Sanfey had indicated, or mentioned earlier.
14 12:27:30 15
MR. O'HIGGINS: I am grateful for that, it puts matters in context, I was just
16
somewhat concerned that I was, that these matters are coming out of the blue
17
then from everyone's point of view.
18
Q. 372
19
Chairman can I just say too there appears to have been one private session interview with Mr. Lynn, after 27 of May 1992, as I understand it no reference
12:27:50 20
was made to Mr. O'Herlihy's reference to that conversation to Mr. Lynn, in that
21
private interview.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: Q. 373
I know that yes.
So if Mr. Lynn didn't refer to it in that interview he can't be criticised.
12:28:02 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
statement, we now know that it was said by your solicitor to the Tribunal's
28
solicitor, that's how it was stated in that way in the opening time opening by
29
Ms. Dillon, but there is no mystery now, there is no mystery as to why Mr. Lynn
12:28:21 30
There is no criticism of him not dealing with it in a formal
didn't make a further statement. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:28:25
12:28:45
71 1
Q. 374
Mr. O'Herlihy, to wrap it all up, you will understand that Mr. Lynn will say
2
that he was at the County Council meeting for the whole of it, that he didn't
3
leave the gallery, or the chamber and that in fact he didn't go to the Royal
4
Dublin Hotel until after he had done the interview and that only for a sandwich
5
on his own. I take it you say that that cannot be the case?
6
A.
That is not my recollection.
7
Q. 375
Can I ask you something about the conversation itself, just a few questions I
8
want to ask you about it, Mr. Dominic Glennane and Mr. Noel Murray are both
9
also my clients and each of them will say that they remember you being in the
12:29:14 10
Royal Dublin Hotel, but that they don't remember Mr. Lynn being there and in
11
fact would have been, wouldn't have expected him to be there because his place
12
was down in the chamber, do you recall Mr. Glennane Mr. Murray being there?
13
A.
14 12:29:36 15
I recall Mr. Murray, in a coming and going situation, but I don't remember Mr. Glennane.
Q. 376
Yes. Could we have a look at page 36, 8014? Mr. O'Herlihy you were asked at
16
the top of the page there, was anybody else present when you were having this
17
conversation the answer was "I would have thought, I don't know. I mean its
18
possible that Noel Murray was present but the conversation if I remember
19
correctly we were standing at the bar, and it was probably a private
12:30:07 20
conversation and I would think that -- I can't, I don't know. We were not the
21
only people there, but I think the conversation was maybe Noel Murray was
22
there, I don't know honestly. I suspect not. But I don't know, I mean we
23
would have been in a little island talking to each other" do you have any
24
position today as to whether Noel Murray was there?
12:30:27 25
A.
26 27
conversation. Noel Murray was certainly in the hotel. Q. 377
28 29 12:30:46 30
In terms of the conversation, the conversation would have been a private
But you seem unsure during the course of that answer as to whether Noel Murray was party to the conversation with Mr. Lynn?
A.
No to my knowledge he wouldn't have been party to the conversation but he would have been thereabouts, you know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:30:48
12:31:02
72 1
Q. 378
But you were less sure in 2000, you said we were not the only people there but
2
I think the conversation was, maybe Noel Murray was there, I don't know
3
honestly.
4
A.
I'll have to stick to that then won't I. I don't know honestly but my
5
recollection, such as it is now is that he was certainly not part of the
6
conversation but he was there.
7
Q. 379
8 9
as this? A.
12:31:19 10
11
Would you not remember him being part of such a momentous conversation as such
That's exactly the point. The fact that I don't remember him being part of the conversation suggests to me that he wasn't part of the conversation.
Q. 380
12
But you seemed less sure when you were in private interview with the Tribunal in July 2000?
13
A.
Well I don't know. I can't answer that.
14
Q. 381
I mean wouldn't it, when you were told this by Mr. Lynn, if Mr. Murray was
12:31:39 15
16
present, one assumes you would turn to Mr. Murray and say, Noel did you -A.
I think the difficulty I have in a situation like that is I am attempting to be
17
as honest as I can and you know to make declamitary comments, about people
18
being there, or not being there, is not my normal style for a start, certainly
19
in terms of trying to be careful you can actually do yourself a certain amount
12:32:03 20
21
of damage by suggesting that you are unsure. I am sure of only the basic fact. Q. 382
22
All right. Could I ask you to have a look at page 8006, you see that Mr. O'Herlihy?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 383
Now this is when you asked Mr. Lynn about the project and he said "merit
12:32:33 25
doesn't come into it, the quality of the project has nothing to do with it", he
26
then said "you cannot get through a planning application or material
27
contravention in Dublin County Council unless you buy it" and you said "what do
28
you mean buy" it he said "planning permissions and material contraventions were
29
worth 50,000 a year in the back pocket of councillors in the Dublin County
12:32:54 30
Councillors who play ball with developers". Is that your best recollection of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:32:57
12:33:06
73 1
what he said?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 384
Do you stand over that today as your recollection?
4
A.
I, absolutely -- because as I said to the Tribunal earlier, I had no
5
involvement whatever with planning applications or construction industry or
6
whatever, and that to me was such an extraordinary comment that it just stuck
7
in my mind.
8
Q. 385
9 12:33:25 10
11
permission nor a material contravention? A.
I'm not aware of that.
Q. 386
Well you must be aware, Mr. O'Herlihy, what was happening was a review of the
12 13
You know that what was afoot that day was neither an application for planning
development plan, it wasn't an application for planning permission? A.
14
Well I can't remember that either, but I will tell you this much, it was material as far as the go ahead for Cherrywood was concerned, it was important
12:33:44 15
from that point of view for Monarch. The technical detail, I can't answer at
16
this stage.
17
Q. 387
But you mentioned twice planning application, material contravention?
18
A.
That is what was said to me. I am not saying that this was a planning
19
application or material contravention. What was said to me is that, that a
12:34:04 20
material contravention or a planning application could not go through on its
21
merits, it had to be bought, and that 50,000 a year was the calculation that
22
was made by the councillors if they played ball with the developers. Now how
23
would I make up a statement like that, would you ask me? How could I possibly
24
make up a statement like that when I have no idea in the wide world what the
12:34:28 25
dynamics of the industry was, or the whole question of getting planning
26 27
permission. Q. 388
Well I suppose what I am trying to find out Mr. O'Herlihy, is whether those
28
were the exact words said or whether it's a paraphrase? Because my client, who
29
is intimately familiar with the mechanics of planning applications and
12:34:46 30
development plans and so on, can't understand why it's alleged he would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:34:51
12:35:07
74 1
referred to a planning applications at all in the context of a review of the
2
development plan. Why talk about oranges when he was concerned with apples?
3
A.
I don't know.
4
Q. 389
You may well be aware from your own public knowledge that planning permissions
5
are not decided by councillors, they are decided by the officials of the low
6
authority, and that therefore the question of paying money to councillors in
7
respect of planning permissions doesn't arise; so why would Mr. Lynn who would
8
know that, even if you didn't, refer to planning applications, putting 50,000 a
9
year in councillors pockets.
12:35:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
can't really comment on.
13
A.
But isn't that -- obviously that's something that Mr. O'Herlihy
Yeah.
14 12:35:38 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
It's a matter which obviously your client can give in evidence in
support of his contention that he couldn't have said anything of this nature. Q. 390
Can I ask you this then Mr. O'Herlihy, in that context Mr. Lynn will say that
18
he, even if it were true he wouldn't have said that; so are you standing over
19
the exact words that you have used here?
12:35:59 20
A.
I am standing over these words, yeah.
21
Q. 391
Planning applications and material contraventions?
22
A.
That's what I was told. You see, going back to the point that I made earlier,
23
he could have been talking at that particular point about planning applications
24
and material contraventions in a much broader context than the Monarch property
12:36:21 25
26
context, I don't know, you will have to ask him that. Q. 392
At page 8008, you see that middle paragraph there, and a note of caution
27
entered what you were telling Mr. Gallagher at this point and you said, you
28
were being asked Mr. Lydon you said "I have to be very careful here now because
29
everything I am talking about anecdotal, there is no material or tangible
12:36:55 30
evidence of anything like this in my relation with Monarch. This was a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:36:58
12:37:13
75 1
conversation in a bar, in a bar of a hotel and it is entirely anecdotal. I
2
don't have any evidence of any sort to back it up" and you return to that topic
3
two pages later, at 8010.
4 5
You see at the bottom of the page there you are talking about the conversation
6
and you say the "The conversation was entirely anecdotal in the sense that it
7
could have been a fellow boasting in a bar, for all I know. There was no
8
evidence what so ever in my dealings with Monarch at any stage that suggested
9
that this was part and parcel of the way that they did business." Now your
12:37:36 10
reference there to "it could have been a fellow boasting in a bar", can I ask
11 12
you Mr. O'Herlihy, did you take this conversation seriously? A.
I did. You see, as I said to you earlier, I have no experience, I have had
13
since no experience and up to then no experience what so ever of that
14
particular industry. If a person says that to me and he says it with authority
12:37:58 15
I take it to be a fact, or I take it to be, you know, but I did make the point
16
that it could have been a reaction to the fact that I was naive, it could have
17
been an exaggeration. I have no evidence and this wasn't caution, this was
18
realism. I have no evidence whatsoever to indicate that this was a fact, and
19
therefore I entered that as caveat on the basis of being fair and being honest.
12:38:23 20
Q. 393
All right, well it's very fair of to you say that, but did you ever afterwards,
21
immediately afterwards or in the week afterwards, write down the contents of
22
your conversation?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 394
You didn't take a note of it?
A.
No.
Q. 395
Even to fix it in your own mind for your own purposes not to show to anyone
12:38:38 25
26 27 28
else, you didn't write it down? A.
29 12:38:50 30
No, it fixed in my own mind because it was such an extraordinary conversation, but I didn't write it down.
Q. 396
Did you ever discuss it with anyone? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:38:52
12:39:03
76 1
A.
2
I may have, I probably did make a reference to it along the lines somewhere, you know, about the council and that.
3
Q. 397
To whom?
4
A.
I don't know, I can't remember.
5
Q. 398
Well when Mr. Lynn said it to you, did you say it to Dominic Glennane or Noel
6
Murray, "can this be true, you will never guess what Richard has just told me",
7
something of that nature?
8
A.
I have no recollection of that.
9
Q. 399
By your own time line and given that you may have reservations about your own
12:39:25 10
time line, this conversation would have taken place waiting for the vote of
11
which you have informed at half 12?
12
A.
That's what I thought.
13
Q. 400
You think you may have had a cup of coffee for about another hour after that.
14
In the hour that you spent, did you discuss it any further with Mr. Lynn or
12:39:39 15
Mr. Murray or Mr. Glennane or anyone else, you had just been told something
16
that according to your evidence this morning was staggering, you were gob
17
smacked by it, and you were disgusted by it, now given that you were disgusted
18
by it, did you not mention it to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Murray?
19
A.
12:40:02 20
No, because my interpretation of the conversation was that it was a private conversation, at that time and I didn't discuss it with anyone, I wasn't going
21
to start raising a hair at that particular point in time. It didn't occur to
22
me to say to anybody else at that time.
23
Q. 401
24
involvement with Monarch was at an end, you could have been retained on an
12:40:25 25
26
ongoing basis? A.
27 28
I'd say there wasn't a slightest prospect of that, I would be a realist about these things.
Q. 402
29 12:40:35 30
At that stage is it not fair to say that you weren't aware that that your
You thought from that day on you wouldn't have any more association with Monarch?
A.
Yeah, I mean I was specifically appointed for a particular project and the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:40:41
12:40:57
77 1
project finished with that vote, that was the end of my involvement, it was
2
never understood by me, nor never implied by Monarch that I was to continue or
3
anything like that, so I assumed that was the end it, and I was right, it was
4
the end of it.
5
Q. 403
You then, up to that day had been associated with the PR for a project, which
6
if what Mr. Lynn told you was true, involved whole sale bribery and corruption,
7
did that concern you from the point of view of your own personal reputation?
8
A.
9
I think you're ignoring one fact, or one point I made, I have no idea whether it was true or not. And if I was to exercise my judgement on the basis of the
12:41:26 10
eight months I spent with Monarch as I said it was entirely out of character, I
11
would not have been party to something that was, if there was a sniff of
12
corruption in it, I wouldn't have been part it have under any circumstances,
13
there was no such sniff, it was a very legitimate campaign. So when that was
14
said to me, I said to myself okay, as I said in the thing that was somebody
12:41:50 15
boasting, was it somebody taking the Mickey out of me, was it somebody
16
reflecting on the fact that I was such an innocent, I don't know, I never knew
17
whether it was true or not and certainly, like the whole campaign as far as I
18
was concerned, was over at that stage anyway.
19
Q. 404
12:42:07 20
21
You didn't know whether it was true, but I asked you a few minutes ago did you take the conversation seriously and you said, absolutely?
A.
I did because I would have assumed that this was a person talking from the
22
basis of understanding the dynamics of the industry, which I did not and
23
therefore in that sense I took it to be true.
24
Q. 405
12:42:28 25
You took it to be true. So you have the project leader, the person with whom you have worked most closely, telling you that this is true, telling you this
26
and you take it that it is true and yet you never mention it to Mr. Glennane,
27
you never mention to Mr. Murray, you don't discuss with anybody else, you don't
28
write it down, can I ask you did you raise it with Monarch, with the board of
29
directors?
12:42:46 30
A.
I didn't, I had no further contact with Monarch, as far as I recall after that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:42:53
12:43:03
78 1
Q. 406
Did you take up with Fine Gael?
2
A.
No, why would I take it up with Fine Gael?
3
Q. 407
Would it not have been a matter of great interest to Fine Gael the matter that
4 5
there is rampant bribery in Dublin County Council? A.
I wasn't involved with Fine Gael in those days if I recall I think my
6
relationship had finished I don't know I can't remember, I didn't anyway is the
7
answer.
8
Q. 408
9
A.
No I did not.
Q. 409
Did you take any kind of advice about it?
A.
No I didn't, because I didn't know whether it was facts all or not as I said to
12:43:15 10
11 12
Did you speak to your solicitor about it?
you earlier on.
13
Q. 410
Did you consider reporting to the Gardai?
14
A.
No I did not.
Q. 411
So despite the fact that you took the conversation seriously and assumed that
12:43:26 15
16
Mr. Lynn was telling you, what he believed to be true, you didn't write it
17
down?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 412
You didn't see a solicitor, you didn't say it to the other representatives of
12:43:39 20
Monarch who were present, you didn't follow it up with Monarch, you didn't say
21
it to the party, with whom you had an association and because of which
22
association you got involved in the project in the first place, and you didn't
23
consider reporting to the Gardai?
24
A.
12:44:00 25
Because I had no evidence whatsoever. I mean if you want to go to the Gardai, you have to go with more than a conversation in a bar, you have to go on the
26
basis of the fact that I can tell you categorically A B C D and E, there was no
27
evidence whatsoever that was true, it may be true, but there was no evidence
28
therefore I wasn't going to go and run to, from Billy to Jack and tell them
29
something, a conversation in which I couldn't say was true or not.
12:44:21 30
Q. 413
Were you not concerned that if all this came out at a later stage it would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:44:25
12:44:38
79 1 2
damage your reputation? A.
Well what you are saying is damaging my reputation now. In fact the reality is
3
that if never dawned on me that this thing would actually get to a Tribunal,
4
you know. That wouldn't be the reason I wouldn't say it, the reason I didn't
5
say it was that there was no evidence.
6
Q. 414
Okay. Can I have a look at page 8007? Now Mr. O'Herlihy this is where you
7
refer to Mr. Lynn telling you that, what do is you pick off a lead councillor
8
in each of the parties and you discuss the matter with them and you get an
9
estimation from him as to the amount of money and the kind of money involved
12:45:12 10
that would be required to actually buy the votes, and you give that money to
11
the lead councillor and he does everything after that. Now do I understand you
12
to come back from this morning, from asserting that Mr. Lynn said you pick a
13
lead councillor in each of the parties, am I wrong in that?
14 12:45:32 15
A.
As against what.
Q. 415
Did I understand to you suggest this morning that in fact it might be only one
16 17
lead councillor that would be picked? A.
I said there to John Gallagher, that it was each of the parties, but only one
18
name was mentioned so I did make the supposition that that person could be
19
working for all the parties but that I do not know.
12:45:54 20
Q. 416
Yes but Mr. Gallagher understandably, asked you about why you didn't follow
21
that up, if you have a look at page 36, 8014, now if you see halfway down, you
22
are asked was any other politician mentioned that you can recall? Answer "No
23
well I don't know. I mean the natural inquisitive question for me would have
24
tonne to say well who was the person in Fine Gael and who was the person in the
12:46:31 25
Labour Party, but I never asked that question, I don't know why I didn't ask
26
the question. Now do you have any view today as to why you didn't ask that
27
question?
28
A.
29 12:46:47 30
No I haven't, it could well be that we were interrupted, I don't know. I have no idea.
Q. 417
Well was it not a question crying out to be asked? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:46:51
12:47:08
80 1
A.
It certainly would logically suggest, it should be asked, but therefore there
2
must be a logical reason why it wasn't asked and it could be because we were
3
interrupted and that was the end it, I don't know. I actually do not know.
4
Q. 418
5
I think your background Mr. O'Herlihy is as an investigative reporter isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 419
And I think we know that one of your greatest attributes as a broadcaster is
8
your ability to ask the question that the audience wants asked, if there had
9
been an audience or a fly on the wall there, would they not have been screaming
12:47:23 10
who is the Fine Gael guy, who is the Labour guy, ask, but you didn't ask?
11
A.
I didn't ask.
12
Q. 420
You are a dyed in the wool Fine Gael person, whether or not you have a formal
13
association with the party, I don't think I am mis-describing you when I say
14
that, would you not at least have been dying to know who the Fine Gael person
12:47:43 15
16
was? A.
I can't -- I honestly can't answer the question, I don't know. I don't know
17
why I didn't ask the question, there must have been a logical reason but I
18
can't remember what it might have been, I don't know.
19 12:48:28 20
Q. 421
All right. Now could I have a look at that, page 8016, now, sorry, if I just look at the last question on page 8016, to your best recollection that was Don
21
Lydon who was the person to whom the hundred thousand was to be paid? Answer
22
Yes to the best of my recollection. My understanding was that he didn't get
23
the 100,000 he got the 100,000 to distribute, how much he got of it I have no
24
idea, but the idea was that he would actually ensure that the votes -- that the
12:48:48 25
Fianna Fail votes would be -- although there might have been other votes as
26
well, but that he would be able to deliver a certain number of votes on that
27
and that he would pay them he would regard as the appropriate fee, as it were,
28
for the vote and that what was left over, he would keep himself. That was the
29
function of the man who was point, as it were, and the way they explained it to
12:49:10 30
me was that there was usually on from each party and that that was the way it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:49:11
12:49:35
81 1
usually worked. And then you go on to say, now I'm not saying that was the way
2
it worked for Monarch on this particular project, but what he was explaining to
3
me is that it was a general principle for construction industry people --
4
looking for planning permissions, I assume that should be, sorry that doesn't
5
appear to be on screen.
6 7
Just the second paragraph, Now I am not saying that that was the way it
8
worked... Do you see that?
9 12:49:44 10
A.
Do I yeah.
Q. 422
Now do I understand that to be consistent with the evidence that you gave this
11
morning that effectively you seemed to be rowing back from saying that Mr. Lynn
12
was saying that this would happen, was what had happened on this particular
13
project and saying he may have been talking in a general way?
14 12:50:03 15
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 423
I understood you to say that this morning and that appears to be what you are
16 17
is a saying here? A.
Yeah I think I was making two points. The question was really was raised by me
18
in relation to the specific project, the question of the, the answer in terms
19
of the lead councillor could have been a generic answer in the context and way
12:50:24 20
in which it normally operates.
21
Q. 424
So, so in Mr. Lynn describing how...
22
A.
How the System operates...
23
Q. 425
This payoff may take place he may have been talking...
24
A.
He could have been talking generally, or generically, in that context.
Q. 426
But Ms. Dillon then asked you, did he say he paid a hundred thousand? And your
12:50:42 25
26
answer to that was, yes.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 427
So he was talking directly on the one hand and on on the other...
29
A.
No no, I am only speculating, he said it, I didn't say it. I am telling you
12:50:55 30
what he said and I asked him the question on the hundred thousand and that's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:50:59
12:51:32
82 1 2
the answer I got. What is down in black and white was what I was told. Q. 428
All right. Can I ask you then about the hundred thousand pounds, mention of a
3
figure of hundred thousand spent by Monarch, seems to have been circulating
4
around the time of the Council meeting were you aware of a figure of a hundred
5
thousand pounds which it was suggested Monarch had spent in trying to get this
6
rezoning?
7
A.
I wasn't aware of any figure of any sort.
8
Q. 429
Yes?
9
A.
I wasn't aware of any money of any sort being mentioned, I never heard of that
12:51:47 10
11
figure of a hundred thousand until then. Q. 430
Yes. Ms. Eithne Fitzgerald was asked by Counsel for the Tribunal on Tuesday of
12
last week about a quote attributed to her, in an Irish Times article, now
13
Chairman I don't want to be -- I don't want to disturb Mr. O'Higgins in
14
relation to this, this was the article Ms. Fitzgerald was asked about, its part
12:52:17 15
of the brief and I would like Mr. O'Herlihy to see it, I am not expecting --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
I think he probably has it.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:52:27 20
It's in the brief, the earlier objection related to material we
didn't have, but this is in the brief so no difficulty.
21 22 23 24 12:52:52 25
CHAIRMAN: Q. 431
All right is there a page number for it.
7764. Now you see the bit in the centre Mr. O'Herlihy the bit around the headline quotes, it says "A leading public relations consultant Mr. Bill O'Herlihy is engaged for the campaign as well as architects planners and
26
landscape designers. Monarch have told me that they were spending 100,000
27
pounds to bring pressure to bear on us to rezone their land said Councillor
28
Eithne Fitzgerald, Labour. To put this in context it is more than the
29
nationwide campaign to elect Mary Robinson cost.
12:53:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:53:15
12:53:28
83 1
Now there is a hundred thousand pounds and you in the same paragraph
2
Mr. O'Herlihy, you weren't aware of a general suggestion abroad, that Monarch
3
had spent a hundred thousand pounds?
4
A.
No but I think you are, to use your own analogy, you are confusing apples with
5
oranges. Hiring of public relations consultant and all the various experts
6
that are mentioned there by Mrs. Fitzgerald, costs money, developing a road
7
show costs money, developing a television promotional film costs money, so a
8
hundred thousand wouldn't be out of the ordinary at all, and would have nothing
9
whatsoever to do about which I am talking.
12:53:53 10
11
Q. 432
Yes. So the 100,000 figure wasn't in anyway unusual then?
A.
It could be the promotional figure that they decided was the right figure for
12 13
that particular project. Q. 433
14
Yes. Ms. Fitzgerald, before this Tribunal, said she didn't recall the 100,000 pound figure and didn't think it was anybody in Monarch who had mentioned it
12:54:12 15
to her.
16
A.
Well I hope you are not suggesting it was I said it to her.
17
Q. 434
No I am not, I'm not. But she said and I quote "If you are trying to read into
18
that particular quote that I thought money was being spent to buy councillors,
19
that would not have been something at that time that I would have contemplated
12:54:30 20
was going on, so just for the record Ms. Fitzgerald was distancing herself from
21
any discussion of 100,000 was spent in anyway corruptly, what I am saying to
22
you is that, given that a figure of 100,000 pounds was being bandied about in
23
this article, appearing along side your name, although it's not suggested that
24
you had anything to do with that, is it possible that someone else mentioned
12:55:03 25
this figure to you and that your recollection has become jumbled in some way
26
and that it has become part of another conversation you may have had in
27
relation to this?
28
A.
29 12:55:23 30
I don't remember having a conversation with Monarch in relation to the promotional costs of the campaign at all.
Q. 435
Is it possible that somebody else, whether in Monarch or outside Monarch, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:55:28
12:55:56
84 1
mentioned the figure, in a completely different context?
2
A.
I have no recollection of such conversation.
3
Q. 436
Certainly Monarch were spending monies of that order on the campaign around
4
about that time, is it at all possible that somebody would have mention that
5
had as a figure which represented expenditure to you and it would have got into
6
your head in that way?
7
A.
In the context in which I am talking, no.
8
Q. 437
Right. You will be aware as I have said, that Mr. Lynn not only denies the
9
conversation which you had and says that it couldn't possibly have taken place,
12:56:20 10
and that's most unfortunate because you are somebody for whom he and the other
11
Monarch people have regard, do you have any theory as to why Mr. Lynn who, to
12
use your own words was a nice, decent very professional guy, why he would
13
certainly blurt out to you the details of a scheme to bribe councillors?
14
A.
12:56:50 15
whatever it might have been, I don't know you will have to ask him that
16 17
I have given you a few propositions, maybe in responding to my naivete or
question. Q. 438
My client's position Mr. O'Herlihy is that while they are not suggested in
18
anyway that you are activated by ill will or malice or anything like that, they
19
say that your account of the meeting or the conversation with Mr. Lynn is
12:57:15 20
inherently unbelievable and could not have taken place because Mr. Lynn simply
21 22
was not there? A.
Well my response to that is that it is unbelievable that I would come into a
23
Tribunal, either now or in 2000 and fabricate a story that would damage the
24
reputation of a person for whom I have a lot of respect, it is inconceivable I
12:57:46 25
would do that. And I am simply reporting what was said to me. I do so, I can
26
assure you, with a very heavy heart, I don't want to be in this situation,
27
there is no gain in this for me at all, in fact a lot of the questioning of you
28
in the last couple of minutes have been damaging in my judgement to my
29
reputation, which I think is unfair, because from my perspective I did nothing
12:58:06 30
wrong. I have never been involved in my entire life, in anything to do with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:58:12
12:58:31
85 1
financial inducements, or bribery of any sort, I never was part and parcel of
2
any meeting with Monarch or any other client through more than 33 years that
3
had anything to do with something that was either illegal or immoral, so it is
4
unbelievable that I would take a position that would be damaging to people in
5
the way that -- so I reject completely out of hand the notion that this is all
6
fabricated.
7
Q. 439
Well in fairness Mr. O'Herlihy, I never used the word fabricated, I wasn't
8
suggesting it, what I said was it was inherently unbelievable, in fact what I
9
was going put to you next, was the fact, would you -- what way would you go
12:58:52 10
with me on the suggestion that because Mr. Lynn wasn't there and because of
11
your lack of recall of certain details and the fact that you did absolutely
12
nothing afterwards, not even to write down details of the conversation, could
13
it be that you are simply mistaken in your recollection and that the
14
conversation never took place or that it is a miss remembered version of a
12:59:17 15
16
conversation you had with somebody else? A.
No, that would not be my -- I'd have to reject that, the only concession I make
17
to you is maybe my timing is incorrect, that's the only concession I could make
18
to you, that the time of the conversation was different to the time I gave that
19
the conversation took place.
12:59:43 20
21
Q. 440
Thank you Mr. O'Herlihy.
A.
Thank you.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 12:59:50 25
MR O'TUATHAIL: Mr. Chairman before the Tribunal rises, if that's the proposal,
26
Seamus O'Tuathail here I appear for Senator Lydon, I would ask you in lieu of
27
the fact that our client was certainly not present at this conversation, that
28
you would repeat for the benefit of the media, the warning that you issued when
29
you ruled that this evidence, naming my client, would be accepted and opened in
13:00:17 30
this Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:00:17
13:00:34
86 1 2
I do that because of the severe damage that a misrepresentation of this
3
evidence could make in the public mind. Its very important matter, its been
4
followed along. Mr. O'Herlihy has already said that this is pure hearsay, he
5
couldn't swear to it, he hasn't sworn to it and its a remembrance situation, in
6
which I propose to cross examine in the afternoon, so I ask you please to
7
repeat your ruling so that that will be carried with any reports of this
8
morning's proceedings.
9 13:00:51 10
CHAIRMAN:
Well just, I am not quite clear as to what you are referring to,
11
but I mean certainly as far as the Tribunal is concerned this is evidence of a
12
conversation that Mr. O'Herlihy says he had with Mr. Lynn, Mr. Lynn says that
13
conversation didn't take place and I assume Mr. Lydon will contest any
14
suggestion that might arise from Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence, that he, Mr. Lydon
13:01:20 15
did anything inappropriate.
16 17
MR. O TUATHAIL: Sorry Mr. Chairman, finally I am simply asking, this was
18
allowed in on a certain basis, that we were notified in advance that Senator
19
Lydon could be named in this session.
13:01:38 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
22 23
MR. O TUATHAIL: Mr. O'Herlihy objected in evidence to the naming of Senator
24
Lydon, wanted to write down the name, it was simply allowed in on the basis
13:01:47 25
that it may be of assistance in the general running of the Tribunal.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
informed and his legal team had been informed, so its only reason he,
29
Mr. O'Herlihy would have been asked to write down the name would be that if the
13:02:06 30
Well it was allowed in on the basis that Mr. Lydon had been
party to be named had not been informed. But the name has to come out Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:02:12
13:02:19
87 1
obviously and -- all right.
2 3
MR. O TUATHAIL: And the fact that its pure hearsay, that is correct should come
4
out as well and accompany any reports.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Yes but that's, even Mr. O'Herlihy himself said that, he has no
7
direct knowledge.
8 9
MR. O TUATHAIL: That's the point I'm obliged Mr. Chairman.
13:02:28 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right you'll want to cross examine for a short while?
12 13
MR. O TUATHAIL: Certainly yes.
14 13:02:33 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. O'Herlihy you will have to come back at 2.00, I'm afraid. All
right?
17 18 19 13:02:54 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:02:56
14:04:07
88 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AFTER LUNCH
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Yes, sir good afternoon Yes, sir I think Mr. O Tuathail.
6 7
THE WITNESS WAS THEN EXAMINED BY MR. O TUATHAIL.
8 9
MR. O TUATHAIL: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Herlihy Seamus O Tuathail is my
14:04:17 10
name and I appear with Mr. Humphreys, for Senator Lydon, I have some questions
11
arising out of your, particularly out of your evidence to Mr. Gallagher in the
12
year 2000.
13 14
Now just to give, I think we agree that these matters or these events if they
14:04:38 15
happened at all, happened in May 1992, isn't that correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 441
You spoke to Mr. Gallagher in what you believe was confidence?
18
A.
I may interrupt, you are a bit off mic would you --
19
Q. 442
Sorry, that's the old RTE experience kicking in there.
14:04:54 20
21
Now thank you very much for that, you spoke with Mr. Gallagher, in confidence
22
in July 2000 and now six years later in this year and this moment, and this
23
morning, for the first time this evidence has come to light, isn't that so. I
24
think you mentioned that you hoped when you were talking to Mr. Gallagher that
14:05:24 25
this matter would never come to light isn't that?
26
A.
That's absolutely correct.
27
Q. 443
Yeah. And you said that, I think, in the context where you were dealing with
28 29 14:05:39 30
the conversation in the bar which is my main concern? A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 444
And you protested valiantly in relation to having to give the evidence and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:05:46
14:06:05
89 1
particularly naming Senator Lydon, that's so?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 445
Yes. Now, just generally a few background questions. You were retained by
4
Monarch Group and your job was to, you campaigned for a period of eight or nine
5
months and you had a threefold objective if I'm correct. You wanted to
6
establish a climate, using public relations techniques in the local community,
7
of support for the Cherrywood project?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 446
And in that sense you say quite honestly that you were probably contracted for
14:06:27 10
this business because of your Fine Gael connections?
11
A.
I'd say that was a big, had a big bearing on it, yeah.
12
Q. 447
Now just going briefly as you can, through your Fine Gael connections, with you
13
have, you mentioned that you worked for 35 years in public relations, what are
14
the Fine Gael connections you are referring to?
14:06:52 15
A.
The Fine Gael connections really go back to the end of my period in current
16
affairs and I was particularly friendly with Ted Neilan, he and I worked on 7
17
days together. And he set up a group of people that subsequently became known
18
as the national handlers, if you remember working with Garrett Fitzgerald,
19
Peter Barry, people like that, and I worked on various campaigns. I was the
14:07:18 20
first paid public relations consultant to work on a political campaign in
21
Ireland, that was the first direct elections to the European Parliament. I
22
worked also on piles of general elections, well a number of general elections
23
and I did the party political broadcasts for them and I ran the press office
24
for a number of campaigns, as a consultant.
14:07:44 25
26
Q. 448
You did that for the Fine Gael party, or for Fine Gael in Government?
A.
Well initially for the Fine Gael party and then for Fine Gael in Government, it
27
alternated, depending on whether they were in or out, most of the time as you
28
know they were out.
29 14:08:03 30
Q. 449
I think the gentleman you mentioned Ted Neilan became a Fine Gael TD for Sligo?
A.
He did, but when I worked with Ted Neilan he was the communications director of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:08:08
14:08:22
90 1 2
Fine Gael. Q. 450
Fine Gael, yes. And what Ministers, over the period, in term terms of your
3
professional public relations involvement, what Ministers or ministerial
4
departments might you have worked for?
5
A.
Well I worked for Peter Barry, I worked for Enda Kenny, I worked for Michael
6
Lowry. I can't remember any others but, you know they took up a lot of my
7
time.
8
Q. 451
I think you mentioned that Mr. Frank Dunlop --
9
A.
Oh, I worked for John Boland, sorry I worked for John Boland and Jim Mitchell.
Q. 452
He was the Minister to for Public service?
A.
Public Service that's right and Jim Mitchell Transport and Power, that's
14:08:52 10
11 12
another.
13
Q. 453
You worked for them as a civil servant or professionally?
14
A.
No no as a paid political, as a public relations consultant.
Q. 454
Yeah. And going on from that then you say in your conversation with
14:09:05 15
16
Mr. Gallagher which is recorded, that you believe in terms of the Monarch
17
retainer that it was principally to make contact with Sean Barrett, would that
18
be correct?
19
A.
14:09:29 20
No that would be overstating it a little bit to be honest. He was a key person in it obviously because they felt that he was leader of opinion in South Dublin
21
and therefore in the Dun Laoghaire constituency area and council area he'd have
22
been immensely important and getting his support for the project was seen
23
initially when I first joined, to be hugely important, but he made it clear he
24
wouldn't support it.
14:09:50 25
26
But it was also to make contact with other party people, in order that the
27
message of Cherrywood would be planted firmly in the minds of everybody in
28
terms of its quality and its merits.
29 14:10:12 30
Q. 455
Yeah. Just referring there, I'm looking at page four internally or page number eight of the Tribunal, the Gallagher conversation, question 22, or answer 22 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:10:22
14:10:38
91 1
rather --
2 3 4
MS. DILLON: Q. 456
7986.
7986 now on that page there, if you look at that Mr. O'Herlihy, you see that
5
clearly, you say in relation to the Monarch project, you say at line 17 "And
6
together we planned" that's Mr. Lynn "Together we planned the media campaign,
7
we planned the community campaigns and we both liaised together in the context
8
of the political campaign per se" and you are asked the question "What did you
9
do as part of the that political campaign? Answer: Well principally I was
14:11:07 10
asked to make contact with Sean Barrett, that was one of the primary objectives
11
because of his status and leadership within the Council or in terms of the
12
influence in the Council."
13 14
So I think, I don't think we are in disagreement that initially you were
14:11:20 15
employed as it were to head hunt Sean Barrett's support for this project, would
16
that be correct?
17
A.
That would have been an imperative all right, yeah.
18
Q. 457
Yeah and how would you define a lead councillor just -- how would you define
19 14:11:42 20
the lead councillor in any Council group, how would you define that person? A.
Well my definition could be entirely wrong, but as, in terms of the
21
conversation that I re told earlier today the definition I would have of it, he
22
would be the main point of contact between the client or the company and the
23
council, and the councillors more accurately.
24
Q. 458
14:12:09 25
and leadership within the council or in terms of the influence in the council,
26 27
Yes. Just in relation to that matter on screen there, because of his status
would that qualify in your description as a lead councillor? A.
I didn't see it in those terms at all, as I interpreted it and I could be wrong
28
about this, as I interpreted it, it had nothing to do with status within the
29
council area, it was a question of his ability to make contact with other
14:12:32 30
members of the council for this particular project at the time, therefore I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:12:35
14:12:48
92 1 2
suppose it included automatically a certain status. Q. 459
3
Yes. And but you wouldn't define him in your sense of what a lead councillor is, as a lead councillor?
4
A.
Sean Barrett.
5
Q. 460
Yes?
6
A.
In the context of his importance within Fine Gael and his importance within
7
Fine Gael in his own constituency I think he was a hugely important person, but
8
not in the way that you are implying.
9
Q. 461
14:13:08 10
But also, when you were talking of Mr. Barrett earlier this morning, you described him I think as a friend?
11
A.
Mm-hmm.
12
Q. 462
So the liaison with Mr. Barrett goes beyond politics?
13
A.
Oh yeah and he made that very clear to me in coming to see the Monarch plans
14
and model, he made it very clear to me that the only reason he was coming was
14:13:25 15
because we were friends, otherwise he wouldn't because he was voting against
16 17
it. Q. 463
18 19 14:13:38 20
And you had worked I think, when Mr. Barrett was a Minister, had you worked for any of his Ministries?
A.
No I don't think so, I don't think I did.
Q. 464
And the overall campaign and I just want to ask you if I can, coming back to
21
the Mick, political campaign, you were liaising in, with Monarch on a political
22
campaign per se?
23
A.
Mm-hmm.
24
Q. 465
Now what did that involve precisely?
A.
As far as I was concerned as I explained earlier T, meant that I made contact
14:13:58 25
26
with councillors. I asked -- I talked to them about the quality of this
27
particular proposal and I asked them to come and view the plans and the model
28
in where ever was appropriate, where ever it was there at the time. It could
29
have been in community areas or it could have been Monarch's headquarters or
14:14:21 30
could have been in the Royal Dublin. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:14:23
14:14:34
93 1
Q. 466
2
And in 1992 there was a series of general elections around that period, were Fine Gael in power at that time?
3
A.
I don't think so, I think they were out of power.
4
Q. 467
Yeah.
5
A.
I think, if I remember.
6
Q. 468
Yeah. And -- but looking at the transcript of Mr. Gallagher, you seem to
7 8
confine your efforts largely, if I'm correct, to Fine Gael councillors. A.
9
quite honest about it, because my contact with them would have been fairly low
14:14:55 10
key or non existent in many cases, so I think what I was trying to do was
11 12
Well I mean I wouldn't have been well known to councillors of any party, to be
accentuate the positive. Q. 469
Yes. And you say that they would have, that people who visited the project or
13
looked at it at your request would have included Fine Gael councillors and a
14
Green -- that you weren't able to name this morning?
14:15:15 15
16
A.
Yeah.
Q. 470
A Green councillor. But you don't know if they included Fianna Fail or Labour,
17 18
I'm looking at page 7 of Mr. Gallagher's? A.
19
I don't know, but you can take it for granted that would be the case. It has to be recognised also that Monarch had a very sophisticated operation
14:15:33 20
themselves in the contact they had with councillors, so in a way I was gilding
21
the lilly I suppose you could say, because already the ability to make contact
22
with the councillors was there.
23
Q. 471
24 14:15:56 25
Yes. And I think the retainer if I'm correct, looking at the invoices that were shown this morning, the retainer was a hundred pounds per hour, was it?
A.
26
Well in what we have seen yeah, I can't remember but it was fairly modest let me tell you.
27
Q. 472
Well was it a minimum of five hours per week?
28
A.
I can't remember, you see I don't have the contract, I don't know.
29
Q. 473
Well you were meeting at least twice a week for a nine month period with
14:16:16 30
Monarch people isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:16:17
14:16:41
94 1
A.
Yeah, yeah.
2
Q. 474
And then if I could come along to the -- I think you now accept that the
3
council meeting, when it finished on, in May of 1992, finished around the 2
4
o'clock mark or a few minutes later in the afternoon?
5
A.
That point has been made strongly.
6
Q. 475
By Mr. Sanfey, and that your timing, I think you conceded that your timing
7
could be out. Your timing is then running between 11 o'clock and at least 2
8
o'clock in the Royal Dublin?
9
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 476
Now do you recollect, did you have lunch in that period?
11
A.
I have no -- I can't remember, I can't remember.
12
Q. 477
Yeah?
13
A.
I would suspect I didn't actually, but I don't know. I could have had a
14:16:59 10
14 14:17:10 15
sandwich, I don't know. Q. 478
Yeah well the detail that you can remember is that when you were asked about
16
drowning your sorrows after the vote was made known, that more than likely
17
there was no drink in the company, it was coffee?
18
A.
Yeah there wasn't any drink.
19
Q. 479
And are you saying that everyone else in that company was not drinking?
A.
I have no idea, I can't remember. I honestly can't remember.
Q. 480
So the other three people, I think you have identified up to three people, some
14:17:31 20
21 22
of them coming and going, could have been drinking?
23
A.
Theoretically yes, but I don't know.
24
Q. 481
And certainly if they started at 11 in the morning they would be well on by two
14:17:52 25
in the afternoon?
26
A.
No there was no question of drinking -- if they drank.
27
Q. 482
Well which is it Mr. O'Herlihy, either you can remember or you can't remember?
28
A.
I'm saying to you, that to imply that people were drinking, from 11 o'clock in
29 14:18:11 30
the morning until two in the afternoon, is completely absurd. Q. 483
But for you to say that you have no recollection and then to say its completely Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:18:15
14:18:31
95 1 2
absurd and rule it out is also absurd? A.
I'll tell you why its absurd, because people were waiting for the count or
3
waiting for the result of the Council vote, so they were not likely to be
4
completely jarred or hammered, by the time the result came in, so it was
5
important.
6
Q. 484
I'm not even suggesting?
7
A.
That's the implication of drinking for three hours.
8
Q. 485
Well I asked you the question were the other people in the company drinking?
9 14:18:41 10
You deny that you were drinking. A.
I'm not --
11
Q. 486
You said you couldn't remember. Now are you changing your evidence?
12
A.
If you want to call it changing my evidence, I can't remember but I doubt very
13 14
much if any of us was drinking. Q. 487
14:18:57 15
16
Well surely the phrase drowning your sorrows relates to drink and not to coffee.
A.
I made that point already this morning that that was simply a figure of speech,
17
obviously you guys who are very literate can tell me I was wrong to say it, but
18
I didn't say it in the context of drink.
19 14:19:15 20
Q. 488
But its a suspicious factor in the very suspicious scenario that's arising in relation to this conversation. Could I come along to, as it were, the meat of
21
the situation here. This is the remembered conversation between yourself and
22
you allege Mr. Lynn and that's denied since this morning. And I'm looking at
23
page 15 internal, page 30 of the transcript and you say here -- I'm looking at
24
line 6 on page 15 internal, he said "A hundred thousand pounds" he mentioned
14:19:56 25
specifically Fianna Fail. Now and then you go ahead on page 9, there seems to
26
be a question missing but that's a matter for the Tribunal, you go ahead anyhow
27
in reply to some other type of question and you say "And well I mean hang on a
28
second now, my recollection is that he mentioned Fianna Fail, I had to be very
29
careful here now because everything I am talking about is anecdotal" we can
14:20:21 30
agree on that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:20:21
14:20:32
96 1
A.
Oh absolutely.
2
Q. 489
Even today its anecdotal "There is no material on tangible evidence or anything
3
like this in my relation with Monarch" is that correct?
4
A.
Absolutely correct.
5
Q. 490
Yeah. This was a conversation in a bar --
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry Mr. O Tuathail what's the page number?
8 9
MS. DILLON:
14:20:44 10
The page reference Mr. O Tuathail are giving me are not the
correct references.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: Q. 491
14
What page.
Page 15 internal, page 30 on top right hand it would be helpful maybe to get it up.
14:20:56 15
16
MS. DILLON:
17
Sorry 8008 that's page 30, is that the page?
18
Q. 492
19
Well page 30 is page 8008 and its not the page in question.
Sorry that the page? Yes I think it is, I'm told it is. Yes it is. And he said a hundred thousand pounds, he mentioned specifically Fianna Fail.
14:21:19 20
21
Now I am simply putting to you Mr. O'Herlihy how tenuous your own evidence is
22
in its own terms. First of all its anecdotal, we have covered that, then you
23
say there is no material or tangible evidence of anything like this in my
24
relation with Monarch. Then you follow that on by saying, this was a
14:21:37 25
conversation in a bar, in the bar of a hotel and it is entirely anecdotal. Now
26
why would you -- what do you imply by saying this was a conversation in a bar,
27
in the bar of a hotel?
28 29 14:22:03 30
A.
Because it was entirely outside the parameters of the normal formal meetings with Monarch, that's what I am implying in it, nothing whatever to do with normal meetings with Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:22:05
14:22:25
97 1
Q. 493
"I don't have any evidence of any sort to back it up" is that correct?
2
A.
That's absolutely correct.
3
Q. 494
Yes. You said, then you go ahead at line 20 there "And he said he had. And if
4
my memory is accurate, and I would in the swear to this" now I want to pause
5
there, you are not swearing to this today either I take it?
6
A.
Well I've given the evidence under oath.
7
Q. 495
No I am asking you, because of the seriousness of the allegation that's been
8
floated around, "If my memory is accurate, and I would not swear to this
9
because I just can't be a hundred per cent certain that I am giving you the
14:22:49 10
right name, but I am almost sure the name was Don Lydon" now you are not
11 12
swearing even today that it was? A.
Well I suppose what that reflects is a kind of, the natural caution of taking a
13
person's character and my recollection is that the name that I have given is
14
the accurate name.
14:23:15 15
16
Q. 496
Yeah because --
A.
But I couched it as I always would in a case like that, I hope to God I'm not
17 18
wrong. Q. 497
19
Well if I go ahead to page 16, we will come back to that recollection because its central to the issues that you have raised here, albeit in terms of
14:23:32 20
hearsay. Just looking at page 16 now, that's page 32 in the right hand top,
21
once the vote was over there my involvement was ended, now I want to emphasise
22
very strongly that I could be inaccurate with the name I have given you --
23 24 14:23:59 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Q. 498
Where is that, wait now --
That's on page 16 internal, page number 32 on the top right, we better get it up.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
Its up.
29 14:24:10 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah okay line 15.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:24:13
14:24:26
98 1
Q. 499
Yeah onwards. "Now I want to emphasise very strongly that I could be
2
inaccurate with the name that I have given you. I am not certain that I am
3
accurate but I could be inaccurate." now --
4 5 6
MS. DILLON: Q. 500
7 8
Sorry I am not certain that I am inaccurate.
Yes, but I could be inaccurate. Yes, thanks Ms. Dillon for that. Now what exactly does that statement mean, given to Mr. Gallagher in July of 2000?
A.
9
It means exactly what it says, in the sense that I am pretty sure that the, that the name I have given the Tribunal and given Mr. Gallagher on that
14:24:53 10
occasion, is the correct name, but having said that, as I say, natural caution
11
is such that I just wanted to be, wanted to just put in that qualification.
12
Q. 501
But that's not a qualification, its a total contradiction, as I read it?
13
A.
Well its not really, it said I am not certain that I am inaccurate, but I could
14 14:25:15 15
be inaccurate, that's a qualification. Q. 502
16
Well now isn't that a 50-50 position, you are trying to have it both ways Mr. O'Herlihy?
17
A.
Listen I am not trying to have it anyway let me tell.
18
Q. 503
You either its true or its false?
19
A.
As far as I am concerned the evidence I have given is true and the name I have
14:25:28 20
given is the name I recollect after 15 years, so it has to be couched in that
21
length of time.
22
Q. 504
And this was, this name was given eight years on?
23
A.
That's right, exactly.
24
Q. 505
And you have already replied this morning that you took no action whatever in
14:25:50 25
relation to that at the time, even though you professed to be shocked by the
26 27
information? A.
Well I certainly was shocked by the information, but I would have been
28
ridiculed I any I had taken any action against an allegation that I couldn't
29
prove one way or the other.
14:26:04 30
Q. 506
Well then if I go down to the following line there, line 21, same page, you are Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:26:11
14:26:31
99 1
referring again to the conversation and you say it was "It was entirely, the
2
conversation was entirely anecdotal in the sense that it could have been a
3
fellow boasting in a bar for all I know" now how vague is that? Whose the
4
fellow?
5
A.
Well you are literally interpreting a figure of speech, the fellow clearly is
6
Richard Lynn, because that's the person I am talking about in that particular
7
thing and the fellow is not somebody who is conjured out of the air, it related
8
to a conversation I had with him.
9 14:26:54 10
Q. 507
And a fellow who boasts in a bar, doesn't he usually have drink on him?
A.
Generally, yeah but I'm not saying he had on this occasion, I can't remember
11 12
one way or the other. Q. 508
Well metaphors are being re translated here. So in terms of your auditors, in
13
terms of three people that were in your company, if that was the entire
14
company, this could have been a sort of a drink sodden episode remembered in
14:27:18 15
16
the tranquility of Dublin Castle eight years later? A.
17 18
Well I have told you already it was not a drink sodden recollection, I think I made that very clear to you.
Q. 509
19
Well you were certainly sober yourself on your own evidence. I want to, I want to go and deal with this though, you then say and I think you answered
14:27:38 20
Mr. Sanfey, you then go ahead to say that of course this didn't relate to the
21
Monarch transaction that was afoot that particular day, is that correct?
22
A.
I don't think so, I don't think that's what I said.
23
Q. 510
Well if I could, if I could go back on some of the replies you gave this
24
morning in cross-examination either to Ms. Dillon or to Mr. Sanfey, when
14:28:07 25
Mr. Sanfey put it to you about material contraventions and planning which
26
wasn't the business afoot in the council offices on that morning, you did say
27
and I'm quoting you here I hope accurately, "There could have been talking
28
about planning an material contraventions in a broader context?"
29 14:28:35 30
A.
Oh yeah that's right I did say that, yes.
Q. 511
So there is two possible contexts now arising on your evidence. One is there Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:28:40
14:29:04
100 1
was a specific context, that this particular motion and vote in which Senator
2
Lydon was involved and 72 other councillors, that a hundred thousand pounds had
3
been spent to secure a positive vote and for some reason this project had
4
failed, isn't that one context? And the other context is that somebody was
5
explaining to you, generally, how the building industry, over the years had
6
bought planning permissions and material contraventions?
7
A.
Yeah correct.
8
Q. 512
Yeah. And you also said in relation to that, you said it twice in your
9
evidence this morning, "I don't know whether they were talking generally or
14:29:24 10
about the particular project" isn't that support the --
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 513
Yeah. So that, as it were, that gives Monarch a clean slate, in relation to
13
the business being transacted in Dublin City Council that morning.
14 14:29:38 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well Mr. O Tuathail I remember Mr. O'Herlihy clearly stating in
16
response to that series of questions, that the -- this conversation with
17
Mr. Lynn arose in the context of him raising the issue specifically in relation
18
to the vote that day and whether, the word or term merit was mentioned, that's
19
the context in which Mr. O'Herlihy explains he raised the issue or at least he
14:30:18 20
raised the issue of vote on that particular day, and then he said Mr. Lynn went
21 22
on to say what he said. Q. 514
23
Well thank you Mr. Chairman, could I then refer the Tribunal and the witness to page 20 internal?
24 14:30:40 25
MS. DILLON:
26
8019 please. Now at line four its coming towards the end of the
conversation with Mr. Gallagher and on line four he says "Now I am not --
27 28 29 14:31:09 30
CHAIRMAN: Q. 515
That should be 8018.
Yes the third line down "Now I am not saying that that was the way it worked for Monarch on this particular project, but what he was explaining to me was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:31:13
14:31:38
101 1
the way it worked as a general principle for the construction industry people
2
looking for planning commissions" that's probably permissions. So therefore
3
Mr. O'Herlihy, this is your statement six years ago, clearly this conversation
4
that you had, if you had it and if you heard it correctly, this was giving a
5
general background from somebody in the company about how planning permissions
6
worked or were obtained in reality by bribery, isn't that correct?
7
A.
Yes, that is an interpretation.
8
Q. 516
Yeah. And that allowed you, with clear conscious then, to present your final
9
bill some few days later, to Monarch for the work you had already done on the
14:32:10 10
project?
11
A.
You are joking I hope are you?
12
Q. 517
No I am asking you the question straight up.
13
A.
They are completely irrelevant, I don't understand why you should ask that
14 14:32:18 15
question. Q. 518
Because you said you were shocked, I'm exploring your state of mind.
16
A.
Listen I have gone through.
17
Q. 519
From the time you heard this and your reaction to it, I am quite entitled to
18 19 14:32:30 20
21
ask the question. A.
Well I have gone through the answer.
Q. 520
Please do it again.
A.
The answer simply is, that there were no facts whatsoever to back up the
22
allegation made. Now it is very easy to be here in the Tribunal be pompous
23
about did you go to the Gardai, did you go to Fine Gael, did you go to the
24
Manager did you do this?
14:32:48 25
26
Q. 521
I didn't ask you any of this?
A.
I know that the questioners were asked what am I going to say? I hear this
27
that and the other. I would be a complete ridiculed idiot. I had no evidence
28
and I made it very clear to John Gallagher. I had no evidence whatsoever, I am
29
simply re telling a conversation, I don't know what weight you put tonne that's
14:33:07 30
for the Chairman of the Tribunal, I can't put any weight because I don't know Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:33:11
14:33:25
102 1
whether its true or not, I said that to John Gallagher and I said it again
2
today.
3
Q. 522
But you were also relating this hundred thousand pounds issue to a general
4
situation in the building industry and not to the specific vote that was taking
5
place in Dublin council offices that morning, is that correct?
6
A.
That is not correct, that's not what I said.
7
Q. 523
Well will I read it -- you can read it there.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
14:33:37 10
I think in fairness to the witness if Mr. O Tuathail is going
select a portion from the transcript that relates to a portion of the answer he
11
should go back to the question that was originally put which he will find on
12
page 8014 and while the answer is quite lengthy it might assist the witness in
13
making any clarification, rather than simply selecting a portion of it?
14 14:33:55 15
A.
Thank you.
Q. 524
Now which page are we talking about?
16 17
MS. DILLON:
18
8016, commences at page 8014 and the question at line 39, was there any other
19
politician mentioned that you can recall? And then the answer commences, it
14:34:12 20
21
Question, the portion of which Mr. O Tuathail selected at page
goes on for another page. Q. 525
Hold on now, can you give me the internal pagination.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
24
continues on the next page and concludes on the third page.
14:34:31 25
Q. 526
Internal page 18. Question commences at question 39, it
Yeah. "Was there any other politician mentioned that you can recall?" and then
26
the witness goes ahead and he says "No, well I don't know. I mean the natural
27
inquisitive question for me would have been to say well who was the person in
28
Fine Gael who was the person in the Labour Party. But I never asked that
29
question, I don't know why I didn't ask the question.
14:34:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:34:58
14:35:17
103 1
In fact if I remember looking back at it, I don't remember any Fianna Fail
2
people coming in and seeing the project, but it wouldn't have followed that
3
that -- that they hadn't because you see my function really would have been to
4
deliver other than the Fianna Fail, I mean it would have been a particular
5
connection with Fine Gael and maybe Labour, because of the coalition, you know,
6
but they would have assumed automatically that I didn't know much about -- I
7
didn't know anything about Fianna Fail.
8 9
Now I think Mr. O'Herlihy, just in passing, you are saying there "I didn't know
14:35:37 10
anything about Fianna Fail" you are being more or less positively asserting
11
that you had no connection with Fianna Fail in this, in this particular
12
campaign, is that correct?
13
A.
14
would have been on Fine Gael and to an extent Labour, but there would have been
14:35:56 15
16
No, that's not, that wouldn't be entirely correct but the greater emphasis
presumably been some Fianna Fail people as well. Q. 527
Now then do you return, sorry I have to go back on this now because I have been
17
pulled up by Counsel for the Tribunal, but on page 19 question 41 and your best
18
recollection.
19 14:36:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 528
Is that the next Page sorry its on this one, number 41.
To your best recollection that was Don Lydon? Answer: Yes to the best of my
22
recollection. My understanding that he didn't get a hundred thousand pound, he
23
got the hundred thousand top distribute. How much he got of it I have no idea,
24
but the idea was that he would actually ensure that the votes, that the Fianna
14:36:38 25
Fail votes would be, although there might have been other votes as well but
26
there he would be able to deliver a certain number of votes on that and we pay
27
them what would be regarded as the appropriate fee for the vote and what was
28
left over he would keep for himself" so we are talking about Senator Lydon at
29
this stage. And then we go ahead to page 20 and you say quite emphatically, at
14:37:00 30
page 4 on page 20, we might as well get that up on screen, line four rather on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:37:06
14:37:09
104 1
page 20.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
What page is this?
4 5 6
MS. DILLON: Q. 529
8018.
Page 20 internal.
7
That was the function of the man who was the point, as it were and the way they
8
explained it to me, they, was that there was usually one from each party and
9
that was the way it normally worked. Now having discussed Senator Lydon,
14:37:34 10
having discussed Fianna Fail, they then, he then adds what I was putting to the
11
witness before I was interrupted "Now I am not saying that that was the way it
12
worked for Monarch on this particular project", so there is no doubt whatever
13
on any interpretation of that, is there Mr. O'Herlihy, that you were
14
exculpating Monarch on this particular project in relation to this rumoured
14:38:01 15
16
hundred thousand pounds? A.
What I am doing there is trying to, obviously in a fairly garbled way, I am
17
trying to be as fair as possible, I didn't know one way or the other whether it
18
was true. So that's why I was saying it is not, I'm not saying that that's the
19
way it worked for Monarch on that particular project, because I have no
14:38:21 20
evidence one way or the other to support that.
21
Q. 530
But you are saying affirmatively.
22
A.
You are putting two, excuse me, you are putting too positive a response on that
23 24 14:38:39 25
spin if you can use a PR expression on that particular line. Q. 531
Well could I just repeat the line to you, it couldn't be my view, but I shouldn't give a view, could it be more emphatic than this Mr. O'Herlihy "Now I
26
am not saying that that was the way it worked for Monarch on this particular
27
project" then you go ahead to give your reasons for denying that, "But what he
28
was explaining to me was the way it worked as a general principle for the
29
construction industry people looking for planning permissions" now isn't
14:39:01 30
that -- you are agreeing with that I take it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:39:03
14:39:25
105 1
A.
Well what I am saying to you is that you can interpret now I am not saying that
2
that was the way it worked for Monarch as a qualification if you want to put it
3
that way. You see I am being asked to be specific on certain points that were
4
raised to me in a conversation, and I have no idea how to interpret these
5
things accurately because I have no idea what the background was.
6
Q. 532
7
What might have been the motive of your informant, would you hazard any guess in this conversation Mr. O'Herlihy?
8 9 14:39:42 10
MS. DILLON: Q. 533
I don't --
Why would somebody point a finger at Senator Lydon.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
I don't want to interrupt.
13 14 14:39:52 15
MR. O'HIGGINS: If I might interrupt that surely is a question for Mr. Lynn if at all? Mr. O'Herlihy has already repeatedly told the witness what was said.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
If he said this to him?
19
I didn't ask him about and I didn't mention Mr. Lynn's name, I don't think it
14:40:10 20
How can Mr. O'Herlihy guess as to what was in the mind of Mr. Lynn?
has been established in evidence that he was talking to Mr. Lynn.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
It says --
23
He was talking to three people in a bar, and he can't recollect the time he
24
spent in the bar.
14:40:21 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
your informant? Which I understand to be Mr. Lynn according to Mr. O'Herlihy,
28
would you hazard any guess in this conversation and that's clearly a question
29
that Mr. O'Herlihy can only have an opinion about, and we don't necessarily
14:40:42 30
Wait now, you said -- you asked, what might have been the motive of
want to know, or need to know his opinion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:40:46
14:41:07
106 1
Yeah but -- what he does say, what he does say in relation to having or not
2
having opinions Mr. Chairman -- hold on now.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
But the question you are asking is, why do you, Mr. O'Herlihy
5
think, Mr. Lynn said this to you? Now I can't see how Mr. O'Herlihy can give
6
that, an answer to that, other than --
7
Well Mr. Chairman I want to correct that, I never mentioned Mr. Lynn's name.
8 9 14:41:27 10
CHAIRMAN:
No you talked about his informant.
His informant yes.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
Yes on Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence, I don't accept that necessarily. I have
14
listened this morning to careful examination of the witness by Mr. Sanfey and I
14:41:41 15
16
Who we have been told repeatedly today, that that was Mr. Lynn.
am not at all convinced, there were three people in the company, one of them was coming and going --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
to who he says the informant of this information was and that was Mr. Lynn. He
14:41:58 20
But the question, the evidence is quite clear from Mr. O'Herlihy as
has never indicated that any snip et of information on this issue came from
21
anyone else who might or might not have been there for all or part of the
22
conversation.
23
Well if I come back to the issue of opinion --
24 14:42:14 25
MR. O'HIGGINS: Mr. Chairman I don't think Mr. O'Herlihy is in the slightest
26
need of protection from me, but at the same time, might I just ask that if
27
Mr. O Tuathail has some case to put, then I have no objection to his putting
28
it, but is he making the proposition now that this was said by somebody to
29
Mr. O'Herlihy but not by Mr. O'Herlihy? Because there is no evidential
14:42:41 30
foundation of any description for the proposition that somebody else said Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:42:45
14:42:56
107 1
something to Mr. O'Herlihy and how therefore can Mr. O Tuathail ask any
2
question about the motivation of some party unknown. I think the Chair has
3
already said --
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think anybody can answer ask that question of
6
Mr. O'Herlihy, unless Mr. Lynn or the or anyone else said the reason I am
7
saying this to you is because I am angry, or whatever. He can't, he shouldn't
8
be asked --
9 14:43:14 10
MR. O'HIGGINS: Obviously Mr. O Tuathail can, but the question is whether he
11
may. In my respectful submission he can't.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
you to ask this witness as to what he thinks was in the mind of the person who
14:43:30 15
I think we made it clear Mr. O Tuathail we don't -- we can't permit
gave him this information.
16 17
MR. O TUATHAIL: Very well Mr. Chairman if that's your ruling in the matter.
18 19
Q. 534
14:43:46 20
The next question I want to ask you Mr. O'Herlihy is the, when this conversation took place, or this portion of the conversation, the allegation
21
that's made, was it before or after the news arrived about the vote and the way
22
the vote had gone in the council chamber?
23
A.
24 14:44:10 25
My recollection is that that was a conversation that took place before the vote was in.
Q. 535
And how does that square with Senator Lydon's actions in the council chamber on
26
the vote, where he withdrew a Monarch proposal and instead proposed the
27
manager's proposal, the official's proposal for the vote, which turned out 35
28
to 33 against?
29 14:44:38 30
A.
I don't know.
Q. 536
Now but, in other words isn't that another -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:44:42
14:44:57
108 1
A.
I think we are getting away from the main point with respect sir, I am simply
2
re telling a conversation that took place, I am not interpreting what anyone
3
did in any other location such as the council, I don't know. I haven't a clue.
4
I am simply telling you what was told to me.
5
Q. 537
Well we are exploring the context or the res jeste if we go to Munster Irish,
6
in relation to what happened in the bar and your recollection of it, because a
7
very serious and poisonous allegation has emerged in relation to my client and
8
its hedged around, with all the caveats you have put in yourself Mr. O'Herlihy,
9
and its very much a question of opinion, whether you ever heard the name of my
14:45:27 10
client in that context or not, that's why I am pursuing this matter, because
11
the context is very important in relation to this, its all we have in a hearsay
12
situation, to grasp and to deal with.
13 14
For instance, if I could advance matters this far Mr. O'Herlihy, what you did
14:45:46 15
say this morning in relation to whoever gave you this information in the bar,
16
you said the person could have been taking the Mickey out of me, do you
17
recollect saying that this morning?
18
A.
I do, I do indeed.
19
Q. 538
Yeah. How does that square with any serious recollection?
A.
The recollection has nothing to do with my interpretation of the recollection.
14:46:04 20
21
The recollection is as I put it, under oath, a fact. Now how you interpret it
22
and how I interpret it is an entirely different matter.
23
Q. 539
24
Yeah and you also said in answer to cross-examination this morning you say the answer could have been generic in the way industry normally operates, that's
14:46:28 25
the industry context rather than the specific context?
26
A.
Yeah, yeah.
27
Q. 540
And do you accept that -- you accept I think that Senator Lydon did propose the
28 29 14:46:46 30
manager's proposal on that occasion in the council chamber? A.
If its a fact its a fact.
Q. 541
Yeah. And -- very well. and towards the end of your conversation then with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:47:21
14:47:53
109 1
Mr. Gallagher I think you expressed some concern about --
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: Q. 542
5
What page number is this?
I will retrieve the page now towards the very end I think. Yeah, page 25 internal at line --
6 7 8
MS. DILLON: Q. 543
9
8028 please.
I think you say there, you are talking to Mr. Gallagher towards the very end of the conversation and you say at line 19 "The one point that I would like for
14:48:18 10
you to bear in mind, from my perspective, is that I have had a number of
11
newspaper journalists from the Sunday Tribune and RTE, a couple of programmes
12
from RTE querying me about this, the concern that I have in surfacing at all is
13
that by association with Frank Dunlop, it damages me and I am very concerned
14
that I am seen to be, even by the people who read the headlines, that because
14:48:39 15
of the fact that I am on television that I have a somewhat higher profile than
16
the average guy" you recollect making that statement to Mr. Gallagher?
17
A.
I don't recollect it, but I'm sure I made it.
18
Q. 544
Yeah and that was in the year 2000?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 545
So any, I think worry about association with Mr. Dunlop would have faded in the
14:48:56 20
21
interval?
22
A.
What do you mean by that?
23
Q. 546
Well you wouldn't be as worried today as you were in the year 2000 when you
24 14:49:15 25
expressed those views to Mr. Gallagher? A.
I can't remember.
26
Q. 547
Yeah.
27
A.
I don't know why I said it.
28
Q. 548
I'm looking at page 22 internally and just to put it to you Mr. O'Herlihy --
29 14:49:41 30
MS. DILLON:
8022.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:49:42
14:50:02
110 1
Q. 549
Sorry yeah, you are operating from memory, its line number 20, its an answer.
2
They are talking about the date, Mr. Gallagher is talking about the date of the
3
vote and he says "Oh it was, I think it would be at the very latest '93, but I
4
don't have any files in the office now, because I would have thrown them out"
5
so you had, by the time you were talking to Mr. Gallagher you had dispersed, or
6
thrown out all your files?
7
A.
Oh I had yeah, yeah.
8
Q. 550
Thank you.
9 14:50:13 10
CHAIRMAN:
All right anyone? Mr. O'Higgins do you want to ask your client?
11 12
THE WITNESS WAS THEN EXAMINED BY MR O'HIGGINS.
13 14
MR. O'HIGGINS: I have really only one composite question with maybe two bits
14:50:26 15
of it. I think Mr. O'Herlihy, that in the course of Mr. Dillon's examination
16
on behalf of the Tribunal your attention was drawn to a bill for, I think
17
January 1992, which included a number of items I think telephone calls,
18
meetings and a meeting with Mr. Frank Dunlop, its page 7771, I wonder if we can
19
have that up? Phone calls, briefing discussions, meeting Frank Dunlop, between
14:50:55 20
the 7th and 18th January. Can you indicate how long is billed for that series
21
of things?
22
A.
Well the series is billed for one hour in total.
23
Q. 551
Yes?
24
A.
So I must have met Frank Dunlop but I have no recollection it have because I
14:51:14 25
wouldn't have put it down unless I had met him, so it would have been, I would
26
have thought, considering briefing discussions would have been with
27
councillors, phone calls presumably to councillors as well and meeting Frank
28
Dunlop would be a very small part that have as well, I couldn't imagine it
29
would be longer than a quarter of an hour or something T, could have been a
14:51:34 30
casual cup of coffee might have a a casual meeting in a hotel, I don't know, I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:51:39
14:51:53
111 1
can't remember. Because he had nothing to do with the campaign as far as I was
2
concerned.
3
Q. 552
This is what I was going ask you, because some pages were put to you by
4
Mr. Sanfey and I don't want to go back to them in detail at present, but I'm
5
suggesting and we'll deal with this if there is evidence to that effect later,
6
that they don't indicate an involvement by Mr. Dunlop in factor no certainty of
7
an involvement by Mr. Dunlop on the 27th of May 1992, now can you say when you
8
were involved up to the 27th of May for which you billed on the 29th, can you
9
remember Mr. Dunlop having to your knowledge, any association with any of the
14:52:21 10
11
affairs of Monarch? A.
No, as far as I am concerned he had nothing whatever to do with the campaign,
12
the campaign was being directed by me in association with Richard Lynn, I think
13
Pembroke PR may have been on a retainer basis I am not quite certain because
14
they are mentioned as well, but Frank Dunlop was never part of any campaign,
14:52:41 15
16
any part of the campaign as far as I was concerned. Q. 553
So can you think of any reason why on the 27th of May 1992, being asked about
17
it several years later, that Mr. Dunlop would know whether Mr. Richard Lynn was
18
in or out of the council chamber at any given time?
19
A.
14:53:04 20
had any role whatever, I don't know why he was in the council chamber, he
21 22
Well not in the context of working on this particular campaign he wouldn't have
certainly wasn't there for this particular campaign anyway. Q. 554
Yes. Thanks very much.
23 24 14:53:19 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Just before Mr. O'Herlihy goes, and this is really
directed at Mr. Sanfey, is it your client's case, because if it is I think it
26
should be put to Mr. O'Herlihy before he leaves the witness box, is it his case
27
that he did not not meet Mr. O'Herlihy on that day, on the day of the vote, the
28
day Monarch lost the vote at all? I know he disputes saying what Mr. O'Herlihy
29
says he said to him and when it might have been said, but is it his case that
14:53:48 30
he didn't meet him at all that day? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:53:50
14:54:03
112 1 2
MR. SANFEY: I don't understand that to be his case. I understand he met
3
Mr. O'Herlihy early in the morning. But I would like an opportunity to take
4
instructions on that, Chair, if you just give me a couple of moments, it
5
certainly is his case that from the time he went into the chamber, he didn't
6
see Mr. O'Herlihy again, but -- I wonder if I could just take instructions on
7
that.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Yes certainly.
14:55:20 10
11
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, Mr. Abrahamson has taken instructions and Mr. Lynn will
12
say that he can not recall with certainty whether he met Mr. O'Herlihy on the
13
morning before the meeting, but that once he went into the meeting he didn't
14
see Mr. O'Herlihy again, didn't have contact with him.
14:55:47 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right. That's fine. Thank you. Thank you Mr. O'Herlihy.
17
Thank you very much.
18 19
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
14:55:56 20
21
MR. QUINN: Mr. William Dockrell please.
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:56:03
14:56:40
113 1
WILLIAM DOCKRELL, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: Q. 555
Good afternoon Mr. Dockrell.
Good afternoon Mr. Dockrell, Mr. Dockrell I think you are a member of the Fine
6
Gael party and on the 13th of July 1995 you were co-opted on to Dun
7
Laoghaire/Rathdown as County Council as a councillor, is that correct?
8
A.
That's correct yes.
9
Q. 556
And I think you were re-elected in the 1999 local elections, is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 557
You were asked for a statement by the Tribunal by letter of the 9th March 2006
14:56:59 10
11 12
at pages 389 and 390 and at 391 to 392 you provided a statement on the 9th of
13
March 2006, isn't that correct?
14 14:57:19 15
A.
That's correct.
Q. 558
I think in that statement you say that you had no contacts with any of the
16
companies or agents in the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
17
A.
To the best of my knowledge and belief, yes.
18
Q. 559
You say that on reflection you did meet, albeit briefly, as you recall on an
19 14:57:38 20
21
informal basis, Messrs Lynn, Sweeney and Reilly? A.
That's correct.
Q. 560
You say you understand that they attended a number of Council or special
22
meetings in the months proceeding the 1999 local elections, and you recall
23
being introduced to them either within the confines of the County Hall building
24
in Dun Laoghaire, or possibly at an informal reception, you say that as far as
14:57:56 25
you recollect you never meet either formally, or otherwise, Messrs Monahan,
26
Gilane or indeed Mr. Dunlop, although you will instantly recognise Mr. Dunlop
27
from his numerous appearances on TV, is that correct?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 561
You say that having examined your files you recall receiving a payment of 500
14:58:14 30
pounds, you think the figure is correct, by cheque from Mr. Richard Lynn, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:58:20
14:58:34
114 1
Dunloe Ewart PLC by letter dated 13 of March 1999 is that correct?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 562
You say the donation was as you understand it given to you in good faith and
4
received by you in good faith as a donation towards your election expenses.
5
You say it was not a favourable payment for voting, as an elected
6
representative on any issue or issues affecting lands at Cherrywood or any
7
other lands in or around the Dublin area, is that correct?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 563
I think in fact you go on at page 392 to say that as you have already stated
14:58:57 10
any donations you received were given to you solely for your election expenses
11
and were accepted by you as such. And you say, you also say I might also
12
mention that I made a statement to the gardai to that effect, is that correct?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 564
In what circumstances did you come to make a statement to the gardai in
14:59:15 15
16
relation to this matter? A.
Well the, I was approached by them, not the local gardai I think these
17
particular gardai were attached to Dublin Castle, if I remember it correctly.
18
And they asked me to make a statement. Now I have searched my files and I
19
don't actually have a copy of that statement but this was a number of years
14:59:39 20
ago.
21
Q. 565
How many years ago?
22
A.
I think it was about three or four years ago now actually.
23
Q. 566
Now just in relation to the 500 pounds you say you received from Mr. Lynn, did
24 14:59:55 25
26
you know Mr. Lynn when you received that money? A.
I would have met him previously, yes.
Q. 567
You have I think in your statement, as I have read it, said that Messrs Lynn,
27
Sweeney and Reilly attended a number of council and special meetings in the
28
months preceding the 1999 local elections is that right?
29 15:00:12 30
A.
That's correct.
Q. 568
And you say you recall being introduced to them within the confines of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:00:16
15:00:27
115 1
council buildings is that right?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 569
From that I take it that prior to months preceding the 1999 local elections you
4
had never met Mr. Lynn?
5
A.
That's correct, yeah, yes.
6
Q. 570
So you had been a councillor from 1995 until shortly and you had remained a
7
councillor, but you had not met Mr. Lynn until shortly prior to the 1999 local
8
elections?
9 15:00:45 10
A.
That is correct sir and that's to the best of my knowledge.
Q. 571
Yes. And then somebody introduced you to Mr. Lynn shortly prior to those
11
elections and you say you received subsequently an unsolicited 500 pound
12
contribution to your election campaign?
13
A.
14 15:01:03 15
I brought it in. Q. 572
16 17
That that's correct yes, that was sent to me. I actually have the letter here,
And do you know why Mr. Lynn would have given you a contribution in those circumstances?
A.
I think it was just in relation to donation for my election expenses, I
18
wasn't -- you know it was my first election and at that stage I hadn't a clue
19
what it was going to cost, but as, you know as I say, as I accepted it in good
15:01:32 20
21
faith and it was understandably given to me in good faith. Q. 573
22
Can I ask you did you receive many unsolicited 5007 pounds donations towards that 1999 campaign?
23
A.
I received a number of donations.
24
Q. 574
No but did you receive many unsolicited 500 pounds or greater donations?
A.
No.
26
Q. 575
This stood out?
27
A.
This particular one I do remember because on reflection and on examining my
15:01:50 25
28 29 15:02:11 30
1999 file I came across the letter. Q. 576
Would you say it was an unusual donation first of all you barely knew Mr. Lynn at that stage isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:02:11
15:02:13
116 1
A.
I wouldn't have known him that well no.
2
Q. 577
It was unsolicited that is correct?
3
A.
That's correct.
4
Q. 578
It was for 500 pounds?
5
A.
500 punt.
6
Q. 579
How would 500 pounds compare to other donations you would receive at that time?
7
A.
It would be a lot bigger certainly.
8
Q. 580
Do you know if anybody else received similar unsolicited donations in or about
9 15:02:27 10
11
1999? A.
I couldn't recall for certain now, you know, on that.
Q. 581
Did Mr. Lynn, Mr. Murray, sorry Mr. Lynn, Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Reilly ever ask
12
you to vote on any of their proposals be it Dunloe Ewart or indeed Monarch
13
proposals?
14
A.
15:02:53 15
of them in the years, well months preceding the '99 election as part of the
16 17
Development Plan. Q. 582
18 19
No these were discussed at our group meetings, I mean they were quite a number
Yes. These were the, would have come up in the normal way in the review of the 1993 plan as varied, isn't that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 583
There had been a variation when you came to the Council in '95?
21
A.
That's correct yes.
22
Q. 584
But there was a review I think which commenced in May or June 96 and I think
15:03:07 20
23 24 15:03:23 25
throughout '97 and in the early part of '98? A.
98, I think you are correct there.
Q. 585
In January '98 I think, if we could have 2617, there were at least 3 or 4
26
proposals or motions which would have benefited the Monarch lands, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 586
Did you support those proposals at that time?
A.
We would have discussed it at group meeting, the Fine Gael group and I think
15:03:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:03:47
15:04:02
117 1
most Fine Gael councillors anyway would have, including myself, would have
2
supported them and I am just speaking on memory now although the evidence would
3
be there on record.
4
Q. 587
Yes. There appears to have been a practice within the council certainly by
5
1998 of not recording the vote on all occasions, in other words those voting
6
for and against motions don't appear to have been listed.
7
A.
Well I would have thought that certainly the main motion, now you are going
8
back to 1997 sir and '98 that's a while back, I would have thought that they
9
would have been certainly in the minutes of the meeting.
15:04:25 10
Q. 588
11
Not in all cases, but in fact in relation to some of the Monarch proposals they were passed by unanimously in some cases, isn't that right?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 589
When they came up for confirmation in June 1998 I think apart from a motion by
14
Councillor Fitzgerald and Smith, which is recorded, if I could have 2647, which
15:04:47 15
is a motion to rescind map 10, changes 4, which would have restricted the
16
extension of the Science and Technology Park, that motion is recorded and I
17
think you voted against the proposal which would have, had it been successful,
18
would have restricted the extension of the park, isn't that right?
19 15:05:09 20
A.
That's correct.
Q. 590
And is it your evidence to the Tribunal that you were never lobbied by anybody
21
on behalf of Monarch and never lobbied by Mr. Lynn in relation to any matter?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 591
Thank you very much?
24
A.
Thank you.
15:05:23 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much Mr. Dockrell.
27 28
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
29 15:05:28 30
MR. QUINN: Mr. Trevor Matthews please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:05:36
15:05:51
118 1 2
TREVOR MATTHEWS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED.
3
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 592
Good afternoon Mr. Matthews.
Thank you Mr. Matthews, I think you first came to be a member of Dublin County
7
Council in March 1992 in succession to a colleague who was promoted to Junior
8
Minister, is that correct?
9
A.
That's correct, Tom Kitt.
Q. 593
Yes. You are a member of the Fianna Fail party?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 594
And I think you continued to be a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
15:06:18 10
13 14 15:06:29 15
Council, after it was formed, in January '94 is that correct? A.
That is correct.
Q. 595
Can I just ask you in the first instance about a series of motions which
16
carried your name and which appear to be dated the 17th November 1997, if I
17
could have 7286 please? This is a motion which was put in on the review of the
18
1993 plan as varied, its signed by a number of councillors but the second
19
councillor who has signed the motion would appear to have been you?
15:06:56 20
21
A.
That's correct yeah.
Q. 596
That's a motion to extend the area of the Science and Technology Park, isn't
22
that correct?
23
A.
Yes that is correct.
24
Q. 597
And I think there is a map accompanying that motion which also bears your
15:07:08 25
signature and then there is a further motion at 7288, its a motion extending
26
the district centre into an area which had previously been zoned for
27
residential purposes isn't that right?
28
A.
That is correct.
29
Q. 598
And that contains your signature also is that correct?
A.
It does, yes.
15:07:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:07:25
15:07:46
119 1
Q. 599
And that was accompanied by a map and we can see that map at 7289 and then
2
finally, there is a motion if I could have 2587, its a motion seeking to delete
3
from a draft written statement a restriction on the redevelopment?
4
A.
On the redevelopment that's correct.
5
Q. 600
Of a district centre is that correct?
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 601
I think in the 93 plan the district centre which had the C zoning had been
8 9
limited to retail elements the size of a neighbourhood centre? A.
Neighbourhood centre, that is correct.
Q. 602
You will, as I have demonstrated there, you have signed those three motions?
11
A.
I did.
12
Q. 603
And the three maps isn't that right?
13
A.
I did, that's right.
14
Q. 604
You were asked I think for a statement earlier this year in relation to your
15:08:00 10
15:08:16 15
contacts with Monarch and their representatives, if I could have 1530 please, a
16
letter of the 10th March 2006 and amongst the matters that were required of you
17
to provide details to the Tribunal, were your contacts with the late
18
Mr. Phillip Monahan, Richard Lynn, Eddie Sweeney, Dominic Glennane, Phillip
19
Reilly Frank Dunlop and others and then you were asked for any payments or
15:08:44 20
benefits you might have received from either the Monarch Group or any of those
21
people is that correct?
22
A.
That is correct.
23
Q. 605
I think you replied if I could have 1532, on 14 March of 1996, I just propose
24 15:08:59 25
to read that statement to you if I may, you refer to the letter of the 10th March which I have just had on screen, you say "I had had no real involvement
26
with the lands in question and the only person that I can recall contacting me
27
was Richard Lynn and I think it was sometime in the mid 1990s, I have no
28
recollection of being contacted, or meeting any of the other people listed in
29
your letter, concerning these lands.
15:09:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:09:18
15:09:32
120 1
I was not a councillor in 1989 as I was only co opted to replace Tom Kitt early
2
in 1992.
3 4
Do I recall making a contribution in the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Council chamber
5
sometime during the process saying it was wrong to limit the retail element of
6
the lands at Cherrywood and this in addition we needed retail warehousing. I
7
think we were talking about one thousand or so new homes, as well as the
8
Science and Technology joint venture project, where around three thousand new
9
jobs were to be created. It was an ideal location for retail, warehousing,
15:09:56 10
leisure and hotel and apartment accommodation just off the motorway with free
11
parking available. I would have discussed this and my ideas with Richard Lynn.
12 13
Concerning the Monarch Group, do I not know what companies or associates or
14
member of the group, or if there are more companies involved other than those
15:10:14 15
listed in your letter.
16 17
With regard to those listed in your letter I did not receive any payments from
18
them concerning, or with regard to, the rezoning of land at Cherrywood" in fact
19
you hadn't been asked if you had received payments concerning or with regard to
15:10:28 20
21
the rezoning of lands, do you accept that, I can open the letter? A.
22
No the letter on my interpretation of the letter as far as that, it did refer to your reference was lands at Cherrywood so I took it to mean that.
23
Q. 606
We'll open the letter its at 1530, I don't want to waste time now?
24
A.
No, no I mean -- I am only saying that was my interpretation of.
Q. 607
Do you accept that your interpretation was wrong, you hadn't been asked if you
15:10:50 25
26
had received money in connection with rezoning or sorry with regard to the
27
rezoning of the land at Cherrywood. You were asked to provide a statement?
28
A.
Of any involvement with regard to the lands at Cherrywood.
29
Q. 608
Yes. Your statement should including but not be limited to and Roman numeral
15:11:13 30
three, any payments or benefit you may have received from or on behalf of those Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:11:17
15:11:35
121 1
listed at Roman numerals one and two, together with details of the manner of
2
such payments or benefit, when such payments or benefits were made, by whom
3
they were made and the reasons therefore, the bank accounts or accounts into
4
which the said payments or funds were lodged, how you treated such funds on
5
receipt.
6
A.
7 8
those listed. Q. 609
9
and two and at two? A.
12 13
No, you weren't asked about payments from Monarch you were asked about payments or benefits received from or on behalf of those listed at Roman numerals one
15:11:52 10
11
With regard to that section I didn't receive any payments from Monarch or
Then I must have misinterpreted the letter I took it to mean Monarch and I took it to mean Cherrywood.
Q. 610
14
You agree with me that when you did reply on the 14 March 2006, you made no reference to a sear east of payments that you had received I think from
15:12:14 15
Mr. Lynn, isn't that right, which I will detail in a moment?
16
A.
I didn't receive a series of payments from Mr. Lynn.
17
Q. 611
I see?
18
A.
I received a 500 --
19
Q. 612
Perhaps I will open your letter on the 16th April 2006. If I could have 8537.
A.
As I said I received a legitimate contribution from Dunloe Ewart, of 500 pounds
15:12:22 20
21
in provision leisure complex 450 euro and this was in 1999 and it was towards
22
the election campaign, but it had nothing to do with, as I would see it,
23
nothing to do with Cherrywood lands.
24
Q. 613
15:12:50 25
The letter that we have now on the screen or the 16th of April 2006 is a letter you wrote after you had received the brief?
26
A.
As I --
27
Q. 614
On the 12th April?
28
A.
As I had received all the boxes of documentation when I had gone through those
29 15:13:01 30
documents. Q. 615
Which show a series of payments, isn't that right? Which I will detail now and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:13:04
15:13:17
122 1
in fairness I should open that letter, the 16 of April.
2 3
"Further to my letter of the 14 March concerning the lands at Cherrywood I,
4
note from the documentation that you sent to me, that Dunloe Ewart PLC and the
5
Pavilion Group were mentioned in connection with the Monarch Group.
6 7
As outlined in my letter concerning the Monarch Group and those listed in your
8
letter I did not receive any payments concerning or with regard to the rezoning
9
of land at Cherrywood.
15:13:29 10
11
I did receive legitimate political contributions towards my campaign in the
12
1999 local election from Dunloe Ewart PLC 500 and Pavilion Leisure Centre
13
Limited, 450 pounds. You have already been advised that Mr. Frank Dunlop made
14
a legitimate contribution of 250 pounds towards this campaign, see attachment.
15:13:50 15
I note that Dunloe Ewart contributed 250 and 150 pounds to the Fianna Fail
16
Dublin South CDC golf classic held on 18 of April 1999 saying that I made the
17
request on their behalf.
18 19 15:14:04 20
With regard to the motions and the correspondence I had completely forgotten that I signed them but as outlined in my letter I would have had discussions
21
with Richard Lynn about the Science and Technology Park and the necessity for
22
a major retail development at this location.
23 24 15:14:19 25
Having viewed the documentation my best recollection of the event is that Richard Lynn made an appointment to see me in my business office on the Naas
26
Road to discuss the motions and see if I would sign them. I have no idea of
27
the date of this meeting.
28 29 15:14:31 30
We had a detailed discussion about each motion and as I agreed that the content of the motions was the right thing to do for the development of Cherrywood I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:14:35
15:14:40
123 1
signed them.
2 3
Richard Lynn took the signed motions with him for submission to the Council.
4 5
The documentation shows that the motions were listed for the 21st of January
6
1998 and that they were not controversial as motions 10.14 was passed bay show
7
of hands, motion 10.13 was passed by amendment, without prejudice to the
8
advancement of the golf club and the Manager's report was accepted with regard
9
to motion 10.15 A" And then enclosed with that letter, if I could have 8539
15:15:05 10
please, are photocopies of two cheques, the first is a cheque of the 18th of
11
May 1999 from Mr. Dunlop and the second is a cheque of the 6th May 1999 from
12
Pavilion Leisure Complex and the third is a cheque at 8540 of 500 pounds dated
13
29th of March 1999, do you see that?
14 15:15:31 15
A.
Yes that's the, for the election.
Q. 616
Yes if I could have 8541 please, we have the letter enclosing the contributions
16
to the election campaign?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 617
Am I correct in understanding Mr. Matthews that the contributions from Dunloe
19 15:15:48 20
Ewart and the pavilion were from Mr. Lynn? A.
No, they are not. Dunloe Management Services, Dunloe Management Services but
21
it was Mr. Lynn that sent the covering letter, but it's not a personal cheque
22
from Mr. Lynn.
23
Q. 618
I accept that. But did you ask for that contribution?
24
A.
I would have sent out a standard letter and I think you have a copy of that
15:16:06 25
letter because there was one as it general election for the election campaign,
26
I don't know whether you have it dated 15 of April 1999, you should have it.
27
Q. 619
We can add it to the brief if necessary.
28
A.
I said there as you know the local elections will be held on the 11th June this
29 15:16:30 30
year and I am preparing my campaign. You will appreciate that running a campaign is very expensive and in order to be elected I need assistance and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:16:34
15:16:53
124 1
would be obliged if you could make whatever donation you deem appropriate, you
2
will be aware that Government regulation provide donations in excess of 500
3
have to be declared, its essential that the work carried out in the new county
4
of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown continues by electing councillors who contain the
5
aggressive the approach has been instrumental in obtaining significant
6
infrastructural developments throughout the country. A significant number of
7
candidates from a diversion range of parties will be running this makes the
8
task of being elected very difficult. If the county is to develop and prosper
9
it is necessary that the work carried out to date be continued to ensure that
15:17:11 10
this county is a better place to live in, for my part I'm a senior manager with
11
a major multinational company and bring to the Council a business and
12
developmental approach. I would like to continue this work and with your help
13
will launch a comprehensive campaign through secure, successive forthcoming
14
elections.
15:17:27 15
16
That was a general letter that I sent out.
17
Q. 620
Did Mr. Lynn get a copy that have letter can I ask?
18
A.
Mr. Lynn or, would have got a copy, would have got that letter.
19
Q. 621
And Mr. Lynn I think forwarded the payment to you in April 1999, as we see
15:17:42 20
there, isn't that right?
21
A.
The 7th April 1999.
22
Q. 622
Yes, now when you responded initially to the Tribunal in March you made no
23
mention at that time of the three motions which I opened a moment ago and which
24
you had signed?
15:17:54 25
A.
No as I said I totally forgot them.
26
Q. 623
Even though those motions were signed in November 1997?
27
A.
Well I had forgotten about them, that's all I can tell.
28
Q. 624
You will you tell the Tribunal how you came to sign those three motions?
29
A.
Well basically what happened was that I would have had a phone call from
15:18:15 30
Richard Lynn, asking me, asking to see me and he came to my office as I have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:18:19
15:18:36
125 1
explained in the letter.
2
Q. 625
How well did you know Mr. Lynn in 1997?
3
A.
I would have known him, I would have known him reasonably well because he'd
4
been promoting the Monarch scheme for quite some years, I suppose the first
5
time really he saw me was about 1994, as I said when I was on the Council in
6
'93, '92 and '93 I would have been new and I don't think there was any real
7
contact with him until the new council started in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown. I
8
think its probably fair to say that I would have had a lot of correspondence
9
and brochures or whatever was going with the Monarch proposal, I think they
15:19:08 10
were flying around to nearly all councillors and to the local people generally.
11
Q. 626
You were a member of the council I think in May 1992 isn't that right?
12
A.
That's when I would have been, in May 92 yeah.
13
Q. 627
If we could have 7207 I think you voted in favour of Messrs Lydon and McGrath's
14
proposal that the manager's proposal the map 92/44 be accepted isn't that
15:19:31 15
right?
16
A.
Just a second to see what are we talking about here.
17
Q. 628
This is a map which would have suggested I think an extension and development
18
of these land at four houses to the acre on an Action Area Plan of piped
19
sewerage?
15:19:44 20
A.
I voted for.
21
Q. 629
You voted for that isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 630
You voted also for Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan's proposal in relation to
24 15:20:01 25
26
the town centre is that correct, if I could have 7214 we can get that vote up. A.
That is correct.
Q. 631
Both of those proposals would have been proposals which would have been
27 28
acceptable to Monarch interests isn't that right? A.
29 15:20:17 30
Yeah and I mean just with regard to the Monarch Development and all that, it seemed to be a very very good plan and seemed to be good for the area.
Q. 632
Did Mr. Lynn approach you and seek your support for either of those proposals Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:20:22
15:20:37
126 1 2
at that time? A.
I don't know whether he did or he didn't but I can just say generally that
3
Mr. Lynn N, all the time, never asked me for my vote or to vote, now I was in
4
favour of the proposals, so -- but he.
5
Q. 633
He never asked you for your support for Monarch proposals?
6
A.
No what he did was he would put the proposal in front of me and explain what
7
they were trying to achieve, but I actually agreed with what they were trying
8
to achieve, but he never asked me to go in and vote for a motion.
9
Q. 634
15:20:56 10
11
were trying to achieve? A.
12 13
Q. 635
Yes. But he surely would have known from the first contact with you that you were a supporter of the Monarch proposals?
A.
16 17
I honestly don't know, but I mean I would have been contacted on a number of occasions.
14 15:21:09 15
How often would you come to you and put before you the proposal of what they
I don't think any doubt about that, I have been a supporter of development of the county I think from the very beginning.
Q. 636
And I think you voted in favour of the Councillor Marren Coffey proposal on the
18
11th of November 1993 isn't that right, if we could have 7263, this was what
19
went on public -- sorry which, the were pose all, that was acceptable an put on
15:21:33 20
display in the 1993 Development Plan isn't that right?
21
A.
Just a second please, this was the County Manager's recommendation.
22
Q. 637
No this was a proposal by councillors Marren and Coffey, which effectively
23
reversed a motion by Councillor Barrett which had reduced the density on the
24
site, from four to one house per acre?
15:21:59 25
26
A.
I wouldn't have agreed one house to the acre, so I would have voted for that.
Q. 638
Yes. If we could have 2359 please? The area, the entire area coloured yellow
27
on that map is an area which the Manager had recommended be zoned at four
28
houses to the acre?
29 15:22:22 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 639
The Barrett motion had reduced it to one house to the acre and the proposal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:22:29
15:22:57
127 1
which you supported by councillors Marren and Coffey were that that portion
2
surrounded by the read line and coloured yellow be zoned at four houses to the
3
acre, that vote took place on the 11th November 1993. Can I ask you did
4
Mr. Lynn or anybody from Monarch ask you to support that proposal?
5
A.
I can't recall whether they did, but I mean I would have supported. I wouldn't
6
have supported one to the acre and I mean, I even think four to the acre is too
7
low.
8
Q. 640
9
is capable of carrying four to the acre as opposed to one to the acre that area
15:23:18 10
11
So your view would have been that at least, if there is an area of land which
ought to be zoned one four to the acre? A.
I put it to you where I am living myself is either 10 or 12 houses to the acre,
12
I think that's proper development of land, four to the acre is a very limited
13
development and even if you take it forward nowadays, they are filling in all
14
the corner sites where I am living so its going to be more than 10 or 12 to the
15:23:37 15
acre this is the way its gone, land is too scarce just to even -- I think four
16
to the acre is far too low.
17
Q. 641
Well can I --
18
A.
That's my opinion.
19
Q. 642
Yes okay, can I put it in the negative to you Mr. Matthews, do you see the area
15:23:50 20
coloured yellow outside the red line north of the red line?
21
A.
At the top.
22
Q. 643
Yes well all of the area top and bottom, but outside the red line, you were
23 24 15:24:04 25
voting -A.
Its coloured blue isn't it.
Q. 644
No no the area coloured blue was an agricultural zoning, the area coloured
26
yellow which has, which is outside the red line which is -- slightly there is
27
very little to the bottom?
28
A.
You are talking about that land.
29
Q. 645
Yes?
A.
Yes okay.
15:24:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:24:23
15:24:42
128 1
Q. 646
In supporting the Councillor Marren Coffey motion in November 93 you were
2
effectively zoning that land at one house to the acre and can I ask you having
3
regard to what you have said about density how you came to vote that that land
4
be zoned at one house to the acre in November 93?
5
A.
In 93.
6
Q. 647
Yes?
7
A.
I can't really. I mean as I said I was very knew at that stage and -- I don't
8 9
know but I would -- my whole thing would be to vote for higher densities. Q. 648
15:25:04 10
Now Mr. Lynn has discovered to the Tribunal a number of expenses claim forms for week endings and there are two which I just want to put to you for the
11
moment, one is for the week ending the 28th of January of 1994 at 4956 and the
12
other is for the week ending 13th May 1994 which is at 5119 and they appear to
13
show a claim by Mr. Lynn for expenses in connection with the Cherrywood
14
Properties Limited, Cherrywood rezoning, T Matthews, do you see that? Could
15:25:32 15
Mr. Lynn have spoken with you in relation to the Cherrywood rezoning in May, in
16 17
January and May '94? A.
He could, as I said that was Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council time, so it
18
is quite possible. As I said to you at the beginning I think that was the time
19
that I was probably first had contact with Mr. Lynn.
15:25:50 20
Q. 649
Yes and I think in fact Later in May 1994 during this period the Council were
21
preparing a, an Action Area Plan based on the vote which we saw previously
22
isn't that right for the Cherrywood lands and I think that came before the
23
Council together with a motion from Councillor Gilmore, in relation to the
24
Science and Technology Park, I think you referred to the Science and Technology
15:26:14 25
Park?
26
A.
Which I would have within in favour of.
27
Q. 650
You were very much in favour of that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 651
And did you know that from a strategy point of view that Monarch recorded your
15:26:25 30
support as something that should be obtained, as appears from a document Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:26:29
15:26:45
129 1
discovered to the Tribunal which probably was created sometime prior to June
2
1994, if I could have 5202?
3
A.
Yeah I saw that in the documents.
4
Q. 652
You saw at 5203, the support of the following members must be obtained and you
5
are there?
6
A.
I saw that in the documents.
7
Q. 653
There are a number of follow On expenses claim forms, supplied by Mr. Lynn,
8
which appear to suggest that he was meeting with you for '94, '96 and you will
9
have seen these in the --
15:27:09 10
A.
Yeah I did yeah.
11
Q. 654
Yes. You will have seen those?
12
A.
I honestly believe they can all be attributed to me.
13
Q. 655
You don't believe those --
14
A.
I met Mr. Lynn, but I don't see how they can all be attributed to me.
Q. 656
For example the week ending 3rd of November 1994 at 5433, Development Plan
15:27:22 15
16
review, T Matthews, then there is one at 5435 for the week ending 11th November
17
94, I think there was a --
18
A.
Its just those amounts --
19
Q. 657
There was a crucial vote --
A.
The point is I was working in industry, I had to limit the time I took off to
15:27:40 20
21
go to the Council meetings, or anything, I had to work through lunchtime, I had
22
to work late at night, I took homework, I was trying to build up my base in
23
Dundrum, so I mean there wouldn't have been time for those sort of meetings
24
that's why I just question this.
15:28:02 25
Q. 658
Okay.
26
A.
For example if you take the 26th of the 1st '96.
27
Q. 659
Yes that's the week ending.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 660
If we can have 5746 please.
A.
I was in Malta from 20 of January 96 to 3rd of the 2nd 96.
15:28:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:28:21
15:28:43
130 1
Q. 661
So you think you were away?
2
A.
And if you take 11th of the 7th or 4th of the 4th I was in Sydney on the 27 of
3
the 3rd and flying back, via Japan, on 8th of the 4th.
4
Q. 662
If we can have 6300 please?
5
A.
So I don't see how they can all be attributed to me to be honest with you, but
6
that's not to say I didn't meet Richard Lynn, I did meet him he was very
7
professional, showed me the plans and kept me abreast of what's going on,
8
that's not in dispute.
9
Q. 663
Yes. You dealt with the 5th of the 1st '96, if I could have --
A.
No 26th of the 1st '96.
11
Q. 664
He has a schedule in for the 5th of January '96 which is 5735.
12
A.
He has yes.
13
Q. 665
Your query is on the one for 26 of January?
14
A.
No I am querying generally the amount of things, I don't remember anything like
15:29:05 10
15:29:26 15
16
that. Q. 666
17
There is one for the 24 of May '96 which is at 5951, he has one for the 21st June 96?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 667
At 6022, he has one for the 23 of August '96 at 6067, he has another for the
15:29:42 20
4th of April '97 at 6300, the 6th June '97 at 7360, the 11th July '97 at 6365
21
the 8th August '97 at 6375. You say whilst you had meetings with him you
22
dispute you may have had meetings on all those occasions that he seems to
23
suggest?
24 15:30:10 25
A.
I can't see that I would have had the time to have -- I mean a cup of coffee yes, but I can't see I would have had the time they appear to be lunches or
26
something, as I explained to you. I used to work through my lunch hour because
27
I was working full time, that's really what I am saying, but I am not saying
28
that Richard Lynn didn't keep me fully abreast of the development and what they
29
wanted to do with Monarch, as I told you already I agreed what they wanted to
15:30:31 30
do with the Monarch developments. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:30:33
15:30:39
131 1
Q. 668
Thank you very much Mr. Matthews.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Okay, thank you.
5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
7 8
MR. QUINN: We have one witness left.
9 15:30:48 10
CHAIRMAN:
How long will this witness be approximately?
11 12
MR. QUINN: I think a half hour. Unless the stenographer wants a break?
13 14
MR. QUINN: Mr. Marren please.
15:31:01 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:31:01
15:31:37
132 1
DONAL MARREN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MR. QUINN:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Marren?
5
A.
Good afternoon.
6
Q. 669
Thank you Mr. Marren. Mr. Marren I think you are a member of Fine Gael and you
7
were first elected to the local authority in 1978 is that correct?
8
A.
January '78, yes.
9
Q. 670
Yes. I think that you were a member in its time of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
15:31:55 10
11
County Council, is that correct? A.
12 13
and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in 1994. Q. 671
14 15:32:13 15
First of all Dun Laoghaire Corporation and then Dublin County Council in 1985
I think for a time I think you were in fact Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council is that right 1998?
A.
On two occasions, 2001 and 97/98.
16
Q. 672
Would it be from June or July of '97 to...
17
A.
The election of Cathaoirleach was on second Monday of July traditionally.
18
Q. 673
You have supplied a statement to the Tribunal which is to be found at brief
19
pages 8007 to 8309. I think one of the questions asked of you was details of
15:32:40 20
any payments you might have received from Monarch interests, or the series of
21
named individuals, and I think in that statement at 8309 you say you may have
22
received a political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties Limited
23
around the time of the local election in 1991 but you couldn't state this with
24
certainly and you had been unable to find any records to verify it isn't that
15:33:04 25
26
right? A.
Yes I would just like, Mr. Quinn -- first notice I got really of being
27
requested to make a statement on this, was a letter of the 16th of May, which
28
was delivered in error to another address, no fault of the Tribunal, but then
29
the occupiers were away from home and it left me with about three days in fact
15:33:30 30
to draft a statement, I did that under pressure. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:33:32
15:33:42
133 1
Q. 674
Yes.
2
A.
I realise subsequently that I did not receive a donation at that time.
3
Q. 675
At all?
4
A.
From Monarch, at that time, 1991 as I stated there had.
5
Q. 676
Okay. So contrary to what we see here you got no payment at all from Monarch
6
in 1991, is that what you are saying?
7
A.
That's what I believe to be the case.
8
Q. 677
Can I ask you what caused you to say you might have received 500 pounds from
9 15:33:57 10
them? A.
Because I think I did in 1999 and I think that may have been in my mind.
11
Q. 678
You were confusing 1999 with 1991?
12
A.
I did, if you understand the circumstances -- I had to draft that under a lot
13 14
of pressure and inevitably, I think I made that mistake. Q. 679
15:34:22 15
Yes. I think you had been lobbied by a series of people on behalf of Monarch isn't that right? You had received representations from a number of people as
16
we see from your statement at 8308. You say you received many representations
17
during the period of the consideration of the Development Plan on the lands at
18
Cherrywood in the ownership of Monarch Properties from servants or agents of
19
Monarch Property Limited. You say you cannot recall having any contact or
15:34:45 20
meeting with the late Mr. Phil Monahan, other than exchanges a few words with
21
him at the official opening of the Bloomfield shopping centre in Dun Laoghaire.
22
You said did you not receive any payments or benefits from Mr. Monahan in his
23
capacity as servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
24 15:35:00 25
You said I think Mr. Noel Murray whom you understood to be a director or Senior
26
manager of Monarch Properties, made representations concerning the lands at
27
Cherrywood. You said did you not receive any payments or benefit from
28
Mr. Murray in his capacity as a servant or agent of Monarch?
29 15:35:15 30
A.
Correct.
Q. 680
I think you said Mr. Eddie Sweeney, whom you understood to be a director of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:35:19
15:35:33
134 1
Monarch Properties, made representations concerning the land at Cherrywood
2
particularly with regard to the proposed Science and Technology Park. You
3
outlined the benefits such a development could have for the county. And you
4
visited the Science and Technology Park in Montpelier, France along with
5
Mr. Michael Ryan a consultant associated with Plessey Park Limerick and
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney, on invitation of Mr. Sweeney. Can I ask you were there
7
other councillors on that visit?
8
A.
No, just those three persons.
9
Q. 681
No other representatives from the local authority?
A.
No just the three named persons.
Q. 682
You said you did not receive any payments from Mr. Sweeney in his capacity as
15:35:49 10
11 12
servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
13 14
You say did you not receive any representation from Frank Dunlop concerning the
15:36:02 15
land at Cherrywood and you did not receive any benefits or payments from Mr.
16
Dunlop in his capacity as a servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
17
You met with Mr. Dominic Glennane, whom you understood to be the financial
18
controller of Monarch Properties Limited, on a few occasions, you could you not
19
recall him making explicit representations concerning the land at Cherrywood
15:36:19 20
and did you not receive any benefits or payments from Mr. Glennane in his
21
capacity as a servant or agents of Monarch Properties.
22 23
You said Mr. Phillip Reilly, whom you understood to be a Senior manager with
24
Monarch Properties made representations concerning the lands at Cherrywood.
15:36:38 25
You did not receive any benefits or payments from Mr. Reilly in his capacity as
26
servant or agent of Monarch Properties, you say Mr. Richard Lynn whom you
27
understood to be a servant of Monarch Properties Limited made several
28
representations concerning the lands at Cherrywood in his capacity as a servant
29
or agent of Monarch Properties, isn't that correct?
15:36:52 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:36:52
15:37:07
135 1
Q. 683
2
All in all therefore a quite a number of representations had been made to you by different representatives of Monarch, in relation to the Cherrywood lands?
3
A.
Yes, very many.
4
Q. 684
Now I think the first real vote in relation to these lands came about on the
5
6th of December 1990, when a motion by Councillor Betty Coffey and councillor
6
McDonald, was proposed, isn't that right, if we -- you will have seen that?
7
A.
Well what actually, I didn't get a brief either, I got no documentation and I
8
asked Mr. King on Tuesday, the 30th to supply me with some, he did that
9
promptly, I got a CD ROM the following day, I have gone through up to page
15:37:34 10
2775. But I really haven't had an opportunity, I devoted as many hours as
11
could I, but I haven't had an opportunity to really to get a real...
12
Q. 685
Feel for it?
13
A.
Recall, that's right.
14
Q. 686
Would you prefer Mr. Marren if your evidence were taken on another day?
A.
No I will go through with it now, but I may have to ask for help occasionally.
16
Q. 687
As far as we understand the voting pattern we'll certainly help you?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 688
Do you recall the meeting of the 6th of December 1990, at 6952. When DP90/123
15:37:49 15
19
which was the Manager's proposals had been discussed on two previous occasions
15:38:10 20
in the months of October and November of 1990?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 689
And I think Councillor Coffey had tabled a motion, but she didn't proceed with,
23
but both herself and councillor McDonald put forward a motion on the day which
24
would have effectively restricted and considerably reduced the effect of
15:38:29 25
DP90/123, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes, yes.
27
Q. 690
When their motion was put forward Councillor Fitzgerald proposed an amendment
28 29 15:38:40 30
to that motion, isn't that right? A.
You will have to help me here.
Q. 691
If I could have 6954 please? Councillor Coffey motion, sorry councillor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:38:49
15:39:05
136 1
McDonald Coffey motion is 6953, I will just read to you, the Draft Development
2
Plan for 1990, for Carrickmines Valley area be prepared on the basis of
3
limiting zoning development to the eastern side of the South Eastern Motorway
4
proposed line and taking cognisance of the developments approved in the area
5
since the adoption of the 1983 plan and in doing this significantly reduce the
6
number of areas being proposed for industrial zoning and indicate where public
7
open spaces/parks will be provided and indicate the nature of residential
8
zoning for proposed residential lands.
9 15:39:20 10
By way of amendment to the motion in the names of councillors McDonald Coffey
11
and Murphy, it was proposed by Councillor Fitzgerald and seconded by Councillor
12
Buckley to amend the motion to broadly confine development zoning to the east
13
of the motorway and north of the Glenamuck Road?
14 15:39:39 15
A.
Yes, I voted for that didn't I.
Q. 692
You did, yes. You voted for the amendment, but you don't appear, and the
16
amendment was unsuccessful -- and then the motion itself was, went on to be
17
voted upon and you don't appear to have voted on the motion at all?
18
A.
19 15:40:03 20
Well I probably not there, was I, I wasn't in attendance was I? You see like a lot of us I had a 9 to 5 job.
Q. 693
Sorry, apologies you actually did vote on the motion itself. At this stage we
21
are confusing our councillors. You voted for that amendment as appears at
22
6954?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 694
And that motion was unsuccessful. On the casting vote of the Chairman and then
15:40:26 25
the motion itself was proposed, as you see at the bottom of 6954 and if we go
26
to 6955 we see that amongst those voting against it was yourself, Councillor
27
Marren.
28
A.
29 15:40:52 30
Yes, I can see I voted against it, but I am really finding it difficult to recall.
Q. 695
Yes. You voted in favour of an amendment to it and that was unsuccessful and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:40:59
15:41:19
137 1 2
then you voted against the motion itself. A.
I would -- well I really would love to be able to read through that and try to
3
recall it, but I cannot I'm really struggling at the moment, try to recall the
4
circumstances of that motion.
5
Q. 696
6
In fact I think you had contributed to the debate on the day, if we look at 6953 please? You see?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 697
The discussion resumed with contributions from Councillors Marren, Muldoon,
9 15:41:38 10
Cass, Shatter, McMahon and Laing. A.
That the proposed rezoning be abandoned? That's the motion isn't it?
11
Q. 698
Yes.
12
A.
I recall now re coiling, with a certain amount of shock, at the proposal of
13
the Manager on that occasion, that all that valley be built on, it seemed to
14
me just on initial presentation, that it was the wrong thing to do.
15:41:58 15
Q. 699
Yes. And that's why you proposed an amendment to councillor McDonald and
16
Coffey's motion, which was to the effect that the development would take place
17
east of the motorway line, only?
18
A.
Yes, yeah.
19
Q. 700
You see by voting against Councillor Coffey and McDonald's motion you were
15:42:29 20
21
effectively reverting to the Manager's proposal, isn't that right? A.
22
I'm sorry Mr. Quinn but, whether it's the lateness of the day, or what, but I really am finding it very difficult to comprehend.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Well perhaps --
15:42:51 25
26
MR. QUINN: Maybe if I took it in stages, you had the Manager's proposal which
27
was DP90/123, which you say was a proposal that you felt you couldn't support?
28
A.
Mm-hmm.
29
Q. 701
Then you had Councillor Coffey and McDonald's proposal, leaving aside the
15:43:06 30
proposed amendment to it, which you supported, but councillor McDonald Coffey Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:43:11
15:43:22
138 1
proposal, which was effectively limiting zoning to the motorway line or
2
proposed motorway line and you --
3
A.
I think I would support, I think.
4
Q. 702
But you, the record shows that you voted against it.
5
A.
Did I, well I'm sorry.
6
Q. 703
If we could have 6955 please, again?
7
A.
I appear to have acted in a contradictory manner.
8
Q. 704
I am not -- its just I am just looking for --
9
A.
Well.
Q. 705
An explanation in relation to it if there is one or if you can recall one?
A.
No I cannot, but I often recall occasions like that, when debate developed
15:43:55 10
11 12
and -- I mean inconsistency, I hold my hand up, I have frequently if you want
13
to trace a line through that whole Development Plan from start to finish, I
14
think I could count many inconsistencies, but I did eventually come around to a
15:44:22 15
16
clear vision of what I felt was the right thing to do. Q. 706
Okay. I think by the 24 of May 1991 the Manager the manager had put forward
17
three options in relation to what might form the 1991 Draft Development Plan
18
and there was a vote in relation to those options and, at that meeting on the
19
24 of May '91 and we see the vote at 7006 and you voted in favour of the first
15:44:50 20
option, which in fact was the successful option, namely that the plan would be
21
on the basis of DP 90 A/129 A.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 707
Which effectively limited development, at four houses to the acre to the east
24 15:45:08 25
26
of the motorway line, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 708
And then, I think, there were a series of motions and the matter came become
27
before the Council with a Manager's recommendation contained in the map 92/44
28
if we could have 7203, which is effectively extending the residential zoning to
29
one of the proposed lines of the South Eastern Motorway on an Action Area Plan
15:45:32 30
on piped sewage at four houses to the acre and I think Councillors Lydon and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:45:38
15:45:59
139 1
McGrath, had proposed that that map be adopted, and that vote took place as I
2
say on the 27 of May 1992, if we could have 7207 and I think you voted in
3
favour of that proposal at that time, isn't that right?
4
A.
I voted in favour of that, yes.
5
Q. 709
That was unsuccessful, but you were in favour of that proposal, isn't that
6
right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 710
Then I think that the meeting continued and there was a vote on the order in
9
which matters would be taken, if we can have 7208 and a proposal by councillors
15:46:21 10
Gilmore and O'Callaghan, as to the order in which motions would be taken was
11
unsuccessful and you voted against their proposed order, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 711
And then I think there had been a motion in the names of Councillors Lydon and
14 15:46:38 15
16
Hand, which at that stage was withdrawn, isn't that right? It wasn't -A.
Yes, I recall that.
Q. 712
It was indicated they didn't wish to proceed with that you indicated you recall
17
that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 713
Then there were a series of motions which would have effectively zoned the area
15:46:49 20
at one house to the acre, there was a motion for example you see at the very
21
bottom of 7209 and more particularly at 7210, a motion by councillors Gordon
22
and Reeves, that the land be zoned on septic tank, at one house to the acre and
23
a motion by councillor Breathnach and Smith, at one house to the acre?
24 15:47:09 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 714
That motion I think had been unsuccessful and you voted against that?
A.
Yes, I had come around at that stage, I had been very convinced by the
27
arguments put forward by the planners I recall it now, they argued for
28
something which they termed a buffer zone, that would be east of the N11 where
29
the housing in Dun Laoghaire Corporation on the -- which side am I now, the
15:47:31 30
eastern side of the N11 was of course, had been constructed in the 70s and 80s Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:47:37
15:47:59
140 1
at a high density, high for that time it was 16 or 17 to the hectare. And the
2
argument then between the N11 and whatever the proposed new line of the motor
3
would be four to the acre and would give way to agricultural land, that seemed
4
an appealing proposition and one that I more and more favoured.
5
Q. 715
Yes and I think that having voted against that then there was a motion by
6
councillors Fitzgerald and Dillon-Byrne, again at a density not exceeding one
7
house to the acre and you again voted against that, as we see at 7211?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 716
There was a motion by Councillors Lohan and Keogh, that the lands be proposed
15:48:17 10
at AS 2, that is septic tank, one house to the acre. And you voted against
11
that?
12
A.
That's right, yeah.
13
Q. 717
Then there was a proposal for high amenity zoning, and I think you voted
14
against that, that was a motion by councillors Smith and Breathnach, then there
15:48:33 15
was a further motion for special amenity area order in the names of councillors
16
Gilmore and O'Callaghan and you voted against that, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 718
Then Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan had a proposal that portion of the land
19 15:48:51 20
be zoned C, for district centre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 719
And you voted in favour of that isn't that right?
22
A.
A district centre, is it?
23
Q. 720
C, yes, district centre.
24
A.
District centre. I thought I voted against that.
Q. 721
If we could just have 7214 please, we are now in May 1992 and the proposal by
15:49:01 25
26
councillors O'Callaghan, Gilmore and O'Callaghan is that Dublin County Council
27
hereby resolves that the lands on map 27 outlined in red which had been signed
28
for identification purposes by the proposers of the motion be zoned C in the
29
review of the Development Plan?
15:49:25 30
A.
For district centre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:49:27
15:49:40
141 1
Q. 722
Yes?
2
A.
I did change my mind on that subsequently because I felt and there were very
3
telling arguments for traders in Dun Laoghaire, that they were being squeezed
4
out of the business by excessive provision of shopping, already had been in
5
place, Cornelscourt Dunnes, Stillorgan shopping centre, Frascati centre in
6
Blackrock and one more they said, I took on board their arguments that a
7
district centre there, not at that stage but later, wasn't the correct thing to
8
do.
9
Q. 723
15:49:58 10
Then I think there was a motion by councillors Gilmore and O'Callaghan in relation to seeking agreement with the landowner and the developer, in relation
11
to the lands, I don't think you voted on that proposal, nor did you vote in
12
relation to proposal by councillors Barrett and Dockrell, which was a
13
successful proposal, that the lands be zoned at a density, not exceeding one
14
house to the acre, isn't that right?
15:50:18 15
A.
Yeah, probably wasn't there was I, if I were there I expect I would have voted.
16
Q. 724
Yes. What way would you have voted on that proposal?
17
A.
Well I had come around now to accept four -- ten to the hectare or four to the
18 19 15:50:36 20
21
acre. Q. 725
You would have voted against that?
A.
I expect so, yes.
Q. 726
That's at 7216. Now I think you then, the 91 map was amended, went on public
22
display and the matter came back before the council on the 11th November '93,
23
isn't that correct?
24 15:50:56 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 727
There is a motion, there are two motions which I wish to bring to your
26
attention, you will have seen these I am sure, at 7226 there is a motion to
27
accept the Manager's recommendation and delete the amendment, that is the
28
amendment which would have been inserted by that last vote which you don't
29
appear to have voted upon.
15:51:15 30
A.
No, well I have a clear recollection of that because I actually spoke on it and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:51:20
15:51:39
142 1
proposed it.
2
Q. 728
Okay. Can I ask you when was that motion lodged?
3
A.
I think it may have been on the day, I think I was acceptable at that second --
4
Q. 729
Yes. The motion as signed who would have typed the motion?
5
A.
Oh I think I got assistance with that, but that wasn't unusual.
6
Q. 730
Who gave you assistance?
7
A.
I think may have been Mr. Lynn.
8
Q. 731
Yes you think Mr. Lynn may have typed the motion for you?
9
A.
Let's be clear on this, provide the secretarial services, it was to my
15:51:54 10
prescription, I knew exactly what I wanted, that is not I think what Mr. Lynn
11
wanted I think Mr. Lynn wanted, I think Monarch were pressing 16 if I recall to
12
the hectare and pressing for restoration of the district centre I wasn't taking
13
either of those, and I also added in my own hand that the remainder of the land
14
be two to the hectare.
15:52:14 15
16
Q. 732
Can I ask you you say Mr. Lynn would have typed the motion for you?
A.
Well -- I think so, but not absolutely certain, but I mean if -- I got, we get
17
a secretarial assistance, either through the County Council, or some other
18
place.
19 15:52:33 20
Q. 733
I was going to ask you that, what secretarial assistance was available to you?
A.
If you went in to the general purposes office and asked or the planning office
21
asked to have a map, could I have a map, in fact these maps were fairly freely
22
available through the executive officers, and you could get a, I wasn't
23
computer literate at the time, but I have rectified that in the meantime.
24
Q. 734
15:53:02 25
Okay. Just in dealing specifically, rather than in the generality of the situation, if we deal with the specifics of this motion, are you saying
26
Mr. Lynn typed this motion, insofar as a portion of it is typed, at your
27
behest?
28
A.
Yes, yes.
29
Q. 735
Was that typed on the day?
A.
You have asked me -- I can't recall whether it was submitted that day or
15:53:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:53:21
15:53:39
143 1 2
earlier, I really cannot recall that. Q. 736
3 4 5
Can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you a councillor asked Mr. Lynn to type a motion in relation to lands that he was concerned with?
A.
Well I will. I will and I hope I will tell them fairly and as accurately as I can.
6 7
I had very clearly come to the view that ten houses to the hectare was
8
appropriate at that land. I know the question will be asked, why not the whole
9
area? Because the Manager was recommending 178 hectares be zoned at ten to the
15:53:57 10
hectare, but we had come through a very bruising debate, we come through a
11
fairly torrid time in the Council and some of my closest political associates,
12
councillors Barrett and Dockrell and indeed very close friend in the Labour
13
Party councillor Frank Smith, were resolutely opposed to that ten to the
14
hectare and you know, I felt that it was academic in a way the lands to the
15:54:29 15
north of it have, because they had no access by road, so the lands that
16
mattered was the land in the ownership of Monarch Properties, which could be
17
developed and was developed in the short-term, because the access lead onto the
18
Wyattville Road, that was one reason.
19 15:54:50 20
The other reason I felt was I mean the idea of a Science and Technology Park
21
was talked about much later in '94, late '94 and early '95, but it was a
22
concept that we had discussed frequently prior to that and I had been Chairman
23
of the third level education committee, an ad hoc committee for Dun Laoghaire
24
VEC with a task to recommend to the VEC, how the second level College of Art
15:55:19 25
and Design in Eblana Avenue, might have its status increased to a regional
26
technical college. And I recall recommending to the VEC, well they to meet
27
certain criteria, you had to get land of 70 hectares you had to have three
28
colleges, one of the colleges we recommended to be in the new school, would be
29
a business school and to supplement, or support that, we fought, I'm not sure
15:55:44 30
if we used the word Science and Technology Park, but incubator or units that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:55:50
15:56:01
144 1
would assist the graduates from the academic into the commercial world, in art
2
and design and so on.
3 4
Now that was very much in my mind and Mr. Sweeney it was in '92, I think, came
5
to me and talked enthusiastically about the location of a Science and
6
Technology Park in this land down here. He met a very receptive mind because I
7
had already developed my thoughts on it even though it was only theorising, he
8
was a practitioner, he was a businessman and had already contacts with business
9
people abroad, so I was very enthused by that idea and I felt that the rezoning
15:56:30 10
of that land, I say rezoning I mean maintaining the Manager's recommendation of
11
a density of ten to the hectare, would supplement and expedite the provision of
12
a Science and Technology Park.
13 14 15:56:52 15
And thirdly, I think I have to really stress this point, that I mean on a local elected representative, I represent people and try to represent their views as
16
best I can. Now there were two groups of people, there was the upper
17
Carrickmines and the lower end you have Loughlinstown. There is a very big
18
difference in quality of life, residences, there is a very articulate affluent
19
and well organised group of people at the north, who didn't want any
15:57:22 20
development whatsoever and I had to recognise to a certain degree their
21
sensitivities and the sensitivities of my colleagues, but quite an opposition
22
was the case south, at Loughlinstown and they were the people that I was
23
closest to. They were the people that I represented on the Council and they
24
were fully supportive of the Monarch proposals. They saw it as something that
15:57:45 25
would lift their area, an area that had been subject to unemployment and a
26
certain amount of social problems and they felt that this creation of a new
27
dynamic centre, might provide opportunities, but more importantly would lift
28
the area and its image.
29 15:58:02 30
And they were their hopes and aspirations, they were the aspirations, I wasn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:58:07
15:58:30
145 1
going to trample on, in fact I saw it as my duty, to help realise those hopes
2
and aspirations. And that's why I put that motion and I remember speaking in
3
the council, as I tell it to you Mr. Quinn, I tell it in a matter of fact way,
4
but I can tell you I spoke with passion and enthusiasm on that day, as to what
5
that meant to the people that I represented.
6 7
And there were a number of councillors coming out of the Council who thanked
8
me, said I didn't know how I was going vote, you made up my mind for me on that
9
occasion.
15:58:44 10
Q. 737
11
My question to you Mr. Marren was how did you, a councillor, come to have Mr. Lynn type a motion for you on the day?
12
A.
You mean.
13
Q. 738
Physically?
14
A.
Physically.
Q. 739
Yes. How did it come about that you had to rely on the promoter of this
15:58:56 15
16
development to sign the motion that you were proposing on the day?
17
A.
Well I mean, it was a secretarial service, it wasn't that --
18
Q. 740
That would have been available to you within the Council to provide a
19 15:59:13 20
secretarial service to you? A.
If it was available from somewhere else I'd take it.
21
Q. 741
Who provided you with the map?
22
A.
Don't -- I wouldn't like to be represented as some sort of a stodge who was
23
told here do this, go and do that. I wouldn't -- I hope you are not implying
24
that.
15:59:27 25
Q. 742
No just, this is an inquiry Mr. Marren and we are really enquiring into the
26
circumstances on the day and the circumstances surrounding this particular
27
motion and how it came to be typed up and how the map came to be provided and
28
typed up and signed by you. And at this stage I am really concerned about the
29
circumstances under which the motion came to be physically typed up, did you
15:59:51 30
ask Mr. Lynn to type up the motion or did Mr. Lynn have a typed motion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:59:56
16:00:16
146 1
A.
2 3
Well I think it may be in discussion, I'm not sure who initiated it, but I am the responsible person. They are my thoughts and that is my wish.
Q. 743
I appreciate that the motion obviously reflects your wish because you signed
4
it, but just getting the mechanics into place so to speak, how did -- who
5
produced this typed motion and map?
6
A.
I think Mr. Lynn did, I really do.
7
Q. 744
Okay. Did you ask him to type it or did he produce a typed motion and map for
8 9
you? A.
16:00:32 10
I told him what I wanted, I believe that to be the case, this is what I am doing and this is as far as I am going and then on reflection I said I better
11
be some palliative, some consolation for the people at the upper end who are
12
advocating.
13
Q. 745
14
tell Mr. Lynn, that this was what you were proposing, so that he would have a
16:00:54 15
16
How long before the debate on the 11th November 1993 did you ask Mr. Lynn or
map and motion ready for signature? A.
I think, if you go distribute the earlier motions we went through, I think my
17
ideas were crystalising, what I wanted. What I wanted was the Manager's
18
recommendation of ten to the hectare, I was supporting that now. What I was
19
supporting was a neighbourhood centre, rather than a district centre and what I
16:01:13 20
was most anxious was to secure was some Science and Technology Park, so those
21
thoughts were formulated and I think Mr. Lynn either sitting in the public
22
gallery, or where ever quickly picked up what I was doing.
23
Q. 746
24
And knowing your mind or your attitude to the matter you say that he had a motion prepared which reflected that without having discussed it with you, is
16:01:33 25
that correct?
26
A.
No he would have discussed it with me, he knew exactly where I stood.
27
Q. 747
Did you have a discussion with Mr. Lynn sometime in advance of the meeting on
28
the 11th November where you discussed the context or the content of a motion
29
that you would be prepared to support?
16:01:49 30
A.
I had frequent meetings. I mean it was very difficult and I -- I told them yes Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:01:57
16:02:10
147 1
this is what I am doing.
2
Q. 748
And he produced a motion for you is that correct?
3
A.
To my prescription.
4
Q. 749
Yes. And what you were proposing, was that, was a rezoning at four houses to
5
the acre of the Monarch only lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 750
And one of the reasons you put forward for selecting the Monarch only lands was
8
the accessibility to all of the lands. If I could have 2359 please, this is
9
the map which I think shows all of the lands zoned at one house to the acre, we
16:02:32 10
see the Monarch lands outlined in red, as I understand it, Mr. Marren and you
11
would have a better knowledge of the area than me at this stage, that there was
12
no road built on any of the lands at this stage?
13
A.
Oh that's right, yes.
14
Q. 751
So there was no greater accessible to the Monarch lands at this stage than
16:02:48 15
there was no any of the other lands isn't that right?
16
A.
At that stage.
17
Q. 752
Yes?
18
A.
But it was planned in the immediate term to enter from the Wyattville Road, a
19
link road which would and has now of course, linked up with the South Eastern
16:03:03 20
Motorway, at that time the line of the motorway wasn't determined, but it,
21
whatever it would be the link road to was to come in here from the Wyattville
22
junction and it was the plans were well advanced for provision of that which
23
would allow for the development of those lands, wouldn't allow for the
24
development of the upper lands.
16:03:21 25
Q. 753
26 27
If I could have 7226, presumably the distinction between these lands and the upper lands was just the length of the roadway, isn't that right?
A.
Well they would be accessed by the spine road that's planned from the Glenamuck
28
interchange down to the Wyattville interchange and that hasn't as yet been
29
produced and I don't think those lands will be accessible until that spine road
16:03:43 30
is constructed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:03:44
16:04:00
148 1
Q. 754
Not alone were you supporting a proposal which would have given four houses to
2
the acre on the Monarch lands, but you were also suggesting that the balance of
3
the lands which the Manager was recommending be zoned at four houses to the
4
acre, that they be zoned at one house to the acre isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 755
So you were going against the Manager's recommendations and you were singling
7 8
out for support only the Monarch lands? A.
9
Well its what you might call an example of real politic. Sometimes you have to balance your realities with your ideals. On this occasion there were
16:04:26 10
sensitivities at work, which had to be catered for and the motion was not
11
intended to confer benefit absolute or, on Monarch, vis-a-vis the other
12
developers, nor the corollary did it intend to disadvantage the other
13
landowners vis-a-vis Monarch.
14 16:04:48 15
Q. 756
But isn't that the effect of the motion?
A.
I would contend that is academic, because it really didn't matter, that land
16
couldn't be developed then, nor has it been developed since, nor can it be
17
developed until the spine road is constructed, whereas their land could be
18
developed, that really on the day met most people's, well the vote was there to
19
show it, it met with the majority vote.
16:05:09 20
Q. 757
Now can I ask you, did Mr. Lynn also have insight into the mind of councillors
21
Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and Ormonde on the day they seem to also have signed
22
the motion?
23
A.
I couldn't answer that.
24
Q. 758
Did you discuss your motion or this motion with any of the other co
16:05:28 25
26
signatories? A.
I am certain that that would have been the case, I'd hardly put their names,
27
we'd hardly put our names tots one motion without having discussed it and
28
coming to agreement about it, but I have no recollection of those discussions.
29 16:05:47 30
Q. 759
The impression I am getting from what you are saying to me Mr. Marren is that you had detailed discussions with Monarch in the lead up to this vote on the 11 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:05:52
16:06:05
149 1
of November 1993 as a result of which Mr. Lynn produced a typed motion and a
2
map, which you signed and you subject to the amendment as we see it in your
3
handwriting on the motion?
4
A.
Mm-hmm.
5
Q. 760
Isn't that correct?
6
A.
Well the main part of it is my thoughts as well. They emanate from me.
7
Q. 761
Yes?
8
A.
That I am sure would not be what Monarch would have wished, they would probably
9
have framed a motion 16 to the hectare, district centre, but -- that's mine. I
16:06:22 10
take responsibility.
11
Q. 762
This is what the Monarch, the market would hold on the day?
12
A.
The market.
13
Q. 763
Yes, in other words this is what the councillors would --
14
A.
That was my judgement, it was a political judgement and one that proved to be
16:06:34 15
correct.
16
Q. 764
Which coincidentally favoured Monarch, isn't that right?
17
A.
That wasn't the intention. And I have outline that had. My intention was not
18
to give a, confer an advantage on any landowner nor to deny for that matter any
19
landowner an advantage. I was working for the, what I thought was the best
16:06:52 20
interests of the people and I can -- I have taken sworn testimony today and I
21
take that very very seriously as a practising Christian, I am what I did was,
22
in the best interests of the people I represent, nothing else.
23
Q. 765
Had Mr. Reilly approached you in relation to the matter at this stage?
24
A.
Mr. Phil Reilly, I would meet periodically, perhaps at some of those, perhaps
16:07:22 25
in some social occasions or where ever, but I can't recall him immediately
26
prior to that, meeting with him.
27
Q. 766
Was it Mr. Lynn you dealt with?
28
A.
Mr. Lynn I would have met, I also met Mr. Sweeney regularly and Mr. Sweeney who
29 16:07:40 30
particularly promoted the idea of Science and Technology Park and I think it was the instrument that really enthused me about this area. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:07:46
16:08:00
150 1
Q. 767
2
Were there any other councillors present when you were discussing this matter with Mr. Lynn in the lead up to the vote on the 11th November?
3
A.
Not that I recall.
4
Q. 768
Now there was a second motion I think if I could have 7228 which was also
5
proposed and was successful on the occasion, isn't that right, in relation to
6
the limiting the size of the neighbourhood centre isn't that correct?
7
A.
Yes yes yes.
8
Q. 769
Could I take it Mr. Lynn would also have that motion typed?
9
A.
That was clearly not in his interest, but he may very well have. Monarch were
16:08:19 10
seeking a district centre, my attitude was and it changed incidentally as you
11
saw on the screen there, initially I thought a district centre was a good idea,
12
gradually came to the belief that a neighbourhood centre was accurate.
13
Q. 770
14
If I could have motion 7228 and 7226 side by side please, would you agree with me Mr. Marren that these motions would appear to have been typed, by the and
16:08:51 15
produced from the same source?
16
A.
Oh I do yes, oh I do.
17
Q. 771
And if Mr. Lynn produced the motion in relation to the residential zoning
18
doesn't it follow as of course, that he must also have produced the other
19
motion?
16:09:06 20
A.
Provided I would prefer to say the secretarial services, he could in the in his
21
interests for the company he worked for advocate a neighbourhood centre, nor
22
indeed could he have advocated ten houses to the hectare, that's what I had
23
settled on and agreed, and if I was facilitated in producing the motion that's
24
fine.
16:09:28 25
Q. 772
And I think then that both motions were successful, but that in time the
26
restriction in relation to the neighbourhood centre was lifted subject to a
27
wording from the Manager, isn't that right?
28
A.
In Dun Laoghaire in the first variation.
29
Q. 773
Yes?
A.
Oh, yes. I mean the opposition seemed to dissipate very rapidly, when we
16:09:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:09:52
16:10:13
151 1
settled down with Dun Laoghaire, people who were very much opposed to
2
residential development in this area seemed now to be quite favourably disposed
3
to it, people who cast doubt on the feasibility of a Science and Technology
4
Park, were now advocating it as a recipe for the cure of the economic ills of
5
the area, I didn't participate very actively in those debates, I often listened
6
in silent astonishment, because there was quite a change in people's attitudes
7
and I am never quite sure what caused it, but it was much easier for me in the
8
new Council.
9
Thank you very much Mr. Marren.
16:10:39 10
11
Q. 774
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Can I ask you Mr. Marren, you said you didn't believe that
Mr. Lynn would have wanted just ten houses to the hectare? A.
I think their submission, Judge Faherty, was for 16.
Q. 775
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 16:10:54 15
Yes because that's one of the responses you gave, but there
16
was a letter written by Mr. McCabe to the Council in July, and this was
17
obviously in response to the second public display, as a result of
18
Mr. Barrett's motion, the second map showed two houses to the hectare, isn't
19
that right, for all the lands?
16:11:15 20
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 776
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22 23 24
And Mr. McCabe I think he was a planner, on behalf of Monarch
wrote to the Council seeking -- he was objecting to change number 3? A.
Yes, yeah that would --
Q. 777
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:11:36 25
26 27
Yes, now I was reading the beginning of his letter he is
asking that -- if I just as I understand it, its page 7221.
28 29 16:11:46 30
MS. DILLON:
Yes just in relation to this document sorry to cut across
Mr. Quinn, there are two versions of this letter, we have inquired from Dun Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:11:50
16:12:00
152 1
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council to confirm which, if either were received by
2
them, we still don't have that confirmation.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
appear --
Maybe I should leave the question Ms. Dillon, it would
6 7
MS. DILLON:
What is common to both is that they were unhappy with the
8
density gone out in second display there is no issue about that.
9 16:12:08 10
Q. 778
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Exactly. That is my question Mr. Marren Monarch were clearly
11
unhappy about the density as is evidenced from this letter, and they were
12
objecting to that change and they seem to want it removed. If the change were
13
removed simplicitor change 3 goes off the map, the second public display as I
14
understand it it, would revert to what went out on the first display that's ten
16:12:32 15
16
houses to the hectare? A.
17
Yes, that's my understanding, yes that would have been the case. But there were -- sorry.
18 19
Q. 779
16:12:45 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I am just saying that if that letter is there and now assuming
that is the letter that was sent to the Dun Laoghaire, to the County Council,
21
back in 1993 and we don't know yet obviously, this may be subject to
22
clarification later, it will be seen, it would suggest that Monarch were
23
looking for two things really, a reversion to the first display, ten houses to
24
the hectare and perhaps an extension of the boundary, further down southwest,
16:13:10 25
do you understand?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 780
But there didn't seem from that letter again this may be subject to
28
clarification at a later stage, I am cautious in my question to you, that
29
Monarch would appear, that they wanted would, have been happy enough with ten
16:13:24 30
houses to the hectare, they wanted change 3 gone? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:13:26
16:13:38
153 1
A.
Yes I understand.
Q. 781
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2 3
I am just wondering, if that is the case, where do you say
4
between July '93, because this was obviously a representation that went in
5
after the second display, and November '93, did Monarch make a formal case for
6
a larger residential density? I know they did previously.
7
A.
Yes.
Q. 782
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
I think their original was 16. I think they were shocked when it was reduced
8 9 16:13:51 10
11
I am just asking you --
to one to the acre.
12 13
Q. 783
14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But do you see my point? I am just putting, it would appear
that Monarch were just looking for a deletion of change 3, I think in fairness
16:14:06 15
to yourself, a further extension of the boundary of the residential boundary I
16
think they were still looking for that. Why do you say then that the motion,
17
which I understand was typed, it appeared to have been typed at some point by
18
Mr. Lynn as I understand it?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 784
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:14:26 20
21 22 23
Was that before the day, its dated the 11th November? Did it
come to the Council chamber with the motion? A.
24
You know Mr. Quinn posed those questions and I really couldn't answer with certainty, whether it was that day, or the day before, I really couldn't, but
16:14:43 25
it was around that time, certainly.
26 27
Q. 785
28 29 16:14:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Because that's what the motion says, to delete the -- to
accept the Manager's recommendations? A.
Yes. Yes but I had reached that position myself independently, much earlier on and I recall the planner in question, Mr. Conway, and I -- I almost recall the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:15:03
16:15:19
154 1
day on which he convinced me it was the right thing to do, in retrospect of
2
course it probably wasn't, but we can only make our judgements at a particular
3
time.
4
Q. 786
JUDGE FAHERTY: Can I ask you, back in -- when was it, May 1992, the manager
5
had put forward his, this is before the second display, his more ambitious
6
project that it would be, I think, still low level residential density, at four
7
houses to the acre, on an Action Area Plan?
8
A.
Yes.
Q. 787
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9 16:15:35 10
And I think he also wanted to extend the actual residential
11
zoning further south, that was his -- this was the DP 92/44, this was the
12
Manager's map?
13
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 788
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 789
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 16:15:49 15
16
And you supported that?
17 18 19
counsel says, was in relation to the whole of the area that had been already
16:16:01 20
21
An that map when it went up and I understand subject to what
zoned residential in this area? A.
Yes approximately 178 acres.
Q. 790
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24
now that motion was unsuccessful, but it was a motion that was voted on, the
16:16:11 25
26
Yes and you had supported that, you voted in favour of that,
first matter that was voted on back in May 1992. A.
Yes.
Q. 791
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 16:16:34 30
I am just -- why then, this is the question that you probably
anticipate, since you had voted in favour of that back in 1992, why limit it -A.
Oh I know. Well I think we were all on a sort of odyssey, a journey of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:16:38
16:16:59
155 1
discovery if you like and we had to adapt ourselves to situations, I -- I mean
2
some of my very close colleagues, close associates were resolutely set against
3
it and it was really an effort to, I suppose to, help them some of the way, at
4
the same time achieve what we in the south end and Loughlinstown people really
5
wanted.
6 7
Q. 792
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just can I ask you Mr. Marren, the very first vote on the 11th
8
of November, it was a motion to confirm change 3. I think there was some
9
amendment made to that it was lost, but that was the first vote that was taken
16:17:15 10
on the 11th November, I have forgotten now whose names it was, but it was a
11 12
motion to confirm change 3? A.
Yes Councillor Barrett and Dockrell was it.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Smith and Buckley.
16:17:42 15
16
Q. 793
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes 7261 and that motion is lost isn't that correct?
17
A.
For 27, against, 43, yes.
18 19
MR. QUINN: No the vote is at 7262.
16:17:57 20
21
Q. 794
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
A.
Yes.
Q. 795
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Yes.
Q. 796
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7262 actually.
23 24 16:18:07 25
You vote against that obviously because you don't --
26 27
And that would appear, just want to - that vote in itself
28
would you voting against that would appear consistent with more or less the
29
approach you you took back in 1992, in support of The manager's map?
16:18:26 30
A.
Yes yes, I think so yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:18:29
16:18:48
156 1 2
Q. 797
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But I am just asking you why not then leave it at that Mr --
3
because that vote having lost, what was the effect of, on the map, can I ask
4
you that as a councillor -- this change 3 had gone out in 1992, this
5
confirmation vote, this is a confirmation vote and its lost?
6
A.
This is a confirmation, it was lost.
8
Q. 798
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
A.
Yes on my understanding then is that it would be all, ten to the hectare, the
7
16:19:06 10
Therefore doesn't the support change 3 had was now lost?
whole lot.
11 12
Q. 799
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
A.
Well there was conciliation if you like, consolation for whatever for a lot of
14
Yes?
my close colleagues and the upper land couldn't be developed -- it was academic
16:19:21 15
and it was going to happen fairly soon anyway, those people --
16 17
Q. 800
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I don't know if you can answer this question Mr. Marren, on
18
the minute that is we have now, they may not be the entire minutes of the 11th
19
of November and I can't say, but in a lot of meetings we would have minutes of
16:19:37 20
meetings from the County Council, we would have seen, in various Modules there
21
would be reports given and objections and representations would be referred to
22
by the Manager and indeed by -- and itemised, isn't that correct?
23
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 801
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24 16:19:56 25
26 27
Can you recall whether objections and representations by
residents of the northern part of the lands -A.
Oh, yes, very strong representations.
Q. 802
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
I'd say to summarise in a sentence, they were opposed to any development, I'd
28 29 16:20:06 30
And just to get back to --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:20:10
16:20:23
157 1
say that was their position.
2 3
Q. 803
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Right. And get back to the question of the road Mr. Marren,
Mr. Quinn has suggested that there was no road as of the November '93? A.
6
No that's right but it was planned and we knew it was planned an we knew it was coming on stream fairly soon, which it did.
7 8
Q. 804
9 16:20:36 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Were you aware that there was, the pipe running through the
Monarch lands? A.
Oh, yes, it was bisecting it I think.
Q. 805
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12 13 14
But the -- that pipe obviously wouldn't begin and end with the
Monarch lands, did you know where it continued on to? A.
16:20:50 15
I thought it went from Glenamuck cottages, down to Shanganagh outfall, I think that was the line of it.
16 17
Q. 806
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see. And can I just ask you, when you, you seem to be the
first signature on the motion on the 11th of November Mr. Marren. A.
Yes.
Q. 807
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:20:59 20
21 22 23
Mr. Marren, do you have a recollection of actually signing it
for Mr. Lynn? Or when it was produced? A.
24
Oh I remember -- I couldn't say the exact location, but I remember putting my name to that motion, yes.
16:21:14 25
26
Q. 808
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And were there others with you when you signed it?
27
A.
No I can't recall that, I really cannot, but I would -- I'm sure I would have
28
discussed that with councillors that are from my general area, that is
29
councillors Coffey and Lohan.
16:21:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:21:33
16:21:47
158 1
Q. 809
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
A.
But I could say I definitely didn't discuss it with councillor Ormonde,
3
But you don't know when this discussion --
definitely not.
4 5
Q. 810
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Did you discuss it further with the Manager or Council
officials, Mr. Marren, when this motion was put? A.
Usually if you put forward a motion in the Council if there is a planning
8
officer or Manager there who disagrees with the content or feels that it is an
9
unproductive type of motion they are very prompt to say so, no such expression
16:22:08 10
was made when I moved that motion.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
13 14 16:22:15 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Right thank you very much?
Thanks.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten tomorrow, all right?
16:22:36 20
21
MS. DILLON:
May it please you sir.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
24
THURSDAY 8TH JUNE 2006, AT 10.30 AM.
25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
09:38:38
10:05:40
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
9TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.00 A.M:
3 4
MR. QUINN:
Good morning, sir. Mr. McCabe please.
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Quinn.
5 6 7 8
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF FERGAL McCABE
9
BY MR. QUINN
10:05:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. McCabe.
MR. QUINN:
Good morning, Mr. McCabe, I am sorry that you had to come back but
12 13
Q
1
14
I don't think we will be very much longer. I think we had been dealing with
10:06:04 15
your involvement with Monarch interests in the lead up to the crucial vote on
16
the 11th November 1993 and if I could have 7026. This is a motion which was
17
proposed by Councillor Marren and others which had direct relevance to the
18
Monarch lands, isn't that right, you may or may not have been here yesterday
19
when this motion was being dealt with by Councillor Barrett?
10:06:29 20
A
I generally heard Councillor Barrett's evidence, I didn't follow the thread of
21 22
it. Q
2
23
Yes. Did you know that this vote, this motion was being tabled for the 11th November?
24
A
10:06:39 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
No, I didn't. 3
Did you have any input into this motion? No none whatsoever.
4
28
There is an accompanying map 7227, did you have any input into the preparation of that map?
29
A
10:07:00 30
Q
This is the map attached to the motion? 5
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:07:00
10:07:08
2 1
A
2
Q
No, I didn't. 6
3
But you would agree with me that the motion and the map clearly identified the Monarch lands?
4
A
5
Q
Yes, they are the Monarch ownerships. 7
And I don't think it's in dispute but it's obvious from the wording of the
6
motion, it was intended that the Monarch lands and only the Monarch lands would
7
be zoned at four house to the acre, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
That seems to be the intention of the map you are showing me. 8
10:07:27 10
Now, I think you provided, following on that vote, you provided to Mr. Sweeney a report on the outcome of the vote, if I could have 4703.
11
Can I ask you, you had, I think you told the Tribunal yesterday that you
12
weren't present at any council meeting?
13
A
Yes, I should clarify I was looking at the evidence last night, I have
14
obviously been at council meetings in my career, usually as a consultant to
10:07:51 15
councils but I have never been at meetings to deal with lands, clients' lands
16 17
which were the subject of the Development Plan process. Q
9
Yes. Now, accompanying that letter is a map, if I could have 4706. If I could
18
have 7229, which is the map accompanying the motion and if it could be put
19
beside 4706. If they could be put side by side please.
10:08:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
What's the other page?
23
MR. QUINN:
7229 sorry, 7227, either way, that's the map that accompanied the
24
motion in relation to the C zoning, the one on the left and the one on the
22
10:08:57 25
right is the map which accompanied your letter, you would agree with me they
26 27
look almost identical? A
They do in the sense that the map on the left shows the body of lands and an
28
area designated for a neighbourhood centre and the other lands, the other map
29
shows what appears to be agriculture.
10:09:16 30
Q
10
Where did you get the map which accompanied your letter? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:09:19
10:09:50
3 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Could I see my letter again please? 11
Yes, if I could have 4703 please. Obviously I am referring there to the outcome of the zoning motions.
12
Yes. Did somebody provide you with the zoning motions and accompanying maps? I must have been made aware of them but I can't say from what source.
13
7
But in any event, you didn't prepare or provide the map which accompanied the zoning motions?
8
A
9
Q
No. 14
10:10:09 10
Now, I think it was your view that the lands had been zoned at 10 houses to the hectare, isn't that right, which would be about four house to the acre?
11
A
12
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 15
Yes. Were you familiar with the various lettering that was being applied by
13
the council in the different zoning types, for example, I think AP was
14
residential on piped sewerage, isn't that right, E was industry, B was
10:10:39 15
agriculture?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
10:10:48 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 16
Communities, I think -17
18
There was no question of an action area plan in relation to these lands as a result of that motion, isn't that right?
A
Not in relation to that motion, that's simply to relate to specific land
24 10:11:02 25
On an action area plan? Yes.
22 23
A1 I think was a zoning for residential?
parcels. Q
19
Yes. But an action area plan was actually undertaken, isn't that right,
26
because if we look at 4923, this is a meeting on the 6th January 1994 with
27
Mr. Murray and two representatives of the Monarch interests and Mr. Murray has
28
advised, as you will see under heading "zoning/action plan" that he would
29
expect to have an action plan completed in approximately two months. Do you
10:11:30 30
see that? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:11:30
10:11:44
4 1
A
2
Q
I do, I wonder is Mr. Murray, you know, using the word action plan loosely. 20
3
area?
4
A
5
Q
I couldn't say I knew. 21
6 7
Did you have any discussions with Mr. Murray or anybody within the newly created Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in relation to an action plan?
A
I don't recollect but I would say they would have been prudent to have an
8 9
Did you know that the council were proposing to have an action plan for the
action plan for such a large area of land. Q
22
10:12:04 10
Yes. But if that were the case, presumably the councillors would have deemed an action plan as being the appropriate zoning for the lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That would have been the correct thing to have done, yes. 23
Yes. And I think following on those discussions at 4975 on the 15th February
13
1994, Monarch wrote to you in relation to the possibility of you heading up a
14
team dealing with an Environmental Impact Statement own on the lands, isn't
10:12:31 15
that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 24
And I think at this stage, it had been accepted or acknowledged that there
18
would have to be some sort of access to the lands, isn't that right, so that
19
they could be opened up for development?
10:12:41 20
A
21
Q
That would seem to be the thrust of the second paragraph. 25
Yes and that appears to have been accepted by the planners and the council.
22
And it was in that context, I think you were coming on board as providing
23
planning advice, isn't that right?
24
A
10:13:00 25
Q
Yes. 26
Just in relation to the lands generally, would you agree with me that this was
26
a green field site in '89, it had a very low density zoning on septic tank
27
which was unrealistic but had a residential designation so to speak, isn't that
28
right?
29
A
10:13:17 30
Q
Yes. 27
It had no services, it had no access, it was still uncertain exactly what area www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:13:22
10:13:36
5 1
of land could be developed having regard to the movement on the line of the
2
Southeastern Motorway?
3
A
4
Q
That would have been the position in early '89. 28
5
But it was almost certain it was land that it was land that at some stage going to be developed?
6
A
7
Q
If one took into account the ERDO study and the council's own working papers. 29
Yes. It was going to be developed so really what Monarch, the developer are
8
seeking to achieve here, is they are seeking to accelerate the development of
9
the land, is that right?
10:13:52 10
A
11
Q
I think that's a very good way of putting it. 30
Now, I think the issue then arose in relation to the science and technology
12
park, isn't that right? It had been mooted and had been in the air but I think
13
at this stage the science and technology park becomes more centrally involved
14
in relation to the lands, is that right?
10:14:19 15
A
It does but as I say I am not terribly familiar with where the idea came from
16 17
or how it -Q
31
But as a strategy, would you agree with me that it was obvious that in the
18
absence -- that the science and technology park was the key to opening up the
19
development of these lands.
10:14:36 20
A
Not necessarily, there was demand for housing also but there was an identified
21 22
shortfall for employment uses and -Q
32
If I could have 5211, this is a strategy report prepared in June of 1994 within
23
Monarch and under the heading "science and technology park" it says "The
24
rezoning of the agricultural lands and the increase of the residential density
10:14:58 25
rests on the premises that a science and technology park will be brought to
26
fruition, without this potential job creation concept, the agricultural lands
27
will not be rezoned and no increase in density will occur."
28
A
29
Q
10:15:18 30
A
What's the genesis of that? 33
That's a report compiled by I think perhaps Mr. Lynn for Monarch in June 1994. I am not too sure I would concur with the, with his conclusion. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:15:24
10:15:39
6 1
Q
34
2
It was created I think maybe, if we look at 5215, on the 15th June 1994, you wouldn't agree with 5212?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
No. 35
You wouldn't agree with Mr. Lynn's assessment? No, it would seem to me that the lands by their very nature should have been
6
comprehensively developed which required a range of necessary uses,
7
residential, commercial, employment.
8
Q
36
9
But we are talking about accelerating the development prospect for these lands, and you are talking about bringing on board the manager and his planners and
10:16:03 10
perhaps councillors, isn't is that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 37
And the council has just voted on the lands in November of 1993, we are now in
13
early '94 and I suggest to you it's being envisaged by Monarch that the key to
14
increasing densities and opening up additional agricultural land for
10:16:30 15
16
residential development was the prospect of a science and technology park? A
I can't respond to that, I haven't seen the memo, it wouldn't be the conclusion
17 18
I would come to myself. Q
38
19
Okay. I want to put yourself in the frame of mind you were in back in June of '94, or January to June '94, when you were advising Monarch and you presumably
10:16:42 20
attended a series of meetings and would have advised different representatives
21
within Monarch, isn't that right, at that time?
22
A
23
Q
I am sure I must have. 39
24
And what I'm suggesting to you is that as far as Monarch were concerned, whether it was a good or bad strategy, as far as Monarch were concerned, the
10:16:56 25
strategy now was to promote the science and technology park and try and trade
26
that off against an increasing density and an extension of the residentially
27
zoned land with the manager/councillors.
28
A
29
Q
10:17:20 30
That's what the memo suggests but I don't recollect it being put to me. 40
Yes. You would agree with me that at different stages were different strategies being devised in relation to these lands, isn't that right, both in www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:17:23
10:17:40
7 1
relation to accelerating the Carrickmines sewer, accelerating the line of the
2
roadway, proposals in relation to what might be comfortably rezoned on the
3
lands, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
It was an evolving situation. 41
But from your point of view and within Monarch, you were devising strategies on
6
how you might get these lands rezoned at different stages, I am not saying
7
there's anything particularly wrong in that approach but as a planner, that's
8
your --
9
A
I think my concern throughout the entire exercise was ownership neutral, this
10:18:04 10
was a strategic area of land and I was of the view that whatever consequences
11
there were for Monarch, the correct approach was that the development of the
12
largest area of land possible should be pursued in a comprehensive fashion so
13
that at some later date in the future a properly planned development would
14
arise, environment would be provided.
10:18:27 15
Q
42
Under normal circumstances, had these lands been rezoned as they were, they
16
would just lie there and either be developed at four houses to the acre or
17
alternatively, they would have been either a variation of the plan or
18
alternatively, there would have been an opportunity on the review of the plan,
19
which occurred I think in this case in 1997/1998. The choices were simple, you
10:18:52 20
either developed on the existing zoning, you brought a material contravention,
21
you varied the existing zoning or you reviewed, you varied it on review.
22
A
23
Q
Yes. They are the practical options. 43
24
But that did not happen here, isn't that right? Within months of the November 1993 decision, you were into an action area plan and an attempt to increase the
10:19:14 25
zoning and the area of zoning on the lands, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 44
And the key, the strategy key to that as appears from this memo is the science
28
and technology park which for obvious reasons was very attractive to the
29
planners, isn't is that right?
10:19:29 30
A
It would have appear to be but that wasn't my strategy. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:19:33
10:19:49
8 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
45
So the document would appear to suggest. 46
Did you not know that it was Monarch's strategy at this time? I don't recollect that there was a direct link between the provision of science
5 6
But it was Monarch's strategy I suggest to you?
and technology and increased densities. Q
47
7
But a science and technology park would have itself have necessitated a variation of the plan for starters, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes, it was, it was different use. 48
10:20:04 10
Different use and you are now into a variation of the plan which gave you an opportunity to deal with other aspects of the plan that you have may have been
11
uncomfortable with as a developer, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Well not necessarily. 49
14
Under normal circumstances it was unlikely you would get a variation of the plan in the absence of the five year review, isn't that right?
10:20:20 15
A
16
Q
I don't think there's a rule there, you know. 50
But it's not on the table, unless obviously you have a large number of
17
councillors who support you, in which case it would be difficult to justify a
18
review so soon after a confirmation of the existing plan.
19
A
I think I know where you are going, all I can say is that I don't see a direct
10:20:42 20
correlation between the provision of science and technology and the need to
21 22
change other elements. Q
51
23
But as it happened, there was a review undertaken and the review did increase density on the lands, isn't that right?
24
A
10:21:04 25
Q
If you -52
First of all, there was a variation necessitated by the science and technology
26
review, isn't that right? And that resulted in an increased density on the
27
lands.
28
A
29
Q
10:21:28 30
If you could show me the text of the variation or the -53
Well I think there was, if we could have 7284 please. This is a draft variation and I think it had been identified in the earlier meeting in early www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:21:36
10:21:50
9 1
January 1994 with Mr. Murray that he was of the view that there was an anomaly
2
in relation to agriculturally zoned lands; in other words the residential
3
zoning had been to a notional prior line of the motorway.
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 54
However that line had now moved westward. Yes.
55
And there was an area of Monarch lands which had been or were zoned
8
agricultural zoning and it was felt that they now could be zoned for
9
residential purposes, isn't that right?
10:22:05 10
A
That seemed appropriate, an appropriate planning decision to make. I could
11
observe on that map for the first time the QBC or quality bus corridors
12
appearing and that's a very significant factor which would of itself increase
13
densities. It would be more relevant in increasing densities than a science
14
and technology park.
10:22:31 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
56
I don't know but I see it on this map. 57
18 19
You say that would have, the creation of a quality bus corridor would have increased the density on the lands?
A
There's a direct correlation between, provision of public transport and
10:22:51 20
densities.
21
Q
22
A
58
I understand that that was an objective of the '93 plan, quality bus corridor? I see. But I would have thought the quality bus corridor would have been
23 24
When was the quality bus corridor put in?
determined of density more than the science and technology park. Q
59
Do you, you presumably knew that there were a series of meetings between
10:23:11 25
Monarch representatives and the manager and the planners in relation to the
26
science and technology park which led to an agreement, whereby the council
27
became a joint venture partner in the science and technology park, isn't that
28
right?
29
A
10:23:26 30
Q
I am aware of that. 60
And there was a trade off in relation to density and there was a variation www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:23:29
10:23:38
10 1
which was confirmed in April '95, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
I am not aware of that. 61
4
right?
5
A
6
Q
I accept that. 62
7
However I think there were difficulties experienced in development, in the development of the science and technology park, isn't is that right?
8
A
9
Q
10:23:56 10
Yes. But it had the support of the councillors and the planners, isn't is that
It it didn't materialise. 63
A
At all? Is there a science and technology park in Carrickmines at the moment? The first building that was, that arrived I think was Lucent Technologies.
11
Now, whether that would be considered the kind of use that wouldn't have
12
arrived in some other zone and would have been attracted purely to a science
13
and technology zoning, I am not too clear.
14
Q
64
10:24:23 15
If we -- sorry just in relation to the, before I leave it Ms. Dillon reminds me in relation to the bus corridor, if we could have 7280. This is a specific
16
local objective on map 27. Do you see there number 4, extend bus way/LRT
17
proposal to Wyattville Road?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 65
10:24:48 20
21
that right? A
Well, possibly the consequences of it hadn't been said but to put a bus way
22 23
So it's unlikely that would have sparked the review or the variation, isn't
through lands zoned at 10 to the acre wouldn't make very much sense. Q
66
24
That bus corridor, was that to be through the lands or was it on the adjoining Bray Road?
10:25:03 25
A
26
Q
27
A
It was on the general line of the old Harcout Street railway. 67
Has been that been constructed? The railway procurement agency is in the process of, I think the EIS has been
28
published. And the railway order has been published.
29
Q
10:25:20 30
A
68
What we are talking about is the extension of the Luas, isn't that right? It's now upgraded to LUAS. Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:25:22
10:25:44
11 1
Q
69
But even at this stage it would have necessitated, and I am talking about
2
'93/'94, the creation of a roadway which would have been along the lines of the
3
existing LUAS, isn't that right? Through a field site which hadn't been
4
developed and which had been an objective in the 1993 plan?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:25:53 10
Q
Sorry, could you repeat that point? 70
In 1993 -Yes.
71
-- in the Development Plan, that was an objective going forward. Yes.
72
Which provided that at some stage in the future, where the old Harcout Street
11
line, that there might be some sort of rapid transport system put in place,
12
isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
10:26:08 15
A
Yes. 73
And even now, the LUAS hasn't been brought to Cherrywood? It's imminent and contributions are being levied to make it happen but I would
16
make the point that at the time in early '90s in particular, the public
17
transport debate was beginning to be, was more -- there was much more
18
discussion of it and it would seem to me that the implications of the provision
19
of a quality bus corridor or subsequently a LUAS, through development lands
10:26:37 20
21
would require increased densities in any event. Q
74
22
1993 plan, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
10:26:51 25
A
It doesn't seem to have been. 75
Yes. Well it's a specific local objective of the '93 plan. The provision of the bus way was the consequent -- density doesn't seem to be
26 27
Yes, and it was debated and discussed and was dealt with in the context of the
realised. Q
76
It's certainly not realised in relation to the balance of the lands through
28
which this bus corridor was to travel and which were to remain zoned at one
29
house to the acre.
10:27:09 30
A
Well that's an absurdity. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:27:12
10:27:41
12 1
Q
77
2
At 6054 I think, sorry just before I get to that, if I could have 7050, this is an extract from your submission in 1991.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 78
To the Draft Development Plan. Do you see 4.1.2, "The basis of physical
5
planning is the relationship between land use and transport. The creation of a
6
high capacity transport system is presumably intended to make the city centre
7
and the city regions as accessible as possible to the maximum number of
8
people."
9 10:27:54 10
A Q
That's correct. 79
11
So you were making submissions on the basis of a transport, increased transport system as far back as 1991, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:28:06 15
Q
Yes. 80
And that was on behalf of Monarch? Yes.
81
And Monarch were briefing councillors at that time and subsequently, isn't that
16
right? And presumably they were briefing them based on submissions and advice
17
being given to them by others, other professionals, including yourself, isn't
18
that right?
19
A
10:28:20 20
Q
Presumably. 82
21
on the lands, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
24 10:28:50 25
And this was available to them as a possible inducement to increase the density
Possibly. 83
If I could come to 6054. This is a memo of July 1996, the review necessitated by the science and technology park has taken place in April 1995 and now we are a year on and we are also into the review of the 1993 plan. And you see there
26
on the second part of the first paragraph, where they are dealing with how they
27
might approach the manager in relation to existing zonings, they say:
28 29 10:29:10 30
"The matters need to be addressed if zoning is to be enhanced. It is necessary to re-establish a good working relationship with the county manager to overcome www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:29:15
10:29:28
13 1
his embarrassment of having piloted changes in the Development Plan to achieve
2
a science and technology park and then find the parties are reluctant to
3
proceed with the venture. The manager will not be cooperative until and unless
4
the science and technology park moves ahead."
5 6
You see what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. McCabe and whether it was intended or
7
otherwise, that the Monarch devised a strategy of putting or placing a science
8
and technology park on these lands and that on the back of that they got the
9
cooperation of the manager and presumably the councillors, to increase density
10:29:47 10
on the lands: The science and technology park never materialised and now in
11
July 1996 as you go into the review of the 1993 plan, they find themselves in a
12
situation where they have lost favour with the manager.
13
A
14
Q
But I'm unaware of that debate. 84
10:30:10 15
16
actually happened, isn't is that right? A
Well if an objective is put into a Development Plan a zoning objective, then
17 18
You are unaware of that debate but you agree with me that is exactly what
the planning authority is bound to pursue it. Q
85
The manager had gone out own a limb presumably to try and create employment
19
within his district and he had promoted this science and technology park. He
10:30:27 20
had become a joint venture holder in the park, there had been consequences
21 22
which had benefited Monarch but the park had never been created, is that right? A
As said, I think one or two of the buildings that arrived would be of science
23
and technology nature but -- and I have never seen a science and technology
24
park but I don't know what it looks like but I think I generally agree with you
10:30:55 25
the science and technology park didn't arrive.
26
Q
27
A
86
I would again suggest that was for a different reason. More to do with public
28 29 10:31:10 30
But the increased zoning had arrived?
transport. Q
87
Yes. You think that the increased zoning and the variation of the 1993 plan, which occurred in '95 occurred as a result of increased transport? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:31:19
10:31:40
14 1
A
I would think that as the debate went on, that the penny dropped more regarding
2 3
the implications of provision of public transport for residential densities. Q
88
Yes. Now, I think that there was a review of the '98 plan, sorry the '93 plan
4
and there were again the Monarch lands had the density restrictions removed,
5
isn't that right? The science and technology park was increased and there was
6
effectively an increase in density brought about in the 1998 plan, isn't that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
10:31:57 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
The density caps were removed. 89
Yes. And you were involved and you made submissions in relation to that. I believe I did.
90
On behalf of Monarch. Yes.
91
Thank you very much, Mr. McCabe.
14 10:32:03 15
CHAIRMAN:
I think Mr. Sanfey wants to ask you a few questions.
16 17
MR. SANFUI: Chairman, in fact I don't intend asking any questions, Mr. McCabe
18
dealt with everything in evidence.
19 10:32:15 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
Thank you very much, sorry to bring you back.
Not at all, thank you, sir.
22 23
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
24 10:32:22 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. William Murray please.
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:32:25
10:32:56
15 1
MR. WILLIAM MURRAY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A
Good morning, Mr. Murray
Good morning, chairman.
6 7
Q
92
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Murray, thank you very much for attending the
8
Tribunal. I think Mr. Murray, you have previously given evidence to the
9
Tribunal in connection with the O'Halloran Darragh Kilcoyne lands and the
10:33:08 10
Paisley Park rezoning, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 93
And in the area of land that was concerned in that module or those two pieces
13
of land were fairly close to the Monarch lands which were the subject of this
14
Module, isn't that right?
10:33:22 15
A
16
Q
Correct. 94
17
And can I take it and account Tribunal take it, that you affirm the evidence you have already given in relation to the Carrickmines I Module?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 95
10:33:34 20
And in the course of that evidence, you will recollect, Mr. Murray, that there was some discussion about the origin of a map called DP90/123?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 96
23
And it was your view I think and correct me if I am wrong, that was a map that was prepared by the planners, is that right?
24
A
10:33:47 25
Q
That's correct. 97
And did you accept that any particular submission or any particular matter
26
would have had a bearing or a significant bearing on that map, can you
27
remember?
28 29 10:34:10 30
A
Would I accept that it had, I don't know whether to yes or no or to that. It wouldn't have had a bearing, any submissions wouldn't have had a bearing, that's the answer. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:34:11
10:34:32
16 1
Q
98
If I can just show you the map at 6937, Mr. Murray, and it will come up on
2
screen beside you. Now it's a slightly feint copy of DP90/123 but I think you
3
will be reasonably familiar with DP90/123?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 99
6
lands at Carrickmines.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:34:40 10
And outlined and hatched in red on that map are the outline of the Monarch
Q
Right. 100
Do you see that? Yes.
101
Now, the map DP90/123 was a fairly radical proposal from the planners in
11
relation to increasing the amount of residentially zoned land and increasing
12
the amount of industrially zoned land, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's correct. 102
10:35:04 15
Now, if we just take a few items off that map, Mr. Murray, the first thing that has happened is the line of the motorway, is that blue line on that which is
16
the line of the motorway, is that now in the same position as it was in the
17
1983 plan?
18
A
19
Q
I couldn't tell you, you would have to put the two up. 103
All right. I will give you the 1983 plan, page 6875. Or perhaps a better map
10:35:31 20
would be 6876. Now, you see outlined in the red to the right of the screen
21
there's an outline of the Monarch lands, do you see that? To the left of the
22
screen, I beg your pardon, do you see that where the cursor is?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 104
10:36:07 25
And do you see the line of the motorway plotted through the Monarch lands if we could have page 6877 please, it might assist Mr. Murray. This is an enlarged
26
extract from the 1983 plan, Mr. Murray.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:36:18 30
Q
That's better. 105
Is that clearer? Yes.
106
Now, you will see there the proposed line of the motorway bisects the Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:36:23
10:36:39
17 1
lands, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 107
And if you go to DP90/123 at page 6937, you will see that the blue line which
4
is the motorway line is beneath or south of the Monarch lands, isn't that
5
right?
6
A
7
Q
That's right. 108
8 9 10:36:45 10
that right? A Q
That's correct. 109
11 12
It would follow from that then that the line of the motorway has moved, isn't
All right. Now, can you outline to the Tribunal the reasons as to why the line of the motorway was moved on the map at DP90/123?
A
The line of the motorway didn't become fixed until quite some number of years
13
after that and various studies and various reports would have been prepared and
14
various lines drawn by the engineers for the road over the period as the lands
10:37:15 15
were being examined. What you see on the map there was the then current best
16 17
thinking in relation to the road line in the county council. Q
110
And certainly you had received a detailed submission in November 1989 from
18
Monarch Properties Limited, isn't that right? The planning department had
19
received that. You will have seen that in the documentation and it's in
10:37:38 20
Ms. Collins' statement which you refer in your own statement, Mr. Murray, is
21
that right?
22
A
23
Q
24
Yes. 111
In that it was suggested one of the matters that was suggested was a change in the density, the residential density, an introduction of retail, an
10:37:52 25
introduction of a business or industrial park, and in order to facilitate all
26
of that, the moving of the line of the motorway off the Monarch lands. Would
27
you agree Mr. Murray, that from Monarch's point of view, it would have served
28
their interests better to get the line of the motorway moved beneath their
29
lands? Doesn't that follow?
10:38:12 30
A
Oh it would, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:38:15
10:38:28
18 1
Q
112
2
Because it had been agreed by the council that the development would stop at the line of the motorway, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
I am not so sure that's correct. 113
Up to the line of the 1983 motorway as it then was, was it not agreed by the
5
council that the residential development would stop at the line of the
6
motorway?
7
A
I don't think that's correct. Now, in terms of the whole motorway certainly,
8 9
maybe some particular stretches. Q
114
10:38:47 10
And certainly in December of 1990, the effect of the motion before the council was to leave zoning at the 1983 line, isn't that right? Certainly the
11
document --
12
A
13
Q
That was a motion in the course of the consideration of the review, yes. 115
14
But certainly it appears to be the position on the understanding of the councillors who have given evidence that even prior to that, that the decision
10:39:08 15
had been made that development would only take place up to the line of the
16
motorway?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
10:39:23 20
Q
In parts of the Carrickmines area, that's true, yes. 116
And that would have covered the Monarch lands, isn't that right? In this, in the case of this map, yes.
117
And indeed if one looks at the residential zoning maps, the residential map, if
21
one looks at the map I think prepared in May of 1991, at 7018, if that can be
22
turned the correct way please.
23 24 10:40:00 25
Now, this is a map DP90/129A which I will come back to but what I want to draw your attention to, Mr. Murray, in relation to -- if you just look at that map
26
and I will give you an increased, a closer, blown up version of that map is at
27
7019. If you just have the map on screen normal size will do fine please.
28
Thank you very much.
29
What I want to draw to your attention, Mr. Murray, just in relation to the
10:40:54 30
development to the line of the motorway because the Tribunal has been told by a www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:40:56
10:41:14
19 1
number of councillors that it was their understanding following the making of
2
the 1983 Development Plan, that residential development as permitted under the
3
1983 Development Plan went as far as the line of the motorway as it then was in
4
the '83 plan. And do you see on that map the black line that cuts through the
5
old 1983 line cutting through the Monarch Properties lands?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 118
8 9 10:41:27 10
And you will see that the residential zoning from the 1983 plan is confined to the west, to the east of that line, isn't that right?
A Q
Yes. 119
And that would appear to support the information that has been provided to the
11
Tribunal that development under the 1983 plan was confined to the east of the
12
1983 line, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
10:41:44 15
A
16
Q
In the Cherrywood area. 120
In the Cherrywood area which is what we are concerned about? Right.
121
Would you agree then, Mr. Murray, insofar as these lands are concerned or the
17
Monarch lands are concerned, that the position on the ground from 1983 before
18
the review of the plan took place was that the importance of the Southeastern
19
Motorway line in that location was that it determined the level of development.
10:42:05 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 122
22
So that any person who owned land, the further west they could move the line, the more land was available for development?
23
A
24
Q
Well that follows. 123
10:42:21 25
Yes. And indeed on that map, it can be seen that there is, there are two lines, the 1983 line and then a revised line.
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 124
Do you see that? But if we go back to the original question Mr. Murray which
28
related to DP90/123 and I think you have agreed that the line of the motorway
29
has been moved, isn't that right?
10:42:45 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:42:47
10:43:10
20 1
Q
125
Isn't that right? At 6937. Now, according to what had been established in the
2
19 -- stated in the 1983 plan, if DP90/123 had been adopted by the council,
3
Mr. Murray, the effect of that, on the Cherrywood lands and on the Monarch
4
Properties lands would have been the following, there would have been a town
5
centre zoning. Coloured red on the map, is that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 126
8 9 10:43:25 10
immediately adjacent to the town centre zoning. A Q
Yes. 127
11 A
13
Q
Yes. 128
14
And the balance of the lands within the Monarch take would have been zoned residential at normal densities.
10:43:38 15
A
16
Q
Either residential or amenity, recreation. 129
17
The only -- yes, that's the green area, the small green area, isn't that right, near Tully Church?
18
A
19
Q
It looks blue to me. 130
10:43:57 20
If you look at the outline of the Monarch lands, do you see that there's a kind of a dotted green area immediately south of the interchange between the
21
motorway and the Monarch lands, where the cursor is?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
10:44:18 25
Q
Yes. 131
That is in the vicinity of Tully Church, isn't that right? It's hard to read the map, it probably is.
132
26
A small portion of that green area abuts into the Monarch property lands on that map, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
10:44:34 30
There would have been a distributor road that was feeding into the Southeastern Motorway.
12
29
There would have been an area of industrial zoning on the Monarch lands
Yes. 133
So that what was being proposed by the planners in connection with the Carrickmines Valley but particularly for the Monarch property lands, was the following, a neighbourhood centre, an industrial area, increased residential www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:44:39
10:44:51
21 1
density to normal levels, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 134
And a small area of high amenity adjoining Tully Church, isn't that right? Yes.
135
Now, what had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission to the
6
council was summarised in a portion of the document at 6912, a detailed
7
document was provided to the planning officials of the council and set out at
8
paragraph 7.1, 7.12 and 7.13 were matters that were being sought by Monarch
9
consisted of 1, a neighbourhood structure of 5 to 6,000 persons stretching from
10:45:32 10
Cherrywood to Lehaunstown to Carrickmines Great with a local centre, shops
11
school and church, so that was seeking residential, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:45:44 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
What's the date on that please? 136
It's November 1989. Yes.
137
Isn't that right? Yes.
138
The second matter that was sought was a substantial commercial centre of ten
18
hectares to serve the southeast area of the site with direct access on to the
19
Wyattville Road extension?
10:45:58 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 139
22
hectares, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 140
10:46:13 25
Monarch had sought?
27
A
28
Q
10:46:32 30
Would it be fair to and correct me if I am wrong, Mr. Murray, that in DP90/123 that substantially, the council were giving Monarch or agreeing with what
26
29
And the third thing was a business or industrial park of 11 and a half
That's how it looks. 141
Isn't that right? And I want to draw to your attention what Mr. Eddie Sweeney said in statement to the Tribunal and Mr. Richard Lynn because Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney have stated in their statements and will tell the Tribunal that www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:46:37
10:46:54
22 1
they believed that the planners had accepted their submission and had adopted
2
it and produced a map which they brought to the council, do you agree with
3
that? That DP90/123 was partly as a result of a submission made by Monarch
4
Properties?
5
A
Well as I said at the beginning, I don't have any specific recollection of
6
taking their submission and implementing it in terms of bringing it into the
7
plan.
8
Q
142
9 10:47:16 10
Well Mr. Eddie Sweeney will tell the Tribunal apparently at page 2186 that the Monarch proposal --
A
Can I just say that my role in this particular part of the plan was of a
11
supervisory sort of a role and I didn't directly draw up in the draft of the
12
plan.
13
Q
143
14
explain it a moment Mr. Murray?
10:47:36 15
A
16
Q
17
A
Absolutely but it was drawn up by others and brought forward. 144
But you were the person who brought it to the council? If there was a link or connection between some submission that may have come in
18 19
Indeed, yes, but we will see how you come to speak to it to the councillors and
which and the plan itself, it's not a link that I was aware of. Q
145
10:48:06 20
Be that as it may, Mr. Murray, I mean you were the deputy planning officer at the time, isn't that correct?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 146
And when the map and the manager's report was brought to the councillors, you
23
were the person who was called upon by the manager to explain the contents of
24
the map and answer any queries arising from the councillors' considerations,
10:48:12 25
isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 147
Right. So that whoever might have prepared the map is really irrelevant
28
because you are the person who stood over the map before the councillors, isn't
29
that right?
10:48:22 30
A
It's not irrelevant if you are looking for a link between a submission and what www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:48:24
10:48:40
23 1 2
went on to the map. Q
148
I am not, I think you misunderstand me, Mr. Murray, I am not looking for any
3
link in relation to anything, I am trying to see whether or not when you have
4
considered the documents and you have looked at the map, whether you now at
5
this point in time accept that it would appear that the planners, for whatever
6
reason, accepted the submission that was made by Monarch and replicated that in
7
DP90/123?
8
A
You could take that, it would appear, yes. It would. I mean that's one
9 10:48:59 10
explanation of it, yes. Q
149
11 12
Is there another explanation you would like to offer to the Tribunal, Mr. Murray?
A
I don't know, as I say, I mean it's a question of fact whether there was a link
13
or not and I am saying to you is that I can't make that link, I didn't do that
14
part of the work.
10:49:12 15
Q
16
A
150
Yes. I stood over the final plan because I was a deputy planning officer and agreed
17
with it. But I mean the submissions, the likes of submissions that come in
18
from anybody, in those days there was piles of them, they just got buried and
19
if they were read once, that was it.
10:49:29 20
Q
151
But certainly insofar as Monarch were concerned at 2186, Mr. Murray, sorry not
21
Mr. Murray, Mr. Sweeney will tell the Tribunal in the second paragraph that the
22
Monarch proposals generally were accepted by the planners and were therefore
23
officially recommended by them to the county manager to be subsequently
24
reflected in his report to the council and I understand that Mr. Sweeney there
10:49:51 25
is talking about the submission that was made in 1989 which was subsequently
26 27
reflected in DP90/123? A
That's his view but as I said to you, I can't confirm to you whether or not
28 29 10:50:10 30
there was a direct link between the submission and the draft. Q
152
And indeed at 1384, Mr. Richard Lynn, whom I believe you would have met on a number of occasions, Mr. Murray, you would have met Mr. Lynn on a number of www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:50:15
10:50:27
24 1
occasions, is that right?
2
A
3
Q
That is right. 153
And Mr. Lynn will tell the Tribunal in the centre of that page, "A submission
4
was made to Dublin County Council proposed Draft Development Plan based on the
5
work of the above team and that submission was accepted by the county manager
6
and formed part of the manager's report to the council of October 1990, titled
7
the Carrickmines Valley action plan." Now, I suggest to you that the only
8
matter that Mr. Lynn could be discussing there is DP90/123 because that's the
9
only map and the report that goes with it that was brought to the council in
10:50:48 10
October 1990, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
I am confused now about Carrickmines Valley action plan. 154
1990. 155
10:51:03 15
Well the only matter that was brought to the council in 1990 in connection with the Cherrywood area was DP90/123 and the report that went with it, Mr. Murray,
16 17
Well leaving that --
isn't that right? A
That was part of the whole Development Plan review process, there was numerous
18
reports and numerous -- well maybe went on to -- I don't know the dates but
19
there were a lot of reports, it was an ongoing process, it wasn't the only
10:51:25 20
21
thing that was brought up. Q
156
Just in relation to the point that you made about the submission that was made
22
by Monarch Properties to Dublin County Council at 2952, Mr. Richard Lynn is
23
told by Mr. Fergal McCabe of Mr. McCabe's belief that the submission was being
24
considered seriously by the council. And I think indeed that there's
10:52:02 25
correspondence from the council saying that they had received the submission
26
and that it was being examined critically. Would you have seen the submission
27
at all, Mr. Murray?
28
A
29
Q
10:52:22 30
I must have I suppose but I have no specific recollection of it. 157
I think when the matter came before the council on the 16th November 1990, at 6949 and this was the second meeting to consider the Carrickmines Valley, the www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:52:35
10:52:56
25 1
proposals, the third paragraph, sorry the second paragraph under the heading
2
"Chairman", says "The proposals shown on DP90/123 were further explained by
3
Mr. Willie Murray and overhead slides illustrating the zoning of the area were
4
shown." Isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 158
7
So it would follow from that that you were explaining DP90/123 to the councillors?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 159
10:53:07 10
And I think at the earlier meeting, which had considered first considered the Carrickmines Valley was the meeting of the 18th October at 6930 and at 6934 of
11
that, in dealing with -- this is the report that explains DP90/123, you will
12
see there under the heading residential "development" that the lands zoned for
13
residential development would accommodate a population of 30,000 and it
14
represents an additional population and it talks about two shopping centres,
10:53:46 15
one at Ballyogan and a new one at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 160
And then at 6935 in the second last paragraph, it was recommended that the
18
approach be adopted and in the final paragraph "The manager indicated the
19
planning officer would prepare a supplementary report" and you provided that
10:54:06 20
report to the meeting of, we have already dealt with it, on the 16th November.
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 161
Would you agree, Mr. Murray, that it's likely that one of the factors that was
23
taken into account in formulating the proposals in connection with the
24
Carrickmines Valley were the submission made by Monarch Properties?
10:54:27 25
A
26
Q
It certainly looks like that. 162
27
development on all of the Monarch lands, is that right?
28
A
29
Q
10:54:44 30
The moving of the line of the motorway even on DP90/123 would have facilitated
Yes. 163
Because once they were to the east of the motorway line, according to what had been agreed in 1983, they were open for development, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:54:50
10:55:08
26 1
A
Well you know it would have to be agreed again, I mean that was, '83 was '83
2
and there was a line there and that was the line. A different line might cause
3
a different view to be taken by the council. Depending on other
4
considerations, it's not just simply a matter of where the line is.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
164
Yes but as people understood matters. If the same policy were to continue through, yes but it mightn't have.
165
But as matters stood at the time, in October 1990, the stated council position
8
following the making of the '83 plan until the '83 plan was actually changed,
9
was that development would stop at the line of the Southeastern Motorway?
10:55:30 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:55:40 15
Q
Yes, as shown on the '83 plan. 166
As shown on the '83 plan. It didn't say anything about moving it.
167
Correct. Or where the development would stop if it were moved, it's a different point.
168
Yes. But insofar as the Carrickmines Valley area was concerned and where the
16
Monarch lands are situate in particular, the position as far as those lands are
17
concerned, is that development would stop at the line of the motorway, at that
18
point in time?
19
A
The 1983 development was to stop at the line of the motorway which was in the
10:56:00 20
centre of the Monarch lands. If the motorway were to move, it's a different
21
planning story.
22
Q
23
A
169
Yes. There's no reasons to that development would move with it or not move with it.
24
Everything has to be considered at the time of making a plan. So the movement
10:56:15 25
of the motorway would give rise to consideration of what was the appropriate
26
land use in the vicinity. You can't say a policy was adopted in 1983 that
27
would automatically apply later on.
28
Q
29 10:56:36 30
170
No but what I am saying if the motorway wasn't moved, it was going to cut the Monarch lands in two, isn't that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:56:37
10:56:50
27 1
Q
171
It wasn't moved and whatever decision might be taken if that position were to
2
pertain, the existing position, if there was no change in the line of the
3
motorway, was that development would stop at the line of the motorway.
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 172
Right. So one or two things would have to happen, there would either have to
6
be a change of the policy in of the council in relation to the development west
7
of the motorway or there would have to be a move in the line of the motorway?
8
A
9
Q
10:57:07 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 173
And in DP90/123, the line of the motorway was moved? Yes.
174
And that would, if it had been implemented, if DP90/123 had been adopted by the
12
council and accepted as an appropriate draft plan to put on display, that map
13
would have benefited land owners, including Monarch, isn't that right?
14
A
That's right, not only did the motorway move on that map but the policy of
10:57:27 15
stopping development at the motorway was abandoned.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
10:57:39 20
Q
175
But that wasn't accepted by the council, isn't that right? That's correct, that's correct.
176
And it was rejected in December of 1990. That's correct.
177
And the decision that was made by the council was recorded at 6953 and at the
21
bottom of that, the motion that was successful which was that the draft
22
development for 1990 be prepared on the basis of limiting zoning development
23
east to the Southeastern Motorway proposed line and then it sets out certain
24
other matters that are taken into account, but effectively but would you agree,
10:58:10 25
Mr. Murray, that was a rejection of DP90/123?
26
A
27
Q
Oh yes. 178
And the council having come up with DP90/123 is now being instructed to prepare
28
a map based on the 1983 plan and take account of developments that have
29
actually occurred?
10:58:25 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:58:25
10:58:41
28 1
Q
179
2
noted by the council, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 180
5 A
7
Q
Yes. 181
8
10:58:59 10
A Q
Yes. 182
A
13
Q
Yes. 183
14
And again, can I just draw to your attention that on this map which is entitled "adjustments to the 1983 plan to form basis of 1991 draft" do you see that?
10:59:23 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 184
17
And that would have been in accordance with the instruction that was given in December 1990, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
With the motion, yes. 185
10:59:34 20
Now, what adjustment is being taken account of there, can you explain, Mr. Murray, that moves the line of the motorway off the Monarch lands?
A
Well, there's a revised line for motorway shown which moves the motorway off
22
the Monarch lands. Q
186
24
Yes. Just looking at that map, the motorway line that bisects the Monarch lands is the 1983 line, isn't that right?
10:59:58 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 187
27
And there is then a broken black line which is described as revised line for motorway.
28
A
29
Q
11:00:09 30
And I will show you an extract of that which relates to the subject lands at 7019. And the lands outlined in red are the Monarch lands.
12
23
Which is at 7018. And this again covers the Carrickmines Valley, isn't that right?
11
21
Yes. However in May of 1991, another planning map was prepared for the area DP90/129A, isn't that right?
6
9
And that map I think was presented to the council in January of 1991 and was
Yes. 188
And it commences outside the Monarch lands at a junction further back, isn't that right, at the top of the map? www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:00:16
11:00:26
29 1
A
2
Q
It, it -189
3
It leaves the '83 line and rejoins the '83 line at a point beneath the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 190
6
Would it be fair to and correct me if I am wrong, that what that line appears to be doing is moving the motorway off the Monarch lands?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
It does move the motorway off the Monarch lands. 191
Yes. Why was that suggested as a line, can you remember, Mr. Murray? No, I can't, I can remember that there were a lot of studies being done by the
11:00:48 10
roads department in relation to the appropriate line for the motorway based on
11
all of the transportation objectives that they wanted to achieve with the
12
motorway and based on how it might link back to Dun Laoghaire and based on the
13
sort of landscape it was going through and the effect it would have on that
14
landscape.
11:01:06 15
So I don't know precisely where the dotted line came from in or who it came
16
from but it would have been generated internally in the county council by the
17
roads department.
18
Q
192
19
planning officer for this area at that time.
11:01:23 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 193
22 A
24
Q
Yes. 194
11:01:35 25
And you would have known, I assume, that the owner of the adjoining lands was Mr. Galvin, who -- the lands subsequently became known as the golf course
26
lands, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
11:01:50 30
You would have known at this stage that the owner of the lands outlined in red were Monarch Properties.
23
29
Well you would have known the area, isn't that right, you were the deputy
Yes. 195
And correct me if I am wrong but what has occurred on this map which emanated from the planning department of Dublin County Council was to move the line of the motorway or the revised line of the motorway off Monarch Properties's lands www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:01:56
11:02:14
30 1
and put it on to the Galvin's lands?
2
A
3
Q
That's is the result of the revision that was made to the motorway line, yes. 196
4
Monarch Properties on the one hand and Mr. Galvin on the other hand?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
And others, yes. 197
But the two largest landowners were affected, isn't that right? Yes.
198
9
And it follows does it not, that what would have a beneficial effect on one mighty equally have a detrimental effect on the other?
11:02:29 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 199
12
Because if the line of the motorway was going to cut through Mr. Galvin's lands it was going to have an effect on his plans for the government course?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 200
11:02:40 15
But what this map is suggesting is a revised line for the motorway which has the effect of moving the motorway, be it a notional line or otherwise off the
16
Monarch Properties lands and into Mr. Galvin's lands?
17
A
18
Q
That's the effect of it. Yes. 201
19 11:02:57 20
So that the two landowners who were directly affected by this change are
And can you give any reason to the Tribunal why that decision would have been made by the planning department in May of 1991?
A
The decision arose out of a revised road line as being the appropriate road
21
line at that particular time reflecting the current thinking in the roads
22
department. It's not even how it ended up. It moved further up and it's
23
constructed now further out. It was a very movable feast at that time and
24
could have gone anywhere. It at one stage it went down right down parallel to
11:03:20 25
the N11 and very close to. There were numerous lines throughout those years
26
and that was just the current one at that time which we were asked to
27
incorporate.
28
Q
29
A
11:03:33 30
Q
202
Who asked you to incorporate it? Well that line would have come from the roads department.
203
But certainly looking at the map in its simplest form, it really only affects www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:03:37
11:03:46
31 1
two landowners?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
It has the effect you describe definitely but that's not the cause. 204
The cause is considerations of road design. 205
206
I am not suggesting that they do but this is a map that comes from the planning department, isn't that right?
A
The map but it's made up of inputs from others and the revised line of the
11:04:00 10
11
Well what consideration? The planners don't draw motorways.
8 9
What is the cause?
motorway could have come from nobody except the county engineer. Q
207
The second thing that's happening there and this is a planning matter and you
12
might be able to assist in in relation to that, Mr. Murray, there's a change
13
proposed there of a change in zoning density effectively, it's not a change,
14
it's only from AS/1 to AP?
11:04:19 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 208
And the AS/1 is residential septic tank one house to the acre. Yes, is there a key?
209
19
Not on this map unfortunately, but I can get you a key off the '83 plan but S/1 was septic tank one house to the acre.
11:04:37 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 210
22
And then the change that is proposed is AP which is residential, pipe on piped, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 211
11:04:49 25
And the density on the legend and I will goat you the legend is four houses to the acre or ten houses to the hectare which I understand was regarded as low
26
density?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:05:00 30
Q
Yes. 212
If you go north on that map, you see a second AS/1 to AP, do you see that? Yes.
213
And these lands are all of the lands that were zoned residential in the '83 www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:05:04
11:05:16
32 1
plan, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 214
4
tank to piped sewerage for the Carrickmines Valley?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 215
7
And that arose I suggest as a result of the decision to bring the, the upgrade of the Shanganagh sewer and the advent of the Carrickmines sewer scheme.
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 216
11:05:30 10
11
So what was being proposed by the planning department was a change from septic
Can you indicate on that map, if you could Mr. Murray, where across the Monarch lands the sewer pipe was going to go.
A
From recollection, I think it goes up the valley which is the dotted line on
12
the right hand side, close to it there, a bit to the left. I think that's
13
roughly the line of the -- roughly, you go north from there through the peak, a
14
dotted line going northwards.
11:05:54 15
Q
16
A
217
The motorway line. No, inside it, it goes through the top corner, that one yes, I think that's the
17
valley, the Carrickmines Valley, it's hard to read the map but it ran I think
18
up the Carrickmines Valley.
19
Q
11:06:12 20
A
21
Q
218
And it was to go all the way, would it also served the northern lands? Yes.
219
So that if one takes the cursor and goes the whole way up the north, would it
22
have continued in a somewhat straight line and served the northern portion of
23
the lands?
24
A
11:06:25 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Up as far as about there and it swings off to the west. 220
Swings off -- From where? Somewhere around where the cursor is there.
221
28
But was it designed to serve the northern lands which were also being changed from AS/1 to AP?
29
A
11:06:39 30
Q
Oh yes. 222
So that it was intended that all of those lands be serviced by the Carrickmines www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:06:43
11:06:50
33 1
sewer?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes and a great deal of other land also. 223
That's right. 224
6
And was the genesis of this entire pipeline the decision to rezone the Ballyogan lands?
7
A
8
Q
Was the genesis of -225
9
The introduction of the Carrickmines sewer, Mr. Murray, and the opening up of this land for development arose as a result of a decision to develop the
11:07:08 10
11
And the sewer was to swing west to serve the Ballyogan lands, is that right?
Ballyogan lands, is that right, a commitment to develop the Ballyogan lands? A
In part, there were other lands that were zoned which were not serviced, there
12
were a lot of land serviced by way of pumped systems, this is my recollection
13
of it and that was undesirable. And the strategic decision was made to provide
14
a new mains sewer and a new main treatment works.
11:07:32 15
Q
226
16 17
And just in relation to the sewer and the treatment works, was that a capital cost, that was going to be a capital cost, is that right? To the council?
A
Well no, I don't think entirely to the council. I wouldn't be clear on how
18
those things were financed but there was certainly an element of finance from
19
the department.
11:07:51 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
227
Whatever it was called then, Environment and Local Government. 228
23 24
A
That's my recollection of it, I wouldn't be the expert now in relation to that, they would be matters for the county engineer.
Q
229
27
But you, this map would have been changed in the planning department because of the imminence of the development of the Carrickmines sewer.
28
A
29
Q
11:08:29 30
And for large scale infrastructural developments at that time, the department would have had an input in the provision of money, is that right?
11:08:11 25
26
What department was that?
Oh, yes. 230
That's what led to the change to piped sewerage, even though the pipe wasn't in place. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:08:29
11:08:39
34 1
A
2
Q
Oh yes, yes. 231
And the effect of that, would it be fair to, it would have been accepted and
3
understood once the sewer went in, all of the lands were going to be opened up
4
for development?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
All of -232
The Carrickmines Valley lands that were zoned residential. Yes.
233
9
And if the 1983, if the line had been changed for the Southeastern Motorway in accordance with the broken line that's outlined on DP90/129A, that would have
11:08:55 10
meant that all of Monarch's lands could have been zoned residential up as far
11
as that line.
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 234
14
Now, I think that that was approved by the council in May of 1991, Mr. Murray, isn't that right?
11:09:07 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 235
And it went out on the first public display as the map at 7021. Now, the
17
yellow lands were all of the residentially zoned lands up to the 1983 line and
18
they have now been changed, you will see, to AP, isn't that right?
19
A
11:09:40 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I will just get to grips with it. 236
Mr. Kavanagh will increase and you will see that it's AP. Yes.
237
And that was piped, residential on piped sewerage, isn't that right? AP, yes.
238
11:10:01 25
And the balance of the Monarch lands which are west of the motorway line are zoned agriculture.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:10:15 30
A
Yes. 239
Now, I think a submission was made by Monarch Properties to the plan -That's west of the '83 motorway line.
240
That's correct. But not the then current one. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:10:17
11:10:32
35 1
Q
241
Not the then, no, because you will see again on that map as you point out on
2
that map that the line of the motorway has moved again even slightly further
3
west, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 242
6 7
will become the golf course lands? A
Well, it hasn't become the golf course lands. It's zoned B at the moment,
8 9
Now, it's completely traversing the golf course lands, isn't that right? What
there was a proposal for a golf course at that time. Q
243
11:10:52 10
Yes and it became on objective of the council in the making of the 1993 plan that those lands would be used for public golf course, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That's right. 244
And I think that was passed unanimously by the council but what has happened to
13
the proposed line of the motorway, is that it has moved further away from the
14
Monarch lands, if I can put it in its simplest terms?
11:11:09 15
A
16
Q
Perhaps, marginally, yes. 245
17
Again there's also provision, again it's a notional line for the Wyattville link, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 246
11:11:22 20
Cutting through the Monarch lands and that would have provided a link from the N11 down to the motorway.
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 247
23
And that again would have provided access, isn't that right, on to the motorway from the Monarch lands?
24
A
11:11:31 25
Q
If they were getting an access to it, yes, very likely. 248
Now, I think a submission was made by Monarch Properties to the Development
26
Plan and in summary what was sought is set out at 7039 and what Monarch sought
27
was that the designation of AP be altered to A1/PS, in other words to ordinary
28
development densities.
29
A
11:11:59 30
Q
Yes. 249
And because AP was low density as it then was, isn't that right, Mr. Murray, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:12:07
11:12:26
36 1
the second, the zoning zonal boundary between the present residentially lands
2
to the east and the agricultural zoned lands to the west be altered to the line
3
shown on the attached map and then that a new objective to put in a town centre
4
facility or district centre facility be included in the location shown on the
5
attached map and I think that location ultimately became the location of the
6
town centre, 7042. You will see the area marked C in the centre of that map
7
was the area that ultimately became the town centre and that was what was
8
sought.
9 11:12:47 10
A Q
Oh yes. 250
11
Now, I think that the matter effectively came back in before the council in May of 1992, isn't that right, Mr. Murray?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 251
14
And there were a number of motions but the first matter that was dealt with was a modification or changes that were proposed by the manager and that is the map
11:13:07 15
at DP92/44 which is page 7203. I am going to show you the original copy of
16
7203, Ms. O' Raw please. (map handed to witness)
17
This map, Mr. Murray, was the map that was produced by the manager, isn't that
18
right? And this map is described as proposed zoning and motorway changes on
19
maps 26 and 27, 1991 Draft Development Plan.
11:14:00 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 252
Now, can I suggest to you, Mr. Murray, looking at the map and if we could just
22
have the map back on screen please, looking at the map that the main changes
23
that are suggested by this map affect in the main, only the lands owned by
24
Monarch Properties.
11:14:29 25
A
Can I take a step backwards, I'm just not quite sure, are you saying this map
26
was presented to the council?
27
Q
28
A
253
I don't know, I can't confirm that, it doesn't look like it's in a finished
29 11:14:40 30
Yes.
state such as would be presented to the council, it may well have been. Q
254
Yes, if you look at 7207 which will come up on screen beside you now, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:14:46
11:15:08
37 1
Mr. Murray. And you will see there proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded
2
by Councillor McGrath that "The manager's report and the proposed amendments to
3
the draft plan recommended therein and shown on DP92/44" and it sets out what
4
those changes are and "was put to the council" and as happens lost, and if you
5
go back to the map the original of which is in front of you and a copy of which
6
is on screen at 7203, you will note you are looking at DP92/44, isn't that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. It didn't look finished to me. 255
11:15:28 10
The report did say if they were prepared to accept it, proper maps would be drawn on foot of it. But looking at it now, Mr. Murray, is it fair to say that
11
the substantial portions of the changes on this map are directed towards the
12
lands of Monarch Properties.
13
A
14
Q
11:15:42 15
A
16
Q
The substantial changes? 256
Yes. Occur on those lands, yes.
257
Well we know from the earlier map that we looked at that there were northern
17
lands that are also zoned residential which are not apparently subject to any
18
change by the manager on this map, isn't that right?
19
A
That's right.
11:15:58 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon, would it be possible for Mr. Murray, if you put up
22
7039, the 1991 plan, the one that went out on the first public display, if they
23
could go up side by side if possible.
24 11:16:12 25
26
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Murray could work off the original he has in front of him and
he has that and we will work off the 7039 on screen please.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
now.
Just in fairness to himself, the point you are making to him
11:16:35 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:16:35
11:17:04
38 1
Q
258
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, 7021. You see on screen beside you, Mr. Murray, at 7021,
2
these are the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley that were
3
residentially zoned in 1983 and which as a result of DP90/129A are now zoned AP
4
and they went out on the first public display.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 259
The manager bring before the council through the planning department changes
7
that he proposes to the 1991 map and they are contained on map 92/44 which you
8
have in front of you?
9 11:17:13 10
A Q
Yes. 260
Now, what I had asked you was this, would you agree that the main change, the
11
substantial thrust of DP92/44 is directed towards the Monarch Properties'
12
lands?
13
A
14
Q
Just can I clarify what changes you are talking about? 261
11:17:41 15
Well the suggestion that the zoning density would be changed from AP to A1P encompasses in the main the Monarch property lands and not the balance of the
16
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley, isn't that correct?
17
A
18
Q
That's correct, yes. 262
19
In fact if you look at the map that's on screen to your left, which is 7021 I think, you will see that all of the lands coloured yellow is zoned residential
11:17:59 20
and if you go back to look at DP92/44 you will see that the changes proposed by
21
the manager to changing the density from AP to A1P relate substantially only to
22
the Monarch lands?
23
A
Perhaps I will clarify, I am not sure what you mean when you say change in the
24
density. AP was to be four to the acre on piped services. A1P is the same
11:18:28 25
density as far as I recollect, four to the acre but that the lands must be
26
subject to action area plan. That's the implication of the one.
27
Q
28
A
263
So all -- to the extent that the Monarch lands are affected, it means that the
29 11:18:54 30
And that action area plan --
lands within the Cherrywood area are to be the subject of an action area plan. Q
264
And the action area plan will make provision for retail, neighbourhood www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:18:58
11:19:07
39 1
facilities, shopping, schools, houses, matters such as that sort?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
That's correct. 265
Yes. 266
6
It will be prepared by the planners and it will come back into the council to be approved, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 267
9 11:19:19 10
And it will come back into the council for approval?
There's no provision in this map for the northern lands to be subject to an area action plan?
A
No, the view is taken at that point that the area between the valley to the
11
north and the N11 and the Brides Glen and the motorway was a reasonably
12
discrete area and should be subject to its own local area plan and that was the
13
view at that point.
14
Q
268
11:19:44 15
On DP92/44 the small area to the west of the map, the change that's being proposed there is from B to AP, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:19:54 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 269
That's not a change for action area plan, is that right? That's right.
270
And that's again outside the Monarch take. Yes.
271
And again, if I can ask you just to confirm that what the manager is also
22
proposing is to move again the notional 1983 line somewhat further west and to
23
rezone the lands that were agriculture to A1P again.
24
A
11:20:16 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
That's the, yes, yes. 272
And -It's the first line that you come across to the left of the old line, yes.
273
And the effect of that would have been to leave Monarch with a reduced amount
28
of agriculturally zoned land and an increased amount of residentially zoned
29
land, is that right?
11:20:32 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:20:32
11:20:43
40 1
Q
274
2
subject to an action area plan?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 275
5
And the action area plan would have -- the planners would have created a plan which would have had to come back into the councillors for their approval.
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 276
8 9
All of which residentially zoned land was going to be, if this was passed,
And the councillors when the action area plan came back into them could have made any changes they liked?
A
11:20:53 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 277
Isn't that the position? Yes.
278
So that effectively, if this had been passed and it's adopted and accepted by
13
the council, the Monarch lands would have been opted out, as it were, of the
14
1993 review.
11:21:08 15
A
Well the zoning would have been fixed at A1 and the detail of the further
16
development of the detail of the lands use for the area wouldn't take place in
17
that plan.
18
Q
19
A
11:21:23 20
Q
279
That's right. Would have been done afterwards.
280
Yes and it would have allowed for the council or it would have allowed for the
21
council after the 1993 plan was made, everybody would have known that there was
22
going to be a reconsideration or an immediate reconsideration of the Monarch
23
lands.
24
A
If that had been passed, there would have been local area plan, or action area
11:21:43 25
26
plan prepared, yes. Q
281
27
was lost?
28
A
29
Q
11:21:59 30
That in the event was unsuccessful, isn't that correct, Mr. Murray, the vote
Right. 282
And the council did not accept the manager's changes, isn't that right? You will have seen that in the documentation but they did approve a motion by www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:22:03
11:22:21
41 1
Councillor Barrett at 7175 please. And Councillor Barrett's motion encompassed
2
all of the residentially zoned lands in the Cherrywood area on map 27, isn't
3
that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 283
6
And Councillor Barrett's motion which was passed was a motion to confine the density of those lands at one house to the acre?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 284
9
Now, can I ask you this, Mr. Murray, as a professional planner: That went out on the second public display and representations were made about it and it came
11:22:44 10
back in for final consideration by the councillors in November of 1993. If
11
that motion, when a vote was brought in November 1993 seeking to confirm that
12
change and that motion was lost, what was the effect of losing the motion from
13
your point of view, what would the map have been, do you understand the point
14
I'm making?
11:23:12 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
This map shows one to the acre. 285
As per the motion. 286
19 A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:23:34 25
Q
Can we see that one? 287
The motion? Yes.
288
It's November 1993. And the map.
289
26
Yes. The 7174 no, you are looking for the motion seeking to confirm the change in November 1993.
27
A
28
Q
11:24:08 30
It went out on public display, the second display at one to the acre. A motion was brought seeking to confirm the change.
11:23:27 20
29
One to the acre. And --
The one you are asking me about and the map. 290
Yes. The motion is at 7224. Now, the first part of that is the motion, "Dublin County Council resolves that the lands referred to as change 3 on map 27 be confirmed as low density housing" and change 3 on map 27 can be seen on www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:24:15
11:24:41
42 1
7218. Sorry, 7217. Now, you will see in the centre of the yellow lands there,
2
3.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 291
5
successful passing of Mr. Barrett's motion.
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 292
8 9
A Q
11
A
12
Q
Right. 293
294
A
If the motion to change what went on display was lost, well then it would have been what went on display which was one to the acre.
Q
295
17
It went on display on the first public display, the second -- this is the second public display.
18
A
19
Q
It would be the second public display has it at one to the acre, is that right. 296
11:25:32 20
Has it as one to the acre and that is lost and not confirmed, what takes its place?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:25:41 25
A
26
Q
It would revert. 297
So what had gone on display in 1991, the first public display? Yes.
298
Which would have been four to the acre. Yes.
299
27
It wouldn't have reverted as I think Mr. Barrett suggested yesterday to what had been on the map in 1983?
A
No, no, what went on display first was the draft plan which if it was not to be
29 11:25:56 30
Now, if no other motion had been brought, Mr. Murray, what would the status of those lands have been in the '93 plan?
11:25:12 15
28
And that was lost? Right.
13
16
And that went on public display and there was then a motion brought by Councillors Buckley and Misteil to confirm change 3.
11:24:53 10
14
And change 3 was the change in density brought about as a result of the
changed would become the plan. Q
300
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:25:57
11:26:09
43 1
A
2
Q
So if it's not changed by this process, well then it would become the plan. 301
3
The sequence here was that the 1991 draft plan had it at four to the acre in the first public display.
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 302
6
As a result of Councillor Barrett's motion, the second public display it's one to the acre, the confirming motion is lost.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 303
9
And if there had been no other motion, you say it would have reverted to the 1991 draft of four to the acre.
11:26:23 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 304
And it would not have reverted to the 1983 plan. That's correct.
305
14
Can I just show you very briefly, Mr. Murray, the motion that was brought in November 1993 at 7227 please. This is the map attached to a motion and I will
11:26:46 15
she you the text in a minute, would you agree the outline of those lands are
16
the Monarch lands?
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 306
19
And the motion is at 7226. And this motion seeks to accept the county manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands
11:27:03 20
outlined in red on at attached map and the attached map are the Monarch lands
21
only, is that right, you have just seen it?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:27:16 25
Q
Yes. 307
And that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare. Yes.
308
The effect of that motion and what that motion was seeking, Mr. Murray, was to
26
rezone the Monarch lands at four to the acre and the balance of the
27
residentially zoned lands at one to the acre?
28
A
29
Q
11:27:31 30
Yes. 309
Isn't that right? Looking at the plan from your knowledge and experience of the location, what are the reasons that would justify making such a distinction www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:27:36
11:27:57
44 1 2
in the residentially zoned lands? A
I couldn't, I wouldn't come up with any reasons to make a distinction like
3 4
that. Q
310
If you look at the map at 7217 and these are the residentially zoned lands in
5
the Carrickmines Valley and from your knowledge of the area, are there any
6
reasons that would justify a zoning of four to the acre for the Monarch lands
7
and that the balance of those lands at one to the acre?
8
A
9
Q
No. 311
11:28:19 10
I think you would agree, I think what happened and you have seen it from the documents and you would know this, that these lands were zoned at the Monarch
11
lands were zoned at four to the acre and the balance of the lands were zoned at
12
one to the acre in the 1983 plan, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 312
11:28:35 15
And I think also as a result of a motion brought by Councillor Gilmore A district centre zoning was achieved an a portion of the lands.
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 313
18
And I think that the manager was not in favour of the district centre zoning, is that right?
19
A
11:28:49 20
Q
I don't know that, I don't know the answer to that. 314
I think in May I think the manager had said in May -- sorry, when they came
21
into the confirming meeting, the manager I think had recommended that the
22
amendment be deleted at 7265.
23
A
24
Q
11:29:26 25
That's the Gilmore's motion? 315
Yes, this is when it came back in for the confirming meeting and the manager is giving his report in relation to the rezoning, he recommends the amendment be
26
deleted and the amendment of course is the amendment putting the town centre on
27
the lands, isn't that right?
28
A
I think what was proposed there was a town centre, what the manager was saying
29
only retail of a neighbourhood centre scale should be allowed so to put a bald
11:29:49 30
town centre zoning on would be inappropriate. Without any kind of limitation www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:29:55
11:30:05
45 1 2
on the retail. Q
316
3 4
isn't that right? A
There was an amendment there then and the manager would have withdrawn an
5
objection at that point.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:30:15 10
And that amendment was in fact I think adopted by the councillors and accepted,
Q
317
And the effect of that was to cap the retail element at neighbourhood size. Yes.
318
And that became an objective in fact in the written statement. Yes.
319
Now, would it be fair to, Mr. Murray, arising out of what happened in the
11
course of the review of the Development Plan that the best chance that Monarch
12
had of maximising their potential in relation to the lands was DP90/123 had it
13
been accepted?
14
A
11:30:40 15
Q
The best chance? 320
16 17
Yes. In other words the most benefit would have accrued to the Monarch lands if DP90/123 had been accepted?
A
You can't just say that. I mean DP90 had the motorway thing going through,
18
just south, off their lands. From a strategic point of view, that whole area
19
was always an area which proper planning and development would require to be
11:31:06 20
zoned and developed at normal densities and for a range of uses. And that's
21
why DP90/123 came along. And their best bet, Monarch's best bet I suppose in
22
terms of what happened subsequently, would have been if that had gone through,
23
yes, if that's what you are asking me.
24
Q
321
11:31:37 25
That was the question. I mean the most advantageous plan that was put forward from Monarch's point of view in the review of the 1938 plan was DP90/123, the
26
zoning was normal zoning density, it had industrial zoning, it had town centre
27
zoning and it had no Southeastern Motorway, isn't that right?
28
A
29
Q
11:31:59 30
That's right. 322
And when that was unsuccessful, in other words when the councillors did not accept that, it followed that there had to be a second approach by Monarch, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:32:04
11:32:17
46 1
isn't that right? They then had to make a submission to the Development Plan.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
They did, yes. 323
Yes, that's the process. 324
And that's what happened. Yes.
325
Isn't that right? Well, you said to have motions prepared, I don't know if they had them prepared
9 11:32:27 10
And then it became necessary to have motions prepared by councillors.
but they were certainly prepared. Q
326
11
Motions that affected the Monarch lands both for and against were brought before the council in May of 1992, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 327
14
And had the motion that, let's say the pro Monarch motion been successful, it would have had a certain effect but it wasn't successful, isn't that right?
11:32:44 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 328
And would it be fair to that the last chance of salvaging anything for Monarch
17
Properties arose when the matter came back in before the council to be
18
confirmed in November 1993?
19
A
11:32:58 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 329
Isn't that right? Yes.
330
23
At that stage, they had to get whatever they could, they had to claw back whatever they could, isn't that right?
24
A
11:33:09 25
Q
I imagine so, yes. 331
26
Because if they didn't, they were going to be left with one house to the acre on the 1993 plan.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:33:19 30
Q
Yes. 332
And any change in connection with that would require a material contravention? Or a variation.
333
Or a variation but a material contravention would require a 75 percent majority www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:33:25
11:33:33
47 1
of the council, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 334
4
And whereas a vote on a Development Plan is a simple majority vote, a vote of one will do you, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 335
So that it became essential for Monarch to ensure insofar as they could that
7
what had happened in May of 1992 with Mr. Barrett's motion was not replicated
8
in November 1993 when the matter came back in before the council.
9 11:33:50 10
A Q
Yes. 336
Can I ask you finally, Mr. Murray, about what you know about the making of the
11
area action plan, you will have heard Mr. Quinn talking about with Mr. McCabe
12
earlier this morning about the action area plan in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
13
County Council in early 1994. And can you tell the Tribunal what you recollect
14
of the making of that action area plan?
11:34:28 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Of the making of it, how the lines were drawn on the map? 337
I think there was an objective in the Development Plan to prepare one. 338
19
to map 27. And if we have 7280 please. These are the special objectives in
21
relation to map 27, isn't that right? A
I must have been mistaken in relation to that then. I don't, then the answer
23 24
is I don't recall how work was commenced or why work was commenced. Q
339
11:35:27 25
Yes. Did you have any discussions with anybody from Monarch Properties as to the making of an action area plan or how an action area plan might arise in the
26
new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
27
A
28
Q
29 11:35:49 30
Just one second. To be fair to yourself, Mr. Murray, I am not at all sure that that in fact is correct, I will just get you the written statement in relation
11:34:53 20
22
No, no. How it came to be that there was an action area plan in early 1994?
I can't, I don't recall. 340
The 1993 Development Plan was made or confirmed on the 10th December 1993, is that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:35:50
11:36:02
48 1
Q
341
2
And in January of 1994, old Dublin County Council split into three local authority areas, is that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 342
There was Fingal, South Dublin and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council? Yes.
343
7
And you became at that stage the planning officer for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 344
11:36:12 10
And Mr. O' Sullivan became the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 345
13
And you had both previously within the planning officer designate and the manager designate, isn't that right?
14
A
11:36:21 15
Q
Yes. 346
And would it be fair to that this land in the Carrickmines Valley was one of
16
the last undeveloped pieces of land within Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
17
Council?
18
A
Well one of the last undeveloped and with access to new sewerage facilities,
19 11:36:41 20
yes. Q
347
And there were a number of matters that were going to be important in relation
21
to developing any of that land, one was the introduction and actual
22
implementation of the Carrickmines sewer?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 348
11:36:59 25
And that would require an input from the department of the environment in relation to the provision of money?
26
A
27
Q
That's my recollection. Yeah. 349
28
In determining the speed of the matter could be implemented, the quicker you got the money, the quicker the sewer was going to built?
29
A
11:37:12 30
Q
I would imagine so, it wasn't my area. 350
And The other item that was going to be important was determine the line of the www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:37:16
11:37:27
49 1
motorway?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 351
In the making of the 1993 plan, the council had unanimously adopted a
4
resolution and indeed it became part of the statement that, it became an
5
objective of the council to develop a golf course on the lands at Lehaunstown?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:37:38 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 352
And they were the Sean Galvin lands, isn't that right? Yes.
353
And those lands joined immediately the Monarch property lands. Yes.
354
12
And a movement of the motorway line off Monarch Properties lands was going to bring it into Mr. Galvin's lands?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 355
11:37:53 15
And vice versa, if you were take it go off Mr. Galvin's lands, it was either going into the Monarch Properties --
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:38:07 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 356
-- was a westerly line, it was even further west than Mr. Galvin's lands. Well the bit we are talk being, it may still have been on his lands.
357
Yes but not cutting it in two? Cut can it in some fraction.
358
Yes, so there would have been certain competing interests that would have to be
22
balanced, is that right? By the planners in approaching this, you have a
23
stated objectivity of the public golf course and you have the residential
24
development with the town centre of on it, both of them brought in under the
11:38:29 25
1993 plan, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 359
28
And the line of the south eastern motorway was going to be an important determinant in deciding how things were going to progress in the area?
29
A
11:38:41 30
Q
Yes. 360
Right. And at that stage was is still the position that development would stop www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:38:43
11:38:46
50 1
at the line of the motorway, Mr. Murray?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
In that particular location? 361
Yes. Yes.
362
6
So that it was still the council position that once the line was fixed and built, there would be no development to the west of that line?
7
A
8
Q
I don't know was it explicit but it was a fact, yes. 363
9
And that was the understanding of the planning department, isn't that right, in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
11:39:05 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 364
And in a way when one looks at it and looking back at it, is that the more land
12
available for actual development would have had a knock-on effect for revenue
13
for the council, is that right?
14
A
11:39:23 15
Q
Revenue in terms of levies? 365
Yes. So the more houses you build, the more industry you brought in, the more
16
development there was, then the more revenue stream would be created for the
17
council?
18
A
That's right but there were also costs involved. If the revenue was to meet
19 11:39:41 20
costs, it's not just pure revenue. Q
366
No, no. I mean accepting all of that, but I mean it's a cause and effect, you
21
ever going to have to put a very expensive sewer through the Carrickmines
22
Valley, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 367
11:39:54 25
Zoning at one house to the acre was unlikely to pay for that by way of development levies?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct. 368
28
Therefore the increase in density that would follow would have assisted in paying for the sewer, if I can put it at its simplest?
29
A
11:40:04 30
Q
Yes. 369
There were certain infrastructural matters that had been set out as five year www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:40:09
11:40:22
51 1
proposals such as the Wyattville Road and the Southeastern Motorway in the 1993
2
plan, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 370
And they were going to have to be paid for, isn't that right? Yes.
371
One of the sources of revenue for the council would have been development. Yes.
372
9
So the council itself would have had some interest in the line of the motorway as being the end line for development, isn't that right?
11:40:32 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 373
Because the more development you got to the east of the line, the better you
12
were in a position to balance your books by way of paying for the
13
infrastructural developments.
14
A
11:40:45 15
Q
Well, yes I suppose so. 374
It's simple, isn't it. Now, I think that in January of 1994, in fact the 6th
16
January 1994 at 4923, you are recorded here, Mr. Murray, as informing
17
Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lafferty of Monarch Properties Limited under the heading 2,
18
where it says "zoning action plan" and I wrote "Willie Murray stated he would
19
expect to have the action plan complete in approximately two months time and it
11:41:16 20
would draw attention to the anomaly of the B zonings, the recommendation would
21
be that this be changed to AP zoning."
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 375
24
Well first of all, would you agree you must have had a meeting on the 6th of January 1994 with Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lafferty?
11:41:36 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 376
27
And that you appear there to be telling them there's going to be an action plan and you will have it ready in two months?
28
A
29
Q
11:41:46 30
You see that?
Yes. 377
Isn't that right? And that you are going to draw the attention to the anomaly of the B zoning. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:41:47
11:42:11
52 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 378
And an action plan was prepared, isn't that right, by April of 1994? Yes.
379
And I think that is at 2722 and I just want to draw to your attention in the
5
report that speaks to that map, Mr. Murray, at 7473, just on the last paragraph
6
there, the report notes "Two areas of land located between the proposed
7
motorway and residentially zoned land and totalling 26.4 hectares are presently
8
zoned partly B agriculture and partly G high amenity. It is considered this
9
zoning is now somewhat anomalous and these lands should be further examined and
11:42:37 10
they are shown for future consideration on the action plan."
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 380
Now, I am drawing to your attention there the use of the words anomalous
13
together with the earlier record of you informing Mr. Lafferty and Mr. Sweeney
14
at 4923, that the report would draw attention to the anomaly of the B zoning
11:43:00 15
and the recommendation would be that these would be changed to AP.
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 381
And then if you look at the map at 2722 please, and can I ask you, were the
18
lands that you were talking about, the lands within the take of Monarch
19
Properties which are zoned agriculture immediately adjoining the residentially
11:43:24 20
zoned lands to the south of the picture and then the agricultural lands
21
adjoining the residentially zoned lands in the centre of the picture?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 382
24
So what you were acknowledging in January of 1994 to Monarch Properties was that you felt or it was your opinion that that zoning was anomalous and that
11:43:47 25
the zoning should be changed?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 383
28
Notwithstanding the decision in December of 1993 by the councillors that the zoning should be agriculture.
29
A
11:43:59 30
Q
Not withstanding it? 384
Yes, I mean the decision had been made in December 1993 by the councillors that www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:44:03
11:44:14
53 1
the zoning on that land would be a portion of it residential and a portion of
2
it agriculture, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
That's right. 385
5
that the agricultural zoning should be changed to residential?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
That's right. 386
387
And you had explained that to Monarch Properties and you told them that you were having an action area plan prepared?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 388
13
Now, the action area plan with respect to you, Mr. Murray, seems to deal only with the Monarch Properties lands, is that right, would that be fair to say?
A
No. That's not fair to at all. The red line encloses the Monarch lands but
11:44:42 15
16
Right. And was that, and that was your view obviously, is that right? Yes.
11:44:26 10
14
And in January of 1994, you are expressing your view that that's anomalous and
the action plan goes much further than the Monarch lands. Q
389
17
If we have the full action area plan on screen please, Mr. Kavanagh, this is the full extent of the action plan.
18
A
19
Q
11:44:57 20
A
Yes. 390
Now, and you say it doesn't focus on the Monarch Properties lands. No, I am saying it doesn't relate exclusively to the Monarch lands. It relates
21
to the entire land segment between Cabinteely and the new motorway line and
22
Carrickmines and the N11.
23
Q
24
A
11:45:12 25
Q
391
Right. And Brides Glen.
392
I must show you our own report of the Cherrywood action plan, 7472 and I want
26
to drawer to your attention under the heading "location" the note presumably by
27
yourself, "The plan centres on 236 acres of land presently owned by Monarch
28
Properties Limited." Now which is correct, Mr. Murray, the evidence you have
29
just given to Tribunal or the report that you prepared at the time the draft
11:45:39 30
action plan was prepared? www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:45:40
11:46:00
54 1
A
2
Q
Both are correct. It does centre on Monarch lands are in the centre of it. 393
I had asked you did you agree with me that the plan centred on the Monarch
3
lands and you had said no, that you had said the plan was dealing with other
4
lands in the area and I am just drawing to your attention what you yourself
5
said in the report that went to the Planning Development and Tourism Committee
6
on the 25th May 1994?
7
A
It it's a descriptive term that the Monarch lands are in the centre of the
8
local area, local action area plan. I am not disagreeing with you in that
9
sense but it's not exclusively about the Monarch lands, that's what I was
11:46:21 10
11
trying to say. Q
394
And certainly in the body of the report in dealing with the main element of the
12
plan, you deal with the anomalies, is that right, that the 7473, you deal with
13
a number of houses, you deal with the district centre and neighbourhood shops
14
and the park and ride, isn't that right? Now the district centre is dealing
11:46:58 15
only with the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
The district centre is located in the Monarch lands, yes. 395
18
identified, isn't that right?
19
A
11:47:08 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 396
And that's the anomaly on the Monarch Properties lands. Well there's two, two areas of land in the anomaly as it were.
397
23
If you just leave it on screen, Mr. Kavanagh, increase it Mr. Kavanagh, the bottom part of the page. Thank you.
24
A
11:47:44 25
Q
26 27
The anomaly to which you refer is dealing with the anomaly you had earlier
The last paragraph refers to two areas of land. 398
Would you agree that in the main, the action plan is dealing primarily if not exclusively with the Monarch Properties lands?
A
The action plan relates to all of the lands, the Monarch lands are central to
28
it, they contain as it happens the town centre, district centre, they don't
29
contain the golf course, they don't contain the river valleys, they don't
11:48:07 30
contain the land which is up near Cabinteely. They are central. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:48:11
11:48:28
55 1
Q
399
2 3
Mr. Murray, is it? A
No, it's for the Cherrywood to Carrickmines section, the valley would proceed
4 5
then up towards Ballyogan and Stepaside. Q
400
6
And did you do an action area plan for the balance of the Carrickmines Valley, that part not covered by the action plan?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:48:40 10
But it's not an action area plan for the entire of the Carrickmines Valley,
Q
We did ultimately. 401
At this time, in January 1994? Not at this time.
402
11
Would you agree, Mr. Murray, that you and your department had extensive contacts with the personnel from Monarch Properties over the years?
12
A
13
Q
I would say so, yes. 403
14
And that your diaries record a very significant number of meetings with various individuals, including but not limited to Mr. Eddie Sweeney?
11:48:57 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:49:06 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 404
Mr, I think Richard Lynn. Not so many with him but some, yes.
405
Mr. Noel Murray? Yes.
406
Mr. Phillip Reilly? Yes.
407
And I think Mr. Phillip Monahan on one occasion at least? Perhaps, yes.
408
Can you remember the circumstances under which you came to meet Mr. Monahan.
11:49:18 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon, could I stop you there, we will break for a few
27
minutes. We will break for ten minutes.
28 29 11:49:33 30
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS: www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:05:54
12:06:00
56 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Murray please.
3 4
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF MR. WILLIAM MURRAY
5
BY MS. DILLON:
6 7
Q
409
8 9
you had met Mr. Phillip Monahan prior to the break, is that right? A
Yes, if it's on record that I met him, I know I met him but I am not quite sure
12:06:28 10
11
Good afternoon, Mr. Murray. I think I had just asked you about whether or not
where. Q
410
I think there's an entry in your diary but there is also a record of a meeting
12
with Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan in fairness you were not present at on the 13th May
13
1996 at 5936. And this is a meeting involving Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan, Mr. Dermot
14
Drumgoole, Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mr. Noel Murray and I want to drawer to your
12:06:52 15
attention at 5937, the following page, under the heading "Galvin's golf course
16
lands. "PM advised he had bought the lands with Manor Park Home Builders with
17
a view to jointly developing these lands. PM -- that's Mr. Monahan -- stated
18
that he would like to move the Dun Laoghaire golf club from its present
19
position over the Cherrywood lands. KOS -- that's Mr. O' Sullivan -- stated he
12:07:15 20
did not think it would be as easy as Mr. Monahan thought. He stated that a
21
number of public representatives had preliminary discussions with him in this
22
regard and they were still sitting on the fence. Mr. Monahan stated he was of
23
the view at least 60 to 70 percent of the committee of Dun Laoghaire golf club
24
were in favour of them moving.
12:07:30 25
26
Mr. Monahan gave a brief outline of how he would like to see the road moved to
27
enable the golf course be developed on the mountain side of the new road, Mr.
28
O' Sullivan advise the EIS on the Southeastern Motorway was at an advanced
29
stage."
12:07:46 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:07:46
12:07:59
57 1
Did you know anything about a proposal, Mr. Murray, to swap or exchange lands
2
with either the Dun Laoghaire golf course or any golf course with lands at
3
Cherrywood?
4
A
I know about those sort of considerations, those sort of ideas at some point in
5
time, but as to when, I don't know. I mean it was always a possibility that
6
someone would come up with a suggestion like that. But I don't know when or
7
when I became aware that it might be a possibility, I just don't know.
8
Q
411
9
But certainly if this is an accurate note of what happened in May of 1996, Mr. Monahan appeared to be suggesting that there would be a change or an
12:08:20 10
exchange of lands between Dun Laoghaire golf club and the Cherrywood lands?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 412
Were you aware of any such suggestion? I couldn't say that I was or not, I don't think I was but I don't know.
413
12:08:38 15
Thank you very much, Mr. Murray, if you answer any questions anybody else may have.
16 17
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, just one or two questions.
18 19
THE WITNESS WAS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. SANFEY:
12:08:44 20
21 22
Q
414
Mr. Murray, my name is Mark Sanfey, I represent Monarch Properties, just one or two questions arising out of your evidence.
23 24
Ms. Dillon asked you in relation to the December 1993 meeting as to whether
12:09:00 25
there was any reason justifying as a differentiation between a zoning balance
26
of four to the acre for Monarch Properties and one to the acre for everyone
27
else and you gave a one word answer to that question and you said no. Can I
28
take it that your answering that question in your capacity as a planning person
29
and that you are not aware of any valid planning reason as to why that should
12:09:30 30
be so? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:09:31
12:09:48
58 1
A
That's what I'm saying. I don't see any difference between the land within or
2 3
outside the Monarch lands in relation to planning or in relation to density. Q
415
4
In fact in December 1993, the manager was recommending the deletion of change 3 for the whole of the valley, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 416
7
And in fact Councillors Marren and Coffey proposed motion to delete change 3 but limited that change to the Monarch lands?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 417
12:10:04 10
With the result that it would remain one per acre for the balance of the lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 418
I take it you would accept as a general proposition, Mr. Murray, that
13
councillors take a number of factors into account, not just pure planning
14
factors and they have a number of matters to deal with interests of their
12:10:20 15
constituents, political matters and so on?
16
A
17
Q
Well I don't know what councillors take into account. 419
Right. Well suppose what I'm really is you to confirm your one word answer no
18
was really wearing your planning hat, that you couldn't see any valid planning
19
reason?
12:10:38 20
A
21
Q
Oh yes, absolutely. 420
Because last Wednesday we had Councillor Marren here who spoke at length about
22
the various reasons that he had for limiting it to the Monarch lands and they
23
were mainly political reasons what he saw to be the interests of his
24
constituents and so on but you have no reason to --
12:10:57 25
A
That's as may be, I mean I thought the question was directed to me as planning
26 27
witness and planning expert and that's the context in which I answered it. Q
421
28
And you have certainly no reason to doubt Councillor Marren's bona fides in relation to the reasons he advanced?
29
A
12:11:15 30
Q
I have no idea what he said. 422
Thank you. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:11:15
12:11:38
59 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
would primarily decide the route of the motorway which moved as the whole plan
4
for the valley progressed. It moved from one location to another and what I
5
understand your evidence, it is to the effect that the engineers to the council
6
would have primarily driven the ideas which would give rise to the movement of
7
the line from time to time and not the planners.
8
A
9
Mr. Murray, could I just ask you, you have explained how engineers
I don't think, Chairman, that would be entirely true. The engineers would be responsible for the alignment and functionality of the road line. Clearly, you
12:12:13 10
know, strategic planning considerations come in also. We have a situation
11
where there was limited amount of zoned or serviceable serviced land, it was a
12
scarce resource, that the motorway was likely to remain as the barrier in that
13
location to development.
14
And therefore there is a planning desire to increase the amount of land
12:12:39 15
available for development because it's obviously scarce. So there is a
16
planning input into a decision but the actual final line must be, must meet the
17
functionality requirements and the technical design requirements of the
18
engineers.
19 12:12:53 20
CHAIRMAN:
Exactly but that's as I would have assumed it, that the, if you
21
like, the main driving force behind the location of the motorway line would be
22
from the planners and then obviously the engineers would have to then take into
23
account the sort of lie of the land and so on.
24
A
Mmm.
12:13:19 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
particular location would be, that would be coming from the planners.
28 29 12:13:41 30
A
But that the main driving force behind the line going into a
Well there were numerous studies done and all sorts of environmental and ecological and landscape considerations and obviously the planning considerations to maximise the amount of available development land. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:13:45
12:13:59
60 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
be going through the Monarch lands.
4
A
We see in the earlier maps, the proposed route of the motorway to
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
blessing, so to speak, of that time of the engineers.
8
A
And presumably when that line was drawn, that would have had the
That would have been very early on. It didn't firm up until --
9 12:14:12 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A
12
Yes but that line --
Oh it would have, it would have. Well, I can't say if it actually, it must have. It must have. They wouldn't have gone with it.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:14:35 15
16
And then we see the line moving significantly west of that
position. A
Yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
what would be the approximate distance between the line as it originally went
12:14:49 20
through the Monarch lands and the line as we subsequently see it west of the
21 22
In terms of distance, as a matter of interest, what would it be,
Monarch -- are we talking about a half a mile or -A
23
Well it would be a matter of the fact of whatever line you choose, you have to measure it.
24 12:15:10 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
But it's a significant distance.
To where it ended up, it is, yes. But to the first shift, it's not hugely significant -- a couple of hundred metres.
28 29 12:15:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
I know you can't be certain as to how the lines were shifted and
the reasons for them, but is it likely that the suggestion for the line being www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:15:40
12:16:02
61 1
moved to the extent that it was off the Monarch lands, that that suggestion is
2
unlikely to have come from the engineers but more likely to have come from the
3
planner or at least the planning side of the council?
4
A
Well the planning input would have been to maximise the amount of land.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A
Yes.
But as regards impetus and stuff, it's hards to, you know --
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
12:16:14 10
To put it another way, isn't it unlikely that the engineers, having
picked the or having at some stage been satisfied with the earlier line going
11
through the Monarch lands would have themselves said we want to move it a
12
significant distance away?
13
A
14
I wouldn't agree necessarily with you. We are looking at the line as it affects the Monarch lands but the line is influenced by things that are
12:16:44 15
happening further up and further down the line in terms of its geometrics and
16
as the studies develop and the alignment is firmed up in terms of landscape and
17
so on. You could well get an engineering inspired change but the two may very
18
well have come together on this, both the planning and engineering.
19 12:17:07 20
CHAIRMAN:
The preparation of the maps, DP90/123 and DP90/129A and indeed any
21
of the other maps we looked at, presumably somebody had to coordinate the
22
preparation of that map because as you have suggested there, the motorway line
23
is moving as I presume the other considerations are developing as these things
24
are being discussed at official level but somebody finally has to sit down and
12:17:38 25
draw the map, which is then produced to the council. And presumably somebody
26 27
has to coordinate that. A
Yes.
28 29 12:17:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
In that the engineers don't just draw their line of the motorway
and somebody else puts in different areas of zoning, presumably somebody at the www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:17:59
12:18:19
62 1
end of the day has to say this is what we will do, this is the map that we will
2
produce, who would do that?
3
A
Well the ultimate sign off will be by the manager on recommendation from the
4
technical officers and the technical officer on the roadside would be the
5
county engineer and I would be the technical officer on the planning side.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
which culminates in this map, is that coordinated in some way? Somebody
9
presumably has to at the end of the day, produce for the manager a map saying
12:18:44 10
11
Well is there, is that -- is that effort from different people
this is our combined view as to what the map should show? A
Well I couldn't tell you now at this point in time whether we had sign off on
12
that map, you know, precisely in relation to the final line of the road from
13
the county engineer. I don't know if we had or if we hadn't. But it was, we
14
did say that the map wasn't to be a final map. It was an indication of a
12:19:10 15
structure that would work and then the final map would then, you know, if it
16
was adopted, the motorway may well have changed when it was brought as a
17
Development Plan map to the council.
18 19 12:19:23 20
CHAIRMAN: A
But somebody had to, in the council, had to prepare that map.
That was prepared in the planning department.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
24
Yes. And by whom, who would actually physically prepare the map?
Well there were quite a number of studies done that led to the map, you know, differing versions of it, would probably still available.
12:19:40 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
Is there --
It was a Development Plan team which Enda Conway was in charge of and the
28
actual drawing of the map would be done by the drawing office.
29
CHAIRMAN:
12:19:58 30
And would there be somebody coordinating or chairing those meetings
and who would eventually say right, this is what we have agreed? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:20:02
12:20:17
63 1
A
2
Well yeah, it would have come as a draft and I would have been involved in approving it and bringing it to the manager.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
would appear on that version, that final version that would go to the manager,
6
would that be based on, I mean would the engineers have been involved in that,
7
making that final decision?
8
A
9
Yes. And the line on the motorway, the line of the motorway as
They would certainly have been shown it, you know, and it may well have gone to the development coordination meeting, I am not quite sure about that. But we
12:20:43 10
were in a situation where everybody was, for all those years, extremely busy
11
dealing with all these things and it wasn't always possible to get sign off
12
from everybody on everything.
13 14 12:21:00 15
CHAIRMAN: A
All right.
So that's why it was left that, if the structure is, the basic structure is
16
adopted and the principles, the lines weren't as important as the principles,
17
the principle was that the motorway interchanges would be the focus of the
18
industrial development and that certain areas were landscape areas, certain
19
were residential. If that 123 had been adopted, more detailed plans would have
12:21:27 20
been brought for the statutory process of the Development Plan. And they would
21
have had sign off by the county engineer in relation to the road. So that road
22
line was a planning road line if that's what you are really trying to get at,
23
essentially it was a planning road line.
24 12:21:50 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Thank you.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
Mr. Murray? If there's going to be an action area plan.
29 12:22:14 30
A
I just want to ask you, who decides on an action area plan,
Well, some times it's actually an objective of a Development Plan. Sometimes it is a zone which requires an action area plan to be prepared and other times www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:22:25
12:22:45
64 1
it may arise out of consideration of people want to make planning applications,
2
you have a general zoning, a blanket zoning so where do the schools go, where
3
do the shops go, where do the internal roads go and where do the open spaces
4
go. You need a plan to show that so the planning department would generally
5
produce such a plan:
6 7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
9
At that at the instigation of the council or --
It could be at the instigation of the council, it could be generated internally or it could be due to indications from developers that they want to lodge
12:22:58 10
planning applications.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
14
I see. And --
Sorry to interrupt you but the plan, the local area planner as they are now called, the action area plan would go through a process of approval with the
12:23:11 15
council.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
discussion with some of the Monarch representatives in early January.
19
A
Yes. The reason I ask you that, you obviously were in
Yes.
12:23:23 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
pretty shortly I think and you raise the anomaly of the, what you saw as the B
23
zoning on the Monarch lands, isn't that correct?
24
A
And you mentioned that you would have an action plan ready
Yes.
12:23:37 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
into being on the 1st January, isn't that correct?
28
A
29 12:23:52 30
Yes. JUDGE FAHERTY:
A
But I'm just wondering, obviously the new council only came
So the council hadn't met before the 6th January, had it?
I doubt it. I doubt it. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:23:54
12:23:56
65 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Unlikely, probably.
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
by Ms. Dillon in 1992, when the manager came back, that was the May 1992, this
7
was after the first public display, and the manager had proposals and he was
8
proposing changes, indeed to what had gone out on the first public display and
9
it was largely going from four houses to the acre on piped sewerage to A1P
12:24:30 10
Very well, can I just ask you, earlier I think you were asked
which you said involved an area action plan. And he wanted to further extend
11
the zoning, the residential zoning I think further south which would have
12
incorporated some of the Monarch lands.
13
A
To the motorway line, yes.
14 12:24:51 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes. And that map was put up and Ms. Dillon asked you a
16
question or sort of it put it to you that for the lands north of Monarch, if
17
you like north of the Brides Glen divide, there was no provision for an action
18
area plan on those lands and I think your answer was that that was a discrete
19
area and could have its own action area plan and I am just wondering why wasn't
12:25:27 20
that considered by the council at the time? That map you put out, it was
21
DP92/44. That was produced at the meeting, it didn't get anywhere because it
22
was voted down by the council but there was only provision for an action area
23
plan on lands which were largely Monarch lands, it wasn't exactly Monarch in
24
fairness but it didn't include the lands north of Monarch which were zoned
12:25:52 25
residential, the densities, certainly on the draft plan that had gone out four
26
to the acre. And I am just saying why would it not, why would it not be A1P,
27
you see there on the screen actually to your right, Mr. Murray, why would that
28
not have had, that type of zoning be put on the lands north of the Monarch
29
lands?
12:26:20 30
A
I don't know why but I mean I could make post hoc arguments as to why because I www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:26:26
12:26:45
66 1
said it's a relatively discrete piece of land separated from the valley by
2
another land, by a non-development zone which is G and there's a G zone
3
separating it from the bit over at the Carrickmines end as well. It does, it
4
can stand on its own and needn't necessarily --
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
that in fact all of the lands were zoned residential four to the acre.
8
A
Yes. I'm just saying in the light of your earlier answers
Yes.
9 12:26:57 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
In the first plan in 1991, isn't that right? And that was
11
indeed the map that had gone out in 1991. The sewer, the proposed sewer line
12
obviously would presumably I think you said earlier would run up north of the
13
Monarch lands, isn't that correct?
14
A
Yes.
12:27:14 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
envisaged that all these lands would be developed because they were zoned
18
residential as far as back as 1983 and I am just wondering why was the idea for
19
an area action plan just confined to that area and not for this other, albeit a
12:27:41 20
21
And would be serving the other of lands and it was always
discrete area, north of the Monarch lands? A
I don't really know the answer but it could have been because Monarch were the
22
people who were pushing to make things happen there. And it couldn't really
23
happen without a local area plan or an action area plan. It could have
24
influenced the extent of that particular study but I don't know the answer.
12:28:09 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.
29
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
12:28:19 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:28:20
12:28:53
67 1
MR. QUINN:
Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan please.
2 3
MR. KEVIN O'SULLIVAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
4
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A
Good afternoon, Mr. O'Sullivan.
Good afternoon.
8 9
Q
423
12:29:03 10
MR. QUINN:
Good afternoon, Mr. O' Sullivan. You were asked on the 7th April
2006 to provide a statement to the Tribunal in relation to the lands at
11
Cherrywood and I think at brief pages 7597 to 7613 is your statement, dated the
12
24th April 2006 and I think you have already given evidence to the Tribunal and
13
I don't propose unless you insist I do so to go through that statement in any
14
detail at this stage.
12:29:22 15
A
I think in preparing that statement on the previous occasion, I think you
16
yourself had asked me to include the Monarch lands so in reality I reproduced
17
the previous statement.
18
Q
424
19
matter, you I think started out at a finance officer in Cork in 1976 and moved
12:29:48 20
to Dublin I think at a finance officer in 1987?
21
A
22
Q
City treasury In 1988, yes. 425
23 24
And in relation to just to refresh the Tribunal's memory in relation to this
By 1983 I think you were in Dun Laoghaire corporation with responsibility for Deansgrange?
A
In 1983, I was appointed an assistant city and an assistant county manager and
12:30:06 25
I was delegated functions at that time by Frank Feeley, the city and county
26
manager as assistant county manager for Dun Laoghaire corporation and
27
Deansgrange joint Burial Board.
28
Q
29 12:30:24 30
426
I think by September 1989 you had taken over from Mr. Morrissey who in turn had taken over from Mr. Redmond?
A
No, I took over from Mr. Prendergast, I was asked by Mr. Feeley at some stage www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:30:31
12:30:45
68 1
in August or September 1989 to move into the county, county and city. I am
2
sorry.
3
Q
4
A
427
I had responsibility for planning in the city and planning in the county with
5 6
the exception of Dun Laoghaire Borough. Q
428
7 8
I think the big issue vis-a-vis planning in September 1989 was the review of the Development Plan.
A
There was a review of the Development Plan in the country which was ongoing and
9 12:31:03 10
You had a planning responsibility overall planning responsibility?
there was about to be a review of the Development Plan in the city. Q
429
I think by September 1991, you moved, you changed your responsibilities and now
11
you became responsible for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown as assistant manager, is that
12
right, assistant county manager with responsibility for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown?
13
A
What happened in 1991 was that the government made a decision to proceed with
14
the split of the county, which had in fact been put on the long finger after
12:31:31 15
1985 and one of the decisions they made at the time was to appoint three
16
embryonic managers in effect. They were interviewed I think in July of that
17
year and I was one of the three who was offered appointment and I accepted
18
appointment in September.
19
Q
430
12:31:55 20
21
Yes. I think the idea at the time was that you would in time become the manager of the newly formed Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
A
That was enshrined in law and the -- enshrined in law and I think the idea was
22
that the three managers I suppose would take an interest in ensuring that the
23
break up took place?
24
Q
12:32:12 25
A
26
Q
27 28 29 12:32:30 30
431
In an orderly fashion. As orderly as possible, yes.
432
And I think the break up did take place on the 1st January 1994 and you became the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
A
The first thing we had to do was prepare what was called a reorganisation report. Memory is that that had to be prepared six months after the first meeting of the area committee and I think we prepared the reorganisation www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:32:35
12:32:58
69 1
report, publish the reorganisation report sometime during the summer of 1992
2
and in that reorganisation report, we targeted the 1st January 1994 as being
3
the date for the creation of the new authorities.
4
Q
433
Now, we know from evidence given by Mr. McCabe that the first submission made
5
by the Monarch Group was made in November 1989. I think you had been appointed
6
planning manager in September of 1989.
7
A
8
Q
I can't remember the date but it was some time in September 1989. 434
9
that submission at 6911 by Mr. McCabe on behalf of Monarch dealt with the
12:33:22 10
movement of the line of the motorway. Were you aware that that submission had
11 12
gone in at that time? A
I think the first time I saw was that submission was when I read some of the
13 14
And indeed just arising out of what the Tribunal dealt with, with Mr. Murray,
documentation that you would have circulated. Q
435
12:33:41 15
Now, you have given evidence previously in relation to DP90/123 and the various working papers, particularly working paper number 4 and I don't, unless you
16
wants to something addition to what you have already said, ask you any further
17
additional questions in relation to that.
18 19
Can I take you to 1993, Mr. O' Sullivan. You were the manager designate at
12:33:58 20
21
that stage, isn't that right? A
That's correct. In strict legal terms, the delegation as assistant county
22
manager was done by the -- still the city and county manager but it wasn't an
23
optional delegation in that he was obliged to make the delegation at that
24
stage.
12:34:16 25
Q
436
26
Laoghaire/Rathdown?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:34:33 30
Yes. But for all intents and purposes, you were going to be in charge of Dun
There was absolutely no doubt about that. 437
And any issue that might have arisen prior to January 1994 in relation to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown was an issue that, if it were important enough was to be brought to your attention, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:34:34
12:34:53
70 1
A
At that stage I was the area management was the technical term and my
2
responsibility at the time would have been Dun Laoghaire corporation which
3
still remained in place, Deansgrange Joint Burial Board which still remained in
4
place and what was called the Rathdown area of Dublin County Council.
5
Q
438
And there is equally no doubt but that and you have admitted to it in your
6
statement, you had a series of meetings with Monarch representatives throughout
7
your period, that is say to from --
8
A
9
Q
12:35:17 10
There were various meetings with representatives of Monarch, yes. 439
Now in June of 1994, Mr. Lynn prepared an action report for the Cherrywood lands and the Monarch interests and I just want to put in context.
11 12
We have now as of November 1994, a vote on the Cherrywood lands which provides
13
that the Monarch lands an the Monarch lands only will be zoned at a density of
14
four houses to the acre. Sorry, November 1993. For some reason in January
12:35:40 15
1994, it would appear that an action area plan had been undertaken and you have
16
heard Mr. Murray's evidence in that regard.
17 18
And now in June, there having been, that action plan having come before I think
19
it's the Planning and Tourism Committee in May 1994 of the council. It has
12:36:01 20
been adjourned to a June meeting, a June 1994 meeting as has a motion by
21
Councillor Gilmore in relation to the provision of a science and technology
22
park and if I could have 5206, this is a progress report from Mr. Lynn and
23
before I open that report, can I ask you, was there an understanding between
24
you and representatives of Monarch, you in your capacity as county manager,
12:36:28 25
that there would be a science and technology park within the Monarch lands and
26
that there would be some level of understanding or agreement between you as a
27
result of the siting of the science and technology park, that there would be a
28
review of the zoning of their lands in early 1994?
29 12:36:50 30
A
I think on the science and technology park, and certainly at the time that I did that narrative statement, my memory would have been that the first www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:36:55
12:37:22
71 1
initiative on the science and technology park was in 1994. Having seen the
2
statement of Richard Cremmins, that's brought back to me the question of the
3
Sprint programme and at that point I remembered that prior to 1994, discussions
4
were ongoing or there were discussions about the concept of a science and
5
technology park.
6
Q
7
A
440
Yes. And -Now in terms of the specific question you ask me, I don't believe there was any
8
understanding at that stage that in the variation for the science and
9
technology park, there was any question of any other variation being done as
12:37:39 10
11
well. Q
441
If I just refer you to Monarch's understanding as Mr. Lynn appears to have
12
noted it in 1994, June 1994. Under the heading variation to the Development
13
Plan, he provides "In September 1993, Monarch/Guardian agreed to give a letter
14
to Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan committing the landowner to reserving a significant
12:38:02 15
portion of land which could be considered by the incoming council for possible
16
industrial use to accommodate a science and technology park.
17 18
Any residentially zoned land thus taken up for industrial purposes was to be
19
compensated by bringing in the agriculturally zoned land for residential
12:38:18 20
purposes. There were a number of meetings at which personnel from Monarch and
21
Guardian were present. This proposal was hardened up and an understanding in
22
principle was reached with the county manager regarding it's format and the
23
timing and likely success with elected members although the timescale initially
24
envisaged has not been adhered to, the county manager has taken forward a draft
12:38:38 25
action area plan to the council at the meeting on the 23rd May 1994" and then
26 27
he refers to a copy of that? A
I don't remember there being anything as firm as that in 1993. In fact my
28
memory, I haves to say, my memory is that the question of the other Monarch
29
lands would have been on the table when firm discussions took place with them
12:39:04 30
about the joint venture in fact. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:39:07
12:39:28
72 1
Q
2
A
442
Joint venture I think comes in around June 1994, isn't that right? I can't remember how the joint venture came on the table, Mr. Quinn. I thought
3
it had come from some where within the council and I would have understood it
4
coming from within the council because in the first act of the new council in
5
January 1994 would have been to prepare a budget. And that proved to be an
6
extremely traumatic exercise and the lack of resources which the county had
7
became very apparent and led soon in fact to charges having to be introduced
8
which for some councillors would have been the first. So I think there would
9
have been an enthusiasm among many of the councillors for sort of getting
12:39:52 10
involved in some commercial activity which would generate income for the
11 12
council. Q
443
Can I put forward to you what Mr. Lynn's understanding was as of 16th June 1994
13
if we could have 5204, this is the same document but at a different section and
14
it's an addendum and it might be of assistance in dealing with the joint
12:40:14 15
venture:
16 17
It says "In speakings with Dermot Drumgoole, development officer Dun Laoghaire
18
County Council on the 16th inst", that's the 16th June 1994 "He indicated that
19
the government apparently favours that the science and technology park be
12:40:27 20
located on public lands, Fonthill and Abbotstown being mentioned as two likely
21
locations. He is preparing a draft submission for council approval for the
22
meeting on the 29th June recommending Cherrywood. He asked that we consider
23
the possibilities of the council taking an interest in the Cherrywood lands to
24
satisfy the public involvement stance of the government.
12:40:46 25
26
This appears to be very acceptable and it is recommended that serious
27
consideration be given to this matter and it be followed up. He has not had
28
the opportunity of discussing it with Kevin O'Sullivan, county manager, as of
29
yet."
12:41:00 30
That would appear to be, as far as Mr. Lynn is concerned, in any event, in June www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:41:04
12:41:20
73 1 2
1994, the genesis of the -A
I read that, Mr. Quinn, which is I can't I said to you that I had thought that
3
the initiative had come from the council itself. But at the end of the day, if
4
that happened, it happened. I don't remember it. I don't remember it being
5
raised with me by Mr. Drumgoole.
6
Q
7
A
444
Yes. But in any event, somebody must have raised it with you? It was raised, I know from my own point of view, initially I was uncomfortable
8
with it, but I got more enthusiastic as time went on and we finally agreed a
9
joint venture.
12:41:42 10
Q
445
11
cited in Cabinteely, is that right?
12
A
13
Q
In the context of that minute, that does seem to be the rationale of it, yes. 446
14
Now, the science and technology, would you agree with me that the science and technology park was being viewed by Monarch as an opportunity to vary the plan
12:42:04 15
16
It seems to have been raised so as to improve the chances of the park being
to their advantage? A
Well I suppose I never thought that the reason for the suggestion of a science
17
and technology park was altruistic. I have read some of the internal documents
18
that were produced and it's certainly a lot more calculating than I would have
19
thought at the time. And I think that it would appear anyway, that the Monarch
12:42:35 20
saw the science and technology park as a means of ensuring that zoning would
21 22
take place in the land, yes. Q
447
And I think it is the case that, and I put it to Mr. McCabe at 5211, that they
23
saw that the rezoning of the agricultural lands an the increase of residential
24
density resting on the premises that a science and technology park would be
12:42:57 25
brought to fruition.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29 12:43:15 30
I am not sure whether I would necessarily, Monarch may have seen that -448
That's what I mean? But I am I am not sure I would necessarily agree with that because certainly there was nothing zoned there which we would not have felt should have been zoned at the end of the day. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:43:16
12:43:37
74 1
Q
449
Yes and your recommendation was four houses to the acre in the 1993 report. I
2
take it there was some confusion expressed by Mr. Barrett in relation to your
3
report. I take it you will accept that you are recommending that all of the
4
lands there, not just the Monarch lands, would have zoning on four houses to
5
the acre?
6
A
7
Q
Well, that's my recollection, Mr. Quinn, yes. 450
Would it be fair to say that having decided that there would be a science and
8
technology park sited in the Cherrywood lands, that and when I say you, you the
9
officials within the council, you were anxious to see that come to fruition and
12:43:59 10
11
you were prepared to facilitate it as best you could? A
Once we were part of the science and technology park and once there was a
12
science and technology park proposed, naturally we wanted the development to
13
take place.
14
Q
451
12:44:19 15
Now at 5207 again dealing with the strategy, Mr. Lynn says "It would be noted however that serious reservations were expressed at the meeting of the 23rd May
16
1994 regarding the rezoning proposals by some of the members." And he
17
describes it, "It is expected that the county manager will continue to promote
18
the zoning and density changes providing he perceives that the majority of the
19
elected members are in favour of such changes."
12:44:41 20
21
And then he goes on to say "That at this point, it is essential that serious
22
discussions take place with leading members of the council to ensure their
23
support."
24
A
I think my memory of that stage was that when this was being developed, I asked
12:44:58 25
the council to set up a small group which could act as a sounding board so that
26 27
at no stage was I finding myself going completely off side with the council. Q
28 29 12:45:24 30
452
You weren't going to go out on a limb, while you were lukewarm with the concept of a join venture, you were happy with a science and technology park?
A
Oh yes. I think that's very true, I was very enthused about a science and technology park, my lukewarmness was in relation to a joint venture. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:45:28
12:45:42
75 1
Q
453
2 3
to have the approval of the council members? A
It did but I didn't want to go down the road of discussing this unless the
4 5
But in any event you couldn't create a science and technology zoning, you had
members were being brought along at the same time and knew what was happening. Q
454
Now, it would appear also from that document which I am opening to you, that
6
other departments within the council were very amenable to assisting Monarch in
7
developing their lands at that time, you have heard the evidence of Mr. Murray
8
and his reference to the action plan in January of 1994.
9 12:45:59 10
But if you look for example under the heading "services and access", you see
11
"That by letter of the 23rd May 1994, Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council
12
confirmed that they expect that the scheme -- that is the Carrickmines Valley
13
sewerage scheme -- will commence in early 1995 and that a clause will be
14
inserted into the contract to allow the early connection for the development of
12:46:20 15
Cherrywood. This was achieved through direct negotiating with the county
16
engineer. The county engineer has also undertaken to examine if it becomes
17
necessary, a temporary service connection should the mains scheme be delayed
18
beyond an acceptable timeframe."
19 12:46:35 20
You will also see at the next page at 5208 under the heading main access, "This
21
matter was discussed with the county engineer at meetings on the 19th May and
22
2nd June, at which his proposals to be submitted to the council were tabled.
23
They provided for a flyover together with a slip road north and south of the
24
Wyattville junction. He also indicated how temporary access could be gained to
12:46:57 25
the site complimentary to his proposals."
26 27
Then the next one dealing with and I won't read it, central roundabout, at the
28
bottom you see access to the lands adjacent to the N11, agreement was reached
29
with the county engineer to allow access from the N1 to service circa 20 acres
12:47:12 30
of residentially zoned lands subject to an existing access of the an adjoining www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:47:17
12:47:27
76 1
landowner being permanently closed and that agreement appears to be over the
2
head of an named engineer. Isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
It is, yeah. 455
5
And then again at 5209 under the heading "water". "Agreement was reached that the site would be serviced from the Rathmichael area on existing services."
6 7
So it would appear from reading those reviews of the situation as of June 1994,
8
that the various departments of the council were very anxious to facilitate a
9
development of the lands, isn't t right?
12:47:55 10
A
11
Q
There was an enthusiasm about developing the science and technology park. Yes. 456
12
Well not just the science and technology park wasn't starting at that stage, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 457
12:48:09 15
Now, we know that I think Councillor Gilmore tabled a motion in relation to the science and technology park and the go ahead for that was given at a meeting on
16
the 29th June 1994, is that correct? And that led to further meetings between
17
yourself and Monarch which resulted I think in agreement being reached in
18
November 1994 whereby you would become a joint venture, a joint venture partner
19
with Monarch and GRE, is that right?
12:48:35 20
A
21
Q
22
A
That's right. 458
And you had several contacts with Monarch, is that right? Well, there were lots of meetings at that time, I think the meetings were
23
mainly with Eddie Sweeney and Richard Blackwood from GRE. And also I also
24
remember at some stage a conversation with somebody else from GRE but it may
12:48:53 25
26
have been a telephone conversation. Q
459
Would it be fair to say there was, like all negotiations, an element of hard
27
balling going on between yourself and your new partners as to what you might
28
concede or be prepared to support in the event of a joint partnership with
29
Monarch and GRE?
12:49:11 30
A
There was but I mean certainly we would have had a bottom line and we didn't www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:49:17
12:49:30
77 1 2
get to the bottom line if I remember rightly. Q
460
3
When you say, you would have had been prepared to concede more than you actually did?
4
A
5
Q
I think we might have been, yes, but we played it as hard as we could, yes. 461
Now, in that regard, would it be fair to say and I am going to open a letter in
6
a moment and I will ask you to comment on it, that Monarch were approaching you
7
on the basis that they had the councillor majority for what they were
8
proposing; in other words, that they did not necessarily need your agreement
9
for what they were seeking to achieve.
12:49:50 10
A
Yeah, I read that, Mr. Quinn, and I don't remember it. But at the end of the
11
day, they didn't go that route. And I would guess that at that stage, despite
12
all that's happened before, at that stage I was pretty confident that the
13
council would go with whatever recommendation emerged and was recommended by
14
the manager and senior officials.
12:50:21 15
Q
462
If we could have 5393, this is a letter from Monarch on the 20th October 1994
16
to GRE, this is at a crucial stage of the negotiations, isn't that right,
17
because the vote I think is on the 14th November when agreement is concluded.
18
If we just look at the very last paragraph there, this is where Monarch are
19
trying to convince GRE to go with your proposals for the joint venture
12:50:43 20
agreement. It says: "Richard and Anthony are confident that the motion will
21
succeed which is the opposite view held by the county manager and his officials
22
who were saying even it it did succeed on the first vote on a marginal basis
23
that it would fall at the further vote after the end of the three month display
24
period due to public pressure and the lack of support from the manager and his
12:51:01 25
officials."
26
Now I think the vote in question was a motion which would have
increased density, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:51:15 30
Q
There was a motion which I think was withdrawn after -463
After agreement. After the --
464
Just to put in context, am I right in thinking you are seeking to negotiate a www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:51:20
12:51:39
78 1
one third interest in this science and technology park and in consideration of
2
that and for a preferential purchase contract, you are prepared to recommend to
3
the councillors increasing density which would obviously be of benefit to
4
Monarch. On the other hand Monarch are telling you they have a motion in place
5
which will increase the density in any event.
6
A
7
Q
Which I certainly wouldn't have welcomed at the time. 465
I appreciate that so effectively they were seeking to call your bluff so to
8
speak and say they could get sufficient councillor support to increase the
9
density even against your recommendations?
12:51:58 10
A
That's what that seems to be saying. I don't remember it but that's what it
11 12
seems to be saying. Q
466
I accept that's what it's saying but I am just slightly surprised that you
13
couldn't remember that level of debate going on in the lead up to the agreement
14
concluded?
12:52:12 15
A
16
Q
I don't remember it. 467
Now I think as it happened, you did come to the council, as I say, on the 14th
17
November 1994, at 5486. We see where you produced a report including the
18
agreement which you had recommended, which you had concluded, the heads of
19
agreement which you had concluded but which obviously had to be signed off by
12:52:41 20
the members and there was a full debate on that and on the proposed variation
21
and I think by a substantial majority, something like 17 to 2, the agreement
22
was accepted and your recommendations were accepted for the variation, isn't
23
that right, and the variation went through and was put on public display and
24
was confirmed at a meeting in April 1995, is that right?
12:53:01 25
A
26
Q
That's correct, yes. 468
Now, by July 1996, however, if we could have 6054, the science and technology
27
park hadn't taken place, you were about to or you had just commenced a review
28
of the 1993 plan and you had a meeting with Monarch and you will see there from
29
the second paragraph under paragraph 1, that they were anxious to re-establish
12:53:28 30
good relations with you. Can you recall that taking place, Mr. O' Sullivan? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:53:33
12:54:03
79 1
A
I can recall being angry that we were unable to obtain the transfer of the
2
lands. I think the question of establishing good relations with me objectively
3
is really irrelevant because I couldn't, in considering a new Development Plan
4
and making recommendations, I couldn't take any grudge against anyone else but
5
I suppose human nature being human nature, something like that was going to
6
happen.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
12:54:17 10
A
11
Q
12
A
469
Were you disappointed is what I really want to know, by 1996? I was angry I think, Mr. Quinn, at that stage, that it hadn't moved forward.
470
Yes. And did it ever take place? The transfer of land took place.
471
What you had envisaged back in 1993, did that ever come to from fruition? I don't think, Mr. Quinn, what I was about to say the transfer of land took
13
place. Noel Smyth through Dunloe became involved and I think for the first
14
time there seemed to be an urgency to get the thing up and moving and that was
12:54:44 15
happening when I left. I left in September 1998 and I have absolutely no idea
16
what the position is on the ground now.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
472
But that was five years on from when you had originally -It was, yes.
473
12:55:05 20
Now, can I just finally deal with one matter just to get a view on it, on the review of the 1993 plan which took place, the position paper in June 1996 and
21
on the consideration of a series of draft maps and written statements in the
22
January to April 1997 period, on the 2nd April 1997 and more particularly on
23
the 4th February 1997, there was a motion in relation to the densities, you had
24
produced as a draft plan a plan which did not contain any densities, isn't that
12:55:34 25
right?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct, yes. 474
And at 254 -- sorry, 2550, there is a motion by Councillor Dillon-Byrne, Smyth
28
and Buckley that the density zoning of all the maps of the Draft Development
29
Plan be restored to that density which was designated and in the same manner
12:55:55 30
the Development Plan presently in being. Now, that motion was debated in www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:56:00
12:56:24
80 1
February and wasn't completed and was reviewed in April 1997 and I think was
2
voted, was unsuccessful but I think you undertook as we will see at 6299 in
3
the -- to make arrangements for and you agreed to make available to the members
4
a written list together with the relevant maps showing the changes proposed in
5
the draft plan which had been presented at previous meetings. Now, can I ask
6
you, why did you decide to suggest that there would be a publication of a draft
7
plan which did not show any densities in early 1997?
8
A
Because the planning advice that I was getting at the time was that the
9
numerical presentation of densities wasn't good planning practice. Now, the
12:56:52 10
memory of what happened at the time would be that and perhaps I should go back
11
to the previous borough plan, in that borough plan an attempt was made at that
12
stage to change the density situation in the borough plan. Changing -- would
13
not have been in favour of that and there was a sort of compromise reached in
14
the council which was a mixed use development zoning, which in fact ended up
12:57:23 15
with very high densities and very good quality developments.
16 17
So when we came to do, when the drafts came to be done for the 19 -- what was
18
ultimately the 1998 plan, the recommendation was that there be no densities in
19
it, that densities would be controlled by development control and not by sort
12:57:42 20
21
of numbers on a map and I went along with that view and supported that view. Q
475
Now in the report which you provided to the council in February, if I could
22
have 2550 and I just want to put two matters to you, if I may, up see there
23
about half ways down, your report, which was read to the council and commences
24
"In the Dublin County Development Plan 1983, there are no specific density
12:58:11 25
controls on the bulk of the lands zoned residential."
26 27 28
Now that report is repeated at the adjourned meeting of the council. A
Sorry, Mr. Quinn, first of all that makes no sense at all. Why would we be
29 12:58:24 30
referring -Q
476
That's exactly the point I am going to ask you in a moment. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:58:27
12:58:58
81 1
A
I would think that should be 1993, I can't swear to it but I would think, it
2 3
doesn't make any sense to referring to a 1983 plan when it wasn't there. Q
477
Because if you look at the adjourned debate on the 2nd April 1997 at 6295, you
4
say the following report of the manager was read. At the special meeting of
5
the council held on the 4th, the February the following motion was moved. The
6
report of the motion was as follows and it omits the first paragraph of the
7
report which you seem to have presented.
8
A
9
Q
It does. 478
12:59:15 10
And I am just wondering if you can help the Tribunal in any way as to -- how that came about?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
I have no memory at all of it, is it material, I am not sure is it material? 479
It's an unusual? It is unusual. You would have expected that what was reproduced as being the
14
last report would be the last report.
12:59:33 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
480
And that would make sense and that it wouldn't be referring to a 1983 -I think I can understand if it was a typographical error, that that can happen.
481
Just going back to the variation, the possibility of the variation, I had
18
referred to the meeting in September 1993 but in fact could that have gone back
19
further, I wonder if we look at 4312, this is a Monarch note of a meeting held
13:00:11 20
on the 14th July 1993, where Mr. Sweeney appears to have tabled two draft
21
submissions, the second of which would have supported a science and technology
22
industry and a C zoning and if we look at the last page of that at 4313, it
23
concludes, "K O S -- who is presumably you -- suggested we that we proceed with
24
the two submissions and that the science and technology submission could be
13:00:40 25
26
withdrawn within a fortnight from the 4th August 1993 and that he should have word from his legal adviser which if appropriate he would pass on.
27 28
If it were not possible to accommodate the industrial proposal, he would
29
seriously look at the as a variation to the plan in the new year when the new
13:00:58 30
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came into being." www.pcr.ie Day 651
13:00:58
13:01:07
82 1
In other words, I think you were concerned as to whether or not you could so
2
alter the plan, it having been published, it should include an industrial
3
zoning?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
It couldn't be at that point. 482
But as early a as July '93, a science and technology was being discussed? I think I said to you at the beginning here that when I started seeing the
7
Sprint programme, I suspected this discussion on science and technology went
8
back into early 1993, if not in late 1992.
9 13:01:29 10
Q A
483
Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. O' Sullivan. Thank you.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask?
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
13 14 13:01:36 15
A
Thank you. Judge.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW:
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
That completes today's.
13:01:42 20
21
MS. DILLON:
Yes, sir, there are no further witnesses listed for today and I
22
think we have three witnesses lists for Tuesday, including Mr. Dunlop but it
23
might be as well to alert people there's no sittings next Friday, this day
24
week.
13:01:55 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, there are no sittings on this day week.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
The 16th.
29 13:01:59 30
CHAIRMAN:
And we are sitting next week, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. www.pcr.ie Day 651
13:02:03
13:02:08
83 1 2
MS. DILLON:
That is correct.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
And I think we are sitting on Tuesday at 11 o'clock. And the other
5
two days at half ten.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
May it please you sir.
8 9 13:02:29 10
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY, 13TH JUNE 2006 AT 11.00 A.M.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 651
09:06:15
10:07:57
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
14TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Quinn.
6 7
MR. QUINN: Mr. Eamonn Gilmore, please.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:08:06
10:08:29
2 1
MR. GILMORE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr Gilmore.
4 5
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr Gilmore.
6 7
Mr Gilmore, the Tribunal recently wrote to you and requested a statement in
8
relation it your involvement with the lands at Cherrywood.
9 10:08:38 10
11
On the 12th of June you provided a statement.
It's at 8587 and 8593 of the
brief.
12 13
Whilst I don't intend to go through the statement in detail, it would be fair
14
to say that if we could have 8593, dealing with a query in relation to any
10:08:57 15
payments or benefits you may have received.
You said the following.
16 17
"During the 1992 General Election, Mr. Richard Lynn telephoned me to state that
18
Monarch Properties wish to make a financial contribution to my election
19
campaign.
10:09:13 20
I declined the offer.
During a subsequent election, either the
1997 General Election or the 1999 local elections, Mr. Lynn telephoned me again
21
to offer a contribution to my election campaign.
22
indicated that he had expected me to decline and that it was made in the
23
context of a general offer to parties and candidates generally.
24
these occasions did Mr. Lynn make the offer conditional for supporting on a
10:09:34 25
When I declined the offer he
On neither of
planning matter nor indeed did he refer to any planning matter during these
26
conversations.
27
Democratic Left, the end of 1998 beginning of 1999, I was informed by
28
constituency officers of the Labour Party that Mr Eddie Sweeney or his company
29
had made a donation of 1,000 pounds to the Dun Laoghaire constituency of the
10:09:54 30
Labour Party.
Around the time of the merger of the Labour Party and
The contribution was returned to Mr. Sweeney."
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:09:58
10:10:11
3 1 2
Is that your evidence in relation to payments you may have been offered or
3
received from Mr. Lynn, Monarch Properties or their associated companies?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 2
Now, can I ask you why did you decline the offer from Mr. Lynn for the General
6 7
Election 1992, which I think was held in November 1992? A.
It was probably instinct.
8
rezoning of land.
9
controversial.
10:10:44 10
It was
I didn't think it was appropriate to accept a contribution to
decisions on matters that effected their company. Q. 3
13 14
I was a member of the County Council at the time.
my election campaign at a time when I was a member of the County Council making
11 12
At the time Monarch Properties were proposing
I should have asked you at the outset.
In 1992 you were a member of the
Dublin County Council, isn't that right? When were you first elected? A.
10:11:09 15
I was elected in 1985 re-elected in '91.
Served until the end of '94 when I
was appointed Minister of State and then was co-opted back on again in --
16
Q. 4
September, I think?
17
A.
1997 and then served until the end of the dual mandate in 2003.
18
Q. 5
Did you get the impression from Mr. Lynn that he was making similar calls to
19 10:11:29 20
other politicians during the course of that election? A.
21
Yes, my impression was that this was a ring around of some kind to offer election contributions, it wasn't a terribly long conversation.
22
Q. 6
Did he indicate to you the amount that they had proposed offering you?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 7
And again, I think in either '97 or 1999 you received a similar call?
A.
Yes, and it was the same, you know, type of ringing around, you know, would
10:11:47 25
26
you -- you know, can we make a contribution to your election campaign and I
27
declined and he said something to the effect 'well that's what I expected you
28
to say' and went on to wish me well in the election.
29 10:12:11 30
Q. 8
Were those the reasons why you returned the 1,000 pounds from Mr. Sweeney's companies in '98/'99? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:12:13
10:12:32
4 1
A.
Well that came through the party rather than to me and it came up in
2
discussions. Around the time of the merger we had a kind of a joint committee
3
of the old constituency executive of the Labour Party and the old constituency
4
executive of the Democratic Left.
It came up at one of those meetings that
5
this contribution had been made.
There was a brief discussion on it.
6
was returned.
7
Q. 9
And it
Now, I think you have told the Tribunal, if we look at 8592, that you knew Mr.
8
Dunlop and you knew that Mr. Dunlop was lobbying in the early 1990's on behalf
9
of developers.
10:12:58 10
11
He lobbied you in relation to two developments at least.
at least was in the Carrickmines area, the Paisley Park? A.
12
That's correct, that was my first contact with Mr. Dunlop.
He approached me
about Paisley Park.
13
Q. 10
And another development?
14
A.
I remember he sending me stuff or giving me material about Quarryvale.
Q. 11
Yes.
10:13:14 15
16
Just in relation to Mr. Dunlop.
You would have seen Mr. Dunlop, I take
it on your visits to the council chamber?
17
A.
Oh, yes, he was regularly around the council chamber.
18
Q. 12
And Mr. Lynn equally and Mr. Reilly and possibly Mr. Sweeney?
19
A.
Yes, I would have seen them regularly.
10:13:34 20
chamber.
21 22
One
They were both around the council
Also, over that period of time they were a regular feature at
various community activities and various events around the constituency. Q. 13
Now, just dealing with the Cherrywood lands themselves.
I think the Manager
23
brought proposal to the council in late 1990, which was effectively DP90/123.
24
And there were two meetings one in October and the other in November, which
10:14:01 25
culminated I think in a motion being debated on 6th of December 1990. Do you
26 27
recall the Manager's proposals and that debate on 6th of December 1990? A.
Yes, I do.
I recall that there was a recommendation from the Manager that
28
there should be, I suppose, a strategic approach taken to future development of
29
what became known as the Carrickmines Valley, the area of -- the area really
10:14:27 30
from Leopardstown Road out to Loughlinstown, Shankill and back up to Stepaside, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:14:34
10:15:00
5 1
Kiltiernan and the Manager was recommending a mixture of housing, industrial
2
and commercial development right across that whole stretch of area.
3
Q. 14
Did you know by December '90 that Monarch had acquired these lands in
4
Cherrywood and had made submissions to the Manager and to the planners in
5
relation to their possible development?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 15
I don't think you were present at that meeting on the 6th of December but you
8
were present I think at a meeting on the 24th of May '91 when there was
9
discussion on the map for public display; isn't that right?
10:15:16 10
11
A.
That's right.
Q. 16
You supported the first proposal there I think, which was the '83 map subject
12 13
to amendments; isn't that right? A.
14
That's right.
The Manager, first of all it has to be said, was anxious to get
something out on public display because we were coming up towards the Local
10:15:36 15
Elections and we'd been at it for about four years.
And there was this -- he
16
presented a set of I think it was three alternatives, one of which was to put
17
out this varied version of the '83 Plan and I supported that, yes.
18
Q. 17
19
Now, I think then that that map went on display between September and December '91 and submissions were received.
10:16:02 20
There were some oral hearings I think in
early '92 and the Manager came back then in early '92, around May '92, with his
21
proposals DP92/44 namely.
If we could have 7203, please.
22 23
This is the Manager's proposals. They are effectively to extend the
24
residential zoning and to extend it on an action area plan; isn't that right?
10:16:34 25
26
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 18
Now, I think you yourself at that stage had, together with some of your
27
colleagues, tabled some motions; isn't that correct?
28
A.
That's correct, we had.
29
Q. 19
If we could have 7162.
10:16:48 30
This is a motion signed by yourself, Councillor
O'Ceallaigh and Councillor Colm Breathnach? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:16:52
10:17:02
6 1
A.
O'Callaghan.
2
Q. 20
Apologies, for a special amenity area order to be made for the
3
Loughlinstown/Shanganagh Valley; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right.
5
Q. 21
I think there was a further motion. If we could have
7165, please. This was
6
a proposal that the lands be zoned AS 1, which is, I think, is residential on
7
septic tank.
One house to the acre
8
A.
One to the acre, yes.
9
Q. 22
And then if I could have finally 7168, which is a proposal that an identified
10:17:25 10
area of land be set aside for C zoning; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 23
Now, can I just ask you in relation to that C zoning.
13 14
How did you come to
table that motion? A.
10:17:41 15
Well, in the lead up to the tabling of those motions there was a lot of debate in the community.
There were I suppose two differing views emerging; one was
16
that there should be no development at all on the lands and the second was a
17
view, mainly, centred in the Loughlinstown/Ballybrack area, mainly among
18
community leaders, that the proposals that were made by Monarch Properties
19
would generate employment.
10:18:08 20
Now, bearing in mind that the Manager in his
original recommendation in 1990 had proposed that there should be some
21
commercial zoning on that land, we decided to table a motion which would, we
22
felt, generate some employment in that area.
23 24
Q. 24
You had attended I think a meeting of the Carrickmines Valley Preservation Association held on 5th of November '91. We see that at 3368.
10:18:32 25
26
And we see your contribution as noted, I think, by a representative of Monarch
27
at 3369.
28
motorway and why land shouldn't be zoned for industry.
29
difference in density between four houses to the acre and ten to the acre.
10:18:52 30
Namely, you had queried why there should be no junctions on the
Was that reasonable? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And you queried the
10:18:53
10:19:11
7 1
A.
Yes, there were a number of issues.
One was the Carrickmines Valley
2
Association were suggesting that there should be no junction on the motorway
3
between Shankill and Sandyford.
4
that would concentrate all of the traffic coming on and off the motorway in
5
both the Shankill and Sandyford areas and I expressed that.
I didn't agree with that because I felt that
6 7
I had indeed at meetings with the council argued that the effect of what we had
8
done in what had gone out on public display, in my opinion, had left the Dun
9
Laoghaire/Rathdown end of the county short in terms of the industrial and
10:19:35 10
commercially zoned land.
There was no land zoned for industry -- there was no
11
remaining land effectively in the old Dun Laoghaire borough which was zoned for
12
industry or commercial activity.
13
end of the old County Council was very low and the effect of the motions that
14
had been passed in May of 1991 had been to cut that down even further.
And the amount in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
10:19:59 15
16
And given that there was very substantial unemployment, we'd about 8,000 I
17
think in the Dun Laoghaire Labour Exchange, there was I think about 13,000 I
18
think altogether unemployed in the county, there was -- it was having huge
19
effects in communities like Loughlinstown and Ballybrack in particular.
10:20:18 20
felt that there was a need to redress that in the amendment stage of the County
21
Development Plan.
22
that were held around that time as well
23
Q. 25
24 10:20:36 25
I
I expressed that at that meeting and indeed other meetings
I think on 18th of March '92 you wrote to Mr. Lynn.
I think at that stage you
were suggesting an independent? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 26
Economic assessment of the development; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right.
When Monarch mounted this big public relations campaign to
28
support their proposal and as part of that they said that they were going to
29
create 1,000 jobs in the construction stage and 1,000 jobs would be generated
10:20:59 30
when it would be all built.
Now, I reckoned that yes, there was jobs
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:21:05
10:21:22
8 1
potential in what they were proposing but I felt that they were exaggerating
2
the amount and I suggested that there should be an independent evaluation
3
carried out of the jobs potential of what they were proposing and I recommended
4
that that should be carried out by the Irish Productivity Centre.
5
Q. 27
I think they acceded to that request?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 28
I think the 1,000 jobs during the initial construction phase became 500 and 600
8 9
jobs; is that correct? A.
10:21:38 10
Yes, it didn't -- I mean, they didn't come to the conclusion that it was going to be 1,000 at construction and 1,000 afterwards.
11
entire construction stage and 600 when completed.
12
significant I felt.
13
Q. 29
14
Which of course was still
Would it be fair to say during this period there would have been contact between you and representatives of Monarch, possibly Mr. Lynn in relation to
10:21:55 15
the strategy and your proposals in relation to the district centre?
16
A.
Oh, yes.
17
Q. 30
Can I ask you.
18 19
I think it was 500 over the
How did you settle on the precise location for the centre as
appears in the map accompanying your motion? A.
10:22:14 20
Um, well, I was conscious of the road connection from the old Wyattville Road to the new motorway was going to go up there and there was also the Harcourt
21
Street line.
22
be preserved for public transport. At that time the idea was a bus way now
23
it's obviously the LUAS and the location was around where the connecting road
24
and the bus way would intersect.
10:22:37 25
Q. 31
26
Yes.
And I had a separate motion that the Harcourt Street line should
Was that the subject of any negotiation with the Monarch representatives
or discussion at that time or was it solely your --?
27
A.
No, no, it was our own -- it was our own um -- it was our own ideas.
28
Q. 32
Well then I think on 27th of May the Manager produced his report and if we
29
could have 7207.
10:23:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:23:08
10:23:13
9 1
Councillors Lydon and McGrath proposed that the Manager's draft be accepted;
2
isn't that right? I think you voted against that?
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 33
At the time.
Can I ask you were there particular councillors who were -- who
5
were easily identifiable with the Monarch proposals at this time? In other
6
words, were there councillors whose views in relation to this were well known?
7
A.
I mean, there were a lot of councillors who had motions down on it.
8
Q. 34
Yes?
9
A.
And it was obviously very -- there was a lot of controversy about it.
10:23:39 10
I -- no, I wouldn't -- I mean, that wasn't, I mean that wasn't my view that
11
there were particular councillors that you could say were identifiably --
12
Q. 35
Supportive?
13
A.
Supportive of Monarch.
14
Q. 36
In any event you voted against that proposal. If we look at 7208.
10:23:58 15
I mean, different people had different motions on it.
that proposal or motion was unsuccessful; isn't that right? A.
That's right.
What we were trying to do, we felt that the motions we had
18
submitted were kind of a package.
19
as a package.
10:24:20 20
We were anxious to have had them voted on
The standing orders required each motion to be voted on
separately and to relate only to a specific thing.
21
separately.
22
get to voting on it as a package.
23
I think
you then had a proposal that the motion would be taken in a certain order and
16 17
I --
Q. 37
24
Yes.
So we suggested that order.
It was as close as we were going to
Councillor Lydon, I think, and Hand advised the members that they wished
to withdraw a motion that they had tabled.
10:24:44 25
They had to be voted on
That's at 7209.
And then you got
into the first of a series of motions?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 38
In relation to the density effectively?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 39
We see at the bottom of 7209 a motion by Councillor Gordon and Reeves which is
10:24:54 30
to be found at 7210, that the lands be zoned effectively at one house to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:24:59
10:25:13
10 1
acre on septic tank.
I think that was taken together with a motion in the
2
name of Councillor Breathnach and Smith that there would be -- that the Monarch
3
lands would be at one house to the acre.
4
density; isn't that right?
That would have been very low
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 40
That was about as low as you could go at that time vis-a-vis housing?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 41
I think you voted against that?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 42
You were to subsequently vote on the same day in favour of an almost similar
10:25:20 10
11
motion brought by Councillor Barrett.
12
that motion and in favour of the Councillor Barrett motion subsequently?
13
A.
14
Well first of all, that motion came before the motions that we had tabled ourselves.
10:25:41 15
And we were anxious, to if you like, support the motions that we
had tabled ourselves.
16
Can I ask you why you voted against
end.
The Councillor Barrett motion if you like was at the
And that was the fall-back position.
17
Q. 43
You would never have got to your motions had these motions been successful?
18
A.
That's right. Those motions, they would have cut across the proposals that we
19
had had in our motions and then obviously as the proposals which were in our
10:25:57 20
motions began to fall, if you like the fall back position then became
21 22
Councillor Barrett's motion. Q. 44
23 24 10:26:12 25
I think we see your motion at 7214 and I think you were successful in relation to that motion.
That's the C zoning; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 45
And then we see the Councillor Barrett motion.
26
I think the matter then went
out on publish display for a second time; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right.
28
Q. 46
Now, sometime in 1993 it appears that the idea of a Business and Science and
29 10:26:35 30
Technology Park being sited on the left-hand side became a reality. you first hear about the science and technology suggestion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
When did
10:26:38
10:26:58
11 1
A.
I think it was sometime around the middle of 1993.
There was an invitation to
2
visit Montpelier in France to look at a science and technology park there.
3
And I remember that was around the time in fact our third child was born, which
4
was in August.
5
Q. 47
6
So it was sometime around then.
We see in correspondence between Monarch and GRE on 13th of July '93.
At
4825, if we look at 4826.
7 8
There is a dispute in relation to fees incurred in relation to that trip.
9
Mr. Sweeney, as we see there, says outcome of the conference has been used to
10:27:18 10
good effect with Councillor Donal Marren and Deputy Eamonn Gilmore in
11
particular and may yet provide us with a mechanism of obtaining an acceptable
12
zoning on Cherrywood.
13 14
You would accept that at this stage Monarch were anxious to increase their
10:27:32 15
density both in relation to housing and in relation to industry on the site;
16 17
isn't that right? A.
18 19
Q. 48
Yes.
Councillor Marren has given evidence that he was the only person who
travelled on that.? A.
22 23
Could I say that I didn't actually go on that visit to
Montpelier.
10:27:48 20
21
That's right.
Oh, yes.
I mean, there was no -- you know, they were looking for the maximum
amount of zoning that they could get on it. Q. 49
24
I think at a meeting with the manager on the 14th July 1993 at 4312, they are putting forward the concept of the Science and Technology Park, but they are I
10:28:09 25
think asking for an increase in density for any lands that would be lost as a
26
result of the park being sited there; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 50
You weren't aware of that?
29
A.
No.
Q. 51
Were you aware of any discussions with the management as opposed to the
10:28:21 30
I wasn't aware of that at the time.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:28:25
10:28:41
12 1
councillors in relation to the science and technology or indeed industry on the
2
land in this period that is 1993?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 52
Now, we do know that there was a -- that the matter came back before the
5
council, I think, on 11th of November 1993, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 53
And two motions in the names of Councillor -- If I could have 7226, please.
8 9
This is a motion in the name of Councillor Marren, Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and
10:28:59 10
Ormonde, effectively zoning an area of land with four houses to the acre with
11
the balance being zoned at two houses to the hectare, which is effectively one
12
to the acre, came before the council; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 54
If I could have 2720. This is the map which would have shown, the blue area as
10:29:18 15
you will see on the map is an area zoned for agricultural purposes.
16
The red
area is your town centre.
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 55
The area surrounded by the red verge line is the Monarch lands?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 56
And all of the area coloured yellow including that surrounded by the red line
10:29:32 20
21
is an area where the Manager was suggesting ought to be zoned at four houses
22
to the acre?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 57
And the motion that came for debate was a motion that only those lands, that is
10:29:49 25
to say the Monarch lands, be zoned at four houses to the acre.
26
You voted
against that motion I think at that time?
27
A.
I did, yes.
28
Q. 58
The motion was successful.
29 10:29:58 30
Can I ask you, was there any good reason why only the Monarch lands should at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:30:02
10:30:16
13 1 2
that time be zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
I don't recall any discussion of that at the time.
3
you know, in the debate that took place about it.
4
an issue in the argument.
I don't recall that being, I don't recall that being
5
Q. 59
In the council?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 60
It would appear, would you agree with me, that that motion would appear to have
8 9 10:30:25 10
benefited only the Monarch lands? A.
Well it applied only to the Monarch lands.
Q. 61
And Mr. Murray, the planning officer, said that there was no good planning
11
reason why only the Monarch lands.
12
in principle.
13
lands should be zoned at four to the acre?
14
A.
10:30:46 15
16
I appreciate that you were opposed to it
But that there was no good planning reason why only the Monarch
Well I don't -- I mean, if that's Mr. Murray's view obviously he was the county planner at the time.
Q. 62
Now, the zoning was not an area Action Plan zoning it was just four houses to
17
the acre on piped sewage.
18
early '94.
19
4293 on 6th of January '94 that he was hoping to have an Action Plan ready
10:31:09 20
We know from the notes of the meeting with Mr. Murray indeed at
within two months.
21
I think an area Action Plan was commence in the
And he was also suggesting that the plan might highlight
the anomaly of that area coloured blue on the map.
22 23
If we could have 2720 again, please, which was zoned agricultural.
24
that the line of the motorway was likely to move further west, that that area
10:31:27 25
be zoned for residential purposes also.
That now
Did you know that those debates and
26
those discussions were taking place at that time with the planners or the
27
Manager?
28
A.
I did not, no.
29
Q. 63
It would appear that in early '94, that is to say in I think in May '94 you
10:31:48 30
tabled a motion in relation to the science and technology park; isn't that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:31:52
10:32:02
14 1
right?
2
A.
Yes, for the planning committee of the council.
3
Q. 64
For the planning committee of the council.
Did you have any discussions with
4
either the management in the first instance.
5
Manager or the planners, in relation to the tabling of that motion in advance
6
of it being tabled?
7
A.
When I say management I mean the
I didn't have any discussions specifically about the motion.
But I would have
8
had I think at the time that the science and technology park idea was floated,
9
probably some brief informal discussions with the Manager about, you know,
10:32:30 10
whether he thought it was a good idea or did he thing there was anything in it
11 12
or merit in it or was it a runner. Q. 65
13 14 10:32:37 15
Yes.
That type of discussion.
Would it be fair to say that he was supportive of anything that would
create jobs within his county? A.
Yes, he was positive about it.
Q. 66
Yes.
If we look at.
There was a meeting then I think on the 19th of May.
16
Your motion is tabled for the Planning and Tourism Committee on 23rd of May.
17
On 19th of May '94 at 5107 there is a meeting between the representatives of
18
the council and representatives of Monarch and indeed, GRE. If we look at 5108
19
under the heading Action Area Plan.
10:33:07 20
The plan is produced to the Monarch
representatives.
21 22
And AP I think is the Deputy County Manager.
23
had had with Kevin O'Sullivan, County Manager, in relation to changing 56 acres
24
and 11 of agriculture to facilitate job creating zoning science and technology
10:33:24 25
park.
Outlined previous discussions he
The Deputy Manager indicated GRE were prepared to consider -- sorry.
26
I should say that is Mr. Pat Field, who is a representative of GRE, were
27
prepared to consider this subject to being compensated for loss of residential
28
land.
He also raised a point of the density of residential on service land.
29 10:33:46 30
Did you know at this time when you were tabling your motion that it was likely Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:33:50
10:34:08
15 1
to result in GRE and Monarch asking that there be additional lands zoned for
2
residential or indeed other lands zoned for industrial purposes?
3
A.
No.
In fact, my thinking was that it would have done the reverse, because I
4
was quite unhappy at the four to the acre zoning that had been put on the land
5
and felt that, you know, given a choice, you know, that if you had -- the one
6
thing we weren't short of in Dun Laoghaire at that time were large houses and
7
large sites.
8
And I felt that the -- the purpose of my motion was to -- was to if you like,
9
substitute the science and technology park for some of the housing zoning.
10:34:33 10
Q. 67
We were short of opportunities for people to get some work.
Now, I think that if we continue on at 5109.
Just you see RML, I think that's
11
Mr. Lynn, advised that the members would be receptive to a proposal from
12
management to change the 66 acres to industrial to facilitate a science and
13
technology park, to retain 17 acres of commercial and for the residue of the
14
lands to be zoned residential with an A1 density.
10:34:57 15
16
DT, who I understand is the Deputy Manager, indicated that it was his
17
impression that the change of the industrial lands was a fait accompli.
18 19
Did you understand the change to industrial lands or the science and technology
10:35:11 20
21
lands at this stage, that is to say May 1994, to be a fait accompli? A.
22 23 24 10:35:32 25
No, I did not.
The motion that I had tabled wasn't considered by the
committee until after that. Q. 68
That's right.
We do know, for example, on 14th of June.
8617, that Monarch were writing to GRE. between Monarch and GRE.
If I could have
This is in relation to the agreement
And we see from that letter, "we discussed amongst
26
other things a fee payable to Monarch Property Services for work in connection
27
with the change of zoning to industrial on certain of the Cherrywood lands.
28
The fee suggested for this was 50,000 payable immediately and a further 100,000
29
on success, half being payable by guardian".
10:35:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:35:53
10:36:04
16 1
Did you know that there were those sort of discussions and correspondence
2
between Monarch and GRE at this time in relation to the possibility of getting
3
industrial zoning on the lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 69
Now, there was a report I think published or produced by Mr. Lynn in June of
6
1994 and you will have seen that in the brief circulated but included in that
7
was a projection for fees that might become payable.
8
please, sorry, the report itself is at 5167 but if I could have 5175. There's
9
a heading Budget for Social Events.
10:36:43 10
it refers to an appendix A.
If we could have,
You will see there at item No. 11.
And
And at appendix A, to be found at 5178 under the
11
heading Cherrywood General Promotions.
That's 5178.
They set out a budget,
12
as I understand it, we'll hear evidence I'm sure in time from the
13
representatives of Monarch in relation to it.
14 10:37:03 15
You will see that there is a proposed budget in relation to a general election
16
and a Senate election.
17
parties including I think your own at that time.
18
were proposing a budget for at that time, that is June '94, in relation to
19
upcoming political events?
10:37:24 20
21
There is a budget for all of the various political Did you know that Monarch
A.
No, I did not.
Q. 70
Now, Monarch identified a number of key people in relation to the matter.
22
think you were identified as one of those.
23
I presume it wouldn't surprise you that you would have been identified as
24
somebody whose support ought to be solicited at this time?
10:37:50 25
26
They were all local councillors.
A.
Well, I was a member of the council at the time and ...
Q. 71
You step out the of the picture I think by late '94 because you're appointed
27
a Minister; isn't that right?
28
A.
That's correct, yes.
29
Q. 72
I think there was a policy of the Government's to designate as an area a
10:38:05 30
I
science and technology park and Cherrywood -- the Carrickmines lands was one of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:38:10
10:38:26
17 1 2
the areas that was in contention for that; isn't that right? A.
Yes, the designation idea I think had come back actually too early -- I knew it
3
was in the air this idea of designating at the time that I tabled the motion
4
for the planning committee.
5
universities and that there were a number of sites in consideration.
6
which was the Cherrywood site.
7
Q. 73
And I knew that there were discussions involving One of
If we could have 7464.
8 9
The science -- the possibility of a science and technology park and the review
10:38:41 10
of the plan and the negotiations with the Manager.
11
Did you know that the
Manager negotiated on behalf of the council to become a joint partner?
12
A.
Yes, I did.
13
Q. 74
Yes?
14
A.
Before I went off the council at the end of '94.
Q. 75
That was reported, I think, at a meeting on 14th of November '94.
10:39:00 15
In fact, that had been reported to the council.
16 17
If we could have 2390.
18
at 2391, and subsequently the agreement itself is I think at 2392.
19
was that the council would purchase one-third of the lands.
10:39:30 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 76
Yes.
22 23
We see that meeting.
We can see the Manager's Report The idea
Now, you knew -- you were present for that, that was shortly before you
left the council; isn't that right? A.
24
That's right.
My recollection of it was that the Manager came back with a
recommendation that the council would become a partner in the whole science and
10:39:50 25
technology park project idea.
That it would acquire part of the lands.
And
26
I think there was also the idea that if the council acquired additional lands
27
adjacent to it, that it could -- that the council could increase its share of
28
the project and there were some arrangements made for setting up of some kind
29
of a joint company and so on to manage it.
10:40:14 30
Q. 77
And I think that that found unanimous agreement amongst the councillors; isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:40:20
10:40:33
18 1 2
that right? A.
Yes, the whole idea of the science and technology park was unanimously
3
supported by the council at the time.
There may have been some, some
4
individuals may have some difficulties -- I think probably some individual
5
aspects of it but the overall idea was a general consensus on the council that
6
this was a good idea, this was something we should be looking for and we were
7
also aware that there was sites in each of the other three local authorities.
8
Q. 78
Yes?
9
A.
Who were bidding to get this designation as a national science and technology
10:40:52 10
park.
11
Q. 79
I think that designation was given in 1996 but not to Cherrywood?
12
A.
That's right.
13
Q. 80
I think it went to City West?
14
A.
City West, yes.
Q. 81
There is no doubt but that the science and technology park allowed for increase
10:41:00 15
16
in density on the site in Carrickmines; isn't that right? That whole scheme
17
brought about by the review of the plan, the action area plan, the variation of
18
the plan necessitated, I suggest, by the science and technology park allowed
19
for an increase in density and increased area for residential zoning?
10:41:31 20
A.
Well it was a consequence of it.
21
Q. 82
Yes?
22
A.
That there was an increase in density.
23 24 10:41:40 25
26
I wouldn't agree that it necessarily
had to be like that. Q. 83
Yes?
A.
But that was the way it turned out.
Q. 84
That appears to have been -- as far as Monarch and GRE were concerned, they
27
were anxious that if there were to be a science and technology park at this
28
location, in particular if the council were to be involved, then the gain to
29
them was an increase in density; isn't that right?
10:41:57 30
A.
Yeah, the agreement or if you like the framework that was agreed, was that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:42:03
10:42:23
19 1
council would acquire part of the land, would become a partner in it.
2
was this knock on effect in terms of the -- I think there was some knock on
3
effect in terms of the district centre and also a knock on effect in terms of
4
the land which was zoned residential and I suppose that emerged as a kind of a
5
package.
6
Q. 85
There
Now, I think that there was -- it took some time for there to be any
7
development in the area; isn't that right? And certainly I'm not sure if there
8
is even still a science and technology park in the area or do you know?
9
A.
Well, Dell and Lucent have been located there.
Q. 86
We're back in '94/'95?
11
A.
No, it was a number of years after that before ....
12
Q. 87
I think the Manager when he was giving evidence expressed annoyance that it
10:42:44 10
That also developed.
13
took so long for there to be development there.
14
on the delay in getting the development, employment development on the lands?
10:43:04 15
A.
Do you recall any discussions
Oh, yes, there was annoyance that it was taking so long for it to emerge.
16
know that it got caught up.
17
court cases and they had all kinds of internal problems and so on.
18
it wasn't designated as a science and technology park.
19
Q. 88
Yes.
I
There was Monarch Properties, I think there were Of course
Now, I think the review of the '93 plan came about in '97.
10:43:28 20
21
And you were back in in late '97.
22
the January '98, which again result in an extension of the science and
23
technology area and the effectively increase in density and a review of the
24
restriction on the town centre; isn't that right?
10:43:46 25
26
I think a series of motions were debate in
A.
That's right, yes, yes, I remember that.
Q. 89
Thank you very much, Mr Gilmore.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
any rumours or stories of payments to councillors which were circulating in the
10:44:04 30
All right.
Mr Gilmore, could I just ask you.
Were you aware of
early 1990s and were the subject I think of some newspaper reports, some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:44:09
10:44:19
20 1
witnesses have said they have recalled hearing rumours and stories to that
2
effect.
3
A.
Do you recall anything of that nature?
Well I remember the newspaper articles.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
I mean, there had been newspaper articles about what was happening in planning
7
in County Dublin going probably back to the 1970s.
8
Garda investigation into the Dublin County Council Bord Pleanala or perhaps
9
both around 1989.
10:44:43 10
11
There was, I recall, a
It was around the time I was elected to the Dail.
And I
remember at the time feeling that the Garda investigation was not going to get to the bottom of it.
And I called in the Dail for an inquiry.
12 13
I also published in the lead up to the 1991 Local Elections, a kind of a
14
summary of what had been happening on the County Council by way of material
10:45:05 15
contraventions and Section 4 motions and that type of thing.
I never -- I
16
didn't hear of specific, you know, A paid B money but I suppose my general
17
impression was that -- was that there were payments going to political parties
18
and that there was a kind of a general disposition to be pro, probuilding or
19
pro, you know, proconstruction.
10:45:36 20
But I didn't hear.
I didn't hear of any
specific, somebody paying somebody money, that type of thing.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr Gilmore.
23 24 10:45:46 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN:
We'll rise until eleven o'clock so that ...
10:46:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:46:13
11:12:00
21 1 2
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
3
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
Continuation of questioning of Mr. Frank Dunlop as follows:
9 11:12:11 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
Good morning, Chairman, Judges.
14 11:12:24 15
MR. MURPHY:
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop
16
A.
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
17
Q. 90
Mr. Dunlop, could I just ask you, to begin with, if having overnight perhaps
18
reflected on your evidence yesterday and considered your evidence, anticipated
19
your evidence today, have you anything, have you any comment to make about your
11:12:42 20
evidence yesterday? Would you like to add anything, is there any correction
21
you want to make in it or are you happy with it?
22
A.
No.
I'll proceed as normal.
23
Q. 91
Right.
Mr. Dunlop, can I ask you -- yes.
Could I have 8705, please.
24 11:13:27 25
The Tribunal has received recently a narrative statement from Cathal Boland.
26
A.
Uh-huh.
27
Q. 92
And on page 8705, under your name, the first paragraph he says "on two separate
28
occasions Mr. Frank Dunlop extended invitations to me to attend, which I did,
29
the official openings in both the Tallaght and UCI Malahide Road, Coolock
11:14:02 30
cinema complexes.
The date of the Tallaght event eludes me while the Malahide
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:14:10
11:14:21
22 1
Road was in the late Summer, early Autumn of 1991.
Mr. Dunlop's company were
2
the public relations firm engaged to handle the events.
3
promoters were keen to have a cross-section of the community in attendance at
4
these high profile events.
5
the above, their servants or agents"
As I understand the
No other benefits were received by me from any of
6 7 8
Have you any comment to make on that, please? A.
9
Yes.
We did act for, I beg your pardon, we did act for the company that
Mr. Boland refers to and we were responsible for the publicity surrounding the
11:14:40 10
openings of -- advising the companies and surrounding the openings of -- of
11
various openings that they had throughout the city.
12
Q. 93
Right.
13
A.
UCI, United Cinemas International.
14
Q. 94
Right.
11:14:55 15
What is the company you're talking about?
Has that anything to do with what I was asking you yesterday about,
namely about the opening of the Tallaght Centre?
16
A.
No, no, absolutely not.
17
Q. 95
It's a different one?
18
A.
No, the Tallaght Town Centre as an entity as such, nothing to do with me.
19 11:15:11 20
UCI, was a client. Q. 96
21 22
All right.
A normal regular client.
And they didn't open -- did they open their cinema complex at the
same time as the Tallaght opening? A.
That I can't tell you whether or not they were open at the same time as the
23
actual opening of the complex.
24
certainly we advised the company and we did the promotions in relation to the
11:15:33 25
26
I couldn't absolutely say that.
But
openings. Q. 97
But I imagine that in relation to, for example, if the Tallaght Centre opening,
27
that we talked yesterday that you went to with Mr. Lawlor and the other people
28
whose names you wrote down?
29 11:15:49 30
A.
Correct.
Q. 98
And the opening that you went to with Mr. Boland. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
If they were the same
11:15:54
11:16:05
23 1
opening on the same day you'd recall?
2
A.
Yes, I would.
3
Q. 99
Yes?
4
A.
In fairness.
5
And I don't think they were.
I -- I just looked at it on the screen and I've seen it.
this statement five minutes ago.
6
Q. 100
Yes?
7
A.
In relation to, the usual.
8
Q. 101
Yes?
9
A.
Certainly members of my staff were responsible.
Q. 102
Yes?
11
A.
For the publicity surrounding these openings.
12
Q. 103
Yes.
11:16:15 10
I saw
But certainly we acted for UCI.
But can I just -- you see, Mr. Dunlop, one of the things I'm finding
13
difficulty with you is that you don't seem to be able to give a definitive
14
answer on anything and you always leave the door a little bit open for
11:16:30 15
something, for a different answer if some more, what you call "evidence" comes
16
to light.
17
really couldn't be any doubt, the opening of the Tallaght Centre that I
18
discussed with you yesterday and the one you I'm talking about now, the opening
19
of the UCI that you acted for with Mr. Boland.
11:16:51 20
I don't think there could be
any doubt in your mind as to whether they are two separate occasions or one
21 22
I'm just suggesting to you, perhaps I'm wrong in this, there
occasion? A.
I can absolutely assure you that UCI Cinemas, United Cinemas International was
23
in no way in the forefront of my mind at the time we went to the opening of the
24
Tallaght Town Centre with the people that I mentioned to you yesterday.
11:17:08 25
Q. 104
Mr. Dunlop, I think Mr. Dunlop, you have said previously?
26
A.
Uh-huh.
27
Q. 105
That you never paid money to Mr. Cathal Boland?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 106
And have you just a few moments ago you've been given the statement?
A.
Yes.
11:17:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:17:40
11:17:52
24 1
Q. 107
If you can go to 8706, please.
2 3
And if -- I'll just read out that paragraph.
4 5
"Frank Dunlop phoned me and arranged to meet me in the council after lunch.
6
am unclear as to what the date was.
7
We had a chat about the election, what might happen.
8
contribution in a sealed envelope and told me it was provided by four or five
9
individuals.
11:18:10 10
I
I was in the FG room and Frank came in. He gave me a
When I asked him for their names he told me they were happy to
make the contribution and that it was not necessary that they be acknowledged.
11
I was then and still am unaware of the identity of these subscribers.
12
gave me to believe -- he gave me to believe that he was not one of these
13
people.
14
and left.
11:18:33 15
But he
He indicated he was in a hurry, wished me luck regarding the election Subsequently when I opened the envelope which contained 4,000
pounds in cash.
There is no documentation in my possession other than my
16
record of receipt of this amount.
17
Dunlop is not recorded as making any other contribution or subscription to me
18
at any time nor do I recall him as so doing."
19
I understand this was November 1992, I think that comes from the previous page.
11:18:58 20
21
Have you anything to say about that? A.
22
No. Sorry, I do have something to say about it.
Q. 108
Right.
24
A.
No.
Q. 109
All right.
26 27
11:19:36 30
You didn't make that?
So Mr. Cathal Boland is inventing that, making it up, not telling
the truth, making an allegation against you that is without foundation? A.
28 29
The answer is no, I did not
make that contribution.
23
11:19:15 25
From records to hand it is clear that Mr
Well, he may have well got 4,000 pounds but he certainly didn't get 4,000 pounds from me.
Q. 110
I'm not interested in if he got it from anybody else, Mr. Dunlop. talking about 4,000 pounds in cash from you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
We're
11:19:38
11:19:48
25 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 111
Did he get any sum in cash from you?
3
A.
He got a contribution that he requested from me for some political function, a
4
fundraising function that he was organising.
5
Q. 112
How much?
6
A.
I think it was something in the order of 250 pounds or something.
7
Q. 113
I take it 250 is right?
8
A.
Yes, you can.
9
Q. 114
Okay.
11:19:57 10
11
that. A.
All right.
Okay.
That's fine.
We're aware, we're on notice of
This he just -- he didn't get this from you, you are flabbergasted?
Well I am -- well the answer is no, I did not make that contribution to him.
12
And secondly, the background is why would I make such a contribution to Cathal
13
Boland? Cathal Boland never appeared on the radar screen, as far as I'm
14
concerned, in relation to matters we're dealing with in this Tribunal.
11:20:23 15
fairness to him, he never asked for and I never gave him any money in relation
16 17
In
to anything relating to the Development Plan in Dublin County Council. Q. 115
Now, Mr. Dunlop, in we could just have -- I want to just touch on something.
18
Page 571, please. I was asking you yesterday about that first meeting with Mr.
19
Sweeney?
11:20:57 20
21
A.
Yeah.
Q. 116
And I was -- your evidence is that that meeting just took place just with
22
Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes
24
Q. 117
You are very clear about that and I was putting to you about your private
11:21:12 25
interview in May 2000 when you said it was Mr. Sweeney and Mr Lawlor.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 118
I can't remember how you answered me.
28 29 11:21:29 30
Anyway, you said what you are saying
now is correct and what you said then was not correct? A.
What I did say to you yesterday and the transcript may well show it to be correct.
Yes, I did meet Mr. Sweeney on his own. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Yes, I did meet
11:21:35
11:21:49
26 1
Mr. Sweeney with Mr. Lawlor on other occasions with Monarch.
2
summarises what I said.
3
Q. 119
Can you tell me this.
I think that
That first meeting with Mr. Sweeney in Harcourt Street.
4
How could you describe your recollection, have you a good recollection of it or
5
a vague recollection of it?
6
A.
I would say I have a reasonable recollection of it, yes.
7
Q. 120
A reasonable recollection of it?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 121
Is it a recollection, the reasonableness of the recollection one that maybe you
11:22:04 10
11
wouldn't remember precisely who was there? A.
12
No.
Let me assure you in relation to who was precisely there.
I met
Mr. Sweeney on his own on that occasion.
13
Q. 122
All right.?
14
A.
I met Mr. Sweeney obviously many more times, either alone or in the presence of
11:22:20 15
16
other people. Q. 123
17
571 and I put this to you yesterday.
Your answer is -- do you see this? The
introduction was facilitated by Liam Lawlor with Eddie Sweeney?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 124
At Monarch's offices in Harcourt Street.
11:22:37 20
I met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam
Lawlor at that office?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 125
And then you go on to say how Mr. Sweeney explained certain things to you.
23 24
Now, I put that to you yesterday, all right, as to what you had said to the
11:22:47 25
Tribunal in an interview in May 2000 about who was at the meeting?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 126
And Mr. Lawlor was there?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 127
Could we move on in that interview, please, to page 589.
11:22:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:22:59
11:23:19
27 1
Now, and Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Dunlop, I remind you that you have sworn today and
2
yesterday that Mr. Lawlor was not at this first meeting
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 128
Page 589.
5
Mr. Hanratty at line 50, while we are waiting on that can I just
flash back to the first meeting that you had with Eddie Sweeney.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 129
You said that Liam Lawlor was there?
8
A.
9
Q. 130
11:23:32 10
Yes. Can you just recall again what was said at that by Mr. Sweeney and or Mr. Lawlor
11
A:
12
are making a blip of the whole thing.
13
Q:
To who?
14
A:
To Sweeney.
11:23:47 15
I will tell you what was said by Mr. Lawlor.
To Sweeney.
Mr. Lawlor said that you
And Sweeney said there is very little I can do
about it because we cannot control Phil.
We do not know what Phil is at and
16
according to Richard, Phil is causing most of the problems for us by virtue of
17
his running an independent. I'll come black to all of this later.
18 19
Thinks he can do it himself and by running an independent campaign and talking
11:24:03 20
to people individually on his own initiative which was the first indication
21
that I had, obviously I had not been involved before.
22
scenario to discover.
23
a client.
24
or independently and to pick up the pieces
11:24:20 25
Which was a disastrous
To find yourself of running on something on behalf of
You discover the client is doing something completely differently
Q: This was a briefing meeting was it.
26
A:
Yes.
I remember it vividly"
27
A.
Uh-huh.
28
Q. 131
Now, do you disagree that you remember that first meeting vividly as opposed to
29 11:24:32 30
reasonably? A.
No, I disagree, sorry.
I disagree that that account in contrast with the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:24:40
11:24:55
28 1
account that I have given now.
2
you.
3
Q. 132
This account, the latest account I've given
Mr. Liam Lawlor was not present at the first meeting.
Mr Dunlop, would you please stick to my simple question.
Do you have a vivid
4
recollection of the meeting or what you said a moment ago, a reasonable
5
recollection which I would have thought are two different things.?
6
A.
I have a reasonable recollection of the meeting.
7
Q. 133
You said in 2000 to the Tribunal you had a vivid recollection.
8
A.
I have a reasonable recollection of the meeting and what was said by
9 11:25:09 10
Which is it?
Mr. Sweeney. Q. 134
11
I take this as an inconsistency then on your part that you don't have a vivid recollection, Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
No, I don't agree.
13
Q. 135
Now, I remember it vividly because it was in Eddie Sweeney's own office which
14 11:25:26 15
was a very cluttered affair in the Harcourt Station.
Q: was this meeting
arranged by Liam Lawlor ?
16
A:
Yes.
17
Q:
In what day I suppose it's on -- did he phone you and ask you to come
18
along?
19
A:
Exactly.
11:25:38 20
Q:
Or did he set up the meeting?
21
A:
He set up the meeting.
22
Q:
In what capacity was he acting here, was he an advisor or something?
23
A:
I think I said there, when I was talking to Mr. Gallagher I, said I
24
believe that certainly there was a very strong relationship between Liam Lawlor
11:25:55 25
and Phil Monahan in the first instance and obviously between Liam Lawlor and
26
the Monarch organisation.
27
Q:
28
Eddie Sweeney kind of apprise you or update you of what had happened up to that
29
point
11:26:11 30
A:
They told you that somebody was making a monumental whatever of it.
He said that Richard and Phil but Richard in particular had done an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Did
11:26:14
11:26:28
29 1
enormous amount of work with all of the councillors.
2
bending the wind to every wind that blew out in Cherrywood in relation to the
3
opposition. Notwithstanding the fact that a lot of them were already on board.
4
Q: yes.
5
A:
6
Q: Was there any discussion in Mr Lawlor's presence by Mr Sweeney in connection
7
with what you were going to do, why you were being brought on board.
8
Presumably Mr Lawlor knew because it was he who arranged the meeting?
9
A:
Yes.
Q:
The discussion ran along the lines that look there is a scenario here
11:26:39 10
They seemed to be
In sense of having been given money
Yes.
11
where a decision has to be made, what is going to be run with.
You know,
12
Frank here knows all of the councillors, knows all of the people.
He can.
13
do not mean to be sort of but this..
14
bit immodest my saying he knows them all and they will believe him.
11:27:00 15
I
this was actually said and it sounds a If Frank
says look this is the best thing to do on a compromise basis. I'll get the
16
thing sorted.
17
directions and drawings if we did this and that and and altered this and
18
altered that, we have facility to do it but there was absolutely no doubt in my
19
mind then, or now, that I was brought in by Lawlor, recommended to Eddie
11:27:19 20
At that same meeting, as per usual, maps were flying in all
Sweeney and others on the basis that I had capacity, persuasiveness or
21
otherwise to ensure that whatever was acceptable to Monarch would run.
22
that meeting was there any discussion of how much your fee would be or was that
23
a different occasion.
24
participate in that conversation at all?
11:27:37 25
A:
No, you raised the fee.
Lawlor would have been there during it.
26
Sorry, perhaps I shouldn't have skipped.
27
I was leaving something out, question 76:
28
Q:
29
different occasion?
11:27:51 30
A:
Question 77.
At
Did Lawlor
He did not participate in it."
Maybe just in case, you might think
Was there any discussion of how much your fee would be or was that on a
No, no, I raised the issue of the fees and at the end of a period of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:28:03
11:28:10
30 1
time, ten minutes or fifteen minutes, Sweeney said a lot of money has been
2
spent on this already and got that much money available, you know what Phil is
3
like.
4
ain't doing it for nothing was the bottom line.
5
Q: Did Lawlor participate in that conversation at all?
6
A:
7
and I did not see why he should participate in it because he was probably.
8
Again, I have no proof of this but he was probably on a separate arrangement
9
and he would probably regard, I think what's left out there is 'me', as
11:28:28 10
Phil likes to look after the money things himself.
I said look I
Lawlor would have been there during it but he did not participate in it
something of an idiot for allowing myself to be envaigled into a position where
11
it's only 25 grand.
12
Q: Part of which had to be at least dispensed?
13
A:
Yes.
14 11:28:43 15
Now, the rest I'll come to later.
16 17
Mr. Dunlop, I'm only putting that long extract to you for two reasons.
18
can be no doubt from that interview where you said you had a vivid
19
recollection -- from that interview with Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty.
11:29:01 20
Where you said that you had a vivid recollection of the first meeting.
There
There
21
is no doubt there on a number of occasions you are clear that Mr. Lawlor was at
22
the meeting.
You are even quoting Mr. Lawlor.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 136
Secondly, it was clear from what you said yesterday that Mr. Sweeney rang you,
11:29:19 25
I didn't think for a moment that the phone call was out of the blue.
But you
26
were saying -- I think you agreed it wasn't right out of the blue, you had
27
maybe a notion that it might be coming.
28
spoke to you you realised that he was there and you would have inferred that
29
Mr. Lawlor set it up.
But it was afterwards when Mr. Lawlor
11:29:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:29:36
11:29:57
31 1
Somewhere along the line you have either told two blatant lies to the Tribunal.
2
Either in that interview to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty or today and
3
yesterday to the judges in the Tribunal on sworn evidence.
4
A.
Elect? Choose you mean.
What I told you yesterday and what I'm telling you
5
this morning is I went to the meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
6
person present.
7
others and Mr. Lawlor.
8
Mr. Gallagher, conversations along those lines.
9 11:30:19 10
11
Please, elect.
There was no other
I did attend other meetings in Monarch with Mr. Sweeney and Along the lines of what I told Mr. Hanratty and
Q. 137
Don't go into that, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Sorry.
Q. 138
I don't mean to interrupt you if you're saying something important --
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Mr Chairman, on behalf of Mr Dunlop, in so far as Mr. Murphy is
14
purporting to make allegations of deliberate falsehoods.
11:30:30 15
I think it is
entirely irresponsible of him to interrupt Mr. Dunlop when he is attempting to
16
defend himself.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
now whether the clear impression one has from the private interviews with
11:30:51 20
I don't quite agree.
Mr. Dunlop is being asked simply to indicate
Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty, to the effect that the first meeting involved
21
Mr. Lawlor.
That that clearly is in conflict with the evidence he has given
22
us yesterday and today to the effect that Mr. Lawlor was not there.
23 24
And Mr. Murphy asked Mr. Dunlop to now decide which version was correct.
11:31:17 25
So that's what Mr. Murphy was asking Mr. Dunlop to do.
26 27
So perhaps, Mr. Dunlop, if you could first of all, say which is correct.
28
the version in the private interview correct.
29
given us yesterday and today correct?
11:31:32 30
A.
Is
Or is the version that you've
Yesterday and today inconsistency with my statement that I made to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:31:37
11:31:40
32 1
Tribunal.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Can you explain then to us?
Yes?
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
was given some years ago but closer to the date when the meeting took place.
8
Why that account was given and given in such detail if it didn't take place?
9
A.
11:32:04 10
Why this very clear account of a first meeting involving Mr. Lawlor
It's six years ago.
Yeah, these were wide discussive discussions with the
Tribunal, with the representatives of the Tribunal in -- am I on mike?
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Yes.
With the Tribunal in private session in relation to my relations with various developers and politicians.
11:32:21 15
Certainly there is absolutely no doubt.
And
there can be no doubt and as far as I'm concerned there is no doubt, that
16
Mr. Liam Lawlor was involved.
As I said, in my statement, was responsible
17
for, I suspect, the recommendation to Monarch that I be brought on board.
18 19 11:32:39 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
Yes we --
Discussions along the lines that I say in private session did take place.
But
the first meeting that I had with Mr. Sweeney was with Mr. Sweeney alone.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
you stating that at the first meeting it was A, set up by Mr. Lawlor.
11:32:59 25
discussion at that first meeting A.
Yes, I know it says that.
28 29 11:33:11 30
And B,
that Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Sweeney and yourself were in attendance and conducted a
26 27
But do you accept that the transcript clearly states -- clearly has
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well can you explain --
I accept it says that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:33:12
11:33:24
33 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
give a different version now?
4
A.
Can you explain why you said that quite clearly at that time and
Well, in answer to your previous question, Chairman.
These were wide
5
discussions with the Tribunal trying to put the pieces together as to what
6
relationship I had with various developers, various companies and various
7
politicians.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
11:33:42 10
11
But does that mean then that you -- that what you said at the time
at the first meeting is incorrect? A.
It's incorrect.
What I'm saying is that the first meeting that took place
12
with Mr. Sweeney was as a result of a phone call from Mr. Sweeney.
13
with Mr. Sweeney alone.
14
and others from Monarch, in the Monarch properties offices.
11:34:03 15
I attended at various other meetings with Mr. Sweeney
Mr. Lawlor, on occasion, not on all.
16
I attended
In the company of
Yes, conversations and discussions along
the lines that I outlined in the private session did take place but --
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
11:34:18 20
Sorry
Sorry, the difference Chairman is in the private session I said this took place at the first meeting.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
place at the first meeting at a time six years ago, much closer to the event
24
than now?
11:34:30 25
A.
Can you explain why you clearly stated all of this to have taken
Uh-huh.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
be incorrect at the time? Is that your explanation or is it that you are
29
mixing up the first meeting and subsequent meetings?
11:34:51 30
A.
I mean, is it that you -- that you gave a version which you knew to
Well, I don't mean to be disingenuous, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But I would suggest to you
11:34:56
11:35:10
34 1
at the meeting in the private session that I -- that I mixed up certain
2
elements of the many conversations that took place between Mr. Sweeney,
3
Mr. Lawlor, myself and other representatives of Monarch.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7 8
Q. 139
9
MR. MURPHY:
11:35:19 10
just by way of a question to you.
11 12
Mr. Dunlop, I want to just go a little bit further with that, I want to suggest to you that throughout
that interview, you lied to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher? A.
No.
All of the details that I gave Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in relation
13
to my relationship with Mr. Sweeney, and Mr. Lawlor, and other representatives
14
of Monarch, is absolutely correct.
11:35:43 15
this took place at the first meeting.
Other than, in that instance, I said that That is not correct.
16
Q. 140
Okay.
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 141
That is not correct.
19
A.
No, there was no deliberate intention --
Q. 142
All right?
A.
On my part on that occasion to mislead Mr. Gallagher or Mr. Hanratty.
11:35:55 20
21 22
There is no other --
These
were --
23
Q. 143
Well --
24
A.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
11:36:09 25
That is a lie.?
These conversations with Mr. Murphy, or with Mr. Hanratty,
and Mr. Gallagher, were conducted in particular circumstances in as relaxed an
26
atmosphere as possible to enable both sides to come to a conclusion as to what
27
occurred in general terms.
28
what had happened in Dublin County Council in relation to particular
29
developments.
11:36:37 30
To enable people to put the jigsaw together as to
And I was of the disposition then, as I am now, to assist as
best I can in relation to what exactly happened. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:36:41
11:36:54
35 1
Q. 144
So this is an error about putting Mr. Lawlor at the first meeting?
2
A.
Well you suggested and I'm attempting to correct the suggestion that you made
3
in relation that it was a deliberate lie.
4
Q. 145
Yes.
5
A.
You're not suggest it.
6
Q. 146
I know --
7
A.
I know you said it and I am disputing that.
8
Q. 147
Yeah?
9
A.
In the circumstances that I have outlined to you --
Q. 148
You have explained that.?
11
A.
Thank you.
12
Q. 149
It's a mistake when you told --
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 150
I take it there are no other mistakes?
A.
There may well be, there may well be.
Q. 151
There may well be more mistakes in this relaxed atmosphere that were made that
11:37:02 10
11:37:08 15
16 17
I'm suggesting that.? You did say it.
are not deliberate?
18
A.
Well --
19
Q. 152
All right.
11:37:33 20
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
all of that was.
Because the twin -- the second part of what
One was in Mr. Lawlor's presence but the other was
21
Mr. Lawlor clearly organising it, setting it up, phoning you, asking you to
22
come to the meeting.
23
another thing you said it in that interview?
24
A.
11:37:50 25
26
That's another thing you don't agree with but that's
I said it became clear to me subsequent to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor had a role in it because Mr. Lawlor said to me --
Q. 153
I know that.
What we just read out what you said at that meeting and it was
27
that it was set up -- yes.
28
and what capacity was he acting.
29
told Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty that Mr. Lawlor actually phoned you to set
11:38:16 30
up the meeting.
That Mr. Lawlor phoned you and set up the meeting I mean, you are also saying that when you
That that's not right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:38:18
11:38:45
36 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 154
Okay.
Now, before going back to the detail of your first meeting, Mr. Dunlop.
3
I want to suggest to you in September 2003 you submitted the second narrative
4
statement to the Tribunal. If we could have that, please, 422.
5 6
Could you just tell me.
7
mean, it's pretty, this is three years later, pretty important request from the
8
Tribunal, pretty important narrative statement.
9
that statement?
11:38:58 10
Did you have everything you required before -- I
I take it you are happy with
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 155
And that it told the truth?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 156
And that you did whatever research was necessary to formulate that statement to
14 11:39:06 15
16
provide it to the Tribunal? A.
Well, I don't know what you mean by "research", but I made the statement.
Q. 157
All right.
Well did you rely just on your own memory or for example, did you
17
go to your accountants, have discussion with anybody that might be necessary.
18
Are you satisfied that's your document and that it's accurate?
19 11:39:23 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 158
I want to suggest, to you, Mr. Dunlop, that it's riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies.
22 23
Now, if you remember yesterday morning, you agreed with me that your statements
24
and interviews taken together were confusing and difficult to follow and
11:39:39 25
contradictory.
And you agreed with that.
26 27
In the same way, I want to now put to you that this statement.
28
go through them very briefly just to touch on them to show what I'm talking
29
about but I just want your general reaction to that statement.
11:39:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I'm going to
11:39:50
11:40:05
37 1
You have read that statement and you've read your interviews.
2
to you that statement is riddled with what I've just said
3
A.
4 5
You've just said that it's riddled with inconsistencies and are going to go through them.
Q. 159
6
I am but before I do that I want you to know, do you think having read it that it's riddled with inconsistencies?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 160
You think it's accurate?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 161
All right.
11:40:09 10
I am suggesting
Before I just embark on that, can I ask you what, when you
11
prepared this statement in 2003, how would you have described your expertise in
12
planning matters?
13
A.
14 11:40:27 15
My expertise in planning matters.
I've never claimed to be an expert in
planning matters. Q. 162
How would you describe, you know, if somebody asked you what do you know about
16
the planning process.
If they had asked you in August 2003 what would you
17
have said, what you have would you have answered them?
18
A.
About the planning process per se or the Development Plan per se.
19
Q. 163
The whole thing.
A.
There was a Development Plan, various mechanisms that you had to follow --
21
Q. 164
You wouldn't describe yourself as an expert on it?
22
A.
Definitely not.
23
Q. 165
Would you have described yourself as familiar with it?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 166
With the '83 Plan, the '91 draft, applications, motions to rezone, all of that
11:40:46 20
11:40:56 25
26 27
kind of stuff? A.
28 29 11:41:14 30
Everything that happened in '93?
Not necessarily with the '83 Plan or what was the other one you mentioned the '90 plan, no, not necessarily.
Q. 167
Okay.
But the procedure whereby you go for zoning and so on?
A.
I've described that on a number of occasions here in the building, in the room. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:41:19
11:41:41
38 1
Q. 168
Okay.
Can we take page 422, line -- well Monarch was known to -- Monarch was
2
known to me as a company which developed the Tallaght Town Centre, was owned by
3
Mr. Phil Monahan and engaged in attempts to have the lands at Cherrywood,
4
Loughlinstown in Carrickmines in South County Dublin rezoned from agricultural
5
use to other purposes mainly housing and retail.
6 7 8
Do you want too say anything about that? A.
9
No, let me go through it.
If this is the way that you want to proceed.
Was
known to me as a company that developed the Tallaght Town Centre, correct.
11:41:54 10
Was owned by Mr. Philip Monahan, correct.
There may well have been other
11
shareholders, I don't know.
12
Cherrywood rezoned from agricultural use to other purposes mainly housing and
13
retail, yes.
14
Q. 169
11:42:17 15
Engaged in attempts to have their lands at
Now, I suggest to you that Monarch were not engaged in attempts to rezone from agricultural to other purposes.?
16
A.
Well, fine.
17
Q. 170
Who is right, are you right that it was engaged in that or am I right in saying
18 19
You are suggesting it.
that it wasn't? A.
11:42:41 20
Monarch Properties were engaged in having lands at Carrickmines -- at Cherrywood, Loughlinstown, known as Cherrywood in Carrickmines zoned for
21
residential purposes and, and I don't know at what stage this entered into the
22
frame or into the picture, a district centre.
23
Q. 171
24 11:43:06 25
Mr. Dunlop, don't you know that Monarch were not trying to rezone from agricultural to residential?
A.
Well, that does not appear on my horizon in relation to my relationship with
26
Monarch.
What Monarch were trying to do during the course of the Development
27
Plan was to get lands in Cherrywood rezoned.
28
Q. 172
They weren't.
29
A.
What?
Q. 173
They weren't?
11:43:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:43:22
11:43:33
39 1
A.
Well that's the general orientation and understanding that I had of it.
2
Q. 174
I suggest you didn't.?
3
A.
I --
4
Q. 175
I suggest you knew jolly well it had nothing to do with rezoning from
5
agricultural to residential?
6
A.
Well you may suggest it.
7
Q. 176
It's wrong?
8
A.
Fine.
9
Q. 177
You say it's wrong?
A.
No, I'm not saying it's wrong.
11:43:38 10
11
You said it's wrong.
You're the one who said
it's wrong.
12
Q. 178
Well you are saying I'm wrong; aren't you?
13
A.
No, I'm saying --
14
Q. 179
Can we both be right?
A.
What I'm saying is, my understanding in relation to what was occurring during
11:43:50 15
16
the course of the Development Plan, this is the Development Plan.
17
planning application.
18
applications being made on the basis of submissions for lands to be rezoned
19
from one usage to another.
11:44:11 20
Q. 180
It's the Development Plan.
It is not a
Where you have lands,
This was not happening in this case, Mr. Dunlop.
I suggest you know and knew
21
that what was happening was Monarch, when you came in in March '93 what they
22
wanted to do was to change the density of the land and get a better density
23
than one house per acre?
24
A.
Yes, certainly.
Q. 181
Is that right?
26
A.
No, certainly the density issue was a major factor.
27
Q. 182
It was the only factor?
28
A.
Well, as I explained in my statement, yes.
29
Q. 183
Sorry.
11:44:28 25
11:44:43 30
Yes.
And the town centre.
Of course.
I'm not talking about that.
You are saying in the first paragraph of your narrative statement to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:44:47
11:45:04
40 1
Tribunal coming from where you were, with all you knew of what you did with
2
Monarch and the plan, etc and the zoning and so on.
3
fundamentally wrong in suggesting that they were trying to get a change of
4
zoning from agricultural to residential.?
5
A.
You are getting it
Well I've said to you five minutes ago and I'm saying it to you again.
My
6
relationship with Monarch was on the basis of the problem that they had during
7
the course of the Development Plan vis-a-vis their lands in Cherrywood,
8
Lahaunstown vis-a-vis their application for residential and/or town
9
centre/district centre.
11:45:26 10
Q. 184
Yes.?
11
A.
That was the reason I was brought in.
12
Q. 185
Yes?
13
A.
That had developed as a result of bad communication.
14
Q. 186
But they told you, I presume, in briefing you.
11:45:43 15
And you knew, that in fact
these lands had been zoned residential from 1983 or maybe before.
16
And what
was required was a change not of zoning but of density?
17
A.
They may well have done.
18
Q. 187
Yeah.
19
A.
Perceptionally, yes.
11:46:04 20
Now, all right.
Anyway, you agree that's wrong what you say there?
But my understanding in relation to the difficulties
with Monarch was to solve their problem and their problem was -
21
Q. 188
I understand that?
22
A.
Density.
23
Q. 189
I understand that, Mr. Dunlop.
24 11:46:16 25
It was to unscramble the problem.
We'll come to that.
Anyway, perceptionally
this is an inconsistency? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 190
Sorry, whatever that means.
27
A.
Very good.
28
Q. 191
Now, just going on from there.
Because I don't understand it?
29 11:46:28 30
I had met Mr. Philip Monahan once or twice socially but had never acted for him Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:46:35
11:46:45
41 1
or his company Monarch.
2 3
I opened to you yesterday where you talked about Mr. Lynn, you know, having
4
worked for him and being paid by I can't remember now, being paid by Monarch
5
prior to this involvement?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 192
That's a second inconsistency.?
8
A.
Being paid by Monarch? When?
9
Q. 193
Well do you want me to get the up the thing again? All right.
11:47:29 10
This is the
one that I couldn't find yesterday and I've lost it again.
11 12
It was where it was -- you had said that you had done something for Monarch
13
previously or Mr. Lynn.
14
payments.
11:47:51 15
And you had received, I think you'd received
But anyway, it was to the effect that you had had a business
dealing with Monarch or somebody in Monarch before March '93.
16
was that you had no recollection of it.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 194
Do you recall what I'm talking about?
19
A.
Yes, I do I remember it now.
You put it on the screen subsequently.
11:48:04 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Were you referring to a private interview?
Yes.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Page 572 I think it was.
11:48:09 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you, Judge.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think that might be it.
29 11:48:13 30
And your answer
MR. MURPHY:
It is, thank you.
572.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:48:17
11:48:29
42 1 2 3
Q. 195
Down at the bottom "I had got other monies from Monarch previously but that was
4
purely from public relations work.
It had nothing whatsoever.
It was purely
5
the publication aspects of various things and I then kept in touch with Mr
6
Richard Lynn".
7 8 9
Isn't that an inconsistency with what you say here? A.
Well yes it is.
Q. 196
That's fine?
11
A.
I never did any work.
12
Q. 197
That's the second inconsistency.
11:48:37 10
Because I never got.
And then paragraph two.
Taking into
13
account the diary references to him in November 1992.
14
the other executive of Monarch personally prior to my becoming involved with
11:48:55 15
I did not know any of
the company in early '93.
16 17 18
That's wrong? A.
19 11:49:07 20
Did not know the other executives in Monarch personally prior to my becoming involved with the company in 1993.
Q. 198
21
I'm not saying whether you did or not.
I'm just saying it's inconsistent with
what you said in private interview?
22
A.
Fine.
23
Q. 199
Did you think in the last sentence of that paragraph "I recall that
24
Messrs. Lynn and Reilly were conducting their lobbying of councillors
11:49:20 25
contemporaneously with my lobbying in relation to Quarryvale and other matters
26
in the latter parts of '92 and the early parts of '93"
27
Quarryvale could actually be a mistake for Paisley Park?
28
A.
No, I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
29
Q. 200
All right.
11:49:41 30
Do you think
Because Quarryvale was an ongoing issue.
We'll ignore that one. The next paragraph then
"I had not met
either Messrs. Lynn or Reilly prior to encountering them casually in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:49:46
11:49:55
43 1
environs of Dublin County Council's offices.
2 3
That's an inconsistency again, isn't it? It's along the same lines of not
4
having known Mr. Lynn prior to March 1993?
5
A.
Which I didn't.
6
Q. 201
Just the inconsistencies?
7
A.
I did not know him before March 1993.
8
Q. 202
All right.
To go on to the next page, 423.
9 11:50:07 10
Half way down the second paragraph.
"Monarch would not achieve the level of
11
rezoning it either wanted or considered economically viable".
12
the second paragraph on the right margin you have the name Monarch and then
13
would not achieve the level of rezoning
14 11:50:33 15
Half way down
A.
Yes, I have it, yes.
Q. 203
That's a bit like the first point I'm making that it wasn't rezoning it was
16
density?
17
A.
Density, yes.
18
Q. 204
All right.
19
And -- all right.
And then at the bottom of that page "I do not
know who recommended to Mr. Sweeney that he contact me.
11:50:53 20
He being Mr. Lawlor.
And I never discussed the genesis of the contact with any other third party".
21 22
That's inconsistent with your private interviews?
23
A.
With the private interview, yes.
24
Q. 205
Next page.
524.
11:51:05 25
26
Top.
"However, having met Mr. Sweeney following his contact with me
27
Mr. Lawlor told me a short time afterwards that he knew that I had met with
28
Mr. Sweeney".
29 11:51:14 30
That's also inconsistent. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:51:16
11:51:28
44 1 2
"I subsequently attended a large number of meetings in Monarch's offices in
3
Harcourt Street requesting ".
4
you had said in private interview two.
I think yesterday we dealt with the fact that It's another inconsistency
5
A.
I think I had said that I met Mr. Sweeney twice.
6
Q. 206
Two meetings in Monarch offices in Harcourt Street?
7
A.
That's what I said in the private meeting.
8
Q. 207
That's an inconsistency.?
9
A.
Yes.
11:51:40 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Mr. Murphy, we have to rise just for a few minutes to attend
12
to something.
It will be probably less than ten minutes.
MR. MURPHY:
.
13 14
All right.
Certainly.
11:51:48 15
16 17
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
18 19 11:55:01 20
21
Q. 208
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you, Chairman.
22 23
Mr. Dunlop, Chairman, just before, I'll continue.
24
out to me that the point I was making at the beginning of this narrative
12:15:14 25
Mr. Redmond just pointed
statement by way of an inconsistency in relation to the question of zoning.
26
That it wasn't a question of rezoning from agricultural to residential.
27
makes the point and I accept it that in fact part of the motion in May '92,
28
which was I think Mr. Don Lydon proposing the Manager's recommendations.
29
did include for a change from agricultural to residential in respect of part of
12:15:46 30
the lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
He
It
12:15:47
12:16:02
45 1 2
Where I was coming from is in fact that really when Mr. Dunlop was brought into
3
the Monarch team, it was really to deal with increasing the density from one
4
house per acre. So I accept what Mr. Redmond points out.
5
drop that as an inconsistency.
And I think I'll
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
witnesses will mix-up terms planning and rezoning and words.
9
deal I think turns on how one expresses what was in fact going on in the
12:16:26 10
Well also, and I think it's fair to point out too, that a lot of So not a great
council.
11 12
But anyway, that's fine.
I can understand.
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
12:16:33 15
16
saying. Q. 209
It wasn't a good point anyway, Chairman, I think is what you're
(laughter)
Mr. Dunlop, sorry, to keep coming back to this first meeting with Mr. Lawlor.
17 18
You said in your statement., page 423, please.
19 12:16:46 20
I am just trying to skip through what I see as inconsistencies in your
21 22
narrative statement. A.
Before you go any further, Mr. Murphy.
May I, without appearing pedantic.
23
When you talk about inconsistencies in my statement.
24
between the statement that you have and the private sessions, not internal
12:17:08 25
You mean inconsistencies
inherent consistencies in the statement.
26
Q. 210
That's correct.
27
A.
I don't want to appear pedantic.
28
Q. 211
Yes.
I think it's an important point.
Could we just go to the bottom of that.
Last paragraph.
29 12:17:18 30
"My direct involvement occurred in early 1993 after I was contacted by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:17:22
12:17:35
46 1
Mr. Eddie Sweeney of Monarch.
My diary, I believe that meeting may have
2
occurred on the 9th of March '93". I think that should be the 8th?
3
A.
It is the 8th, Mr. Murphy, yeah.
4
Q. 212
Anyway --
5
A.
There was a meeting on the 9th as well but it didn't involve Mr. Sweeney.
6
Q. 213
As you've said, you were contacted by Mr. Sweeney.
That's what you say here
7
in October, September 2003.
8
I was pointing out to you that in fact you had said in private interview?
9 12:17:53 10
And that's what you are saying in evidence.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 214
That you were contacted by Mr. Lawlor and that Mr. Lawlor was present.
11
you don't agree with that.
And
And
That's fine. 4041, please.
12 13 14
This is your telephone messages, Mr. Dunlop. A.
No, it's not.
12:18:13 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's 4014.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
I may have called the wrong number.
19 12:18:20 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
No, I think you called the correct number, Mr. Murphy.
21 22 23
Q. 215
24 12:18:33 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
Telephone messages Monday 8th of March 1993.
That's your
document I think, isn't that right, Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 216
9:55.
27
Ann - Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch house at
five o'clock today?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 217
That seems to be in the teeth of what you've been telling us?
A.
Well he has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch house at five o'clock
12:18:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:18:53
12:19:05
47 1
today.
2
secretary.
3
Q. 218
4
Yes, obviously Liam Lawlor.
Ann rang.
That's Liam Lawlor's
That puts you on notice before going to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor has arranged that meeting?
5
A.
Yes, it does.
6
Q. 219
I think your sworn evidence on a number of occasions was that you didn't learn
7
of Mr. Liam Lawlor's involvement until afterwards when he informed you that he
8
was aware a meeting had taken place?
9
A.
12:19:22 10
He told me a short time afterwards that he knew I met Mr. Sweeney.
I have
said consistently, over yesterday and today, that Mr. Lawlor was not at the
11
first meeting.
12
Mr. Lawlor said to me, I don't know 'how did you get on with Ed?'or 'I know you
13
met Ed'.
14 12:19:37 15
It was subsequent to my meeting with Mr Sweeney that
Q. 220
And what was the last part?
A.
Mr. Lawlor told me a short time afterwards that he knew that I had met with
16
Mr. Sweeney.
17
Q. 221
Ed?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 222
But, Mr. Dunlop, you have said categorically now that it's Mr. Sweeney who
12:19:50 20
phoned you to set up a meeting?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 223
You didn't know of Mr. Lawlor until afterwards?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 224
This is your phone message saying that Ann has phoned and left a message saying
12:20:01 25
that Mr. Lawlor has arranged a meeting with Mr. Sweeney in Monarch house
26
today?
27
A.
Yes, they would appear to be inconsistent.
28
Q. 225
I presume your telephone message is accurate?
29
A.
These were not kept by me but my secretary.
Q. 226
Who was your secretary?
12:20:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:20:27
12:20:29
48 1
A.
I can't remember her name now, she has long since gone, Norma, I think.
2
Q. 227
Do you think she made a mistake about that?
3
A.
No, I wouldn't suggest she made a mistake.
4
This message was recorded by her
for my benefit.
5
Q. 228
You are not distancing yourself?
6
A.
No, no, these messages have come up on previous occasions and used in evidence
7
by other people.
8
Q. 229
Doesn't it mean what you told the three Judges a few moments ago is wrong?
9
A.
No.
12:20:48 10
What I have said yesterday and what I have said today and what I said a
few moments is that Mr. Sweeney rang me in relation to -- I spoke to
11
Mr. Sweeney.
12
at the meeting.
13
Q. 230
14
Don't mind that. Mr. Sweeney.
12:21:13 15
We agreed to meet.
We did meet.
Please don't go on to that.
Mr. Lawlor was not present
sorry. Your evidence was
I think you said yesterday a few days earlier rang you.
This
is on Monday?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 231
I think you said a few days earlier rang you to set up the meeting?
18
A.
I said I wasn't quite sure.
19
Q. 232
All right.
12:21:26 20
I said it could have been a few days earlier.
This appears from this that you are being phoned on Monday morning
to be told for the first time that Mr. Lawlor has arranged a meeting with
21
Mr. Sweeney for five o'clock?
22
A.
Yes, it would appear so, yes.
23
Q. 233
Doesn't that mean that what you said earlier and yesterday just was not true?
24
A.
No.
12:21:43 25
What I've said to you yesterday and what I'm saying to you today again,
messages or telephone messages, that I spoke to Mr. Sweeney and went and met
26
Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request.
27
Q. 234
Did you say you phoned Mr. Sweeney?
28
A.
No, no, Mr. Sweeney rang.
29 12:22:09 30
Mr. Liam Lawlor's secretary could --
Asked me to go and see him.
I went and saw him.
Mr. Liam Lawlor's secretary, Ann, I do not dispute this, obviously left a message for me for my benefit to say that Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:22:14
12:22:32
49 1
Sweeney in Monarch at five o'clock today.
2
what I'm saying today.
3
saw him.
4
that he knew that I had met with Ed.
5
Q. 235
6
Mr. Sweeney rang me to go and see him.
I went and
Subsequent to the meeting with Mr. Sweeney Mr. Lawlor told me, said
Well it's totally inconsistent with your in-house document recorded by your secretary?
7
A.
Well -- I don't -- I'm not going to dis--
8
Q. 236
I suggest to you.
9
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I'd like you to deal with this
conclusively because it's terribly difficult to pin you down.
12:22:49 10
pin you down on this.
11 12
What I've said to you yesterday and
I'm trying to
And I want to know if what you told a few times today
and yesterday is wrong? A.
No.
What I've said to you yesterday and what I'm saying to you today is that
13
I went to see Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request.
14
inconsistency in Ann, Liam Lawlor's secretary saying that he has arranged a
12:23:15 15
meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
16 17
12:23:28 20
I went and I saw Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's
request. Q. 237
18 19
I do not see any
Well you told us Mr. Dunlop, that you didn't know anything about Mr. Lawlor being involved until you met him after the meeting?
A.
Correct, yes, following --
Q. 238
That is a lie.
Because this says, your secretary says that Ann has phoned
21
that Liam has -- so you knew before the meeting that Liam had set it up.
22
Whatever about him going to be there.
23
You knew all about Mr. Lawlor's involvement before going to Mr. Sweeney?
24
A.
12:23:53 25
Leave that.
That he had set it up.
No, what I have said is Mr. Lawlor contacting -- met me afterwards and said, 'you met Ed, how did the meeting go?'.
26
Q. 239
'How did the meeting go, I wasn't there?'
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 240
But you said that -- that was the first you knew about Mr. Lawlor.
29 12:24:08 30
It's from
that you tell the Tribunal that you inferred and I think you say really this is what happened.
That Mr. Lawlor is responsible for suggesting your name to
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:24:14
12:24:22
50 1
Mr.--
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 241
And what you said on sworn evidence is that's where you found out about
4
Mr. Lawlor recommending?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 242
And thanking Mr. Lawlor?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 243
But you knew before you went to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor had set it up?
9
A.
No.
12:24:32 10
If you look at the list of telephone calls on that day.
calls are virtually within ten minutes of each other.
The telephone
Five -- ten fifteen
11
minutes of each other.
That means that I either was not in my office or could
12
not accept those calls.
And I may well have got that information subsequently
13
later in the day.
14
yesterday and what I'm saying today, is that that is how the arrangement was
12:24:58 15
16
I cannot attest to that.
What I have said to you
put in place. Q. 244
It's an ingenious, Mr. Dunlop, explanation for why you are suggesting now that
17
why that happened.
18
what you are saying about knowing Liam set it up.
19
is that maybe you didn't get the message before the meeting?
12:25:14 20
21
I think you must be accepting that it's inconsistent with
A.
Well what I'm saying to you.
Q. 245
Don't repeat yourself.
22
I think what you're saying
Again, to repeat myself again.
Are you saying you didn't get the message before you
went to the meeting?
23
A.
Let's not get testy.
24
Q. 246
Are you telling the truth, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I'm telling you the truth about the meeting with a man called Ed Sweeney at his
12:25:28 25
We've enough testiness.
26
request in his office, subsequent to which Liam Lawlor, a short time
27
afterwards, said that he knew that I had met with Ed Sweeney --
28
Q. 247
29 12:25:46 30
Why we're taking so long is because you will not answer the question. to ask every question half a dozen times?
A.
No you don't. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I have
12:25:47
12:26:01
51 1
Q. 248
I do.?
2
A.
No, no, that's an exaggeration.
3
Q. 249
Well perhaps it's five times.
Mr. Dunlop, it is quite simple.
Are you now
4
saying that that message, I have no idea what you did on 8th of March 1993 or
5
where you were except I know that you went to the meeting in the afternoon.
6
Is it your case now that you wouldn't have got that message?
7
A.
I'm not saying it is my case.
8
Q. 250
Right.?
9
A.
I am saying that it is a possibility.
12:26:17 10
your grey hairs.
Sorry, Mr.-- I don't want to add to
But it is a possibility as --
11
Q. 251
Okay?
12
A.
As I have given evidence here before in relation to the receipt of messages.
13
I did not sit behind a desk from nine o'clock in the morning until one o'clock,
14
go for lunch, come back at two and sit behind a desk until five.
12:26:35 15
the way I operated.
I was out of my office for considerable --
16
Q. 252
At your desk and not taking your messages.
17
A.
That's a possibility too.
18
Q. 253
You would then have been told about the message?
19
A.
That's a possibility.
12:26:51 20
21
That is not
You told your secretary perhaps --
What I'm saying to you is this meeting was set up as I
have outlined to you. Q. 254
I'm not interested in it, Mr. Dunlop.
I want to know, Mr. Dunlop, can the
22
Tribunal take it that before you met Mr. Sweeney on your own, late afternoon
23
Monday, this Monday?
24 12:27:03 25
26
A.
Yes?
Q. 255
That you did not know about this message.
A.
Well what I -- the only answer I can give to you to that is yes.
Can the Tribunal take that? Because
27
given the consistent evidence that I have given to you today, yesterday and
28
today --
29 12:27:16 30
Q. 256
Yes?
A.
Yesterday and today. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:27:18
12:27:32
52 1
Q. 257
All right.?
2
A.
Is that Mr. Lawlor was not at the meeting.
Mr. Lawlor made contact with me
3
shortly afterwards or I linked up with Mr. Lawlor shortly afterwards.
4
said he knew that I had met Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 258
No.
6
A.
Yeah and he knew that I had met Mr. Sweeney.
7
Q. 259
So why did Mr. Lawlor make contact with you after the meeting?
8
A.
Sure Mr. Lawlor was in contact with me virtually on an hourly basis.
9
Q. 260
You were very close businesswise.
A.
Not businesswise.
12:27:50 10
And he
What you said was Mr. Lawlor made contact with you shortly afterwards?
We were very close.
11
clients and who recommended clients.
12
in my office quite frequently.
He was a -- an operator who suggested As I said to you yesterday.
And he was
13
Q. 261
That does not mean that he was very close businesswise?
14
A.
Well I gave him money, if that's businesswise, yes.
Q. 262
What did you give him money for?
16
A.
On various occasions.
17
Q. 263
For introducing you?
18
A.
He asked for money and I gave it to him, as I've given evidence heretofore.
19
Q. 264
Yes.
A.
Liam was always looking for money.
21
Q. 265
Why from you?
22
A.
Well, because he would claim that he had introduced me to a particular client.
23
Q. 266
Yeah?
24
A.
And he would look for an introductory fee.
Q. 267
And did you pay him in every Module -- in every development where he introduced
12:28:10 15
12:28:23 20
12:28:34 25
26
What was he asking for money for?
you did you pay him?
27
A.
No, I don't think I paid him in all.
28
Q. 268
All right?
29
A.
Certainly he did not ask me and he was not offered in this Module.
Q. 269
Okay. Yes. That's close business dealings; isn't it? Or is it?
12:28:49 30
I think there was some disputes in some.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:28:57
12:29:06
53 1
A.
We're into definitional terms.
2
Q. 270
We are.
3
A.
Well, I mean, I had a close relationship with Liam Lawlor.
4
What do you think?
business with Liam Lawlor.
5
Q. 271
All right?
6
A.
I wasn't involved in Liam Lawlor's business.
7 8
my business. Q. 272
9 12:29:21 10
I didn't run a
Liam Lawlor wasn't involved in
He wasn't a shareholder in my business.
And how much would you have paid him overall, over the years, over the Development Plan, say?
A.
11
Well certainly over a period.
I've given documentary evidence to the Tribunal
in various stages of the order of -- over 100,000 pounds.
12
Q. 273
Pretty close.
13
A.
Oh, yes.
14
Q. 274
All right.
A.
Well it's recorded in my diary at five o'clock.
Q. 275
Have you any recollection of the time of the meeting which you remember
12:29:39 15
16 17
Pretty serious business dealings; isn't it?
Do you know what time the meeting took place at?
vividly?
18
A.
Have I any recollection of the time.
19
Q. 276
What time did you go to the office, what time did you start at?
A.
Start out at?
Q. 277
Why do you suddenly go into this extraordinary position of disbelief and
12:29:55 20
21 22
suspicion and not understanding the simplest of questions that a child of two
23
would answer?
24
A.
12:30:10 25
You don't put them simply, Mr. Murphy.
answer to you the diary reference is to meet Mr. Ed Sweeney at five o'clock.
26
I am a reasonably punctual person.
27
I could have been there at five to five.
28 29 12:30:33 30
If you put the question simply I
Q. 278
All right. five.
Okay.
I could have been there at five past five.
You could have been there at five to five or five past
My simple question.
did that meeting start at.
And I can't put it any simpler.
Is what time
You have a vivid recollection of it?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:30:36
12:30:51
54 1
A.
Five o'clock it says.
2
Q. 279
That's what it says.
The evidence, according to yourself, is a document
saying five o'clock.
Did it start at five o'clock?
3 4
A.
5 6
there at five o'clock. Q. 280
7 8
And the chances are, you'd no message.
You didn't get a message -- you didn't
get this message from your secretary about Liam? A.
9 12:31:05 10
All I can say to you is my documentary reference is my diary. I was to be
The chances are that is as I have said to you two minutes ago, that is a distinct possibility.
Q. 281
11
Page 4042, please. Mr. Dunlop, would you go down to 4:45, please. that out.
12
A.
"Ann, Liam won't be able to make meeting until 5:30."
13
Q. 282
You are looking at me, Mr. Dunlop.
14
A.
You asked me to read it out.
Q. 283
Thank you.
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 284
Mr. Dunlop, everything you are saying in the witness box is untrue.?
18
A.
I absolutely reject that.
19
Q. 285
This is untrue.
12:31:49 15
And read
12:32:04 20
Do you have anything to say?
I've read it out.
Do you have anything to comment to make on it?
What you are saying in this small point that we're making now
about this first meeting, who set it up, who was at it, the time of it, whether
21
or not you got the messages.
Is a tissue of lies.
Now --
22
A.
Let me --
23
Q. 286
Please explain, let's concentrate on this entry that you have read it out.
24 12:32:22 25
Explain it to the three Judges? A.
26 27
You have asked me to read it out and I have read it out, "Ann, Liam won't be able to make meeting until 5:30".
Q. 287
That's the second time you've read it out.
Explain total fundamental
28
inconsistency between the entry in your book here and all you've said about
29
getting the earlier message and whether or not Liam was involved etc..
12:32:42 30
explain to everybody in the room? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Please
12:32:43
12:32:55
55 1
A.
Well I've explained it, I don't know how many times.
2
Q. 288
Once.
3
A.
Let's go again and you'll get the truth as I've told it to you. I don't know
4
I want it once, Mr. Dunlop and I want the truth.?
how many times already.
5
Q. 289
Let's have it.?
6
A.
I went to a meeting in Monarch Properties.
7
Q. 290
Don't give us that, Mr. Dunlop.
Give us the truth on this, don't give us all
8
of this ranting and this rubbish.
Repeating when I ask a question you repeat
9
the question or you repeat the answer you gave. Please answer.
12:33:13 10
Explain these
two entries and your sworn testimony, on oath, to three Judges, to the
11
Oireachtas.
Explain your evidence, today, that Mr. Dunlop -- that you did not
12
know Mr. Dunlop set up the meeting.
That he wasn't at the meeting?
13
A.
Mr. Lawlor.
14
Q. 291
Mr. Lawlor.
That's a wonderful point Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Lawlor.
That you did not know Mr. Lawlor set up the meeting.
12:33:36 15
I beg your pardon.
That
That he
16
was not at it.
17
them or did get them whatever.
Please, once and more all.
18
there, bored out of their minds.
Would you please tell them the truth for the
19
first time this morning?
12:33:54 20
A.
And that everything about these messages that you didn't get Three judges up
First of all, I reject that statement that you have just made latterly.
21 22
I went to a meeting in Monarch with Mr. Ed Sweeney at his request.
23
subsequently told by Mr. Lawlor.
24
said that he knew that I had met Eddie Sweeney.
12:34:14 25
26
I was
I met Mr. Lawlor sometime afterwards.
He
Ann saying Liam won't be able
to make the meeting until five O'clock. You prefaced all of this by saying five o'clock.
The meeting is in my diary for five o'clock.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
were in the office, whether you got it or were en route to the meeting.
12:34:31 30
Mr Dunlop, can I just ask you.
Irrespective of whether you At
the very least that statement which is, as I understand it, and then you have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:34:37
12:34:50
56 1
given evidence previously.
2
accounts of messages, calls to your office taken largely in your absence or
3
when you were otherwise engaged by your secretary
4
A.
You will say that these are contemporaneous
Yes.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That I think is taken on the 8th of March 1993?
Yes.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:35:00 10
And that -- what Mr. Murphy is putting to you, I would
suggest, is at the very least, that that would appear corroborative of what you
11
told the Tribunal in May 2000; that Mr. Lawlor was in attendance at the very
12
first meeting.
13
A.
Well, I --.
14 12:35:15 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
If you look at the gist.
Now, assuming that the Liam.
and
16
you've said I think on many occasions here that the Liam in this -- largely in
17
these messages referred to the late Mr. Lawlor.
18
A.
There's no doubt about that, yes.
19 12:35:28 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that that would suggest to anybody reading it.
That
21
Liam's, unfortunately for some reason, there is a meeting scheduled for five.
22
You've agreed that, it is in your diary.
23
meeting until 5:30.
24
A.
He for some reason can't make this
Yes.
12:35:42 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
examined you on yesterday and this morning and earlier.
28
some seven years after the event when you were in discussions with Mr. Hanratty
29
and Mr. Gallagher, you were telling them about your meeting, your first meeting
12:36:07 30
I am saying to you, Mr. Dunlop, that given to what Mr. Murphy That in May 2000,
with Mr. Sweeney and how it was set up and who was there. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:36:10
12:36:21
57 1
A.
Yes.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
like, corroborative of, if you like, or vice versa really with your private
5
interview.
6
A.
And I don't want to repeat it.
But that would appear, if you
Yes.
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That's a contemporaneous record
Yes, it is.
12:36:26 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
by many people here about those records.
13
from and I think that's really what he wants you to address to the Tribunal.
14
I may be wrong.
12:36:40 15
A.
And you have stood over that in evidence and cross-examination That's where Mr. Murphy is coming
It is certainly some aspect of it.
I accept fully that that is an accurate representation of what Mr. Murphy asked
16
me.
17
effect that I said -- that I said in the private sessions or those messages.
18
Mr. Lawlor was not at the first meeting.
19
other meetings with Eddie Sweeney.
12:37:11 20
21
Certainly.
And what I've said is that notwithstanding anything to the
He just wasn't there.
He was at
And I certainly would not be discussing
anything in relation to my fees in front of Mr. Lawlor. Q. 292
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
24
certainly would not discuss your fees in front of Mr. Lawlor?
12:37:29 25
Wait now.
We'll just take that point Mr. Dunlop.
You
A.
No.
26
Q. 293
Which I completely understand.?
27
A.
You do?
28
Q. 294
But you've given evidence in that private interview that you did discuss the
29 12:37:43 30
fees in front of -- with Mr. Sweeney in front of Mr. Lawlor.? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:37:43
12:37:53
58 1
Q. 295
Now, your point is it wasn't the first meeting?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 296
Let's leave that for a second.
4
The point you now introduce is that you
wouldn't have that discussion about fees in front of Mr. Lawlor.?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 297
How do you make up to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 the fiction
7
that Mr. Lawlor would have been laughing at you because you were agreeing to do
8
all ever this for 25 thousand?
9
A.
12:38:17 10
Well Mr. Lawlor would, often said to me, not to under sell myself, these people have plenty of money and I hope you're getting plenty of money for this, with
11
an ulterior motive, I hasten to add, from his own point of view.
12
got the possibility is the more he would get.
13
place with Eddie Sweeney was for, at his request, because of the difficulties
14
that they had in Monarch.
12:38:42 15
The more I
No, the reason the meeting took
The fee was discussed with Mr. Sweeney at the first
meeting, as is evidenced by the remittance advice notices from Monarch to the
16
payments.
17
Q. 298
I think you must know that you've completely failed to answer the question.?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 299
Why did Mr. Lawlor not get a payment from you in the Cherrywood case?
A.
Well he certainly didn't ask me.
21
Q. 300
Why didn't he?
22
A.
Well I can't answer why he didn't ask me.
23
Q. 301
Hold on, Mr. Dunlop.
12:39:02 20
24
impression.
12:39:17 25
You've given us the impression.
Not just an
You've told us he's there. he's around the place in a very
substantial way looking for his, what did you call it, an introductory fee?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 302
And you did say maybe in one or two that you didn't -- you didn't get them in
28
every case.
29
Mr. Lawlor would have no hesitation in looking for money?
12:39:33 30
A.
What was the explanation for -- I get the impression that
None. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:39:33
12:39:45
59 1
Q. 303
Why didn't he come to you in this case?
2
A.
Well I think that is, to be fair to you and to everybody, I think that's a
3
futile question.
I cannot answer why he didn't come to me.
4
you is that he didn't.
All I can tell
5
Q. 304
It's very strange.
6
A.
Yes, I would say, yes, a bit odd.
7
Q. 305
Now, 4045 please. For completeness on this thing about the meeting.
8 9
I want
to -- your diary entry, this is your diary entry for Monday March 8th A.
Yes.
Q. 306
Shows five o'clock: E Sweeney?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 307
And there's no mention of Mr. Lawlor there?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 308
And do you know how many days after that meeting with Mr. Sweeney on his own
12:40:03 10
12:40:14 15
16
you met Mr. Lawlor and he told you all about the meeting? A.
17
Well, what I've said a short time afterwards.
It could have been the same day
or the following morning.
18
Q. 309
Well, would you like --
19
A.
Mr. Lawlor was in constant contact with me both at my office and at home.
Q. 310
Because you had so many deals going?
A.
Well, yes.
12:40:30 20
21
The relationship was such that he was giving.
He was
22
transmitting information to me.
23
longer a member of Dublin County Council.
24
information to me or suggesting to me various things that might possibly be
12:40:51 25
But that he was transmitting
done or ought be done in particular circumstances in relation to a particular
26 27
Notwithstanding the fact that he was no
client in Dublin County Council. Q. 311
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I suggest, like, you get this phone call and
28
whatever.
29
out of which you have got 85,000 that we're aware of.
12:41:12 30
The meeting is set up for the 8th of March.
higher sums from this Development Plan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It's a development Have you received
12:41:13
12:41:27
60 1
A.
Have I received higher sums? Um, oh, yes I have, yes.
2
Q. 312
How much?
3
A.
Um.
4
Q. 313
And where? Which one, which development and how much?
5
A.
Well it hasn't been opened here.
6
Q. 314
Has it not?
7
A.
Well.
8
Q. 315
Don't say which it is.
Just give me the amount?
9
A.
I know the protocols.
No, it hasn't been opened here.
12:41:37 10
11
one. Q. 316
12
You will be talking of hundreds of thousands.
Okay.
So there's hundreds of those.
That's enormous.
A.
Well not miserable.
14
Q. 317
In 1983.
A.
Oh, um, I wouldn't -- I'd hesitate to do a priority list.
Q. 318
Well don't.
16 17 18
Well is it the second highest?
Just in rough terms.
Take your time, Mr. Dunlop.
I don't want
to ....? A.
19 12:42:11 20
This was only a
miserable 85,000 in 1983?
13
12:41:51 15
But in relation to
It would be relatively.
It would be relatively near the top.
I'm not
suggesting that it is the second highest. Q. 319
There might be another one above it?
21
A.
There might be one or two above it.
22
Q. 320
I get the impression you know exactly what the other one or two are?
23
A.
Let's not be disingenuous here, Mr. Murphy.
24
Yesterday you were talking about
various clients and who introduced who to whom.
12:42:33 25
answer to you.
I'm just being careful what I
As soon as I say it was the second highest you come along and
26
say it wasn't the second highest.
27
the top.
Yes, I'm just saying it could be here near
28
Q. 321
Between 85,000 and the other one which is hundreds of thousands you said?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 322
There's a huge gap, can you just tell me have you one or two others in the
12:42:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:42:49
12:42:54
61 1
middle somewhere?
2
A.
Possibly one or two others.
3
Q. 323
Would they be 100,000 or 150?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 324
It's a pretty substantial -- it's a pretty good brief this particular one,
6
isn't it?
7
A.
The Monarch one?
8
Q. 325
Monarch, yes.?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 326
Just tell me exactly when you met Mr. Lawlor after your meeting with
12:43:02 10
11
Mr. Sweeney and you had this discussion you're telling us about.
12
evening, was it the next morning --
13
A.
14
No, it could have been that evening or it could have been the following day. I can't absolutely say to you definitively how soon afterwards.
12:43:22 15
Was it that
But I have
already said to you that Mr. Lawlor was a regular caller on the phone and a
16
regular caller to my offices uninvited.
Both invited and uninvited.
17
Q. 327
And I think did you meet subsequently with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
18
A.
I met -- I think the diary will show that's on the screen I met Mr. Lynn and
19 12:43:51 20
Mr. Reilly the following day, March the 9th.
At 5:15.
Q. 328
And you had a chat with Mr. Lawlor before that?
21
A.
It is quite possible, yes.
22
Q. 329
All right.
Mr. Dunlop, the meeting with Mr. Sweeney, 5.00 or 5:30 Monday the
23
8th of March, just you and Mr. Sweeney.
24
introduced it -- sorry.
12:44:32 25
You told us yesterday Mr. Sweeney
He explained the background of Cherrywood to you.?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 330
About which you knew something yourself anyway?
27
A.
Anecdotally, yes.
28
Q. 331
Would it be fair to say that you were brought into this? Would it be fair to
29 12:45:04 30
say that you were brought into Monarch invited you on to their team for a cocktail of reasons? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:45:10
12:45:43
62 1
A.
I'd say that's possible, yes.
2
Q. 332
Yeah.
There were various issues.
And could I have, please, 544.
3 4
Was one of those reasons, Mr. Dunlop, because it was well known that you gave
5
money to councillors for their vote?
6
A.
My answer to that is yes.
7
Q. 333
And was another reason to undo Mr. Lydon's mistakes?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 334
And was another reason that Mr. Phil Monahan was running his own show and
12:46:31 10
looking for too much -- looking for too much by way of density?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 335
You see, Mr. Dunlop, I had a lot of difficulty in reading your statements and
13
reading your interviews and trying to understand why you were suddenly
14
introduced to this particular project.
12:47:08 15
16
And they were some of the reasons that I was picking up.
And it seems to me,
17
and I wonder.
18
If I put it to you anyway and if it's wrong well then you can correct me.
Because this would short circuit things if I have it right.
19 12:47:21 20
If we put all of those things together.
If, would I be right to say that --
21
sorry.
22
getting what they wanted in their development when you came in in March 2003?
23
March 1993.
24 12:47:45 25
Yes.
Q. 336
And they were in trouble because Mr. Lydon's proposal -- Mr. Lydon was -- where was he in all of this, in relation to Monarch?
A.
28 29 12:48:06 30
Cherrywood were in trouble?
A.
26 27
Am I right in saying that Cherrywood had a problem in relation to
Well, I think I've said in my statement that it was indicated to me by Mr. Lynn.
Q. 337
Uh-huh?
A.
That Mr. Lydon was -- they were relying on Mr. Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Mr. Lydon was Monarch's
12:48:12
12:48:28
63 1
man, as it were.
2
Q. 338
Yes.
3
A.
In the sense of anything that was proposed, and I don't mean to suggest
4
anything other than this.
That Mr. Lydon, Councillor, Senator Lydon was the
5
man who stood up on his feet and made various proposals or speeches, or
6
whatever, in relation to the Monarch proposal.
7
completeness, Mr. Murphy.
8
for too much.
Now, sorry.
Just for
You did ask me whether or not Monarch were looking
9 12:48:46 10
This is, this goes to the core of the issue where the confusion arose.
And
11
that is that it was obvious that there was an internal disagreement, let's not
12
put it any stronger than this, as to what could or could not be achieved.
13
there was a fear that from an economic point of view or viability point of
14
view, or whatever.
12:49:17 15
satisfactory.
That what was being proposed or suggested would not be
And that any attempt to compromise or accept a compromise would
16
not be acceptable to Mr. Monahan.
17
terms.
18
please do.
19
Q. 339
12:49:45 20
And
I fully understand that.
Now, that's -- that's in very broad general
And if you wish to pursue it further, yes,
But in general, broad terms that was the orientation.
That's very helpful.
So, I mean, Mr. Lynn was kind of Monarch's face on the
ground and on the floor of the chamber; isn't that right?
21
A.
Oh, yes.
22
Q. 340
And Mr. Lydon was Mr. Lynn's -- was the Councillor with whom Mr. Lynn -- sorry.
23 24
He was kind of -- was he sort of putting up the Cherrywood, the Monarch case? A.
Yes.
Q. 341
Yes?
26
A.
He had done so much prior to, a year previous almost.
27
Q. 342
In May?
28
A.
May I think it was, 1992.
29
Q. 343
The big meeting was May '92?
A.
And the irony of the, as I understood it then and as I think I still understand
12:50:00 25
12:50:10 30
Well he had done so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:50:23
12:50:36
64 1
it.
The irony of that position was that instead of ending up with the
2
Councillors agreeing to what the Manager was proposing, they actually voted
3
against what the Manager was proposing and the vote was lost.
4
Q. 344
Yes?
5
A.
Whereas, what the Manager was proposing, while it may not have been acceptable
6
to Mr. Philip Monahan, was certainly a -- half a loaf.
7
Q. 345
Yes.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 346
The Manager's motion was defeated 35 - 33; isn't that right?
A.
Yes, I think I have -- I accept what you're saying, yes.
11
Q. 347
I'm relying on Ms. Dillon to correct me.
12
A.
Well if Ms. Dillon says it is, it's correct.
13
Q. 348
Well ....
14
A.
Sorry, what was the figure you gave me?
Q. 349
The Manager's motion.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 350
That was defeated 35 - 33?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 351
Did Mr. Lydon propose that?
A.
My understanding is that he did.
12:51:14 10
12:51:31 15
12:51:38 20
21
So just that meeting in May 1992, Mr. Dunlop.
My understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke on
the floor.
22
Q. 352
Yeah.
23
A.
And there was dreadful confusion.
24
Q. 353
Yes.
A.
Now, it so happens, Mr. Murphy, for clarity.
26
Q. 354
Yeah.
27
A.
And for ease of progress.
28
Q. 355
Yeah.
29
A.
That because of my role in other developments I happened to be in the -- not in
12:51:48 25
12:51:59 30
the chamber, nearby at the time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:52:01
12:52:15
65 1
Q. 356
Yes.
2
A.
And I have not direct, because I wasn't in the chamber.
But I have an
3
immediacy in relation to the reaction that took place at that particular time,
4
as a result of what happened on the floor.
5
Q. 357
You'd have a vivid recollection of that day then?
6
A.
I have a recollection.
7
Q. 358
Even though you had no personal or financial involvement?
8
A.
Yeah, well it was an issue that everybody was talking about.
9
Q. 359
All right.
12:52:38 10
But if that motion that was defeated had been passed.
Monarch -- I know that you weren't involved.
I think
What I'm thinking of is you were
11
presumably told by Mr. Sweeney on the 8th of March, a year later.
12
that vote been passed, motion been passed, Monarch would have been reasonably
13
happy with that even if it wasn't enough for Mr. Monahan?
14
A.
12:53:00 15
I'm glad you made that qualification.
Some elements of Monarch would have
been happy.
16
Q. 360
All right.
17
A.
Maybe I'm ....
18
Q. 361
What houses per acre would that have represented?
19
A.
Was it four?
Q. 362
If that motion had been passed.
A.
Let me just check.
12:53:10 20
21
That had
22
Now, --
I don't know if this is ... yes, I don't -- I don't have
it -- I don't.
23
Q. 363
All right.
24
A.
I know that -- I know that the position was that they ended up with one house
12:53:37 25
per acre.
26
Q. 364
That's correct.
27
A.
So, um, it may well have been that had that motion been passed they would have
28 29 12:53:49 30
I'm coming to that.
Anyway --
got four houses to the acre. Q. 365
Fine.
A.
I'm not being absolute about that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:53:51
12:54:03
66 1
Q. 366
That's fine.
But that motion was defeated and it would have partially
2
satisfied Monarch, or maybe it would have made some people in Monarch happy.
3
It wouldn't have made Mr. Monahan happy?
4
A.
I don't think so.
5
Q. 367
That's defeated.
A result of that was Mr. Lydon, I think on Mr. Lynn's
6
instructions, withdrew his motion for what was exactly what Monarch wanted.
7
Mr. Monahan wanted.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 368
Is that right?
A.
Yes, motion 31 A 1 withdrawn.
Q. 369
Just -- sorry just for a moment don't go on to that.
12:54:15 10
11
There was a vote on another motion.
12 13
Do you think am I right when I say that Mr. Lydon withdrew a motion which would
14
in fact have given Mr. Monahan what he was looking for?
12:54:35 15
16
A.
Yes, I think you're right.
Q. 370
And he withdrew it because it wouldn't make sense to bring it on after the
17
other motion was defeated?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 371
All right. We go down the list and get the town centre passed?
A.
Correct.
21
Q. 372
Then we come to Mr. Barrett's motion?
22
A.
Which ends up with one house per acre -- hectare.
23
Q. 373
That's correct, one house per acre.
24
A.
One house per acre -- or hectare.
Q. 374
One house per acre.
12:54:47 20
12:55:00 25
I understand that if Barrett hadn't introduced that
26
motion, it would all have reverted to the Draft 1991 Plan and it would have
27
been four houses per acre?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 375
So that Mr. Barrett's was really messing things up for Monarch.
12:55:17 30
I'm not
saying intentionally but the success of his motion gave Monarch a worse Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:55:22
12:55:42
67 1
situation than they'd have got if he hadn't brought it in?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 376
Yes.
4
A.
The perception at the time.
5
But the perception, if I may use that word.
And sort of a continuing perception was that had
Barrett not done what he did.
6
Q. 377
Yeah.
7
A.
That the day would not have been saved for Monarch.
8
Q. 378
Yes.?
9
A.
Now, I accept the logic.
Q. 379
Yes.?
A.
I accept the logic of what you outline, that had Barrett not put in that motion
12:55:47 10
11 12
or proposed that motion.
13
Q. 380
Yes?
14
A.
And I don't know what the genesis of that motion was or I wasn't involved.
12:56:03 15
As
I say, most of this is from an observer's point of view, most of the comment
16
did not concern Barrett.
17
Q. 381
Uh-huh?
18
A.
It concerned Mr. Lydon.
19
Q. 382
Uh-huh?
A.
As a result of what had happened.
21
Q. 383
Uh-huh.?
22
A.
But I accept that what you're saying is that had Barrett not have done what he
12:56:13 20
23
did the logic would appear to be that they would have reverted back to the
24
previous council proposal itself; that it would have been four houses to the
12:56:32 25
acre.
26
Q. 384
Uh-huh.
27
A.
Sorry?
28
Q. 385
What you've just said.
29
A.
Yes.
12:56:45 30
Most of the comment was Mr. Lydon?
I'm trying to repeat what you've just said.
Most of the comment on the fringes of the meeting outside of the chamber
as a result of what happened was about Mr. Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:56:47
12:57:02
68 1
Q. 386
In a word, to what effect?
2
A.
You know, he's after making a balls of it.
3
Q. 387
Right.
4
Now, and Mr.-- all right.
to Barrett.
Now, and you've anticipated me in relation
Because you've said in your private interview?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 388
Mr. Barrett's motion saved the day and I couldn't and can't understand that.
7 8
You say that was the feeling. A.
9
Yes.
That was the perception?
I completely understand Mr. Murphy.
even personally I can't get my head around.
12:57:20 10
But I have to say to you, that
that was a perception at the time.
11
Q. 389
All right.?
12
A.
That Barrett had actually saved the day.
13 14
And it is something that I just
Whereas the reality is, if you look
at it logically, what would have happened is as you outlined. Q. 390
12:57:38 15
All right. 1993.
That's perfect.
Mr. Dunlop, if we come on to the 8th of March
And months have passed now at this stage.
16
probably no urgency because nothing can happen.
17
for the second time in July '93.
18
of the year, isn't that right?
19 12:57:55 20
A.
Yeah.
Q. 391
All right.
But I think up to then The plan has to go on display
There will be another meeting before the end
Now, what I just want to -- am I right in thinking that in March
21
'93.
22
May '92 Monarch had really ended up with a bit of a disaster.
23
mean by that is that they hadn't got the Manager's proposal which I think might
24
have been four houses per acre.
12:58:23 25
I'm not particularly on that date or anything.
Since the meeting in Sorry.
Mr. Lydon's motion, which would have given
Mr. Monahan, would have made him pretty happy was withdrawn.
26
What I
And they end up
with one house per acre.?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 392
A bit of an uneconomic, unviable disaster from Monarch's point of view.
29 12:58:37 30
that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Is
12:58:38
12:58:57
69 1
Q. 393
Who made 10 million for these lands in 1989.
2
A.
Well I don't know.
3 4
Anecdotally I'll agree with you.
as to how much they paid for the lands. Q. 394
All right.
Way over the odds? I heard various figures
I don't know.
So do you know that between May '92 and March '93 when you come on
5
to the team, that Monarch must have been pretty cross with the outcome of that
6
meeting in May '92?
7
A.
8 9 12:59:13 10
Well I think I've said, Mr. Sweeney did say to me. Mr. Sweeney.
And others, not only
Like, you know, you cannot rely on these politicians.
Q. 395
Yeah?
A.
They won't do you know, what -- not what we tell them to do.
11
But they won't
do what we want them to do.
12
Q. 396
Yeah?
13
A.
But the fundamental point. I'm sorry if this is repetitive.
14
The fundamental
point in relation to this is that internally in Monarch it was perfectly
12:59:34 15
obvious to me from day one that there was confused communication lines.
16
Q. 397
Uh-huh.?
17
A.
Mr. Lynn was unhappy.
18
Q. 398
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Certainly about the alleged, unspecified activities of Mr. Monahan.
12:59:54 20
knew what Mr. Monahan was doing.
21 Q. 399
Mr. Who?
23
A.
Mr. Monahan.
24
Mr. Phil Monahan.
Mr. Philip Reilly was completely frustrated.
He just could not come to terms with the fact of what was happening. Q. 400
Uh-huh?
26
A.
So the internal.
27
Q. 401
Yes.?
28
A.
Confusion manifested itself externally.
29
Q. 402
Yes?
A.
In the communications to councillors.
13:00:22 30
Whether he was
making deals.
22
13:00:20 25
Who he was talking to.
Nobody
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
13:00:24
13:00:30
70 1
Q. 403
Yes?
2
A.
What exactly is it that Monarch wants.
3
Q. 404
Yes.?
4
A.
And.
5
Q. 405
Like in relation to density for example?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 406
Do they want 50 houses to the acre or would they be happy with ten or eight or
8 9
four. A.
13:00:50 10
That kind of thing; would that be right?
Correct.
And politicians, by their very nature, and in the cocooned
atmosphere in which they operate, are people who sometimes give more credence
11
to rumour or suspicion and don't accept assurances.
12
Q. 407
Uh-huh?
13
A.
As easily as we'll say somebody like yourself.
14
Q. 408
Uh-huh?
A.
Or myself.
16
Q. 409
Uh-huh?
17
A.
Would in normal business circumstances.
18
Q. 410
Uh-huh?
19
A.
In Dublin County Council among all the parties.
Q. 411
Uh-huh?
A.
Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and otherwise.
13:01:07 15
13:01:16 20
21 22
And there was total confusion.
Nobody knew exactly what Monarch
wanted.
23
Q. 412
All right.?
24
A.
Notwithstanding the excellent lobbying PR work.
Q. 413
Yeah?
26
A.
That had been done.
27
Q. 414
Yeah?
28
A.
By Monarch's representatives up to the point when the vote took place.
29
Q. 415
And that would have been done by Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly; is that right?
A.
Certainly I would say Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
13:01:29 25
13:01:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But Mr. Lynn was more -- as
13:01:46
13:01:58
71 1
far as I'm concerned, at my estimation, was there more often than Mr. Reilly.
2
But certainly I met and spoke to Mr. Reilly on a number of occasions while he
3
was there because he had a specific role.
4
Q. 416
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Mr. Murphy, it's just gone one o'clock.
7
adjourn until two o'clock.
8 9
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you.
13:02:06 10
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
So we'll
13:02:25
14:07:08
72 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M..
2 3 4
Q. 417
5 6
MR. MURPHY:
7
just finishing up with the May 1992 motion.
8
Barrett, Mr. Barrett's motion was passed and in short form the effect of that
9
was one house per acre for Monarch?
14:07:31 10
Chairman.
Mr. Dunlop, I think just before the break we were
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 418
Not a happy position for Monarch?
12
A.
No.
And the position there was that
But a positive, a positive decision in relation to the Development Plan.
13
I mean, they now have, as distinct from a defeat and a withdrawal, they now
14
have a motion that has passed.
14:07:51 15
Q. 419
16
Well, except you agreed with me earlier if that motion hadn't been introduced it would have gone back to the 1991 draft plan, which was four houses per acre?
17
A.
Subject to the technicalities I agreed with that.
18
Q. 420
One house per acre would be no advance on 1983?
19
A.
No.
Q. 421
All right.
21
A.
1983?
22
Q. 422
Yeah.?
23
A.
Oh, yes, sorry I beg your pardon.
24
Q. 423
In any event, it's a serious situation from a business, financial point of view
14:08:09 20
14:08:22 25
But anyway --
I know where you're coming from.
for Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn and everybody connected with Monarch.
26
Isn't that the long and short of it?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 424
That gathers some urgency then as we get into 1993 because of what's ahead -
29 14:08:43 30
the second display and a further confirmation meeting and then the final plan? A.
Correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:08:44
14:09:05
73 1
Q. 425
And you have said that you were told that that -- you understood that Mr. Lynn
2
and Mr. Reilly had worked very hard to get those motions passed.
3
motions passed and so on?
4
A.
5
Yes.
Anecdotally.
Mr. Sweeney complemented them.
The right
And I knew from my own
personal experience as an observer that they had been fairly active.
6
Q. 426
Mr. O'Herlihy was your predecessor there?
7
A.
That I understood.
8
Q. 427
I think his contract wasn't renewed after the vote.
9
A.
No, I don't know any of the technicalities about Mr. O'Herlihy's being hired or
14:09:22 10
11
what his contract was or was not. Q. 428
12 13
Do you know?
All right.
Presumably Mr. Sweeney told you what Mr. O'Herlihy had done and
contributed? A.
14
Not in any great detail.
I knew -- two things I want to say about that.
is, I never met Bill O'Herlihy in relation to the Monarch proposal.
14:09:41 15
One
I never
saw him in Dublin County Council ever during the course of the Development
16
Plan, and I was told in particular by councillor Tom Hand.
17
Q. 429
Yes?
18
A.
Whom I think I have indicated previously was a man who, you know, was a --
19 14:10:03 20
provided information.
He said that a video had been distributed.
Q. 430
Yes?
21
A.
To all of the councillors.
22
Q. 431
All right.
23 24 14:10:16 25
And he wasn't too impressed by, he thought the video was a bit too
much? A.
It was over the top.
Q. 432
Okay.
All right.
Do I take it, just again in short form, Mr. Dunlop, that
26
in fact while Mr. O'Herlihy was a PR person working for Monarch and then you
27
came on.
28
person?
29 14:10:33 30
A.
He finished and the then the following March you come in as a PR
That would appear to be the sequence.
From my point of view it's not I'm
brought in because Bill O'Herlihy has failed or I am brought in because Bill Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:10:36
14:10:51
74 1
O'Herlihy hasn't done X, Y, or Z. I'm brought in in the circumstances that I
2
outlined to.
3
Q. 433
Do I gather that maybe his PR role was different.
4
whatever.
5
be right?
It was to produce videos or
He was not involved with the lobbying of councillors.
Would, that
6
A.
I absolutely agree.
7
Q. 434
Yeah?
8
A.
Was that Mr. O'Herlihy's role would appear to be a straight forward
9
communication process with identified audiences, including the local community
14:11:06 10
11
and the politicians. Q. 435
12 13
Perfect.
And the lobbying of councillors was left -- that was a job that Mr.
Lynn and Mr. Reilly took on and did? A.
14
Yes.
As I said to you earlier, I never saw Mr. O'Herlihy in Dublin County
Council talking to a councillor lobbying.
14:11:25 15
16
Any understanding that I had of it, then and now --
The only people I saw on behalf of
Monarch were Richard and Phil. Q. 436
Perfect.
Mr. Dunlop, what I want to say to you then.
Come March '93 when
17
the thing is gathering urgency for Monarch people in relation to what's going
18
to happen at the final meeting.
19
position from May '92.
14:11:48 20
Mr. O'Herlihy's role has not continued after May '92.
And they are -- they have to be -- essentially what they have to do is to
21 22
The position is that they have an unhappy
change the mind of the councillors; isn't that right? Before November 1993? A.
Yes.
No.
With respect, I think Mr. Murphy, for ease of progress.
It would
23
be better to say that they first of all have to make up their minds what they
24
want.
14:12:10 25
26
Q. 437
That's a good point.?
A.
Because there's no point in them -- in the councillors or anybody else, indeed
27
but as we are dealing with Dublin County Council and this issue, it is the
28
communications with the councillors that count.
29 14:12:26 30
Q. 438
Yes?
A.
So if there is confusion internally in the organisation of Monarch as to what Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:12:31
14:12:41
75 1
is or is not wanted --
2
Q. 439
Yes?
3
A.
Therefore there is going to be inevitable confusion at the other end.
4
Q. 440
I understand.
You are explaining that to me now, Mr. Dunlop, I understand
5
that.
Now, so when you come in in March '93 to this meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
6
He is explaining all of this to you, I presume?
7
A.
Yes, in broad terms.
8
Q. 441
Broad terms.
9
to be a consultant to Monarch, you are hearing for the first time formally
14:13:02 10
11
You are hearing for the first time, formally, and now as about
about this internal wrangling or whatever the internal dissatisfaction is? A.
Yes were aware of it maybe anecdotally etc. It would be completely
12
disingenuous of me to suggest that I was not aware anecdotally that Mr. Phil
13
Monahan --
14 14:13:24 15
Q. 442
Yes?
A.
Was operating either in parallel with Richard and Philip or was operating in
16
such a way that he was causing difficulties for them.
17
Q. 443
Yes.
18
A.
Now, Mr. Monahan is no longer with us and I don't want to attribute anything to
19
him that would .... that was my understanding then and continues to be my
14:13:48 20
21
I understand.?
position. Q. 444
The position was that he had a very high expectation from a density point of
22
view and a very high hope.
23
high a hope and perhaps they were being more realistic is that it broadly?
24
A.
14:14:06 25
Whereas Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn didn't have as
Broadly, I think the orientation was that Mr. Sweeney would appear -- as it appeared to me, accepted the role of Richard and Phil, that what they were
26
recommending should be -- they should run with that.
27
that.
Monarch should run with
And that --
28
Q. 445
And what was that, how many houses per acre?
29
A.
But you see, this was the point.
And one of the points that I did make to
Mr. Sweeney at an early stage.
make up your minds what you want.
14:14:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:14:33
14:14:45
76 1
Q. 446
Just tell me what the extremes are. Are they four per acre?
2
A.
There was a proposal for a higher residential initially in parts of the initial
3
proposal that went in in 1991 I think.
4
Q. 447
Uh-huh?
5
A.
And they would have sort of reflected Mr. Philip Monaghan's views.
6
Q. 448
Uh-huh.?
7
A.
But realism as to what the officials would agree to --
8
Q. 449
Yes?
9
A.
Or recommend.
Q. 450
Yes?
11
A.
And this was the core problem.
12
Q. 451
Yes?
13
A.
That as a result of what happened in May 1992 --
14
Q. 452
Yes?
A.
The official's recommendation was defeated.
16
Q. 453
Yes?
17
A.
So if they could get back to that original position, which was four per acre,
14:14:58 10
14:15:05 15
18 19
then that would be a starting point. Q. 454
14:15:22 20
Does that mean, Mr. Dunlop, that in fact you had when you came in, and now you are hearing, you are getting all of this information on that Monday afternoon
21
and the position, as you are receiving it, is that Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Reilly
22
and Mr. Lynn would be kind of happy with -- they'd compromise at the four.
23
Whereas on the other hand Mr. Monahan was out there looking for ten plus maybe?
24
A.
14:15:46 25
I don't know what Mr. Monahan was looking for or what he was saying to people. But what the presentation to me was such --
26
Q. 455
Yes?
27
A.
That if they didn't get their act together and get something on the -- accepted
28 29 14:15:58 30
that they might end up with nothing. Q. 456
All right.?
A.
And -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:15:59
14:16:20
77 1
Q. 457
All right.?
2
A.
It would be disingenuous for me also not to suggest, even though I wasn't aware
3
of the details, I was aware anecdotally that there was some relationship with
4
some other company, investment company, that may well have been looking for --
5
had high expectations in relation to the viability of the land.
6
Q. 458
I'm lost on that.
7
A.
I don't know the name but, I mean, my impression was that there was some other
8 9
What are you talking about there?
company. Q. 459
Yes?
A.
That Monarch was either associated with or going to go into joint venture with.
11
Q. 460
Would that be GRE?
12
A.
I don't know.
13
Q. 461
Okay.
14
A.
I do know that GRE were involved with them in Tallaght.
Q. 462
All right.?
16
A.
Whether they were involved with them here ....
17
Q. 463
They were involved here, yes.?
18
A.
There was some company that obviously people were dictating, look we need X to
14:16:34 10
14:16:46 15
19 14:16:57 20
Yeah.?
get a return on our investment. Q. 464
Mr. Dunlop, then, the reason -- the reason why you are brought in and the
21
instruction that you were given then.
22
combination and maybe twofold.
23
interviews or your statement.
24
has to get its act together?
14:17:18 25
Would it be kind of a sort of a
And you say twofold in fact in one of your
There are two things.
First of all, Monarch
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 465
And that seems to mean that Mr. Monahan has to be brought back on side?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 466
Bring into line with a compromise position at around four houses per acre;
29 14:17:30 30
would that be right? A.
In broad terms, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:17:32
14:17:37
78 1
Q. 467
Broad terms?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 468
And if that was done then Monarch has its united front?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 469
It knows what it wants.
Let's say it's four houses per acre for the moment.
6
And then the job is then to convince the councillors that they should vote for
7
this?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 470
And this would be where your speciality would come in as a person who knew the
14:17:54 10
councillors and would lobby them.
Would that be right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 471
And am I right in thinking that go an integral part of what they knew about you
13
and your relationship with councillors was, they knew that you would pay money
14
to councillors in return for their vote?
14:18:12 15
A.
Well you say that's an integral part.
I mean, that is, with respect, a
16
supposition on your part and it is a supposition on my part as it applies to
17
the generality of Monarch.
I don't know what everybody in Monarch thought.
18
Q. 472
No?
19
A.
All I can say to you is what the culture of the meeting that I had with
14:18:35 20
Mr. Sweeney.
21
Where he indicated to me that I would have to do things with
councillors and it was the only way to get things done.
22
Q. 473
Yes?
23
A.
But I cannot attribute those same sentiments to anybody else.
24
And I have
specifically said to you, not yesterday or today but I am specifically saying
14:18:52 25
to you now, that in any contact or discussion or debate or strategy that I had
26
with either Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly separately or both of them together, that
27
was never ever alluded to.
28 29 14:19:21 30
Q. 474
All right. is twofold.
Okay.
But sorry.
I mean, all I'm getting at here is, your job
I mean, Mr. Monahan has to be, has to be, some sense has to be
spoken to Mr. Monahan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:19:23
14:19:28
79 1
A.
But not by me.
2
Q. 475
Very good.
3
A.
Not by me.
4
Q. 476
Don't worry about that?
5
A.
Okay.
6
Q. 477
He is going to have to be reigned in a bit?
7
A.
Yes, yes.
8
Q. 478
That's right?
9
A.
He is going to have to be controlled.
Q. 479
Okay.
11
A.
On the basis of an agreed strategy.
12
Q. 480
Now, you weren't brought in to talk to Mr. Monahan?
13
A.
No, no.
14
Q. 481
So you are saying now, you were saying to Mr. Sweeney.
14:19:37 10
14:19:52 15
16
I was going to ask you that.?
And then the councillors are going to be have to be lobbied?
You, Mr. Sweeney, and
you Monarch get your act together and tell me what you're happy with? A.
Yes.
As I go on to say and I don't mean to be pushing things forward,
17
Mr. Murphy, as I go on to say, it was obvious -- it was obvious that Mr. Lawlor
18
was advising Mr. Monahan.
19
Q. 482
Yes?
A.
At the same time trying to advise Mr. Sweeney.
21
Q. 483
Yes?
22
A.
And the rest of the company.
23
Q. 484
Yes?
24
A.
Let's use the phrase "honest broker" in the circumstances.
14:20:11 20
14:20:22 25
He is trying to
get people to come to realise --
26
Q. 485
Yes?
27
A.
That unless there is a straight forward line of communication, things are going
28
to go disastrously wrong.
29
expressed, not dissatisfaction but expressed deep concern as to what Phil
14:20:43 30
Mr. Lynn, in particular, on a number of occasions
Monahan was doing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:20:45
14:21:07
80 1
Q. 486
Yes.?
2
A.
He did not know.
Other people did not know.
And I think it is fair and
3
legitimate to say that he was, as I would be, or indeed anybody else in those
4
circumstances would be, upset.
5
conducted, in a very professional way.
6
person who in fact was his employer.
7
Q. 487
That if a programme of lobbying was being That this was being undermined by the
Now, and what this means is that Mr. Monahan was out there telling councillors
8
that he wanted this larger -- no, but I'm sorry.
9
understanding of it right in relation to what your task was and the context in
14:21:28 10
which you were coming in.
Just to see is my
Mr. Monahan is out there.
Did you understand,
11
saying that he wanted this greater density, greater number of houses per acre.
12
And you had Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney with a more realistic, more
13
compromised position?
14 14:21:47 15
A.
Yeah.
Q. 488
And then as well as that, is there a suggestion, which I think you made in your
16
interviews, that Mr. Monahan may have been offering money to the councillors or
17
offering higher figures than ultimately were going to come right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 489
Yes?
A.
And if I am going on a little bit longer just stop me.
21
Q. 490
Yes.?
22
A.
Nobody knew exactly what Mr. Monahan was doing.
23
Q. 491
Uh-huh?
24
A.
We did know and his employees did know, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Sweeney, did
14:22:09 20
14:22:27 25
Well that is -- can I deal with that compositely for a minute.
Just stop me.
know, even though Mr. Sweeney was a member of the Board.
They did know that
26
Phil had, on an historic basis, very, very good political contacts.
27
have been a but hypocritical. They may have been Mr. Monahan, you know,
28
exaggerating the contacts or whatever.
29
were contacts.
14:22:55 30
They may
Nonetheless, we did know that there
And we certainly did know that there was a relationship
between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor.
Phil -- Richard Lynn had over a long
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:23:06
14:23:17
81 1
period of time obviously developed a very close working relationship with a
2
number of politicians, with specific reference to this particular project.
3
Q. 492
Mr. Lynn?
4
A.
Mr. Lynn.
5
Q. 493
Oh, yes, yes.?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 494
Uh-huh.?
8
A.
Particularly in Mr. Reilly's case, as I understood it then and understand it
9 14:23:29 10
11
Assisted by Mr. Reilly.
now, on the Fine Gael side. Q. 495
Are we talking about the councillors now?
A.
Yes, we are.
In relation to Mr. Sweeney, I have no evidence -- I have no
12
knowledge or evidence to suggest that Mr. Sweeney had any relationship with any
13
politician.
14 14:23:43 15
Q. 496
Uh-huh?
A.
Other than a comment that he passed to me to say that they couldn't be relied
16
on.
17
Q. 497
Uh-huh.?
18
A.
So, in all of that mix where you had a very successful campaign, ending up in a
19
motion in May 1992, which would have ended up with Monarch getting four houses
14:24:03 20
to the acre in Cherrywood.
That being defeated.
Another motion withdrawn.
21
And a Sean Barrett motion getting one house to the acre.
22
cause of deep dissatisfaction to Mr. Monahan.
That obviously was a
23
Q. 498
Uh-huh.?
24
A.
That is the broad brush picture of what was happening.
Q. 499
That -- that's --
A.
Now, as it transpired, thereafter, in -- after my first meeting with
14:24:27 25
26 27
Mr. Sweeney when Mr. Lawlor was present at other meetings, it transpired that
28
Mr. Lawlor was attempting to advise Mr. Monahan in some fashion or other.
29
Mr. Lawlor was not slow to understand densities, acreages, zonings, or
14:25:00 30
whatever.
Neither was Mr. Monahan.
I was only to -- certainly Mr. Monahan
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:25:10
14:25:30
82 1
attended one meeting in Monarch.
2
Q. 500
Yes?
3
A.
And to the best of my belief, put his head around the door at another meeting.
4
At all times, I believe that Richard Lynn and I can't say the same about Philip
5
Reilly, but I do believe that Richard Lynn resented the involvement of Lawlor,
6
or whatever role Lawlor was playing.
7
didn't know what was happening.
8
while he was conducting his operation on behalf of Monarch, here were two
9
people, his own employer, Mr. Monahan, and another, Mr. Lawlor, a politician
Because again it was a blind spot.
He
He didn't know what Lawlor was doing.
14:25:59 10
but no longer a member of the council, operating, allegedly, on behalf of the
11
company, while he was out there, as the face of the company, lobbying with
12
councillors.
13
Q. 501
Yes.
14
A.
No, no, Mr. Reilly.
14:26:22 15
Now, and Mr. Lynn had Fine Gael -Mr. Reilly had a Fine Gael -- either directly or through
a family connection, knew a -- certainly one Fine Gael councillor.
16
Q. 502
Yes?
17
A.
Councillor Therese Ridge.
18
Q. 503
Sorry.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 504
Mr. Monahan you said contacted politicians.
21
A.
We didn't know. We had no idea.
22
Q. 505
Fine?
23
A.
We did not know.
14:26:33 20
And
24
That's Mr. Reilly?
We did know that as a result of -- sorry.
by saying we did know.
14:26:57 25
Did he know councillors?
Let me preface
Anecdotally we knew, at least I did, that Mr. Monahan
had a relationship or knew Senior Government ministers.
26
Q. 506
Uh-huh?
27
A.
And there was a -- let me put it stronger than this.
There was a rumour
28
circulating that Philip Monahan had gone to the Government or a Minister in the
29
Government and said that, you know, the only way that this can be done in
14:27:22 30
Tallaght is by tax designation. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:27:24
14:27:40
83 1
Q. 507
Uh-huh?
2
A.
Now, that may be anecdotal. I don't know.
It may be a rumour.
I was not involved.
It may have substance in
3
it.
But in those circumstances, given
4
the success that Tallaght was.
5
face of it, was the person who had succeeded in bringing Tallaght to fruition.
And given that Philip Monahan, at least on the
6
Q. 508
Uh-huh?
7
A.
That this man did have strong political connections.
8
Q. 509
I see.
9
Thank you.
connections.
14:27:58 10
Now, so that's Mr. Monahan's connections, Mr. Reilly's
Who was dealing with the Fianna Fail councillors before you came
on board?
11
A.
Mr. Lynn.
12
Q. 510
Had he close?
13
A.
Well as I understood it from Richard, that he had.
14
Q. 511
Yes?
A.
Good contacts with Fianna Fail.
16
Q. 512
All right.
17
A.
It was a twin pronged operation before I came on board.
18
Q. 513
Yes?
19
A.
There was Philip and there was Richard.
Q. 514
Yes.
A.
And obviously, in fairness to them, notwithstanding anything that might have
14:28:05 15
14:28:17 20
21
So --
Okay --
22
been said up to this point or may be said subsequently.
23
to a situation where in May '92 they had a motion which obviously was being put
24
forward by Councillor Lydon with the agreement of the company and it fell.
14:28:41 25
Obviously, they got
Q. 515
Yes.?
26
A.
Notwithstanding the fact that it was being recommended by the Manager.
27
Q. 516
Okay.
I want to move on just back to the March' of '93 when you come in, Mr.
28
Dunlop.
As you say, there was a twin approach by Monarch which had failed up
29
to then.
There's now a sort of twin problem.
14:29:00 30
to make up its mind as to what it's looking for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
One is to get Monarch to agree
14:29:04
14:29:10
84 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 517
And that had nothing to do with you?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 518
Was that Mr. Lawlor to talk to, to reign in Mr. Monahan?
5
A.
Putting it bluntly, yes.
6
Q. 519
So you were brought on then for the second purpose, which was your normal
7 8
purpose in these matters; to do the lobbying? A.
9
I was brought on for the specific purpose to add, again, to use a phrase for the descriptive purposes, to add value to what Richard and Philip were doing.
14:29:30 10
I wasn't directly brought on to lobby every councillor, which I did not do.
11
But I was brought on to add, to supplement what Richard and Philip were doing.
12
Q. 520
And they had done very well?
13
A.
In my estimation, yes.
14
Q. 521
Sorry, when you were brought on, it isn't to deal with Mr. Monahan.
14:29:51 15
It is to
do your normal lobbying of councillors?
16
A.
Yes, correct.
17
Q. 522
And it is well known in March '93 to councillors and to people in Monarch that
18 19
you at that time were paying councillors money to councillors for their vote? A.
14:30:09 20
Well that is something -- that's a supposition that you are making. know.
Again, as I have said five minutes ago, I don't know what the extent of
21
that information was with people.
22
allude to relates to Mr. Sweeney.
23
Q. 523
24 14:30:29 25
I don't
No -- yes, okay.
Yes.
Certainly, the only comment that I can
But what I want to say, can I come to 544 please.
It's not me making the supposition. A.
You're all right.
26
Q. 524
Do you see there line 6?
27
A.
Line 6.
28
Q. 525
Top of the page.
One.
Half a loaf being better than no bread.
As I said
29
to you the other day, it is important to get some recognition at some stage
14:30:54 30
which would allow for further motions between the first and second display Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:30:58
14:31:15
85 1
prior to the final vote.
2
was a lot of to go and froing.
3
an IQ of more than one to know that not only was I dispensing but other people
4
were dispensing as well, what amounts or how or to whom or distributor wise it
5
was happening.
6
Lynn of Monarch to try and organise the situation with Cherrywood which had
7
been zoned per house per acre or two houses.
8
A.
9
The final vote being in December of '93.
It was obvious it to me that one wouldn't need
Concluding in an approach to me by Eddie Sweeney and Richard
Well, let me deal with that, if I may.
I have said that I had the meeting
with Mr. Sweeney and the comment that was made.
14:31:35 10
So there
I have also said that I have
never had a conversation with Richard Lynn about specific payments to specific
11
politicians.
12
Q. 526
Okay.?
13
A.
I did have a comment made to me by Mr. Lynn.
14
Q. 527
Uh-huh?
A.
In relation to 'you think these idiots would get their act together there's so
14:31:44 15
16
much money being spent on them.'
Now, that was the phrase that was used.
17
Mr. Lynn may have an explanation for that.
18
Q. 528
Yes?
19
A.
I took that to mean, in the circumstances, that he was aware that money needed
14:32:04 20
21
to be paid to politicians. Q. 529
Yes.
Okay.
Just I'm.
That's fine.
But Mr. Dunlop, it would have been
22
widely known -- just leave it at that for a second, within councillors, that
23
you were paying money to councillors?
24 14:32:20 25
A.
If you are going to specify councillors, yes.
Q. 530
Councillors, yes.
26
had already acted for, and you were paying councillors in those cases?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 531
Yes.
29 14:32:39 30
And outside of that, there were other developers that you
And it's clear from what you've said that Mr. Sweeney said to you on
that day, that he was aware of the necessity to pay councillors? A.
Well, he was aware that there were certain things that I had to do with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:32:43
14:32:57
86 1
councillors and that other -- that was the only way that things could be done.
2
Q. 532
Done?
3
A.
I am not saying that Mr. Sweeney said specifically I know that you, Frank
4
Dunlop, are paying councillors and that you have to pay councillors.
5
explained to you yesterday, the culture of the meeting, two reasonably
6
intelligent people having a conversation.
7
Q. 533
Yes.
But -- yes.
I'm sorry.
Sorry, Chairman.
Yes.
And as I
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
8 9
What I'm saying is that all right.
14:33:52 10
You had a significant relationship with
councillors or certainly with a number of councillors; isn't that right
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 534
That would have been widely known?
13
A.
Yes, I think I would accept that, yes.
14
Q. 535
Yes.
14:34:10 15
And you had a special sort of expertise -- sorry.
lobby councillors and you were good at it.
Your role was to
Would that be fair now?
16
A.
That's fair, yes.
17
Q. 536
And you were recognised to be good at it?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 537
Yes?
A.
Yes, I would say that.
21
Q. 538
And you were recognised to have been successful?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 539
At lobbying councillors?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 540
And an integral part of that lobbying would be paying them money.
14:34:18 20
14:34:24 25
26
be but was paying them money?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 541
Isn't that right?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 542
All right.
14:34:35 30
Not would
And you were brought on to the Monarch team for the purpose of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:34:41
14:34:52
87 1
lobbying councillors?
2
A.
And I don't mean to be, to quibble with you, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q. 543
Yes?
4
A.
Because I am as anxious as you to move on.
5
Q. 544
Yes?
6
A.
But not specifically -- to add support to what Philip and to Richard and Philip
7
were doing.
8
Q. 545
Yes?
9
A.
Now, I knew.
14:35:05 10
Because I had a meeting.
I met Philip and Richard.
And they
outlined to me --
11
Q. 546
Yes?
12
A.
In some detail what their concerns were and who they were talking to and who
13 14
they weren't talking to. Q. 547
14:35:17 15
16
Yes.
But what would adding support to their work mean if it wasn't meaning
you talking to councillors and paying councillors? A.
17
Well, that is a matter for, in the first instance, for them to answer. far as I understood it and took it --
18
Q. 548
Yeah?
19
A.
For my conversations with Mr. Sweeney at subsequent meetings.
14:35:35 20
That once it
was agreed what was required, and that was agreed within the company, that I
21
would go to other -- key councillors.
22
Q. 549
Yes?
23
A.
And.
24
Q. 550
Yes?
A.
Just to focus this for a moment.
26
Q. 551
Yes?
27
A.
Not that they were going to go totally negative or whatever.
14:35:47 25
But as
People were beginning to go off side.
But people were
28
going off side in the sense that some councillors were saying that we should go
29
for as much as we can get.
14:36:05 30
less.
And other people were saying well we should go for
But we don't know what Monarch wants. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:36:08
14:36:41
88 1
Q. 552
Were Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath two councillors continuing to go for the higher?
2
A.
Certainly Mr. McGrath.
3
Q. 553
All right.
4
A.
There were others I think.
5
Lydon.
I would say almost to the same extent Mr. Fox, yes.
Are they the two you have in mind?
Sorry.
I think councillor .... sorry.
Sorry.
Don
I beg your pardon.
6
Q. 554
Uh-huh.?
7
A.
Don Lydon appeared to be.
I don't know what happened between Don Lydon and
8
Richard Lynn subsequent to the May 1992 vote.
9
look, whatever the majority of councillors would go for, he would be willing to
14:36:58 10
But Don Lydon appeared to say
go for that obviously on the basis that if there was support, if there was a
11
majority support for something he would go with that.
12
Betty Coffey -- Betty was -- she was from Dun Laoghaire.
She represented one
13
of the wards in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown constituency.
So she was in the
14
middle of it.
14:37:33 15
She was in the thick of it.
I think I said that
And I think Betty was advising
caution, which would have been her normal.
16
Q. 555
Yes?
17
A.
In fairness to her, her normal disposition anyway.
18
Q. 556
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Which would be contingent on not upsetting the officials.
14:37:46 20
If the officials
were upset --
21
Q. 557
Yes?
22
A.
Betty would be upset.
23
Q. 558
Yes.
24
Mr. Dunlop, when you leave that meeting that afternoon, you know that
your job now is to add support to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly and that means go to
14:38:03 25
councillors, persuade councillors who might be going to change their mind or
26
might be going off side to come back on side and persuade other councillors to
27
come on side.
28 29 14:38:29 30
A.
I didn't.
Would that be right?
Well, first of all -- the first objective was having agreed what I
agreed with Mr. Sweeney, then to meet Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly. then to agree with them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And
14:38:31
14:38:47
89 1
Q. 559
Yes, yes, yes.?
2
A.
Now, again, and this is subject to other people.
Not subject but obviously
3
other people will give evidence to this effect and I don't mean to offend
4
anybody unnecessarily.
5
the fact that somebody like me was brought in.
But I do think that certainly Richard Lynn resented
6
Q. 560
Oh, I see, yes, yes.?
7
A.
Well you can understand his position.
8
Q. 561
Of course, yes.?
9
A.
Here he is in a position where he knows that his boss may well be doing
14:39:00 10
something that he does not know about.
11
involved with his boss and here now is a third person being brought in.
12
Q. 562
Yes?
13
A.
Out of the blue.
14 14:39:18 15
16
With the implication, expressed or otherwise, implicit or
otherwise, that he may not have been doing his job. Q. 563
Yes?
A.
Mr. Reilly didn't seem to be unduly unhappy.
17 18
He know that Mr. Lawlor is in some way
He seemed to be happy that there
was at least some further support. Q. 564
19
All right.
Okay.
And what we have to do between May -- between this March
'93 and November '93 is we have to persuade some councillors to vote
14:39:40 20
differently?
21
A.
Well you have to persuade people having agreed as to what we want --
22
Q. 565
Yeah?
23
A.
We have to persuade people that that's what they should vote for.
24
Q. 566
Can we just leave the Monarch side of it getting their act together away.
14:39:54 25
It's nothing to do with you now isn't it?
26
A.
Exactly.
That's agreed.
27
Q. 567
They have to get their act together.
28
Mr. Reilly.
29
are going to add your efforts to it?
14:40:09 30
A.
You are going to talk to Mr. Lynn and
Presumably, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly continue their efforts.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
You
14:40:10
14:40:24
90 1
Q. 568
2
Yeah, all right.
In simple terms -- all right.
Mr. Sweeney at that meeting who you would talk to?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 569
Which of the councillors you would talk to?
5
A.
No, I didn't.
6
Q. 570
All right.
7 8
11
Were you told by Mr. Sweeney which councillors had been spoken to
already by Monarch? A.
9 14:40:37 10
Now, did you discuss with
No.
Because Mr. Sweeney made it clear in the presentation that he made to me
that he relied on. Q. 571
Mr. Lynn?
A.
No, Richard and Philip, both of them. As I said, complemented them on what
12
they were doing or trying to do, to get done.
13
Q. 572
All right, in the course of the meeting which lasted for how long?
14
A.
I think I said to you earlier or maybe it was yesterday, I cannot absolutely
14:40:54 15
say how long the meeting was.
16
hour.
I cannot say definitively.
It was, you know, half an hour, 45 minutes, an Sorry, maybe I can.
17
Q. 573
And in the course of --
18
A.
No, I can't sorry.
19
Q. 574
In the course of this meeting he said what you've said to us already.
14:41:10 20
Which
led you to understand that he understood that councillors would have to be paid
21
or might have to be paid?
22
A.
The tenure of his remarks to me --
23
Q. 575
Yeah?
24
A.
And we've had this before.
Q. 576
Yeah?
A.
In other Modules, the tenure of his remarks to me were such that he indicated
14:41:23 25
26 27
that he knew that I had to do certain things with councillors and that that was
28
the only way that things could get done and he did get on to speak about the
29
unreliability of politicians.
14:41:44 30
You can't rely on them.
You know, you don't
know what they're going to get up to one day after the next. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:41:47
14:41:54
91 1
Q. 577
Yes?
2
A.
And you have to keep your eye on them.
3
Q. 578
Now, whatever about the precise words, because you don't remember the precise
4 5
words, you said? A.
6
I will not attribute the words 'I know that you, Frank Dunlop, have to pay councillors to get this done'.
7
Q. 579
But?
8
A.
To him.
9
Q. 580
Was it clear to you after this meeting that he had said to you, whatever words
14:42:14 10
he used, that they amounted to communicating to you that he knew that monies
11
would have to be paid to councillors?
12
A.
That's as I took it.
13
Q. 581
And could there be any room for doubt from his conversation with you?
14
A.
As far as I'm concerned, no.
Q. 582
All right.
14:42:31 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
a note of it.
19
A.
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I think you told us yesterday, because I have
Yep.
14:42:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
do".
23
him to say? I understood you to say that -- or to be quoting him fairly
24
accurate. Well which?
14:42:58 25
A.
It doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate.
"Do what you have to
Is that something that you -- is that a summary of what you understood
You have to do what I know you have to do.
Something along those lines.
But
26
the point I really want to make, Mr. Chairman, is that I will not attribute
27
comments to him saying that he specifically said to me "I know that you have to
28
give money to politicians".
He did not say that.
29 14:43:13 30
CHAIRMAN:
But -- well.
I mean, if he said words such as you've suggested he
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:43:18
14:43:38
92 1
said.
2
That comment is perfect capable of a perfectly innocent.
3
A.
What did you understand that to be? Because that's quite capable.
I readily accept that.
That's why I made the point to Mr. Murphy yesterday in
4
the culture of the meeting and the circumstances of the conversation.
5
in no doubt.
6
doubt when I left the meeting that Mr. Sweeney knew a number of things in
7
relation to my operation with Dublin County Council and councillors and
8
payments might necessarily have to be made.
Mr. Murphy just asked me and I said it to him.
I was
I was in no
9 14:43:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
No, no, no.
Well is that because that issue was discussed? First of all, it wasn't an agendad meeting and this was an item
12
on the agenda.
13
circumstances to me.
14
indicated to me in the type of language that he used without specifically
14:44:19 15
This was a conversation where Mr. Sweeney was explaining the He wanted me to become involved.
saying that I know you have to pay politicians.
We agreed a fee.
He
He indicated to me in such a
16
way that I left the meeting in the full knowledge.
And I have said this
17
before in relation to other matters in other modules.
18
an asterisk on this particular Module.
19
monies would have to be paid or might have to be paid to politicians.
And that is why I have
Is that Mr. Sweeney was aware that
14:44:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
to be of the view that money would have to be paid.
23
to do this work.
24
A.
But if you were in a room with Mr. Sweeney and you understood him
Why wasn't there a more open discussion about it?
Well I think we -- we've had this discussion before here in this room.
14:45:06 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
About what?
About people not openly saying --
28 29 14:45:14 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
And that you would have
But this is in relation to another Module.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:45:14
14:45:19
93 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well at the moment we are he only interested in this Module.
Yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
other was thinking on this subject.
7
wouldn't have been a more open discussion?
8
A.
9
So why, if the two of you were in a room, and each knew what the I mean, is there any reason why there
Well, let's take it from my point of view, for a start.
I was not going to
say to Mr. Sweeney, whom I had never met before, I was not going to say to
14:45:44 10
Mr. Sweeney, 'you know that I have to do X, Y and Z'.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
meeting.
14
A.
That I could understand would be your view at the start of the
Correct.
14:45:55 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
But your evidence is that you were fully of the view yourself
Yes.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:46:04 20
advanced.
21 22
towards the end of the meeting or when the meeting was well That you felt he knew that you were going to have to pay the
politicians? A.
Correct.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
14:46:17 25
26
So I'm just wondering at that stage why wouldn't there have been
some open discussion? A.
Well, I certainly wasn't going to raise it.
And he didn't, in the
27
circumstances that I've outlined, he did not specifically say A, B, C, I know
28
what you have to do X with anybody in particular or anybody or anybody in
29
general.
14:46:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:46:33
14:46:44
94 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
3
Exactly.
But you said he was indicating that in a different way.
That's why I left the meeting satisfied that he knew what I had to
do.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Q. 583
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
9
Cherrywood project for some considerable time before March '93; is that right?
14:47:01 10
A.
11
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Lawlor was involved with Mr. Monahan and this
Well. That I don't know. I cannot specifically say that to you.
The logic
is that he was.
12
Q. 584
Yes?
13
A.
But he never discussed that with me.
14
Q. 585
Would you have any idea would he have been around, would he have been involved
14:47:18 15
16
He never told me that.
in May '92? A.
17
Well he certainly wasn't a member of the council because he lost his seat in the June 1991 Local Elections.
18
Q. 586
Yes?
19
A.
He could well have been advising.
Q. 587
But, Mr. Lawlor --
21
A.
Mr. Dunlop.
22
Q. 588
From what you told me this morning, you were in very frequent contact with
14:47:28 20
23 24 14:47:37 25
Mr. Lawlor? A.
Yes.
Q. 589
Would you not have known then and you knew an awful lot back in May '92 what
26
was going on in Cherrywood that you've told us, not that you were involved?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 590
So you would have known whether Mr Lawlor, in May '92, you are in a position
29 14:47:53 30
today to tell us whether Mr. Lawlor was involved in May '92 on behalf of Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:47:53
14:48:12
95 1
A.
No, I'm not and even, on any reflection, given the personality of the late
2
Mr. Lawlor.
3
involved in.
4
Q. 591
No, but you'd have known.
5
people.
6
there?
7
A.
Mr. Lawlor wouldn't necessarily tell you everything he was
Yes, he might tell you or you'd know from other
You'd have known from Mr. Reilly or Mr. Lynn or seen Mr. Lawlor
No, in fairness to both of them, I do not recall them ever mentioning that to
8
me in any discussion that we had with them on the margins of the council
9
meetings.
14:48:34 10
Q. 592
11 12
What would be wrong if they said it to
you that he was involved? A.
13 14
Why do you say in fairness to them.
They can say they knew if they want to.
I'm just saying I don't know, I can't
attribute a view to them. That's what I mean by that. Q. 593
14:48:53 15
So by March '93 we've got a bit of a crisis looming for Monarch in relation to Cherrywood?
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 594
And Mr. Lawlor is there at that point; yes?
18
A.
Mr. Lawlor is now in the frame.
19
Q. 595
Yeah.
14:49:04 20
Certainly as far as I'm concerned.
In fact you say, you've told the Tribunal I think in the interviews,
that you regarded him as an advisor or strategy advisor or something like that;
21
is that right.
22
A.
Well that was the way Mr. Lawlor would present himself.
23
Q. 596
All right.
24
A.
Well he was at meetings.
Q. 597
Yes?
26
A.
That I attended.
27
Q. 598
Yes?
28
A.
And I had discussions with him from time to time.
14:49:18 25
29 14:49:29 30
So he was very heavily involved when you came in?
but I had discussions with him.
Not on a very regular basis
He might just say to me what's going on in
relation to Monarch down in the council. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:49:31
14:49:46
96 1
Q. 599
2 3
Did he have -- he had a close relationship with Mr. Monahan I think you said; or did you?
A.
I don't know what the nature of the relationship was between himself and Mr.
4
Monahan but certainly they had a relationship.
5
it was a business like relationship, whatever.
But certainly he had a --
6
what's the word I'm looking for? A quizzical.
A sort of quizzical attitude
7
as far as Phil Monahan was concerned.
8
know what Phil would get up to or, you know, I'm sure Phil is involved in
9
something that I can't put my finger on or whatever.
14:50:23 10
Whether it was close, whether
Like, to such an extent you'd never
He had that sort of.
Q. 600
All right?
11
A.
Attitude to Phil.
12
Q. 601
And Mr. Lawlor, was he -- did he -- was he close to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly or
13 14
Mr. Sweeney? A.
No, no, no.
Q. 602
All right?
16
A.
I think he may well have been close to Mr. Sweeney.
17
Q. 603
Anyway, Mr.-- yes.
14:50:30 15
I don't think Mr. Lawlor was close to Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly.
So in March '93 the crisis situation for Monarch in
18
relation to Cherrywood.
19
this point suggests to Mr. Sweeney that the answer to your problems is bring in
14:50:51 20
Mr. Lawlor has been involved for some time and at
Mr. Dunlop because of his familiarity with councillors?
21
A.
In broad brush terms, yes.
22
Q. 604
In broad brush.
Right.
That's the sort of thing he would have said to you
23
in many other developments? Do you remember yesterday we were talking about
24
where he introduced you.
14:51:20 25
26
It would have been the same.
It's very similar to
the other situations where Mr. Lawlor introduces you to the developer? A.
Yes.
And Mr. Lawlor, again, for ease, Mr. Lawlor was a very active
27
participant.
28
fax on your machine from Mr. Lawlor that he had dictated the night before for
29
suggestions or recommendations as to what ought to be done.
14:51:47 30
You could go into your office in the morning and find a 20 page
-Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Or proposals for
14:51:47
14:52:04
97 1
Q. 605
I think the Tribunal knows that, Mr. Dunlop.?
2
A.
I'm glad the Tribunal.
That is the very active participation that Mr. Lawlor
3
took.
4
in the council, to be active.
5
Q. 606
6
Yes.
So it would not be unusual for Mr. Lawlor, albeit not directly involved
Like, when he wasn't a member of the council.
How can he have any
influence with councillors?
7
A.
It's very difficult to explain that.
8
Q. 607
Or is there a simple explanation.
9
A.
Well there may be a simple explanation.
14:52:32 10
I think one councillor, and I think
I'm sure I've given evidence to this effect before.
One councillor expressed
11
to me that he admired Liam Lawlor because he stood up to the officials and
12
would not accept anything that the officials said no matter what they proposed
13
he was able to.
14 14:52:47 15
Q. 608
All right?
A.
Bore holes in it.
And people admired that.
Whereas other councillors, by
16
virtue of their professions or day jobs or whatever, didn't have the time to do
17
that kind of ...
18
Q. 609
19
All right.
At this stage in the meeting, Mr. Dunlop, you know what your job
is and you know the things that have to be done first like Monarch getting
14:53:24 20
their act together etc.?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 610
What about money?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 611
What discussion did you have with Mr. Sweeney about your remuneration?
A.
We had a discussion about money and remuneration, as you call it.
14:53:34 25
26
agreed 25,000.
27
Q. 612
All right.
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 613
Did he say to you I'll pay you 25.
A.
It didn't happen like that is the answer to your question.
14:53:51 30
Did that just simply happen like that?
Did you say I'll look for 25; what?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And we
14:53:54
14:54:11
98 1
Q. 614
How did it happen?
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 615
What did you open at?
4
A.
Well, I don't absolutely categorically recollect what I opened at.
5
There was obviously some negotiation about it.
It
certainly would not have been 25.
6
Q. 616
No?
7
A.
But.
8
Q. 617
100?
9
A.
No.
Q. 618
50?
A.
I would have -- I would, and it's only -- I'm not trying to in any way be
14:54:19 10
11
I don't think I would have.
12
disingenuous.
13
surprising for me that if I didn't ask for 50.
14 14:54:42 15
On reflection, it would be very
Q. 619
Okay.
A.
He thought about it and said something to the effect, that you know, that's a
16
Okay.
I don't absolutely recollect.
Did he open at less than the 25? Did he work his way --
bit high or a bit much or whatever.
17
Q. 620
Did he say 25 and you said okay?
18
A.
Whether he said 25 or I said 25.
19
Q. 621
Much haggling?
A.
Not a great deal, no.
21
Q. 622
25.
22
A.
Um, I don't think VAT was mentioned.
23
Q. 623
And what would the consequence of that mean, that you'd have to pay the VAT;
14:54:55 20
24 14:55:08 25
We ended up at 25.
Is that plus VAT?
wouldn't it? A.
I would have to issue an invoice plus VAT or issue an invoice without VAT.
26
Q. 624
What was the intention?
27
A.
I would have to pay VAT ultimately.
28
Q. 625
Was the intention that you would issue an invoice and then you'd pay the VAT?
29 14:55:21 30
You've -A.
That I can't tell you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:55:24
14:55:49
99 1
Q. 626
But you must know, Mr. Dunlop.
You looked for 50.
You agreed 25.
Is that
2
Mr. Dunlop now knowing I've agreed my fee of 25,000 which will be into my
3
pocket or does it mean that I've to take the VAT out of it, and it's what, five
4
grand?
5
A.
21%.
6
Q. 627
Yeah.?
7
A.
In fairness to your question, I don't think the VAT entered into it.
8 9
it was just a straight forward agreement that there would be 25. Q. 628
Okay.
A.
I did not say plus VAT.
11
Q. 629
No?
12
A.
He did not say does that include VAT.
13
Q. 630
Did you talk about invoices?
14
A.
No, I don't think we did.
Q. 631
All right.
14:55:55 10
14:56:07 15
I think
That's that.?
At least that is as I recall it.
Can I take it then that the idea was that you would be paid 25,000
16
which would go into -- which you would either cash or go into your accounts
17
which weren't available?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 632
So VAT didn't come into it?
A.
No.
21
Q. 633
And tax didn't come into it?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 634
Thank you.
14:56:22 20
24
All right.
And the other calculation that I would imagine would
have been important in your own mind would be how much of that was going to go
14:56:37 25
into your pocket having dispersed.
So you were there at this meeting for
26
three quarters of an hour having discussed a lot of things.
27
your mind is what will the agreed fee be.
28
before you offer the 50 you are saying to yourself how much am I going to have
29
to pay out?
14:56:57 30
A.
At the back of
To work-out that out for yourself
I would accept that that was part of. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:57:00
14:57:05
100 1
Q. 635
It has to be?
2
A.
Feeling.
3
Q. 636
It's an expense?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 637
It might be 1,000 or 10 or whatever?
6
A.
Correct, yeah.
7
Q. 638
Can you tell the Tribunal during that meeting before offering your 50, saying
8
50 or before agreeing your 25, what was can in your mind as to what you'd have
9
to pay out?
14:57:21 10
A.
That I did not know.
Because, first of all, I knew again anecdotally and from
11
what Mr. Sweeney told me, that Richard and Philip had strong contacts with the
12
politicians in the two main parties.
13
to talk to.
14
approached them to stick with it or vote for what Monarch wanted.
14:57:50 15
16
I did not know who I was going to have
And I certainly did not know who was going to ask me when I So, I
suppose, the simple answer to you, Mr. Murphy, as little as possible. Q. 639
Yes.
Now, one thing you've touched on there, Mr. Dunlop.
I'm not sure that
17
we touched on it earlier.
18
that councillors -- that a substantial sum of money or any sum of money had
19
already been paid by Messrs. Lynn and Reilly to councillors?
14:58:14 20
Did Mr. Sweeney say to you or lead you to believe
A.
No, there was no reference whatsoever to that.
21
Q. 640
Simply that they had contacts?
22
A.
Absolutely, yes.
23
Q. 641
All right.
24
Did you understand at that stage -- would you have known yourself
at this meeting from all you knew about the whole thing, and the way these
14:58:28 25
things work and the way Monarch and Cherrywood worked, would you have known
26
that money had been paid out?
27
A.
Known is a very strong word.
28
Q. 642
It is.?
29
A.
So therefore the answer is I would not have known.
Q. 643
All right.?
14:58:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:58:39
14:58:50
101 1
A.
2
But it would be again.
Sorry to use this word again.
It would be
disingenuous of me to suggest to you that I did not have -- knowing the system.
3
Q. 644
Yes?
4
A.
Knowing the nexus.
5
Q. 645
Yes?
6
A.
I would -- I would not have been surprised.
But the only surprise that I can
7
express to you is what was said in the opening statement as to the level of
8
contributions that were made to politicians.
9 14:59:14 10
Q. 646
Oh, yes.?
A.
But as to the detail or the reality, it would be completely disingenuous of me
11
to suggest that I would not have had a suspicion.
12
Q. 647
Yes.
And -- right.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 648
All right.
You suspected that Monarch had already paid councillors?
14:59:34 15
16
Chairman, would it be possible just to rise for five minutes please?
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
19 14:59:39 20
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you.
21 22 23 24
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
14:59:55 25
26 27 28 29 15:11:38 30
Q. 649
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, just in relation to agreeing that 25.
You've said
so it wouldn't have been -- VAT and tax wouldn't have come into it. into your pocket.
Just one thing about invoices.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It was 25
Would it have been your --
15:11:42
15:11:59
102 1
does it follow from that, that it wouldn't have been your intention to issue an
2
invoice? I mean, obviously, when -- what you've just said?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 650
Why would you issue an invoice if you're not going to pay VAT and the Revenue
5
aren't going to know about the payment?
6
A.
Well there's no invoice extant.
7
Q. 651
Yes.?
8
A.
And the remittance advice notes or notices from Monarch are to the global
9 15:12:13 10
Let me just say that first.
amounts, 15 and 10. Q. 652
Yes?
11
A.
Without any attribution of VAT.
12
Q. 653
Yes?
13
A.
And they are.
14
Q. 654
All right?
A.
If my memory serves me correctly, within days of the first meeting.
16
Q. 655
Yes.
17
A.
It would appear not, yes.
18
Q. 656
And I think yesterday we spent some time on this when you were saying there
15:12:28 15
So that means -- so it was never in your intention to issue invoices?
19
were invoices.
And you did issue invoices and I took you through them and
15:12:41 20
there weren't.
Can you just reconcile that?
21
A.
As I said, my normal practice would be to issue invoices.
22
Q. 657
Would that be except in the cases where you wouldn't issue them?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 658
Yes?
A.
If you didn't issue invoices, obviously the intention would be that you didn't
15:12:56 25
26
Well if -- sorry for laughing.
want -- you weren't going to issue them.
27
Q. 659
Yes.?
28
A.
But I -- there are no invoices extant.
29 15:13:18 30
Therefore, I am saying that no
invoices were issued taken in conjunction with the remittance notices that did not contain VAT elements on them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:13:20
15:13:32
103 1
Q. 660
2
It's just that I remember yesterday Mr. Dunlop, you were saying that you didn't really think Monarch would make payments to you without invoice?
3
A.
I don't think they would.
4
Q. 661
It doesn't really add up the whole thing; does it?
5
A.
Well insofar as I'm concerned it does.
6 7
agreed. Q. 662
In the context that that's what we
I was paid within a very short time, in two tranches.
Now, can I just ask you about that.
The agreement was 25,000 and you were
8
paid in a very short time, 11th, 12th March '93 is that right? The two letters
9
... the 11th and 12th '93?
15:13:57 10
A.
Yes, the 11th, 15th and 12th 10.
11
Q. 663
And this meeting was on the 8th?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 664
You were paid really very quickly?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 665
As was your custom I think.
15:14:11 15
16 17
right? A.
18 19 15:14:24 20
21
You tended to get paid very quickly; isn't that
Well if people were in a bind and they were looking for my services, there was one way to concentrate attention.
Q. 666
Yes?
A.
And that was to say pay up.
Q. 667
Right.
And why then in the private interviews on a number of occasions did
22
you say that you -- you got the money from Monarch with difficulty and it took
23
a long time to get paid and so on?
24
A.
15:14:45 25
Oh, yes I did.
There were, subsequently there were difficulties in relation
to payments that we subsequently agreed with Mr. Sweeney.
26
least one --
27
Q. 668
Yeah?
28
A.
If not two.
29
Q. 669
Yep?
A.
Had to go to Dominic Glenane to seek his help to get payment.
15:14:54 30
But certainly one.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And I had on at
15:15:01
15:15:16
104 1
Q. 670
2
The thing is in May 2000 when you were talking to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty.
The only figure you were talking of was 25,000?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 671
So you knew in May 2000 when you were talking to the two Tribunal counsel that
5
you had been paid in a matter of four days the 25,000 that you had agreed.
6
When you were talking to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher where is the delay and
7
serious delay, as you referred to in your interview.
8
you talked to?
9
A.
15:15:37 10
The only answer that I can give you to that, and that is that one has an appreciation of some difficulties in getting paid by somebody and that was in
11
my mind.
12
difficulties with what --
13
Q. 672
14
And it was in my mind.
And it was definitely in my mind that I had
When you spoke to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty you were aware that there had been delays in getting paid by Monarch in respect of payments which came after
15:15:56 15
16
Where is that delay that
the payment of 25,000 which was paid promptly? A.
No, I didn't actually say that in fairness, Mr. Murphy.
I did say that it was
17
in my mind when I was talking to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty in the private
18
interviews that there were difficulties with Monarch in getting paid.
That
19
there is some illusions between the 25 and a delay in getting paid.
That
15:16:18 20
obviously does not apply because I got paid relatively quickly.
21
Q. 673
Yes?
22
A.
But I'm not saying that at that stage I knew or had come to the conclusion that
23 24 15:16:35 25
I was paid more. Q. 674
I'm sorry?
A.
When I was talking to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher, I told them in, private
26
session, I told them that I had got 25,000.
27
Q. 675
Yes?
28
A.
Okay.
29 15:16:53 30
Subsequently, as we discussed yesterday, on the basis of an audit, we
recognised payments of 60. Q. 676
Yes.
So you don't recall the extra 60 that you were paid, at this meeting Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:17:06
15:17:22
105 1
with Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 677
You don't recall the 60 extra that you were paid.
4
But you do recall the delay
in it being paid?
5
A.
In general I recall in my relationship with Monarch delays in getting payments.
6
Q. 678
Mr. Dunlop, can you just see what I'm saying to you?
7
A.
I can't really.
8
Q. 679
In May 2000, you tell the Tribunal that it's 25,000.
9 15:17:32 10
So on that day you
didn't recall the 60,000? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 680
Now, just one second.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 681
But yet you are able to tell the Tribunal that you got a delay in being -- that
14 15:17:42 15
Sorry.
You didn't recall that?
there was a delay in being paid? A.
Equally, I didn't tell Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 in the
16
private session that I got 25,000 within four days.
17
either.
I didn't tell them that
18
Q. 682
No.
19
A.
Yes, I told them I got 25.
Q. 683
And in May 2000 you knew that you had got that 25 immediately.
15:17:59 20
21
You told them you got 25? Because that was the agreement with Mr. Gallagher. And you also
knew that you were paid another 60,000 but you didn't tell the Tribunal?
22
A.
No, that's not what I said.
23
Q. 684
I'm suggesting it to you.?
24
A.
I would refute the suggestion.
15:18:19 25
The agreement was for 25.
Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher that.
I told
And in fact, in fact, I think I put that
26
in one of the lists that I made in the box in 2000.
27
Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher that I had experienced delays in payment from
28
Monarch.
29 15:18:48 30
Q. 685
But I did say to
And that is the truth.
Now, just before I forget that.
What were the delays you experienced in
payment by Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:18:49
15:19:22
106 1
A.
2
Well, subsequently, after the first two payments on the 11th and 12th of March 1993 for 15 and 10.
3
Q. 686
Yeah.
4
A.
I'll tell -- there is an -- sorry, I beg your pardon, Mr. Murphy.
5
When is the next one?
invoice for -- there is an invoice from my office.
6
Q. 687
Could we have page 491, please.?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 688
Have you got that up on your screen, Mr. Dunlop?
9
A.
Yep, yes.
Q. 689
The lower schedule.?
11
A.
The lower schedule.
12
Q. 690
It says 12th of March.
15:19:54 10
13 14 15:20:06 15
There is an
and 10, 25,000.
One of them is the 11th.
Yes.
Q. 691
The next one is per Tribunal 10,000. May.
17
isn't that right? A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 692
All right. May.
21
And the position is that was the 26th of
That's the controversial cheque we were talking about yesterday I think;
18
15:20:28 20
15
You are paid within four days?
A.
16
That doesn't matter.
Just leave that for a second.
There was an invoice for 15,000 in
That was the invoice on the 19th of May paid in 7,500 on 2nd of July.
And 7,500 on the 17th September, is that the delay you are talking about?
22
A.
19th of May invoice No. 834, 12,396.69 plus VAT at 21%, 15,000.00
23
Q. 693
That's an invoice?
24
A.
It's an invoice. It is marked not in my handwriting, but by an officer in the
15:20:56 25
office.
26
Q. 694
Yes?
27
A.
Paid 19/5 and either 17 or 19, 9 '93.
28
Q. 695
17.9.93 I understand because that's when 7,500 was paid?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 696
What's that other date there.
15:21:10 30
That suggests it was paid on the date of the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:21:14
15:21:22
107 1 2
invoice? A.
3
Yes.
That I cannot answer you.
Because that would -- if the invoice was
sent --
4
Q. 697
Yes?
5
A.
I can't understand why, unless ...
6
Q. 698
I mean, on page 491 there, the date for the 7,500 is the 2nd July but on the
7
invoice you have you are saying in manuscript is a May date for the first
8
7,500?
9 15:21:38 10
11
A.
Correct.
Q. 699
Did you write it? Did anybody in your office write it?
A.
What's written in handwriting is not my handwriting.
12
handwriting that is.
13
Q. 700
In your office?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 701
Sorry.
15:21:52 15
ignore that.
17
other date? A.
19 15:22:12 20
it is the person who dealt with the cash receipts book.
Doesn't it say -- it gives you the 17th of September date.
16
18
I'm not worried about that.
Q. 702
All right.
Now, the first one there, that says it's paid in May.
Now, your
Coyle & Coyle? A.
Yes.
23
Q. 703
Document, schedule says 2nd of July.
24
A.
You're looking at the lower.
Q. 704
Yes?
26
A.
You are looking at the lower matrix.
27
Q. 705
Yes.
28
15:22:51 30
What's the
Well it says paid 19/5 and it looks look an & not AND but whatever you call it.
22
29
It's the other date.
Let's
Either the 17.9.93 or 19.9.93.
21
15:22:28 25
I know the person whose
I don't know?
Mr. Dunlop, I'm just suggesting to you that isn't a huge delay, is it,
to be paid your May 15,000 in two tranches in July and September? A.
Well, well it depends on your appreciation of what a delay is, Mr. Murphy. You may well be used to that type of delay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:22:54
15:23:12
108 1
Q. 706
I assure you that if you regard that as a serious delay don't come to the bar.
2
A.
Mr. Murphy, can I absolutely assure you, that it is not my intention to come to
3
the bar, yet.
4
Q. 707
Now, are you saying to us that that's a serious delay?
5
A.
No, what I'm saying to you is --
6
Q. 708
That you mentioned to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty?
7
A.
Yes, that there were delays in getting payment. Like, it's a question of
8
approach. What you consider to be a delay or not.
9
people at the bar are not paid up front.
15:23:32 10
Q. 709
Okay.
I'm happy to accept that
There is another payment then that we only agreed to yesterday 2nd of
11
November '93 of 15,000 and 22 December of 15,000.
12
Sorry, you got more.
13
on the 8th of March.
14
Mr. Hanratty, that there was serious delay in getting paid by Monarch?
15:23:59 15
A.
Sorry.
So, in all you got 60,000.
You got 80,000 in the year '93 having started
Is that the basis of a whinge to Mr. Gallagher and
Well I don't think I used the word "whinge".
There were difficulties in
16
getting payment from Monarch.
17
not twice, to Dominic Glenane, seeking his assistance in getting payment on
18
invoices sent.
19
Q. 710
15:24:26 20
It did eventuate in my going at least once, if
Did you go to him -- first of all, tell me the invoice that you went to him about.
Secondly, any other payment that there may not have been an invoice.
21
In respect of those eight payments coming to 80,000 in 1993.
22
payments that you had to go to Mr. Glennane about?
Identify the
23
A.
I can't do that.
24
Q. 711
Of course you can, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I can't.
Q. 712
If you had serious delay about this you couldn't possibly not remember.
15:24:43 25
26 27
We'll
rule out the first two because they were paid in four days?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 713
So, take the others now. There is one 10, two 7,500's and two 15,000's. Which
15:24:58 30
of those did you go to Mr. Glennane, your employer in Monarch, and say there's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:25:03
15:25:21
109 1 2
a delay? A.
Mr. Glennane may well be able to help you in relation to my coming him.
3
sit here before you I can't help you.
I would like to but I can't.
4
just making a quick reference to see if there is anything in the diaries.
5
my recollection is correct, there is one but I can't find it now.
6
Q. 714
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, were you saying something to me?
7
A.
No, I may -- I'm -- yes.
8 9
No, I can't.
As I
And I'm If
Sorry.
Much as I would like to help you I
can't. Q. 715
15:25:58 10
All right.
You see Mr. Dunlop, can I suggest to you that the reason that you
said that to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty was because, as appears from the
11
private interviews, in May 2000 there was a confusion in your mind.
12
weren't sure did you come into Monarch in the end of '92 or early/March '93 or
13
were you in fact there in May '92 for this particular vote?
14 15:26:25 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 716
And the cheques, you getting your payments in March, if you came in in May '92,
16
meant there was a serious delay of a year?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 717
Well, now --
19
A.
Sorry?
Q. 718
What isn't as I outlined it?
A.
You have outlined it.
15:26:40 20
21 22
Certainly not as you outline it.
You said that there was a serious confusion in my mind
as to when I became involved in Monarch.
23
Q. 719
Well was there not?
24
A.
No, there wasn't.
15:26:56 25
What I did say, that I came in to Monarch sometime in late
'92 or early '93.
26
Q. 720
Yes.?
27
A.
Correct me if I'm wrong, that is not what I said.
28
Q. 721
598, please.
29 15:27:15 30
And you
Now, this is just, Mr. Dunlop.
now it's 8th of March '93.
I mean, you've told us clearly
I understand that.
I understand you could have
had a confusion between the end of '92 and the beginning of '93. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
The
15:27:19
15:27:28
110 1
significant thing would be the meeting in May '92?
2
A.
The meeting with whom?
3
Q. 722
The meeting --
4
A.
Sorry, the council meeting you're referring to.
5
Q. 723
Is there some other meeting?
6
A.
No, no, you said the meeting in '92.
7 8
I'm just wondering which one are you
referring to. Q. 724
9
Yes.
Sorry.
Page 598.
Is that what we have there?
A: The motion on that day Mr. Gallagher, from Sean Barrett or was that
15:27:55 10
subsequent.
11
Q:
Councillor Barrett.
12
A:
I have suspicions that was a subsequent date
13
Q: Councillor Barrett had a motion and it was seconded by Councillor Dockrell
14
that land and map attached to the motion in relation to lands stretching from
15:28:07 15
Glenamuck Road to Cherrywood road be zoned for residential development not
16
exceeding one house her acre
17
A:
18 19 15:28:19 20
Q. 725
That is Sean Barrett's
Q: That was done at the same meeting.
Later at the same meeting, on the 22nd
of May 1992. A:
Then my involvement would have been earlier than I indicated to you
21
earlier because that was one of the crucial meetings that took place and that I
22
told you was the incident where a motion was withdrawn. It was a compromised
23
motion brought forward by Sean Barrett.
24
just Sean.
15:28:33 25
26
As it turns out there now or was it
Q: that was passed? A:
That was passed and that was one house per acre.
27 28
Now, all I'm putting to you is, because I have accepted your statements and
29
interviews were utterly confused as to when you came in.
15:28:47 30
towards the '93 date. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
They went more
15:28:50
15:29:04
111 1 2
But there was a significant confusion about whether, how involved you were in
3
May '92.
4
suggesting to you that maybe you were saying to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
5
that there was a delay in payment because you were so confused maybe you felt
6
you were there for Mr. Barrett's motion in May' 92.
7
cheques in March '93 and that was a delay
8
A.
9
No.
I accept completely that it's the 8th of March '93.
Let me just say to you.
But I'm just
You've got your first
I accept fully the basis on which you make the
suggestion and that there may have been confusion in relation to the date,
15:29:26 10
which I said late '92 or early '93.
I accept that.
What is absolutely clear
11
in my mind is that I was not involved with Monarch at that time.
12
of the May '92.
13
Q. 726
I accept that.?
14
A.
Thank you.
Q. 727
But is this the reason there was confusion.
15:29:41 15
16 17
At the time
Really there was never any delay
about payment? A.
No, no, there is not confusion, because why would I have gone to Dominic
18
Glennane otherwise? Dominic Glennane did not appear on the horizon at all in
19
relation to lobbying, zoning, strategy, or whatever.
15:30:02 20
Q. 728
All right.?
21
A.
So there would be no other reason for me.
22
Q. 729
Could it have been some other payment than the 1993 payments that you went to
23 24
Mr. Glennane about? A.
Yes, it could be.
Q. 730
For example?
26
A.
Well, what other payments that we got.
27
Q. 731
For example?
28
A.
That I cannot tell you.
29
Q. 732
Well, what are the other payments that you got from Monarch?
A.
No.
15:30:13 25
15:30:24 30
Other payments that we got.
The only payments that I got from Monarch are what we have outlined. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:30:29
15:30:44
112 1
Q. 733
85?
2
A.
85, that we accepted yesterday, the dispute about the ten.
3
that dispute.
Not re-entering
They are the only payments that I got from Monarch.
4
Q. 734
Yes?
5
A.
The only other issue that is out -- that is outstanding is an invoice for a
6
success fee.
7
Q. 735
All right.?
8
A.
Which was -- sorry.
9
Q. 736
We'll come to that in a second.?
A.
All right.
Q. 737
All right.
15:30:57 10
11 12 13
cheques as far as you were concerned. A.
14 15:31:18 15
16
There was delay about one of those cheques anyway or two of those
The basis of that remark to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty was that I went to Mr. Glennane at some stage to seek his assistance in getting payment.
Q. 738
Mr. Dunlop, that first -- why were you paid in two cheques of 15 and 10?
A.
Yes.
I think that was more to do with Monarch's approach to doing it than
17
anything to do with me.
18
Sweeney wanted it done.
19
Q. 739
Why?
A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 740
Did he explain to you?
22
A.
No.
15:31:43 20
But that's -- you will note that the payments are within a day of each
23
other.
24
same date.
15:31:55 25
That that is the way that they wanted, that Eddie
One is on the 11th and one is on the 12th.
So it's virtually the
Q. 741
Mr. Dunlop, you agreed the 25 at this meeting on the 8th?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 742
You didn't invoice?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 743
You probably said you wanted it by the end of the week?
A.
Something along those lines.
15:32:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:32:06
15:32:15
113 1
Q. 744
And you got two cheques?
2
A.
The meeting was on the 8th and we got the first payment is dated 11th, which is
3
Thursday.
4
Q. 745
All right.
5
A.
Thursday and Friday.
6
Q. 746
Okay.
7
Thursday and Friday?
And you've agreed this fee of 25 without making up your mind or having
much thought about how much you'd have to pay out to councillors?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 747
Did you often do it that way?
A.
As I said to you earlier on before the break, it was a calculation that you had
15:32:36 10
11
to make.
It entered into the calculation in relation to any negotiation --
12
Q. 748
Mr. Dunlop, everything you're saying there is obvious?
13
A.
All right.
14
Q. 749
Could you please tell me.
15:32:53 15
Is it usual for you when you do these serious
negotiations about substantial fees?
16
A.
You would think about what -- yes.
17
Q. 750
Why didn't you here?
18
A.
In relation to?
19
Q. 751
Yes.?
A.
I said to you before the break, that yes, it was in my mind.
21
Q. 752
And what conclusion -- Mr. Dunlop --
22
A.
But I did not --
23
Q. 753
Nobody in their right mind in this meeting on the 8th of March '93, if the
15:33:09 20
24
negotiation of the fee comes up would agree that fee without having some idea
15:33:21 25
of the ballpark of the disbursements.
26
day.
Now, please, what? How much on that
You didn't discuss it with Mr. Sweeney, you've said that umpteen times?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 754
But Mr. Dunlop had to have in his mind this is going to cost me a grand or
29 15:33:43 30
5,000 or 10. Therefor I'll look for 50 and settle for 25? A.
As I said to you before the break, as little as possible. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:33:45
15:33:57
114 1
Q. 755
Yes?
2
A.
Yes, it was in my mind, I said that to you before the break.
3
little as possible.
4
this proposal.
5
Q. 756
I also said as
Bearing in mind I had no discussions with anybody about
What you would then do, any normal business will do, is I will agree the fee
6
with you after I've had a discussion with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly as to what
7
councillors they've spoken to and then I'll know who I have to pay?
8
A.
No. Certainly, no such discussion took place.
9
Q. 757
Now, how come if you agree a fee of 25,000 on the 8th of March do Monarch pay
15:34:21 10
you 80, 000 by the end of the year and 5,000 a year later?
11
A.
Because I went back to Mr. Sweeney to look for more.
12
Q. 758
Well tell us about the arrangement you had with Mr. Sweeney on the 8th of March
13 14
that allowed to you go back? A.
15:34:39 15
We agreed a fee of 25,000.
As you have pointed out and I have agreed, the
25,000 was paid in two tranches within four days.
Subsequently, I went back
16
to Mr. Sweeney in relation to the project and the advice that I was giving and
17
the support that I was giving and the lobbying that I did.
18
wanted more.
19
And I said I
Q. 759
Well, now, tell us about that meeting with Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Well I can't --
21
Q. 760
Show me the date of it in your diary?
22
A.
Well, I can't tell you exactly which one it was.
23
Q. 761
Mr. Dunlop, how is it that when it comes to something important you can
15:35:06 20
24 15:35:20 25
But there are --
remember nothing? A.
26
That is untrue, as you well know! There are a number of meetings with Eddie Sweeney in his office throughout and up until the end of 1993.
27
Q. 762
Mr. Dunlop --
28
A.
So at one of those meetings or some of those meetings.
29
Q. 763
Mr. Dunlop, when did you decide 25,000 isn't enough? Date?
A.
Can't give you a date.
15:35:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:35:48
15:35:57
115 1
Q. 764
Pardon?
2
A.
Can't give you a date.
3
Q. 765
Month?
4
A.
Within maybe a month afterwards.
5
Q. 766
Within a month?
6
A.
Could be.
7
Q. 767
Is that what you're saying?
8
A.
It could be.
9
Q. 768
Or it could be within six months?
A.
Certainly within the period that we looked at for the payments in 1993.
Q. 769
You'd say it was sometime in 1993 that you went to Mr. Glennane and said you'd
15:36:05 10
11 12 13
I can't give you an exact date.
I'm not saying definitively.
want more; would you? A.
14
In the schedule that we have looked at between the 8th of March 1993 and the end of March of 1993 I was paid a specific amount of money.
15:36:27 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could we have that again Mr. Murphy.
It's 491 I think.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
491, please.
Yes, 491, yes.
19 15:36:44 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
evidence.
It's here.
I just wanted it up while the witness is giving
Thanks.
Q. 770
23 24 15:36:53 25
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, I'm not sure what you're saying now?
A.
With the exception of one.
26
Q. 771
Yeah.?
27
A.
Which is the last one.
28
Q. 772
Yeah?
29
A.
Which was paid in 1995.
Q. 773
Forget about that.?
15:36:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:37:00
15:37:10
116 1
A.
Right.
Well I'm just making the point.
2
Q. 774
Sorry.?
3
A.
A specific sum of money was paid to me in 1993.
4
Q. 775
80, 000?
5
A.
Um, depending on how you add it up.
6
Q. 776
Hold on, Mr. Dunlop.
We've had all of this.
How you add it up is a question
7
of the cheque with the forged signature for ten whether it's included or not.
8
70 or 80, 000 was received by you as a matter of definite in '93?
9
A.
15:37:36 10
11
Q. 777
And if you take off the cheque that you're not sure.
I don't know.
You've
told us you paid 10,000 you get 70; is that right? A.
14
Well it depends on the attitude that you adopt in relation to the ten. cheque was made out to me.
15:38:01 15
16
So you are subtracting the five in August of 1995 and you get 80.
Are you with me?
12 13
Right.
The
It was negotiated by somebody other than me and my
signature was on the back. Q. 778
Mr. Dunlop, it most certainly does not depend on what attitude the Tribunal.
17
adopts. It depends on what your attitude is which is A, you got it and B, you
18
didn't.
19
question?
15:38:11 20
A.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, will you please proceed with the answer to my
Let's proceed.
Let's take five off 85 so we have 80.
We agreed originally 25.
In the period 1993 I
21
got 80.
22
from the payments that were made within the four days.
23
Q. 779
Try and avoid the repetition.?
24
A.
The rest of the money.
Mr. Sweeney and myself.
That is obvious
The rest of --
I could make the same point.
15:38:32 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
simple answer.
28
of May you get more money.
29
In September you get more money.
15:38:53 30
A.
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop. You are paid 10, 15.
It seems to me.
It has to be a fairly
And then at some stage before the 26th
And then again before July you get more money.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:38:54
15:39:02
117 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
and May.
4
A.
So you must have gone back to Mr. Sweeney sometime between March
Correct.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
8
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And that's what I said to Mr. Murphy earlier on before we
started this --.
9 15:39:08 10
CHAIRMAN:
Could you tell us then how that arose?
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
to you.
14
A.
I just want to add an addendum of what the Chairman is putting
The first invoice is 19th of May, Mr. Dunlop.
Yes.
15:39:20 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
25 you say you didn't invoice
18
A.
We know that's not an invoice regarding the 25.
Because the
Yes.
19 15:39:26 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You have already received that by March?
Yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
extra monies?
15:39:34 25
A.
The first recorded document, as I understand it, referring to
Yes.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
understand.
29
A.
Emanates from yourself.
Namely, an invoice which I
I don't know what number it is.
Correct.
15:39:43 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Is it dated the 19th of May.
15:39:43
15:39:54
118 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Which you say you were paid in two tranches in July and some
2
other date that's yet -- some confusion about.
3
no confusion as to the date.
But they are invoiced, there's
4 5
As I understand it the first recorded invoice is not referring to the 25,000,
6
which is already paid in the two tranches, is the 19th of May
7
A.
Correct.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
15:40:08 10
Really what Mr. Murphy is asking you is how did it come about
that you sent an invoice to Mr. Sweeney, or whomever you sent it to on the 19th
11
of May?
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Just before Mr. Dunlop answers Judge Faherty's question.
14
would just like to draw the Tribunal's attention to one matter. To suggest
15:40:19 15
I
that the fee note of the 19th of May in the sum of 15,000 is in fact the first
16
fee note I don't think is correct.
17 18
There is a fee note for 12, 100 dated 10th of April 1993.
19 15:40:31 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21
That's fair enough, Mr. .
there's one on the 12th of April.
Well then perhaps Mr. Redmond, if
We don't know when that was paid.
22 23
If we go with your first.
I'll take Mr. Redmond's point on that.
24 15:40:44 25
26
If we deal with the invoice of the 12th of April then. A.
Yes.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
As opposed to the 19th of May chronologically
Yes.
15:40:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:40:51
15:40:57
119 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
25,000 was paid?
3
A.
That seem's the first recorded document from you after the
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
arrived at a situation but you were in a position having negotiated a fee, you
7
say, back in March to invoice Monarch for further monies.
8
A.
9
Yes.
I think that's where Mr. Murphy is coming from.
How you
Sorry. that's why I said to Mr. Murphy perhaps within a month.
But I
went back to Eddie Sweeney having thought about it, having attempted to get
15:41:22 10
more out of him in the first instance and negotiated 25 and said this will take
11
more.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
I want more.
And did you -I need more for what I'm doing.
15:41:32 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
meeting arose and what was said and what arguments you put forward to support
18
the additional money? Yes.
19
that having spoken to Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly, having seen what the
15:41:59 20
Did you give an explanation? Can you tell us about how that
Well, not in specific detail other than to say
situation was in relation to Monarch's position, I went back.
And as I recall
21
matters, there was very little difficulty with Mr. Sweeney in relation to the
22
matter which allowed me to issue invoices.
23 24 15:42:20 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
But what prompted you to go back?
Because I was dissatisfied with the 25.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Why?
I didn't think it was enough.
29 15:42:26 30
CHAIRMAN:
But your disbursements were small.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:42:29
15:42:46
120 1
A.
Yes, they were.
But a lot of money was going to be made on this development
2
and my role, given the history of it, up to that point, was going to be
3
crucial.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
to give you more money?
7
A.
But did Mr. Sweeney not say to you we have a deal and I'm not going
As I've said to you, as I recall matters, there wasn't a great deal of
8
difficulty with Mr. Sweeney in relation to it.
9
invoices.
He agreed to it and I sent
15:42:59 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Q. 780
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
15:43:08 15
And what influenced you in looking for more money was this means
an awful lot to Monarch, it's a big job, it's big profits; is that right?
16
A.
That certainly.
17
Q. 781
And what else?
18
A.
Well there was a mess.
19 15:43:21 20
There was a right proper mess that needed to be
resolved. Q. 782
But, Mr. Dunlop, Monarch were going to put their act together, come back to you
21
and say we'll go with the four acres compromise.
And now you'll talk to your
22
councillors and do your usual job and get 25,000 for it?
23
A.
Who is going to get the blame if this doesn't succeed.
24
Q. 783
And did you -- you knew all of that on the evening of the 8th of March.
15:43:43 25
Everything.
You knew how much the importance of this to Monarch, the size of
26
Monarch, the fact that there was a mess.
You knew everything.
There's
27
nothing knew there unless Mr. Dunlop, you made other disbursements.?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 784
Or you knew you were going to have to make other disbursements.
15:44:00 30
only rationale explanation for it. Notwithstanding any imputation and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Which is the
15:44:04
15:44:21
121 1
rationality in relation to development, the Development Plans in Dublin County
2
Council.
3
A.
That is not the case.
The case is as I have already said to you.
I tried to get more money from
4
Eddie Sweeney on the first occasion.
5
was paid very rapidly.
6
Judge Faherty, that I went back to him perhaps within a month.
7
Q. 785
8 9
All right.
I didn't.
So anyway, the idea on the 8th of March was there was no -- the
door wasn't left open.
It was 25,000 full stop isn't that right?
That is correct.
Q. 786
That was the intention?
11
A.
That is correct.
12
Q. 787
And so you come back to Mr. Sweeney.
13 14
The 25
As I already said to you before the intervention of
A.
15:44:41 10
We agreed the 25.
Do you think you come back to him on the
19th of May, the day of your invoice and then hand it to him? A.
That I cannot say to you.
Q. 788
Just think about it a little bit.
16
A.
No, I wouldn't have gone to a meeting with an invoice in my hand, no.
17
Q. 789
No.
18
A.
I'd have spoke to him, met him or spoke to him on telephone or met him.
19
Q. 790
Okay.
A.
Yes.
Q. 791
Right.
15:44:52 15
15:45:13 20
21 22 23
Did you have a --
So you'd have -- would you have?
So that's the -- that's another 15,000 for you?
Now, I'm going to leave Mr. Redmond's just for a moment if you don't
mind? A.
Sorry, which is Mr. Redmond's?
24 15:45:21 25
CHAIRMAN:
What?
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
28
invoice for April.
29 15:45:30 30
Mr. Redmond's invoice.
Mr. Redmond was talking about the
I'm going to come back to that.
A.
Yes.
Q. 792
But looking at the schedule.
We've dealt with the 15 and 10.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Now we're
15:45:35
15:45:53
122 1
dealing with this invoice.
2
for a moment.
And we'll ignore the 10,000 for the 26th of May
And this invoice is paid in 7,500 twice.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 793
So we'll drop down to the 2nd of November '93.
5
Okay?
There's a 15,000 there and a
15,000 on the 22nd of December.?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 794
Now, can you explain what happened that you had to turn around in November, at
8
this stage, with the thing coming up that month, the meeting, and look for
9
more?
15:46:06 10
A.
No.
Not specifically other than that I, my only contact in relation to money
11
with Monarch was with Eddie Sweeney, and that I went back to Eddie on a number
12
of occasions in relation to payments.
13
Q. 795
14 15:46:26 15
16
Okay.
We have -- I'm sorry for labouring this, Mr. Dunlop.
But it's very,
very difficult to get the information from you.? A.
You're quite welcome.
Q. 796
We've dealt with the 15 and 10, the first 25,000.
And we've dealt with the
17
invoice of the 19th of May for 15,000.
18
when you went back to Mr. Glennane but you can't really fix dates or anything
19
like that.
15:46:44 20
And that represented another occasion
A.
No, hopefully Mr. Glennane can elucidate that.
21
Q. 797
A document and maybe an attendance on you; is that right?
22
A.
He may well be.
23
Q. 798
Sorry.
24
I don't know.
I have no evidence -- no knowledge.
Before we come to the payment on the 2nd of November of 15,000.
Tell
us what was going on in your mind from a financial point of view for your
15:47:16 25
business from the September on.
26
You now had how much, 15? You now had 40,000
and you'd paid out four?
27
A.
What do you mean what was going on in my mind?
28
Q. 799
Well what was your thinking? You're going to get another 30,000 before the end
29 15:47:25 30
of the year? A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:47:25
15:47:38
123 1
Q. 800
So you must be saying to yourself I still haven't enough.
That?
2
A.
Would appear logical, yes.
3
Q. 801
Tell us all about that, Mr. Dunlop.?
4
A.
All I can say to you is that it was obvious that I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 802
Mr. Dunlop, you are a businessman.
Mr. Sweeney is a businessman.
You have
6
already said that Mr. Sweeney had said something to about Phil kind of liking
7
to look after the money etc. Now, how is it that having agreed 25,000 in that
8
full knowledge of everything except what the disbursements will be, you go back
9
for another 15 when you do know what the disbursements will be because you've
15:48:01 10
11
now met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. A.
12
No, no, no sorry.
And that's 40,000?
Please, let the record show.
It is wrong to suggest that
I knew what the disbursements would be having met Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn.
13
Q. 803
Of course you did?
14
A.
Sorry.
Q. 804
You said what was outstanding in that equation was you had to talk to Mr. Lynn
15:48:15 15
16
and Mr. Reilly as to whom they had spoken to.
17
councillors you had to bribe.
18
A.
19 15:48:31 20
21
Correct.
You would then know what
The imputation there is that Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and I spoke
about disbursements. Q. 805
No.
A.
Well then let me make it clear that that is not the case.
22
I'm not saying that? Unless the record
shows that it's the case.
23
Q. 806
You made it clear earlier?
24
A.
Good.
Q. 807
That you didn't talk of disbursements to these gentlemen.
15:48:41 25
26
They had political
connections?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 808
You would find out who they had spoken to and then Mr Dunlop can go home and
29 15:48:50 30
sit at his desk and make out his list at his desk and make out his team that he has to talk to and pay.
And the meeting with Lynn and Reilly was the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:48:54
15:49:07
124 1
following day, the 9th of March?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 809
So you now -- and the invoice we were looking at is the 19th of May.
So
4
sometime in the next two months you talk to Mr. Glennane and you say that you
5
are unhappy.
6
that comes in two seven and a halves.
7
payments.
8
You know what it's costing you.
9
So could you please tell me when you made up your mind that the 40 wasn't
15:49:32 10
11
And he says that's great.
We'll pay you another 15,000.
And
So now you've probably made all of your
We'll look at that in a moment.
You've made your disbursements.
And you're going back for another 30,000.
enough and why? A.
Sorry to correct you, Mr. Murphy you said I went back to Mr. Glennane.
12
Presumably you mean that I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
13
conscious of the attitude and approach that you take.
14
something I need to make it correct.
15:49:51 15
Sorry.
But again, very
Therefore, if you say
You said I went back to Dominic Glennane
and spoke to him and I need more money.
16
Glennane.
17
I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
18
Do you accept that, that you said that?
I did not go back to Dominic
I only when to Dominic Glenane when there was a delay in payment. Let the record show that you said Mr. Glennane.
19 15:50:06 20
CHAIRMAN:
No, no, it doesn't matter.
21 22 23
MR. MURPHY: A.
24 15:50:19 25
Well I do.
I don't care, Mr. Dunlop
Because you are the very person who will come along subsequently
and say X, Y or Z that I said. Q. 810
Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
There you go again.
27
Q. 811
Mr. Dunlop, you went back to Mr. Sweeney.
28
This is manufacturing distractions,
Mr. Dunlop.
29 15:50:28 30
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:50:29
15:50:38
125 1 2
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
Give us some idea about how you broached the subject.
6
of arguments you used for more money.
7
whenever they took place, were very small.
8
A.
Mr. Dunlop, can you tell us how many times you went back in 1993? Explain to us what sort
Given the fact that your disbursements,
Yeah.
9 15:50:53 10
CHAIRMAN:
Did you discuss those disbursements with Mr. Sweeney or anyone
11
else.
12
to extract more money from Monarch.
13
information was exchanged between you in support of further payment.
14 15:51:23 15
A.
We just want to know how more money was paid, what arguments you used
Yes, Chairman. Mr. Sweeney.
That's very clear.
What their attitude was and what
My diary records that I went back to
I had a number -- including a meeting I had with Mr. Sweeney on
16
the 8th of March.
17
with Mr. Sweeney during the period 8th of March 1993 to the end of December
18
1993.
19
doing a quick flick.
15:51:57 20
If my counting is correct here, I had 13 diaried meetings
So that is, I'll count them again just to make doubly sure but I'm just I went back to Mr. Sweeney on a number of occasions in
relation to more money.
And I said to him that, in general terms, said to him
21
it's bigger than I thought it was going to be.
22
thought it was going to be.
23
more councillors.
24
back to him.
15:52:16 25
agreed.
It's more difficult than I
I never said to him that I need more money to pay
He never suggested that that was the reason why I was going
Each occasion that I asked and subsequently issued invoices, he
On the basis that he apparently was happy with what I was doing or
26
the progress that was being made.
27
Lily a little bit in saying that this was an enormous project.
28
as I have said to Mr. Murphy, one of the factors that did come into my mind was
29
that the agreed fee of 25 having been paid, the recognition of the benefit that
15:52:52 30
I'm not suggesting that I was gilding the But certainly
would accrue to Monarch and also the difficulties that might result if it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:53:01
15:53:11
126 1
didn't succeed.
2 3
I made various arguments along those lines with Mr. Sweeney.
I have to say
4
that I never had a difficulty, other than a short negotiation with Mr. Sweeney,
5
in relation to money.
6
to explain to Mr. Murphy, on a number of occasions, at least one, I had to go
7
to Mr. Glennane to get payment on foot of an invoice.
It was, as I said in my private interviews, as I tried
8 9 15:53:32 10
That is as simple an outline of the scenario as I can give it to you. Q. 812
11
MR. MURPHY:
12
50,000.
Mr. Dunlop, 8th of March.
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 813
That's the end of the matter.
In May you have decided it's a much bigger,
much more value to Monarch, it's a bigger job, I need more.
16
You look for
Mr. Sweeney negotiates you down to 25?
13
15:53:50 15
Your first meeting.
You go to
Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 814
Without difficulty.
19
another 15,000.
15:54:06 20
Without any difficulty. We're at 40.
Without any negotiation it's
The same thing happens again and we're leaving
out the 10 now that we're not -- that particular cheque.
The same thing then
21
happens in November for another 30,000 when the job is done -- I mean, you must
22
have done your work at that stage.
23
calculation that you'd have to take into account.
24
Mr. Sweeney.
15:54:29 25
A.
Yes.
There couldn't conceivably be another But you're back to
And once again without any difficulty there's 30,000?
And to further give something of a flip to the point that you're making.
26
I get another five in August of 1995 and I issue an invoice for a success fee
27
on foot of Mr. Sweeney saying to me send it in and let's see how far you can
28
get.
29 15:54:59 30
Q. 815
Mr. Dunlop, the extra five was a different matter. other? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It was a balance off the
15:54:59
15:55:04
127 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 816
So that's not a very good point.?
3
A.
Well --
4
Q. 817
Mr. Dunlop --
5
A.
The payment was made.
6
Q. 818
I exclude the Judges from this.
7
I suggest to you that there isn't a person in
this room who believes what you are saying.?
8
A.
Well that's a difficulty for them.
9
Q. 819
Because it doesn't make sense.?
A.
Well that is the amount of money that I got.
15:55:16 10
11
it.
12
with it.
And the only person who can attest to it is the man that I negotiated
13
Q. 820
Mr. Sweeney.
14
A.
Correct.
15:55:38 15
16
That is the basis on which I got
Who if my reading of his submission to date is such that he has a
very hazy idea of how I was even employed. Q. 821
17
Mr. Dunlop, you are saying that Mr. Sweeney as, what was his position in Monarch?
18
A.
I don't know what his exact title was.
19
Q. 822
He was a high up person there, a senior person?
A.
He was a member of the Board, an executive director of Monarch Properties.
Q. 823
You are saying that for this crucial thing for Monarch, which has failed in
15:55:53 20
21 22
May' 92.
23
no problem with you coming back to him a few times during the year to increase
24
that to 85?
15:56:13 25
You come in in March '93.
He negotiates you for 25.
And he has
A.
That is obvious from the level of meetings that I had with him.
26
Q. 824
Yeah?
27
A.
And from the invoices that were sent out.
28
Q. 825
It wasn't because you are needing money to pay somebody or anything like that,
29 15:56:45 30
Mr. Dunlop, was it? A.
By "somebody" who do you mean? No is the answer, sorry. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:56:49
15:57:25
128 1
Q. 826
Okay.?
2
A.
But I don't know what you mean by "somebody".
3
Q. 827
Now, page 4839, please.
Mr. Dunlop, you agreed with me yesterday that in --
4
you accepted that in private interview you told Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
5
that you did not - - that there was no success fee?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 828
Now, can you please explain the invoice dated 14th of December '93.
8 9
Invoice
No. 1251 for a success fee for 50,000 and VAT? A.
15:57:51 10
Yes.
I obviously had a discussion with Eddie in relation to a success, which
it was, as the end result.
And this was sent on foot of a conversation with
11
him and my recollection is, as I recall matters, was that he said send it in
12
and see how far you get.
It's an invoice for 50,000 plus VAT.
13
Q. 829
Why is VAT included?
14
A.
Well VAT is included on some of the invoices.
Q. 830
Why?
16
A.
Well, I can't explain the rationale of that.
17
Q. 831
You didn't pay it sure you didn't?
18
A.
Well I didn't get it.
19
Q. 832
Well, in the other ones, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well if they went through the company, yes, it was paid.
21
Q. 833
I see.
22
A.
But I wasn't paid this 50,000.
23
Q. 834
Now, could you tell me again, let's have it, the meeting.
15:58:19 15
15:58:30 20
24
The detail of the
meeting that you went to. You've had a success now I'd say. You're in good
15:58:46 25
form and Monarch are in good form.
You now, do you ring up Mr. Sweeney and
26
say I'd like to talk to you about a success fee which we never agreed.
27
going to be 50,000 plus 10 and a half.
28
I'm going to talk to you about it?
29 15:59:12 30
A.
I'll tell you all about it in this way.
It's
In fact it's going to be 60,500 and
That it could not have been sent to
Monarch Properties without a prior agreement. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Sorry.
Prior discussion with
15:59:17
15:59:29
129 1
somebody.
It wouldn't have been sent out of the blue.
2
Q. 835
Who was the discussion with?
3
A.
I believe on this occasion.
4
Q. 836
Mr. Monahan?
5
A.
No, no, no, Mr. Monahan wasn't involved.
6
Q. 837
Who was it?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 838
Everything else was Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
On this occasion I cannot absolutely categorically say to you that I discussed
15:59:42 10
this with Mr. Glennane.
11
But the comment was made to me either by Mr. Sweeney
or Mr. Glennane 'send it in and see how far you'll get'
12
Q. 839
You don't know which it was?
13
A.
I'm not 100 percent certain.
14
Q. 840
Why would it be Mr. Glennane.
16:00:03 15
But certainly it was one or other of them. A moment ago you fought with me because I
suggested you went to him for a bit more money.
16 17
Who was it?
Now apparently you might have
gone to him? A.
No, there is no disparity.
What I'm saying to you is that I cannot absolutely
18
categorically say to you that this conversation took place with Mr. Sweeney.
19
There were discussions with Mr. Glennane about payments, delayed payments.
16:00:23 20
Q. 841
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop -- we don't need those.
As a matter of sworn
21
evidence, Mr. Dunlop, you discussed a success fee in the sum of 60,500 with
22
either Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes, and I sent in the invoice.
24
Q. 842
All right.
A.
I can't specifically say to you whether it was on the phone or at a meeting.
16:00:40 25
26
On the phone did you discuss it?
Sorry, I can't say.
27
Q. 843
Have a look at your diary.
28
A.
What date would you like me to look at.
29
Q. 844
What time do you think?
A.
I would say sometime in the beginning of December.
16:01:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:01:03
16:01:34
130 1
Q. 845
Uh-huh.?
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 846
Do you have --
4
A.
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
In December, we have October.
December the 10th.
December the 10th.
No, sorry.
There is a
5
reference to Monarch on December 10th but it relates to somebody else.
6
says Monarch receipt.
7
was their Christmas party or their drinks party, sorry.
8
with Eddie Sweeney on --
9 16:02:04 10
It's actually a shortened for Monarch reception.
Q. 847
Were Monarch very pleased with you, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I think they were.
11
I think they were very satisfied.
I certainly didn't get
any complaints from them. Q. 848
Did they take you out to dinner or anything like that?
13
A.
No, I never had -- other than ad hoc occasional sandwich with ...
14
Q. 849
Would it be fair --
A.
Richard Lynn or Philip Reilly.
16
Q. 850
Would it be fair to say that their success was due to you?
17
A.
Partly.
18
Q. 851
Largely?
19
A.
Well there were other people involved.
Q. 852
Who?
21
A.
Phil -- Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly.
22
Q. 853
Their efforts had failed in May '92?
23
A.
Not through any efforts -- not through any difficulty in relation to their
16:02:32 20
24 16:02:43 25
efforts. Q. 854
The success in November '93 largely due to you?
26
A.
I would say it was to a large part, yes.
27
Q. 855
They would have been very pleased with you?
28
A.
I think so.
29 16:02:57 30
It
There is a meeting
12
16:02:22 15
It
They never expressed any dissatisfaction either verbally or in
writing. Q. 856
Did they express satisfaction? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:03:09
16:03:14
131 1
A.
I don't recall anybody sort of coming along and clapping me on the back and
2
saying well done Frank or without you we wouldn't have -- it wouldn't have
3
happened.
I don't recollect any of that.
4
Q. 857
Are you serious?
5
A.
I am.
6
Q. 858
Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lynn.
7 8
None of those gentlemen said
'brilliant job, Frank, great job, you did it'? A.
9
Never had any contact with Mr. Monahan other than the meetings I alluded to his being at one meeting and coming into the room at the other.
16:03:38 10
dealt with in relation to Monarch were Eddie Sweeney, on occasion Dominic
11
Glennane for non-payment, Richard Lynn --
12
Q. 859
Why are you listing these people?
13
A.
And Philip, these are the only people.
14
Q. 860
None of those people congratulated?
A.
There was general -- there was general satisfaction all around.
Q. 861
All right.
16:03:57 15
16 17
Your diary is saying, excuse me, Mr. Dunlop.
there is a witness for four o'clock.
18 19
Will I continue or?
16:04:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
I don't know if the witness is here.
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
Maybe not here yet.
24 16:04:17 25
CHAIRMAN:
But we'll just finish this.
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
28 29
The only people I
CHAIRMAN:
Topic and then we'll rise.
16:04:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I understand that
16:04:23
16:04:41
132 1 2
Q. 862
3 4
MR MURPHY: Mr. Dunlop, just back to your diary there for a second. before the 14th of December.
A.
5
Yes, there is.
Is there a note of?
There is a meeting listed in my diary for Tuesday November 9th
at 11 o'clock Monarch - Eddie.
6
Q. 863
Could we have that page, please?
7
A.
The page in my diary.
8
Q. 864
The page number in the top right hand corner?
9
A.
I'm not dealing with the Tribunal documentation.
Q. 865
Oh, right.?
11
A.
My own diary.
12
Q. 866
What's the date?
13
A.
Tuesday the 9th of November.
14
Q. 867
Tuesday what?
A.
The 9th of November.
16
Q. 868
What's the relevance of that?
17
A.
You asked me.
16:04:56 10
16:05:06 15
Sometime
I'm dealing with my diary.
You have it there somewhere if you can work-out.
18 19 16:05:17 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr.
Are you with me at all?
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop is trying to identify a possible date when there was a
23
discussion about the fees.
24 16:05:26 25
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman, I know that.
We're talking about December '93.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN:
He has gone back to now to -- he has picked out a date.
Q. 869
29 16:05:32 30
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, why on earth would you go back to a date before the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:05:37
16:05:41
133 1
motion.
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 870
Mr. Dunlop, would you please point, take your diary.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
of November?
7
A.
Wait now.
Wait now.
What's the purpose of referring to the 9th
Because Mr. Murphy asked me was there any reference in my diary to a meeting
8
with Mr. Sweeney or any representative of Monarch prior to the issuing of the
9
invoice of the 14th of December 1993.
16:06:05 10
and I said let's look at it from the beginning of December.
11
Isn't that what I
said?
12
Q. 871
Yes.?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 872
What are you looking at?
A.
Sorry.
16:06:13 15
And he asked me then when did I think
Would you just wait for one minute.
16
December.
17
already alluded to for Monarch on the 10th of December.
18
because it was a reception party.
19
next meeting.
16:06:38 20
There is nothing in December.
I went back and I looked at There is a reference, which I have I've ruled that out
I then went back and I had a meeting.
The next reference to anybody of any substance in Monarch is
Mr. Sweeney on the 9th, Tuesday the 9th of November 1993.
21
Q. 873
Mr.--
22
A.
At eleven o'clock.
23
Q. 874
So, Mr. Dunlop, after the day of the motion, which is the big success and
24
nobody knows what's going to happen until then.
16:06:52 25
On the 11th of November
there's nothing in your diary before this invoice on whatever date it is?
26
A.
The 14th.
27
Q. 875
The 14th of December.
28
A.
Other than a reference to Richard Lynn on the 16th of November.
29
Q. 876
A reference to Mr. Lynn.
A.
Never discussed money with Mr. Lynn.
16:07:11 30
The
Nothing apart from the reception?
You didn't deal with him?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:07:12
16:07:29
134 1
Q. 877
No.
Are you sure you didn't discuss it at the party? Are you being fair to
2
yourself.
3
Christmas party that you would like a success fee?
4
A.
5 6
Maybe you'd have said to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney at the
That would be well nigh impossible because I wasn't there.
Didn't go to the
party. Q. 878
7
So you didn't meet Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney with a view to discussing a success fee if your diary is correct?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 879
Does that mean you discussed it on the phone?
A.
It probably is, correct.
11
Q. 880
And which of them was it?
12
A.
That I've already said I cannot absolutely definitively say to you which of
16:07:42 10
13
them it was.
14
Monarch.
16:08:06 15
16
The normal.
The normal, because of my relationship with
And because of the fact that I discussed fees with Mr. Sweeney,
would have been Mr. Sweeney. Q. 881
17
And all previous applications for an increase in the fee, which were much smaller amounts, you went physically to Mr. Sweeney and discussed it with him?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 882
But for 60,500 you ring one or other of them and discuss it?
A.
Yes, yes.
21
Q. 883
And tell us about the telephone conversation.?
22
A.
I've already given you -- because of the success and because of what had
16:08:23 20
23
happened, issue -- I was going to issue an invoice for 50,000.
24
Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane said 'well send it in and we'll see how far you'll
16:08:44 25
And either
get'.
26
Q. 884
And previously no difficulty at all?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 885
Suddenly a success fee of 65,000, send it in and see how far you get?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 886
No promise, no hope, no encouragement or ...?
16:08:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:08:57
16:09:06
135 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 887
All right.
3
A.
The invoice was sent.
4
Q. 888
It was sent.
5
A.
Sorry?
6
Q. 889
Could we have 4839, please.
A.
That's not my handwriting.
Q. 890
Well I would have assumed that would be a Monarch handwriting.
So you went back and you sent it in; did you?
What's okay on it?
7 8 9 16:09:17 10
11
think so, Mr. Dunlop? Why would you say "okay"?
12
A.
Exactly.
13
Q. 891
What does it suggest to you?
14
A.
It suggests that it is okay E.
Q. 892
Okay what?
16
A.
The signature or at the back is E.
17
Q. 893
By any chance would that be Eddie Sweeney?
18
A.
It could well be.
19
Q. 894
Is it, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 895
Have you never seen his initial?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 896
Never once have you seen his initial?
24
A.
Don't know how he writes.
Q. 897
You what?
A.
I don't know how he writes.
16:09:33 15
16:09:43 20
16:09:49 25
26 27
I don't know whose handwriting it is.
It's not mine.
How would I know how he writes? For goodness
sake.
28 29
Would you not
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
I think we'll leave it there this afternoon.
16:09:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:09:59
16:10:11
136 1
We'll sit tomorrow at .... have we another witness tomorrow?
2 3
MS. DILLON:
There's one witness at two o'clock.
4
tomorrow afternoon, Ms. Mary Harney.
Who was confirmed for
5 6
Other than that it will be Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Well, we'll sit at 10:15.
10:15 tomorrow.
9
we're going to rise now briefly to await another witness.
I know
16:10:28 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
All right?
I beg your pardon.
Sorry.
All right.
Friday is the difficulty.
16:10:41 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
10:15 tomorrow.
17
other witness comes.
And we'll sit again in a few minutes when this
18 19 16:10:55 20
21 22
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
23 24 16:10:59 25
26
MR. AHERN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
27 28 29
MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Ahern.
16:20:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:20:50
16:21:06
137 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
Dermot Ahern
Q. 898
3 4
MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Ahern.
Mr. Ahern, you were written to through your
5
solicitors by the Tribunal in April of this year.
6
statement which is to be found at pages 8117 and 8118 of the brief.
7
If I could have 8117, please.
And you supplied a
8 9 16:21:25 10
You say you set out the circumstances surrounding the receipt by Fianna Fail of 3,000 from Monarch Properties Limited and locally referred to as Wilton House
11
in June 1989.
12
You say this was a keenly fought election.
13
Ceantair made a determined effort to engage in a fund-raising campaign to
14
ensure the best possible campaign for its' three candidates, all members of the
16:21:47 15
You say in a General Election was held on 15th of June' 89. Fianna Fail Comhairle Dail
Oireachtas, and you then name the three candidates.
You say following the
16
normal practice the director of elections, former TD and Senator Joe Farrell,
17
assembled three candidates to draft and jointly sign a letter which was then
18
sent to known party supporters and previous donors in County Louth seeking
19
contribution to the General Election campaign.
16:22:05 20
21
You say you do not have a copy of this letter but you attach a copy of a
22
similar letter which is impressed the stamp of one of the candidates.
23
believe such a letter was sent to Mr Philip Monahan or Monarch Properties,
24
Wilton house on behalf of all three candidates.
You
16:22:20 25
26
And I think we can see that letter, that copy letter.
If we look at 8584 and
27
it was subsequently supplied to the Tribunal by your solicitor on 7th of June,
28
2006.
29 16:22:32 30
I think what you are saying is that a letter similar to the one now on screen Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:22:35
16:22:49
138 1
would have been sent to Mr. Monahan; is that correct?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 899
Now, you said that such a letter would have gone either to a previous donor or
4 5
a known party supporter. A.
6 7
Well both.
Can I ask you into which category Mr. Monahan fell?
He was a previous donor and he was also a known party supporter in
that he attended party functions. Q. 900
You say that the practice was that these letters would be followed up by a
8
phone call and calls by the director of elections in the area or a member of
9
the organisation on his behalf.
16:23:14 10
Normally the director of elections made as
many calls as he could himself and if possible when making calls was
11
accompanied by the election candidate in the relevant area.
12
requested me to accompany him to Mr. Monahan's office.
Accordingly, he
13 14
Is that because you were the election candidate in the area, Mr. Monahan's
16:23:28 15
16
area? A.
That's right.
If you recall that election was called very suddenly by the
17
then Taoiseach, Mr. Haughey.
18
he came back from Japan.
19
some time in order to prepare, and normally, the candidates would meet and
16:23:46 20
It's 17 years ago.
But he called it just after
Normally, when you run into an election you have
discuss with the Director of Elections the issue of division of the
21
constituency from the voting point of view during the election.
22
election literature, posters, how many to buy, how many to get, what to put on
23
them.
24
issue of sending out a letter to known party supporters signed by the election
16:24:13 25
Also,
And one of the issues that normally would be looked at also is the
candidates.
And as I said in the narrative, it was always the way that the
26
director of elections would ask the candidates to call on a number, as many as
27
possible of those people that had been written to.
28
the teeth of the election we weren't able to call to everybody.
29 16:24:40 30
Q. 901
I think if we look at 2116.
Obviously, as this was in
We see that the election was called on 25th of
May of that year; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:24:43
16:25:00
139 1
A.
Yes, in and around that.
It's normally three weeks before the election.
2
Q. 902
The election itself took place I think on 15th of June?
3
A.
That letter that you put up being a copy we think of the type of letter that
4
was sent.
5
though the letter is undated.
6
particular election.
7
Q. 903
It refers to the fact that the election was on 15th of June.
Even
I'm nearly sure that's a letter from that
If I could go back then to your statement at 8117.
You say we discussed the
8
election, the economic climate in Dundalk and desire to make a big effort in
9
terms of posters and bill boards during the campaign.
16:25:19 10
Although I was the
sitting TD, Mr Farrell was a long-term friend of Mr Monahan and in general
11
conducted the meeting.
12 13
You say, Mr. Monahan agreed that he would make a donation.
14
sent to me as TD and addressed to my constituency office at Dublin street,
16:25:33 15
Dundalk.
The donation was
I think we have a copy of that letter enclosing the cheque.
16 17
If we could have 8119.
18
constituency office at 6 Dublin Street, Dundalk
19
I think it's addressed to you care of your
A.
That's correct.
Q. 904
It refers to the meeting on the 6th of June?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 905
The letter the 30th of May.
16:25:44 20
23 24 16:25:54 25
That letter would have gone out five days after
the election being called? A.
That's right.
Q. 906
If I go back to 8117.
You say that Mr. Monahan agreed he would make a
26
donation.
27
fixed practice in relation to political donations you sent both the original
28
letter and cheque to the joint treasurers of Fianna Fail Comhairle Dail
29
Ceantair with instructions to lodge the monies to the appropriate Fianna Fail
16:26:16 30
The donation as I say was sent to you.
In accordance with your
account and to issue receipt to the donor directly in due course. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
You
16:26:20
16:26:39
140 1
exhibited a receipt dated 29th of July 1989 of 3,000 pounds by Seamus Kirk.
2 3
If we could have 8121.
I think that's the received stamped by Allied Irish
4
Banks and it is for Louth CDC FF
5
A.
What you put up there is the lodgement docket.
6
Q. 907
Sorry.
7
A.
Yeah, I have the original here if the judges wish to see.
8
Q. 908
I think it is signed by the joint honorary treasurer?
9
A.
It is signed by Seamus Keelan and Jimmy McShane, who is now deceased. Seamus
16:26:51 10
The receipt is at 8120.?
Keelan is an accountant by profession and it is in the name of Wilton House
11
Limited.
12
Q. 909
Do you believe that the cheque was in the name of Wilton House limited?
13
A.
Absolutely.
14
Seamus Keelan being an accountant, he was meticulous.
As you
can see, the documentation that I provided is meticulous from the point of view
16:27:17 15
of the lodgement docket.
I have the lodgement docket here if anybody wants to
16
see it.
17
dated 6th of June 1989 that you sent to me originally.
18
say "we", Fianna Fail Dail Ceantair had a record also when I checked with the
19
treasurers when you originally wrote to me in April.
16:27:45 20
Q. 910
21 22
And also I have a copy of a letter, which is same copy of a letter We actually, when I
If I could have 2866 please. I think this is the copy letter that you are referring to?
A.
Yes, I have a copy here which indicates quite clearly that in the handwriting
23
of Seamus Keelan how that 4,020 lodgement is made up.
24
to Wilton House, 3,000.
16:28:02 25
It includes reference
Q. 911
If I could have 8119?
26
A.
I don't know if you have a copy of that.
27
Q. 912
I have the letter?
28
A.
That's it there.
29
Q. 913
And are you saying that the manuscript writing on the bottom right hand corner
16:28:12 30
Yes, that's it there.
of that letter is in Mr. Keelan's writing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:28:15
16:28:28
141 1
A.
I believe it to be.
2
Q. 914
That makes up the 4,020 which I put up at 8121 which appears to have been
3 4
lodged to the bank account? A.
5
That's right.
I also have with me but I didn't produce it.
I didn't have it
when I made the statement, a copy of the actual account six days after.
6
Q. 915
That's a lodgement of 4,020 pounds?
7
A.
I have it here if you want to see it.
8
Q. 916
You go on to say that I also exhibit the lodgement docket and we've seen the
9
lodgement docket.
16:28:48 10
You say the 3,000 pounds was received from Monarch
Properties/Wilton House, formally formed part of this lodgement.
I exhibit a
11
copy of the original letter to me dated 6th of June with a list of other donors
12
in the handwriting of one of the local officials, totalling the aforementioned
13
amount of 4,020 pounds.
14
Monahan have a discussion in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, Cabinteely or
16:29:07 15
You say at no time did Mr. Farrell or myself or Mr.
indeed for that matter any other developments that day.
I did not have any
16
contact or conversations or otherwise with Mr. Monahan or persons related to
17
lands at Cherrywood, Cabinteely, County Dublin at that time or at all.
18 19
Just in relation to your meeting.
16:29:24 20
21
It took place on the 6th of June 1989,
isn't that right ? A.
22
The letter was dated 6th of June '89. It would have been in and around that time.
23
Q. 917
I think the letter talks about the meeting that day; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 918
Did you know when you met Mr. Monahan on that date, that he had had a meeting
16:29:33 25
26
with Mr. Flynn on the 24th of May, '89? If I could have 7661.
27
A.
No, I didn't.
28
Q. 919
He didn't make any mention to you of having met anybody else on a previous
29 16:29:48 30
occasion? A.
Not that I recall.
I mean, the meeting was a follow-up from the letter.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But
16:29:53
16:30:18
142 1
also I do recall that headquarters had issued an instruction to TDs in every
2
constituency because they were going to produce what are called 8 by 4 posters.
3
This was a new way of postering the county.
4
think, in the constituency, 12 sites where these 8 by 4 foot large posters
5
could be put.
6
was in effect derelict.
And there were one or two sites which myself or Joe
7
Farrell had identified.
The reason we went, apart from the follow-up of the
8
letter, was to discuss the possibility of putting up posters.
9
context, as I say, that we met.
16:30:43 10
my knowledge.
They asked us to try and get, I
Mr. Monahan had quite a lot of property around Dundalk which
It was in that
There was no other discussion, to the best of
To be fair to Mr. Monahan, over the two years from '87, I was
11
first elected in '87.
12
huge queues going into Newry every day of the week, not only from Dundalk but
13
also from further afield.
14
socially -- refer to the fact that Dundalk needed something.
16:31:10 15
'89 was what was known as a for sale town.
Phil Monahan any time I met him used to refer to
literally overnight the queues stopped.
17
of the shopping centre.
18
be done to stem the tide across the border.
19
the fact that Fianna Fail had taken in the 48 hour rule. Q. 920
21 22
Mr. Monahan was the owner at the time
He was always very conscious that something needed to So he was very complimentary of
Did not speak to you on that occasion concerning his lands at Cherrywood. Did he ever speak to you concerning the lands in Cherrywood?
A.
23 24
Fianna Fail
brought in the 48 hour rule. Ray Mc Sharry was the Minister for Finance and
16
16:31:32 20
No.
In fact until you wrote to you me on the 28th of April I had never heard
of lands at Cherrywood and I don't even know where they are. Q. 921
16:31:51 25
Mr. Monahan had as part of his team Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
Now, Mr. Sweeney has
included you, if I could have 2191, amongst people he says that he would have
26
contacts with.
27
included.
28
should ask you in the first instance did you know Mr. Sweeney?
29 16:32:21 30
There were
A.
He gives a whole series of politicians there.
You are
Do you recall ever speaking to Mr. Eddie Sweeney? I suppose I
I knew Mr. Sweeney vaguely.
I would have had -- I mean, he was a personal
friend of my brother's from drama circles.
I didn't really know him.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
To the
16:32:21
16:32:30
143 1
best of my recollection, the only involvement I had with Mr. Sweeney was from a
2
legal point of view when I would have been acting for clients in Dundalk who
3
would have had perhaps disputes with Monarch Properties.
4
Q. 922
Yes.?
5
A.
But I see from this list.
6
I haven't seen it before.
He has more or less
spoken to every major politician in County Louth.
7
Q. 923
Mr. Richard Lynn.
8
A.
I, did, yes.
9
Dundalk.
16:32:50 10
Did you know Mr. Lynn?
Mr. Richard Lynn was the town clerk for a number of years in I had dealings with him when he was town clerk.
But I had no
dealings with him once he left the employment of Dundalk Urban District
11
Council.
12
member of Louth County Council. Obviously as TD I would have had dealings with
13
Mr. Lynn obviously in relation to constituency matters.
14
Q. 924
16:33:14 15
I wasn't a member of Dundalk Urban District Council.
If I could have 2864 just for completeness.
I was a
I think Mr. Monahan did write to
Mr. Frank Wall who would have been the Fianna Fail, would he have been the
16
Director of Elections or Treasurer?
17
A.
He was the General Secretary.
18
Q. 925
General secretary.
19
later.
16:33:30 20
On the 9th of June, which would have been three days
And I think he advised Mr. Wall whilst enclosing a cheque for 16,000
pounds towards the election campaign, that he had paid you 3,000 pounds; isn't
21
that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 926
And enclosed the correspondence?
24
A.
I didn't know anything about that letter until it was sent to me by the
16:33:42 25
Tribunal recently.
I didn't know anything about the circumstances of that.
26
Q. 927
Thank you very much, Mr. Ahern.?
27
A.
Thank you.
28 29 16:33:49 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:33:50
16:34:17
144 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
A quarter past ten.
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
6
THURSDAY, 15TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:15 A.M..
7 8 9 16:34:32 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
09:30:12
10:36:09
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY,
2
THE 20TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning.
9 10:36:13 10
11
Before the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop commences if I could just update you on some housekeeping matters.
12 13
Counsel for Mr. Tony Fox is unable to be here today and Mr. Fox is listed to
14
give his own evidence on Friday and it -- the Tribunal has been requested to
10:36:29 15
16
adjourn the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop by Mr. Gordon until after Mr. Fox gives evidence.
17 18
I think that the Tribunal has similarly acceded to a request I think from
19
Mr. Lydon in relation to Mr. Lynn and in those circumstances, it might be
10:36:46 20
appropriate to defer the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop by Mr. Gordon to the
21
same date as the cross-examination by Mr. Shipsey on behalf of Mr. Sweeney.
22 23
CHAIRMAN: All right.
That's granted.
24 10:37:00 25
MS. DILLON:
Now, in relation to that cross-examination or the resumption of
26
that cross-examination, we had understood on Thursday that Mr. Sweeney's legal
27
team would indicate to the Tribunal this morning the date upon which
28
Mr. Shipsey would be available to commence his cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop
29
but unfortunately it appears to be the position that that information is not
10:37:19 30
yet available. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:37:20
10:37:32
2 1 2
It wouldn't really be fair to ask Mr. Dunlop to hold himself in readiness over
3
the next four or five weeks until such date as it's indicated to the Tribunal
4
that Mr. Shipsey will be available to cross-examine.
5 6
So, perhaps, the Tribunal might be minded to request the legal team for
7
Mr. Sweeney to, say, by tomorrow evening indicate a date or series of dates
8
when they will be available to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop so that Mr. Dunlop can
9
make whatever plans he wants to make for the next four or five weeks
10:37:50 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Well, even better again, perhaps it could be done today.
12
a member here from?
Is there
13 14
SOLICITOR:
Yes, I appear.
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps you might talk to Mr. Shipsey today.
SOLICITOR:
He should have a better idea this evening.
CHAIRMAN:
Because we would be keen to organise that today before we finish at
10:37:57 15
16 17 18 19 10:38:04 20
21
four or thereabouts.
22 23
SOLICITOR:
Okay.
24 10:38:15 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I think that Mr -- counsel for Mr. Lydon is going first I
understand.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
29 10:38:24 30
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Dunlop.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:38:26
10:38:40
3 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop.
3 4
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP AS FOLLOWS:
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
Good morning, Judges.
8 9
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Good morning, Members of the Tribunal.
10:38:47 10
11
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
12
A.
Good morning, Mr. Humphreys.
13
Q. 1
I appear for Senator Lydon. I just have some questions arising out of the
14
examination that has taken place to date.
10:39:01 15
16
I want to deal firstly with the Manager's motion which was defeated 35 to 33.
17
And that was referred to on Wednesday, the 14th of June last, at page 63.
18 19
If I could have page 63.
10:39:14 20
21 22
A.
Yep.
23
Q. 2
Can it come up on the screen?
24 10:39:31 25
CHAIRMAN:
It will come up now.
26 27
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Page 63. Question 338.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
What's the page number?
10:39:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:39:56
10:40:36
4 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think it's day 353.
Is it last Wednesday's evidence you're
2
looking for Mr. Humphreys?
3
MR HUMPHREYS: That's correct, Judge, I am looking for Wednesday, 14th of June,
4
2006 page 63 of my transcript. Question 346 is what I'm looking for.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
What's the question again?
7 8
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Question 346.
9 10:40:44 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Q. 3
All right.
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And that says that the Manager's motion was defeated 35 to 33.
12
And if you could just move down to question 351.
It states there "did
13
Mr. Lydon propose that?" and your answer, Mr. Dunlop, was "my understanding is
14
that he did, my understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke on the floor".
10:41:10 15
16
Can I take it, Mr. Dunlop, that if it's your understanding, that you didn't
17
actually see him on the floor on that day?
18
A.
19 10:41:27 20
Yes, I did see him on the floor on that day but I cannot absolutely attest to say that he actually spoke on the floor.
Q. 4
All right.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 5
And your answer is "it is my understanding is that he did".
23 24
Sorry.
Question 351. Did Mr. Lydon propose that?
that "I was there, I saw him, I heard him?" A.
10:41:45 25
No, my answer is -- my understanding is that he did, my understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke from the floor.
26
Q. 6
It's only an understanding?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 7
All right.
29 10:42:05 30
Your answer is
That's fine.
Now, if we could just move on but just can I take
it from it that it's only an understanding, that you weren't actually physically present in the chamber when that proposal was made? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:42:05
10:42:15
5 1
A.
I was in and out of the chamber on that particular day.
2
Q. 8
Just answer the question.
3 4
was made. A.
5 6
The answer is yes or no?
I was there when the matter was being discussed and I was there when the confusion occurred.
Q. 9
7
All right.
The question that you were asked at 351 was "did Mr. Lydon propose
that?" and your answer is "it is only an understanding."
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 10
Now.
10:42:41 10
Thank you. If I could just move on to question 356 and if you would
just go to question 355 and if you could just read your answer, please?
11
A.
Sorry.
12
Q. 11
Question 355?
13
A.
Sorry.
14 10:43:03 15
16
Were you there in the chamber when that proposal
I beg your pardon.
355.
Yes, yeah.
That's because -- they
happened to be not in the chamber, nearby at the time. Q. 12
And if you just continue on question 356?
A.
Yes and I have not direct -- because I wasn't in the chamber. I have a an
17
immediacy in relation to the re-action that took place at that particular time
18
as a result of what happened on the floor.
19
Q. 13
10:43:19 20
If you just go back to the first part of that question.
The answer at 355 is
that you were nearby, not in the chamber?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 14
All right.
"I have not direct" now what were you going to say there before
23
you changed to "because I wasn't in the chamber". I suggest to you that you
24
were going to say because I have not direct evidence or not knowledge.
10:43:35 25
26
that be correct? A.
27
Well, I can't say to you what I was going to say in relation to that particular question, Mr. Humphreys.
28
Q. 15
Well it's your answer.?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 16
And "I have not direct" and then "because I wasn't in the chamber?"
10:43:47 30
Would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:43:52
10:44:05
6 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 17
Well, I suggest to you that you were going to say I have no direct evidence or
3 4
no direct knowledge because I wasn't in the chamber? A.
5 6
have said to you. Q. 18
7 8
I was in the council at the time.
That's precisely the point I'm getting to. not in the chamber.
A.
9 10:44:23 10
No, I'm not going to say yes or no to that because what I have said is what I
Is that you were nearby, you were
Isn't that your evidence?
No, what I said to you.
I was in and out of the chamber.
I said to you
earlier on. Q. 19
Well, I have to suggest to you, because evidence that is stated later that it
11
was very difficult to get in and out of the chamber and that it wouldn't be
12
possible to get in and out of the chamber, is that your evidence that you gave
13
last Thursday?
14 10:44:39 15
A.
Not only the evidence that I gave last Thursday but on many other occasions.
Q. 20
I am not interested in many other occasions, Mr Dunlop, this is difficult
16
enough. I just want to zero in on this particular point and on this particular
17
day?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 21
I asked you about the proposal and you said it was your understanding that he
10:44:49 20
made the proposal.
You then say that because of your role in other
21
developments you happened to be in there.
22
chamber.
And then you say "not in the
Nearby at the time" isn't that your answer?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 22
And then you were going to go on and say "And I have not direct, because I
10:45:06 25
wasn't in the chamber?"
26
A.
No, that's your interpretation, Mr. Humphreys.
27
Q. 23
All right.
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 24
"I have not direct, because I wasn't in the chamber".
10:45:17 30
That's what you said?
Read the answer again.
That's what you said.
The first line of it at question 356?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:45:21
10:45:31
7 1
A.
Yeah, well I don't think it needs replication.
2
Q. 25
Please read it.?
3
A.
"I have not direct because I wasn't in the chamber but I have an immediacy in
4 5
relation ..." Q. 26
That's fine.
You weren't in the chamber.
Now, Mr. Lydon's evidence will be
6
that, in respect of this particular time, that he nodded to Mr. Lynn and not
7
Mr. Lynn to him.
Is that possible?
8
A.
Well, anything is possible.
9
Q. 27
Well, your evidence was that it was Mr. Lynn who nodded to Mr. Lydon to come
10:45:55 10
outside the chamber.
11 12
Now, I'm putting it to you that Mr. Lydon's evidence
will be that he nodded to Mr. Lynn to come outside the chamber.? A.
13 14
Yes, it's possible.
Well, all I can say is if that's what Mr. Lydon is going to say about nodding to Mr. Lynn or Mr. Lynn nodding to him, I can't say anything against that.
Q. 28
Well did you see Mr. Lydon nod?
A.
I saw the communication between the two of them.
16
Q. 29
Well which was it? If you saw it who nodded first?
17
A.
Um, there was a communication between Mr. Lydon.
18
Q. 30
That's not the question that I asked you.
10:46:18 15
19 10:46:38 20
I asked you who nodded first and
you said you saw it.? A.
21 22
I can't attest to it.
I'm telling you that there was a communication between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon. And ...
Q. 31
That was a non-responsive answer.
You are not answering the question.
23
question is specific.
24
You're talking about a communication.
10:47:06 25
Mr. Lydon is saying that he nodded first to Mr. Lynn. You said you saw it.
Now, you either
saw it or you didn't see it?
26
A.
I saw communication between the two of them and they both left.
27
Q. 32
All right.
28
No useful purposes is served by this answer.
non-responsive.
29 10:47:11 30
The
Now, if I could move on.
We might revert to it.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
The answer is
10:47:18
10:47:31
8 1 2
If I could have the transcript of the 11th of May, 2000.
3
reference 544545.
It's Tribunal
Pages 544 and 545.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
What's the day number?
7 8
MR. HUMPHREYS:
9
It's page No. 544.
It's Book Two of the brief.
The reference is Cherrywood.
10:47:48 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
That's the important part.
12 13
MR. HUMPHREYS:
14
2000.
And that would be -- it's the transcript of the 11th of May
10:47:57 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
It's brief No. 544.
17 18 19
Q. 33
10:48:36 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Thank you, Chairman.
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
If you could go to the bottom of that page.
is the private sessions on the 11th of May, 2000.
21
This, I think,
It's the transcript. Can
you see that at the bottom of the page?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 34
And just it was suggested it might be eight and it was settled at four.
24 10:48:53 25
you could just read that paragraph to the bottom of the page, please? A.
Beginning with my answer?
26
Q. 35
Yes.?
27
A.
Yeah.
Right.
"I think it was Sean Barrett who put the ultimate motion which
28
actually was the one that popped the thing through.
29
quite a deal of toing and froing.
10:49:09 30
If
But there would have been
To go back to the point -- to go back to
the point, I was called in by Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn because people Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:49:13
10:49:30
9 1
were going off side.
2
intelligent ones and the stupid ones.
3
is a psychiatrist or psychologist".
4
Q. 36
Because, like all groupings in society there are the
If you could stop there.
5
necessary.
6
Lydon, isn't that correct?
Unfortunately they used Don Lydon who
I don't want to go onto the next page unless
You go on to make remarks that are prejudicial about Senator
7
A.
If you want to interpret them as prejudicial, yes.
8
Q. 37
Well you go on.
9
Well let's go to another.
Let's go to another piece if
that's the approach.
10:49:46 10
11
If you could go to page 564, please.
12
page 564.
That would be the Tribunal reference No.
13 14
All right.
10:50:10 15
Now, if you could just begin there.
You see at the second half
of the page after Mr. Alan, it comes to Mr. Hanratty?
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 38
And again, if you could read there to the bottom of the page.?
18
A.
Mr. Hanratty: "and when you were being brought in to kind of clear up the mess
19
it was pretty well towards the end.
10:50:28 20
It was very much towards the end.
A: Yes.
21
Q: And what information or instructions were you given with regard to what
22
Lydon had already done?
23
A:
24
Fail in the first instance, which he had because I suppose this very very
10:50:45 25
To unscramble as much of the damage as he had possibly done within Fianna
unfair -- because I suppose this very, very unfair and personal and maybe
26
wouldn't say it.
27
professional capacities and degrees and whatever everybody considered him to be
28
totally mad
29 10:51:04 30
Q. 39
Maybe we wouldn't say it. I mean notwithstanding his
If you just to stop there. you go on to make remarks in that vein thereafter. You say there that it was very unfair and personal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
Now I will come back to
10:51:09
10:51:18
10 1
the question that I asked you one minute ago. They are remarks that are
2
prejudicial to my client; isn't that right?
3
A.
I don't accept that.
4
Q. 40
You don't accept that. You don't accept that referring to somebody as being
5
totally mad and in the context of the stupid ones.
6
remarks to be prejudicial?
7
A.
In the circumstances we are outlining, no.
8
Q. 41
All right.
9
You don't consider those
Mr. You Dunlop, you suffered a financial loss as a result of the
vote that was taken in respect of the Baldoyle Lands by my client amongst
10:51:37 10
others; isn't that right?
11
A.
I suffer a financial loss, yes.
12
Q. 42
I'm putting it to you that you had a certain attitude towards my client which
13 14 10:51:47 15
is evident by these remarks here; isn't that correct? A.
No.
Q. 43
Alright you are saying -- your evidence to this Tribunal are that the
16
derogatory remarks that you make about my client are neither prejudicial to my
17
client nor reveal any kind of bias or animosity towards my client?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 44
Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlop.
10:52:01 20
21
Now, if we could move on.
22
425.
If I could move on to Tribunal reference No. page
23 24
Now, if you could just move to the last paragraph at that page.
10:52:29 25
with "I spoke".
26
And beginning
Now, if you could just read the line down as far as the
remarks that are made about Senator Lydon
27
A.
Beginning of the paragraph?
28
Q. 45
Yes, please?
29
A.
"I spoke with both councillors Colm McGrath and Tony Fox regarding Monarch's
10:52:42 30
Cherrywood proposal. Internally in Fianna Fail there appeared to be disparate Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:52:53
10:52:58
11 1
views as to what could be achieved.
2
strong line for as much rezoning as possible while others such as Councillor
3
Betty Coffey expressed caution.
4
do whatever the majority of councillors recommended."
5 6
Q. 46
Thank you.
Councillors McGrath and Fox maintained a
Senator Don Lydon appeared to be willing to
Now, if I could just -- next I want to go to -- I think it's the
transcript of the 13th of June.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Is there a day No.?
9 10:53:19 10
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Sorry, Chairman.
I just want to get that for myself.
11
It's the transcript of the 13th of June.
And it's page 13 on my book.
12
it's question 100.
If I could have question 100.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Day 562.
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Thank you very much.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Day 652.
Yes.
And
13 14 10:53:42 15
16 17 18 19 10:54:26 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Is it a short extract because if it's short you can ...
22 23
MR. HUMPHREYS:
24
I'll move to another area if that's okay and I'll come become to that at the
10:54:38 25
Well, actually I want to move back to the question again.
end.
26 27
If I could just go back to what I began my questioning with and that is, I
28
think it's Wednesday the 14th.
I'll just get the reference.
All right.
29 10:55:16 30
If I could -- the extract what I want to go to approach -- I want to approach Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:55:22
10:55:32
12 1
it from a different angle.
If I could go to Thursday the 15th of June, 2006.
2
That's the last day of the Tribunal.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
654.
5 6
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And if I could go to page 8.
If that could come up.
7 8 9 10:55:46 10
And it's before question 32 is what I'm looking for. A.
Question what, Mr. Humphreys?
Q. 47
Just before question 32.
11
machine.
Yeah.
I am trying to assist the person operating the
Okay.
12 13
Now, if that could just move up to the intervention by the Chairman, I don't
14
think it has a reference number.
It would be line one I think.
Yes.
10:56:04 15
16
Now, I just want you to read three short paragraphs, Mr. Dunlop.
17 18
If you begin with "Chairman" there:
19
the screen
10:56:16 20
A.
21 22
On line one.
On the top of the page on
"Chairman, we were only interested in what you saw happen that particular day, not what you assume happen or think should have happened, I accept that ..."
Q. 48
Sorry, just to put it in context. We're talking about the day of the motion of
23
the manager's motion and the question that I began with in respect of the
24
proposal made by ...
10:56:32 25
A.
Right.
26
Q. 49
Senator Lydon and you say your understanding was that he made a proposal?
27
A.
Yes.
Okay.
"Chairman we're only interested in what you saw happen on that
28
particular day not what you assume happen or think should have happened.
29
accept that.
10:56:49 30
Chairman, now can you clarify the position did you see Mr. Lynn
calling out Mr. Lydon or did you not see -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
I
10:56:52
10:57:06
13 1
Q. 50
Just a little bit slower.
2
A.
Right.
Yeah.
Thanks.?
"Did you see Mr. Lynn calling out Mr. Lydon or did you not see or can
3
you remember one way or the other?
4
A:
5
Chairman: Yes.
6
A: I did see Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon to come out.
7
Chairman: All right.
8
Q. 51
Well the simple answer to that is yes.
All right.
We can deal with it in cross-examination."
Very good.
9 10:57:16 10
Now, if I could go back to page three of that same day.
11
A.
Question?
12
Q. 52
Question 12.
13 14
If you just read out question 12 and question 13 and the answers
thereto for me, please? A.
10:57:43 15
Right.
"And what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
A: Yes I would see there was contact.
16
Q: Did you see it.
17
A: No, I can't say I definitely saw it, no."
18
Q. 53
19
Sorry, you were asked there and "what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
10:57:57 20
A: Yes, I would say there was contact".
You were asked did you
see it and you said "no I can't" ".
21 22
Now, do you accept there's a contradiction in your evidence on foot of that?
23
A.
There would appear to be, yes.
24
Q. 54
Well, I have to put it to you that there is a contradiction and you are telling
10:58:18 25
the Chairman at one stage that you did see it and you're saying there that you
26
didn't see it.
Isn't that correct?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 55
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
29 10:58:27 30
Now, is it possible to go back to the 13th of June, 2006? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:58:34
10:58:44
14 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
652.
Day 652.
13th?
4 5
MR. HUMPHREYS:
.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 56
And it is question 100.
8
And if I could go to question 100.
I just want to put it in context, Mr. Dunlop, so that
you know the context in which the question is being asked.
9 10:59:07 10
Question 100.
Mr. Dunlop, I think you have provided the Tribunal with two
11
statements to date in the Monarch Module.
12
the second being September 2003.
13
A:
14
And then you are asked at question 103,
10:59:26 15
The first being October 2000 and
Is that right?
That's correct, yes.
Q: Did you read them or whatever? And you said
16
A: thank you.
17
Q: Did you read the private interviews that you had with the Tribunal in May
18
2000? And you said
19
A: Yes.
10:59:34 20
21
Now, I want you now to move on to question 100.
22 23
And I just want you to read from question 110 to question 114 with the answers
24
and then I'll ask you a question.
10:59:49 25
A.
From question 110 to?
26
Q. 57
114 and the answers there to?
27
A.
All right.
28
Q. 58
Slowly now, yeah.?
29
A.
Q: 110, would you, do you agree, Mr. Dunlop that you have grossly under stated
11:00:06 30
Question.
to the Tribunal the amount of money that you received from Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:00:10
11:00:30
15 1
A:
Yes.
2
Q:
Do you agree that you told in private, the Tribunal, in private interview,
3
that the agreement in relation to a fee did not include a success fee and that
4
you subsequently, you invoiced Monarch in the sum of in for a success fee in
5
the sum of 50,000 plus VAT?
6
A:
Correct, yes.
7
Q:
Do you agree that in private interview you named two councillors as
8
councillors to whom, as councillors whom you bribed?
9
A:
Correct.
Q:
And that when it came to your -- in the two statements I have referred to,
11:00:47 10
11
you dropped those two councillors and replaced them with a different two?
12
A:
Correct.
13
Q:
114.
14
gross misleading of the Tribunal?
11:01:06 15
A:
Would you agree with me, Mr. Dunlop, that all of that amounts to a
No."
16 17 18
Q. 59
19
All right.
And we're talking about the situation I think where the statement
you made in private interview to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000;
11:01:20 20
isn't that correct ?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 60
And the statement that you then made the following October?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 61
Isn't that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 62
Now, if I could just go and listen carefully to my question now.
11:01:25 25
26
At question
27
113.
28
statement as opposed to the one in private interview.
29
councillors and replaced them with a different two and you said correct.
11:01:44 30
And that when it came to your, obviously that refers to the public
Isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
You dropped those two
11:01:45
11:02:01
16 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 63
Now, my question is this.
When you told Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher and
3
gave two different names, that they say hold on, Mr. Dunlop, you're after
4
dropping two councillors and naming another two.
5
they say that to you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 64
Did they confront you --
We've a problem here.
Did
8 9 11:02:10 10
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
This makes no sense.
The replacement occurred in the statement when Mr. Hanratty was not involved.
11 12
There was no change on the day in front of Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
13 14 11:02:22 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
The subsequent statements came in, where different people were
named were sent in by Mr. Dunlop or sent in by his solicitors.
They did not
arise in a face-to-face interview with Counsel for the Tribunal.
17 18
MR. HUMPHREYS:
19
question that's been properly put to Mr. Dunlop.
11:02:42 20
But, Chairman, it is a matter for the Tribunal and it is a I'm asking him what action,
what action that the Members of the Tribunal legal team took in respect of what
21
was two contradictory statements naming two individuals.
22
session and one in public session.
One in private
23 24 11:03:00 25
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah, well what do you mean what action? He named two people in
private and that remained the position until he changed the names in subsequent
26
statements which were made outside the Tribunal and furnished to the Tribunal.
27
And then he was subjected to cross-examination in relation to those by
28
Mr. Murphy last week.
29 11:03:24 30
MR. HUMPHREYS:
That's precisely the point.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
And the point is this.
It
11:03:27
11:03:39
17 1
wasn't on foot of Mr. Dunlop's reply there now until last week, some six years
2
later, after the statement was made that the opportunity arises in respect of
3
the contradictory evidence.
4 5
But we've been here for three years at this Tribunal.
6
to his credibility and in the submission or the evidence that went before in
7
the Callaghan case that went before the Supreme Court, there's reference made
8
to what the then Chairman said which was and I'm quoting from page 19 of that
9
judgement "the Tribunal wouldn't concede from interested parties information
11:04:01 10
And this evidence goes
which would suggest that there is a glaringly inconsistency between an account
11
given on a previous occasion privately to the Tribunal and one given publicly
12
because that would clearly be wrong".
13 14 11:04:18 15
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
But that was in relation -- that wasn't in relation to
Monarch.
16 17
Those submissions to the Supreme Court were in relation to what happened in a
18
different Module.
19 11:04:22 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
But, Mr. Chairman, it goes to credibility.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
23 24 11:04:29 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And it's the credibility of this witness.
We should be in a
position to be able to confront the witness because there is a credibility problem.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
it was and it was always the position of the Tribunal that we were dealing with
11:04:40 30
If you reed read the details of the case before the Supreme Court
it on a Module by Module basis and we would deal with inconsistencies in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:04:46
11:04:56
18 1
relation to evidence given on a Module by Module basis.
2 3
So, at the time that the case went to the Supreme Court the Monarch Module
4
hadn't happened.
5 6
So even by applying our own procedures, as they existed before the O'Callaghan
7
case, we would never have considered cross-examining Mr. Dunlop in relation to
8
statements made in a Module that hadn't yet been heard in public.
9 11:05:19 10
I mean, that is the position if you read it.
But that's more, if you want to
11
make it a criticism, you are entitled to it, that's a criticism of the
12
Tribunal.
It's not a criticism of Mr. Dunlop.
13 14 11:05:35 15
MR. HUMPHREYS:
That's correct.
I'm not criticising Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Dunlop
gave the answer that I in fact sought.
16 17
But the point about it is this.
It's my respectful submission that the
18
credibility of a witness cannot be divided into a Module.
19
either credible or not credible.
Now, a witness is
11:05:47 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
basis.
But Mr.-- wait now.
It was never divided into a Module by Module
23 24 11:05:56 25
We said that we would deal with the credibility of Mr. Dunlop and other witnesses who were common to a number of modules over the entire of the public
26
hearings relating to those modules.
But that we would only deal with them on
27
a Module by Module basis.
28
credibility until all of the evidence was heard in relation to those modules.
But that there would be no decisions as to
29 11:06:14 30
MR. HUMPHREYS:
I accept that.
And I hear what you're saying.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
It still
11:06:19
11:06:27
19 1
remains a matter as to how the Tribunal and the legal team actually conduct the
2
actual inquiry.
3 4
I say that that, I respectfully submit is fundamentally flawed. That is my
5
submission.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
is that you are cross-examining Mr. Dunlop.
9
submissions to the Tribunal as to the way it has conducted its affairs, you are
11:06:42 10
11
That's perfectly -- these are submissions.
certainly entitled to do so.
But your position now
I mean, if you want to make
But not as part of a cross-examination of a
witness.
12 13
MR. HUMPHREYS:
14
for Mr. Dunlop and I say it was a question I am entitled to put to him which is
11:06:55 15
16
Well, my reply is in response to the interjection by counsel
that this was only corrected some six years later, last week.
I put the
question, I got the answer required.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
decision from the court's point of view was to correct a procedural flaw that
11:07:11 20
But wait now.
It was the whole purpose behind the O'Callaghan
it identified in the work of the Tribunal.
But it was never the position
21
prior to O'Callaghan, prior to the O'Callaghan case that evidence in relation
22
to the future modules, including evidence relating to the credibility of
23
witnesses, would be dealt with in those modules until they actually came on for
24
public hearing.
11:07:31 25
26
That was the admitted position of the Tribunal at all times.
27
decision effectively took a different view and the position is now all the
28
parties have been furnished with all of the relevant statements, including the
29
private interviews and people like Mr. Dunlop are here to deal with issues
11:07:57 30
relating to inconsistencies. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
The O'Callaghan
11:07:59
11:08:14
20 1 2
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Yeah.
And my submission -- and my question was in respect of
3
what action the legal team for the Tribunal took in respect of an inconsistency
4
that emerged, unknown to us, some six years ago.
5
Anyway --
I've made my submission.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
inconsistencies in the way that they would do now post O'Callaghan.
9
never the practice of the Tribunal to raise inconsistencies in relation to
11:08:29 10
I want to make it clear.
I mean, the Tribunal did not deal with It was
Tribunals -- or in relation to modules that hadn't yet come on for public
11
hearing.
12
Court.
That was the stated position that was argued before the Supreme
13 14
MR. HUMPHREYS:
11:08:46 15
I accept what you're saying in respect of that but it still
comes back to the issue that this witness, some six years ago, named two
16
councillors and then changed that.
And that matter wasn't pursued.
17
wasn't in effect corrected until some six years later, today.
And it
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
11:09:02 20
But it was never the practice or the intention of the Tribunal that
it would be corrected until Mr. Dunlop was giving evidence in relation to the
21
issue.
22 23
That's why he's here.
That's why he's here to be cross-examined.
24
clearly an inconsistency, very serious inconsistency here.
There is
11:09:18 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
27
to the credibility of the witness. I have no further question.
28
Mr. Chairman.
29
submissions.
11:09:30 30
A.
That is so and the purpose of my cross-examination has been as Thank you,
I will make any further comments in respect by way of Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
Thank you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:09:30
11:09:45
21 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Now, who would like to? Who is next in the queue to cross-examine?
3
Connor Creegan, Chairman, for Cathal Boland.
4
simple matter of clarification, for Mr. Dunlop.
I have one question.
Just a
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
something?
8
MS DILLON: In relation to the submission that was made by Mr. Humphreys?
9
CHAIRMAN: Yes.
11:09:55 10
Sorry, just before you go, Ms. Dillon, did you want to say
MS DILLON: No, Sir, other than that as Mr. Humphreys well knows what the prior
11
procedure of the Tribunal had been and indeed in relation to his own client's
12
inconsistencies.
13
familiar with his client's position in the Ballycullen Beechill modules and
14
dealing with inconsistencies there.
The same position has been adopted in the past. He will be
11:10:15 15
16
Nothing further.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Now, sorry ...
19 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. CREEGAN AS FOLLOWS:
11:10:18 20
21 22
Q. 65
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop
23
A.
Good morning, Mr. Creegan.
24
Q. 66
I just have one question, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 67
I wonder if I could have day 653.
11:10:25 25
26 27
June just?
28
A.
14th the 14th of June.
29
Q. 68
Last Wednesday.?
A.
What, yes?
11:10:53 30
Page 22, question 98:
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
That's the 14th
11:10:54
11:11:10
22 1
Q. 69
Question 98.?
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 70
I think we're on the screen, we're on the 13th of June, Chairman.?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 71
Question 98?
6
A.
Yes, Mr. Creegan, got it, yeah.
7
Q. 72
I'm just waiting for it myself?
8
A.
I beg your pardon.
9
Q. 73
I've got it now.
Yeah.
Got it, yeah.
I have it in my own.
11:11:26 10
11
Mr. Murphy said to you "and the opening that you went to with Mr. Boland" just
12
hold it there.
13
Mr. Boland's evidence or statement, I should say, that he was invited to two
14
cinema openings.
11:11:47 15
I just want to clarify with you.
That's in relation to
He said by you but by your PR company who were acting for
UCI; am I correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 74
I just want to clarify.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 75
But he was merely an attendee like many others that you invited?
A.
That's language.
Q. 76
Much obliged, Mr. Dunlop.
11:11:57 20
21
He didn't go with you?
You're absolutely correct, yes.
22 23
Thank you Chairman
24 11:12:04 25
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
Who is next?
26 27
MR SANFEY: I think that means I'm up, Mr. Chairman.
28 29
Mr. Dunlop, my name is Mr. Sanfey.
11:12:16 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:12:16
11:12:24
23 1
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. SANFEY AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
Q. 77
Just so as you are clear.
I represent Monarch Properties Limited and all of
4
the various Monarch companies.
Richard Lynn, Paul Monahan, Dominic Glennane,
5
Noel Murray, Phil Reilly and the Estate of Mr. Philip Monahan.
6
A.
Grand.
7
Q. 78
Chairman, before I begin my cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop.
8
Can I just say
one thing.
9 11:12:35 10
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
11
MR SANFEY: Much of Dunlop's evidence concerned Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
I think,
12
in fact it would be fair to say that many of the remarks, of which we would be
13
most concerned, concerned Mr. Sweeney rather than other Monarch people.
14 11:12:50 15
Mr. Sweeney is a director of Monarch.
But as you are aware, Mr. Chairman, he
16
is separately represented by Messrs. William Fry and Mr. Bill Shipsey in
17
particular.
18 19 11:13:07 20
Because of that, I obviously have had no opportunity to speak to Mr. Sweeney, nor would it be proper for me to do so.
He has his own representation.
21 22
I just wanted to say two things really.
23
matters which in Mr. Dunlop's evidence which pertain solely to Mr. Sweeney.
24
would just like to point out that no adverse inference should be drawn by
11:13:29 25
26
Monarch by my failure to do that.
To the extent that I do not deal with I
Mr. Shipsey, obviously, is going to take up
anything that deals with Mr. Sweeney.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
course of cross-examination or on behalf of Mr. Sweeney by his own counsel that
11:13:47 30
Yes.
That's a fair enough point.
If something arises in the
you feel you, as, insofar as it might effect the interests of your clients, who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:13:52
11:14:11
24 1
do not include Mr. Sweeney, then you will have an opportunity to further
2
cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
4
Uh-huh.
Hopefully, briefly.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
That was my second point.
I would just
like to reserve my position in the event that anything came up.
5 6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: Q. 79
9
MR SANFEY: Mr. Dunlop, can I also start with the meeting of the 27th of May at the council.
11:14:22 10
All right.
This was the motion to approve the County Manager's proposals.
The one that was defeated by 35 votes to 33.
11 12
And I think Mr. Humphreys has also referred to some of the evidence that you
13
gave the last day and I think you'll agree that was it was somewhat
14
contradictory?
11:14:34 15
16
A.
In what way?
Q. 80
Well, I'll take you through it now.
I think you did accept when Mr. Humphreys
17
put it to you that was there was a contradiction and you weren't sure whether
18
you had --
19 11:14:48 20
A.
I beg your pardon, Mr. Sanfey, yes.
Q. 81
Perhaps could we just look at a portion of the transcript.
21
It's day 654.
It's last Thursday and I'm looking for page 3 of that.
22 23 24
Now, at question 14. A.
Question 14? Yeah.
Q. 82
Perhaps I'll read it out just for ease of reference, Mr. Dunlop?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 83
Mr. Murphy asked you was "Mr. Lynn in the chambers all of the day or in the
11:15:14 25
28
environs all of the day or in and out?" And the answer was.
29
A: That I can't attest to because for one simple reason and I'm subject to
11:15:29 30
correction on this, I think the public gallery on that particular chamber Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:15:33
11:15:51
25 1
format, as it existed then, I think at maximum held ten people and the press
2
gallery which is right beside it inside the door can facilitate at a maximum 6
3
or 7 people.
4
my experience, on occasion, it was necessary to be the chamber.
5
Q: Yes
6
A:
7
place, you sat there and you didn't come out because if you came out you
8
couldn't get back in.
9
Q:
11:16:04 10
So if you wanted to be in the chamber, and I can only give you
And if you wanted to be in the chamber You got in there.
I see.
You took your
You would know if he was stuck in the chamber for the whole day
or stuck in and around the chamber for the whole day or whether he was ...
11
A:
The only way I can answer that, Mr. Murphy, is that if I had a motion of
12
enormous importance going through council, that I was controlling or attempting
13
to control, I would be in the chamber."
14 11:16:18 15
Could I ask you few questions about that, Mr. Dunlop.
16
Your engagement by
Monarch didn't come until the following March; isn't that correct?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 84
And your general experience as you relate there is that -- just stop me if I'm
19
not paraphrasing this correctly.
11:16:42 20
chamber.
21
There was very little space in the council
You had to get in early.
And by and large if you lost your seat
you did so at peril of not being able to get back in?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 85
And when Mr. Murphy was asking you whether Mr. Lynn was stuck in the chamber.
24
I take it that you couldn't answer that because the answer that you gave was to
11:16:59 25
say the only way I can answer that is that if I had a motion of enormous
26
importance going through the council that I was controlling or attempting to
27
control I would be in the chamber?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 86
Do I infer that that you certainly can't say that you saw Mr Lynn in the
11:17:14 30
chamber all day but your estimation is that he certainly would be there because Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:17:17
11:17:30
26 1
it was of enormous importance to you?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 87
Now, in cross examining Mr. O'Herlihy I put Mr. Lynn's position to
4
Mr. O'Herlihy, which was that for that very reason he was in the chamber all
5
day and he gave the very reasons that you instance there in relation to the
6
restricted space and the desirability of not leaving the chamber, the
7
importance of it and so on.
8
A.
No, it doesn't.
9
Q. 88
All right.
11:17:52 10
I take it that comes as no surprise to you?
Now, can I just move on two pages in that transcript.
At
number -- page No. 6.
11 12
The Chairman intervened in view of what appeared to be a somewhat contradictory
13
position you'd taken, Mr. Dunlop.
14
Chairman, sorry just before because this is important.
11:18:12 15
And once again I'll just read it out. Are you saying, Mr.
Dunlop, that you recollect this occurring on this occasion, the occasion of
16
this particular motion?
17
A:
18
the melee that took place in the chamber and outside
In the circumstances that obtained that day, yes, with the confusion in
19 11:18:32 20
CHAIRMAN:
21 22
Are you saying that on that you did of that occasion see Mr. Lydon
being signaled to by Mr. Lynn to come out? A.
Yes.
23 24 11:18:36 25
CHAIRMAN: A:
So you do recollect it?
I do recollect it, yes".
26 27
Now, Mr. Humphreys has already examined you in relation to who beckoned who and
28
so on.
29
way the chamber was configured Senator Lydon was facing front so it would have
11:18:54 30
Mr. Lynn concurs with Mr. Senator Lydon's version.
Because of the
had to have been him who turned around and beckoned to Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
In any
11:18:59
11:19:17
27 1
event, Mr. Lynn will say that he was motioned out by Mr. Lydon who told Mr.
2
Lynn that in fact there was no point in going ahead with Mr. Lydon's own motion
3
because it wouldn't you succeed given the way the Manager's motion had gone on.
4
Can I put it to you Mr Dunlop, that you did see them conferring as such?
5
A.
Communicating, yes.
6
Q. 89
And you do have that recollection?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 90
You are clear about that.
9 11:19:27 10
11
evidence initially. A.
Yes.
Q. 91
All right.
Whatever contradiction there may have been in your
That's your firm position now?
12 13
Could we have a look at page 589 of the brief.
14 11:19:48 15
You are being asked about various occasions in the council chamber I think.
16
And just at the end of page 588 you're asked "were you present on those
17
occasions?" and the answer is "I would have been present, yes"
18
A.
Sorry, Mr. Sanfey.
19
Q. 92
I'm just looking at the last line?
A.
Yes, I have you yes.
Q. 93
An introduction.
11:20:08 20
21
Where are you? What question are you on?
22
A:
23
Q: Was Mr. Lynn present?
24
A:
11:20:21 25
I would have been present, yes
Always.
Always present.
Not Phil Reilly but not always but Richard
Lynn always."
26 27 28 29 11:20:40 30
Can I ask you what you meant by that? Mr. Lynn always being present? A.
Always being present.
In relation to the Monarch proposals, in relation to
the Cherrywood development, Mr. Lynn was the lead man on behalf of the company. And was in evidence in the -- in the environs of the council, the council lobby Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:20:46
11:21:08
28 1
and the chamber as often as I was in the context of any time I was there
2
because I had other matters to deal with in relation to lobbying councillors.
3
But that's what I meant.
4
proposal was coming forward on any given day, as per an agenda, the -- it would
5
be surprising if Richard wasn't there.
6
Q. 94
He would have been present -- if the Monarch
Can I take it from the evidence that you gave the other day, that you would
7
also find it surprising if Mr. Lynn absented himself from any portion of such a
8
meeting dealing with the Cherrywood proposals?
9
A.
11:21:27 10
11
Yes, I would.
And in the context of the -- the configuration of the room, in
which the meeting was taking place and the configuration of the council itself. Q. 95
Yes.
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
12 13
Now, can I have a look at page 425 of the brief, please.
14 11:21:38 15
Now, do you have that, Mr. Dunlop?
16
A.
Yes, yep.
17
Q. 96
In the second paragraph thereabouts, five or six lines from the end "neither
18
Messrs Lynn nor Reilly ever discussed with me any payments to any specific
19
councillor nor party with regard to Monarch's proposal.
11:22:12 20
21
You've said something similar in your private interviews and evidence in the
22
last few days.
I take it that you stand over that now?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 97
Can I have a look at page 561 of the brief, please.
11:22:23 25
26
Just once again I'd like to give you an opportunity to comment on this, Mr.
27
Dunlop?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 98
There is a reference to Mr. Lynn taking a call in John of God's about a motion.
11:22:50 30
And then Mr. Gallagher said "sorry did you believe that or did you have any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:22:54
11:23:07
29 1
knowledge of whether or not Richard Lynn was paying any monies."
2
A:
3
present and I never saw any transactions taking place".
I had no knowledge.
I definitely have no knowledge because I was never
4 5
I take it that you stand over that?
6
A.
Yes, I do.
7
Q. 99
If we could have a look at the last day's evidence.
It's day 654.
Page 157.
8 9
Question 1028.
11:23:39 10
11
In fact, I can read it out.
I don't intend to refer to this at length.
12 13 14 11:23:56 15
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
A.
Yes, I have it, Mr. Sanfey, yeah.
Q. 100
You were talking about councillors being facilitated and Mr. Murphy asked you
16
who is an alleged facilitator?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 101
I think this may be in fact from ...?
19
A.
This is the private interview.
Q. 102
Private interview, yes.
11:24:10 20
At 1027 it says "isn't that right.
21
A:
He is the facilitator to Monarch and councillors
22
Q:
Facilitator means paying money doesn't it?
23
A:
I have, well I have no and I don't think I'm saying there, I have no
24
evidence ever or that Mr. Lynn gave money to councillors"
11:24:30 25
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 103
And you stand over that as well?
27
A.
Yes.
When I say "yes" I mean I'm agreeing with what I said previously, in
28
case there is any misunderstanding, Mr. Sanfey.
29
evidence.
11:24:58 30
Q. 104
At page 582 of the brief.
I have no such knowledge or
There is a question in relation to Mr. Lynn.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
"Do
11:25:07
11:25:20
30 1
you believe or did he tell you that he had actually given money to Don Lydon?
2
A:
No.
He never said that he had actually given money to Don Lydon."
.
3 4
And that would appear to be consistent with your evidence in the last few days
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 105
Richard Lynn, as far as you are aware, never gave money to Don Lydon?
7
A.
Richard Lynn -- never told me that he had received money from Richard Lynn.
8
Q. 106
All right.
9
Now, once again, if I could look at the transcript for day 654.
Towards the end.
It's page 158.
11:25:41 10
11 12
A.
13 14 11:26:10 15
16
What's the question? What number question and I might be able to get it I quicker, Mr. Sanfey.
Q. 107
It's question 1031?
A.
Yes, I have it.
Q. 108
Just the three questions there.
Now just "you're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn
17
facilitated Mr. Lydon:
18
A: With money is that what you're asking me, is that what the core of this
19
question is, is that what you're asking me?
11:26:23 20
Q:
Is that your answer.
You're not suggesting Mr. Lynn facilitated
21
Mr. Lydon with money.
22
A:
23
Q: so what did you mean when you said you had no doubt that Richard Lynn was
24
facilitating both certainly Lydon, certainly no doubt about this?
11:26:40 25
A:
I have no evidence that Mr. Lynn ever gave money to Mr. Lydon
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon had a close relationship as is obvious if you look
26
at the record of Dublin County Council and what Senator Lydon did or tried to
27
do.
28
the last three days,
29
Q: Has it been three days, yes?
11:26:55 30
To infer further from that, as I have said on a variety of occasions on
A: During the course of the last three days that was a close relationship Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:26:59
11:27:10
31 1
between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
After the meeting with Mr. Lynn and
2
Mr. Lydon, it was agreed that it would continue to have that close
3
relationship.
What went on between them, I don't know."
4 5
Q. 109
Am I right in inferring, Mr. Dunlop, that what you were saying was that as a
6
result of the initial strategy meeting it was agreed that because Mr. Lynn was
7
the one who had been dealing with Mr. Lydon, that he should continue to do so
8
but you say what went on between them I don't know
9 11:27:28 10
A.
Correct.
Q. 110
And there's certainly no suggestion in your evidence that money changed hands
11
between them?
12
A.
And I never made any such imputation, directly or otherwise.
13
Q. 111
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
14 11:27:39 15
Now, as I understand your evidence, Mr. Dunlop.
You are fairly clear that
16
nobody on the Monarch side ever said to you or made a specific reference to you
17
paying money to councillors or that money had been paid by Monarch people to
18
councillors.
19
A.
11:28:12 20
I'm talking about a specific reference?
When you say specific reference.
Do you mean the word "payment, money and
councillors" all in the one sentence?
21
Q. 112
Yes.
22
A.
No is the answer.
23
Q. 113
Could we have a look at page 565, please.
26
A.
Day, Mr. Sanfey? Which day? Oh, yes.
27
Q. 114
Private interview, Mr. Dunlop?
28
A.
Oh, yes.
29
Q. 115
Now, yes.
24 11:28:21 25
11:28:47 30
You do, however, attribute a number of remarks to Mr. Lynn from
which you drew certain inferences? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:28:50
11:28:57
32 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 116
I'd like to deal with those now, if I may.
3 4
At question 82 on page 565.
5 6
The question was and this is Mr. Hanratty.
7
Richard Lynn when you were being brought in to clean-up the mess as to what he
8
had done with regard to looking after the councillors up to that point in time?
9
A:
11:29:16 10
"Well, what were you told by
In relation to specific people, nothing."
And that's consistent with
everything you've said to date
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 117
" in general, that a phrase "when you think of the amount of money that is
13
being spent you think that these idiots would get their act together"
14
Q: well were you given any information as to how much money they had spent up
11:29:34 15
to that point.
16
A:
17
understand that to mean that Monarch or somebody on behalf of Monarch had paid
18
substantial monies to councillors to achieve whatever rezoning Monarch was
19
seeking to achieve?
11:29:45 20
A:
None at all" And then Mr. Gallagher intervened and said "did you
My interpretation of the phrase that was used, that I have just used, was
21
my personal interpretation of it.
22
Monahan, notwithstanding the widespread anecdotal about Phil carrying large
23
bundles of cash in the boot of his Mercedes for distribution".
24
talk to Mr. Monahan in that regard.
11:30:12 25
sentence.
26 27
I never saw Lynn, Sweeney, Murray, Phil
You go on to
If I may say so, you never finished that
Notwithstanding the widespread anecdotal stories etc..
You never
saw Lynn, Sweeney, Phil Murphy doing what A.
You were present at those private meetings.
You wouldn't be surprised at some
28
of the sentences not being concluded either, Mr. Sanfey. Sorry, that's just a
29
passing remark.
11:30:31 30
In the context of the question that is being asked of me and
in the answer that I am giving is that I never saw any of those named Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:30:34
11:30:46
33 1 2
individuals giving money to councillors for politicians. Q. 118
All right.
Thank you.
3 4
Now, when Mr. Gallagher presses you about the remark that you allege that Mr.
5
Lynn made ....
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 119
You say "my interpretation of the phrase that was used that I just used was my
8 9
personal interpretation of it"? A.
Correct.
Q. 120
So that's the inference that you drew from that remark?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 121
All right.
11:30:55 10
13 14
Mr. Lynn will say that he did not say this.
11:31:11 15
And with the greatest of respect Mr. Dunlop, he most certainly wouldn't have
16 17
That he wouldn't have said it.
said it to you. A.
I have to put that to you.
What do you have to say to that?
Why wouldn't he say it to me above anybody -- over and above anybody else? If
18
Mr. Lynn -- there are certain phrases -- there are certain thing that people
19
say to you from time to time that stick in your mind.
11:31:37 20
I can understand Mr.
Lynn saying, using the remark in the context of the amounts of money that
21
Monarch, as we now know, spent in relation to the whole project, the whole --
22
the process, the buying of the land and giving contributions to political
23
parties and politicians.
24
it and I do not, by any means, mean to impute anything of a derogatory nature
11:32:08 25
to Mr. Lynn.
26 27
But I have given you my personal interpretation of
I was being asked what I recollected about my relationship with
various people from Monarch. Q. 122
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
That's most helpful.
28 29
In general in relation to Mr. Lynn.
He will say that he really didn't have
11:32:27 30
very much contact with you at all.
And I'll tell you what he will say about
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:32:31
11:32:44
34 1
his contacts with you.
2 3
You implied, I think, in your evidence that there had been contact between
4
yourself on the one hand and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly prior to your engagement
5
in March '93 when you would bump into each other at the council meetings.
6
you seemed to imply that you would perhaps swap war stories or swap ideas on
7
strategy about your respective motions.
Did I understand that correctly?
8
A.
Yes, in broad brush terms, in general terms, yes, that is correct, yes.
9
Q. 123
Yes.
Well just two points about that.
And
Mr. Lynn will say that certainly as
11:33:09 10
anybody who had been around the council offices at that time would have done,
11
he certainly would have bumped into you from time to time and had words with
12
you?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 124
But he has no recollection of any chats about strategy or anything substantial
11:33:20 15
in that regard?
16
A.
Prior to my being engaged?
17
Q. 125
Prior to your being engaged.
18
A.
So that we're not misunderstanding one another.
19 11:33:37 20
Would you agree with his recollection of that? What I said it Mr. Murphy,
and the record can, the transcript can show it if necessary.
Is that because
we both had contact with councillors during the course of the Development Plan,
21
and the coincidence of those contacts, motions and lobby exercises, yes, I
22
would have met Richard and Phil Reilly and yes, we would have sat down over a
23
cup of coffee or a drink in one of the local hotels or pubs, because that's
24
where most of the councillors relaxed, and, but to suggest that we would have
11:34:07 25
had detailed strategy conversations in relation to what Monarch was doing, no,
26
we would have conversations about the course of the Development Plan, what was
27
happening, how difficult it was to get things moving or to keep things going.
28
All of those in general broad brush terms.
29
never specifically sat me down and said Frank, we seek your advice in relation
11:34:34 30
to the strategy we're following.
But not -- Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly
On the other side of the coin, I never
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:34:45
11:35:00
35 1
contacted Richard or Phil and said listen, boys, I want to contact you and
2
advise you about your strategy, it's good, bad are or otherwise.
3
have been interaction between you us and others who would have been there at
4
the time.
5
Q. 126
There would
Mr. Dunlop, one thing that's slightly puzzled the person whom I represent about
6
your evidence.
7
Lynn in together.
8
involved than Mr. Lynn.
9
meeting you, certainly in the council offices, or discussing the matter with
11:35:25 10
Is that you appeared to more or less lump Mr. Reilly and Mr. Although you did expressly concede that Mr. Reilly was less Mr. Reilly will say that he has no recollection of
you prior to March 1993 at all.
And he will say that his involvement in the
11
project was limited to involvement in some of the road shows and in particular
12
bringing people to see the Tallaght development, because, as I think you are
13
aware, Tallaght was his particular ...
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 127
As it were?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 128
So certainly Mr. Reilly is a bit perplexed at the notion that he would have met
11:35:43 15
18 19
you or discussed the thing at all prior to March 1993? A.
11:36:00 20
Let me put it the other way in answer to that and without implying or imputing anything other than what I recollect.
And that is the first time I ever met
21
Mr. Reilly was in Dublin County Council.
22
Phil Reilly prior to that time but in Dublin County Council.
23
first met him.
24
Q. 129
11:36:25 25
Yes.
I don't ever recollect having met That's where I
You would accept I think that Mr. Reilly was at the time the centre
Manager for The Square in Tallaght.
And that you he had no involvement with
26
the Cherrywood project other than to do some ad hoc campaign work on it, as it
27
were?
28 29 11:36:46 30
A.
Well I can tell you what I know now as distinct from what I knew then.
What
I'm saying to you is I first met him in those particular environs in the context of Monarch's proposals.
What he then was or and what his role was I
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:36:52
11:37:09
36 1
subsequently -- I know from a variety of comments, statements that have been
2
made for the brief.
3
Q. 130
4 5
Would you at least agree with me to this extent, Mr. Dunlop, that Mr. Reilly was somebody who was very much less involved than Mr. Lynn?
A.
Oh, I accept that, yes.
And I think I have indicated that on a number of
6
occasions, including in the private interviews. I think in the one that you've
7
just shown I just said to a lesser extent Mr. Reilly.
8
Q. 131
9
One might have inferred
from your evidence that it was Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly as a sort of double act
11:37:31 10
11
I'm glad to have you acknowledge that, Mr. Dunlop.
almost? A.
Well, certainly -- let's not back ourselves into a cul-de-sac here.
Certainly
12
in the course of my direct involvement with Monarch, as per March, from March
13
1993.
14
not always.
11:37:51 15
Q. 132
16
Yes.
Certainly Mr. Reilly was present with Mr. Lynn.
But as I keep saying,
Mr. Lynn recalls one meeting in Harcourt Street where he met you.
And
two meetings in your office?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 133
And as far as Mr. Lynn can recall, they are the only actual meetings that he
19 11:38:04 20
had with you? A.
Yes.
I think Mr. Lynn is right in the context of one meeting in Harcourt
21
Street.
22
diaried by me with either Richard or Richard and Philip together.
23
ease of progress, I would say that Richard is right in the context of the one
24
meeting in Harcourt Street.
11:38:34 25
Q. 134
I um, I -- I believe he's right in that.
There were other meetings But for
But I think Mr. Lynn's point would be that to a large extent he had very little
26
to do with you.
27
It wasn't a question that you were conferring weekly or fortnightly or evening
28
monthly in relation to the matter.?
29 11:38:55 30
A.
That you were doing your thing.
He was doing his thing.
No, I think that would be a wrong inference Mr. Sanfey. there was a lot of contact between us.
I think they were --
After all, we were on the same ship.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:39:01
11:39:22
37 1
We were um, as the famous phrase in the Godfather films as you know 'all our
2
ships must sail in the one direction'. And we were all going in the one
3
direction.
4
for anybody to suggest that we weren't having contact with one another.
5
would we know that we weren't countermanding what other people were doing?
6
Q. 135
We all had the same objective.
And it would have been ludicrous
Well that brings us back to a point that I think the Chairman alluded to at one
7
point.
8
openly about making contributions to anyone?
9 11:39:46 10
How
You are steadfast in saying that none of the Monarch people ever spoke
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 136
And yet you say that you were working together and effectively strategising
11
together to make sure that presumably the division of labour was appropriate
12
and so on?
13
A.
Yes.
I think we, maybe strategise is a grandiose word.
But certainly we
14
were consulting with one another and telling one another, you know, on a
11:40:02 15
regular basis as to what was happening or not happening in our particular
16 17
sphere. Q. 137
Well, if Monarch were aware that you were paying money to councillors, would
18
they not have referred to that fact in the numerous strategy meetings, whatever
19
it is, whatever you wanted to call it, meetings that you had?
11:40:17 20
A.
21
Well certainly I wouldn't have expected them to refer to it or allude to it and they never did.
22
Q. 138
But why not?
23
A.
Well why would they? Sorry, I don't mean to be asking you a question,
24 11:40:35 25
Mr. Sanfey. Q. 139
26
But the fact of the matter is that they didn't.
You were brought in.
Your sense of it is that Monarch, if I could use the
term for the entity, the collective term?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 140
Knew that you were paying money to councillors but it was never preferred to in
29 11:40:53 30
all of the meetings that you had with them? A.
No, no.
Sorry, Mr. Sanfey.
What I said in relation to -- and I bear in mind
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:40:58
11:41:16
38 1
the remarks that you made to the Chairman at the outset.
2
want to be careful. I made a remark.
3
specific remark or a specific conversation that took place between myself and
4
another representative of Monarch that you are not representing.
5
Q. 141
Mr. Sweeney?
6
A.
Yes.
And therefore I just
I made a statement in relation to a
No other representative of Monarch either directly or indirectly,
7
referred to or alluded to payments to politicians of any sort other than the
8
comment that I attribute to Mr. Lynn about you think the amount of money that's
9
being spent, you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
11:41:41 10
absolute clarity.
For
Any of the people that I dealt with, Richard Lynn, Phil
11
Reilly, and to a far lesser extent on the odd occasion that I met other people
12
in representing Monarch that you represent, no such references or illusions
13
were made, either by them or me.
14
Q. 142
Very good.
Thank you.
11:41:59 15
16
Could we have a look at page 575 of the brief, please.
17 18
Yes.
In fact, the top of page 576.
19 11:42:25 20
21
Q. 143
Now, you say there "Eddie Sweeney told me that disbursements had already been
22
made and you asked me specifically about Richard Lynn.
And Richard Lynn did
23
tell me that disbursements had already been made, did not specific but lots of
24
money had been spread around".
11:42:49 25
26
Can I take it from the evidence that you have given once again this morning,
27
that was not said specifically
28
A.
29 11:43:01 30
No, no, it was not said specifically in relation to disbursements or payments to politicians for their vote.
Q. 144
Yes.
Well did he say it or not say it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:43:06
11:43:20
39 1
A.
Mr. Lynn?
2
Q. 145
Yes.?
3
A.
Yeah, Mr. Lynn in the context of the -- of the whatever, what I'm saying to the
4
Tribunal in that private session that -- in the comment that I made to you
5
already.
6
you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
7
Q. 146
8 9
So when you say Richard Lynn did tell me that disbursements had already been made.
A.
11:43:43 10
When you think of the amount of money that's being spread around
Yeah.
You're referring to the inference that you drew from the idiots remark? I'm not -- I'm not -- and I accept that it seems -- it's likely
infelicitous language.
I'm not suggesting, I am not saying that Mr. Lynn told
11
me ever in specific terms or in general terms or ever, that any individual or
12
collective group of politicians were paid monies before -- for the purposes of
13
their vote.
14
Q. 147
Right.
Now, if --
11:44:01 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
there was a period at which, for example, I remember a conversation in which he
18
said, presumably that's Mr. Lynn, he said "people have just got too greedy and
19
we cannot meet it any more".
11:44:20 20
A.
Well if you look, Mr. Dunlop, at the next paragraph.
You say
What was that a reference to?
Well I think that was a reference in -- along the lines of the comment that Mr.
21
Lynn had already made in relation to the amount of money that's being spent
22
that you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
23 24
I mean, it's my interpretation of the comments.
11:44:42 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
reference to being "too greedy"?
28
A.
But, I mean, that's -- but is that not saying -- I mean.
The
Yeah.
29 11:44:58 30
CHAIRMAN:
Would suggest that the money being spread around was not by way of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:44:58
11:45:09
40 1 2
political donation. A.
Well, I .... it may well be capable of interpretation.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
I mean, it was -- you were saying there that Mr. Lynn had commented or made
6
comments to you to the effect that these people were having to be paid and that
7
they were looking for too much money and that they were too greedy.
8
A.
Isn't that what -- but isn't that obvious from what you say there?
Yeah.
9 11:45:23 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Well, now are you saying now that that was only a reference to him
making political donations? A.
I'm saying -- I cannot say specifically to you that it is directly in relation
13
to political donations or in relation to disbursements.
14
you that it is a comment along the lines of various conversations that I have
11:45:43 15
I am just saying to
had and given evidence in relation to with Mr. Lynn vis-a-vis politicians.
I
16
did not know then whether -- I did have my suspicion, whether Monarch had given
17
monies to politicians legitimately or otherwise.
18
statement, the statement in the brief, in the context of what was paid by
19
Monarch to politicians.
I now know from the brief
11:46:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
he said people have just got too greedy and cannot -- and we cannot meet it any
23
more".
24
A.
What did you mean when you say "I remember a conversation in which
You were attributing this comment to Mr. Lynn?
Yes.
11:46:26 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
27
representing Mr. Dunlop insisted that Mr. Dunlop specify exactly what was said,
28
not just the essence of what was said.
29
Dunlop said exactly what was said was "people are getting very greedy".
11:46:45 30
Chairman, in fairness, if you read on.
Mr. Colm Alan who was
Being put on the spot like that Mr.
think there is a difference between that and what comes in the previous Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
I
11:46:49
11:46:58
41 1 2
paragraph. A.
Uh-huh.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well "too greedy" and" very greedy" is the difference.
Q. 148
6 7
MR. HUMPHREYS:
8
I assume he is plumping for people are getting very greedy.
9
proffered as a possible inference, as an alternative to his own inference, the
11:47:11 10
Well, I'd like Mr. Dunlop to address what he actually said. And he has
possibility that that referred to political donations as opposed to bribes as
11
such.
I take it I understand that correctly, Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 149
All right.
Mr. Lynn will deny that that remark was made anyway.
14 11:47:26 15
In fact, in relation to that.
He -- you referred to there being regular
16
meetings in the Royal Dublin or Conways.
17
the Royal Dublin or Conways.
18
Just the one I referred you to in Harcourt Street and the two in your office
19
A.
11:47:51 20
21
Just Mr. Lynn has no recollection in
Just the meetings that I have referred you to.
By that am I to infer that myself and Mr. Lynn never met each other in the Royal Dublin or Conways, even casually?
Q. 150
22
No. What he is saying is that there were not not regular meetings in the Royal Dublin or Conways.?
23
A.
I see.
24
Q. 151
You disagree with that?
A.
I'm just saying to you that whether you call them regular, irregular, frequent,
11:48:02 25
26
or whatever, the -- apart from the meeting in Harcourt Street, of which I agree
27
with Mr. Lynn, and apart from the meeting that were either in my office, or
28
elsewhere, that the only other place that I ever met Richard Lynn was in the
29
environs of Dublin County Council, which I've always loosely described as being
11:48:28 30
in the lobby of the chamber -- the lobby of the building or the Royal Dublin or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:48:32
11:48:43
42 1 2
Conways. Q. 152
All right.
Perhaps nothing turns on it.
3 4
Can I direct you to the transcript of day 645.
5
Thursday.
Page 71.
That's last
6 7 8
A.
That's the private session.
9
Q. 153
No you have it on your screen there, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 154
Question 474?
12
A.
Yep.
13
Q. 155
You were being asked about -- in fact.
11:49:15 10
14
Do you see it?
Which question?
If you go back to question 470 it says
did Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever tell you directly or indirectly that expressly
11:49:33 15
or implicitly that they paid money to councillors and you said no.
16
Once
again, that's in line with your evidence to date.
17 18
Now, if you move on at question 474.
19
comment that was made to me by Mr. Lynn was, "you know, these are costing so
11:49:50 20
Your answer to a question is another
much"
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 156
Now, is this a new comment separate to the idiots comment or the greedy
23
comment, if I could term them that or are you sort of rolling your
24
recollection into one?
11:50:11 25
A.
No, I'm just looking at the lead up to that question, Mr. Sanfey.
26
Q. 157
Take your time, Mr. Dunlop.?
27
A.
No, I -- what I -- what I am trying to do in reply to Mr. Murphy is to give a
28
sense of the conversation.
29
Mr. Lynn in which remarks, such as this, were made.
11:50:45 30
Sorry.
A number of the conversations that I've had with I cannot absolutely say
to you that it is the same comment or at the same day or at the same time in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:50:51
11:51:07
43 1
relation to when you consider how much money is being spent you'd think these
2
idiots would consider getting their act together.
3
Q. 158
Do you have a recollection?
4
A.
I'm -- I'm -- I'm virtually certain that these were separate occasions.
5
They
were separate comments.
6
Q. 159
Three separate comments?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 160
So there was the idiots remark, the people are getting very greedy remark?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 161
And then there was these people are costing us so much?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 162
Now, you gave a private interview in May 2000, Mr. Dunlop.
11:51:16 10
13
statement in October 2000.
14
2003.
11:51:33 15
here?
And you made a
And then you made a statement again in September
And I assume you have prepared very carefully for giving your evidence
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 163
Would that be fair enough? Now, what I'm wondering is why there is now a third
18
remark added to the two remarks which we knew about from September 2003
19
onwards.
11:51:50 20
21
last Thursday? A.
22 23
26 27
Um, I just can't answer that question, to be honest with you, Mr. Sanfey. Other than to say that is as I recall matters.
Q. 164
24 11:52:08 25
Why has this "these are costing so much" remark only surfaced now,
In your private interview you were repeatedly questioned by Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty about Mr. Lynn and the payment of councillors?
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 165
In fact, if we go through the private interview.
They led you back to that
topic again and again, I think it's fair to say.
28 29 11:52:23 30
Now, why did that -- this remark, not occur to you then? Why did you not reproduce it then eight years after the events, well seven years after the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:52:26
11:52:40
44 1
events you describe, as opposed to 13 years, at which point we are at now
2
A.
That I can't account for.
3
Q. 166
Are you making it up as you go along?
4
A.
I don't think so.
5 6
I think I'm being very helpful to your client, as you
indicated. Q. 167
7
There certainly are measures of agreement between yourself and my clients and Mr. Dunlop.?
8
A.
A lot of agreement between your client and myself.
9
Q. 168
They are perturbed to hear a remark being made for the first time last Thursday
11:52:54 10
which they utterly deny making.
11
Or Mr. Lynn utterly denies making and which
emerged for the first time 13 years after the events described?
12
A.
I see.
13
Q. 169
Do you have any recollection of the circumstances in which this was made?
14
A.
No.
11:53:13 15
Other than in the context that I have outlined to you earlier on in
relation to the meetings with Mr. Lynn in the context of Dublin County Council.
16
And comments in relation to what was and was not happening in relation to the
17
particular project.
18
Q. 170
Is it possible that you are confusing it with the other two remarks?
19
A.
Yes --
Q. 171
Or is it a general remark --
A.
I wouldn't for one second Mr. Sanfey, deny that.
11:53:28 20
21
It is -- it is possible.
22
And as we know, lots of things are possible, as we proceeded through this
23
Tribunal in this room over the years.
24
possible.
11:53:46 25
Q. 172
All right.
Yes, it is quite conceivable and
Thank you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
28
MR SANFEY: Yes.
Mr. Sanfey, I'm going to break for ten minutes.
29 11:53:51 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:54:03
12:11:01
45 1 2
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5 6 7
MR. HUMPHREYS: Q. 173
8
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
Before I go on with this.
I would just like to address
something that was said just before the break.
9 12:11:08 10
I think there may have been an unfortunate reference to, on my part, to a
11
measure of agreement between my client and yours.
12
Tribunal and everybody understands that, that that is a reference purely to
13
matters that I've put to you in evidence.
14
with what I've been putting to you.
12:11:36 15
16
I'm sure the members of the
And with which, where you've agreed
I take it that you accept that.
There
is no suggestion of and agreement between yourselves. A.
No, I fully understand what you are saying, Mr. Sanfey.
That I think I've
17
already given evidence to the fact that I have not met Richard Lynn for many
18
years.
19 12:11:57 20
Q. 174
You've had no contact?
A.
The first time I saw him in a long time was when I walked in here last Tuesday
21 22
morning. Q. 175
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
23 24
I wonder could I have day 654.
At page 71.
12:12:00 25
26
Oh, I'm terribly sorry.
It's question 480.
It's page 71.
27 28
You were talking about, um, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Murphy asked you, at question 480,
29
he said,
12:12:31 30
"Q: And so you took that understanding from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:12:35
12:12:44
46 1
A:
Mr. Lynn is the only person's name I've mentioned so far.
2
Q:
I beg your pardon.
3
A:
Yes.
4
Q:
You didn't get that understanding from Mr. Reilly?
5
A: No I did not.
6
Q:
How is he different?
7
A:
I don't -- he never a comment like that to me.
8
Q:
All right.
9
A:
But I have --
12:12:54 10
From Mr. Lynn?
Q: Would Mr. Lynn have made the comment in Mr. Reilly's presence?
11
And your answer to that I think is "no".
12 13 14 12:13:08 15
This is the alleged comment about -A.
Oh, yes, sorry.
Q. 176
Can I infer from that, that Mr. Reilly certainly never said anything about
16
Agreed, yes.
payments to Councillors whatsoever?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 177
Or --
19
A.
Sorry, you can infer.
Q. 178
I can infer?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 179
Or that there was nothing that could be construed by you as to referring to
12:13:21 20
23 24 12:13:30 25
I beg your pardon.
that? A.
Yes, correct.
Q. 180
I think I've already said to you, Mr. Dunlop, but I'll say it again.
26
Mr. Reilly will say that he is the head person in The Square in Tallaght, he is
27
the Centre Manager?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 181
And his involvement with this project, Mr. Reilly, would term as fairly
12:13:46 30
minimal, limited to participation in the various road shows in Mr. O'Herlihy's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:13:50
12:14:05
47 1
campaign and canvassing some of the Councillors he knew personally coming up to
2
the November '93 vote.
3
A.
Would you accept that?
Yes. Certainly I don't know anything about the road show.
But certainly I
4
would agree in relation to his personal relationship with a small number of
5
Councillors.
6
Q. 182
Yes.
7
A.
Correct, yes.
8
Q. 183
Who is Fine Gael?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 184
And through Councillor Ridge he knows some of the colleagues that Ms. Ridge
12:14:12 10
11
In particular, he is friends with Councillor Therese Ridge?
associates with and so on?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 185
Mr. Reilly will say that that was all he undertook to do.
14
connections.
12:14:29 15
He has no Fine Gael
He's never been a member of the Fine Gael Party.
And that all
he undertook to do was to speak to the Fine Gael Councillors that he knew
16
through Ms. Ridge.
17
A.
Fine.
18
Q. 186
Could I have a look at Day 653, please.
Page 84.
19 12:14:46 20
You see question 519, Mr. Dunlop?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 187
Perhaps to just read that.
23 24 12:15:18 25
"Q: So you were brought on then for the second purpose.
The first purpose I
think relates to some difficulty with Mr. Monahan, or something like that.
26
You were brought on then for the second purpose, which is your normal purpose
27
in these matters, to do the lobbying?
28
A:
29
from the descriptive purposes, to add value to what Richard and Philip were
12:15:36 30
I was brought on for the specific purpose to add again, to use a phrase
doing.
I wasn't directly brought on to lobby every councillor, which I did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:15:37
12:15:46
48 1
not do.
2
were doing.
3
Q:
And they had done very well.
4
A:
In my estimation, yes
5
Q: Sorry. When you were brought on.
6
to do with your normal lobbying of councillors.
7
A:
8
Q: And it is well known in March '93 to Councillors and to people in Monarch,
9
that you at that time were paying money to Councillors for their vote" which I
12:16:02 10
But I was brought on to add, to supplement what Richard and Philip
It's not to do with Mr. Monahan, it's
Yes, correct.
think is what is known in our business as a leading question.
11
"A:
Well that is a supposition that you are making.
I don't know. Again,
12
as I have said five minutes ago, I don't know what the extent of that
13
information was of people.
14
relates to Mr. Sweeney".
Certainly the only comment that I can allude to
12:16:22 15
16
Now, can I infer from that, that leaving Mr. Sweeney aside.
17
with Sweeney, as you know.
18
whether Monarch people, other than Mr. Sweeney, were aware that your modus
19
operandi was to pay Councillors?
12:16:40 20
A.
21 22
Can I infer from that, that you simply don't know
First of all, I never knew what a lead question was, and thank you for explaining that to me, Mr. Sanfey.
Q. 188
I'm not dealing
And the answer to your question is yes.
Very good.
23 24
Just bear with me a moment please, Mr. Dunlop.
12:17:21 25
26
A.
No problem.
27
Q. 189
Yes.
Sorry.
28 29
If you could just go on then to question 525, following on from that.
12:17:34 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:17:34
12:17:44
49 1
A.
525.
2
Q. 190
I think once again in your -- your answer to that.
You reiterate that you
3
never had a conversation with Richard Lynn about specific payments to specific
4
politicians?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 191
533.
7 8
Can I just ask you about this.
9 12:17:47 10
11
Mr. Murphy asked you: "You had a significant relationship with councillors, or certainly with a
12
number of councillors; isn't that right?
13
A:
14
Q: That would have been widely known?
12:18:03 15
Yes.
A: Yes, I think I would accept that, yes
16
Q:
Yes.
And you had a special sort of expertise.
17
lobby councillors and you were good at it.
18
A:
19
Q: And you were recognised to be good at it?
Sorry. Your role was to
Would that be fair now?
That's fair, yes.
12:18:16 20
A:
Uh-huh
21
Q:
Yes
22
A: Yes, I would say that.
23
Q: And you were recognised to have been successful?
24
A:
Yes.
12:18:23 25
Q:
At lobbying councillors?
26
A: Yes.
27
Q: And an integral part of that would be paying money.
28
paying the money; isn't that right?
29
A: Yes.
12:18:33 30
Q:
All right.
Not would be but was
And you were brought onto the Monarch team for the purpose of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:18:36
12:18:45
50 1
lobbying councillors?
2
A:
And I don't mean to quibble with you, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q:
Yes.
4
A:
Because I'm as anxious as you to move on.
5
Q:
Yes.
6
A:
But not specifically to add support to what Philip and to Richard and
7
Philip were doing.
8
Q:
Yes?
9
A:
Now, I knew because I had a meeting.
12:19:02 10
I met Philip and Richard and they
outlined to me.
11
Q: Yes?
12
A: In some detail what their concerns were and who were they were talking to
13
and who they weren't talking to.
14
Q:
12:19:13 15
Yes.
But what would adding support to their work mean if it wasn't
meaning you talking to councillors and paying councillors?
16
A:
Well that's a matter for, in the first instance, for them to answer"
17 18
And then you go on to deal with Mr. Sweeney and so on.
19 12:19:23 20
Can I infer that what you are saying here is I was hired to add support, to add
21
value, to use your own phrase, to what Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were doing.
22
And whether they knew that involved paying councillors is something you have to
23
ask them, you don't know?
24 12:19:42 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 192
All right.
Um, for what it's worth, and you may not have a value -- you may
26
not have a view on this.
27
idea that you were paying councillors.
28
lobbiest in local politics, a man with a great reputation for getting things
29
done.
12:20:07 30
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly will say that they had no They will say that you were the top
As far as they were concerned, you coming on board was simply Monarch
getting the heaviest gun available.
But they will say that they didn't know
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:20:12
12:20:23
51 1
that you were paying money to councillors.
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 193
That's probably not something that you'd --
4
A.
Yeah, well that is an expression of an opinion by them.
5 6
examination and cross-examination to say what they believed to be the case. Q. 194
7
Yes.
In the event of the 85,000 pounds you got, only 4,000 pounds, according
to your evidence, was paid to councillors.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 195
Who did you lobby as such, can you recall?
A.
Yes.
12:20:41 10
It's up to them in
11
Is that right?
Well we went down through that with Mr. Murphy on, um, what day was it,
Thursday?
12
Q. 196
Yes.
13
A.
Thursday or Friday.
14
There was some confusion as to what the question was, if
I remember correctly.
12:21:00 15
But I, various lists were put up on the screen and I
identified various people that I made contact with and who -- and with whom I
16
didn't have contact, if my memory serves me right, as to what happened on
17
Thursday.
18
answer to a question from Mr. Murphy and with the intervention of Mr.-- the
19
Chairman, that I identified people in Fianna Fail whom I did not have contact
12:21:32 20
with.
21
I think I said, at question, um -- well certainly I said at, in
And then I was asked by the Chairman of the non-fianna Fail members
whom did I actually lobby or speak to.
22
Q. 197
All right.
23
A.
Thank you very much.
And I identified those.
Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlop.
24 12:21:56 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Are there other parties here who want to take up the
battle with Mr. Dunlop?
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I had understood from Mr. Murphy that Mr. O Dulachain wanted to
29
ask some questions.
12:22:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:22:15
12:22:36
52 1
MR. REDMOND: If I can be of assistance, Mr. Chairman, on behalf, well not on
2
behalf of Mr. O Dulachain.
3
today.
4
convey it to the Tribunal but I know that he won't be here.
I am aware of the fact that he is not available
That's just from person knowledge.
I was not asked particularly to
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry.
Is his solicitor here?
8
SOLICITOR:
Yes, indeed Mr. Chairman, that's my understanding.
9
Mr. O'Dulachain couldn't be here today.
7
12:22:42 10
11
And I understood that that had been,
that information had been given to the Tribunal.
But I didn't realise until
now it hadn't, Mr. Chairman.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Well does he want to cross-examine?
SOLICITOR:
I understand he does, Mr. Chairman.
14 12:22:50 15
16 17
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
Just to clarify.
18
conveyed to you, which was my fault.
It may not have been
19 12:22:58 20
Mr. O'Dulachain rang me yesterday afternoon.
21
He was hoping to get here by lunch hour.
22
if not the Tribunal would accommodate him.
And he had other commitments.
I told him if he could, great. And
23 24 12:23:14 25
CHAIRMAN: Well we won't be accommodating him today.
I think there are no
other witnesses today, Ms. Dillon; isn't that right?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
today.
Yes, Sir, that's the position.
There are no other witnesses
29 12:23:20 30
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We'll adjourn then until half ten tomorrow.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:23:24
12:23:42
53 1 2
The legal team for Mr. Sweeney might indicate, contact the Tribunal in the
3
afternoon and organise a date for Mr. Dunlop's return, which can be done in --
4
between the Tribunal and Mr. Dunlop's solicitor.
5 6
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Redmond, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
I would be grateful if in reporting to the Tribunal as to the date for
9
cross-examination, that they give a selection of dates which would be of
12:23:52 10
assistance.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
consent.
Hopefully.
These things usually can be arranged by mutual
So hopefully that can be arranged.
14 12:23:59 15
I'm just making the case that the parties who still have to cross-examine Mr.
16
Dunlop should try and approach the Tribunal today rather than after today and
17
make some arrangements so that Mr. Dunlop, and his legal team will know what
18
awaits them in the weeks ahead.
19 12:24:19 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
21 22
And Mr. Fox, in the meantime, his evidence which was scheduled to take place on
23
Friday ...
24 12:24:24 25
CHAIRMAN:
That can go back.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
So half ten tomorrow morning?
12:24:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:24:30
12:27:46
54 1
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
5
WEDNESDAY, 21ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M..
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
09:22:51
14:04:41
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY 6TH JUNE 2006
2
AT 2 PM:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Padraig Flynn please.
5 6
MR. MORAN: Before the witness is sworn, is it appropriate to seek
7
representation at this stage in relation to this Module?
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Yes certainly, granted.
14:04:58 10
11
MR. MORAN: Thank you.
12 13
MR. PADRAIG FLYNN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS
14
BY MR. QUINN:
14:05:26 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Flynn.
17
A.
Good afternoon Chairman.
18
Q. 1
Good afternoon Mr. Flynn. Mr. Flynn, in April of this year the Tribunal wrote
19
to you, I think through your solicitors, and gave you an enclosed extracts from
14:05:41 20
your ministerial diary which appeared to show or highlight a series of meetings
21
you may have had with Mr. Phillip Monahan. And you were asked to provide a
22
detailed narrative statement describing the circumstances which caused these
23
meetings to be arranged and the reasons therefore. And you were also asked to
24
identify the individuals present and whether or not any minutes or notes were
14:06:02 25
26
taken and you were asked to elaborate on the topics discussed and whether they referred to the Shanganagh Sewage System.
27 28
On the 16th May 2006, if I could have page 8129 please? You signed a narrative
29
statement which was received by the Tribunal on the following day, that is the
14:06:21 30
17th May, wherein you set out your replies to the queries raised and I propose Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:06:28
14:06:36
2 1
to read that statement to you and ask you one or two questions arising from it
2
if I may.
3 4
And you refer to the correspondence which I have just referred to in your first
5
paragraph and then you went on to say that you have been provided with the copy
6
diary extracts etcetera, enclosed with the letter of the 27th. You confirmed
7
that the diary entries highlighted, did appear to you to refer to the late
8
Mr. Phillip Monahan. You said that the diary entries concerned are confirmed
9
to indicate the attendance of the late Mr. Monahan at the Department of the
14:06:57 10
11
Environment on the 24th of May 1989, 22nd of November '89 and 12th of February '91.
12 13
You say that, "you do not have in your possession or power of procurement any
14
notes or records created during the course of the attendance referred to and
14:07:10 15
16
you didn't believe any such notes or records were created by you at the time of the attendances."
17 18
You go on to say that, "you did not remember whether Mr. Monahan was
19
accompanied at any such attendances and to the best of your recollection
14:07:22 20
Mr. Monahan was not accompanied by any other person." You say, "you did not
21
know whether any department official was present during the attendances nor did
22
you know whether your private secretary attended and therefore did not know
23
whether any formal departmental notes or minutes were created."
24 14:07:37 25
You say, "you did not remember any dealings that the department may have had
26
were concerning relative to the Shanganagh Sewer System and you had no personal
27
recollection of the Shanganagh Sewer System."
28 29 14:07:50 30
You say, "you had no recollection of receiving an invitation -- sorry, you did have a recollection of receiving an invitation from the late Mr. Monahan to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:07:54
14:08:06
3 1
view the Tallaght Town Centre, which invitation you accepted, but you could not
2
recollect when you viewed the Tallaght Town Centre pursuant to that
3
invitation."
4 5
You say, "You do further remember receiving an invitation from Mr. Monahan to
6
attend the official opening of the centre. And you confirm that you attended
7
the official opening."
8 9
Now Mr. Flynn, I think you were in fact the Minister for the Environment from a
14:08:21 10
period stretching from March 1987 right through to November 1991, is that
11
correct?
12
A.
That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
13
Q. 2
And I think that there was an election called on the 25th of May 1989, isn't
14 14:08:37 15
16
that correct? A.
In July.
Q. 3
25th of -- sorry 25th of May 1989, if I could have 2661 please? Do you see in
17
the first paragraph there for 1987, sorry for 1989, 25th of May 1989, being the
18
date of the order for the 1989 election?
19
A.
That was the day of the order.
Q. 4
Yes and the election itself took place on the 15th June?
21
A.
Quite so.
22
Q. 5
So the election was called on the 25th of May, isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right yes.
24
Q. 6
And on the day prior to that election being called, which I think was the 24th
14:09:02 20
14:09:15 25
of May, one of the diaries furnished to you discloses a meeting, a 5 pm
26
meeting, if I could have document 7661, with Mr. P Monaghan: I think in a
27
previous Module you have given evidence of a meeting which you had on the 23rd
28
of May with Mr. Gilmartin, isn't that right?
29 14:09:44 30
A.
I don't know about that but I, I see here this is not my diary.
Q. 7
You say this is not your diary? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:09:46
14:10:05
4 1
A.
2 3
This is some other diary I don't know where it is. But you did submit to me a copy of my own diary, my own personal diary.
Q. 8
Yes for a later date, in other words where we had both your diary and the
4
department diary, if I could have 7662, this is the diary entry for the 22nd of
5
November 1989.
6
A.
Yes that's, that is my diary.
7
Q. 9
That's your diary, that's for a later meeting which I will deal with in a
8
moment, but if I go back to the, 7661, this diary was supplied to the Tribunal
9
by the, as a ministerial diary for you during your period as Minister for
14:10:27 10
Environment.
11
A.
Yes, obviously that's so, I have no reason to doubt it.
12
Q. 10
Okay, do you recall having a meeting with Mr. Monahan on the eve of the calling
13 14
of the 1989 General Election? A.
14:10:44 15
No, I can't recall the exact date of the meeting, any meeting with Mr. Monahan. But if it's in the diary and I have no reason to doubt it.
16
Q. 11
Just on that point, you knew Mr. Monahan?
17
A.
I met Mr. Monahan on a few occasions, not very often, I met him a few
18 19 14:11:01 20
21
occasions, yes. Q. 12
Mr. Monahan, I think, had been involved in Tallaght, is that right?
A.
Yes he was the developer for Tallaght Town Centre.
Q. 13
And I think you have, in your statement, referred to being in attendance at the
22
opening of the Tallaght Town Centre, which I think was on the 23rd of October
23
1990?
24 14:11:18 25
A.
Yes it was, the end of 1990 and did I attend.
Q. 14
Yes. Can you recall any of the various meetings which you think you had with
26
Mr. Monahan, can you recall any of those meetings?
27
A.
No I have no recollection of what we discussed at any of the meetings.
28
Q. 15
Or what the subject matter of the various meetings?
29
A.
No I have no recollection of what conversations I had with Mr. Monahan on those
14:11:40 30
occasions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:11:42
14:11:58
5 1
Q. 16
Did you know that Mr. Monahan, for example, was involved with Monarch
2
Properties and that Monarch Properties was involved in the development of lands
3
in and around the country?
4
A.
I knew that Mr. Monahan was a developer and had been involved in developing
5
certain projects, I knew particularly that he was involved in the Tallaght Town
6
Centre development.
7
Q. 17
8 9 14:12:13 10
Did you know that by 1989, for example, that he was involved or that his company was involved in the acquisition of lands in Cherrywood?
A.
No.
Q. 18
Your department I think, it was a matter of public knowledge, if I could have
11
8510, your department have discovered to the Tribunal from within their
12
records, an extract from the Irish Times of the 12th of May 1989, which
13
appeared to give some publicity to the acquisition by Monarch of the lands in
14
Cherrywood?
14:12:39 15
16
A.
That may be so, but I have no knowledge of same.
Q. 19
This would have been approximately 12 days before your meeting with
17
Mr. Monahan.
18
A.
That may be so, but I have no recollection.
19
Q. 20
And you have no recollection of what you might have discussed with Mr. Monahan?
A.
No, the only thing I could offer would be that we would have discussed
14:12:53 20
21 22
Tallaght. Q. 21
Yes. He had just acquired or his company had just acquired the Cherrywood
23
lands some 12 days prior to his meeting with you, do you think its probable
24
that he might have discussed with you the newly acquired lands in Cherrywood?
14:13:12 25
26
A.
I have no recollection of that being discussed.
Q. 22
Yes. Would it be usual for people within your department to brief you on
27 28 29 14:13:34 30
upcoming meetings with visiting developers or -A.
If the individual involved had sent in a, requesting a particular matter to be discussed then they may very well have provided a brief, but I have no recollection of any brief or any agenda with Mr. Monahan, they were courtesy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:13:39
14:13:48
6 1
visits.
2
Q. 23
You think that this was a courtesy visit by Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Well I have no recollection otherwise.
4
Q. 24
Could Mr. Monahan, for example, have visited you in your capacity as the
5
Minister for the Environment in circumstances where his lands were being
6
considered in the review of the Development Plan?
7
A.
I have no idea, but certainly I have no recollection of discussing this or any
8
other matter concerning these particular lands with Mr. Monahan. I would have
9
had no involvement there anyway.
14:14:08 10
Q. 25
It would appear that on the 1st of May, the Council had been advised by your
11
department that the Shanganagh sewer was approved for preliminary report, if we
12
could have 8509 please? That is on the 1st of May 1989, did you know that your
13
department had appeared to have approved a preliminary report and preparation
14
of contract documents for Carrickmines Valley Sewer Scheme?
14:14:36 15
16
A.
No.
Q. 26
This is obviously something you would accept that would have been of importance
17
to Mr. Monahan because he had acquired lands which was going to be affected by
18
the construction of this sewer?
19
A.
14:14:55 20
business and they would have been carrying on their ordinary correspondence
21 22
about that matter with the department. Q. 27
23 24
And you say that, can you recall if Mr. Monahan raised the issue with you at all at that meeting on the 24th?
A.
14:15:09 25
26
It may have been important to him, but it would have been County Council
No I have already told that you I have no recollection of that being discussed with Mr. Monahan.
Q. 28
27
Are you saying that Mr. Monahan never discussed his rezoning proposals with you at any of the meetings?
28
A.
I have no recollection of him doing so.
29
Q. 29
You think this was just a courtesy meeting that he had with you shortly after
14:15:25 30
he acquired the Carrickmines site? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:15:26
14:15:46
7 1
A.
2 3
I don't know that, but I know that Mr. Monahan was very much involved with the Tallaght project and it was a very large development.
Q. 30
Did you know that the Council had viewed the approval by your department of the
4
preparation of those contract documents with surprise, if I could have 2850
5
please?
6 7
This is a minute of a meeting held on the 6th of June 1989, attended by
8
Mr. McDaid, Mr. Morris, Mr. Farrell and Mr. McEvoy, the last two
9
representatives were independent contractors to the Monarch Group who had met
14:16:06 10
with engineers with Dublin County Council, and if you see the fourth last
11
paragraph, "DCC -- which is Dublin County Council -- engineers have been
12
instructed to prepare tender documents for approval by the Department of the
13
Environment. J McDaid and Barry Morris stated that they had been surprised by
14
the instruction, as it was not on the priority list. They expect to be
14:16:26 15
complete in four to five months from now."
16 17
Did you know that the council engineers were surprised that the Carrickmines
18
scheme had been given a priority?
19 14:16:39 20
A.
I have no knowledge of that Mr. Chairman.
Q. 31
Now, I think that Mr. Monahan also met with other members of your party and
21
contributed to the party in or around the same time he met you, I don't know if
22
you have seen in the documents supplied to you at 2864, a letter addressed to
23
Mr. Wall from Fianna Fail of the 9th of June 1989, where Mr. Monahan
24
contributed a sum of 16,000 pounds towards the election campaign and he had
14:17:05 25
also advised Mr. Wall of two other contributions he had made to other
26
contestants in that election, Mr. Ahern and Mr. Haughey, do you see that?
27
A.
Yes I see it. Yes.
28
Q. 32
Did you know that it was Mr. Monahan's intention to contribute to the party in
29 14:17:27 30
the upcoming election when you met with him in May 1989? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:17:28
14:17:45
8 1
Q. 33
2
Did he, did you seek any funds on behalf of the party from Mr. Monahan when you met with him in May 1989?
3
A.
No Mr. Chairman.
4
Q. 34
Did you have any role within the party in May 1989, in relation to fundraising?
5
A.
I was the Honorary Treasurer for a period in the party.
6
Q. 35
Were you the Honorary Treasurer in May 1989?
7
A.
I think I may have been. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
8
Q. 36
And as Honorary Treasurer, were you concerned with raising funds for the party?
9
A.
I had nothing to do with the raising of funds other than attending certain
14:18:15 10
11
meetings that were arranged by headquarters. Q. 37
12
Was funding an issue that will arise at those meetings attended by you as Honorary Treasurer?
13
A.
On occasions, yes.
14
Q. 38
Now, it would appear that two issues which were of concern to the Monarch
14:18:32 15
interests in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, were the location of the
16
Southern Cross route and the development of this Carrickmines sewer, you will
17
have seen that from the documents supplied to you, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes, there was reference in the documents to those two projects.
19
Q. 39
Now you had a further meeting, I think, with Mr. Monahan on the 22nd of
14:18:54 20
November 1989, if I could have 7663 please? And both your private diary and
21
the departmental diary has been furnished to you. Your private diary is I
22
think at 7662. Do you recall receiving this?
23
A.
Yes I did.
24
Q. 40
Do you accept that you had a meeting with Mr. Monahan on the 22nd of November
14:19:24 25
26
1989? A.
27
I believe because it's recorded in my personal diary that it probably did take place, yes.
28
Q. 41
Can you tell the Tribunal what was discussed at that meeting?
29
A.
I have no recollection Mr. Chairman.
Q. 42
Could it have anything to do with either the line of the motorway or indeed the
14:19:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:19:42
14:19:55
9 1 2
Carrickmines Valley Sewer? A.
3 4
I have no recollection that either of those projects were discussed with Mr. Monahan at any meeting.
Q. 43
We know that working with Mr. Monahan at this time was a Mr. Eddie Sweeney and
5
Mr. Richard Lynn. Now, Mr. Sweeney has told the Tribunal that he, amongst the
6
people that he met in relation to the Carrickmines and Monarch interest, was
7
yourself. Again you will have seen that in the, if I could have 2191? He has
8
identified a whole series of politicians and councillors that he says he met
9
and he had contact with.
14:20:22 10
11
A.
I can't recall this document having been submitted to me.
Q. 44
It is at page 2191 of the brief, but in any event, can you tell the Tribunal
12
whether or not Mr. Sweeney had any contact with you or indeed anybody else
13
other than Mr. Monahan from the Monarch interest?
14 14:20:42 15
16
A.
No, I have no recollection of that.
Q. 45
Okay.
A.
I didn't receive this document, at least Mr. Chairman --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
of documents or certainly should have been that went to possibly your
14:20:56 20
21
Well I think what Mr. Quinn is saying is that it was in the brief
solicitor, but so I assume it did go unless there was some error. Q. 46
With a letter of the 12th May 2006 --
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry Mr. Madden.
24 14:21:12 25
26
MR. MORAN: If there is an issue in relation to this it would certainly be my immediate reaction that this document was not briefed.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
29 14:21:21 30
MR. QUINN: I understand from Mr. King that there is a letter of the 12th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:21:25
14:21:39
10 1
May 2006 forwarding both a CD ROM and hard copy brief to Mr. Moran, in any
2
event you say --
3
A.
4 5
I can't recall if it's of any particular interest, I can't recall seeing this particular document.
Q. 47
Did you know that Monarch had concerns about the construction of the motorway,
6
the South Eastern Motorway, and had a problem in relation to the construction
7
of the Carrickmines Valley Sewer in relation to the lands in Carrickmines?
8
A.
No, I have no knowledge of that.
9
Q. 48
Its just that, if I could have 2956? This is a meeting at Monarch Properties
14:22:05 10
on the 24th of January 1990, where there is discussion in relation to which
11
particular route of the sewer, sorry of the South Eastern Motorway would be
12
constructed, at paragraph four it says.
13 14
"It was stated by ES," whom I understand was, may have been Mr. Sweeney,
14:22:24 15
although he is described in the top as GS but it is Eddie Sweeney, "that the
16
political decision has been made to align the motorway on the western edge of
17
the site. Although the forward planners in roads and the planners were
18
continuing meetings/discussing options."
19 14:22:42 20
Did you have any involvement, first of all, in aligning the motorway on the
21 22
western edge of the Carrickmines Valley? A.
None. And I can't recall either receiving this particular document
23
Mr. Chairman, but however, be it as it may, I still can't recall the matter
24
that you have referred to.
14:22:58 25
26
Q. 49
All of these documents, Mr. Flynn, would have been contained in the brief of documents which the Tribunal understands were forwarded.
27 28
MR. MORAN: Forgive me for interrupting, Mr. Chairman, I must clarify this
29
point. The CD ROM was certainly sent, Mr. Chairman, it was immediately
14:23:12 30
followed by a request for a hard copy of the documents and they were never Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:23:16
14:23:26
11 1
delivered.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Well if -- I don't know whether there is any real point in doing
4
so, but certainly if Mr. Flynn needs to see any of these documents before they
5
are put to him, he should have that opportunity.
6 7
MR. QUINN: I certainly don't want to take advantage of Mr. Flynn in anyway in
8
relation to these matters. I understood he had both CD ROM and the hard copy,
9
and indeed I don't know if there was any follow up, if the hard copy hadn't
14:23:41 10
been received, seeking copies. I don't know if Mr. Moran had sought additional
11
copies or not, if Mr. Flynn would like, I have no objection to --
12 13
MR. MORAN: If the witness is comfortable to deal with matters as they come
14
before him, so be it, but just to clarify the point, Mr. King will no doubt
14:24:01 15
confirm the request for the hard copy, Mr. King will no doubt confirm that that
16
request has not been satisfied. If Mr. Flynn is comfortable to deal with the
17
issues as they are raised before him, obviously I have no difficulty with that.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Assuming Mr. Flynn continues for the time being, if afterwards he,
14:24:19 20
having consulted with you, he wants to clarify or raise any of these issues
21
again, an opportunity will be afforded to him to return to the witness box.
22 23 24
MR. MORAN: Obliged Mr. Chairman. A.
Thank you Mr. Chairman, I am quite happy to continue.
14:24:33 25
26
MR. QUINN: I understand just for completeness Mr. Flynn, it may be a break
27
down in communication, but from the Tribunal's point of view, on the 12th of
28
May 2006, a CD ROM was forwarded to your solicitors and on the 19th of May a
29
hard copy of the brief was forwarded. Now I can't say it was received as I
14:24:51 30
speak with you but as far as -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:24:53
14:25:06
12 1
A.
2 3
Okay, I am quite happy to continue, Mr. Chairman, and the answer is the same insofar as that paragraph four is concerned.
Q. 50
4
And certainly no reminder has been received after the 19th May that the matter not been received.
5
A.
Okay.
6
Q. 51
Do you know how Mr. Sweeney might have been able to tell a meeting on the 24th
7
of January 1990, that a political decision had been made which, it would
8
appear, wasn't known to the Council officials?
9 14:25:21 10
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 52
Any political decision in relation to environmental matters presumably would
11 12
have been made by you as Minister for Environment in 1990? A.
Certain political decisions would be made, but not on mundane day to day
13
arrangements for re alignments of roads or that kind of thing. That would be
14
done departmentally.
14:25:41 15
Q. 53
Yes, do you know why Monarch or the Monarch interest would approach you in
16
relation to matters, would feel that they were entitled to approach you, as
17
Minister, in relation to matters?
18
A.
I have no recollection of Monarch approaching me on any matters of that nature.
19
Q. 54
On the 3rd of May 1990, if I could have 2980 please? There is a meeting held
14:26:05 20
in Tallaght in relation to Cherrywood, which is attended by the late Dr. Brian
21
Meehan, who was a planning consultant, Mr. Fergal McCabe, Mr. Edward Sweeney
22
and Richard M Lynn, both of whom worked for Monarch at this stage. And if you
23
look at the fourth paragraph under the heading "Carrickmines Valley Sewerage
24
Scheme." It says:
14:26:28 25
26
"It was agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the
27
Carrickmines Valley Sewerage Scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F MacC,"
28
which is Fergal McCabe," indicated that an individual," there named, "would
29
accompany ES," who was Eddie Sweeney, "to see Minister Flynn to indicate an
14:26:45 30
overall need in the area." Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:26:47
14:26:57
13 1 2
Now first of all, would you accept that it was being discussed in May 1990,
3
within Monarch, that there was a necessity to see you in relation to a matter
4
which affected Monarch?
5
A.
It would appear so from that document.
6
Q. 55
And which Monarch believed required a political input?
7
A.
It would appear so from that document, yes.
8
Q. 56
Did you sometime, after the 3rd of May 1990, meet with representatives of
9 14:27:15 10
Monarch in relation to the Carrickmines Valley Sewage Scheme? A.
11 12
personal or otherwise to suggest that. Q. 57
13 14 14:27:34 15
No, I cannot produce a diary for 1990, which shows a meeting with Monarch, although we'll in a moment come to a meeting in 1991.
A.
In another diary though, not in my personal diary.
Q. 58
Yes, but you are not denying the entries in the ministerial diary, are you
16 17
I can't recall that I did and I don't think there is anything in my diary,
Mr. Flynn? A.
I'm not denying that they are recorded in the diary, but I didn't have copy of
18
my own diary, Mr. Chairman, to counter check it because it's here with the
19
Tribunal. I figure that if the Tribunal just sent me the one diary entry in my
14:28:00 20
own diary, then that is the only one that is recorded accordingly, that's what
21
I figured.
22 23 24 14:28:14 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who would keep the ministerial diary?
There would -- I think there might have been two, Mr. Chairman, from recollection. There would have been the ministerial office, that would be kept
26
by my private secretary, the internal ministerial -- which would be the day to
27
day business that would be needed to be attended to by the private secretary,
28
his staff and myself. Sometimes people turned up sometimes they didn't. Then
29
there might have been another diary, a ministerial diary separate to that, now
14:28:35 30
I don't know which we are talking about you see. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:28:37
14:28:50
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
matter which one it is, is it reasonable to assume that it was put there for a
4
purpose?
5
A.
But if there is a note of anything in the ministerial diary, no
Oh, yes of course. But it doesn't necessarily mean that the meeting took
6
place. I would be more happy to rely on my own personal diary because that
7
would mean that I would -- my private secretary, Mr. Chairman, and I, had a
8
meeting once every week, Friday, to check out what was on the agenda for the
9
following week and I always put in in my own personal diary what was necessary,
14:29:14 10
sometimes people didn't turn up and they weren't stroked out, so I can't be --
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
to the extent that at some stage somebody had penned in a meeting --
14
A.
But if it was in the ministerial diary, presumably it was accurate
That is true, quite so.
14:29:29 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: -- with whoever. A.
Yes quite so.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:29:41 20
21
And you are saying that without your personal diary, you don't know
whether that meeting actually went ahead? A.
Well I would be in a much stronger position to say to you, Mr. Chairman, if I
22
had the two diaries, do you understand? And they both recorded the meeting as
23
having taken place, then I would be able positively to say it was my opinion
24
that that meeting did take place, but when it doesn't I'm sorry. Now maybe it
14:29:52 25
is that my personal diary wasn't submitted to me and that you can let me see it
26
now for the dates involved.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
simply indicate that a meeting was intended to take place on a certain date?
14:30:07 30
A.
Well presumably just to clarify this, your personal diary would
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:30:08
14:30:27
15 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
That wouldn't in itself confirm if the meeting had taken place?
Correct. But I certainly, just to repeat for you, Mr. Chairman, to help you
4
insofar as there was, as I say, a diary in the private secretary's office and
5
that one -- I don't think the one that you have submitted to me with the dates
6
aforementioned, is that diary.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
But whose -- how come there was another diary?
I don't know. I don't know.
14:30:42 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Do you recognise the handwriting?
No, except that I feel that its not Gerry Rice's, that's all I'm saying, my
13
private secretary. But then there were several people in the office. But
14
certainly there was a ministerial diary in the private secretary's
14:31:00 15
responsibility and I don't think it's that one. But anyway it's just a moot
16
point.
17 18
MR QUINN: Just on that point, if I may Mr. Flynn, if I could go back please to
19
7662? This is the diary entry for the 22nd of November 1989.
14:31:15 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 59
Now that's your private diary, isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct. Yes it is.
23
Q. 60
Is the writing for the 22nd in your handwriting?
24
A.
It is certainly.
Q. 61
And you are saying that because the entries, as we see them there, appear in
14:31:24 25
26
your handwriting, you can confirm that you had those meetings?
27
A.
Yes, I feel that those meetings took place.
28
Q. 62
But would you agree with me that you might have had meetings which appear in
29 14:31:43 30
the official diary but don't appear in your personal diary? A.
That is a possibility. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:31:44
14:32:03
16 1
Q. 63
Because if we look at 7663, and we look at an entry for 21st, which is the
2
previous day, I think you have already given evidence of a meeting with the
3
person referred to there on the 21st, although if we look at 7662 again, he
4
doesn't appear in your private diary, isn't that right?
5
A.
Listen, they don't correspond, I understand all of that. All I am saying, I am
6
make nothing issue about it Mr. Chairman, except to say I did know Mr. Monahan
7
and I did meet him on a few occasions.
8
Q. 64
9
We understand that there is no ministerial diary for 1989 and 1991 -- sorry we only have ministerial diaries, I understand, for 1989 and 1991, we have no
14:32:29 10
ministerial diaries for 1990?
11
A.
Oh I see.
12
Q. 65
And no personal diaries for 1990?
13
A.
Yes, well I gave you all the diaries I had relevant to the time.
14
Q. 66
So when I say I can't produce a diary entry for a meeting in 1990, I am
14:32:43 15
effectively telling you, Mr. Flynn, that I don't have a diary for 1990?
16
A.
Ministerial diary.
17
Q. 67
Ministerial or personal?
18
A.
Oh I see, okay.
19
Q. 68
Do you think you might have met representatives of Monarch throughout 1990 or
14:32:57 20
at some stage in 1990?
21
A.
No, I have no recollection of having done so Mr. Chairman.
22
Q. 69
But it certainly, you would agree with me, if we go back to 2980, that at that
23
meeting on the 3rd of May 1990, it was the intention of representatives of
24
Monarch to have a meeting with you, isn't that right?
14:33:12 25
26
A.
That's what that document says, yes.
Q. 70
Not alone that, but if we go to the next page at 2981, there was to be a
27
meeting with the planners by representatives of the planners retained by
28
Monarch and that that meeting was to take place after the meeting with you, do
29
you see under the last paragraph, under the heading, "meeting with planners."
14:33:34 30
"It was agreed that F McCabe and Dr. Brian Meehan would meet with the planners Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:33:40
14:33:59
17 1
on the documents already submitted, after the meeting with the Minister had
2
taken place." Do you see that?
3
A.
4
I see that, yes. But I am not aware of any of this at all, of course. I see it here, but I have no -- there is no note in my private, or personal diary.
5
Q. 71
We don't have them Mr. Flynn.
6
A.
Sorry, of course. At the time you are talking about, well if you don't have
7
them, have you the ministerial ones for that time?
8
Q. 72
No, we don't have the ministerial --
9
A.
I see. Then I can't be of any help to you. I have no recollection of meeting
14:34:15 10
11
these people. Q. 73
But you agree with me that it was certainly the intention of representatives of
12
Monarch to meet with you and having met with you, to meet with the planners,
13
isn't that right?
14
A.
14:34:28 15
see Ministers about a lot of things, sometimes it happens and it sometimes
16 17
doesn't happen. Q. 74
18 19 14:34:38 20
Well I tell from you my experience Mr. Chairman, a lot of people would like to
Well by this stage we have at least two documented meetings between you and Mr. Monahan, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 75
We have had the meeting on the 24th of May and we've had the meeting in
21
November, isn't that correct?
22
A.
Quite so.
23
Q. 76
Now, on the 5th July 1990, we have a further memorandum of a meeting held in
24
Tallaght concerning the Cherrywood lands, if I could have 2985 please? Present
14:34:54 25
26
at this meeting is Mr. Edward Sweeney and Mr. Lynn, did you know Mr. Sweeney? A.
27
Mr. Chairman I knew Mr. Monahan. On the occasion that I visited Tallaght there were others with Mr. Monahan, I think a Mr. Murray --
28
Q. 77
Yes, a Mr. Noel Murray.
29
A.
Well yes Mr. Murray. And I think Mr. Phil Reilly.
Q. 78
Yes.
14:35:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:35:26
14:35:36
18 1
A.
2 3
I can't recall the names that you have mentioned to me now, but that's not to say that I didn't meet them at one of those official functions.
Q. 79
4
But unless you met them at an official function you wouldn't have met them separately?
5
A.
I cannot recall.
6
Q. 80
You have no recollection of meeting them in your office in relation to Monarch
7
or Cherrywood?
8
A.
I have no recollection of that matter.
9
Q. 81
Well if I deal with this meeting on the 5th of July 1990, again the Cherrywood
14:35:49 10
lands are being discussed, but if we go to the second page at 2986, under the
11
heading "Access to Site," if I tell you that RML is Mr. Lynn, it says,
12
"Mr. Lynn indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the
13
motorway established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the
14
development and recommended that contact be made at the highest level, i.e.
14:36:12 15
ministerial level to ascertain the position".
16 17
Now the construction of a highway, I would I suggest to you, would have fallen
18
into one of the issues which would be taken care of by the Department of the
19
Environment, isn't that right?
14:36:25 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 82
And therefore checking out the situation in relation to the construction of a
22
motorway would be something that would be brought to the attention of the
23
department, isn't that right?
24
A.
In the normal circumstances, yes.
Q. 83
And you would have been the Minister, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 84
So would you agree with me that it's a fair interpretation of what's contained
14:36:40 25
28
there, that it was the intention of representatives of Monarch to check with
29
you, the Minister, what the position was in relation to the construction of
14:36:54 30
this motorway? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:36:55
14:37:13
19 1
A.
I cannot recollect any meeting dealing with that matter but it would obviously
2
be normal for developers and others to seek clarification about motorway lines
3
and road lines and all that kind of thing, without necessarily having the
4
matter dealt with by the Minister. In fact the Minister would have no
5
involvement in that kind of thing.
6
Q. 85
But you would agree with me that it was the intention of Monarch to check with
7
you what the position was in relation to the line of the motorway, isn't that
8
right?
9 14:37:26 10
A.
What their intention was I cannot speculate on.
Q. 86
Yes, it wasn't a question of writing to the department to find out what the
11
situation was, they were going to raise it at ministerial level, presumably
12
raise it with you?
13
A.
14
Well I would put it to you, Mr. Chairman, that if that was the case and if the Tribunal has sought documentation or correspondence from the department, then
14:37:44 15
in the normal circumstance, people would seek by letter to have, they would
16
seek a meeting either at official level or whatever to discuss the matter and
17
I, I have no recollection of ever seeing any brief whereby a letter asking for
18
a deputation to be received or otherwise in this matter. So in those
19
circumstances I can only surmise that it did not take place. I have no
14:38:11 20
21
recollection of it anyway. Q. 87
We have nothing in the brief in relation to the other meetings as to what the
22
agenda was and you haven't been able to tell us what the agenda was for the
23
other meetings, isn't that right?
24
A.
14:38:27 25
That's so. But I just want to repeat to you, people don't come in off the street to seek a meeting with the higher officers of the department and
26
particularly with the Minister or the Minister's of State, there would always
27
be correspondence.
28
Q. 88
So you are --
29
A.
Excuse me until I finish.
Q. 89
Yes.
14:38:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:38:39
14:38:54
20 1
A.
It would always be recorded that a meeting was sought and if a meeting was
2
sought, it would be brought to the notice of the private secretary and either
3
he or through the individual Minister an agreement would be reached as to
4
whether a meeting should take place or not. I don't see any evidence of that
5
here.
6
Q. 90
Okay. Are you surprised that that evidence isn't been found in the
7
departmental files, in relation to the meetings which I have dealt with
8
already?
9
A.
I suggest that's a matter for you and the Tribunal.
Q. 91
No, but you seem to suggest that such material ought to be available?
11
A.
No, what I said was, the normal practice --
12
Q. 92
Yes, but was it --
13
A.
-- for somebody seeking a meeting with the Minister, would be to request it in
14:39:05 10
14 14:39:18 15
writing. Q. 93
16 17
or alternatively there was a departure from the normal practice? A.
18 19
So either such a request did come in in writing and it's no longer on the files
I am not aware of any departure from normal practice in dealing with these matters.
Q. 94
14:39:36 20
I just want to clarify one issue, just to be fair to you Mr. Flynn, I suggested to you that we didn't have your 1990 diary, I understand that I was, that we do
21
not have your -- we don't have your personal 1990 diary, but we do have a
22
ministerial 1990 diary, sorry about that.
23
A.
I see, that's all right, no problem.
24
Q. 95
There was a meeting I think on the 12th of February 1991, which is at 7664 and
14:40:04 25
again this is the ministerial diary.
26
A.
Okay.
27
Q. 96
Do you accept that you might have met Mr. Phil Monahan at 3 pm on the 12th of
28 29 14:40:17 30
February 1991? A.
On the understanding that it's in this diary, but that I have no corresponding reference to my own personal diary in the matter. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:40:21
14:40:31
21 1
Q. 97
Do you have any recollection of what that meeting was about?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 98
Could it have been about rezoning?
4
A.
I have no recollection of the meeting, so I can have no recollection of what
5 6
transpired at it. Q. 99
What has been discovered to the Tribunal is a document, if I could have 8511
7
please? It's an internal department document, which appears to have been
8
created on the 6th of December 1990, and I will just read the document to you.
9 14:40:47 10
"Further to our telephone conversation in relation to Mr. P Monahan and Monarch
11
Property. I enclose previous material requesting a PQ," which I presume is a
12
Parliamentary Question, "in relation to industrial lands at Ballyogan Road and
13
a press cutting regarding the purchase of the lands in Cabinteely. We are
14
awaiting the submission of contract documents CD by Dublin County Council for
14:41:09 15
the Carrickmines Valley Sewerage Scheme. The work on these is substantially
16
complete and the CD," which is the contract documents, "should be received at
17
the latest by January 1991. A branch sewer to service the Cabinteely area will
18
service the lands acquired by Monarch Properties. This will link with the
19
Shanganagh Treatment Works, which is currently working at 50 per cent
14:41:31 20
capacity."
21 22
That appears to be information being compiled within the department in relation
23
to an upcoming meeting with you.
24 14:41:41 25
A.
I am not aware of that.
Q. 100
Okay. What I really want to direct your attention to is the final post script
26
to that letter it says, "Material required in relation to the meeting of P
27
Monahan and Minister in relation to rezoning of lands". Would you agree with
28
me that that gives the impression that, within the department, it was viewed
29
that the upcoming meeting was a meeting in relation to the rezoning of lands?
14:42:03 30
A.
I have never -- I have had no sight of this document until just now, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:42:08
14:42:15
22 1
Mr. Chairman.
2
Q. 101
Yes?
3
A.
But from the reading of that I don't know what Mr. Monahan was seeking the
4 5
material for, this is -Q. 102
No, no, sorry Mr. Flynn, just to be absolutely fair to you, this document was,
6
is just now being added to the brief and was given to you just before you gave
7
evidence, you may or may not have had an opportunity to consider it, but it is
8
not a document that was given to Mr. Monahan, it was an internal department
9
note as I understand it, to brief you in relation to an upcoming meeting?
14:42:37 10
A.
11 12
Well I am not aware of the contents of that and I have no recollection of the contents of that matter, that is referred to there, being discussed with me.
Q. 103
Okay. But can I suggest to you that it would appear from that internal
13
documentation or that internal document created on the 6th of December, that
14
the subject matter of the upcoming meeting, as far as your staff within the
14:42:59 15
16
department was concerned, was in relation to the rezoning of lands? A.
The only difficulty which have that Mr. Chairman is that the Minister, and
17
that's myself at the time, had nothing to do whatsoever with the rezoning of
18
land anywhere.
19
Q. 104
14:43:17 20
That's exactly the point I am coming to Mr. Flynn, that as far as your departmental staff were concerned, there was a meeting to take place between
21
you and Mr. Monahan in relation to land rezoning, isn't that right, isn't that
22
what appears from that document?
23
A.
24
Wait a moment now. I had nothing to do with rezoning of land either for Mr. Monahan or for anybody else, and I have no recollection of having discussed
14:43:35 25
rezoning of land with Mr. Monahan or anybody else at any time. It's not a
26
matter for the Minister. Zoning of land is confined to other elected
27
representatives.
28
Q. 105
29 14:43:57 30
Did Mr. Monahan ever ask you to exercise any influence over the other elected representatives in relation to the rezoning of lands?
A.
I have no recollection of Mr. Monahan ever asking me to intervene with anybody Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:44:01
14:44:13
23 1
concerning the rezoning or any other business that he was involved in, and I
2
don't see any evidence and there has been no evidence submitted to support such
3
a view.
4
Q. 106
Can you give any reason or indication to the Tribunal as to why your staff
5
would have been of the view that the upcoming meeting between you and
6
Mr. Monahan was in relation to the rezoning of land?
7
A.
8 9
If my staff had meetings with Mr. Monahan about any matter, I was not aware of them.
Q. 107
14:44:32 10
No I am not saying they meetings, the final post script to that letter refers to material required in relation to the meeting of P Monaghan and Minister in
11
relation to the rezoning of lands, it was a meeting between you and Mr. Monahan
12
had a had the subject title of land rezoning?
13
A.
14 14:44:50 15
16
But this is a correspondence between individuals that I don't know anything about.
Q. 108
But they were your staff within the department in 198 -- 1990?
A.
There were hundreds of staff in the department, some of them in Planning
17
Administration and some of them in the Water and Sanitary Services Division and
18
some of them I never met at all. The practice, as far as the Minister would be
19
concerned, is that he would be dealing with the senior staff.
14:45:10 20
Q. 109
21 22
But for some reason these members of staff were of the of the view that the upcoming meeting between you and Mr. Monahan had to do with rezoning of land?
A.
I am not aware what was in the mind of any of my staff concerning those
23
matters. All I am saying to you is, I have no recollection Mr. Chairman, of
24
that matter being discussed between myself and Mr. Monahan, because for obvious
14:45:30 25
reasons, which I have to reiterate for you is, the Minister has no
26
responsibility, and I have also answered the question, did I make
27
representations to anybody who had responsibility for dealing with rezoning
28
matters and the answer is, no I did not.
29 14:45:47 30
Q. 110
Did you ever make representations to any officials with responsibility --
A.
I did not. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:45:50
14:46:09
24 1
Q. 111
2
Did you know when you met Mr. Monahan on the 12th of February 1991, that he had been given a contribution towards Mr. Haughey for the party leader's fund?
3
A.
I was not aware of that matter either.
4
Q. 112
3100 please? You weren't aware of that matter?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 113
Did you know that Mr. Monahan and Monarch Properties had given contributions to
7
individual members of Fianna Fail in various elections in 1989, 1991 and 1992?
8
A.
No, Mr. Chairman.
9
Q. 114
Did you ever seek a contribution towards your, either your own or the party's
14:46:31 10
finances at any of those courtesy meetings that you have referred to with
11
Mr. Monahan?
12
A.
No Mr. Chairman.
13
Q. 115
You can't remember, you say, any of the matters discussed at any of those
14 14:46:48 15
meetings, isn't that right? A.
I have no recollection of the subject matter of discussions that took place
16
between myself and Mr. Monahan at those meetings and I cannot recall if there
17
was anybody else present Mr. Chairman. If there was departmental presence,
18
then there would be a minute of that.
19
Q. 116
14:47:07 20
21
What was the protocol within the department for having people present at meetings between you and visitors, including developers like Mr. Monahan?
A.
If somebody came to see the Minister privately, then the Minister saw that
22
person privately, if there was other matters to be discussed that required
23
technical advice or administrative advice, then others might have been present,
24
and would have been present, if they were present then notes would be taken and
14:47:33 25
there would be a recorded note or minute of the particular subject matters
26
discussed.
27
Q. 117
Thank you very much Mr. Flynn.
28
A.
Thank you.
29 14:47:44 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Madden do you want to ask Mr. Flynn anything, sorry Mr. Moran.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:47:51
14:47:57
25 1 2
MR. MORAN: No Chairman.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
was discussed at these meetings?
6
A.
Mr. Flynn just before you go, you say you have no idea about what
That's right, sorry Mr. Chairman, sorry now. Maybe I should clarify that, I
7
was invited to -- and I stated that in my narrative statement to the Tribunal,
8
just so that you, nobody is under any misunderstanding, I was invited to view
9
the Tallaght project and I was also invited to go to the --
14:48:20 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
according to the diaries, took place or probably took place with you and
13
assuming they did take place --
14
A.
14:48:36 15
Right, well I am more interested in the two or three meetings that,
I cannot, on oath, swear that they did take place, unless I had my diaries to confirm.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Exactly. But if they did take place --
Yes.
19 14:48:39 20
CHAIRMAN: -- presumably they took place for a purpose, either some purpose of
21
yours or some purpose of Mr. Monahan's, you or somebody described them as
22
possibly courtesy visits?
23
A.
24
I did not initiate any of these meetings, Mr. Chairman, that's the first thing to say there. I never asked Mr. Monahan to come to see me about anything. And
14:49:06 25
if he requested a meeting with me, I would have been happy to see him.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
take place if somebody was visiting from another government or --
29 14:49:26 30
A.
And a courtesy visit, presumably, would be a meeting such as might
Oh no, yes that would be the case, but also I had, during my time in politics at senior level, I had courtesy visits from lots of people. Oh, yes, and in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:49:30
14:49:49
26 1
particular now, insofar as the Tallaght centre, which was a huge development,
2
the first of its kind in the developing towns around Dublin. Everybody was
3
interested and Mr. Monahan was the man in charge and he certainly would have
4
been very happy to tell me what was going on and to invite me out to view it,
5
oh yeah.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
Mr. Monarch would be simply attending at your office to --
9
A.
14:50:03 10
But if there were courtesy visits, you are suggesting that
To brief me on what the current state of play was with his Tallaght Town Centre development.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
request?
14
A.
14:50:17 15
And that would be at his behest you think, rather than at your
Oh, yes. I never requested Mr. Monahan to attend and visit on me in my department, to discuss any matter.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Would you be surprised if he did attend, I know you can't think
18
back with any certainty, but would you be surprised if he did attend even for
19
the purposes of a courtesy visit, would you be surprised that he wouldn't have
14:50:37 20
raised some of the issues that would appear to have been exercising his mind
21
and that of his company colleagues at that time with you, given your position
22
as Minister for the Environment?
23 24 14:50:59 25
A.
Well I can't recollect him talking about anything in particular, but even looking through the brief that was sent to me Mr. Chairman, by the Tribunal, a lot of these decisions concerning, in particular the rezoning, took place long
26
after I had left, was working as commissioner and I was just noting that in the
27
brief.
28 29 14:51:19 30
CHAIRMAN:
But I am just wondering while you have said, understandably, that
you as Minister wouldn't be in a position to partake in any shape or form in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:51:26
14:51:34
27 1 2
rezoning decisions -A.
That's right.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: -- but to an outsider, a developer or builder or an ordinary member
5
of the public that mightn't be clear, that mightn't necessarily be clear to
6
them that you wouldn't be in a position to influence, until such time as they
7
would raise it with you and be told by you?
8
A.
9
Oh no, Mr. Chairman, sorry to cut across you there, but any developer the size of Monarch Properties with their executive directors dealing with these
14:51:57 10
matters, they would be fully au fait with the practices of County Councils and
11
the whole question about rezoning and how it took place and why it took place.
12
I mean, no, no, no, Mr. Chairman. Those people would fully understand. Now as
13
you say there would be people in the general public that mightn't understand
14
that, but insofar as the Chief Executives and chief people involved in
14:52:22 15
properties such as Tallaght and things like that, they would know the full
16
understanding of legislation on planning and zoning.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
In your role as Honorary Treasurer of the party around this time --
Yes?
14:52:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN: -- would you have been furnished with lists from time to time of
22
major donations to the party?
23
A.
24
No Mr. Chairman, specifically no. The role of the treasurer was to produce and provide for the Ard Fheiseanna, a Statement of Affairs. I was not acquainted
14:52:58 25
with how matters were dealt with insofar as headquarters and money collection
26
was concerned.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Is there a difference between position of honorary Treasurer and
29
Treasurer?
14:53:10 30
A.
There is. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:53:10
14:53:20
28 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
And you were?
An Honorary Treasurer yes, is a nominated person on behalf of the party who
4
reports annually to the Ard Fheis at the time, as to what the state of play
5
with the finances are, but they would not be involved in any of the day to day
6
business.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right. Thank you very much Mr. Flynn.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
14:53:32 10
11
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Fleming please.
14 MR. SEAN FLEMING, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS.
14:53:45 15
16
BY MS. DILLON:
17 18 19 14:54:12 20
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Fleming?
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 118
Good afternoon Mr. Fleming, in particular I want you to deal with a particular
21
payment that was made by Monarch Properties indirectly to Fianna Fail through a
22
system known as the pick me up system, but in advance of that if we could, the
23
Tribunal could hear some evidence from you in relation to your involvement with
24
Fianna Fail. I understand that you were employed with Fianna Fail party as
14:54:32 25
financial controller in August 1982.
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 119
And that at that stage you had recently qualified as a chartered accountant?
28
A.
True.
29
Q. 120
So your relationship with Fianna Fail was as a professional employee if I can
14:54:44 30
put it like that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:54:45
14:54:54
29 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 121
And part of your duties involved liaising with the fundraising committee and
3
various people involved in fundraising, is that correct?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 122
You would also have been involved in dealing with monies that were to be
6
received by the party through an indirect route, if we can call it that, by way
7
of operation of what became known as pick me up system, is that right?
8
A.
Just say that again.
9
Q. 123
You would also have been involved on occasion with the reconciliations --
A.
Oh yeah.
11
Q. 124
-- let's say, that arose as a result of the operation of the pick me up system?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 125
And please correct me if I am wrong in relation to this, but the way a pick me
14:55:08 10
14
up system operated was that instead of making a direct political donation to
14:55:23 15
Fianna Fail, which would have been a receipt in the hands of Fianna Fail, a
16
party could elect to pay a creditor of Fianna Fail?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 126
That would require the creditor of Fianna Fail to issue an invoice.
19
A.
Normally, yeah.
Q. 127
And that invoice would then be paid by the person who wished to make the
14:55:37 20
21
donation indirectly to Fianna Fail, is that correct?
22
A.
Yeah, by way of paying a bill.
23
Q. 128
By way of paying a bill. And in the particular case of any party who wanted to
24
do this, would it have involved somebody in the party knowing that a person
14:55:55 25
wanted to make a donation by way of a pick me up?
26
A.
It would.
27
Q. 129
Because what would have to happen at the end of whatever fundraising was going
28
on, there would have to be a reconciliation between the creditor and Fianna
29
Fail, isn't that right?
14:56:08 30
A.
Certainly, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:56:10
14:56:28
30 1
Q. 130
So say, for example, if it was a printer who was printing for Fianna Fail, and
2
the printer had a bill of 250,000, let's just say with Fianna Fail, but a
3
100,000 of that had been paid by various people who wanted to make indirect
4
contributions to Fianna Fail, somebody in Fianna Fail would have to sit down
5
with the printer, is that right? And work-out what was owed or what was
6
outstanding on the account?
7
A.
Of course.
8
Q. 131
And was that person normally you?
9
A.
Well I was involved in the carrying out of the reconciliation, not in arranging
14:56:40 10
the PMU or with the actual donor, I wasn't involved in the fundraising, I was
11 12
more involved in the record keeping after the fundraising was done. Q. 132
13 14
Right. Does it follow from that, that at the time that you were employed first by Fianna Fail in 1982, that the pick me up system was already in operation?
A.
14:57:05 15
It was established, that practice, I think, had been ongoing in all voluntary organisations and you know, and it was there before I arrived in Fianna Fail.
16
Q. 133
But it was, and was it a system of fundraising in effect?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 134
What was it?
19
A.
It was the method where the fundraising was done, a person would -- various
14:57:21 20
types of fundraising, whether there was direct appeal to donors to make a
21
contribution to our fundraising efforts or there might have been a fundraising
22
lunch or golf classic or whatever the event might have been. And if somebody
23
had agreed to make a donation, that was the fundraising effort, but the method
24
by which they made the payment was what we called the PMU, we didn't go out
14:57:44 25
ever seeking PMU, people to pay bills directly, because most, over 95 per cent
26
of all our income would have been directly into Fianna Fail Head Office, so we
27
were not ever pursuing companies to make a payment through an indirect method.
28
Q. 135
29 14:58:04 30
But for the 95 per cent of people who made payments directly, Fianna Fail would issue a receipt directly?
A.
Absolutely because the cheque would have been received in Fianna Fail Head Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:58:07
14:58:17
31 1 2
Office. Q. 136
3 4
And would that be a receipt that would be signed by the Honorary Treasurer, for example?
A.
Like all big organisations, there would be preprinted receipts, they wouldn't
5
personally sign them, they would be printed by the printer and a receipt number
6
allocated to the receipt before it would be issued. But they wouldn't be
7
signed -- the name of the Treasurer would be on the receipt.
8
Q. 137
And records would be kept?
9
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 138
Then in relation to the five per cent income or political fundraising that came
14:58:29 10
11
in by way of pick me ups, it required a slightly different form of accounting,
12
is that right?
13
A.
14 14:58:48 15
creditor and then we reconciled the figures with our creditor. Q. 139
16 17
Yeah, because the receipt wasn't directly into Head Office, it went to our
So, what would happen is that, a creditor of Fianna Fail would issue an invoice to, let us say, for example, X company.
A.
Well really it would be a pro forma invoice or you know a pro forma document,
18
they may issue, the practice would have varied depending on the printer and how
19
they dealt with the actual donor, the practice could vary.
14:59:08 20
Q. 140
21
But in general terms the creditor, who is a creditor of Fianna Fail, would issue an invoice --
22
A.
Issue a document.
23
Q. 141
-- a document. That document would record a liability, isn't that right?
24
A.
That document would be to the company for provision of service.
Q. 142
So that would you have somebody like a printing company or a PR company --
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 143
-- who would issue an invoice, that on its face said X company owed them money,
14:59:24 25
28 29 14:59:41 30
in its simplest terms? A.
Well they would issue a document because sometimes the documents would say pro forma invoice, it mightn't be an actual invoice. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:59:44
14:59:54
32 1
Q. 144
If we just have --
2
A.
On some occasions.
3
Q. 145
If we just look at the Monarch Properties one it might help us, at 5350 please?
4
A.
Okay.
5
Q. 146
Now this is an invoice that issued to Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising Limited
6
on the 24th of February 1994, it issues by Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising
7
Limited, who I assume were creditors of Fianna Fail?
8
A.
They were indeed.
9
Q. 147
They were providing services to Fianna Fail.
A.
They would have had at the previous election.
Q. 148
And they are issuing an invoice to Monarch Properties at Monarch House in the
15:00:10 10
11 12
sum of 25,000 plus VAT, total 30,250 pounds.
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 149
Now before that could happen Mr. Fleming, somebody had to, in Saatchi and
15:00:27 15
Saatchi, had to issue the invoice?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 150
And they, I assume, could only issue an invoice if they received an instruction
18
from somebody that an invoice if that amount should be issued to Monarch
19
Properties.
15:00:38 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 151
And that instruction, I assume, could only have come into Saatchi and Saatchi
22
from somebody in Fianna Fail.
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 152
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 153
And that would mean that somebody in Fianna Fail would have to have been told
15:00:46 25
26 27
that Monarch Properties were prepared to pay 30,250 pounds to Saatchi and
28
Saatchi?
29 15:01:01 30
A.
Well they may not have had to be told, they may have been the person who made that arrangement with the donor. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:01:04
15:01:19
33 1
Q. 154
So that the person in Fianna Fail who had made, went to Monarch Property
2
looking for a political support and made this arrangement or an arrangement
3
equivalent to this with Monarch Properties, is that right?
4
A.
5 6
Yeah because somebody in fundraising side of Fianna Fail would have had to make that arrangement as opposed to direct cheque coming into head office.
Q. 155
Right so the issue of this invoice, in February 1994, would indicate that
7
somebody in Fianna Fail believed that Monarch Properties were going to pay
8
Saatchi and Saatchi 30,250 pounds inclusive of VAT?
9 15:01:36 10
11
A.
Yeah.
Q. 156
Right. Who was the person --
A.
Well no, not inclusive of VAT, 30,250 would be the value to Fianna Fail, the
12
VAT was not an issue. Fianna Fail is not registered for VAT, is not a trading
13
company. So the understanding would have been they would have paid 30,250.
14 15:01:57 15
Q. 157
Would be coming off the full bill, as it were?
A.
Yeah. The VAT would be of zero consequence to Fianna Fail because we received
16
the benefit of whatever the payment was, that's what we received.
17
Q. 158
30,250 pounds?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 159
But nonetheless you would also have received a copy of this invoice, is that
15:02:11 20
correct?
21
A.
Absolutely. Sure came from, Fianna Fail Head Office provided that.
22
Q. 160
That's right. But leaving aside you provided it to the Tribunal, in order for
23
to you deal well your own book keeping exercise, in order to keep your books
24
straight with Saatchi and Saatchi, you had to know how much had been paid by
15:02:29 25
26
people who wanted to make donations in this manner, isn't that right? A.
Absolutely. You need to know your outstanding liability to the company and
27
they would inform you if they had received a payment from somebody else other
28
than ourselves on our behalf.
29 15:02:47 30
Q. 161
So you would have seen, for example, that the invoice had issued in the sum of 25,000 pounds plus VAT? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:02:48
15:03:02
34 1
A.
I would have got a copy of that somewhere along the line, yes.
2
Q. 162
But you would have been looking at the bottom figure 30,250 pounds, that would
3
be coming off the full bill as it were to Fianna Fail from Saatchi and Saatchi?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 163
Because Fianna Fail wasn't registered for VAT?
6
A.
Absolutely.
7
Q. 164
Insofar as Saatchi and Saatchi were dealing with the VAT element of that, that
8 9 15:03:12 10
11
was a matter for Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
It was, yeah.
Q. 165
Not a matter for Fianna Fail?
A.
Fianna Fail wasn't involved in that particular transaction. We were the third
12
party -- that transaction was between Saatchi and Saatchi and Monarch, and the
13
VAT element you talked about would be between those two companies not Fianna
14
Fail.
15:03:25 15
Q. 166
Yes, but the benefit of the transaction was for Fianna Fail?
16
A.
Absolutely.
17
Q. 167
So to say they weren't involved in the transaction would not be quite correct,
18
Mr Fleming, because they were involved in the transaction insofar as the
19
benefit of the transaction was for you?
15:03:38 20
21
A.
Yes, but not any VAT aspect of it.
Q. 168
It would also mean, would it not, as of February 1994 the understanding in
22
Fianna Fail and the understanding in Monarch was that the amount of the
23
donation was to be 30,250 pounds?
24 15:03:51 25
A.
That's right.
Q. 169
But in the event the records would suggest that that in fact was not paid,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah, only 15,000 thousand was paid.
28
Q. 170
In fact that wasn't paid -- did this arise as a result of the election in, in
29 15:04:05 30
1993? A.
No, I think there was an election at the end of 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:04:10
15:04:23
35 1
Q. 171
Yes, and this is an invoice in February of 1994?
2
A.
Correct. So we still owed Saatchi and Saatchi money at that point in time.
3
Q. 172
Does that mean that somebody had approached Monarch in or around the time of
4 5
the issuing of this invoice in February of '94 looking for money? A.
Looking for a donation. Like after the '92 general election the Fianna Fail
6
party had serious debts and it took us a couple of years to clear those debts.
7
We would have been fund raising in '93 and '94 onwards and into '95 to clear
8
the debts that had arisen in the three general elections in the previous five
9
years.
15:04:42 10
Q. 173
11
That would mean, would it not, that Monarch Properties were on some list in Fianna Fail as somebody who ought to be approached?
12
A.
Absolutely. All major companies in Ireland would be written to by the party.
13
Q. 174
I think in September of 1994 at 5353 a cheque in the sum of 15,000 pounds
14 15:05:02 15
issued to Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 175
And according --
17
A.
From Monarch.
18
Q. 176
From Monarch Properties Services Limited, and according to the earlier document
19 15:05:14 20
the total amount expected had been 30,250 but 15,000 was paid? A.
That was all that was paid.
21
Q. 177
And that's all that was paid on foot of the original invoice?
22
A.
On foot of that, yes.
23
Q. 178
That would mean then that Fianna Fail themselves would have had to have made an
24 15:05:27 25
adjustment with Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
No.
26
Q. 179
No?
27
A.
No, because we would have only dealt with the transaction when the payment was
28
received. So up to the point in time that 15,000 was received we would have
29
owed Saatchi and Saatchi the full amount. When that 15,000 was received,
15:05:41 30
15,000 would have come off the balance owed by Fianna Fail. There would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:05:44
15:06:00
36 1
been no adjustment prior to the receipt of the money, because when you are in
2
the fundraising business you don't, to use a phrase, count your chickens before
3
they are hatched, only -- often you expect more money from a donor than you
4
actually receive. We would have only dealt with the transaction on the point
5
of receipt, and the Fianna Fail records nationally are written on income
6
received basis not a projected or expected income received basis.
7
Q. 180
Indeed the records with in Fianna Fail, again I think you are familiar with
8
this document at 5355, which record the pick-me-ups I think in 1994, insofar as
9
it deals with the one from Monarch Property Services Limited, it records that
15:06:24 10
in the third column it records that the invoice from the creditor, that's
11
Saatchi and Saatchi, to the donor company, that's Monarch, was for 30,250.
12
There was a copy cheque from the donor and a letter dated 19 of September from
13
the donor company to the creditor, but the amount paid is recorded in the third
14
column, fourth across and that's 15,000 pounds?
15:06:42 15
A.
Yeah. I ever only actually seen the original of that document last Friday for
16
my first time after, that document was not produced when I worked in Fianna
17
Fail, it was produced sometime later. I have only seen that document in recent
18
days for the first time, but it's accurate. The document is accurate.
19
Q. 181
15:07:10 20
And at 5356 there is a copy letter of the 19 of September 1994 enclosing a copy of the cheque and it's the letter from Monarch Property Services Limited and it
21
encloses a copy of the cheque for 15,000 in full and final settlement of the
22
invoice of 30,250. Now that is also supplied to the Tribunal by Fianna Fail?
23
A.
24 15:07:28 25
That was. And I would have seen that, the previous document was a document only generated in 1998.
Q. 182
That would mean, would it not Mr. Fleming, when the money was received by
26
Saatchi and Saatchi it was copied or the documentation in connection to it was
27
copied to Fianna Fail?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 183
So that you could keep your records.
A.
We would know then 15,000 had been received.
15:07:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:07:46
15:07:59
37 1
Q. 184
2 3
Do you know who it was in Fianna Fail that approached Monarch Properties or who in Monarch Properties was approached?
A.
No I don't, and as I said I personally was never involved in the fundraising, I
4
was more involved in the record keeping of the outcome of the fundraising
5
activities and party financial activities, so I was never involved in
6
approaching any donor and I don't know do we have a record of who on our
7
fundraising committee would have been the contact with Monarch Properties. It
8
could have been a number of people and I don't know who was the contact with
9
Monarch.
15:08:15 10
Q. 185
Certainly a document that I think was generated in or around the time that the
11
money was received, or not long afterwards, at 5349 which records the receipts
12
received in September 1994?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 186
There is a reference of Monarch Properties, Phil Monahan?
A.
Yeah, that's right.
Q. 187
Now there are other figures mentioned there and donors have been blanked out in
15:08:33 15
16 17
relation to it. But that would suggest that certainly in so far as Fianna Fail
18
were concerned, that the contact person was Mr. Phillip Monahan, is that right?
19
A.
15:08:52 20
Yeah, he was the proprietor I think of the company, I didn't know the man myself.
21
Q. 188
Yes?
22
A.
But he was the managing director. But that, I would just say that might have
23
been just written, the name of the gentleman involved may or may not have been
24
the point of contact. It would have been the name Monarch Properties mightn't
15:09:08 25
have been known to people at the time, so the name Phil Monahan was just put in
26
as a way of identifying the company, and he may or may not have been the point
27
of contact. It would be an over statement to draw that conclusion from that.
28 29 15:09:30 30
Q. 189
It would be an over statement to draw the conclusion that Fianna Fail recorded Phillip Monahan as the point of contact in dealing with receipts in September of 1994? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:09:31
15:09:42
38 1
A.
2 3
No, it would be an over statement to say from that document that Phil Monahan was the point of contact.
Q. 190
4
In the absence of any other information Mr. Fleming I suggest it's more than likely he was the point of contact?
5
A.
He may well be, I just don't know.
6
Q. 191
Certainly insofar as the documentation has been provided to the Tribunal by
7 8
Fianna Fail? A.
9
Well the letter you showed me a minute ago wasn't signed by Mr. Monahan at all. The previous document you had on the screen, the cheque from Monarch Properties
15:09:55 10
wasn't signed by Mr. Monahan, there was a marketing director, some other
11
director.
12
Q. 192
Mr. Noel Murray, at 5356?
13
A.
So there is two names. The letter from Monarch refers to -- I don't have the
14 15:10:07 15
16
document in front of me. Q. 193
There is the document.
A.
Yeah, so he may have been the point of contact or it could have been
17
Mr. Monahan or somebody else, I personally wouldn't know. Not only do I not
18
know, I wouldn't have known at the time either.
19
Q. 194
15:10:24 20
It wouldn't have been a matter that was of any interest to you because your function was a different function, it was nothing to do with the actual fund
21
raising, your job was the accounting?
22
A.
For the transactions.
23
Q. 195
Yes. And insofar as these pick-me-ups operated, Mr. Fleming, they operated to
24
the benefit of Fianna Fail insofar as they defrayed substantial expenses
15:10:43 25
26
incurred by Fianna Fail with creditors, isn't that right? A.
27 28
to a third party or sponsorship. Q. 196
29 15:10:59 30
Yeah, like any organisation receiving sponsorship or a donation, or a donation
Insofar as the companies were concerned, what was the advantage to the company who was making the payment in operating this system?
A.
The principle advantage, and one that I would have been aware of in general, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:11:03
15:11:22
39 1
would have been it gave confidentiality to the donor that people maybe, may not
2
have wanted staff in their own organisation to know they were making a payment
3
to any political parties and they might have routed their payment directly to
4
one of the suppliers of the party, that would be the principle reason and the
5
only real reason that I would see it gave them confidence. It was of no
6
benefit to the Fianna Fail party to receive the money this way, it would have
7
been far simpler for us to receive the cheque of 15,000 directly and lodge it
8
to our own bank account and use it for our own purposes, so there was no
9
benefit to us, but it was obviously a benefit to the donor because they were
15:11:43 10
11
able to have confidentiality within their own organisation. Q. 197
12
And do you know who it was in Fianna Fail who dealt with this particular item of fundraising, I think I have asked that you already?
13
A.
No, and I don't and I wouldn't have even known at the time, as such.
14
Q. 198
Can I show you 8513 please? This is a letter to the Senior Inspector of Taxes,
15:12:04 15
the Office of the Revenue Commissioners Investigation Branch, arising out of,
16
including an inquiry in connection with Monarch Properties, including the
17
particular payment of 15,000 pounds. I think this arose as a result of certain
18
disclosures made to the Revenue arising out of the operation of the pick-me-up
19
scheme and a number of companies were asked for information. But what I want
15:12:25 20
to draw to your attention there is the third paragraph?
21
A.
Can I just read -- I have never seen it before.
22
Q. 199
Yes, absolutely.
23
A.
I see Secretary, who is the letter from?
24
Q. 200
From Monarch Properties Limited to Mr. Brendan O'Brien, Senior Inspector of
15:12:38 25
Taxes.
26
A.
Okay, just give me a moment to read it because I haven't seen it.
27
Q. 201
Of course.
28
A.
Right. I have read the letter.
29
Q. 202
Now what I want to draw to your attention, I mean any tax computation or tax
15:13:15 30
matters arising from this is a matter for Monarch Properties and it's not a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:13:17
15:13:32
40 1
matter for you and I don't intend to deal with those with you, but what I want
2
to draw to your attention is the third paragraph in which the author of this
3
letter says they have now established from Mr. Des Richardson that they made a
4
payment of 15,000 pound to Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising Limited in September
5
1994 against a VAT invoice of 30,250 pounds?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 203
That would suggest that what is being talked about here is the payment you and
8 9 15:13:42 10
I have been talking about? A.
Yeah, definitely.
Q. 204
That would suggest, Mr. Fleming, that the person who was dealing with Monarch
11
Properties in Fianna Fail was Mr. Des Richardson?
12
A.
Could probably well have been, but I can't be absolutely sure that have.
13
Q. 205
Yes, was Mr. Richardson a fundraiser for Fianna Fail?
14
A.
He was, he was.
Q. 206
Was he involved in the compilation and preparation of lists in Fianna Fail in
15:13:56 15
16
relation to people who made donations to the party?
17
A.
With the members of the fundraising committee.
18
Q. 207
Yes. Did Mr. Richardson keep separate information and documentation,
19
independent of the party books and records, lists of the people he had on his
15:14:14 20
21
own lists? A.
22
Well the lists he had were the lists for Fianna Fail, I don't know who they would have been --
23
Q. 208
Did he operate a separate recording system?
24
A.
No.
Q. 209
Or keeping records separate to the records kept by Fianna Fail?
A.
All the receipts through fundraising committee and by Mr. Richardson were
15:14:25 25
26 27
lodged to the Fianna Fail Head Office account. They no separate bank account
28
at all.
29 15:14:42 30
Q. 210
Did Mr. Richardson have an office separate to Fianna Fail?
A.
He did. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:14:43
15:14:56
41 1
Q. 211
Where did he have that office?
2
A.
It was in the, I think it was in the Berkley Court.
3
Q. 212
Did Mr. Richardson keep his own records within that office, within that system?
4
A.
I am sure he kept a record of what he was doing, yes.
5
Q. 213
But you would say that his record should mirror the records of Fianna Fail?
6
A.
Well if he had -- I don't know that because I don't know what records you are
7
referring to, I don't know that. Like, what I would believe to be the case,
8
everything all the money he received would have been lodged to the bank account
9
of Fianna Fail and we would have a record of that.
15:15:15 10
Q. 214
11 12
Yes, leaving aside the money, but what we are talking about now are lists of subscribers or all of that type of information.
A.
Oh no, there was no parallel duty, he was the fundraiser, I was keeping a
13
record of, you know, of whatever was received and paid out. I wouldn't have
14
had a parallel copy of everything he was working on on a day to day basis.
15:15:35 15
Q. 215
So Mr. Richardson would have had his own lists of subscribers to Fianna Fail
16
and he would have made the returns to you, is that correct, in relation to the
17
monies that he received?
18
A.
19
Yeah, well the lists -- when he came to work for Fianna Fail the previous year he would have started with the list of subscribers that Fianna Fail had at that
15:15:52 20
point in time and his records would have been built from the Fianna Fail
21
records.
22
Q. 216
But would --
23
A.
-- and he would have added more to it and the members of the committee would
24 15:16:03 25
have added more to it. Q. 217
26
Yes, but it would be fair to describe Mr. Richardson's operation as somewhat independent of the Fianna Fail fundraising operation?
27
A.
Was Mr. Richardson's operation independent of the?
28
Q. 218
Of the mainstream Fianna Fail fundraising?
29
A.
No, he was the mainstream Fianna Fail fundraising.
Q. 219
But he operated a separate office?
15:16:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:16:20
15:16:28
42 1
A.
No, he didn't operate from 13 Upper Mount Street, no.
2
Q. 220
He operated a separate office?
3
A.
Yeah, in the Berkley Court.
4
Q. 221
And within that office he kept his own records?
5
A.
Yeah, I am sure he did.
6
Q. 222
All right. Thank you very much Mr. Fleming, if you answer any questions
7
anybody else might have.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much Mr. Fleming.
15:16:36 10
11
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Brian Lenihan please.
14 15:16:44 15
BRIAN LENIHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
16
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: Q. 223
15:17:18 20
Good afternoon Mr. Lenihan.
Good afternoon Mr. Lenihan, I think the position is that you have never been a member of any local authority in Dublin, is that the position?
21
A.
Or anywhere else, yes, that's the position.
22
Q. 224
So that in so far as the lands in Carrickmines are concerned you have never
23 24
been in a position whereby you had any vote in connection with those lands? A.
15:17:35 25
26
That's correct. And I have never had any involvement with the lands at Cherrywood in Carrickmines at any time.
Q. 225
But you have been, I think, you have provided a statement to the Tribunal which
27
I will go through with you, but you have received two payments from Monarch
28
Properties or their connected companies, and possibly a third payment, is that
29
right?
15:17:52 30
A.
Well in fact when you wrote to me you notified me of two payments, but on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:17:57
15:18:08
43 1
examining my own records I identified a third payment which I notified to you.
2
Q. 226
Yes?
3
A.
That's correct.
4
Q. 227
And when you looked at your own records, Mr. Lenihan, in relation to the first
5
payment which I believe to be a sum of a thousand pounds in 1996, is that
6
right?
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 228
Were you, from your records were you able to identify how you had received
9 15:18:18 10
that? A.
No, I will explain the position. I purchased my present residence at Somerton
11
Road in the Strawberry Beds in 1991 and the late Phil Monahan was a very near
12
neighbour. His residence at Somerton had a common boundary wall with my
13
property. Soon after I settled in the area we became acquainted, he walked
14
past my house most days, and I talked to him at the weekend. My father died on
15:18:44 15
first of November 1995. A few days later Phil Monahan called to my house
16
during the morning time to express his sympathies. I remember it very well
17
because it was in fact the only occasion upon which he visited my house, though
18
I can say that as he often passed our front gate he often stopped and talked to
19
me and I met him at other social occasions within the parish. He stated to me
15:19:04 20
21
if I was going forward as a candidate for the vacancy in the constituency he would like to support me.
22 23
Now I was nominated as a candidate in March of 1996 and at that stage the -- I
24
do recall that, you know, various subscriptions were received and lodged. At
15:19:27 25
the conclusion of that by-election I compiled, in a simple copy book, a record
26
of every subscription received by me, and I acknowledged them by hand. I would
27
have written to Mr. Monahan and acknowledged the subscription.
28 29 15:19:44 30
When you wrote your letter to me, I examined my records and discovered that there was a subscription in the name of a company described as Monarch Property Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:19:50
15:20:06
44 1
Services Limited and that it was in the sum of a thousand pounds. Now I looked
2
at my bank statements but I wasn't able to ascertain from the bank statements
3
exactly the date on which the lodgement was made, but I am satisfied that I
4
made a comprehensive record of all subscriptions received during that
5
by-election and it's on that basis I volunteered the information to you about
6
that particular subscription.
7
Q. 229
8 9
people involved in your constituency at that time was Mr. Ned Ryan? A.
15:20:26 10
11
And I think your Director of Elections in that election was Mr, one of the
That's correct. He wasn't the Director of Elections but he was county councillor in the constituency, one of a number at the time.
Q. 230
I think Mr. Ryan is recorded in the books of Monarch as having received a
12
cheque for 1,000 pounds in March of 1996, and could I have 5776 please? And
13
just to draw to your attention this document which is dated 14 of March 1996,
14
you will see at the top "Brian Lenihan" and in brackets "Councillor Ned Ryan FF
15:20:57 15
and I think a cheque in that sum did issue to Mr. Ryan, at 5780 please, and was
16 17
endorsed on the back, at 5781, by Mr. Ryan. A.
Yes. I haven't seen this documentation before, but I mean I have no reason to
18
dispute it. I mean I am simply, what I have told you is that I recorded the
19
fact in my own records that I received a subscription from this company and my
15:21:28 20
form -- I would have assumed from the identification of the company that it was
21
intended as a subscription to my campaign by Mr. Monahan, who was a near
22
neighbour. I didn't solicit any contribution but it did arrive and I
23
acknowledged it and I know I acknowledged various contributions made to the
24
particular donor by handwritten letter.
15:21:49 25
Q. 231
26
I think Mr. Ryan has told the Tribunal he was not a candidate in that election at that time?
27
A.
No he wasn't. He was a local Fianna Fail County Councillor.
28
Q. 232
But that he was involved in fundraising in the constituency at that time?
29
A.
He was, but I have to say that he didn't, you know my campaign was not funded
15:22:09 30
in that way substantially, in fact when looking through the list of donors I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:22:13
15:22:32
45 1
have to say this to Members of the Tribunal, the most generous donors I had
2
were members of the legal profession.
3
Q. 233
I think insofar as the, you received --
4
A.
-- I am not disputing the fact that he may well have handed the cheque over to
5
me and it was lodged in an account on my behalf. I haven't been able to
6
ascertain that as a matter of evidence. I quite accept it's a reasonable
7
inference to draw that the cheque payment was made to me through Mr. Monahan,
8
or through Councillor Ryan. That seems very clear from your records, and I
9
thank you for that.
15:22:48 10
Q. 234
And I think that subsequently in 1997, at 6183, there was a payment of 500
11
pounds for a golf classic, and that's recorded I think about eight or nine from
12
the bottom on the document that's on screen. And I think also in 1999 a sum of
13
300 pounds from Dunloe Ewart, is that the position that accords with your
14
records Mr. Lenihan?
15:23:12 15
A.
Well I accept that golf classics took place on those occasions as I outlined to
16
you in my statement, and I can identify where the sums were lodged, so yes I
17
would accept that it's reasonable to assume those payments were made. I don't
18
have a precise list of all the donors in the golf classics, you will appreciate
19
you can have 35 to 40 teams at a particular classic. The donors are
15:23:36 20
acknowledged afterwards, and since my appointment as a minister I have not
21
organised any golf classic. I think a minister has a different position from a
22
Dail Deputy who has no executive responsibility, so as a result I don't have a
23
list, a current list of golf classic subscribers or assistance.
24
Q. 235
15:24:01 25
I think in fact that at 6306 there is a copy of the cheque in the sum of 500 pounds made out to you?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 236
And that seems to arise from a golf classic?
28
A.
That is correct. And that was made, that was a classic that was organised as
29 15:24:12 30
the sole fundraiser before the 1997 general election, and the proceeds of that golf classic were applied to both party purposes and campaign purposes for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:24:17
15:24:30
46 1 2
myself. Q. 237
Were you ever approached by anybody from Monarch Properties seeking your
3
support or seeking to ask you to seek speak to any of your Fianna Fail
4
colleagues on local authority in connection with any of their lands?
5
A.
No, never. In connection with any of their lands, and I appreciate you are
6
investigating here the lands at Cherrywood, and the lands at Cherrywood I know
7
from what you have said in the letter are located in the Dun Laoghaire county.
8
Dun Laoghaire county was never part of my area, the split of the old Dublin
9
county into three took place before I was elected a member of Dail Eireann, so
15:24:52 10
I would not have been from a position to talk to any councillor in Dun
11
Laoghaire at any stage of my public life, but I can say that I have not
12
discussed the lands at Cherrywood before, during or since my election as a
13
member of Dail Eireann.
14 15:25:04 15
Now you asked then about any other lands that Monarch might have, and of course
16
Monarch had lands at Somerton near my house, and as a private citizen I had
17
opposed the rezoning of those lands for residential use, I think an attempt was
18
made to rezone them for that use in the early '90s. So Mr. Monahan would have
19
made his subscription in the full knowledge of that.
15:25:26 20
Q. 238
I think Ms. Mary Flaherty told the Tribunal she was approached by Monarch
21
Properties, even though she lived outside the area, and I think her
22
constituency is not that far away from your own constituency, that she had been
23
asked to speak on behalf of Monarch with her Fine Gael colleagues on Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council. Did anything similar ever happen to you?
15:25:46 25
A.
No, no. I am not clear, by the way, in relation to the planning history. I
26
have been following the proceedings of the Tribunal in the newspapers, but my
27
understanding is that the most crucial and contentious votes took place in the
28
early 1990s, and I didn't quite see what votes took place in Dun Laoghaire
29
county, but in any event I was not asked by them nor did I make representations
15:26:11 30
to anyone with the lands in Dun Laoghaire. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:26:13
15:26:33
47 1
Q. 239
2 3
I think Mr. Edward Sweeney has told the Tribunal in his statement that he had contact with you at some time. Do you ever recollect meeting Eddie Sweeney?
A.
No, and that surprises me. I didn't peruse the booklet of documentation but I
4
certainly went back over the years. I don't know has Mr. Sweeney fixed a
5
particular year for this particular representation?
6
Q. 240
No, at 2191 he simply says "I specifically recall having had contact at some
7
time or other with the following political representatives" and approximately
8
halfway down that list is Brian Lenihan TD Senior and Junior. Now Mr. Sweeney
9
has not yet given evidence Mr. Lenihan so you will appreciate this is the bet
15:26:53 10
11
information the Tribunal has at this moment in time in relation to the matter? A.
He has given a very long list and I must say I am surprised at him suggesting
12
that, obviously I have to reserve my rights in relation to that. I don't have
13
and I would have, a distinct memory on this particular issue, and I certainly
14
wouldn't, you know I would recall were such a representation made to me. And I
15:27:15 15
am certainly not being made aware of particular plans that they have made. But
16
again -- I do want to assist the Tribunal, but I cannot recall a Mr. Sweeney
17
first of all. The one employee named in your list whom I would know is
18
Mr. Lynn, because Mr. Lynn was constituent of mine and I knew himself and his
19
wife, and he certainly never spoke to me about these matters.
15:27:45 20
21
Q. 241
I think Mr. Lynn lived in Blanchardstown?
A.
He lived in Blanchardstown for a while, I don't think he lives there any
22 23
longer. Q. 242
24
Thank you very much Mr. Lenihan, if you answer any questions anybody else might have.
15:27:56 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much Mr. Lenihan for your assistance?
Just in relation to Mr. Sweeney, I mean -- you know, obviously he intends to
28
raise some issue. It is possible I suppose that Monarch made a general
29
presentation to which they invited people, but I don't recall being at such a
15:28:15 30
presentation I have to say. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:28:16
15:28:30
48 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
the need to return you can certainly.
4
A.
But when he gives, comes to give evidence, obviously if you feel
Yes, I am not sure it will be essential. Thank you very much.
5 6
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. All right, that concludes today?
7 8
MS. DILLON: Yes, I think we are sitting at 10 am tomorrow because, due the
9
non-availability of Mr. O'Herlihy for this morning we have had to put in
15:28:39 10
11
Mr. O'Herlihy for tomorrow morning, but I think you are sitting at 10 o'clock to take one councillor witness and to take Mr. Bill O'Herlihy at 10.30.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
All right, 10 o'clock tomorrow. Thank you.
14 15:28:58 15
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
10:21:40
10:35:19
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
8TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.30 A.M:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, sir. Mr. Larry Lohan please.
7 8
MR. ABRAHAMSON: Chairman, I wonder just before you start to hear evidence, if I
9
could briefly mention a matter, my name is William Abrahamson and I appear with
10:35:28 10
Mr. Sanfui and Mr. Marray for Monarch and some of the other individuals. It
11
just came to our attention that when limited representation was granted to our
12
clients, the reference was to Monarch Properties Limited and my solicitor was
13
just anxious that I would clarify to the Tribunal that we do also appear for
14
all the companies in the Monarch Group, including L&C Properties and Monarch
10:35:46 15
Services Properties.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Well, we understood that and in so far as the granting of limited
18
representation was made, it applies to all those parties.
19 10:35:55 20
MR. ABRAHAMSON: That's the point I simply wanted to clarify. Thank you,
21
chairman.
22 23
MR. LARRY LOHAN, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
24
BY MS. FOLEY:
10:36:13 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Lohan.
27 28 29 10:36:27 30
Q
1
MS. FOLEY:
If I could take you back to where we left off on the last
occasion, Mr. Lohan, if I could have 7172 please. This is the map that was being considered at the meeting of the 11th November 1993. www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:36:41
10:36:58
2 1
Now, the Development Plan review commenced around October 1987 and at this
2
stage it's November 1993, a month from the end which is about six years into
3
the process. The map that we have here is where all of the yellow lands, both
4
Monarch lands and the surrounding lands are one house to the acre and then we
5
have, I don't know if you can see 4A and 4B, the two squares in the centre of
6
lands there which are zoned for C, town district centre and then the lands
7
beside that in white which are agriculture. I was wondering what you thought
8
of that map?
9
A
Well, I know the area intimately because I live beside it, I am very poor at
10:37:24 10
map reading and my sense of direction is also poor but I know those lands
11 12
intimately. Q
2
But I was wondering what you thought -- there's a large area, I think it's 178
13
hectares at two houses to the hectare which would be about 356 houses that the
14
entire of those yellow lands would take and then you have 4A and 4B which is
10:37:44 15
the town centre and the other two sides of the town centre are fields. So
16 17
from -- what would you think of that as a map for November 1993? A
Well if I take it back to my original motion to the council was to leave the
18
lands as they were until such time as all the infrastructure was in place and
19
that didn't actually happen until 1996. Unfortunately for me, my motion was
10:38:08 20
roundly defeated, so I had to accept that and move on and consider other
21 22
elements. Q
3
23 24
on two sides by fields and the other two sides by 356 houses? A
I was totally against the town centre and I put down a motion to have it
10:38:27 25
26
What would your opinion be of it, that where you have a town centre surrounded
rezoned down to neighbourhood centre. Q
4
And I think the Tribunal has heard that the developers wouldn't have been
27
prepared to develop the lands at one house to the acre, that it wouldn't have
28
been viable and you said yourself on the last occasion that from your own point
29
of view, by the time it had come to November 1993, you didn't think one house
10:38:44 30
to the acre was good development. www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:38:46
10:39:05
3 1
A
I thought it would be very bad development of a very important parcel of land
2
because on the other side of the N11, you have houses at 16 to the acre, up to
3
2/3,000 houses, so I thought would be very elitist to have that type, in other
4
words a two tier society, the very rich on one side of the N11 and the very
5
poor and unemployed on the other side of the N11.
6
Q
5
And would you as well that a town centre, that from the point of view of
7
getting tenants for a town centre where you are surrounded by fields and 356
8
houses, that that would not be commercially viable to develop either?
9
A
Well my interest was the town of Dun Laoghaire which I regarded to be dying on
10:39:23 10
11
its feet. Q
6
But at this point on this particular map, we now have a town centre and the
12
residential as I described to you, would you consider that that was a good
13
planning perspective, would you consider that to be a good and viable map?
14
A
Well history has proven that it wasn't because today the centre that's there is
10:39:42 15
not doing that terribly well.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
7
Yes. 8
19 10:39:54 20
Would you agree it was almost inevitable that change would have to happen?
Would you think that this map was the result of careful consideration of the planning issues and the needs of the Dublin community?
A
Well once we came to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, I took my direction
21
from the manager and the professional planners. I know they had a view of how
22
the lands should be developed. There were times I found it difficult to
23
comprehend but as they were professional planners, I spoke to them and took
24
direction from them because I have no experience of planning, I was a new
10:40:15 25
councillor and I had to read myself in the situation, I felt I owed myself that
26
and I owed my community that and I also I would get, from the community as
27
well, I was getting mixed messages, total opposition to everything in
28
Cherrywood and total support for everything in Cherrywood and in between, you
29
had kind of --
10:40:33 30
Q
9
So would you agree there were two powerful lobby groups? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:40:36
10:40:52
4 1
A
Absolutely. You had the Carrickmines Preservation Association on the one hand
2
who were willing to accept four houses to the acre at one stage, they changed
3
their minds subsequently, and then you had the Monarch proposals.
4
Q
10
5 6
And that -- would you agree this map might be the result of the impact of two powerful lobbying groups rather than careful considered planning?
A
Well the lands were already zoned in 1983, 167 acres was zoned in 1983 and that
7
was the fact I suppose you had to live with.
8
Q
9
A
11
With septic tank. You couldn't rezone it back to agriculture without huge legal cost and legal
10:41:08 10
implications.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:41:38 15
Q
12
So it had to remain residential? I would have thought so, yes.
13
Could I have 7226 and 7227 beside each other please. Yes, this is the motion for the last day, yes.
14
11th November. Just to review, we were just pointing out that the area that
16
you have outlined there, you are proposing four to the, four houses to the acre
17
and that the rest remained at one?
18
A
The last day when you brought this up, of course it was 13 years or more since
19
I seen it and I was totally vague, relatively vague about it, I just gave you
10:41:59 20
whatever I could remember. Naturally since then I have been talking about, not
21
talking about it, thinking about it, and I had no documentary evidence of any
22
type except what you provided for me to look back on, which I did.
23 24
I realised at the time that the manager -- this was a compromised motion on the
10:42:19 25
manager's proposal, I know, your honour, you have problems with it or
26
understanding where it came from, there were three ruling parties in the
27
council at the time, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Progressive Democrats, of
28
which we were two, and my name would be attached to that motion because I was
29
part of the ruling group.
10:42:37 30
Q
15
I don't understand what you mean by part of the ruling group? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:42:43
10:42:56
5 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Well the group who elected the Cathaoirleach. 16
Like in the Dail, we were a coalition, if you like. 17
5 6
Oh I see.
Okay. So you are saying this was a compromise between the manager, what the manager was proposing and what else?
A
It was a compromise with what the manager was proposing and what the council as
7
a group were willing to vote for or to accept. And centre to it was the
8
capping of the district centre down to neighbourhood centre, which would of
9
course have negative impact on the development.
10:43:16 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
10:43:52 15
A
18
Sorry, Mr. Lohan, you described your group there as a coalition? That's right.
19
Who would be part of the coalition? Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and Progressive Democrats.
20
And what activities did the coalition discuss? Really I suppose the basic function of any coalition is that they elect the
16
Chair or the Cathaoirleach at any one time. There would be no inter-party
17
discussions on issues, probably each party would come to their own conclusion
18
and then --
19
Q
10:44:16 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
10:44:43 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
10:45:12 30
21
Such as motions or -Yes and would you accept it or would you go with it or might you go with it.
22
Your coalition was formed principally for the election of the Cathaoirleach? That's right, yes.
23
Mr. Lohan, you described yourselves as part of the ruling group. Yes, the group that elect the Cathaoirleach, yes.
24
And would that mean that you would have a majority? Yes, we would have.
25
So that Fine Gael, the Progressive Democrats -And Fianna Fail.
26
And Fianna Fail. If I could have please page 2359, this is a map of the lands following the 11th November 1993 meeting and the success of your motion. If www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:45:22
10:45:41
6 1
you could see the lands outlined in red, the yellow part, sorry the lands
2
outlined in red are Monarch lands, the yellow lands are now ten to the hectare,
3
the blue remained agricultural and the C are still town centre and the yellow
4
around are at one to the acre. I was wondering what you thought of that map,
5
did you feel it was an improvement on the previous map?
6
A
That, I can't recall what I thought at the time. I do remember questioning
7
when the motion was presented whether there was going to be access for the
8
development of the lands and I remember being informed at the Wyattville end,
9
there would be access within a year but at the further end of the lands, there
10:46:07 10
wouldn't be access until maybe 7, 8, 10 years, until the motorway was complete.
11
So the access was the big problem with the developments of the land in total.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
27
The upper end, towards the M50 side; the Southeastern Motorway side. 28
10:46:33 15
If I could have page 3983 please. This is a letter from Phil Reilly dated the 23rd February '94, replying to you and it's a request for support for a T box.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
That's right. 29
For the Alana club? When I was Cathaoirleach in Dun Laoghaire I was very much involved in local
19
community activity and the Alana club are a drug free group who support people
10:46:56 20
who have alcohol or drug problems, so they were short of funds and I said I
21 22
Which end of the lands do you say there was difficulty with access?
would help them in a fund-raising event, that was it. Q
30
I was wondering how well do you know Mr. Reilly, I see there is a handwritten
23
note on it saying "Larry Lohan reckoned Monarch should have first option on the
24
T box and matters like that" and I was wondering how you knew Mr. Reilly?
10:47:24 25
A
I met Mr. Reilly a few times when their road show was first put out because I
26
went along as often as I could to see it and to get to know exactly what they
27
were proposing. Eventually I told them I couldn't support them, but that's
28
when I would have known Phil Reilly but mostly it would have been through
29
Mr. Lynn, Richard Lynn, that I would offer anything like this.
10:47:48 30
Q
31
Can I have page 5084 please, this is around the same time, it's the end of www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:47:55
10:48:11
7 1
April 1994, and it's an expense claim form for Mr. Lynn suggesting that in that
2
week, he met yourself and he is charging expenses of 40 pounds 53 pence
3
attributable to this meeting, do you recall meetings alone between yourself and
4
Mr.--
5
A
I told you the last day, I would have no recall of small items like that,
6
because I would never recall something like that myself.
7
Q
8
A
32
You wouldn't recall having had a meeting? No. I recall having met Richard several times outside council meetings and
9
that but --
10:48:26 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
33
But not on a one to one? I wouldn't, no.
34
If I could have the map at page 2722 please. This is in April 1994 and it's a
13
draft area action plan suggested by the manager. You will see the lands
14
outlined in red there, the Monarch lands.
10:48:57 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 35
But the plan was initiated as I say by the manager and the planners, the
17
residential densities have been increased. There was 65 and a half acres zoned
18
B and G which are considered anomalies. They would be the agricultural lands
19
that you have seen on the previous maps and the residential densities have been
10:49:16 20
increased, there's no mention of a science and technology park here.
21 22
I don't know if you recall in May 1994 Councillor Gilmore proposed a motion
23
"That the committee welcomed the development of a science and technology park
24
in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown area and in order to encourage and facilitate
10:49:36 25
such development, the council agrees to review the zoning of the lands at
26
Cherrywood Loughlinstown which are owned by Monarch Properties."
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:49:52 30
That's correct. 36
Do you recall this proposal of a science and technology park? The science and technology issue arose towards the end of 1993 for the first time, I was Cathaoirleach at the time and I remembered the manager telling me www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:49:55
10:50:10
8 1
about this proposed science and technology development and they asked me what
2
would be my attitude towards them and I said I would totally approve of it
3
because all my life I had been in education and at the time we were
4
endeavouring to get a third level institution into Dun Laoghaire which we
5
subsequently got. Which is now the Institute of Art Design and Technology. So
6
anything that would be favouring employment or for third level students or
7
research and development, that type of thing I would be totally supportive of.
8
Q
37
9 10:50:32 10
And would you have heard this proposal of a science and technology park before the November 1993 motions that finalised the --
A
It was about November 1993 I heard about it for the first time. I knew about
11
the one in Limerick and I had been down there at the University of Limerick and
12
I knew how exciting a project they were, particularly as we had UCD down the
13
road only five kilometres. I felt it would be an ideal location, there was no
14
guarantee we were going to get it.
10:51:00 15
Q
38
16
Was that your understanding, that it was the Monarch lands were only one of the areas proposed as a science and technology park?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
That's right. 39
There were a number of other lands competing as it were? I think there was a special group put together from our council to deal with
10:51:09 20
the minister at the time, enterprise and whatever, Minister for Enterprise, to
21
see if we could get --
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
10:51:22 25
A
26
Q
40
Get it into your area? Into our area.
41
But there were other areas in Dublin, is that right? Yes, it was on open competition really at the time.
42
Later on at this meeting in June 1994, Monarch were anxious for the manager to
27
prepare a draft variation to include the science and technology park and if I
28
could have 5202 please. And one of their goals was to -- point 2 there was "To
29
re-examine the areas noted in the report of the 23rd May 1994 for their present
10:52:05 30
zoning being anomalous" and this would refer to the B and G lands that was saw www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:52:10
10:52:22
9 1
on the previous map which had been zoned for agriculture. At the end of the
2
note of this meeting, "The specific members should be approached on the basis
3
of moving and supporting a motion from the floor, in particular senior members
4
of the Progressive Democrats should be approached and their support obtained."
5
And I think page 5203 please, you see there third at the end of the list there?
6
A
7
Q
I see it. 43
You have been highlighted as a person who's support should be sought and the
8
note is taken by Mr. Lynn on the 16th June 1994. Do you recall at this time
9
for the time of the proposal of the science and technology park being contacted
10:52:45 10
11
by Mr. Lynn seeking your support? A
I can't, but I do -- I can tell you that I was supportive of the development
12
from day one.
13
Q
14
A
10:53:00 15
Q
44
So there would have been no difficulty in gaining your support? Absolutely none.
45
I think on the 14th November 1994, agreement, "the manager informs the council
16
that agreement had been reached between Guardian Royal Properties, Monarch
17
Properties Limited about a potential purchase of one third of the lands which
18
would form the proposed science and technology park."
19
A
10:53:20 20
Q
21
A
I think that was for a joint venture. 46
Joint venture. Because science and technology by their very nature are slow moving things, it
22
takes up to 10, 12 years to bring them to fruition, so it was going to entail
23
ongoing investment so the council would have to get involved to ensure that
24
such ongoing investment would be there.
10:53:37 25
Q
47
On this occasion the manager proposes that "the procedures for Draft Variation
26
Plan be set to place to provide for the rezoning of the lands for the park, the
27
reciting of the existing C zoned lands and the lands currently zoned
28
agriculture to be rezoned at a density of 16 houses to the hectare." And this
29
motion was agreed. Did you find that the zoning of 16 houses to the hectare
10:53:59 30
was preferable to the four houses to the acre which the other lands had? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:54:04
10:54:25
10 1
A
Well eight to the acre or 16 to the hectare is the zoning on the other side of
2
the road. So I suppose I always felt that if you are going to zone something
3
properly and you are going to maximise open space, leisure activities and
4
activities that benefit the community the large, the higher the density that's
5
zoned, the more opportunity you have for providing these facilities.
6
Q
48
If I could have page 5518 please. This is another one of the expense claims
7
forms, Mr. Lohan, you just see there in December 1994, Mr. Lynn has noted
8
contact with yourself again there, you see the sum there of 78 which you have
9
already told the Tribunal you have no recollection of.
10:54:50 10
A
None. I know -- I never had a meal with Mr. Lynn, I am absolutely sure of
11 12
that. Q
49
And then on the 24th April 1995 the manager informs the council there were a
13
number of submissions, three in favour of the variation, 15 against but he
14
recommends that the variation takes place without amendment and there was a
10:55:10 15
vote in that regard, the vote is 23 for the variation without amendment and you
16
were in favour of that I think, that would be your --
17
A
18
Q
19
Yes. 50
Could I have map 7283 please. This is the final map posed to the variation where we see that the stripy lands there are the science and technology park,
10:55:47 20
the lands that are outlined in red and pale colour are ten to the hectare and
21
then the lands on the other side, the ones we were speaking of are 16 to the
22
hectare. 5619 please. This is a letter from Mr. Michael Riordan to
23
Mr. Richard Lynn from May 1995. Seeking support for the Dun Laoghaire Adult
24
Education Board for the 16th.
10:56:22 25
A
Yes, that's correct, I was chairman of that board for eight years. Our
26
function was to take people who were illiterate, who couldn't read or write
27
over a period of years to give them reading and writing skills and numeracy
28
skills and each year we had a session where we would put on display the works
29
of the groups within the county for three days and on one occasion, our
10:56:47 30
president actually opened so it was quite a big event. And it was very www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:56:50
10:57:09
11 1
important to the people concerned and I remember on one occasion, the year the
2
president opened it, one of our students who four years before couldn't read or
3
write was able to give a recital of his own poetry and for him that was a
4
hugely significant thing and his family. I was very proud of my involvement.
5
Q
51
I think Monarch had been regular supporters, they supported you for 100 pounds
6
in 1993 and this letter indicates that they supported you 200 pounds the
7
previous year?
8
A
There was five or six companies we wrote to and Michael Riordan we wrote to
9 10:57:34 10
every year and generally they were all supportive of it. Q
52
5735 please. Just to show you, Mr. Lohan, another one of these expense claims
11
formed and this one is for January '96, the weekend of 5th January 1986 again
12
indicating that Mr. Lynn had some contact with you that week.
13
A
14
Q
I have no recall of these events. 53
10:58:07 15
The next sign of any contact is in June of 1996 at 6019 please and it's the following year, again the adult education exhibition where you are seeking a
16
donation from Monarch Properties and again they donate 200 pounds to the cost
17
of the exhibition.
18
A
19
Q
That's correct. 54
10:58:33 20
request contribute to tickets.
21
A
22
Q
That's right. The 3rd August 1996. 55
23 24
6070 please. A couple of months later in August of 1996, Monarch at your
8322 please. This is the cheque there, it appears to have been made out directly to yourself. And in such circumstances, what would you then do?
A
We had an accountant in charge of the draws and I'd hand all the cheques over
10:58:58 25
to him and where necessary, he would get me to endorse them but generally they
26
were made out directly to the Progressive Democrats, it would be unusual to
27
make one out to myself.
28 29 10:59:23 30
Q
56
Could I have 7465 please. This is the review of the 1993 Development Plan these are the draft changes proposed by the manager and I think you see the Monarch lands there, you see the yellow lands refer to changes 13 and 14 which www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:59:27
10:59:47
12 1
is changing the zoning from AP10 to A and change 14, AP16 to A and for the
2
purpose of maximising potential of the lands suitable for development and in
3
effect lifting the densities and changes 4 and 5 are the stripy lands, down at
4
the bottom of the lands, are to extend the science and technology park.
5
A
6
Q
7
A
That's correct. 57
As far as I can recall, there was very little opposition, I think there may
8 9
These changes passed through the council and there seems to be no opposition.
have been one or two but very little. Q
58
11:00:06 10
And the extension of the science and technology park, what was your belief with a view to that extension?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
I think we extended by 20 acres or something, I was supportive of that. 59
What was the reasoning behind that? Again, everybody was so supportive of the science and technology and I think it
14
was developing as such a rate at that stage that it justified the zoning more
11:00:25 15
land because it would be filled.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
60
The park was being developed -The park would be filled, yes.
61
19
Could I have 7258 please, this is the first display of the Draft Development Plan of 1987 and a number of representations were received from Monarch
11:00:43 20
Properties there, you see the numbers if we could enlarge that bit there
21
please. You see their representation 360 at the top left representation?
22
A
23
Q
I see that, yes. 62
24
it was to remove the cap on the district centre at 362 and then below that
11:01:07 25
representation 359 was to extend the science and technology parks across the
26 27
And that was to extend the district centre and then the representation beside
road. A
I I recall that is -- we resisted extending the cap, we had a cap and we wanted
28
the cap maintained because we wanted to development Dun Laoghaire and not
29
outside the town and particularly not in Monarch lands.
11:01:24 30
Q
63
I think while the motion to lift the cap was put, there was an amendment put to www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:01:32
11:01:46
13 1
it, it was successful with the addition of the terms accepting the manager's
2
recommendation in his report that "The following specific objective replace the
3
cap, the retail elements on lands zoned DC at Cherrywood should compliment
4
adjoining land uses. As such it shall be of a size which will provide for the
5
local needs of the proposed science and technology park, the proposed business
6
park and the adjoining residential neighbourhoods." That isn't quite as firm
7
as a cap, is that correct?
8
A
9
Q
No it's not. 64
11:02:02 10
successful but the amendment to include without prejudice to the advancement of
11
the objective of a public golf course.
12
A
13
Q
That's correct. 65
14
So I think at this stage the lands are now fully developed and there are no areas remaining that are not suitable for development. So from a developer's
11:02:20 15
16
And also the motion to extend the science and technology park was also
perspective, this was a very happy outcome, would you agree? A
Well I was very very supportive of the pay and play, the golf thing and I was
17
very supportive of the science and technology and the zoning, I suppose that we
18
ultimately arrived at was in keeping with the zoning in the area generally, the
19
density levels, not the zoning, the density levels. They allowed for the
11:02:44 20
21
development of Druid's Glen and they allowed for a lot of open space. Q
66
Could I have page 6321 please. This appears to be an internal memo of Monarch
22
Properties addressed to Mr. Richard Lynn, copied to Noel Murray. I think Noel
23
Murray was the marketing director of Monarch Properties, did you know Noel
24
Murray?
11:03:08 25
A
26
Q
27 28 29 11:03:28 30
No, I think I met him once but I didn't know him. I knew of him. 67
And the note indicates that you telephoned and you wanted to speak with Mr. Lynn about the arts centre in Bloomfields?
A
There was a proposed arts centre in Bloomfields and it looked as if the arts group weren't going to take it up. The adult education centre, we were located in the VEC in Sallynoggin and we needed space in Dun Laoghaire very badly and www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:03:33
11:04:02
14 1
we were just inquiring if it was possible maybe we could maybe rent that space
2
if it become available, it subsequently didn't become available anyway.
3
Q
68
Could I have page 2078 please. This is the statement of Mr. Sweeney and dated
4
June 2000. And at page 2079 please, he indicates a donation to yourself on the
5
12th January 1999 for 450 pounds. Do you recall this?
6
A
I can't recall it but if he did, I would have to check that up for you, it
7
would be in the context of the local elections that were taking place that
8
year. But I definitely cannot recall getting any such payment from him.
9
Q
69
11:04:29 10
I think Mr. Lohan in your statement you told the Tribunal that you never received any political contributions or gifts from anyone associated with the
11
Monarch Group or any of the people outlined?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:04:47 15
Q
That's absolutely true, I made that statement in April 1999. 70
So you are not sure whether this payment took place or not? I have absolutely no recall of but I will check it up for you and see but I --
71
And there's a further payment, a contribution arranged by Mr. Richard Lynn in
16
June of 1999 indicating a payment of 500 pounds to yourself for the local
17
election expenses?
18
A
19
Q
11:05:04 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
That's correct. 72
I made the statement in April 1999. That was in June 1999. 73
Excuse me. Sorry, April -- which was it. No, my original statement.
74
That's 7620 please. This is in replay to the Tribunal's letter of April 2006. Yeah, I took the view that the Monarch lands had ceased in 1998 and that any
11:05:40 25
26
But you didn't in your statement, you didn't refer to this donation?
information you wanted was up to that date. Q
75
Could I have page 1300 please, this is the letter from the Tribunal to
27
yourself, Mr. Lohan, and at item 3 there if we could enlarge that please. "Any
28
payment or benefit you may have received from or on behalf of those listed at i
29
and ii" and I think you see there at ii, the names listed are the late
11:06:08 30
Mr. Phillip Monahan, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeney and Mr. Dominic www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:06:16
11:06:23
15 1
Glennane and Mr. Phillip Reilly. That was the question asked of you, Mr.
2
Lohan.
3
A
I took that being a reference to the period of the development of the Monarch
4 5
lands. Q
76
6
please, Mr. Lohan?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:06:40 10
If I could just enlarge, you see the last line of the second paragraph there
Q
I do indeed. 77
It says, "From the 1st January 1989 to date." Yes, I am sorry, I must have misread that.
78
11
Just to refer you then briefly to 6619 which is a request from yourself to Mr. Sweeney.
12
A
13
Q
Yes. That was for a draw we were running too. 79
14
You indicate that you have recently been appointed to the national executive party and asked to help out some financial problems and Mr. Sweeney notes he
11:07:03 15
purchased seven tickets at 100 pounds each in support of your request.
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 80
And then at page 1375 please, this is from the statement of Mr. Lynn, again you
18
will see items 7 and 8 there, around the same time period. A contribution to
19
the Dun Laoghaire Adult Education Board of 800 pounds.
11:07:29 20
A
21
Q
That would be correct, yes. 81
22 23
please. The last two items on that list. A
Yes, Dun Laoghaire Education Committee, fine, and local election. I accept
24 11:07:49 25
that, yes. Q
26 27
And then the tickets for the grand draw of 100 pounds and then page 1376
82
Thank you, Mr. Lohan, if you would answer any questions anybody else might have for you.
A
Thank you very much.
28 29 11:07:59 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Just one question, Mr. Lohan.
Yes, your honour. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:08:01
11:08:50
16 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could I have 2359, I think it's a map, the Development Plan
2
map of 1993 and 7283 beside it if I could for a second. I just want to ask,
3
Mr. Lohan, the one on the right is the lands after the variation of the 1993
4
plan and I think that was finally, I have forgotten the day, I think it was
5
1995 it was actually adopted.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
April 1995.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:09:00 10
April 1995. If you like I suppose it's about 18 months or so
after the draft development, the 1993 plan. And you were saying earlier that
11
when you came to sign the motion in November of 1993, that that was a
12
compromise. And I just want to ask you, ultimately 18 months later, all of the
13
Monarch lands are zoned otherwise than agriculture, isn't that correct, there's
14
no agriculture lands left?
11:09:28 15
A
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
the hectare. To the right, if you like of the old 1983 line, isn't that
19
correct?
11:09:39 20
A
And in November 1993, Monarch had their lands on ten houses to
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
this, obviously the science and technology park. And the district centre
24
capped.
11:09:50 25
A
And by April 1995, they had retained that and then they had
That's correct.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
old 83 line, is that correct?
29
A
And then they had 16 houses to the hectare, to the left of the
That's correct, yes.
11:10:01 30
www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:10:02
11:10:24
17 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
without, as I understand it, any compromise having to be achieved, is that
3
correct, Mr. Lohan?
4
A
I am just want to ask you, all that seems to have happened
Well as I said before, after '92 onwards, I took my direction from the county
5
manager and the professional planners. What they proposed, I tended to support
6
mostly.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
and you took at the '93 map, that's the, is that the Brides Glen there I think,
11:10:46 10
11
Yes but just if you look at that at that, 1995 variation map
is it? A
The Druid's Glen.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
diverse density zoning pattern there now, isn't that correct by '95?
11:10:58 15
A
I beg your pardon, the Druid's Glen, there seems to be quite a
As far as I can remember, yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
have 16 houses to the hectare and ten houses to the hectare. And in terms of,
19
just asking if anybody is looking at that and within the council, when that
11:11:17 20
came to be proposed, were the lands north of the Druid's Glen still within the
21 22
You have one house to the acre, is that right, and then you
jurisdiction of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown? A
The Druid's Glen runs through Cherrywood.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:11:31 25
As i understand it, the Cherrywood lands are still -- So the
houses, I am just wondering the houses, the lands that were zoned one house to
26
the acre, when you were considering if you like looking at densities and you
27
seem concerned about densities, you have given reasons as to why you voted why
28
you did, Mr. Lohan, that you didn't want an elitist pattern developing, which
29
obviously one can understand.
11:11:57 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:11:58
11:12:27
18 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
1993, how come some 18 months later, there was no great, I haven't heard
3
anyway, discussion about giving 16 houses to the hectare to lands that were
4
zoned agricultural, already zoned lands at one house to the acre, I know it's a
5
very long-winded question but you get my drift.
6
A
7
I am just wondering why, if that was a compromise in November
I understand where you are coming from but I honestly cannot recall as to why, what my reasoning or my thinking was at the time on that.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:12:43 10
11
All right and just one other thing. You said last time you
were here that Mr. Marren asked you to sign the motion, is that correct? A
That would be normal within the group.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
of being actually asked or?
11:13:00 15
A
That was the motion on the 11th, do you have of recollection
I don't have a recollection but I now I that's what would have happened.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: Obviously your signature is on it. I see. All right. Thanks
18
very much.
19 11:13:04 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
All right. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
22 23
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
24 11:13:10 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Gerry Gannon please.
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:13:12
11:13:41
19 1
MR. GERRY GANNON, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
2
FOLLOWS BY MS. O' RAW.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Gannon.
5
A
6
Q
Good morning. 83
MS. O'RAW:
Good morning, Mr. Gannon, my name is Eunice O' Raw, I will be
7
taking you through your evidence this morning. The Tribunal wrote to you in
8
April of this year with a note of a meeting that occurred back in August 1991.
9 11:13:54 10
A Q
That's correct. 84
And asked for you to provide a narrative statement and you did so. Just in
11
relation to that particular minute of a meeting, it appears that you attended
12
at a meeting with two other people or the three of you appear to have come
13
together, Mr. Noel Smyth, and Mr. Louis Scully, is that right?
14
A
11:14:16 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 85
You have given evidence to the Tribunal before. Yes.
86
18
And I think in that evidence, you said that you had a relationship with Mr. Smyth?
19
A
11:14:25 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That's correct. 87
And that was in relation to lands at Airfield, is that correct? That's correct.
88
In relation to those lands out at Airfield, the nature of the relationship that
23
existed there, Mr. Smyth owned the lands, I think you told that to the Tribunal
24
before, and then you were involved in obtaining planning permission in relation
11:14:49 25
26
to those lands, is that correct? A
I also had some of the lands owned myself in my name too, so there was a kind
27
of a both parties came together to get the whole thing sorted out.
28
Q
29
A
11:15:04 30
89
Did you purchase the lands together at the time? No, he purchased the lands, I forget now going back because obviously this was the last, this hasn't been brought to me before. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:15:07
11:15:26
20 1
Q
90
Yes. So when did you come on board with Mr. Smyth in relation to obtaining the
2
planning permission for these lands, the Airfield lands? Was it around about
3
the same time or did Mr. Smyth seek to obtain planning permission first of all?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
No. 91
Yes. 92
93
I see. So you didn't need any rezoning done at the time, it was just the planning permissions?
A
It was just basically a sewerage problem, there was a problem with the sewerage
12 13
Were the lands zoned for residential purposes at the time? Yes.
11:15:38 10
11
So it was he brought you on board to obtain the planning permission?
capacity. Q
94
14
I see, okay. So if we could have a look at a document please at 8549. And this is a letter dated the 19th June 1991, it's a letter from Mr. Smyth to
11:16:02 15
Mr. Louis Scully and it's in relation to the Cherrywood lands and he encloses
16
various different documents there in relation to the location maps, etc. and he
17
said "We anticipate that the 1983 plan is unlikely to be the one that will
18
finally be adopted". I think he is referring there to the 1983 road plan,
19
"However, perhaps you would like into the matter and set up a meeting with
11:16:26 20
Gerry and we can discuss it further." So this is in June 1991, Mr. Smyth
21
writing to Mr. Scully and suggesting that Mr. Scully would look into the matter
22
and set up a meeting with Gerry, do you think you are that Gerry referred to in
23
that letter there?
24
A
11:16:46 25
Q
More than likely. 95
26 27
Mr. Scully involved in the Airfield lands as well? A
No, Mr. Scully was -- he dealt in land, he was an agent, a land agent. An
28 29 11:17:08 30
Can I ask the relationship then between yourself, Mr. Smyth and Mr. Scully, was
auctioneer. Q
96
An estate agent and auctioneer, right. And after this letter was written, were you contacted, do you think, by Mr. Scully? Or by Mr. Smyth in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:17:14
11:17:37
21 1
these lands. We see that the minute of the meeting you were sent by the
2
Tribunal was in August of 1991, this letter is written in June '91. And you
3
attended a meeting in August '91. So presumably, between June and August, you
4
were contacted by Mr. Smyth or Mr. Scully.
5
A
6
Q
I have no recollection of it, I might have been, done. 97
7
1991?
8
A
9
Q
That's correct. 98
11:17:53 10
11
However, you ultimately ended up at a meeting in Monarch on the 27th August
Can you recall what was the intention of you attending this particular meeting, what was the purpose behind it?
A
Well to the best of my knowledge obviously in 1991, it was a long time ago and
12
the meeting wasn't a very long meeting as such.
13
Q
14
A
99
Yes. I do remember going into this big boardroom which was very impressive and I
11:18:08 15
remember we were a bit late, the meetings was a bit late but I think the main
16
thing that was the problem there, I think that in 1991 and correct me if I am
17
wrong because this is only meeting I think I had with about the land, I think
18
there was no sewerage line in Cabinteely at that particular time, there was no
19
sewerage capacity and obviously if you are to build houses, whether it's one to
11:18:35 20
the acre or five to the acre or six to the acre, you need a sewer line and I
21
think the houses at that stage were zoned on septic tanks, if I can remember
22
correctly.
23
Q
24
A
100
Yes. And I suppose why I was brought into the meeting probably was to see if it was
11:18:48 25
possible that a new sewer line which was about three miles away, again I am
26
only going from memory, I have no maps or recollection or no details of it,
27
that the sewer be brought in, I feel it needed a sewer line brought to the
28
site.
29
Q
11:19:08 30
A
101
At the time the lands were zoned for low density residential. I think it was one house to the acre, I am not quite sure but I think it was. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:19:12
11:19:39
22 1
Q
102
2 3
Do you remember a discussion or what was said about the zoning of the lands and the density of the housing?
A
Well not really. I think my view at the time was that septic tanks wouldn't be
4
viable on a large septic tank probably is viable on a house on, in a country
5
area but not in an area like that.
6
Q
7
A
103
Was there intention then to increase the density on the lands? No, it was totally a sewer line, the sewer line was far away and I had -- we
8
had already done a sewer line in Airfield, so I think we were the pain purpose
9
of the thing was to see could a sewer line be brought from Cabinteely to
11:20:00 10
wherever the sewer could be taken through.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
104
Correct. 105
14 11:20:14 15
And out in Airfield, you had to have a sewer line put in?
And was it the intention then that a similar project would be done here to see about how to get the sewer line out?
A
We brought a sewer line I think about two and a half mile in Airfield and this
16
was roughly, now I am going totally from memory, I think roughly it was
17
something similar distance, maybe a bit longer to get into a pipe where there
18
was capacity in the pipe to take houses.
19
Q
106
11:20:34 20
to be Noel Smyth, "introduced Gerry Gannon and Louis Scully and stated that --
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Sorry. 107
Page reference 3314. Sorry it should be appearing before you now. Yes.
108
11:20:56 25
"NS introduced Gerry Gannon and Louis Scully and stated that GG" who I take to be yourself "had obtained a planning permission at Grange Road, Malahide".
26
They would be the Airfield lands, would they?
27
A
28
Q
29 11:21:09 30
If we just have a look at the minute of the meeting, it said "NS" whom I take
Correct. 109
"On which Abbey Homes had had seven or eight refusals previously. He obtained permission within --
A
Sorry, that's a little bit of a exaggeration, I don't think it's seven or www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:21:14
11:21:26
23 1 2
eight. But that's what's there but I think they had one or two. Q
110
3
application that had been put in by Abbey Homes?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
Absolutely. 111
And where Abbey Homes -I would have my own engineers looking at this obviously and my architects to
7 8
You think they had one or two refusals. Did you have a look at the planning
see what was the problems. Q
112
9
And do you recall the difference between your application and the application that had been put in by Abbey Homes?
11:21:40 10
A
11
Q
12
A
A sewer line. 113
The sewer line. That was how it was achieved. Sewer pipe, well capacity, you can't flush a toilet without a sewer pipe. And
13
they were doing something similar that time to what Monarch was doing, they
14
were trying to put in a treatment plant at that stage but I thought wouldn't
11:21:58 15
16
work. It was in a residential area so it's different ways and means, you know. Q
114
"He obtained permission within a 15 month period for 770 houses with an
17
additional 135 houses to come together with restaurant, pub, etc, D was not
18
proceeding with a refurbishment at Donaghmede pending Malahide." Do you recall
19
what that is about?
11:22:21 20
A
21
Q
I think that that was reference to Dunnes Stores. 115
"GG was in contact with Manor Parks Homes in the sum of 6.5 million pounds.
22
(David Daly) prior to planning permission." Can you tell us what that was
23
about?
24
A
Manor Park had actually entered -- again I had -- Manor Park had entered a
11:22:49 25
contract with us to purchase the lands.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 11:23:07 30
116
The purchase the Airfield lands? Airfield lands, yes.
117
And "GG had looked at the Cherrywood site and recognised that there was some difficulties attached." So that would indicate that you had done some work on this beforehand? www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:23:10
11:23:17
24 1
A
2
Q
3
A
Well -118
Before this meeting? I knew there was a service problem, that there was no sewerage in Cabinteely at
4
the time.
5
Q
6
A
119
Right. And what were you proposing to do then? Well my engineers was proposing to put in a new sewer line from where were the
7
capacity was in the existing sewers in, I honestly don't know at the time where
8
it was, I think it was up in Shanganagh or somewhere. That was our proposal at
9
this stage, this was only very brief, it's just one look into a meeting, it
11:23:43 10
11
wasn't as if we done detailed studies on it or anything like that. Q
120
12
Mr. Smyth, and Mr. Scully?
13
A
14
Q
11:24:11 15
A
16
Q
Well I suppose Mr. Scully was a valuer, Noel Smyth was a solicitor. 121
122
And you decided to broach Monarch with this possible assistance, or to provide a service?
A
I don't quite know it was like that. I think they could have approached Noel
19 11:24:37 20
And the three of you had operated previously together? Yes, well he'd be -- Yes.
17 18
How did the three of you come together to present this to Monarch, yourself,
Smyth, I don't know, he might have rang me to see about it. Q
123
Yes and according to this note here. "He was prepared to offer his services to
21
provide as follows, GG to look after residential." Was that in relation to
22
providing the sewerage line?
23
A
24
Q
11:24:55 25
Yes. 124
"Monarch look after retail, GG use own architect for residential, GG will enter contract with Manor Homes. He states he has a good rapport with officials."
26
Can you tell me about that rapport that you had with officials and in obtaining
27
what whatever it was that needed to be obtained to provide this residential
28
development?
29 11:25:21 30
A
Well I suppose that, you are talking about 1991 when the services in Dublin were very bad and the services in Dublin at that stage was, there was usually www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:25:26
11:25:49
25 1
one pipe which also connected to surface water and sewerage into the one pipe
2
rather than nowadays it all goes into the one pipe, at the time there was a
3
certain amount of people connecting surface water mains into the sewer pipe. I
4
suppose what we did up in the last site, we disconnected, our proposals was to
5
disconnect all the existing surface water pipes into a separate surface water
6
main and to keep the sewer pipe separate and this was something similar what we
7
were thinking about here.
8
Q
125
9 11:26:04 10
But can you tell me about the contact you would have had with officials in order to obtain --
A
Personally I had no contact at all myself, my engineers would have, they had no
11
contact at this stage, this was just a proposal we were going to do, it never
12
materialised.
13
Q
126
14 11:26:16 15
But in relation to Airfield, for example, did you have any contact with the officials then?
A
No, not me personally, my engineers would have been in contact with them, I am
16
not an engineering person, so obviously that is an engineering detail that
17
would have to be worked out over many months.
18
Q
127
19
And your role was in relation to the development of the lands but you would have other professionals, architects and engineers?
11:26:38 20
A
21
Q
I am not an architect or an engineer. 128
Yes. So what exactly was your role in relation to it? If you are not the
22
architect or the engineer, just to explain exactly the nature of the service
23
that you would have provided to Monarch?
24
A
Well it happened they didn't want me at all but I suppose we would have looked
11:27:00 25
at bringing the pipe from A to B and seeing, first of all, was it viable to do
26 27
and secondly, could it be done. Q
129
Yes. There was a further meeting that occurred on the 3rd September 1991, this
28
is at 3328. And again, you are present with Mr. Noel Smyth, Mr. Louis Scully,
29
Mr. Edward Sweeney, Mr. Noel Murray and Mr. Richard Lynn, Monarch and it said
11:27:38 30
"NS stated that GG required to know the area of land devoted for residential www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:27:43
11:28:00
26 1
purposes and that to be retained for commercial and retail."
2
any discussions about how the land was going to be used at that time?
3
A
4
Q
Can you recall
I haven't seen this before actually. 130
5
It should have been in the documentation that was furnished to you, I believe a CD Rom of the entire brief was sent to you, so ...
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
I haven't seen it. 131
If you would like a minute to have a look at it. Yes.
132
11:28:49 10
And there's a following page as well, page 3329 please. Just to give you an opportunity to have a look at it. I think this appears to be the package that
11
you are presenting to Monarch of services that you would have provided and in
12
relation to that particular package, "NS then outlined the package required by
13
Mr. Gannon and Louis Scully to be involved in Cherrywood."
14
A
11:29:17 15
Q
I am sorry, can you put up -133
Sorry of course 3328 please. This is on the first page, it was a payment of
16
20,000 pounds for this they would open up discussions with David Daly in
17
relation to the sale of the residential lands to Manor Homes. I think you have
18
already said that you had an involvement with Manor Homes in your Airfield
19
site?
11:29:38 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 134
On signing of a contract for the residential lands, payment of 100,000 pounds
22
on the grant of planning permission, 12 percent of residential contract price
23
within this NS was to receive 2.5 percent of which he would not be taking and
24
then it goes on to outline further amounts there. Who, can you recall,
11:30:00 25
negotiated or who came up with those particular figures?
26
A
27
Q
Who wrote the letter? 135
Well this is a minute of the meeting that occurred and this is the Mr. Smyth
28
outlining the package that was, that he said that was being required by
29
Mr. Gannon and Mr. Scully.
11:30:21 30
A
I don't actually know. I think it was just discussions, just a discussion that www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:30:25
11:30:50
27 1
was brought through the same as the last letter, I don't think there's any
2
actually -- I don't know to be quite honest. It's the first I have seen of it.
3
Q
136
On the following page at 3329, it indicates there "E.S" whom I take to be
4
Mr. Sweeney indicated "that GG should do was to provide a layout which he felt
5
David Daly would like and make a submission advising timing etc, after further
6
discussion, NS submitted that the package as outlined by him should be
7
considered by Monarch and if acceptable, heads of agreement should be entered
8
into. The payment of the 20,000 pounds initial fee would be made and work
9
could then be commenced by both Mr. Gannon and Mr. Scully."
11:31:12 10
ever paid, that initial fee in?
11
A
12
Q
No. 137
13 14
A
No, I have no documentation at all about it, if I had I would have given it to the Tribunal.
Q
138
17
You mightn't have any documentation but do you recall assisting Monarch at all in their endeavours?
18
A
19
Q
No. 139
11:31:42 20
21
Did you do any work in relation to assisting Monarch in providing, in obtaining residential --
11:31:28 15
16
Was that 20,000
Do you recall any discussion about changing of zoning or changing of density at this later meeting?
A
No. I was taking the land basically at one house per acre which was in 1991, I
22
think Monarch was trying to achieve some development on the site at that stage
23
because obviously they had paid a lot of money for the site. So --
24
Q
140
11:32:07 25
Yes. Well at this time the lands were zoned on a very low density residential basis. Now, you have been presented at this earlier meeting as some one who
26
had obtained a large amount or high density planning permission on other lands,
27
was something similar being sought by Monarch here?
28
A
29
Q
11:32:35 30
I would say it probably was. They were trying to maximise their lands. 141
And given that their lands were zoned with low density residential, how did you propose to them you could obtain this? www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:32:38
11:32:57
28 1
A
As I say, I didn't make any proposal to them, it was a general talk to them
2
about what their views were and what they were trying to do on it, I never made
3
no actual submission to them on drawings or anything at that stage. Because
4
the first of all the thing that we had to do was, we had to find out if you
5
could get a sewer pipe to the lands which we didn't follow up on that.
6
Q
142
7 8
a change in the zoning. A
Well, we weren't looking at that, we were looking at the house per acre as was
9
there, what we were trying to do first was see could we get a sewer line into
11:33:17 10
the site and then probably afterwards that would be a different --
11
Q
12
A
143
So to get a sewer line put in first and then to get a change in the zoning -That would be my view to get a sewer line into the place because there was no
13 14
I see. But the zoning at that time was low density, so there would have to be
sewer line. Q
144
Thank you Mr. Gannon if you have any questions.
11:33:33 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A
Thank you very much.
Thank you, your honour.
18 19
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
11:33:37 20
21
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Barrett please.
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:33:46
11:33:59
29 1
MR. SEAN BARRETT, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
2
FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Barrett.
5
A
6
Q
Good morning. 145
Good morning, Mr. Barrett, you have previously given evidence to the Tribunal
7
but briefly, you are a member of the Fine Gael political party and between June
8
of 1991 and December of 1993, you were a member of Dublin County Council, and
9
after December of 1993, you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
11:34:33 10
Council?
11
A
12
Q
That is correct. 146
After 1993, insofar as you were a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
13
Council, I think that the documentation shows that in late 1995, your
14
involvement with Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and these lands ceased
11:34:49 15
and you had little or nothing to do with the lands thereafter, isn't that the
16
position?
17
A
18
Q
No, late 1994, I finished because I was appointed to the new government. 147
19
Yes. That's correct and I think in prior to 1991, you had previously been a member of Dublin County Council up to 1982.
11:35:08 20
A
21
Q
That's correct. 148
22
And then you retook your seat or stood in the local elections in June of 1991 and were elected, isn't that the position?
23
A
24
Q
That is correct. 149
11:35:23 25
By the time you were elected in June of 1991, certain things had happened to the Cherrywood lands and I will ask you some questions about that. But can the
26
Tribunal take it, Mr. Barrett, that you would have known this entire area and
27
location very, very well?
28
A
29
Q
11:35:44 30
Well as part of my constituency even though I wasn't a member of council. 150
Yes. And would it be fairs to say and indeed the Tribunal has heard evidence as late as yesterday from Mr. O'Herlihy, that you were opposed to high density www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:35:50
11:36:11
30 1 2
residential development in the Carrickmines Valley? A
Well the position I took was that these lands had been zoned in 1983 at one
3
house to the acre which one would regard as sort of a holding exercise I don't
4
think anybody would ever envisage developing a large area like this at one
5
house to the acre on septic tank.
6 7
When I was elected in 1991, I took a decision that any change was premature
8
pending the overall plan being presented by the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
9
County Council as to the whole area stretching from Cherrywood Road to
11:36:36 10
Glenamuck, so I decided that the best thing to do was to retain what was there
11
in 1983 and to allow the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, through the
12
officials, to present a new action plan for the whole area. I didn't see any
13
sense in changing from one house to the acre to four houses to the acre because
14
it was evident to anybody who knew the area that the whole of that area would
11:37:01 15
16
not be developed purely for housing at four houses to the acre. Q
151
And by that, do you mean that you would have known as your colleagues would
17
have known that portion of the land would have been developed the at a higher
18
density?
19 11:37:19 20
A
All you have to do is look at the report presented, the technical reports presented to the council at that time. They clearly stated that there was a
21
proposal to put a new main sewer, the Carrickmines sewer, into this area and
22
therefore they were indicating that this was in future a development area and
23
therefore anything that was going to be proposed, whether it was one house to
24
the acre or four houses to the acre was going to be totally irrelevant because
11:37:43 25
you had proposal for a new motorway to go through it, the line hadn't been
26
decided, there was a proposal for a new mains sewer, not just to service that
27
land but other lands, right up Glenamuck Road up to Stepaside. So that whole
28
area was going to change. My attitude was that in the 19 -- as it turned out
29
1993 Development Plan, that it was pointless changing from one house to the
11:38:13 30
acre to four houses to the acre, especially with the Monarch proposal which www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:38:18
11:38:42
31 1
also included major retail development when Dun Laoghaire town was dying on its
2
feet, when you had a neighbourhood shopping centre in Loughlinstown, one in
3
Ballybrack, you had shopping facilities being developed in Shankill, you had a
4
major outlet in Cornelscourt and here we were talking about a major retail
5
development in an area that was totally virgin, a virgin area, and Dun
6
Laoghaire town dying on its feet, it didn't make any sense to me. I said to
7
people if you want to develop, go down to Dun Laoghaire and I will support you.
8
That was quite simple.
9
Q
152
11:39:03 10
And at that time, sorry, Mr. Barrett, you had effectively dual membership, you were also a member of Dun Laoghaire Urban District Council, is that correct?
11
A
12
Q
No, I was never a member of. 153
Sorry I beg your pardon. Can I show you the position that pertained when you
13
were elected in 1991, which was the map that went out on first public display
14
at page 7021.
11:39:29 15
16
Now, you will have seen this documentation, Mr. Barrett, in the brief. The
17
yellow lands are the residentially zoned lands and the lands caught within the
18
red boundary are those that were owned by Monarch Properties and in the first
19
public display, the yellow lands were proposed at four houses to the acre or
11:39:50 20
ten house to the hectare on piped sewage as a result of a map that was brought
21
to the council by the manager in May of 1991, just before the elections. And
22
that was the position that was put on the first public display. So when you
23
were reelected to the council, that was the position that pertained?
24
A
11:40:08 25
Q
That's correct. 154
Now, the manager in his report to the members had explained to the members that
26
it was more appropriate that all of these yellow lands be zoned on piped
27
sewerage because of the imminence of the Carrickmines sewer that was going to
28
service the area.
29
A
11:40:26 30
Q
Well that was the report that I saw. 155
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:40:27
11:40:42
32 1
A
2
Q
I didn't necessarily agree with it mind you but -156
That was what the manager had said, that it was more appropriate, that instead
3
of it being on septic tank, it should be on piped sewage but the pipe itself
4
had not been built indeed at this stage, isn't that the position? Now --
5
A
Or the capacity of the pipe hadn't been agreed either. That was an issue
6
following on 1992, 1993 as to the size was pipe that should be installed, as to
7
what level of development should be allowed.
8
Q
157
9
Because the size of the pipe or the diameter of the pipe would determine the density of development, isn't that right?
11:41:04 10
A
11
Q
Correct. 158
And that was a decision indeed I think that came before the council and there
12
was much discussion in the council about the size of the pipe, isn't that
13
right?
14
A
11:41:13 15
Q
Correct. That is correct. 159
16 17
Because that was going to have a knock-on effect on what density, sorry, what the capacity would be would determine the density, isn't that the position?
A
That is correct but it would also determine what level of development should be
18
allowed in that whole area and that's why it was an action plan was needed for
19
this whole area in advance of any change. Which therefore my argument was,
11:41:38 20
which I stated publicly at various meetings and at the council meeting, my
21
argument was that it was premature to make any change when you hadn't decided
22
on the size of the pipe, the pipe hadn't been built, the road line hadn't been
23
decided, and yet we were changing from one house to the acre to four houses to
24
the acre. I couldn't understand it.
11:42:02 25
Q
160
But your position in relation to the lands was that you wanted an action area
26
plan and you wanted the matter left to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
27
Council which was due to take up office in early 1994, isn't that right?
28 29 11:42:25 30
A
Immediately after the Development Plan. What I actually did was I asked the planning officials to supply me with a map outlining the area in that general area which was zoned at one house to the acre. They supplied me with the map www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:42:31
11:42:49
33 1
and I tabled a motion which stated that these lands should be zoned at one
2
house to the acre, the reason why I worded it that way is because technically
3
some of it had gone on public display at four houses to the acre. So I got
4
that map supplied to me by the council and I tabled that motion.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
161
That's the motion that was dealt with by the council on the 27th May 1992. That is correct.
162
But I think that prior to that, in late November 1991, it appears somebody
8
else, the Tribunal heard from Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, you may have had a meeting
9
with Mr. O'Herlihy or some of the Monarch people who wanted to make their
11:43:12 10
proposal to you?
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 163
13
Did you attend a meeting in the offices of Monarch Properties to view the display that they had or their proposals?
14
A
11:43:22 15
Q
16
A
I did. 164
Can you remember first of all who you met at the meeting? I can't remember exactly, but there was a large group of people there. There
17
was Mr. Monahan, who I had met for the first time and there was a large group
18
of officials and a model of who was being proposed. So out of courtesy, I
19
attended and listened to what they had to and then I told them straight up I
11:43:42 20
21
wasn't support it and I gave them all the reasons why. Q
165
And would those reasons have been, Mr. Barrett, the reasons you have outlined
22
to the Tribunal today, that it was premature because the sewer hadn't been
23
built or the size of the pipe hadn't been determined and the matter should be
24
left over to the new council?
11:43:56 25
A
What I said clearly was that this matter should be left to the new council,
26
that an action plan should be drawn up and that I would recommend that if they
27
wanted to have more retail development, that they should move from Cherrywood
28
down to Dun Laoghaire where redevelopment was very badly needed. The town was
29
dying on its feet. It was the main centre of my constituency, I was concerned
11:44:21 30
about it, there was a lot of dereliction in the area and I couldn't see any www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:44:26
11:44:42
34 1
sense of building a new retail centre back in 1991, 1992, in an area that was
2
totally, well for all intents and purposes, agricultural.
3
Q
166
4 5
these lands and were the purchasers of those lands? A
Well it was public knowledge that Monarch and GRE had purchased these lands at
6 7
And prior to this, would you have known, Mr. Barrett, that Monarch had bought
some enormous price. But that was none of my business. Q
167
Yes, I know that but being familiar with the area, the price paid for these
8
lands in 1989 was approximately 10 million pounds, was that regarded as a very
9
high price for land in that area at that time?
11:45:03 10
A
Well I put it to you this way, I wouldn't have paid 10 million pounds for lands
11 12
that was zoned one house to the acre on septic tank. Q
168
I think you mentioned a moment ago that it was regarded as being a high price,
13
was that generally known in the area or in the location that or was it
14
generally considered that a large amount, a bigger than normal amount had been
11:45:24 15
16
paid for these particular lands? A
I suppose I mean we are going back now what, 15, 16 years, you are talking
17
about punts. I suppose given the value of property in the area at that stage,
18
it would have been a large sum of money, yes.
19
Q
11:45:50 20
169
And the line that was used by the council to determine residential development as has been explained to the Tribunal, was what was described as the 1983 line
21
of the Southeastern Motorway and on the map that's on screen, the lands to the
22
east of that line were zoned residential but the lands to the west of that line
23
were zoned agriculture?
24 11:46:11 25
A
Yes, well I mean in 1983, I would imagine that the line that was put in was just an indication that a road was going in, there was never any detailed
26
discussion that, to my knowledge, from '91 to '93 as to the exact line of this
27
road. I mean if you look at back to the minutes of the new Dun
28
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, you will find strangely that a report was
29
presented, to the best of my recollection, by the engineers suggesting three
11:46:40 30
options for that road. The least desirable one, according to that report as I www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:46:47
11:47:04
35 1
recall turned out to be the one that was eventually built on.
2
Q
3
A
170
That's the mountain route, it's called the mountain route? The one through Leopardstown racecourse was the one that the engineers said was
4
least desirable, yet it turned out to be the one that eventually went ahead.
5
Now, that had a significant effect on where development should take place. I
6
was off the council by that stage and in fact the Dail record will show that I
7
questioned why this line was changed and I asked the Minister for Agriculture,
8
who was responsible at the time, for horse racing and I asked why was it
9
allowed that the only remaining race track in Dublin, which was of significant
11:47:31 10
importance to the racing industry, was allowed to lose its six furlong track
11
for a line of a road where the report had previously said it was the least
12
desirable route to take. I could never understand why it was changed. The
13
alternative route was up through Kilgobbin and across through the tip head and
14
I mean all the of this, chairman, is public knowledge. These reports are
11:47:59 15
16
available at the council. Q
171
And I think some of these documents are in the brief, Mr. Barrett, but on the
17
1983 plan, the line of the motorway bisected the Monarch lands, isn't that
18
right?
19
A
11:48:14 20
Q
Yes. 172
21
It's only a notional line because nothing as you say, was built but it did bisect the Monarch lands?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 173
24
And the agreement within the council or the understanding within the council was that residential development would be allowed on the eastern side of that
11:48:28 25
line up to the notional line, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 174
And that beyond that's correct the other side, the western side of that line,
28
would not be available or there wouldn't be residential development, that was
29
the thinking at the time?
11:48:39 30
A
That is so and in fact there was a proposal which I supported, I think it was www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:48:47
11:49:08
36 1
Mr. Galvin, through estate agents called Spain, I think, Paddy Spain.
2
Q
3
A
175
Spain Courtney. He was representing Mr. Galvin and they were anxious to develop a golf course
4
on the line to the west of that notional line. And therefore any movement in
5
that line could affect the viability of a pay and display golf course or pay
6
and play I should say golf course. That if you moved it, if you kept moving
7
it, that it would take up so much land that there wouldn't be sufficient for a
8
golf course and I thought at that stage again we are talking about 1991, 1992,
9
that you know there was a need for pay and play golf facilities because the
11:49:34 10
only other facilities in the area were mainly private golf courses with the
11
exception of a nine hole course in Stepaside which was developed by Dublin
12
County Council.
13 14
And therefore it was important that you were in favour of that golf course on
11:49:52 15
the west side of the line, that to move the notional line more west would
16 17
affect that possibility, so that was a consideration also. Q
176
So at the time, so far as the line of the motorway was concerned, you had two
18
competing interests, Monarch Properties didn't want the line of the motorway on
19
their lands because they would only be allowed develop up to the line of the
11:50:19 20
motorway, that would make sense, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
This would make sense, yes. 177
Mr. Galvin didn't want the motorway going through his lands which adjoined
23
Monarch's lands because he wouldn't be able to build his pay and display golf
24
course?
11:50:33 25
A
26
Q
That's correct. 178
And I think ultimately the manager together with the council officials resolved
27
the matter by saying the line was diagrammatic only and nobody could take it
28
was a fixed and final line?
29 11:50:49 30
A
That was all the more reason, Ms. Dillon, for a proper action plan to be drawn up for this whole area, I can understand Monarch Properties wanting to get www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:50:54
11:51:10
37 1
development on the land they bought, I was talking about the wider area and if
2
you look at the motion I was tabled, it was not confined solely to Monarch
3
Properties land, it was lands zoned at one house to the acre from Cherrywood
4
Road to Glenamuck Road and the map was supplied to me by the officials.
5
Q
179
In fact I think your map, which I am going to show you in a moment,
6
Mr. Barrett, but your map in May of 1992 covered all of the lands that are
7
coloured yellow on that map that's on screen at the moment?
8
A
9
Q
Well that was supplied to me by the council officials. 180
And the map that you prepared for your motion is at 7175 --
11:51:28 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon, could I stop you there, give the stenographer a break,
12
we will break for about ten minutes.
13 14
MS. DILLON: May it please you sir.
11:52:02 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT
17
BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS
18 19
Q
181
12:04:29 20
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Barrett. Just briefly can I ask you before
we look at the motion of the 27th May 1992, and the minutes of the meeting of
21
the 27th May 1992. The lands had been zoned at one house to the acre in the
22
1983 Development Plan, they had gone out on the first public display at four
23
house to the acre, the manager had recommended that the density be changed and
24
that motion was lost on the 27th May, if you hadn't brought your motion,
12:04:55 25
Mr. Barrett, to change the density as it were, on those lands, would they have
26
stayed at four houses to the acre?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:05:05 30
Q
Yes. 182
That would have followed, would it? Yes.
183
So that in even though the manager's map was not accepted by the councillors www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:05:10
12:05:30
38 1
and Councillor Lydon and Councillor -- Councillor Lydon withdrew his motion
2
seeking to the zone the lands to a higher density, if you hadn't brought your
3
motion seeking to rezone them at one to the acre, they would have gone on the
4
1993 plan at four house to the acre?
5
A
6
Q
That's correct. 184
That would have followed. Right. If I show you page 7174, and this is your
7
motion, Mr. Barrett, dated the 11th May 1992, to rezone the lands on the
8
attached map stretching from the Glenamuck Road to the Cherrywood Road
9
Loughlinstown for residential development not exceeding one house to the acre
12:05:54 10
and at map is in question is at 7175. And if we can return this map on its
11
side please. The other way. Yes, and you will see that the outline in red,
12
Mr. Barrett, is the same as the yellow lands we had looked at briefly on the
13
map, isn't that right?
14
A
That's correct, as I said to you earlier, the map was supplied to me by the
12:06:20 15
officials of Dublin County Council. I asked that they give me a map showing
16
what lands between Cherrywood Road and Glenamuck Road had been zoned at one
17
house to the acre in '83. So that's where that map came from.
18
Q
185
19
And you then, your motion then sought effectively to confirm that, to keep them at one house to the acre?
12:06:41 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's correct. 186
They were at this stage proposed for four houses to the acre? That's correct.
187
24
But the manager himself had brought a map before the council seeking to change -- page 7203. Now, this deals with the same lands but in the lands
12:07:02 25
outlined in red are the Monarch lands and what the manager was proposing there
26
was a change from AP to A1P which was an area action plan and again, a change
27
on some of the lands from agriculture to A1P again, do you see that?
28
A
29
Q
12:07:31 30
Yes. 188
And I think at the minutes of the meeting of the 27th, at page 7207, Councillor Lydon proposed and Councillor McGrath seconded that the manager's report be www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:07:37
12:07:57
39 1
adopted and approved. And you voted against that, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
That's correct. 189
Right. Now, if that had been adopted and approved, Mr. Barrett, the effect of
4
that would have been to give, there would have been an action area plan for the
5
Monarch lands, is that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 190
It wouldn't necessarily have dealt with the balance of the lands that were
8
zoned residentially but it would have dealt with the Monarch lands, isn't that
9
right?
12:08:05 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Well it would appear so, yes. 191
According to the manager's map? Yes.
192
14
And it would also have increased the area that was available for residential zoning across the old 1983 line, if you want to see the map again, it's 7203.
12:08:24 15
What the manager was proposing was a change in the notional line of the
16
Southeastern Motorway from the old '83 line to a line that became known as the
17
'91 line and that the lands between those two would be changed from agriculture
18
to action area plan, residential, isn't that right?
19
A
12:08:44 20
Q
That's correct. 193
21 22
give them the benefit of an action area plan, isn't that right? A
Well I wouldn't call it an action area plan, it was just extending the area for
23 24
The effect of that for Monarch Properties if it were passed would have been to
development at four houses to the acre into agricultural zoned land. Q
194
12:09:10 25
That was one effect of it but by putting an area action, an action area plan in place in connection with these lands, when the council came to consider an
26
action area plan, they would also come to consider shopping or retail, isn't
27
that right, in the context of an action area plan.
28
A
29
Q
12:09:29 30
Well that wasn't defined in the motion. 195
No it wasn't defined, it wasn't defined in the motion because all that was proposed by Councillor Lydon was to adopt the manager's report and to adopt www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:09:34
12:09:53
40 1
effectively this map, DP90/244.
2
A
3
Q
Yes, it was increasing the area for development. 196
And it was changing the zoning so far as it was changing it from AP, which was
4
10 houses to the hectare or four houses to the acre on to an action area plan
5
but with still with the same density, it meant the council would consider it
6
again, isn't that right?
7
A
No what would have happened to us the fact that in 1991, when the draft plan
8
went on display, any change that we made subsequent to that would have to go
9
back on display again. So what I -- the effect of my motion, which was passed,
12:10:23 10
that it remain at one house to the acre, the fact that that was different to
11
what went on display in the draft plan in 1991 meant that it had to go back on
12
public display again.
13
Q
197
14
I understand all of, Mr. Barrett, but I am asking you about here, leaving aside your motion or for the moment, if it map had been passed, if this motion had
12:10:46 15
been passed, the effect of that from Monarch Properties' point of view would
16
have been to increase their take of residentially zoned land in the first
17
instance, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
That's correct. Yeah. 198
12:11:00 20
And in the second instance would have been to change the residential zoning from AP to A1P?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes, on piped. 199
On piped sewerage, isn't that right? Yes.
200
12:11:11 25
Now, if that had been passed add you say, that would have had to go out on the second public display and would have to be confirmed by the council?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct. 201
And indeed when your motion was passed it went out on public display and
28
subsequently wasn't confirmed so far as these lands are concerned by the
29
council, isn't that right?
12:11:23 30
A
That's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:11:24
12:11:36
41 1
Q
202
What I was asking you about was, in your view looking at this map, was this
2
something that would inure to the benefit of Monarch Properties if this had
3
been passed?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Well they would have got more land zoned for development, yes. 203
That would have been subsequent, yes. 204
8 9 12:11:53 10
And they would have got an action area plan also?
And within the context of an action area plan, the council would have had to consider retail, isn't that right?
A Q
Well not necessarily. 205
I think the manager when he had given his report in relation to DP92/44 and I
11
will get it up for you in a moment -- sorry I will just show you this, page
12
7197, this had been dealt with at the meeting of the 13th May 1997 and the
13
manager in the third last paragraph in talking about the action area plan had
14
said "This will require the development conform to tan action plan to be
12:12:28 15
adopted by the council. The action plan will provide for the provision of the
16
necessary community facilities, schools, shopping etc and appropriate road
17
system and appropriate open space provision."
18 19
So that within the context of the action plan, the council would have to
12:12:42 20
21
consider, according to the manager in any event, schools and shopping? A
Yes but I mean if that was to, in my opinion if that was to take place, that
22
would be a further variation of that plan of 1993 when they subsequently would
23
have an action plan and if you adopted an action plan, it would have followed
24
that the council then from 1993 onwards would have had to pass a variation of
12:13:09 25
26
the '93 plan. Q
206
27 28
into the new council. A
Well, once the '93 plan was finished by Dublin County Council, Dun
29 12:13:25 30
Or by the time this plan came to be made in December 1993, it would have gone
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council would then have to -Q
207
Vary it? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:13:26
12:13:40
42 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Vary that particular development. 208
As indeed they did with the science and technology zoning, isn't that right? That's correct, yes.
209
Now, on the day itself, the 27th May 1992, that proposal by Councillor Lydon at
5
7307 was unsuccessful. Can I ask you, Mr. Barrett, do you remember this
6
meeting of the 27th May 1992?
7
A
8
Q
9
210
And can you describe to the Members of the Tribunal whether it was a very heated meeting, whether there was a lot of discussion about this entire issue
12:14:01 10
11
I do.
on the Carrickmines Valley? A
Yes, that is correct, I mean people who took the similar view to mine argued
12
that to change the zoning at this stage was premature and that it was, well,
13
the case I was making was that it was quite ridiculous to make any change
14
without having a proper action plan drawn up for the whole area and to consider
12:14:26 15
16
the road network, the sewerage facilities available, the other facilities that would have to be incorporated and the level of open space, the whole area.
17 18
I mean this is a very beautiful area, anybody who knows it. It would -- in my
19
opinion, there should have been a proper action plan outlining what was going
12:14:50 20
to be open space, high amenity, shopping or whatever, science technology,
21
whatever you want, housing. In the whole wide area rather than just
22
concentrate on one area of land which happened to be owned by Monarch
23
Properties. I couldn't understand why there was such an effort to just deal
24
with one piece of this land. When the whole area was going to be affected by
12:15:20 25
the installation of a major sewerage system and a road network and that was the
26
argument and what I used on that occasion was to try and persuade my colleagues
27
to leave it as it is. And not to be seen as anti everything but to do it in an
28
organised fashion when the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was set up
29
and that was only going to be a matter of 12 months or whatever, rather than
12:15:47 30
sort of rush in and just do one piece of it, which never made sense to me. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:15:52
12:16:07
43 1
Q
211
2
Is it your recollection that the focus of the argument on the 27th May 1992 centred on the Monarch Properties lands?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 212
And insofar as Councillor Lydon proposed the map DP92/44 and indeed had a
5
motion that he didn't proceed with on that day, and correct me if I am wrong,
6
would it be fair to say that Councillor Lydon was promoting the pro Monarch
7
viewpoint?
8
A
Well I mean I -- I mean Councillor Lydon would have to answer that for himself.
9
On the particular day, the real -- going into the meeting, the real debate was
12:16:33 10
that the major Monarch proposal which included massive retail and all the other
11
things that were incorporated into the motion that was subsequently withdrawn.
12
Now, in my opinion, once that first motion was defeated, it was evident that
13
there wasn't support in the council for the subsequent motion. That's my
14
feeling. I have no reason to state categorically that was the case but once
12:16:59 15
the first motion was defeated, the next motion was withdrawn because it was
16 17
obvious there wasn't the support there. Q
213
18
And the second motion, which sought the major rezoning, including the retail, was the motion by Councillor Lydon and Councillor Hand, is that right?
19
A
12:17:17 20
Q
That's correct. 214
But the first motion that came to be considered was the manager's proposals in
21
connection with the land which were not as radical, if I can put it like that,
22
in connection with the Monarch lands as Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand's motion, isn't
23
that the position?
24
A
12:17:31 25
Q
That's correct. 215
Now, and it's your view and it seems to be borne out by the sequence of events
26
that when the manager's map failed, in other words when the councillors voted
27
against it, then it would have become apparent to those who were proposing the
28
second Monarch motion, if I can put it like that, that there was insufficient
29
support for what they were proposing in the council chamber?
12:17:52 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:17:52
12:18:00
44 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
216
And -It was a tight vote, it was 33 for and 35 against.
217
And that's a very tight vote, isn't it? Yes.
218
And indeed I think at 7209, the record shows that Councillor Lydon informed the
6
meeting that he wished to withdraw his motion, which had sought residential
7
zoning at 12 houses to the hectare and a retail element and certain other
8
matters that were set out in the motion, isn't that right?
9
A
12:18:24 10
Q
11
A
Yes, including a maximum of 80,000 square feet retail space. 219
Yes and that was quite significant? That was significant, given the state of play in Dun Laoghaire town and areas
12
quite near this location in 1992. It's 14 years ago. Where there wasn't the
13
massive developments that have now taken place.
14
Q
12:18:52 15
220
Thereafter, on that date a number of motions were taken, including a motion that there would be a C zoning on a portion of the lands which was proposed by
16
Councillor Gilmore and Councillor O'Callaghan and you also voted against that,
17
isn't that right?
18 19 12:19:10 20
21
A
Yes, I disagreed with it. I thought that was a pointless exercise but there was a lot of pressure at the time in the locality because of the massive campaign launched by Monarch Properties for extra jobs and so on, facilities in the area, there was a massive pro lobby for that.
22 23
Now, I didn't buy into that argument, to be honest with you, because anybody
24
who knows the area, you would have to cross the main Dublin, Bray Road to get
12:19:37 25
to this retail shopping, where there was no walkways or overhead bridges or
26
anything else. I mean I just didn't buy into this. My argument was the same
27
could be achieved in terms of employment if you went to Dun Laoghaire and
28
redeveloped Dun Laoghaire town. So I didn't buy into the extra jobs syndrome.
29
And despite what has been said and I'd like to turn to that at a later stage in
12:20:08 30
various statements made to this Tribunal, about I was supposed to have been www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:20:13
12:20:34
45 1
lobbying to have other people support for this when I was voting against it, it
2
was completely and utterly untrue. I based my argument solely as I saw it on
3
what was going to be good for the area that I represented.
4
Q
221
And your position, Mr. Barrett, insofar as the retail element was concerned, is
5
you were opposed to that for the same principles that you were opposed to the
6
residential development, it was premature, the facilities weren't in place and
7
also it would have an adverse impact on Dun Laoghaire town centre?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 222
12:20:51 10
You made those known to everybody that that was your position, including the people who represented Monarch Properties.
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 223
Are you satisfied that every person who was at that meeting of the 27th May
13
1992 knew that what was being discussed by the councillors were Monarch
14
Properties proposals in connection with their lands at Cherrywood.
12:21:08 15
A
Well that was the whole emphasis, the whole emphasis was on the Monarch
16 17
proposal. Q
224
The Tribunal has been told by councillors who were present at that meeting that
18
he they did know Monarch Properties owned those lands or that the subject
19
matter of discussion on the 27th May 1992 were the Monarch Properties land and
12:21:26 20
they were unaware of the ownership or actual owners of the land, do you have
21 22
any comment to make on that, Mr. Barrett? A
The only comment I make is I represented the area, I don't know who made these
23
statements but I represented the area and I knew it because it was very close
24
to me and I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't know. Mind you it's not my
12:21:48 25
business to know who owns the land, that's not a reason for voting one way or
26 27
the other. Q
225
28
No but insofar as the meeting of the 27th May 1992 was concerned, the meeting concerned what was going to happen to the Monarch lands?
29
A
12:22:06 30
Q
Well the lobbying was in favour or against Monarch Properties. 226
And that's what everybody was talking about? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:22:08
12:22:22
46 1
A
In my opinion, that would be the case, yes but I wasn't talking about that as
2
you will see from the map because I asked that the area between Cherrywood Road
3
and Glenamuck be retained as one house to the acre. I was not dealing solely
4
with Monarch Properties lands.
5
Q
227
6
You were dealing with all of the lands that were zoned residential in the 1983 plan which were east of the then Southeastern Motorway line?
7
A
8
Q
That's correct. 228
9
And that's on the map that we have seen. Your motion was taken at 7216, sorry, yes at 7216 and because the previous motion had been successful in relation to
12:22:46 10
the town centre zoning, your motion dealt with all of the lands that were
11
residentially zoned except those that had just been zoned for a town centre, is
12
that right?
13
A
14
Q
12:23:02 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 229
In favour, yes. 230
17
In favour, the effect of that was to change the density on the residentially zoned lands, including Monarch lands from four to the acre to one to the acre?
18
A
19
Q
12:23:14 20
A
21
Q
That's correct. 231
And that change necessitated a second public display. That is correct.
232
22 23
And those lands were voted by 36 to 24 at one house to the acre?
And it would also have then required a second vote by the councillors when they came to confirm or not that motion, isn't that right, that change?
A
Unless somebody tabled a motion to the contrary, it would have been adopted as
24
part of the 1993 plan. There was no need for another motion.
12:23:33 25
Q
26
A
233
So -If it had been accepted what went on public display should form part of the '93
27
Development Plan, there was no need for any more motions unless you wanted to
28
change it again.
29 12:23:50 30
Q
234
At that time, can you tell the Tribunal who was the person within Monarch who was most publicly visible in terms of seeking support from councillors, can you www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:23:55
12:24:00
47 1
remember?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
Mr. Richard Lynn. 235
And did you meet him? I did, yes.
236
And did you make known to him your view? Yes.
237
In relation to the lands? Yes.
238
12:24:11 10
Now, Mr. Dunlop, and I outlined this to the Tribunal when I was opening this module, in his private interviews to the Tribunal, suggested to the Tribunal
11
that your motion in some way, Mr. Barrett, saved the day, if I can summarise
12
what he is saying, for Monarch, is there any truth in that?
13
A
Absolutely none, I read that myself, I was absolutely astonished. I mean how
14
could I be doing anything in favour of Monarch when I had succeeded in having
12:24:36 15
the area of land that they were involved in which was zoned at four house us to
16
the acre, that I had gotten it reduced to one house to the acre, I couldn't
17
possibly be doing any favours for Monarch and I mean this wasn't a pro or anti
18
Monarch thing as far as I was concerned, I was dealing with this as an issue in
19
an area that I represented and, you know, I couldn't understand what Mr. Dunlop
12:24:58 20
21
was saying. Q
239
You will have seen and you have been supplied with the extracts from the
22
transcripts of Mr. Dunlop where he and I am summarising what he is saying when
23
I am saying he says you saved the day for Monarch but looking at the sequence
24
of the documentation and what the record shows up to this point in time,
12:25:14 25
Mr. Barrett, the only way in which you could have saved the day for Monarch, if
26
that was indeed the case, if you proposed a motion and everything else in your
27
party voted in a different way is that right? In other words Mr. Dunlop has
28
previously indicated to the Tribunal that sometimes what happened was a local
29
councillor might take a particular view but would have sorted matters out by
12:25:36 30
ensuring that other members of his or her party voted a particular way. I am www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:25:42
12:26:00
48 1
not suggesting that that happened here today here, but just to cover all
2
eventualities if I show you 7216, it's on the screen and just for the record,
3
Mr. Barrett, if you go through the councillors who voted in favour of your
4
motion and indicate those in your political party who voted in favour of the
5
motion.
6
A
Councillor John Dockrell. Stanley Laing. Joan Maher. Olivia Mitchell. Mary
7 8
Muldoon. That's it. Q
240
9
motion and if you look at the list then of those who voted against your motion
12:26:37 10
and if you would indicate any of your Fine Gael colleagues who voted against
11 12
the motion. A
Councillor Anne Devitt, the late Tom Hand. I am not sure was Michael Keating
13
in Fine Gael at that stage or PDs.
14
Q
12:27:12 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:27:25 20
Q
241
242
So that insofar as the -There are some missing from that, I mean there was only, what, 60 voted.
243
Yes. Some had obviously left from the previous vote.
244
But the only matter that was dealt with by the council on the 27th May 1992 was the Carrickmines valley, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
That's correct. 245
24
And the end result of that, Mr. Barrett, was that as a result of your motion, the map that went out on the second public display at 7217, the effect was that
12:27:48 25
the lands coloured yellow on the map at 7217 were now subject to change 3 and
26
change 3 was changing the density from four to the acre to one to the acre.
27
A
28
Q
12:28:11 30
I believe that he was in Fine Gael at that stage, subject to correction? Therese Ridge, four I think.
21
29
Okay. So three or four other colleagues of yours voted in favour of your
That's correct. 246
There was also a second change 4A and 4B which was the introduction of the town centre on lands that had been previously residential for one portion of them and agriculture for the second portions of them? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:28:13
12:28:22
49 1
A
2
Q
Which I voted against. 247
3
Which you had voted against. And that came back before the council in November of 1993, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
That's correct. 248
6
Now, the manager recommended that the amendment of change 3 be deleted. That was the manager's recommendation.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 249
9
If the manager's recommendation had been accepted, Mr. Barrett, and change 3 had been deleted, what density would the residentially zoned lands have been
12:28:39 10
left at?
11
A
12
Q
Four house houses to the acre. 250
The council came to consider that, including yourself, on the 11th November
13
1993 and there were a number of motions before the council, the first motion of
14
which was at 7224, and this was a motion by Councillors Misteil, Smyth and
12:29:03 15
Buckley and it's item number one that they were seeking that the resolving that
16
the lands referred to as change 3 on map 27 be confirmed as low density housing
17
at two houses per hectare, one house to the acre?
18
A
19
Q
They were confirming what I had succeeded in doing. 251
12:29:29 20
Yes and you proposed an amendment to that motion at 2725 and that was the manager be requested to prepare and submit to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
21
County Council not later than June '94, a draft variation of the new County
22
Development Plan for those lands.
23
A
24
Q
That's correct. 252
12:29:48 25
And that was third motion at 7226, which was a motion by Councillor Marren and Coffey which sought to delete change 3 in respect of the lands outlined in red
26
and that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare and the map is at
27
7277 and the lands outlined there are the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
28
A
29
Q
12:30:14 30
Yes, that was effectively the manager's previous proposal. 253
Well the manager's proposal, with respect, Mr. Barrett, had been to delete change 3 in its entirety, that was all of the residentially zoned lands, isn't www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:30:20
12:30:48
50 1 2
that right? The change 3, if you look at 7217. A
No in the amendment in November 1993, there was an attempt to defeat what I had
3
achieved in terms of bringing it back to what it was in 1983, so bring back
4
what the manager had proposed when it went on display in 1991, as I understand
5
it.
6
Q
254
What went on display as a result of your motion was change 3 and change 3 as a
7
result of your motion dealt with all of the residentially zoned lands in the
8
Carrickmines Valley?
9 12:30:59 10
A Q
That's right, yes. 255
11
The manager recommended to delete change 3 in its entirety, so change the zoning on all of the residential lands to four to the acre, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 256
14
Councillor Smyth and Misteil brought a motion seeking to confirm change 3, in other words leave it at one house to the acre for all the residentially zoned
12:31:21 15
land, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 257
And Councillors Marren and Coffey brought a motion seeking to confirm the
18
change for a portion of the lands but to delete it for other lands at 7227.
19
What Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey's motion sought was to change the
12:31:40 20
density on the lands that are on screen which are the Monarch lands to four to
21
the acre but that the balance of the residentially zoned lands would stay as
22
per your motion at one house to the acre?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 258
12:31:57 25
Now, this motion, Mr. Barrett, correct me if I am wrong, is particular to the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
It would appear so from this, yes. 259
And the motion is proposing at 7226 that the Monarch lands, it says "Dublin
28
County Council resolves to accept the county manager's recommendation and
29
delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined in red". That is
12:32:20 30
delete change 3 in respect of the Monarch lands, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:32:20
12:32:26
51 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 260
3
And leave the balance of the lands at two per hectare or one per acre, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 261
So the effect of that would be that the Monarch lands would go on the '93 plan
6
at four to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands would stay
7
at one to the acre as a result of your motion?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 262
12:32:43 10
Now, is there anything on the map of the over all residentially zoned lands that for good zoning or planning reasons that one would say that it's a proper
11
planning or zoning decision to make to zone a portion of these lands at four
12
and the balance of them at one to the acre?
13
A
Well I couldn't see it and I voted against that motion. And again, being
14
consistent, I hope, insofar as that we shouldn't do anything until we had the
12:33:07 15
new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown council in situ and have an action plan prepared.
16
That was one of the reasons why I tabled an amendment to Councillor Smyth's
17
motion to retain the one to the acre because what I was trying to do was bring
18
the council with me in my argument and I was afraid I might lose them because
19
it's always a motive when you are going against the manager's proposal but in
12:33:38 20
this instance I didn't agree with the manager's proposal.
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24 12:34:00 25
263
And your amendment was lost I think, Mr. Barrett, at 7261? Yes.
264
And then Mr. Smith's motion was then put, 43 voted against and 27 for and then the substantive motion with no amendment because your amendment was lost to confirm change 3 was put by Councillor Smyth and Buckley and at 7262, you voted
26
for that motion which was seeking to confirm change 3 which would be in
27
accordance with your May 1992 motion and that was also lost, isn't that right?
28
Now, the effect of that, as I understand it, Mr. Barrett, and you correct me if
29
I am wrong is once that vote took place, the change was not confirmed, isn't
12:34:26 30
that right? This is a motion seeking to confirm change 3. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:34:32
12:34:39
52 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
Oh no, no -- yes. 265
That motion is lost, isn't that right? That is correct.
266
So change 3 is not confirmed. Well, technically, unless somebody had tabled a motion, that motion would have
6
been to the contrary, that motion would have been irrelevant. Because what
7
went on public display was one house to the acre. And all we need do in the
8
adoption of the over all plan was to confirm that change from May 1992. Now,
9
unless somebody had put down a motion to change that again, it would have
12:35:16 10
irrespective of this motion, it would have remained at one house to the acre.
11
Q
12
A
267
But there was a motion. That was really a confirmation motion, if you like, of something that was
13
already decided. So it was academic in many respects, but it was an indication
14
as to the way the council was thinking. Do you get my point?
12:35:39 15
Q
268
I do get your point exactly, but what I was wondering was this, Mr. Barret,
16
would the effect of that -- when that motion was brought and when that motion
17
was lost, would the map, if nothing else had happened that day and that was the
18
only vote that was taken and the change was not confirmed, would the map have
19
reverted to the 1991 zoning?
12:35:59 20
A
21
Q
22
A
No. 269
Or would it have gun back to the 1983 zoning? Or would it have gone back to the 1983 zoning because the overall adoption of
23
the plan comes at the final stage when you adopt the whole plan. So in my
24
opinion, that made no change, it was the following motion to confirm the
12:36:20 25
26
manager's recommendation, that changed the whole thing again. Q
270
27
That's the motion at 7263 and you voted against that motion which was to decrease?
28
A
29
Q
12:36:37 30
A
Increase again the density back up to four to the acre effectively. 271
For the Monarch lands only? Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:36:37
12:36:52
53 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
272
No, I didn't, those I didn't voted against it. 273
4 5
Right. And did you see any good reason why that should be done, Mr. Barrett?
Can I put it to you as bluntly as this, do you agree the sole purpose of that motion had to be to benefit the Monarch lands?
A
Of course it was of benefit to the Monarch lands, yes, but again, I mean as I
6
hope I have displayed in all of this, I wasn't just dealing with Monarch lands,
7
I was dealing with an area bigger area and, you know, what the manager was
8
proposing was dealing with Monarch lands. He wasn't dealing with the whole
9
area at all.
12:37:12 10
Q
11 12
274
Well the manager's proposal was delete change 3 in its entirety which was your motion which covered all of the residentially zoned lands?
A
Effectively he was dealing with one section of the over all area. I wasn't, I
13
was dealing with the over all area and of course as a result of that, it did
14
benefit Monarch to answer your question directly.
12:37:36 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
thing, it might be yourself that might have to answer it. When you say that
18
the manager was only dealing with the Monarch lands, we know that the manager
19
was recommending in November, Mr. Barrett, to delete change 3 for the whole of
12:37:56 20
Ms. Dillon, would you mind if I just interject, just one
the map 26, whatever map that is that's gone up.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
27.
23 24 12:38:08 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27, yes. The map. But just could I seek clarification on, if
you go back to May of 1992, when the manager comes in, in May of 1992, this is
26
after the first public display where they have gone out on four houses to the
27
acre or ten to the hectare and it comes back to the council and the manager
28
before your motion is ever brought, there's a map and a report by the manager,
29
it's called DP92/44 we dealt with it earlier in your evidence. That map, when
12:38:35 30
the manager was proposing A1 on piped sewerage for the lands and an extension www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:38:42
12:39:03
54 1
of some of the already residentially zoned lands, further down south of the
2
1983 line, could I have that map for a moment, that's DP92/44, Ms. Dillon. I
3
don't want to confuse either myself or Mr. Barrett.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
7203 please.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
it may well be the planners who have to answer, that map that's on screen, the
9
AP to A1P, was that largely for the Monarch part of lands and not for the rest
12:39:30 10
Maybe you could assist, Ms. Dillon, that map and maybe indeed
of the lands?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
That appears to be the position because if you travel up to the
13
residentially zoned lands that were in the corner, the change there is from B
14
to AP.
12:39:39 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
17 18
MS. DILLON:
And they are not within the Monarch take and they are not A1P.
19
If you take my point.
12:39:47 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
terms of what Ms. Dillon put to you earlier, Mr. Barrett, the manager was
23
proposing for part of the lands on that map would go from AP to A1P. And an
24
extension of residential al zoning.
12:40:10 25
A
That's what I wanted to understand. Back in '92, this map in
Yes, to four houses to the acre.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
that map were in respect of Monarch lands. Was that your understanding in May
29
1992?
12:40:26 30
A
Four houses to the acre exactly, and that those two changes on
I have a copy of the minutes of the meeting. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:40:28
12:40:40
55 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
the report of the manager that was given.
3
A
Because you have said to us a moment ago yes I have looked at
There was never a report which relates solely to Monarch Properties, lands at
4
Cherrywood.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
residential zoning, that was just in relation to Monarch property lands.
8
A
You are saying that DP92/44 the AP to A1P and extension of the
Yes.
9 12:40:53 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
So do we take it the answer you gave to Ms. Dillon a few
11
minutes ago, you said some of the manager's proposals were only dealing with
12
the Monarch lands, were you referring in particular to this map?
13
A
I was referring to the report that was discussed on the 27th May.
14 12:41:08 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, that's what I'm talking about, that's the report that
16
went with DP92/44. Yes I just wanted to understand that. Thanks. Sorry
17
Ms. Dillon about that.
18 19
Q
275
12:41:26 20
MS. DILLON:
You said just a moment ago, Mr. Barrett, that dealing with
November 1993, that the manager was proposal, that the manager was dealing only
21
with the Monarch lands and I just want to show you the manager's report which
22
is on the 3rd November which is at 7256. And it's commencing at 7255. And in
23
fairness to you, it's headed Carrickmines Monarch Properties, isn't that right
24
A
12:41:58 25
Q
Yes. 276
26
result of your motion all of the residentially zoned lands, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:42:12 30
And then it talks about change 3. But change 3 dealt with, as we know, as a
Yes. 277
In the Carrickmines Valley, including the Monarch lands but not limited to the Monarch lands?
A
That's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:42:13
12:42:31
56 1
Q
278
And the manager recommends in relation to change 3 which are all of those lands
2
at 7256 to delete the amendment. So do I take it from that then, Mr. Barrett,
3
that what the manager was saying was change all of the residentially zoned
4
lands from one house to the acre back to four houses to the acre?
5
A
He was actually saying was in relation to the Monarch property lands, leave it
6
at four houses to the acre and leave the rest at one house to the acre. That
7
was the motion proposed I think by Councillor Marren, was it?
8
Q
9
A
12:42:51 10
Q
279
By Councillor Marren and councillor -Which relates to the managers's proposal.
280
Do you interpret the manager's proposal therefore as being confined to Monarch
11
properties only and not the entire of the residentially zoned lands in the
12
Carrickmines Valley?
13
A
Well the way I read was what was being proposed of the Monarch lands and the
14
additional lands that was zoned from agriculture to development should remain
12:43:12 15
at four houses to the acre and the balance of the land in my motion should
16
remain at one house to the acre.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
12:43:28 20
281
But if that -That's the way I read it.
282
If that interpretation was correct, Mr. Barrett, then there would have been no necessity for the handwritten amendment on the Marren Coffey motion at 7226, if
21
your interpretation of the manager's report is correct, then all the Marren
22
Coffey motion needed to record was to accept the manager's recommendation, full
23
stop.
24 12:43:51 25
A
Well I just I don't know why that was. I mean, my understanding was that what was being proposed was that the lands owned by Monarch Properties would go from
26
one house to the acre to four houses to the acre and the balance would remain
27
at one house to the acre. That's in relation to the over all area where I
28
proposed one house to the acre, to remain at one house to the acre. That was
29
the way it was in '83.
12:44:11 30
www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:44:11
12:44:22
57 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon, just in relation to that point, the map that went
2
out after Mr. Barrett's motion that was for the second public display, perhaps
3
if Mr. Barrett saw that.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
That is the map at 7217.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, with the 1993 amendments.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
The 1993 amendment.
12:44:33 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
isn't it?
Because change 3 is written on a number of parts of that map,
13 14
MS. DILLON:
12:44:41 15
black outline.
I think it's written change 3 is covered by lands within the
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: And not just the red out line.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:44:47 20
No, it's all of those yellow lands are covered by change 3
because they were all covered by Mr. Barrett's motion.
21 22 23 24 12:45:05 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Exactly.
What actually happened, the sequence of the notions, the fact that my motion happened to be last, meant that if anything was proposed prior to the taking of my motion and passed by the council, that I couldn't do anything about it in
26
relation to my own motion. So in other words that area that's shown as zoned
27
for a district centre, my motion excluded that area because I couldn't do
28
anything about it, that's why I voted against that district centre because I
29
knew exactly what was going to happen. You would end up with this area here
12:45:30 30
all zoned at one house to the acre and stuck in the middle you would have a www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:45:33
12:45:49
58 1 2
district centre feeding nowhere. Q
283
But insofar as the manager's report in November 1993 is concerned, Mr. Barrett,
3
his report appears to be speaking to the entire of change 3, which as a result
4
of your motion, covered all of the residentially zoned lands in the
5
Carrickmines Valley.
6
A
7
Q
That would appear to be the case, yes. 284
8 9 12:46:03 10
property residentially zoned lands within that area, isn't that right? A Q
Yes. 285
11
And at the end of the day, you having voted against it, their motion was successful, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
That's correct. 286
14
So that at the end of the process in the making of the 1993 plan, some of the lands were zoned at one house to the acre and some of the lands being Monarch's
12:46:20 15
lands were zoned at four houses to the acre.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Yes and a neighbourhood shopping centre. 287
In the centre of the Monarch lands. Yes.
288
12:46:39 20
Right and I think in 1994, after the council split up, one of the first matters that were undertaken by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was an area
21 22
And the motion by Mr. Marren and Mr. Coffey dealt only with the Monarch
action plan in relation to this area, is that right? A
It wasn't what I was looking for. It again concentrated on only part of that
23
overall area. As I said at the outset what I wanted was that whole area there
24
would be subject to an action plan where we would decide on where the line of
12:46:58 25
the motorway would be, what would be high amenity, what would be open space,
26
where would we have shopping where were we to concentrate whatever type of
27
development and all of those things would be discussed and debated by the new
28
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
29 12:47:25 30
Q
289
Yes and the draft action plan that was prepared at 2722 and again the lands outlined in red there are the Monarch lands but I want to draw to your www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:47:28
12:47:49
59 1
attention there what's in the report that speaks to that map which is at 7472
2
and under the heading location, Mr. Barrett, you will see when they are talking
3
about the plan, that plan centres on 95.3 hectares or 236 acres of land
4
presently owned by Monarch Properties Limited.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 290
7
was on the Monarch Properties lands, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:47:58 10
So it would seem the focus of the action plan that was prepared in April 1994
That's correct. 291
A
Did you agree with that? No, not -- I mean at that stage, there were other objectives, you will see
11
there to develop a public golf course, extend the bus way, retain existing
12
right of way and the creation of additional ones and to examine Tully Church
13
with a view to making a special amenity area order.
14
Q
292
12:48:26 15
If fairness to you, they were already local objectives attached to map 1993 in the 1993 plan?
16
A
17
Q
That would be part of an overall action plan. 293
18
But certainly so far as this action plan is concerned at 2722, the focus of the action plan appears to be lands owned by Monarch Properties?
19
A
12:48:38 20
Q
Yes. 294
Now, in fact I think no, while a decision was made to proceed with the action
21
plan, it was overtaken by events which was the development of a science and
22
technology park.
23
A
Well I left the council in 1994, the latter part of 1994 when I was appointed
24 12:49:01 25
to the new government, so I had no more dealings at council level with this. Q
295
Can I ask you, Mr. Barrett, in connection with these lands, were you ever
26
approached by anybody else in connection with these lands? Or in connection
27
with what you understood to be the Monarch Properties' lands?
28
A
29
Q
12:49:21 30
In what respect, Ms. Dillon? 296
For example in connection with, say, a proposed swap of lands with the golf club? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:49:22
12:49:37
60 1
A
2
Q
I was. 297
3 4
Would you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances of that particular encounter?
A
In the course of carrying out my weekly advice centre, somebody arrived in, I
5
didn't recognise the person, a male, and he asked me, he said as I recall now,
6
I can't be exactly correct with the words I am using because it's so long ago,
7
asked me would I, he said I understand you are opposed to the Monarch proposal
8
and he said would you be interested in taking on a consultancy on a
9
professional basis to see if we could swap lands with Monarch Properties and
12:50:12 10
move either Killiney Golf Club or Dun Laoghaire golf club up to their lands and
11
develop either of Dun Laoghaire or Killiney. So he said I would be prepared to
12
pay a professional fee if you were prepared to take this on, and it would be
13
done on a professional basis. And he outlined a fee and secretarial assistance
14
and possible expenses. I think the whole thing came to about 80,000 or
12:50:44 15
something.
16 17
I was shocked and I said no, I am not interested and I don't accept any payment
18
for any duties I have to perform as an elected public representative and I said
19
also I would oppose you if you tried to have either Dun Laoghaire Golf Club or
12:51:10 20
Killiney Golf Club rezoned for development and that ended the conversation and
21
he left. I have no reason to believe that he was representing anybody, this is
22
what he said to me but that was the end of the conversation. I never saw him
23
before and I haven't seen him since.
24
Q
12:51:29 25
A
26
Q
298
No. 299
27 28
Did he, his introduction to you at this meeting, was an introduction in connection with the lands owned by Monarch Properties?
A
He just walked in and said to me I know you are opposed to the Monarch
29 12:51:49 30
Did he leave you a name?
development but would you be interested taking on this consultancy. Q
300
And insofar as a consultancy is concerned, Mr. Barrett, can I ask you do you www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:51:58
12:52:04
61 1
operate as a consultant in connection with lands in any way?
2
A
3
Q
Never did and never will. 301
And do you have any professional expertise or qualification or do you hold
4
yourself out at having any professional expertise or qualification in relation
5
to negotiation to do with land?
6
A
7
Q
No. 302
8 9
Do you know, may I ask you this: Did you treat this as an underhand approach to you in any way?
A
Well he was at pains to that this would be done on a professional basis, I
12:52:19 10
assume what he meant was that I would be acting in a professional capacity as
11
he saw it and that I would have to presumably disclose any fees to the Revenue
12
if I received them. That was the implication that I took out of it but I mean
13
our conversation lasted about two or three minutes I would say. He got a quick
14
shift from me I can tell you.
12:52:41 15
Q
303
But any such professional engagement by you in 1992, Mr. Barrett, would have
16
brought you into conflict with the job you were doing as a councillor, isn't
17
that right?
18
A
19
Q
12:52:55 20
A
Correct. 304
And did you make that plain to the person who approached you? I told him exactly that I didn't take any reward of any description for any
21
duties I had to perform as a public representative, whether it was on or off
22
the council.
23
Q
305
24
any duties you had to perform?
12:53:15 25
A
26
Q
Correct. 306
27 28
Did you regard this as some or the sorted of an offer of reward for a function that you were going to have to carry out?
A
I don't see how I could carry out duties as a professional consultant and at
29 12:53:30 30
And did you -- sorry, you just said there you wouldn't accept any reward for
the same time be part and parcel of voting on the council. Q
307
At that stage, at the time of this approach, Mr. Barrett, did you know the www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:53:38
12:53:53
62 1
various personnel in Monarch, the various people who were involved in Monarch
2
such as Mr. Lynn?
3
A
The only person I could identify at that stage was Mr. Lynn because he was
4
always around the council and he was lobbying on a regular basis but I mean I,
5
if you ask me who X Y or Z was, I mean I didn't know people involved in Monarch
6
at all until after I was on the council and I met some people at that briefing
7
session that you referred to earlier. And I met subsequently met people in
8
relation to developments that were carried out in Dun Laoghaire, at various
9
functions but --
12:54:19 10
Q
11 12
308
But none of those people that you met subsequently were the gentleman who made the proposal to you?
A
No, no, not that I can recall. I mean as I said, I don't ever recall meeting
13
that gentleman before nor do I recall ever having met him since.
14
Unfortunately, I happened to mention to somebody that I had this approach and
12:54:41 15
then the next thing I read in the newspaper where there was a suspicion that I
16
had taken a large sum of money in connection with this rezoning in Monarch.
17
And that's borne out by some of the papers that were sent to me by this
18
Tribunal. Where various accusations were made by people to this Tribunal in
19
private which are completely and totally untrue.
12:55:07 20
21
I was subjected to newspaper articles which hinted that it was me. I think
22
there was one subsequent article by Mr. Sam Smith where he said it was
23
scurrilous that these people were going around spreading these stories without
24
any evidence and for the last ten years, I have carried this thing where there
12:55:31 25
is a suspicion that I received some large sum of money and there was also
26
suggested that I was going to vote for or against these proposals but at the
27
same time, get my colleagues to vote for them. Which I reject totally out of
28
hand and I dare anybody to come into this Tribunal and suggest that I ever
29
approached them to vote for a proposal that I was voting against. That is not
12:55:59 30
the way I do my business. I made my case quite clear, I made my case through www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:56:05
12:56:25
63 1
argument at the council level, in public, and persuaded people to come to my
2
way of thinking. Unfortunately, I didn't succeed the full way but I succeeded
3
some of the way and I had no objections to ultimately development taking place
4
in this particular area. Anybody with a brain in their head would see that if
5
you are going to put a motorway through this and a main sewer, that there was
6
going to be some development. All I wanted is that it take place at a later
7
stage when there be proper debate and discussion through the local council, ie
8
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
9
Q
309
12:56:50 10
Certainly insofar as the approach was made to you, Mr. Barrett, at the time by this gentleman, this approach was presented to you in the context of your
11
objection to the Monarch Properties' position in connection with their lands at
12
Cherrywood?
13
A
What was said to me was he was thinking of a proposal and would I be interested
14
in taking on this on a professional basis and be paid a consultancy fee.
12:57:08 15
16
That's the way it was put to me. Q
310
Now, in June of 1991, the record of Monarch Properties record a political
17
donation in the sum of 600 pounds to you, Mr. Barrett, and I think you accept
18
you received a donation from Monarch Properties in June of 1991?
19
A
What happened was prior to the local elections in 1991, a cheque arrived to my
12:57:33 20
home from Monarch Properties. I had never met these people. I phoned my
21
director of elections and I said I had received this cheque, I asked him to
22
take it away and to acknowledge it on behalf of the party, which he did. And I
23
supplied the name of the person to the Tribunal who I gave the cheque to.
24
Q
12:57:57 25
A
26
Q
311
And the funds were lodged to the credit of the organisation, is that correct? As I am aware, that's what happened, it certainly wasn't lodged to my account.
312
And the, insofar as there is a suggestion in the documentation that all
27
political donations were paid by Monarch Properties as a result of being
28
solicited, it's your position that you received this money unsolicited, is that
29
correct?
12:58:16 30
A
That's absolutely correct. As I said, I had no dealings whatsoever with these www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:58:21
12:58:43
64 1
people and I also read that in the documentation you supplied to me which was
2
made by a solicitor acting on behalf of Mr. Monahan who was deceased as I
3
understand when this statement was made, I fail to see how any firm of
4
solicitors can say that it's their understanding that all of these donations
5
were solicited. I certainly never wrote to Monarch Properties looking for a
6
donation, not that I can recall. And I'd no reason to, I wouldn't have known
7
where to write to. This was prior to my being elected to the council, prior to
8
any discussions I ever had with Monarch Properties about their proposal one way
9
or the other.
12:59:02 10
11
I also subsequently read and it was only when I received your papers that they
12
also state that I received a cheque for 500 pounds prior to the November 1992
13
general election. I have absolutely no record or recollection of this and as
14
you have already stated in May of the same year, I succeeded in having a motion
12:59:24 15
reducing the density from four houses to the acre to one house to the acre and
16
if anybody thinks I would go look for money off people that I had succeeded in
17
having their density reduced, I mean I don't know, but I certainly have no
18
recollection whatever.
19 12:59:41 20
Now if you accept, if there's a cheque to show that it was there, I have to
21
accept it but I certainly have no recollection, the only thing I can say is
22
that I think from any records I had, I always acknowledged in writing any
23
unsolicited donation I ever received. I have no recollection whatsoever of
24
ever having approached Monarch Properties for any donations.
13:00:06 25
Q
313
At 8376 there is in fact a copy of that cheque dated 19th November 1992 and the
26
reverse of the cheque, 8377 please, do you see there's an account number there,
27
can we turn that upside down there please. I don't know whether that assists
28
you in any way, Mr. Barrett, that's the reverse of the cheque?
29
A
13:00:29 30
Q
Well, that's not my account number. 314
And at 8376, the cheque on its face is made out to Sean Barrett? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:00:37
13:00:49
65 1
A
2
Q
3
A
That's not my account number. 315
On the reverse of the cheque? So the only thing, it may have arrived and I may have passed it over to the
4
organisation. I mean I just have no recollection whatsoever of it but the
5
account number on the back of that cheque, unless it's some account that I
6
never heard of it, I can't recall it. But I mean I had no reason whatsoever
7
not to have disclosed initially to the Tribunal that I would have received that
8
donation.
9
Q
316
13:01:08 10
And I think that the records also show and you will have seen that in 1995, further to a consideration with Mr. Lynn, you sought support for the party at
11
5623 by way of a gala dinner and a cheque of 1,000 pounds was paid to Dun
12
Laoghaire Fine Gael as a result of that. I think the cheque is in fact, is
13
made out to 5633, Fine Gael Dun Laoghaire, it's just slightly above halfway
14
down?
13:01:45 15
A
That was fund-raising for the constituency, certainly it had nothing to do with
16 17
me personally. Q
317
Other than those contacts, Mr. Barrett, have you ever received any funds from
18
Monarch properties or Mr. Phillip Monahan or anybody else acting on the behalf
19
other than those three payments that have just been outlined to the Tribunal?
13:02:00 20
A
Not that I can recall but I noticed also from the documentation supplied to me
21
by the Tribunal, that there was a suggestion made by, I don't know whether I
22
should the person, but an individual who gave evidence in private that he
23
claimed that Mr. Monahan told him that I insured his race horses. I want to
24
state categorically, I never spoke to Mr. Monahan about his race horses and I
13:02:26 25
was also asked by the Tribunal if I had ever insured race horses or anything
26
else on behalf of Mr. Monahan and I checked with my office and they tell me
27
that at no stage they can recall or are there any records of us ever insuring a
28
race horse.
29 13:02:45 30
Now, that was suggested that this was a means of payment to me. At that stage, www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:02:48
13:03:09
66 1
I was a full-time public representatives. I wasn't working on a day to day
2
basis in my business and people would ring up and insure houses and horses and
3
various things. I would not be aware of it. But I went to the trouble of
4
checking, I have no record, nor do my office have any record of having insured
5
in the name of Mr. Monahan, race horses, but it was suggested that this was a
6
means of paying me off. Which is totally and utterly untrue and in fact the
7
same individual had the cheek to leak this, those lies to journalists. And
8
admitted that he couldn't, that they couldn't print the whole lot because it
9
could be libelous.
13:03:33 10
11
Now, I have been subjected for the last ten years to this sort of innuendo
12
based on hearsay evidence or no evidence but hearsay and I have had to try and
13
defend myself. I was on one occasion I was subjected to having, giving an
14
interview as Minister for the Marine about the development of Dublin Port the
13:03:57 15
said journalist asked that he record the interview by way of dictaphone and he
16
came into my office and placed a dictaphone on the table in front of us and
17
when the interview about Dublin Port was finished, I stood up and he stood up.
18
And he said to me by the way, he said what was all that nonsense about you
19
supposed to have got -- received money for rezoning and I said what rezoning
13:04:22 20
are you talking about, he said Cherrywood. I said well that's peculiar, I
21
voted against Cherrywood and that was public knowledge and the next thing I
22
notice that the dictaphone was still on. And I said excuse me, our interview
23
ended ten minutes ago. Two weeks later, there was a banner headline in the
24
Sunday Business Post, Minister denies money for planning. That's the sort of
13:04:47 25
stuff that I have been subjected to by people passing on false information, not
26
accepting that I was genuine in what I was doing out in that whole area of
27
Carrickmines. And it's taken me ten years to get the opportunities to say this
28
in public in front of this Tribunal.
29 13:05:12 30
Q
318
You will understand of course, Mr. Barrett, that the Tribunal must examine any information? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:05:12
13:05:22
67 1
A
2
Q
I accept totally that you have a job to do and I fully accept that. 319
3
And I think you would also accept, Mr. Barrett, that you have been provided with all material and information?
4
A
5
Q
Absolutely. 320
Can I ask you this finally, insofar as Mr. Dunlop has outlined to the Tribunal
6
certain activities that he says he was involved in, in the making of the 1993
7
Development Plan, were you aware or was there any rumour or suggestion of this
8
type of activity on the part of Mr. Dunlop that you can recollect during that
9
period?
13:05:43 10
A
Ms. Dillon, I never knew that Mr. Dunlop was involved in that particular module
11
until I received the documentation from that Tribunal.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
13:06:00 15
321
I just ask you -I never had any contact with him about Monarch Properties at all.
322
I am just asking you generally, Mr. Barrett, about what Mr. Dunlop has described to the Tribunal and what's been fairly widely reported as his
16
conduct, his own conduct which was the bribing of councillors in return for
17
obtaining votes, at the time that this plan was being made and leaving aside
18
Monarch Properties for the moment, were you aware of any concerns or rumour
19
within the council and your colleagues of the way business was being conducted?
13:06:22 20
A
Well as I have just outlined to you, I have been the subject of rumour, I never
21
paid much attention to rumour and nor will I ever pay much attention to rumour.
22
Unless I have concrete evidence that somebody is in receipt of monies
23
illegally, I just ignore it. I mean you know you can't operate on the basis of
24
people whispering falsehoods into your ear every day of the week. If they have
13:06:48 25
something to say. I told the said journalist, by the way, the one I referred
26
to in the Sunday Business Post, you rang me up on another occasion and said
27
well, I believe it's not 80,000 now, it's 27,000, I said is that right. Well I
28
said do you know what you do, if you have all this information, there's a thing
29
called the Tribunal, will you please supply it to them, I don't know whether
13:07:09 30
you ever received any documentation or representations from that said www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:07:13
13:07:27
68 1
gentleman? But that's the sort of stuff that was going on. And people like me
2
and people with a family have to put up with this.
3
Q
323
4 5
Thank you very much, Mr. Barrett, if you would answer any questions that anybody else might have.
A
Thank you.
6 7
MR. SANFUI: Chairman, I have one question.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
13:07:32 10
11
THE WITNESS WAS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. SANFUI:
12 13
Q
14
324
And that's all. I wonder, Mr. Barrett, my name is Mark Sanfui and I represent Monarch Properties, I have one question for you, I wasn't here earlier this
13:07:43 15
morning, but I am assured by colleagues that you agreed with Ms. Dillon that
16
the motion of December 1993, Mr. Marren's motion benefited Monarch by
17
increasing the density from one per acre to four per acre and indeed that's a
18
fact that nobody could dispute.
19 13:08:00 20
We had Mr. Marren here yesterday outlining in detail various planning reasons
21
that he had for proposing the motion and saying that he had become convinced
22
that to increase the density from one to four per acre was the right thing to
23
do and he set out his reasons in that regard. Can I take it that you accept
24
Mr. Marren's bona fides even though you may disagree with the reasons that he
13:08:27 25
advanced and I take it you are not suggesting that the motion was put forward
26
solely for the purpose of benefitting Monarch but for what Mr. Marren saw to be
27
good planning reasons
28 29 13:08:45 30
A
I accept totally that any councillor -- I mean individually, we have a statutory duty and people will differ. Their views will differ on many occasions. I have differed with other people on many occasions and I take in www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:08:50
13:09:08
69 1
good faith what people do the way they believe is the right thing to do. And
2
if Councillor Marren felt that that was the right thing to do, that's a matter
3
for himself. I mean the option open to me is either vote for or against that
4
particular motion. I selected to vote against it because I thought as I have
5
outlined, that we should wait and do an overall action plan. That was the -- I
6
am a realist, I knew that some day there was going to be development of that
7
land. I mean as I said if you are going to have a motorway and a main sewer,
8
of course there's going to be development, there's a question of timing and how
9
you go about it, that's all.
13:09:28 10
Q
325
Yes and in fact Mr. Marren said that he had had disagreements with you I think
11
perhaps disagreements that caused him some distress because he had been close
12
to you but that he put this motion forward and he did so in the best interests
13
of the Development Plan.
14
A
Well of course. I mean it also puts paid to the idea that we met in secret as
13:09:50 15
a group and decided to vote one way or the other. We didn't do that. I can
16
only speak for myself but I mean, I knew that some people in my own group voted
17
and thought differently about different issues. You accepted that. One has to
18
accept it's an individual statutory duty to vote, you cannot in my opinion
19
impose a whip on something like this.
13:10:16 20
Q
326
Yes, thank you Mr. Barrett. Thank you chairman.
21 22
CHAIRMAN: All right Mr. Barrett, can I just ask you one thing and we will, you
23
can stand down then. You mentioned I think in May of 1992, the 27th May the
24
motion that -- this is your motion -- you got a map from an official of Dublin
13:10:33 25
County Council, you went in and you asked them to give you a map and then you
26
used that as a base for your motion. Was that facility there for councillors
27
generally if a councillor who themselves obviously wouldn't have the facility
28
for producing a map or even possibly understanding a map, was there a facility
29
there for councillors to go to the officials, to the engineers and get an
13:11:05 30
explanation for a map or get help in understanding a map? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:11:08
13:11:23
70 1
A
Oh yes. I went to the planning department, the official in the planning
2
department. The administrative end of it and I just asked could they give me a
3
copy of the map relating to the '83 Development Plan for that particular area.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A
7
And were you aware of other councillors using that facility or --
Not really, I mean I understood it was available to everybody. I mean if you want a map, I mean it was --
8 9 13:11:39 10
CHAIRMAN: It wasn't a special favour to you? A
No, no, it's a matter of public knowledge, the area is zoned and it's zoned,
11
it's just to get, in order to submit your motion and to make sense of the
12
motion, you have to indicate what area you are talking about.
13 14 13:11:53 15
CHAIRMAN: A
All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Barrett.
Thank you.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
We will say ten past two.
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, sir.
13:12:04 20
21 22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH
24 13:12:11 25
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:15:06
14:15:12
71 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2.10 P.M.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Richard Conroy please.
4 5
MR. RICHARD CONROY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
6
FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
Good afternoon Mr. Conroy.
Your honours.
14:15:47 10
11
Q
327
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Conroy. I think you were originally elected
12
to Dublin County Council in 1985 and remained a member of Dublin County Council
13
until January 1994, when you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
14
Council.
14:15:59 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 328
17
I think that you were elected or you were a member of the Fianna Fail political party, is that correct?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 329
14:16:12 20
I think the Tribunal asked you to provide such information as you could in connection with the lands at Cherrywood and asked you a number of questions and
21
you replied by letter dated 20th March 2006 at page 185 please, and at
22
paragraph 1 you state "You had no contacts or meetings with any servants or
23
agents of Monarch Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services or any
24
company in the Monarch Group in relation to the lands at Cherrywood." Is that
14:16:44 25
26
correct? A
I think it is correct but I may well at some stage or another, someone of
27
Monarch Properties mentioned the matter to me but I certainly didn't have any
28
contacts or meetings with any of the persons involved.
29 14:17:04 30
Q
330
And other than the lands at Cherrywood, did you ever meet any of the servants or agents of Monarch Properties or Monarch Properties Services Limited? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:17:11
14:17:33
72 1
A
Not having the list in front of me but Richard Lynn was about the place quite
2
frequently and I am not, Mr. Monahan, to the best of nigh knowledge, the late
3
Mr. Monahan I don't think I have ever met him. I think Mr. Murray I may have
4
met at some stage or other on other business. I can't recollect the other
5
names.
6
Q
331
And at paragraph 2, you state "You had no contacts or meetings with the various
7
names parties in relation to the Monarch Group whether a servant or agent or
8
otherwise with regard to the lands at Cherrywood." And I think the parties
9
that were identified to you in the Tribunal letter, were Mr. Phillip Monahan,
14:17:50 10
the late Mr. Monahan, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeney, Mr. Dominic
11 12
Glennane, Mr. Philip Reilly and Mr. Frank Dunlop. A
None other than Mr. Lynn was about the place, as I said, he may have at some
13
stage mentioned it to me or he may have called to the office but I have no
14
recollection of any discussion with him.
14:18:10 15
Q
332
And you say at 3 "You say you have not received any benefit or payment for or
16
on behalf of those listed at 1 or 2." And at 4, "No person made
17
representations to you on behalf of any company in the Monarch Group."
18
A
19
Q
Correct. 333
14:18:25 20
would have met and spoken with all of the members of Dublin County Council,
21
including yourself, you don't dispute that, is that correct?
22
A
23
Q
I don't dispute that and I note in the documentation a tick beside my name. 334
24
Now I think that in 1993, you were a member of Dublin County Council, is that correct?
14:18:44 25
A
26
Q
Yes, I think it was, Ms. Dillon, 1993, yes. 335
27
And in the course of that, you had occasion to come to consider the Carrickmines lands, the Cherrywood lands, isn't that the position?
28
A
29
Q
14:18:59 30
Now, if I can take you, Mr. Lynn in his statement to the Tribunal says that he
Yes. 336
But I think in fact your only involvement as recorded in the minutes of the minutes of the meetings is in connection with the meeting in November 1993, www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:19:02
14:19:11
73 1
isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 337
But you don't appear to have any involvement up to that particular point in
4
time and you were recorded in the minutes of the meeting as voting in favour of
5
a motion that's put before the meeting by Councillor Marren and Coffey. And I
6
will show you a copy of the motion please at 722, 7229 please. These are the
7
lands that were the subject matter of the motion and these are the lands you
8
may take it from me, Mr. Conroy, that these are the lands that were owned by
9
Monarch Properties at Cherrywood. And as a result of the, sorry the motion
14:19:50 10
that was put forward to the meeting was a motion in connection with the
11
rezoning of these lands on behalf of Monarch Properties from one to the acre
12
which they had been since May of 1992 to four to the acre, did you understand
13
that, Mr. Conroy?
14
A
14:20:07 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 338
Yes. 339
18 19
Now, I think that you are recorded at 7263 as voting in favour of the motion.
Can you outline to the Tribunal anything you recollect about that or the circumstances in which you came to support it?
A
In the general terms, which I think I have been consistent about from the
14:20:42 20
beginning, in that I felt that there was a housing shortage, a land shortage
21
and I have consistently supported increased housing per acre or per hectare as
22
it's now known and no other particular reason for voting for it or against it.
23
Q
340
24
Yes. The lands that were the subject matter of this motion were part of the lands, 7217 please, if I just explain to you, Mr. Conroy, on the map that's on
14:21:18 25
screen, all of the yellow lands are zoned residential.
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 341
28
And the Monarch lands are outlined in red and they form part of the yellow lands.
29
A
14:21:28 30
Q
Yes. 342
All of those yellow lands being all of the residentially zoned lands in the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:21:33
14:21:46
74 1
Carrickmines Valley were zoned at one house to the acre in May of 1992 as a
2
result of Councillor Barrett's motion.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 343
When the matter came back before the council in November 1993, the motion that
5
was put before the council by Councillors Marren and Coffey was to rezone a
6
portion of those residentially zoned lands at four to the acre and the balance
7
at one to the acre, you follow that?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. Yes. 344
14:22:03 10
told the Tribunal.
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 345
13 14
A
Well I would absolutely agree that all of the zoning should be four houses or more to the acre, but that was the actual proposition that was before the
16
council at that stage. Q
346
18
And certainly the manager had recommended that that entire change be deleted and that the lands revert to four houses to the acre.
19
A
14:22:35 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 347
And you could have brought a motion to do that, isn't that correct? That is correct, yes.
348
23
But you didn't do that, notwithstanding the fact that you have a pro development view?
24
A
14:22:46 25
Q
That is correct. 349
26 27
In those circumstances, can I ask you, Mr. Conroy, why you didn't take some step to bring all of the zoning to four houses to the acre?
14:22:19 15
17
Now, your position had been pro development as I understand what you have just
So you simply responded, is that correct, Mr. Conroy, to the motion put before the chamber by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey?
A
In that that was a motion which I felt had a possibility of succeeding at that
28
time, yes.
29
Q
14:23:02 30
A
350
Sorry. In that that was a motion which I thought, rightly or wrongly, had the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:23:07
14:23:21
75 1 2
possibility of succeeding at that time. Q
351
Was it your belief at that time that if a motion were put to the chamber
3
concerning all of the lands that were zoned residential in the Carrickmines
4
Valley and to rezone those lands at four to the acre, that motion would not
5
succeed?
6
A
7
Q
It might have been more difficult I am just speculating on that. 352
8 9
Do you have any recollection of there being, of the rezoning of the Carrickmines Valley being a contentious issue before the council?
A
Yes, it was a contentious issue, it's a very beautiful valley and it's very sad
14:23:39 10
that it had to be rezoned but with the demand on housing and later the
11
possibility of a science park, it was, I felt, necessary, but there was a lot
12
of opposition to it, and very understandably.
13
Q
353
14
And was it well known within the council that the lands, the subject matter of that motion, were the Monarch lands?
14:23:59 15
A
16
Q
I am not so sure if that was very well known but it may well have been. 354
And you will have seen in the documentation and records of the minutes of the
17
meeting, Mr. Conroy, that these lands are referred to as Monarch Properties
18
lands throughout the minutes, isn't that right?
19
A
14:24:16 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That is absolutely correct. 355
And they are also so referred in the manager's report, isn't that right? Yes, indeed.
356
So it would follow from that for anybody who was in attendance at those
23
meetings, they would have been aware of the existence of Monarch Properties
24
interests in the lands, isn't that right?
14:24:30 25
A
They would certainly have been aware of it but from time to time you have
26 27
various developers whose interests in the lands are mentioned in the council. Q
357
Certainly if I could move on, Mr. Conroy, to 1994 and the events in 1994. I
28
think would it be fair to that you would have been in favour of the science and
29
technology park?
14:24:49 30
A
Very much so. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:24:50
14:25:30
76 1
Q
358
2
And indeed when matters weren't moving along, I think that you signed a motion at 5396.
3
A
4
Q
I think so. 359
Which is dated October 1994 and by this stage, Mr. Conroy, a decision had
5
already been taken to promote a science and technology park and that decision
6
had been taken by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:25:42 10
Q
Do you mind if I just -360
Not at all. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you.
361
But that decision was taken in June of 1994 and by October of 1994, the council
11
received a motion that's signed by Councillor Lydon, Councillor Liam Cosgrave
12
and yourself, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 362
14:26:03 15
lands and details the break down in zoning that was sought.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 363
And I think you also signed that map, isn't that right? That looks like my signature there, I think yes. Yes, it is my signature, yes.
364
14:26:27 20
21
And I think the map that's attached to that motion at 5397 outlines the Monarch
Now can I ask you, Mr. Conroy, the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion at 5396?
A
Well I would certainly have made my position on a science and technology
22
development as being very very much in favour. It was something which I think
23
at the time, still is urgently needed, a very beneficial development, which we
24
are very fortunate to get and therefore I would have been very happy indeed to
14:26:53 25
sign that motion.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:27:05 30
365
Yes. Who asked you to sign the motion? Sorry.
366
Who asked you to sign the motion? I have no recollection but anyone who asked me to sign that motion, I would happily do so. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:27:06
14:27:17
77 1
Q
367
2 3
the time you signed it? A
I don't really, it likes as though I am the first signature on it but I just
4 5
don't recollect. Q
368
6
Do you remember meeting Mr. Lynn or anybody from Monarch Properties in connection with this motion?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
No, I don't. 369
Do you remember discussing it with either Mr. Lydon or Mr. Cosgrave? They could well have said that they were putting that motion forward and I
14:27:31 10
11
Do you know whether Mr. Lydon or Mr. Cosgrave had already signed the motion by
would have been very happy with that. Q
370
And the motion was an unusual motion, was it not, Mr. Conroy in the sense that
12
the science and technology park was a new development for Dun
13
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
14
A
14:27:43 15
Q
Indeed, yes. 371
And this I suggest to you is probably the only motion in connection with the
16
science and technology park that was ever heard, dealt with or received by Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
18
A
19
Q
I think that's probably correct, I can't just be certain of that. 372
14:28:00 20
your experience as a councillor, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, that would be true. 373
23 24
And it's still your position that you cannot recollect anything about the circumstances in which you came to sign it, Mr. Conroy?
A
I don't think there was anything untoward or out of the way about the signing
14:28:15 25
of it that I can recollect at any rate. It seemed a very proper motion, very
26 27
And therefore the subject matter of the motion is an unusual subject matter in
essential motion and very beneficial one in my view at any rate. Q
374
I am not suggesting that there's anything untoward about it Mr. Conroy, I am
28
simply seeking to establish who was the person who asked you to sign the
29
motion, whether it was somebody from Monarch Properties or whether it was
14:28:36 30
either of the two persons whose names appear beside yours? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:28:41
14:28:53
78 1
A
It certainly wasn't anyone from Monarch Properties, it could have been one of
2
my two colleagues but I would certainly have been happy to initiate that motion
3
myself, i have to say that.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
375
Would you have drafted the motion if you had initiated it? No.
376
7
Does it follow from that, if you were the main proposer of the motion, it would have required somebody else to prepare the motion and present it to you?
8
A
9
Q
14:29:03 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That would be correct. 377
And you yourself did not prepare the motion? Not to my recollection, I don't think so. No.
378
Do you have any idea where the map came from at 5397 please. That would be normal procedure in relation to motions to provide a map, I would
13
take it, it comes from the officials on the council but I have no particular
14
recollection of where it came from.
14:29:24 15
Q
379
In any event, ultimately a variation was made, isn't that right, by Dun
16
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in connection with the science and technology
17
park and that variation was confirmed.
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 380
14:29:39 20
That motion in fact was never proceeded with because the manager brought before the council his own proposals which were accepted, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
That is correct, yes. 381
But other than the fact that this was a unique motion in your experience as a
23
councillor, you can't assist the Tribunal as to the circumstances in which you
24
came to sign it?
14:29:55 25
A
I don't think so, other than that I thought it a very necessary development
26
that should be encouraged in which I was, I didn't sign very many motions when
27
I was on the council, as you will be aware but that was certainly one I was
28
very happy to sign.
29 14:30:15 30
Q
382
Yes, and I think that matters moved on, Mr. Conroy, and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came to consider the Development Plan, the review of the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:30:16
14:30:30
79 1
Development Plan in 1997 and 1998, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
About then, yes. 383
And I think that there were a number of submissions that were made to the
4
council in connection to the Development Plan by Monarch Properties at 2561
5
please. This is a submission 359 and it seeks, Mr. Conroy, rezoning of a
6
certain portion of lands from B agriculture to E1 and the lands are outlined on
7
the map on the following page at 2563. We just need to turn this map. And
8
what was being sought was to extend the science and technology zoning into the
9
area marked 3 on that map, do you see that?
14:31:06 10
A
11
Q
Yes, I do indeed, yes. 384
And I think subsequently, a motion was brought before the council at page 7286,
12
and this motion sought as its objective, the rezoning of 40 acres from B to
13
objective E1 and the map attached to that motion, Mr. Conroy, is at 7287. And
14
you will see that the map seeks the rezoning of the area marked 3 and you will
14:31:45 15
see that the motion at 7286 is signed by Councillors Lowry, Matthews, Cosgrave
16
and yourself, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
That's absolutely correct and the map as well, I've signed. 385
19 14:32:04 20
And the map is signed. Can you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion?
A
I would assume and this is an assumption now, that an extra area was required
21
or had been requested and certainly if it was required to change it to
22
agricultural which is B to E1, science and technology, I would certainly feel
23
that that was something I would support. But I don't recollect if that's the
24
following -- who asked me to sign it but I see names ahead of me.
14:32:39 25
Q
386
26
from Monarch Properties in connection with this motion?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:32:55 30
Yes. Do you remember or do you recollect having being approached by anybody
No, no. 387
Would you agree that what is sought on the face of this motion is exactly what had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission to the council at page 2561. Monarch Properties outline in that letter that they seek a change www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:33:10
14:33:35
80 1
for the lands marked 3 for the provision of a science and development park and
2
you will see and you have seen already that the map that is attached to the
3
Monarch submission at 2563, if we just turn that please, is almost the same as
4
the map that you signed that's attached to the motion, is that correct?
5
A
6
Q
That's absolutely correct. 388
So and it would seem then that the motion that was brought, Mr. Conroy, was on
7
all fours or in agreement with the submission that had been made by Monarch
8
Properties?
9 14:33:48 10
A Q
That would appear to be the case, yes. 389
11 12
And yet you have no recollection of the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion, is that the position?
A
Other than that if it was something in relation to the science park, I would
13
certainly support it. But certainly I wasn't approached by Monarch Properties
14
to the best of my recollection and I don't specifically recollect but somebody
14:34:07 15
16
must obviously have suggested it to me. Q
390
That motion was amended by a motion saying that any such rezoning of the lands
17
marked 3 on the map that's on screen would be without prejudice to the
18
council's stated objective to develop a golf course on those lands. Do you
19
remember that?
14:34:27 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That could well be the case, yes. 391
Yes. 392
24 A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
14:35:01 30
Which it was proposed by your motion would be rezoned were lands that had been zoned for a golf course in the 1993 plan, is that right?
14:34:38 25
29
Because the lands --
That would be correct. 393
So that motion as amended was passed, isn't that the position? To my recollection, yes.
394
And the second submission that was made by Monarch Properties to the council in the review of the Development Plan is at 2564, and this submission seeks an extension of the area zoned DC or district centre and the map shows the area www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:35:06
14:35:24
81 1
marked 2 at 2566. If you just turn this map please. What was sought is an
2
extension of the town centre zoning from the area marked 1 into the area marked
3
2 on that map at 2566, Mr. Conroy, do you see that?
4
A
5
Q
I do indeed, yes. 395
6
So it was an additional piece of land that was sought to be rezoned to include retail and district centre activities.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 396
9
And if I could show you a motion at 7288, Mr. Conroy, which is signed by yourself, isn't that the position?
14:35:42 10
A
11
Q
That is correct, yes. 397
And this motion seeks a rezoning of lands from objective A residential to DC as
12
an extension of the existing district centre zoning on the adjoining lands,
13
isn't that right?
14
A
14:36:00 15
Q
That's correct, yes. 398
And I think you will accept from the map attached to that motion which is at
16
7289, that what is sought there is an extension of the district centre zoning
17
from the area marked 1 into the area marked 2.
18
A
19
Q
14:36:13 20
A
21
Q
Correct. 399
Yes, absolutely. 400
22
And that is exactly the same matter that had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission 360 to the council, isn't that the position?
23
A
24
Q
Absolutely correct, yes. 401
14:36:27 25
26
Isn't that the position?
Can you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion?
A
Certainly, I assume there that one of my colleagues asked me to sign it, I
27
would have to assume that because I would have no particular interest in the
28
district centre per se in the same way that I would in the science and
29
technology one.
14:36:49 30
Q
402
I think you in fact seconded that motion at 2625, Mr. Conroy? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:36:53
14:37:00
82 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Very likely. Yes. 403
It was proposed by Councillor Lowry and seconded by yourself. Yes.
404
And it was passed on a show of hands, isn't that right? I think so, yes.
405
Can you assist the Tribunal as to whether you would have done that at the
7
instigation of somebody from Monarch or whether you did it at the request of
8
one of your colleagues who also signed the motion?
9
A
I cannot assume that it was at the request of the colleague who proposed the
14:37:17 10
motion but it certainly wasn't at the request of Monarch, so therefore I have
11 12
to assume it was one of my councillor colleagues. Q
406
And insofar as these three motions are concerned, the original motion,
13
Mr. Conroy, seeking to bring on a science and technology park that was dealt
14
with in 1994 and these two motions in the course of the review of the
14:37:39 15
Development Plan, it's your position that you accept that you signed the
16
motions and the maps, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
Yes, absolutely, yes. 407
19 14:37:53 20
And that these latter two motions were ultimately successful but that you have no recollection of the circumstances in which you came to sign them.
A
Of the science and technology park, I am quite clear this was something I was
21
very much advocating and in favour of. The other, the retail centre, not
22
really, no.
23
Q
408
24 14:38:09 25
you to sign the motion, is that right? A
I have no recollection of who asked me, but certainly wasn't Monarch Properties
26 27
But you have no recollection in any of these cases, Mr. Conroy, of who asked
so one has to assume therefore it was one of the my colleagues. Q
409
28
And you do not know who prepared the motion or provided the maps, is that the position?
29
A
14:38:25 30
Q
No, I don't. 410
Ultimately those motions were successful, is that correct? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:38:28
14:38:38
83 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
That's correct, yes. 411
Yes, particularly the first one, yes. 412
5
Were you ever in receipt of any money or payments from Monarch Properties or anybody in connection with Monarch Properties?
6
A
7
Q
None. 413
8 9
And you were in favour of those motions in any event, isn't that the position?
In the course of your career in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council since 1994, would you have had occasion to sign many motions?
A
I would have signed a number but I was not I would say the number of motions
14:38:55 10
that I signed was not a very large number indeed.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
414
And the records of the meetings would show -It's on the record the ones I did propose obviously.
415
14
And the record of attendances at the meeting would tend to show, Mr. Conroy, and I am in no was criticising you for this, that you were a less than frequent
14:39:11 15
attender at the meetings, would that be fair?
16
A
17
Q
Before I came Cathaoirleach, that is correct, I had various other demands. 416
Would it be fair to say without putting words in your mouth, that the signing
18
of these motions would be a not commonplace occurrence in your life as a
19
councillor?
14:39:29 20
A
I signed a number of motions, it certainly wouldn't be a commonplace
21 22
occurrence, I think that's fair to say, yes. Q
417
Thank you very much, if you answer any other questions.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
14:39:45 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28
MR. QUINN:
Mr. Fergal McCabe please.
29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:39:52
14:40:23
84 1
MR. FERGAL MCCABE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
A
6
Q
Good afternoon, Mr. McCabe.
Good afternoon. 418
Thank you Mr. McCabe, good after. Mr. McCabe you were a town planner and you
7
were retained by Monarch in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, isn't that
8
right?
9 14:40:32 10
A Q
That's correct. 419
And you were written to by the Tribunal and you were asked to provide a
11
statement, the letter seeking the statement dated the 7th April 2006 is at
12
pages 1426 and 1427 of the brief an your response is 8202. I think you say in
13
the first paragraph of that letter of response, that you have worked for the
14
Monarch property group since you first commenced practice in 1974. Isn't that
14:40:58 15
right?
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 420
18
And you work with the group right up until 1997 and probably later, is that correct?
19
A
14:41:07 20
Q
Yes. 421
21
So therefore you would have been involved with all the other various projects that Monarch had been involvement with prior to Cherrywood?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 422
24
So by 1989, you would have in your capacity as a consultant town planner have quite a good deal of experience with the various personnel within Monarch
14:41:24 25
Group?
26
A
27
Q
I would. 423
28
And Monarch I think at that stage had a reputation in relation to the development of supermarkets and shopping centres?
29
A
14:41:33 30
Q
They were principally a shopping centre developer. 424
The departure towards Cherrywood, that was a departure for them? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:41:39
14:41:58
85 1
A
Yes, it was. I suppose in the sense that it was principally residentially or
2
industrially zoned land but I think their initial interest was there might be a
3
shopping centre involved.
4
Q
425
5
residential property prior to that?
6
A
7
Q
No. 426
8 9 14:42:12 10
But by and large, they hadn't been involved to that extent in relation to
I think that Mr. Monahan obviously was the chairman and chief executive of the Monarch Group and you knew the late Mr. Phil Monahan I presume?
A Q
I did. 427
11
Mr. Noel Murray was also involved with the group and presumably you knew him also?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:42:23 15
Q
I do of course. 428
In what capacity did Mr. Murray -I think Mr. Murray was mainly marketing.
429
16
Then there was a Mr. Phillip Reilly I think who had a responsibility in Tallaght, is that correct?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:42:30 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes, I think that was -430
Did you know Mr. Reilly? I did.
431
And then Mr. Lynn, isn't that right? That's correct.
432
23
Had Mr. Lynn been with the company prior to 1989 and had he been involved with the other projects?
24
A
14:42:46 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
I don't think so, I think Mr. Lynn came in around the time of Cherrywood. 433
So Mr. Lynn would have been peculiar to the Cherrywood development? He certainly was the team leader.
434
28
Yes. Now, I think there was a Mr. Lafferty who was an in-house engineer, is that correct?
29
A
14:42:58 30
Q
In-house architect. 435
Did you have a lot of dealing with Mr. Lafferty? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:43:01
14:43:19
86 1
A
2
Q
Yes, I would have. 436
Now, I think in May 1989, you wrote to Mr. Monahan, if I could have 2846
3
please, this is a letter discovered to the Tribunal by you and it's a letter to
4
Mr. Monahan and it's your assessment of the site, isn't that right?
5
A
I think Monarch had just bought the lands at the time. Mr. Monahan asked me
6 7
for an initial reaction in terms of the statutory planning system. Q
437
8 9 14:43:41 10
Yes. Is that unusual, Mr. McCabe, that you would be asked for an assessment after the purchase rather than before the purchase?
A Q
Yes, I suppose it is. 438
Now, I think the property, according to the Irish Times of the 12th May 1989,
11
at 8510 had been recently purchased for a sum of 11 million which would have
12
been a substantial payment at the time, both in relation to size and indeed in
13
relation to price per acre for this green field, well it was effectively a
14
green field site?
14:44:00 15
A
16
Q
I really don't know about values. 439
You in any event did write as we saw on the 16th May 1989 at 2846 to
17
Mr. Monahan and you set out what you thought was the current zoning situation
18
on the land and what might be contained on the land, isn't that right?
19
A
14:44:24 20
Q
Yes. 440
And both you highlighted the prospect of possibility on both residential and
21
shopping centre, isn't that correct, although you felt the inclusion of
22
shopping facilities in the Draft Development Plan at that stage might be
23
controversial?
24
A
14:44:45 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:44:59 30
I was sceptical as to the viability of a shopping centre at that stage. 441
Yes. It's on page 2, I think.
442
Yes. At 2847, you are familiar with this correspondence I take it? Yes, I am.
443
You would have recently updated yourself on it in any event. I think one of the important points being made by you at the very early stage in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:45:05
14:45:18
87 1
the property is that the current development plan was being undertaken, the
2
review of the current Development Plan was in being, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
I think it had commenced. 444
About 1987 and a series of working papers were being prepared? Yes.
445
And maps were being prepared and I think and would it be fair to that your
7
approach to both that review of the plan and the review of the 1993 plan was
8
that you should get in and try and have your views adopted by the management?
9
A
It was not unusual for significant landowners to make their views known to an
14:45:44 10
evolving Development Plan in the early stages, in fact that's provided for
11 12
statutorily in the 2000 act now. Q
446
We are now talk being 1989. I think in 1989, the idea was that there would be
13
a statutory display when submissions would be made to the plan, isn't that
14
right, after the first statutory display.
14:46:05 15
A
16
Q
In the ordinary circumstances, yes. 447
17
And I think the first statutory display in relation to the '83 plan was between September and December 1991 which was two years away, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
I take your word. 448
Yes. Now, I think there were a series of meetings and you will have seen in
14:46:24 20
the brief if we could have 2850 please, one of the meetings occurred between
21
the roads department and, sorry, the sewerage department of the council and
22
representatives of your associates who I think were retained as engineers under
23
the development?
24
A
14:46:45 25
Q
Yes. 449
26
the Carrickmines Valley sewerage scheme, is that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:47:02 30
And you will have seen one of the issues at this early stage was the issue of
That's right. 450
There were two issues in relation to this green field site, one was a question of access complicated by the proposed siting of the Southeastern Motorway and the other was the question of drainage and in particular, sewage drainage and www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:47:07
14:47:14
88 1
that was to be catered for by the Carrickmines Valley sewer, isn't that
2
correct?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 451
Yes. 452
7 A
9
Q
Yes, of that order. 453
A
me in planning terms alone inappropriate. Q
454
13 14
Yes. It's unlikely that you would get a large scale planning, for 243 houses on the 243 acres.
A
At that particular zoning of septic tanks, it would have caused a lot of
14:47:54 15
16
It would be wholly uneconomic to develop this site on that zoning I take it? Again, I am not, I'm unwilling to give evidence on values but it would seem to
11 12
As indeed was the zoning because the zoning at the time I think was one house to the acre on septic tank.
8
14:47:32 10
And both of those were essential to any development of the site?
pollution problems. Q
455
Yes. Now, I think as we see from the document on screen that when they met
17
with the representatives of the council, they were informed that tender
18
documents had recently been approved by the Department of the Environment in
19
relation to the scheme and that is to say that the internal engineers were
14:48:16 20
surprised at the instruction since it wasn't on a priority list. Do you recall
21
any discussion in May, June 1989 in relation to that matter?
22
A
23
Q
No. 456
24
documents were being drawn up within the council, approval having been given I
14:48:38 25
think on the 1st May or shortly prior to the 1st May of that year, that the
26
scheme could go ahead.
27
A
28
Q
29 14:48:57 30
But in any event, you did find out and you discovered I take it that the tender
Yes, I am aware of that. 457
Yes. And I think you then, on the 7th June 1989 provided your first comprehensive report to Mr. Sweeney, if I could have 2852 please, in relation to the matter, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:48:59
14:49:11
89 1
A
2
Q
Yes, that's it. 458
And I think as I indicated in the very first paragraph there, you were
3
highlighting the advantage of securing a rezoning in the initial draft, isn't
4
that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 459
Presumably if it were the manager's proposal, it had a greater possibility of
7
being accepted by the councillors, although as we discover, that wasn't
8
necessarily the case here at a later stage?
9 14:49:28 10
A Q
Well that's what should happen. 460
Yes. Now, you were suggesting a density, current density, isn't that right, in
11
relation to the lands at this stage. I think in fact what you say is "I would
12
suggest that a representation be made to the planning authority to the effect
13
that the lands be considered for development at full residential densities,"
14
isn't that correct?
14:49:47 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:49:59 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
Yes. 461
Probably in the order of 20 to the acre. 462
463
Which would be about ten to the acre? Eight. Eight to the acre.
464
So therefore four to the acre would be considered low density. It would be lowish. It would be verging on the, verging on the level at which it would be difficult to sustain a proper neighbourhood.
Q
465
26
And I think you directed that a series of studies be undertaken which might be of assistance in compiling a report, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:50:40 30
We know, for example, and we have evidence -Sorry 20 to the hectare, I am sorry.
24 14:50:21 25
What were full residential densities at that time?
Yes. 466
You have seen that document and I am sure you have revised your, you have updated your memory in relation to what went on?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:50:40
14:51:01
90 1
Q
467
We see at 2853 under the heading "Housing development" you said that you would
2
recommend that -- this is the suggested application perhaps for a material
3
contravention at that stage that any such application be delayed, isn't that
4
right? You say there that "However the possibility of seeking a material
5
contravention is available at any time, I would recommend that it would be
6
delayed until such time as a favourable draft zoning at least for the lands has
7
emerged."
8
A
9
Q
Isn't that right?
Yes, ideally until the plan had been fully approved. 468
14:51:21 10
Yes. Now, the submissions and the case for housing and density, you suggest I think at 2854 be established on the principles laid down in the studies
11
prepared for the Development Plan submission, were you there talking about the
12
working papers, etc?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 469
14:51:38 15
And then I think you dealt with the retail element and based on that, I think you followed up that letter on the 7th June with a further letter setting out
16
your charges and recommending that I think it was the late Mr. Meehan who was
17
also a planner?
18
A
19
Q
14:51:52 20
A
21
Q
Dr. Meehan, yes. 470
Be employed also, is that correct? Yes.
471
I think on the 26th June 1989, if we see 2874 you were given instructions in
22
relation to the matter. Now, on the 29th June '89, if we could have 2878
23
please, the issue of the route of the Southeastern Motorway was beginning to
24
surface, isn't that right? And you were given a map with a suggested land use
14:52:23 25
structure, isn't that correct?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct, yes. 472
And I think you wrote to the planners on 2879 on the 3rd July 1989 advising of
28
your client's interests in the land and asking that a development -- not
29
exceeding 10 thousand house to the acre in the forthcoming review of the plan?
14:52:46 30
A
That's right, that's a preliminary letter. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:52:48
14:53:03
91 1
Q
473
2
That's a preliminary letter written to the planners at the time when they were considering the papers for publication to the councillors?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 474
Now, I think that letter was acknowledged as we see on the 10th July '89 at
5
2883 and I think that strategy meetings were beginning to develop within the
6
Monarch Group attended by you and others in relation to how you might proceed,
7
is that correct?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 475
14:53:23 10
11
proceed? A
I was outlining, if I remember right, the form of submission that might be
12 13
Were you providing a strategy control option to Monarch on how they might
successful. Q
476
14
For example if we look at 2894, on the 11th August 1989, I think you were referring to the ERDO report, is that correct?
14:53:44 15
A
16
Q
Yes, it seemed to me it was the bedrock of the whole exercise. 477
Yes. ERDO I think had compiled a report in May of 1988 or revised a report in
17
1988 which suggested that there might be an additional 30,000 houses required
18
in this location, is that correct?
19
A
14:54:03 20
Q
An additional 20,000 population if I recollect. 478
Yes. If we look at 2894, we just look at the second paragraph there, you say
21
that "The revised ERDO strategy for the Dublin sub region of May 1988 which is
22
the basic research document informing the forthcoming review of the Development
23
Plan recommends an additional population of 20,000 persons for the Shanganagh
24
area by the year 2001. In addition to a committed population capacity based on
14:54:30 25
current permissions and land use zoning objectives of 30,000 in the south and
26
south eastern suburbs."
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:54:47 30
Q
I think that might be 2011. 479
20 and 11 as opposed to 30? Sorry an additional 20,000 persons by 2011 rather than 2001.
480
I understand. And I think you were suggesting then that there was a scarcity www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:54:50
14:55:00
92 1
of industrially zoned lands and again these lands might be considered for that
2
purpose?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 481
And I think your suggestion was more or less to the effect that based on the
5
existing zoning, that you would not have a capacity on these lands for that
6
projected population growth.
7
A
I made a study of the southeast area generally and looked at committed lands or
8
permissions and undevelopable of lands and it seemed to me one of the few
9
places in which the 20,000 population could be located was the Lehaunstown,
14:55:24 10
11
Cherrywood lands. Q
482
12
That's 30 years on from when this commission is being undertaken or 20 years on?
13
A
14
Q
14:55:36 15
A
16
Q
By 2011. 483
And it's now 1989, 1990. Yes.
484
17
I think additional population then would give rise to the necessity for shopping and other activities, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
There would be ancillary retail and schools and open space necessary. 485
14:56:00 20
Now, I think that as you go forward, you eventually have a meeting with the planners, isn't that right? And that meeting took place on the 29th August
21
1989 and at 2902 we have a report of that meeting and I think that report may
22
have been in fact compiled by yourself for Mr. Lynn?
23
A
24
Q
14:56:15 25
A
That's correct. 486
I sought the meeting and the members of the Development Plan team agreed to
26 27
meet me. Q
28 29 14:56:39 30
How did that meeting take place?
487
Had you sought similar meetings on behalf of other clients in relation to the review of that Development Plan?
A
In relation to the 199 -- that Development Plan, that was the only submission, I don't think I made any other submissions in relation to that plan other than www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:56:43
14:56:49
93 1 2
Cherrywood. Q
488
3
in the country, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
I was an established planning consultant. 489
6 7
And yet this is the very first and only occasion that you have had to meet with the planners during their review of the plan in advance of its publication.
A
It is but I wouldn't really have made any large scale submissions to the
8 9
Yes. You would have been one of the leading planning consultants at that time
development plans other than Cherrywood. Q
490
14:57:13 10
Yes. Well did you make any submissions during the public display between September and December 1991 other than Cherrywood?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
No. 491
On behalf of any clients? I don't believe so.
492
14:57:25 15
In any event, you discussed your views in relation to the valley and in relation to these lands with the planners, isn't that right, at that, as
16
appears from that and it was obvious that the Shanganagh, or sorry, the
17
Carrickmines sewerage system and the proposed Southeastern Motorway were going
18
to be huge factors in relation to the matter, isn't that right?
19
A
14:57:43 20
Q
Yes. 493
21 22
The motorway was particularly important from the point of view of the line of the motorway, isn't that correct?
A
Well it would because if you were to put residential, new residential
23
population on the lands, in the ordinary course of events, correct planning
24
principles would suggest that the motorway would go on the edge of the lands
14:58:09 25
and the public transport up the middle. It would be unusual to have the
26
motorway running through the middle of a residential area.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:58:30 30
A
494
Presumably the motorway doesn't take account of the ownership of the lands? I -- no, but it would take account of planning principles.
495
For sure but this is a green field site. Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:58:31
14:58:45
94 1
Q
496
2
And the motorway was unlikely at this stage to take account of the ownership or the owners' objectives or views or --
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
No, presumably it wouldn't. 497
For these lands, isn't that right? Yes.
498
7
Yet I think that you discussed two options with the planners at this meeting, isn't that right, in relation to the lands?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 499
14:59:00 10
They had a view, I think there were two, an option A and an option B or C, option A being as we see it at 8554, a suggestion that the motorway would join
11
with the existing road, that is to say the existing Dublin, Bray Road which had
12
been upgraded, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 500
14:59:23 15
16
Option C as we see it there would be to go through the lands to the west of the lands, isn't that right?
A
Well on the map I'm looking at here, there are two options, the blue line is
17
picking up the existing Bray Road and the brown line is where the motorway acts
18
as an edge to the development area.
19
Q
501
14:59:46 20
Yes. I think the '83 plan had envisaged a line going straight through these lands, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 502
And I think it was your view and I think it would have been the councillors'
23
view and possibly the planners' view at that stage, that any development would
24
only be permissible to the line of the motorway.
15:00:06 25
A
26
Q
I am not too sure, if you could repeat that question. 503
27 28
likely to end wherever the motorway line -A
Yes, in general the motorway was considered to be the stop line between the
29 15:00:24 30
Any development, any rezoning of these lands for residential development was
city and the mountain zone. Q
504
So for example if the blue line as we see it there were to be the motorway www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:00:29
15:00:45
95 1
line, it would effectively mean these lands were going to be continue to be
2
zoned for agricultural purposes whereas if the brown line was to be zoned owes
3
a motorway line, there's a possibility that residential development would be
4
extended to the brown line.
5
A
Well, I mean I don't think it's as simple as that. There was an identification
6
of a need for 20,000 population in the area, it had to be accommodated
7
somewhere and this was very well located land. And it is very possible that
8
the, if the blue line were to go ahead that somehow or other a reasonable stop
9
gap for some kind would have to be provided on the south west boundary.
15:01:17 10
Q
505
11
In other words there would have to be development on the other side of the motorway?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 506
14
However assuming the brown line or a variation of the brown line were to be the motorway line, then obviously the development was going to take place east of
15:01:29 15
that line, isn't that is right?
16
A
17
Q
It was preferable. 507
Yes. Now, at that meeting, I think Mr. Davin, if we could have 2903 please,
18
Mr. Davin had suggested a line, and I think if we look at the second last
19
paragraph of that it says "It was generally felt that we had a lot in common
15:01:52 20
and the meeting ended on the request that I would examine in more detail
21
Mr. Davin's line and its implications and possibly come up with a structure
22
plan based on it which could be the subject of further discussions."
23
Mr. Davin's line at that time, as I understand it and I may be wrong, if we go
24
back to 8554 was in fact the blue line.
15:02:13 25
A
26
Q
That's correct. 508
27
on the basis that the motorway line might in fact be the blue line.
28
A
29
Q
15:02:31 30
So in other words you were being invited by the planners to put in a submission
One or the other. 509
Yes. I think after that meeting, there was a return meeting by Muir & Associates with the roads planning department, if we could have 2906 please. I www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:02:39
15:02:57
96 1
think the roads planning department had expected Muir to return some sort of
2
submissions in relation to the line of the roadway also, but this meeting had
3
been called following on your meeting with the planners in September, sorry in
4
August, isn't that correct? And we see there in the first paragraph, "Fergal
5
McCabe had recently met the County Council planners and had been asked by them
6
to examine a certain proposed location for the road and Muir Associates now
7
wish to discuss this in outline with Cormac Rabbitte before embarking on a
8
detailed proposal which may be at total variance with the roads planning
9
department's ideas."
15:03:19 10
A
11
Q
That is correct?
Yes. I think that may have been the first time I have seen that. 510
It's included in the brief of documents, you would have been reporting back
12
presumably both to Monarch and their other professional consultants including
13
Muir Associates, is that correct?
14
A
15:03:32 15
Q
Yes, that's correct. 511
And you would have been advising them of what had been told to you by Mr.
16
Conway and Mr. Davin at your meeting in August and having regard to what you
17
hades to, they had returned to the roads department to see what the position
18
was, isn't that correct?
19
A
15:03:44 20
Q
Yes. 512
21
And I think you submitted to Mr. Davin on the 20th October 1989 at 2912 a draft structural plan for the above -- for discussion purposes, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 513
24
And I think that map which we have been looking at at 8554, if we could have that on screen, was the structure map that you enclose with that letter, isn't
15:04:13 25
that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 514
28
Now as we go forward, I think into late 1989, the issue of the road becomes an even greater issue, isn't that right, the location of the roadway.
29
A
15:04:35 30
Q
In what context? 515
In relation to your submissions and the submissions that you might put in in www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:04:39
15:04:55
97 1
relation to these lands?
2
A
3
Q
The location of the road was critical. 516
4
Critical, yes. Not just the Southeastern Motorway but also presumably any junction on the motorway and access to the lands?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 517
In any event, on the 27th November 1989 I think you formally submitted a report
7
in relation to the lands, isn't that right, if we have 2918 please. And that's
8
a report as we see it at 2919 prepared by yourself, Dr. Meehan and Muir
9
Associates, isn't that correct?
15:05:14 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 518
Mr. Lynn I think will tell the Tribunal, if I could have 14130 please, that the
12
contents of that submission was generally accepted by the county manager and it
13
formed part of the manager's report to the council in October 1990 entitled the
14
Carrickmines area action plan, do you see that, that's an extract from
15:05:33 15
Mr. Lynn's statement to the Tribunal and I take it that you would accept that
16
and agree with it. Perhaps if we could have the third paragraph highlighted
17
please. Just slightly north of the area action plan. You see a submission was
18
prepared --
19
A
15:06:05 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes. Yes, I see that. 519
That report. 520
That would be Mr. Lynn's evidence, I understand. Is that your evidence? I have no knowledge that it was generally accepted by the county manager.
521
15:06:27 25
We will come in a moment to look at DP90/123, do you say that was substantially different from what you were proposing at that's various meetings and these
26
reports you were submitting?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:06:56 30
Do you accept that, Mr. McCabe?
If I could have see DP90. 522
Yes. If we could have 6937 please. The area shaded in red at the bottom right-hand side corner is the Monarch site as I understand it.
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:07:00
15:07:20
98 1
Q
523
I think the entire valley was being proposed for development for either
2
residential or industrial zoning, the proposals were that there would be
3
development at both sides of the proposed line which is the blue line and that
4
the industrial zoning would be close to the interchange, particularly the
5
interchange at Carrickmines.
6
A
Yes. It's a different layout, I mean I accept the principle that the general
7
body of the lands were to be developed for housing and shopping purposes but
8
the --
9
Q
15:07:40 10
A
11
Q
524
Which is what you were hoping for in your submissions? In principle but not in detail.
525
Yes. Yes. Would you accept that in large part the planners accepted your
12
proposals. I don't want to and I will if necessary go through your submissions
13
and through the manager's report to the council.
14
A
Well I accept that they agreed that lands should be developed to ordinary
15:07:59 15
16
densities. Q
526
17
And do you accept that the submission was generally accepted by the manager, as Mr. Lynn will tell the Tribunal?
18
A
19
Q
In principle. 527
15:08:16 20
Now, this was a submission which was made not during the display period but during the consideration of the maps by the planners, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 528
And I think in fact you were able to tell Mr. Lynn on the 18th January 1990, if
23
we could have 2952 please that your submission was being considered seriously
24
and was being examined, isn't that right?
15:08:33 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 529
27
area was deferred."
28
A
29
Q
15:08:46 30
"However until the line of the road was resolved, the land use planning of the Isn't that right?
Yes. 530
Now, if we could have 2954 please, this is a meeting attended apparently by you held on the 24th January 1990 in relation to the Cherrywood lands, isn't that www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:08:51
15:09:02
99 1
right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 531
This was one of the a series of meetings and I think in relation to the
4
motorway, you were advised that it now appears that the western option was the
5
most favoured by the council but that a clear decision may not emerge for
6
another couple of months?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
15:09:11 10
Q
11
A
Yes. 532
Who advised the meeting of that? I did but --
533
Based on? At the time I would have been generally involved with planning in the southeast
12
area and I would have had quite a number of contacts with the Development Plan
13
team in relation to other lands which were being developed at Ballyogan or
14
Cabinteely. So I would have been generally aware of the debate that was going
15:09:34 15
16
on between the planners and the engineers. Q
534
17
There was no doubt but there was a dispute within the council at this stage between the planners and the road department?
18
A
19
Q
There was a debate. 535
15:09:50 20
Yes, and I think it was your view the planners were likely to win out in that debate?
21
A
22
Q
I believe so that, yes. 536
23
However, that debate wasn't doing anything for the development of the site and it was deemed essential that the motorway line be fixed, isn't that right?
24
A
15:10:06 25
Q
The fixing of the line would resolve many of the planning issues of the site. 537
The merits of an immediate planning application were again discussed at this
26
meeting, isn't that right, and again I think you were of the view that the that
27
that, you should hold off on that?
28
A
I always felt that it was pointless making planning applications until the
29 15:10:25 30
planning situation had settled down. Q
538
Because obviously within the council planning department, at this stage they www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:10:29
15:10:44
100 1
hadn't even decided on the proposals that might be put to the councillors in
2
relation to the review of the plan, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
An application would have been entirely premature. 539
I think however the possibility of leverage was also discussed at that meeting
5
and at 2955, I think you or someone suggested that a possible leverage would be
6
to utilise the IDA in relation to the request for 60 acres of land and you
7
indicate that a possible approach to the planners with the IDA might result in
8
the speeding up of a decision, is that right?
9 15:11:07 10
A Q
I didn't make the suggestion about the IDA but that was my response to it. 540
11
Yes. If somebody else suggested the IDA and you suggested that it might sped it up?
12
A
13
Q
That it might, yes. 541
14
Now, there was a meeting again on the 24th January 1990 at 5956 and it would appear from the note of that meeting that Mr. Sweeney was able to advise the
15:11:31 15
assembled experts, including yourself, that the political decision had been
16
made to align the motorway on the western edge of the site although the forward
17
planners in the roads and the planners were continuing meetings and having
18
discussions on options, is that right?
19
A
15:11:47 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I see that, yes. 542
Yes. Can you recall that meeting, Mr. McCabe? No.
543
Do you know the source of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge? No.
544
15:11:59 25
That must have come as a relief, however, to those involved, including yourself, that there was such level of finality in relation to where the line
26
might be.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:12:17 30
Q
Well I don't know with what credibility I would have taken it. 545
Yes. What political decision was Mr. Sweeney referring to? I have no idea.
546
You have absolutely no recollection of that meeting? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:12:27
15:12:41
101 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Not of the meeting specifically and not particularly of that comment. 547
No. 548
Even though you attended quite a number of these meetings, isn't that right? Yes.
549
7
Was there ever any political or discussion of political interference in relation to any of these matters?
8
A
9
Q
No, certainly not. 550
15:12:53 10
Can you give any indication to the Tribunal how this note of this meeting could contain a reference to Mr. Sweeney's contribution, namely there was a political
11 12
Do you ever recollect any discussions in relation to meetings with ministers?
decision taken namely that in relation to the alignment of the motorway? A
I see it but I didn't place any credibility on it because in my view, the only
13
decision that would have been relevant would have been the ultimate line that
14
was posted on the Draft Development Plan map.
15:13:14 15
Q
551
Just let's take that in stages, you recall the comment presumably because you
16
have been able to tell us that you didn't take any notice of it at the time,
17
isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Or I put it differently, I wouldn't have taken much notice. 552
15:13:38 20
I think your evidence, Mr. McCabe was that you dismissed it at the time, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:13:49 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 553
So you must have recalled hearing it? I must have but --
554
But you can't assist the Tribunal as to the source of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge? No.
555
I think the issue of the IDA again surfaced at that meeting at 2957 and it says
27
"Mr. F McCabe discussed the option of mobilising the idea's support in order to
28
expedite the construction of the sewer."
29
relation to the IDA to that the sewer issue might be expedited and resolved?
15:14:15 30
A
Do you recall having a discussion in
Yes, I probably did. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:14:18
15:14:34
102 1
Q
2
A
556
That the IDA as a development agency, who would be an appropriate body to
3 4
And what did you advise?
assist in furthering the Carrickmines sewer. Q
557
5
Had you been involved in any other development where the IDA had been mobilised to expedite any decisions of the corporation or the council?
6
A
7
Q
No. 558
In any event on the 24th January 1995 at 2958 you were asked by Mr. Lynn to
8
identify the most appropriate 60 acres which could be devoted to industrial
9
lands in order that they could advise the IDA, isn't that right?
15:14:57 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 559
And I think you eventually did provide a report, if I could have the 2960 on
12
the 29th January 1990, you said "The most appropriate location for industrial
13
lands, would I imagine be those indicated in my report." Is that correct?
14
A
15:15:16 15
Q
Yes. 560
And I think you went on to provide a further report to Mr. Monahan on the 15th
16
February, if we could have 2964 please. This is effectively a review of the
17
situation, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 561
15:15:43 20
21
contained in it appears to have been contained in prior reports? A
I remember the late Mr. Monahan asking for it specifically, I don't know the
22 23
purpose. Q
562
24
You agree with me it's like a briefing document that he might want to show some one?
15:15:58 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:16:10 30
Can I ask you why did you come to compile that report since most of what's
Yes. 563
That was on the 15th February 1990, is that right? It's not dated but it would have been 1990, yes.
564
Did you know if Mr. Monahan had any meetings with parties or politicians in relation to this project?
A
No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:16:14
15:16:35
103 1
Q
565
Now, I think on the 15th February 1990, the coordinating committee of the
2
council considered the Carrickmines Valley, if I could have 2969 please and
3
they noted that plans were being drawn up in the planning department for the
4
future development of the area and a number of issues required to be resolved,
5
namely the location of the motorway, the question of the provision and
6
limitation of foul sewer, water requirements, major park requirements,
7
industrial lands and road systems and they asked that reports be provided as a
8
matter of urgency, is that right?
9 15:16:49 10
A Q
Yes. 566
I think you were able to tell Mr. Lynn and Monarch on the 2nd March 1990, if I
11
could have 2170 please, that "You now believe for a good reason that the
12
motorway option selection by the planner and road section of the council was
13
the western most line, option B." Is that correct?
14
A
15:17:11 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
That's correct. 567
Again discussions with the Development Plan again in a general way. 568
Somebody was advising you that this is what was happening? I don't think it was somebody was advising me but these are colleagues whom I
19
would have met on fairly frequent basis and I would have asked them I suppose
15:17:30 20
21
What was the source of your knowledge?
how the debate was going between the roads and planning sections. Q
569
Did you know that there was a suggestion at some stage that perhaps IKEA might
22
be involved together with the IDA, if I could have 2977. So as to expedite the
23
drainage system. This is an extract from a letter written by Mr. Lynn and just
24
look at the final paragraph there, it's E.S. which presumably Mr. Sweeney
15:17:56 25
"indicated that he may be in a position to get a letter from IKEA requiring a
26
100,000 square feet development on the retail park which could be used with the
27
IDA to speed up the drainage contact."
28
make contact with IDA and ascertain whether they would back IKEA in their
29
application, do you recall any discussion in relation to that at that stage?
15:18:16 30
A
"RL" which is presumably Mr. Lynn, "to
No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:18:17
15:18:27
104 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
570
No. 571
4 5
You have no recollection of that being discussed?
Can I just ask you at this stage, Mr. McCabe, what exactly was your role within Monarch in relation to these lands?
A
Well I suppose generally to advise on responses to the statutory planning
6
system, to advise them on what current development plans were saying. What --
7
in the light of the ongoing future of the city, what would be the likely future
8
of the Cherrywood lands and then formal responses to the statutory planning
9
system in relation to the publication of draft plans and advice on the
15:19:04 10
11
implications of those. Q
572
12
Yes. The impression I am getting from what you are saying, Mr. McCabe is that your role was that of giving advice?
13
A
14
Q
15:19:19 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15:19:25 20
Q
21
A
Yes. 573
Did you have any role or did you accept any role lobbying councillors? No.
574
Ever? Ever.
575
On behalf of Monarch? Never.
576
Did you have speak to councillors on their behalf? I think I spoke to one councillor that I met on a social basis at one stage,
22
because I should say that I believed that the proposals for the Cherrywood area
23
made sense but that was on a semi personal basis, otherwise no.
24
Q
15:19:48 25
A
26
Q
577
When would you have spoken to that councillor? I couldn't give a date.
578
27
Could you be mistake in your recollection in relation to your responsibilities in respect of lobbying for making representations to councillors?
28
A
29
Q
15:20:03 30
A
I don't think so. 579
Did you bill for making representations to councillors? In one bill I mentioned a representation and that was the -www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:20:06
15:20:24
105 1
Q
580
8267 please. This is an invoice dated the 3rd December 1991, you set out the
2
role that you had played and for which you were billing I think 6,000 to
3
include VAT, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 581
And I think one of the matters that you set out there was the preparation of
6
reports, various meetings with consultants, discussion with council officials,
7
maps and submissions of objections to the Development Plan together with
8
representations to councillors and the media. So you are saying that
9
representations to councillors there was one representation to one councillor?
15:20:46 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Singular, yes. 582
And you never had a role in making representations to other councillors? None whatever.
583
14
Did you ever recommend to Monarch that they make representations to councillors?
15:20:56 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
No. 584
Were you ever present when representations were made to councillors? No.
585
19
Did Monarch ever discuss with you their representations being made to councillors?
15:21:10 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
No. 586
So you say you had no political interface in relation to these lands? None whatsoever.
587
24
But you knew presumably that a review of the Development Plan would require the input of councillors?
15:21:26 25
A
26
Q
I did of course. 588
27
And you knew that a planning application because it would involve a material contravention or indeed a Section 4 would require the input of councillors?
28
A
29
Q
15:21:38 30
A
Yes. 589
And yet you say you never had any involvement with councillors? That was not my role, I was a professional adviser. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:21:42
15:21:50
106 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
590
Did you ever have any role with politicians? No.
591
Other than councillors? No.
592
6
You agree with me that the issue of political contacts was raised in your presence at various meetings?
7
A
8
Q
It was raised, yes. 593
9
If I could have 2980 please, this is a minute of the meeting of the 3rd May 1990 and again the Carrickmines sewer valley is being, sorry, Carrickmines
15:22:10 10
sewer scheme is being addressed, and you see the fourth paragraph, "it was
11
agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the Carrickmines
12
Valley sewerage scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F McC" which is
13
presumably you, "indicated that a named developer with a company Eddie Sweeney
14
to see Minister Flynn to indicate an overall need in the area."
15:22:33 15
16
The suggestion that Mr. Flynn be approached appears to be your suggestion from
17
that note, is that right?
18
A
Another development which I was engaged in the area had a consent I think for
19
about 900 houses which was held back due to I think 300 had been permitted and
15:22:55 20
the balance was held back pending the arrival of main drainage and my other
21
development in the area felt that there might have been some advantage in both
22
developers pressing the department to expedite the sewer.
23
Q
594
24
Just to take that in stages, there were two developers in this valley who both had a problem in relation to the coming on line of the sewer, the Carrickmines
15:23:25 25
sewer, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 595
28
And that difficulty was being discussed by you and others in the context of Monarch and their lands at Cherrywood.
29
A
15:23:35 30
Q
Yes. 596
And the difficulty or the solution or a possible solution to the difficulty was www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:23:40
15:23:53
107 1
the possibility of political input, namely an approach to the minister?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 597
4
And that was your suggestion and you said that suggestion came about because it was something that was being mooted by another developer?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 598
Well did that meeting take place, can I ask you? I don't believe so.
599
9
We know for example you were supposed to meet with the planners, can we have page 2981, which is the second page of the same document and if we look at the
15:24:06 10
third last paragraph it says "It was agreed that Fergal McCabe and Dr. Brian
11
Meehan would meet with the planners on the documents already submitted after
12
the meeting with the minister had taken place."
13
A
14
Q
I see that but I am not aware a meeting took place. 600
15:24:25 15
What was the strategy meeting the planners after the political representation had been made to the minister?
16
A
17
Q
Presumably if there had been expedition on the arrival of the sewer. 601
18
The expedition would have been brought about as a result of the visit to the minister?
19
A
15:24:38 20
Q
Presumably. 602
21
And that Minister's intervention having taken place you would then meet with the planners.
22
A
23
Q
24
A
15:24:49 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 603
It would be pointless meeting with them in advance of it, is that right? I wouldn't go that far.
604
But that certainly was the thinking that meeting at a strategy? Yes.
605
28
You were intimately involved in the strategy in relation to the planning and development of this site, isn't that right?
29
A
15:25:01 30
Q
Yes. 606
You were key to it as was Mr. Lynn and the other representatives of Monarch, www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:25:06
15:25:28
108 1
albeit, sorry, whether it be putting in a Development Plan submission or a
2
planning submission or advising your clients?
3
A
My involvement would be largely to do with the relationship with the statutory
4 5
planning system. Q
607
Let's look at your advice today, your first advice was not to put in a shopping
6
centre submission at this stage. You then advised I think that a submission
7
should go in at this stage during the review process, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 608
15:25:49 10
You had a series of meetings with the various planners and you had relayed the contents of those meetings back to your employer, Monarch, is that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 609
13
You had made a suggestion or had developed a suggestion that the IDA might get involved in an effort to expedite it?
14
A
15:26:03 15
Q
Yes. 610
And it would appear from that document we just looked at, that you had because
16
of your experience elsewhere come up with a suggestion there be a joint
17
approach to the minister to get involved in relation to the expedition of the
18
sewerage system?
19
A
15:26:16 20
Q
Yes. 611
I think there was a meeting on the 5th July 1990, you don't appear to have been
21
at the meeting but you have seen the documentation at which Mr. Sweeney and
22
Lynn were at and 2958 and at 2986, under the heading "access to site" it's
23
taking the second paragraph there RML, which I understand is Mr. Lynn
24
"indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the motorway
15:26:48 25
established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the development
26
and recommended that contact be made at the highest level, ie ministerial level
27
to ascertain the position."
28 29 15:27:03 30
Presumably you would agree with both of those propositions being put forward by Mr. Lynn there? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:27:07
15:27:21
109 1
A
I presume that the position of the motorway was a matter for Dun
2 3
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, not the minister. Q
612
4
What's being suggested here is that we have moved on from the position, we are now talking about the construction.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 613
7
And that the construction of the site was of the motorway was necessary to develop the site.
8
A
9
Q
It wasn't essential, I mean there was access from the Bray Road. 614
15:27:39 10
Well there was access provided a road could be constructed into the site, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 615
13
And there would have been an exit difficulty depending on the level of traffic exiting on to the Bray Road?
14
A
15:27:55 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Certainly the construction of the motorway would have given more accessibility. 616
Now, I think Nathaniel Lichfield got involved, isn't that right? Yes.
617
And in August of 1990, if I could have 2988 please, Delia Lichfield visited the
18
site and she visited you on in the first instance and you took her on a tour of
19
the site, isn't that right?
15:28:09 20
A
21
Q
No, I think she saw the site independently and I met her afterwards. 618
22
that correct?
23
A
24
Q
I don't know that. I thought it was general. 619
15:28:30 25
'85 plan, the maps, the working papers and the ERDO report, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
15:28:51 30
Okay. And I think you suggested as we see at 2989 a series of documents that might be useful studied by her, including the 1983, I referred to there as the
26
29
I understand and I think her involvement was in the context of shopping, is
Yes. 620
And I think it was understood at this stage that an EIS report would probably be required in relation to any large scale development of the site and certainly an EIS report was required in relation to the motorway? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:28:58
15:29:09
110 1
A
2
Q
It was. 621
3
I think you were able to tell her about the position of the motorway as you understood it at that stage, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 622
If we have 2990, I think she was being advised that any approach or overtures
6
to the planners might be counter productive, isn't that correct? You see K
7
Mc E that presumably is a representative of Muir & Associates "was of the
8
opinion that it would be counter productive on making overtures in relation to
9
the planners in relation to the possible short term development and until such
15:29:43 10
time as the outline of the full development was available and would be
11
discussed even at a rough stage."
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 623
14
That was consistent because you had given similar advice previously in relation to a proposal for an outline planning application, isn't that right?
15:29:59 15
A
16
Q
I believe there had to be a context. 624
Yes. And the context here was going to be the Development Plan when it was
17
published, isn't that right, what would be acceptable and if I could just maybe
18
speed it up a little bit, that context was finally published with the report of
19
the manager in October 1990 and the publication of that map which we have just
15:30:20 20
seen of DP90/123, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 625
And we see the manager's report at 3035 and that was presented to a special
23
meeting of the planner on the 18th October 1990. And I think there was a
24
follow up report in November where the manager again having presented that
15:30:39 25
report on the 18th October, on the 16th November updated the members on the
26
report, isn't that right, and finally there was a tour of the valley by the
27
councillors or some of the councillors and the matter came to a head I think on
28
the 6th December 1990, is that correct?
29
A
15:30:57 30
Q
I believe so. 626
On the same day I think you wrote to Mr. Sweeney, if we could have 3068 and you www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:31:02
15:31:17
111 1
advised Mr. Sweeney "That at the meeting last night of planners and councillors
2
to discuss general planning issues in Dublin area and inevitably the current
3
controversy regarding the above lands surfaced."
4 5
Can I ask you, we have been following a series of special meetings and
6
particularly a meeting on the 6th December 1990, since this letter is written
7
on the 6th December 1990, and refers to previous evening's meeting, I take it
8
we are talking about a different meeting, a meeting that possibly took place on
9
the 5th December 1990?
15:31:36 10
A
11
Q
12 13 14
Yes. 627
Can you tell the Tribunal what the circumstances that meeting was held and how you came to be at it?
A
Yes, I can. At the time I was a member of the council of the Irish Planning Institute which is a body which represents professional planners in Ireland and
15:31:50 15
the council during that period was quite disturbed that planning developments
16
in the Dublin area, in relation to apparent land use zoning land use anomalies,
17
for example, in north County Dublin, lots of isolated pieces of land were zoned
18
without any apparent purpose and the movement of the designated centre of the
19
Lucan, Clondalkin area to Quarryvale and we made statements about this. I got
15:32:26 20
a call, I think I was press officer of the council at the time. We got a call
21
from Deputy Liam Lawlor who I didn't know, expressing concern that the
22
professional institute were making these statements and asking for a meeting to
23
see if there was any common ground between I think he was representing the
24
Fianna Fail group and the institute.
15:32:47 25
26
The institute were not in the least happy about the approach but we felt that
27
since it was councillors, deputies who were asking it, we had no option but to
28
go along. So we arranged a meeting in Buswells Hotel on presumably the 5th.
29
And I attended along with Enda Conway who was councillor of the institute and a
15:33:16 30
third member who I can't remember and the Fianna Fail councillors were Deputy www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:33:18
15:33:30
112 1
Lawlor, Colm McGrath and a third councillor who may have been GV Wright but I
2
simply can't remember.
3 4
And I think the intention or the hope of the Fianna Fail councillors was that
5
in some way, the institute might back off or say friendly things regarding the
6
Development Plan process in County Dublin. And it was fairly evident from the
7
outset that they certainly weren't going to do that and a general discussion
8
then involved or ensued. And at one stage I mentioned publication of the
9
manager's plan at Cherrywood and I recollect that, I particularly recollected
15:34:05 10
the views of the councillors that there was a degree of irritation because they
11
hadn't been consulted before its publication and that to a certain extent
12
resulted in negative attitude. I thought that was an interesting piece of
13
information that my clients should be aware of.
14
Q
628
15:34:28 15
There had been no consultation by the planners with the politicians and councillors or there had been no consultation by the developer with the --
16
A
17
Q
No, the planners. 629
18
The planners, the planners were keeping their distance in relation to at least this development and that had irritated the councillors.
19
A
15:34:45 20
Q
That was the impression I got. 630
21
And that's what you are reporting in that letter of the 5th December 1992 to your principals?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Yes. 631
Were you at the council meeting of the 5th December itself? I have never attended a council meeting which had anything to do with planning
15:35:01 25
or zoning.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:35:08 30
Q
632
Sorry -- you have never attended a council meeting? Never.
633
Ever. But never in relation to any project that you were involved in? No, no.
634
Would you have been made aware of the outcome of that meeting which was www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:35:13
15:35:35
113 1
effectively, which was negative towards the managers proposals?
2
A
3
Q
Only what I read in the papers. 635
Yes. But I think you were sent back to the drawing board so to speak by your
4
employers and we see on the 23rd January 1991 at 3094 you are tabling new
5
structure zoning maps in relation to the area, isn't that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 636
Would it be fair to at this stage you are confined now to any proposed
8
development to the eastern side of the proposed motorway line which is likely
9
to run somewhere either through the centre or through the bottom or beyond the
15:36:06 10
Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 637
13 14
that are available to the east for development. A
The more residential accommodation, the more residential development that can
15:36:26 15
16
And obviously the further west that line is, the more of the Cherrywood lands
be accommodated. Q
638
Now, I think Councillor McDonald and councillor, yes, Councillor McDonald
17
tables a handwritten motion at 6972 asking that the council agree to provide
18
for a district shopping center in the rezoning of the lands at Loughlinstown as
19
shown on the attached map and to provide C zoning for same. That would be
15:36:49 20
consistent with what Monarch were seeking at this time, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
It was, yes. 639
No. 640
15:37:06 25
26
Do you know how Councillor Cyril McDonald came to table that motion?
Councillor McDonald sponsored the motion with Councillor Coffey on the 6th December 1990 which eventually stayed DP90/123, is that right?
A
I am not au fait with the various motions and the process of the adoption of
27
the plan.
28
Q
29
A
15:37:21 30
Q
641
Can I ask you, were you ever asked to supply the text of a motion to Monarch. Never.
642
There was a further motion by Councillor McDonald that the lands fronting on to www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:37:28
15:37:48
114 1
the main Dublin, Bray Road and marked in yellow on the map be zoned for amenity
2
lands, that's 6974. I am not going to go through the balance of those motions
3
because in any event, I think the manager short circuited matters by putting
4
forward three proposals in May 1990, is that right?
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
1991 I think.
7 8
Q
643
9 15:38:12 10
Sorry, 1991. Do you recall the debate in May '91 or the lead up
to the debate in May 1991? A
No, I am not au fait with the procedures of the council during the process of
11 12
MR. QUINN:
making the plan. Q
644
Okay. Well in any event I think there was a debate and there were three
13
options put forward by the manager, including the 1983 plan subject to
14
amendments, which according to the manager's plan was known as DP90/129A and
15:38:38 15
that was voted upon to go on display for the Draft Development Plan. You may
16
or may not be aware of it?
17
A
18
Q
No, no, I am not aware of it. 645
In any event, I think that further meetings took place between yourself and
19
Mr. Conroy because the display period as I say had been between the September
15:39:00 20
and December '91 and if we look at 3326, it's a memorandum of a meeting of the
21
2nd September 1991 held in Monarch House and it follows on a meeting where you
22
had undertaken to speak to Mr. Conway to determine the extent of the content of
23
a submission that you would put in in relation to the lands, isn't that right?
24
A
15:39:25 25
Q
That's correct, yes. 646
26
that correct, you had been given instructions to do that?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:39:47 30
And I think that you coordinated a submission which was to be put in, isn't
Yes. 647
At 3339, you were written to on the 11th September 1991 by Mr. Lynn, is that right? And you were asked for a team to put in a submission to the Draft Development Plan and a submission to the officials. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:39:49
15:40:03
115 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 648
You were going to put in two submissions effectively, isn't that right? Yes.
649
And in relation to the submission to the officials, and I think if we look at
5
3340, Mr. Lynn was advising that this submission would be a stronger document
6
and would include the following, and there were a series of documents set out
7
there. Can I ask you why a stronger document might go to the officials that
8
would go in to the plans so to speak?
9
A
I think probably what's intended there is a more detailed document to the
15:40:26 10
planners which might show the actual location of roads, the form of housing,
11
more details as regards open space whereas the Development Plan would be simply
12
colours and notations.
13
Q
650
14
3343 and you got some insights into the council's thinking on issues, isn't
15:40:53 15
16
that right? A
Yes, I was anxious to understand what was the effect of the draft plan zonings
17 18
I think you did in fact have a meeting with Mr. Conroy on the 1st October at
or draft plan adoptions. Q
651
19
In any event I think on the 26th November 1991, you compiled a report which was included in a submission by Monarch on the 2nd December 1991 and if I just take
15:41:14 20
your letter, again I don't want to go in to details on your submission unless
21
you require me to do so but at 3384, we have your submission of the 26th
22
November 1991.
23
A
24
Q
15:41:32 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:41:52 30
Yes. 652
And I think you were there suggesting a designation of AP be altered to A1PS? Yes.
653
In other words pipe sewerage to action area piped sewerage, is that right? That's correct.
654
I understood that AP at this time was piped sewerage at ten houses to the hectare or four to the acre unless otherwise stated?
A
I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:41:53
15:42:04
116 1
Q
655
Okay. The zoning boundaries between AP lands to the east and the agricultural
2
B zoned lands to the west to be altered in line with an attached map, is that
3
correct?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 656
And that a new objective to protect, provide for and/or improve district centre
6
facilities be included in the lands at a location as set out in the map, that
7
would be zone C, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
That's correct. 657
15:42:23 10
And the lands which were fully and visually related to Loughlinstown Stream with a link to Brides Glen, that's the amenity suggestion, isn't that correct?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 658
And there was a suggestion for a link road between the Bray Road on the eastern
13
boundary of the lands and the south eastern motorway on the western boundary.
14
Be indicated that it was a five year road proposal, isn't that right?
15:42:38 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 659
That was to open up the lands for development? If I remember the link was a long-term link.
660
19
I think in early 1991 you got an opportunity to spook to those proposal, isn't that right, in oral submission?
15:42:54 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 661
Just before I move that oral submission is 3575 and I think took place on the
22
5th March 1992. Now, I think at this stage, that is from November 1991 until
23
May of 1992, Bill O'Herlihy had been retained by Monarch, is that right?
24
A
15:43:17 25
Q
26
A
Yes. 662
Did you know that he had been retained? Yes because he organised a number of, I participated in two publicity events
27
that he organised, one was an interview or a debate on East Coast Radio with
28
Michael Smith who is one of the objectors and also I think they made the video
29
and they were the only two involvements I had.
15:43:45 30
Q
663
Yes. I think we see a letter to you on the 20th January 1992 at 3533 where you www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:43:50
15:44:02
117 1
are being advised by Monarch of his appointment, is that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 664
4 5
the matter? A
I understood that his function was to extol the virtues of the Monarch
6 7
What, apart, what function did Mr. O'Herlihy have at this stage in relation to
proposal. Q
665
Yes. Now, I think you give further advice to your clients on the 22nd January
8
1992, if we could have 3538 please. Where you wondered whether there could be
9
some of advantage of Monarch writing to the leaders of the political parties?
15:44:22 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That's correct. 666
Setting out the objectives. Largely because of the all party nature of the ERDO study which the political
13
parties had signed up and which seemed to me to be the basis of the entire
14
exercise.
15:44:44 15
Q
667
Just before I leave the matter, I think at that stage the Cherrywood Residents
16
Association, if we look at 3597 were suggesting that a zoning of four houses to
17
the acre and they enclosed their planners report. That's to be found at 3601.
18
I think they were in time to ask that there would be only one house to the
19
acre, isn't that right, but at this stage, it was felt that four to the acre
15:45:13 20
was acceptable.
21
A
22
Q
I have seen the correspondence, yes. 668
23
And this correspondence and these submissions, presumably will be a matter of discussion amongst the planning team within Monarch?
24
A
15:45:32 25
Q
Well I was aware of them, they were copied to me. 669
Yes. Now, we know that Councillor Lydon and Hand had signed a motion which was
26
lodged with the council on the May 1992 at 7144 please. Did you have any input
27
into that motion being signed?
28
A
29
Q
15:46:00 30
A
No. 670
Did you know that Councillor Lydon and Hand had signed such a motion? No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:46:01
15:46:14
118 1
Q
671
Was there ever a discussion at any of the strategy meetings you attended in
2
relation to this matter as to who would table motions in relation to the
3
proposals at the meetings?
4
A
5
Q
Never. 672
But it would be understood and I take it you would have understood that nothing
6
would have got on the agenda unless it was put forward by way of a motion or
7
proposal by some councillor?
8
A
9
Q
I knew the procedures but I had no involvement whatsoever. 673
15:46:34 10
Were you never curious to know which councillors were likely to support the proposals on behalf of Monarch?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
No. 674
There was never any discussion of it? Not that I recollect.
675
15:46:45 15
Was there ever any discussion of councillors who were supportive of the Monarch situation?
16
A
17
Q
I can't single out anybody. 676
In any event I think the manager produced a proposal which was contained in map
18
92/44 for the area, isn't that right? 7203 please and this was a suggestion I
19
think that the existing pipe sewage would be extended to an action area plan
15:47:29 20
piped sewerage and that an area which had previously been zoned agricultural
21
would be included in that area, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
Again, we are going into an area that I had no involvement in. 677
No but it's something that obviously would have been of concern to you and to
24
Monarch whether or not the manager was supporting, the manager's views in
15:47:52 25
relation to the matter was clearly of utmost important in relation to Monarch?
26
A
I had literally no involvement with Monarch during the process of the making of
27
the plans, my involvement generally came in when the plan had been made and the
28
response was required to the draft plan. But the mechanics of the making of it
29
were beyond me.
15:48:14 30
Q
678
But did you not know or were you not curious to know whether or not the manager www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:48:20
15:48:41
119 1
was supporting the proposals or submissions that you had put in and had spoken
2
to in late December 1991 and early 1992?
3
A
I was generally aware that the principle of the development of the lands for
4
new residential communities was approved by the technical officials beyond
5
that, I didn't.
6
Q
679
And didn't Monarch brief you in relation to the merits of what were being
7
proposed by them. For example on the 21st May 1992, if we look at 3695, you
8
were sent a series of bullet points in connection with the Cherrywood village,
9
is that right?
15:48:59 10
A
11
Q
12
A
Yes. 680
Why did you receive that correspondence? I presume this was in relation to Monarch's ongoing campaign, they had designed
13
and prepared a model of the form of development that might have been provided
14
ultimately on the Cherrywood lands. And I think, what was the word, I think
15:49:26 15
they were selling that.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15:49:43 20
Q
681
Isn't that a briefing document effectively? I don't know.
682
3696 please. Yes, they are generally plus points.
683
Exactly. And you didn't have to be convinced because your employers were
21
already relying on your advice, so presumably they were giving you briefing
22
points so that you could brief people in relation to it, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
15:49:59 25
A
26
Q
27
A
Yes, but I didn't brief anybody. 684
You are saying you didn't brief anybody? No.
685
Could you be mistaken in that, Mr? I don't think so, I just said one particular councillor was a friend, I
28
mentioned the merits of the scheme as far as I remember, the vote was, the
29
person's vote was negative. Otherwise, I had no contact with any councillors
15:50:19 30
in relation to this scheme. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:50:23
15:50:37
120 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
686
This letter was forwarded to you on the 21st May, isn't that right? Yes.
687
And I think the upcoming vote was on the 26th May. 27th May. Can I ask you,
4
do you recall a motion in relation to moving the line of the motorway, which
5
was proposed by Councillor Fox?
6
A
7
Q
No. 688
8 9
motorway line be moved. A
Well obviously in the general plans we had been preparing for the area which
15:50:59 10
saw the motorway as being the ultimate south western line of the development
11 12
Do you have recall any debate or discussion in relation to a strategy that the
area. Q
689
Well it wouldn't be unreasonable in the context of that situation to have a
13
motion which would consider moving the line of the motorway west wards, there
14
by increasing the take east of it and therefore increasing the possible
15:51:20 15
residential zoning area?
16
A
17
Q
It wouldn't be unreasonable. 690
18 19
suggesting that the line of the motorway be moved? A
My basic strategy at all times was the motorway should be the extreme limit of
15:51:38 20
21
Did you put forward a strategy that a motion which the be considered,
the development land on the southwest. Q
691
Did you know for example that the manager had been written to by Monarch, if I
22
could have 3714 in the context of a motion being proposed by Councillor Fox
23
suggesting that the line of the motorway be moved so as to accommodated a golf
24
course?
15:52:07 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:52:28 30
I see that. 692
Do you recall the circumstances under which that letter came to be written? No.
693
That would have been the first letter I suggest to you, to the planning department that you hadn't been involved with?
A
I don't recollect the letter. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:52:30
15:52:42
121 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
694
You don't recollect that letter? No, I don't.
695
4
And you don't recollect any discussion in relation to tabling a motion that the line of the motorway be moved?
5
A
6
Q
Not the tabling a motion. 696
Yes. Now, I think there was, on the occasion, you have heard evidence from
7
councillor or Mr. Barrett in relation to the success of his motion that the
8
zoning on the lands would be of one house per acre, isn't that right, at that
9
meeting or that vote on the 27th May 1992?
15:53:09 10
A
Well I was here but I really lost thread of the various motions which were
11 12
proposed and the consequences of the motions. Q
697
The 1991 draft plan has been published, submissions have been received, the
13
manager has put forward a proposal, I've put it on the screen, councillors
14
Lydon and McGrath have proposed that manager's proposals be adopted. That has
15:53:33 15
been unsuccessful and there were a series of motions and the last of those
16
motions is by Councillor Barrett that the lands remain at one house -- or be
17
zoned at the density of one house per acre?
18
A
19
Q
15:53:49 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 698
Do you recall any discussion following on that motion within Monarch? No.
699
The Councillor Gilmore motion in relation to the centre, the C zoning, that has
22
been successful, do you recall any discussion following on the success of that
23
motion?
24
A
15:54:02 25
Q
No. 700
26
outcome or what had transpired at the meeting on the 27th May 1992?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:54:23 30
Do you recall being at any meetings where there were post mortems held on the
No, in general political matters weren't discussed in my presence. 701
Is that correct now in that you will recall earlier this afternoon I showed a series of meetings at which you were present, where political matters were discussed? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:54:23
15:54:48
122 1
A
In the sense of making representations to ministers regarding the bringing
2 3
forward of infrastructure. Q
702
There is no doubt but that Monarch understood that the support of councillors
4
was essential, isn't that right? And in a letter of the 2nd October 1992 at
5
3837 to GRE, if we look at 3838 on the second page, it says "In order to
6
achieve these results, it was and is necessary to continue contact with those
7
representatives favourable to our side. Unfortunately there still is a strong
8
core of members opposed to any development and will take every opportunity to
9
limit development of the lands. We must continue to hold our support and
15:55:18 10
recent discussions with other parties suggest that additional support has been
11
attracted to our side."
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 703
14
where it was agreed that an increased councillor support was required for the
15:55:41 15
16
development? A
No, the only discussions I remember related to the publicity campaign to, as I
17 18
Do you recall any discussions by way of strategy or otherwise within Monarch
said, extol the virtues of the proposal generally. Q
704
19
Now, there are three letters all dated the 30th July 1993 which appear to be amount to submissions in relation to that published plan, if I could have 4321,
15:56:14 20
and whilst the council doesn't appear at this stage to be able to furnish to
21
the Tribunal with the actual letter received, I am just wondering if you can
22
recall making a submission at that stage in relation to the plan. You see that
23
letter 4321 is addressed to the principal officer, Dublin County Council?
24
A
I was looking at that in my file and I gather it came into my office, there's a
15:56:43 25
26
note at the top which says 'not sent'. Q
705
That's one of the three, that's at 8556, the one you are looking at is 4321
27
and there's a further one at 7221, do you recall making a submission in July
28
1993 on behalf of your clients in relation to the published plan?
29
A
15:57:04 30
Q
I am pretty certain I did. 706
And in order to do that and to make that submission, you would have to be aware www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:57:11
15:57:30
123 1
of the outcome of the meeting on the 27th May obviously?
2
A
3
Q
Well the submission is made to the published amendments. 707
4
Yes, and the published amendments are C zoning town centre and also A residential density of one to the acre?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 708
7
Can you recall what your submissions, if any, were at that stage on behalf of your clients?
8
A
9
Q
Well they would be in the text of the proposal. 709
15:57:45 10
You see the difficulty we have, Mr. McCabe, and I don't know if you can resolve it for us, is that we have three different texts, in other words three
11
different letters all saying -- they are all signed by you but they all seek
12
different objectives on behalf of Monarch.
13
A
14
Q
Do the council not have receipt of it? 710
15:58:17 15
So far the council have been unable to provide us with the copy of the letter received.
16
A
17
Q
I see. I don't know how to answer that. 711
First of all, can you give any explanation as to why there would be three
18
different submissions made on behalf of your clients. Three different
19
submissions, all signed.
15:58:42 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Unless they were three drafts. 712
Which were unsent. 713
24
be contained on the lands vis-a-vis -A
I am sure the submission I wished to make was that ordinary densities should
27 28
prevail. Q
29 15:59:30 30
I will circumvent it in this way, can you tell the Tribunal what you were submitting to the council at this stage ought to be, ought to contain, ought to
15:59:03 25
26
Three drafts.
714
When you refer to ordinary densities, are we talking about 20 houses to the hectare?
A
Again without seeing a letter I would have regarded upwards, up to 20 to the www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:59:35
15:59:55
124 1
hectare, that is eight to the acre would have been an appropriate density. But
2
without actually seeing the letter, I can't tell you exactly what I would have
3
said.
4
Q
715
Now I think somebody at this time had come up a strategy that perhaps a science
5
and technology park might be put up on the site? Can you recall who came up
6
with that strategy?
7
A
No, I must say I was out of the loop on that but I do remember that it seems to
8
have been resolved by Monarch as a separate issue. I was involved making
9
submissions, advocating it but I am not terribly sure where the idea came from.
16:00:20 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
716
Not really. 717
13 14
A
Science and technology parks were a relatively new development at that time, it seemed to be an appropriate one.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
16:00:48 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
718
Yes, but it wasn't your proposal? It wasn't my proposal, no.
719
You don't know where it came from? No.
720
You know who devised the strategy? No.
721
23
I think on the, in that context I think there was a visit to Montpelier in September or prior to September 1993, is that correct?
24
A
16:01:04 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
16:01:27 30
Is it a type of thing you would have suggested to your clients as perhaps providing a planning game to the incoming council?
16:00:38 15
29
Is it unusual you wouldn't have been eventually involved in an issue like that?
I don't know, I wasn't on it. 722
You weren't on that trip? No.
723
You did know, however, that there was an upcoming council meeting which would confirm or reject the May 1992 zoning on the lands, isn't that right?
A
Again, I can't say that I was aware there was a council meeting coming up because I generally didn't make it my business to find out when council www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:01:39
16:01:46
125 1
meetings were I didn't take any particular interest in the process of making
2
the plan.
3
Q
724
4
right?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 725
You had been very much involved in putting in the submission in 1991. Yes.
726
9
You had put in the oral submission in 1992. You had been sent the bullet points prior to the council meeting in May 1992.
16:02:02 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 727
12
You may or may not have put in a submission in July '93 but you certainly prepared three possible submissions?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 728
16:02:16 15
But saying that apart from that, you took no real involvement in relation to what was, after all, the largest development in south County Dublin or proposed
16 17
You had been very involved up to the submission in November 1989, isn't that
largest development in south County Dublin at this time? A
No, what I am saying is that I took no particular interest in the internal
18
process of the council in coming to its decisions, in fact it seemed very
19
bewildering to me. I -- my duty was to respond to the outcome of those
16:02:46 20
21
decisions when they were published as a draft plan. Q
729
No, I am talking now about the involvement you might have had with your
22
clients, Monarch, by way of discussions and strategy leading up to those
23
meetings and the persons employed by them in the lead up to those meetings.
24
For example in the lead up to the May 1992 meeting, you had been written to and
16:03:08 25
advised of Mr. O'Herlihy's involvement and I think you have given evidence to
26
the Tribunal of your involvement with him in relation to the matter at that
27
time.
28
A
29
Q
16:03:25 30
Yes. 730
You were written to shortly prior to May 1992 vote and given the bullet points in relation to the advantages of this site, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:03:27
16:03:33
126 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 731
3
And we have put up the three submissions which you made in July 1993, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 732
6
So you were involved within the strategy being devised within Monarch, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes I suppose I was. 733
9
Because you had been involved in the strategy since May or June 1989, is that right?
16:03:52 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 734
You were still part of the strategy team as was presumably Mr. O'Herlihy up to
12
May 1992 as were Muir & Associates, Dr. Meehan, all the other experts, is that
13
right, Mat Lichfield, you had met Delia Lichfield and we had seen that?
14
A
16:04:09 15
Q
Yes. 735
I am just wondering can you tell the Tribunal what the strategy was being
16
devised at this stage, this is a key stage now, we are moving up to September
17
and on through to December 1993?
18
A
I suppose the general hope was that the council would adopt a plan which would
19
in general provide for ordinary residential density on the great area of the
16:04:34 20
land, provide for shopping, associate ancillary shopping and preserve amenities
21 22
and within the context of a well made plan. Q
736
23
But for the council to do anything, the councillors had to do it, isn't that right?
24
A
16:04:51 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 737
Who was looking after the councillors at this stage, Mr. McCabe? Well presumably from the documentation you sent me, Mr. Lynn.
738
Leaving aside the documentation I sent, you were sent to by the Tribunal, from
28
your recollection now, can you tell the Tribunal who was looking after the
29
councillors at this stage?
16:05:09 30
A
I was aware that Mr. Lynn was the person who liaised with the councillors. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:05:13
16:05:28
127 1
Q
739
2
councillors in the 1991 local elections?
3
A
4
Q
No. 740
5 A
7
Q
Yes. 741
8
16:05:38 10
And we have seen evidence of where you earlier suggested a visit might be made to the minister on another issue, is that right?
A Q
Yes. 742
11
Well did you have any contribution as to how the councillors might be dealt with at this stage?
12
A
13
Q
No. 743
14
Did you know for example that Monarch had been generous to various candidates in the 1992 general election?
16:05:50 15
A
16
Q
No. 744
17
Was there any discussion of the councillor intentions as known by Monarch in the lead up to the 1993 vote?
18
A
19
Q
16:06:09 20
A
21
Q
No, not that I remember. 745
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop for example had been brought on board? No, I didn't know that until I got documents from this Tribunal.
746
22
Is there any reason why Mr. Dunlop's involvement would have been made known to you?
23
A
24
Q
16:06:21 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 16:06:47 30
You yourself as part of a strategy had in fact invited or suggested that the party leaders would be written to, isn't that right?
6
9
Did you know for example that Monarch had been generous in the support of
I can't think of any. 747
Did you know Mr. Dunlop? As I said to the Tribunal, I met the man 15 years ago for ten minutes.
748
You had never come across Mr. Dunlop in your career as a planner prior to this? I was aware of his involvement with the Quarryvale rezoning.
749
Leaving that aside for the moment, Mr. Dunlop was known to you as a lobbyist I take it?
A
Yes. I mean not known to me, known I mean generally. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:06:48
16:07:03
128 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
750
Yes. 751
4 A
6
Q
7
A
No. 752
Why not? My view was I was a professional planner and my job was to make the best
8
planning case and hope that that would succeed. Q
753
16:07:22 10
11
Did it ever occur to you to suggest to Monarch that perhaps Mr. Dunlop's services might be taken on board?
5
9
Not specifically but generally would have been known as a lobbyist?
You had given other, if I could describe it, political advice to your principles?
A
I think a suggestion seeing the minister regarding bringing forward
12
infrastructure or writing to the party leaders on a matter which they had
13
already taken a view I wouldn't have thought constitutes political advice.
14
Q
754
16:07:42 15
But did you advise your clients or did you understand them to know that the voting intentions of the councillors was crucial?
16
A
17
Q
No. 755
18
Was there ever any discussion of how the Monarch proposals would find its way on to the agenda of the council?
19
A
16:07:54 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
16:08:16 25
No. 756
And you say you never knew that Mr. Dunlop had been employed? Certainly not.
757
You had been crucially involved, isn't that right, throughout the period? Yes.
758
In writing to their partners or their joint venture partners on the 2nd September 1993 at 4344, Monarch set out the likely costs for the September to
26
December 1993 period, if I can have 4349 please. And if we just concentrate on
27
the first three items there, that is Mr. Dunlop, yourself and Mr. Meehan. You
28
see that Mr. Dunlop was receiving or was likely to receive 4,000 per month
29
whereas in fact you were I think 1,000 a month.
16:09:01 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:09:01
16:09:11
129 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
759
And yet you were the expert, isn't that right? Yes.
760
And you had been providing all the advice as far as back as May 1989? Yes.
761
6
Does it surprise you that Mr. Dunlop's remuneration would be greater than yours at this time?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
It does seem a significant amount of money. 762
Were you on a success fee as a matter of interest? No.
16:09:33 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn it's nearly quarter past four.
13
MR. QUINN:
Unfortunately Mr. McCabe has obliged the Tribunal by being here
14
today, I understand he has some difficulties tomorrow and I am not sure if the
12
16:09:44 15
Tribunal were to sit early, if it would. I would envisage that I would be no
16
more than a half and hour or three quarters of an hour and if the Tribunal were
17
to sit at ten perhaps.
18 19 16:09:59 20
CHAIRMAN: A
Would that suit you Mr. McCabe tomorrow or some day?
It's not possible to go on?
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
Not this afternoon because we have other commitments.
Well I am not hands of the Tribunal.
24 16:10:05 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well I mean we can offer you tomorrow at 10 o'clock and possibly
26
finish shortly after half ten or alternatively some other time you could talk
27
to --
28
A
No, ten o'clock tomorrow.
29 16:10:21 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:10:21
16:10:31
130 1 2
MR. SANFEY: Chairman I should say I will have some short questions I hope no
3
more than 10 or 15 minutes
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
tomorrow.
7
A
All right. We might be talking about three quarters of an hour
Okay.
8 9 16:10:41 10
CHAIRMAN: A
Ten o'clock tomorrow.
Thank you.
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
13
FRIDAY, 9TH JUNE, 2006 AT 10.00 A.M.
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:10:44
11:05:34
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON
2
TUESDAY 13TH JUNE 2006 AT 11 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Morning sir.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. Michael Joseph Cosgrave please.
9 11:05:38 10
MICHAEL JOSEPH COSGRAVE, HAVING BEEN SWORN
11
WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Morning Mr. Cosgrave?
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
Morning Mr. Cosgrave.
16
A.
Good morning.
17
Q. 2
Mr. Cosgrave, you are a member of the Fine Gael party I think?
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 3
You were a member of Dublin Corporation from 1974 to 1985?
A.
That's right.
Q. 4
And a member of Dublin County Council, I think, from 1985 until January '94
11:06:07 15
11:06:16 20
21 22
when you became a member of Fingal County Council, is that correct?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 5
And I think you were asked by the Tribunal to supply a statement in relation to
11:06:32 25
your dealings with personnel connected with the Monarch Group and in particular
26
in relation to lands at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 6
And I think you provided two statements which are more or less the same and the
29 11:06:48 30
first is to be found at page 296 of the brief, that is to say the Tribunal's typed version of your manuscript statement but I don't think you will find that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:06:54
11:07:10
2 1
it differs from your typed statement which is to be found at 294 and 295, and I
2
think dated the 25 of February 2006 you wrote to the Tribunal and said you
3
would have had contact with Mr. Richard Lynn who may have canvassed your
4
support for the project, isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 7
And you say with regard to political donations you had previously informed the
7
Tribunal of 1,000 pounds received from Mr. Dunlop towards the expenses in the
8
Senate elections in 92, 93 and to the best of your recollection you received a
9
political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior to the November
11:07:31 10
92 general election, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 8
And I think that's also what you also told the Fine Gael inquiry into these
13 14 11:07:38 15
matters, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 9
Just dealing in the first instance with the payments that you might have
16
received from Monarch, Mr. Cosgrave, if I could have page 3241, this is a
17
document supplied to the Tribunal on discovery by Monarch and you will see
18
about two thirds of the way down there is a reference to a payment on the 13th
19
June 1991 to MJ Cosgrave, F G, local election expenses is the designation or
11:08:03 20
purpose for the payment and it's in the sum of 300 pounds?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 10
And if I could have 3255 this is an extract from the payments cash book of
23
Monarch and you will see there, just the first five or six entries, you will
24
see on the 13 of June 1991, Michael J Cosgrave, F G, cheque number 3689, 300
11:08:30 25
pounds?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 11
Did you receive in June 1991, 300 pounds from Monarch Properties, Mr. Cosgrave?
28
A.
I may have, but I cannot recollect that.
29
Q. 12
Yes, if you did receive it how do you think you came to receive it?
A.
I'd imagine it would be by cheque.
11:08:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:08:44
11:08:54
3 1
Q. 13
Yes?
2
A.
And that that would be the way, but as I say I don't really recollect it.
3
Q. 14
Did you know Mr. Lynn in 1991?
4
A.
Oh, I would I'd say, yes.
5
Q. 15
How did you first come to meet with and know Mr. Lynn?
6
A.
Well, he would be in the area of the council, you know lobbying on behalf of
7
his clients and he would approach you on different projects. He may have
8
written to me also on projects, I'm not sure of that.
9 11:09:16 10
11
Q. 16
But he certainly sought your support for various projects that he had?
A.
He would have sought my support for various projects I'm sure.
Q. 17
Was he a person therefore that you would have sought contributions from for
12
your local election?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 18
You never sought a contribution from him?
A.
Never, never.
Q. 19
You see Mr. Smyth, Noel Smyth and Partners Solicitors to the Monarch Group, if
11:09:26 15
16 17
I could have 1579 please, wrote to the Tribunal on behalf of his clients on the
18
22nd of June 2000 and on the third paragraph of that letter he says in
19
relation to the 1991 list, and I'm just showing you the 1991 list?
11:09:46 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 20
All the contributions are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for
22
assistance to defray local election expenses, save as set out no records have
23
been located in this regard?
24 11:09:59 25
A.
Yeah.
Q. 21
It is Monarch's and Mr. Lynn's understanding I understand, that any payments
26
made in 1991 were made as a result of a request for payment?
27
A.
I don't recall approaching Mr. Lynn for a donation at any time.
28
Q. 22
Did you, was it your practice to solicit donations?
29
A.
No.
Q. 23
Ever?
11:10:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:10:17
11:10:29
4 1
A.
Never.
2
Q. 24
So any payments you would have received would have been received in an -- would
3
have been received by you without having been solicited from the donors?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 25
Including --
6
A.
I have never written, to my recollection, to anyone about a donation or I have
7 8
never asked, as far as I can recollect, anyone about a donation. Q. 26
9 11:10:46 10
11
Now that's the 1991 donation, I think you told the Tribunal that you received 500 pounds in November 1992?
A.
That's right.
Q. 27
Prior to the election in November 92, I think you were a candidate in that
12
election is that right?
13
A.
I was indeed, yes.
14
Q. 28
Who did you receive that money from?
A.
That money, I believe would have come from Monarch, from the documentation I
11:10:55 15
16
have received.
17
Q. 29
Yes?
18
A.
It has enlightened me quite a lot, so that I presume it would have come from
19 11:11:09 20
Monarch with a covering letter but I have no documentation from that time. Q. 30
Well you had no documentation when you were telling the Fine Gael inquiry and
21
you were telling the Tribunal that you had received that money isn't that
22
right.
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 31
So you must have been relying on your memory or other documentation you had
11:11:20 25
within your possession?
26
A.
My memory.
27
Q. 32
Your memory. So you have a recollection of receiving 500 pounds from Monarch
28 29 11:11:31 30
for the 92 general election, is that correct? A.
I remember receiving a donation from Monarch.
Q. 33
Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:11:31
11:11:37
5 1
A.
In that election.
2
Q. 34
Yes?
3
A.
On the first interview I had with this Tribunal.
4
Q. 35
Yes?
5
A.
I pointed out that I had received a donation, but I wasn't certain exactly what
6
it was, but I would check and then when I did check I discovered another cheque
7
which I forwarded to this Tribunal, which was in later years, I think it was
8
199 --
9 11:11:55 10
Q. 36
We will come to that in a moment?
A.
But that was my recollection of the time, it was 500, but I am now satisfied
11 12
it was a thousand when I see the documentation. Q. 37
Yes, because the thousand, if we could have please 3586, just in relation to
13
the 500, your evidence I think in, as referred to in your statement earlier
14
this year, which I have just referred to at 296, was that the 500 from Monarch
11:12:22 15
was received prior to the November 92 general election, isn't that right, could
16
I have 296 please? This is your letter to the Tribunal Mr. Cosgrave?
17
A.
This is my letter to the Tribunal, yes that's right.
18
Q. 38
Yes. And you are dealing with monies that you may have received isn't that
19 11:12:38 20
21
right? A.
That's right.
Q. 39
And you say that it was 500, it was from Monarch and it was prior to the
22
November 92 general election?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 40
And that was consistent with what you had told the Fine Gael inquiry, isn't
11:12:50 25
that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 41
So, as to the amount and as to the date of payment you were satisfied in
28
February of 2006 and indeed in May 2000 when you attended before the Fine Gael
29
inquiry, that it was 500 pounds and it was for the 92 general election, isn't
11:13:13 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:13:13
11:13:26
6 1
A.
General and Senate election I suppose, they were both.
2
Q. 42
Well you didn't refer to the Senate election, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, I didn't.
4
Q. 43
If we could go back to 296, you said 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior
5
to November 1992, isn't that what you were telling the Tribunal?
6
A.
That's what I was telling the Tribunal.
7
Q. 44
In fact I think you reiterated that in a letter of the 9th March 2006, if I
8
could have 299 please, you said to the best of my recollection I received a
9
political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior to the November
11:13:46 10
1992 election, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 45
So it was prior to the election and it was prior to the November 92 election,
13 14
isn't that right? A.
That was my memory.
Q. 46
And it was 500 pounds?
16
A.
My memory was 500 pounds.
17
Q. 47
Yes. In fact I think either in addition or in substitution for that 500, you
11:13:53 15
18 19 11:14:09 20
did in fact receive one thousand pounds in December 1992, isn't that right? A.
December --
Q. 48
If we could have 3586 please? If you look at the fourth last entry on that
21
list Mr. Cosgrave?
22
A.
Right.
23
Q. 49
You see on the 16th of December 1992?
24
A.
It says Senate elections.
Q. 50
Yes. The general election had taken place in November, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 51
So prior to the general election would have been prior to the 25th of November,
11:14:27 25
28 29 11:14:39 30
I think it was 92? A.
I think it was the 18th.
Q. 52
Prior to the 18th, yes prior to the 18th of November, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:14:42
11:14:59
7 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 53
But whereas in fact the records show that you received a separate and possibly
3 4
additional payment of 1,000 pounds on the 16th of December 1992? A.
5
I received a payment as it has come to my attention now of a thousand pounds only.
6
Q. 54
You say that it's only a thousand pounds?
7
A.
Yeah. It's not 1500.
8
Q. 55
That's the point I want to clarify with you, but if it is this thousand, first
9
of all it is twice what you had told the Tribunal as having received from
11:15:14 10
Monarch, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 56
And it is not before the general election 1992, it's --
13
A.
The Senate election.
14
Q. 57
It's the Senate election?
A.
It was paid in December, the election was over, the general election was over,
11:15:22 15
16 17
so therefore it was into the Senate election. Q. 58
If we could have 8380. You see Monarch have other witnesses that have given
18
evidence of having received two payments, one for the general election and one
19
for the Senate election?
11:15:40 20
21
A.
No.
Q. 59
I'm just wondering could you have equally received two payments, one for the
22
general election and one for the Senate election?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 60
How could you get something, such a simple thing so obviously wrong
11:15:55 25
26
Mr. Cosgrave? A.
27 28
time, you know. Q. 61
29 11:16:11 30
My memory failed me, that's the only thing I can say. We are going back a long
How many cheques for 1,000 pounds would you have received other than Mr. Dunlop's, in the general or Senate election for 92/93?
A.
I think two, I'd have to check that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:16:15
11:16:25
8 1
Q. 62
Two in addition to Mr. Dunlop's?
2
A.
No, no. Mr. Dunlop.
3
Q. 63
Mr. Jones?
4
A.
No, no.
5
Q. 64
No?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 65
If we go back to the election, sorry your statement to the Fine Gael inquiry on
8
the 12th May 2000, and that's at 266. You were satisfied, if we look at 267,
9
you were satisfied at that time that it was in fact 500 pounds you had received
11:16:58 10
from Monarch, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 66
Whereas in fact it was 1,000 pounds?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 67
And you say not 1500?
A.
Not 1500, no.
Q. 68
And then I think you also received, as you have indicated, a further
11:17:08 15
16 17
contribution in 1997, if we could have 6322 please on the third of June 1997
18
you received 495 pounds, isn't that right?
19
A.
495, that's correct.
Q. 69
Yes. Were these the only contributions you received from Monarch?
21
A.
Definitely, yes.
22
Q. 70
And who would have given you those cheques?
23
A.
I would imagine they would have arrived by post.
24
Q. 71
Did you who would you have acknowledged or to whom would you have sent an
11:17:29 20
11:17:47 25
acknowledgement in respect of those cheques?
26
A.
I didn't send any acknowledgements.
27
Q. 72
You didn't send any acknowledgements?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 73
Did you ever thank anybody for the contributions?
A.
Well, if you saw someone who had given you a contribution you would probably
11:17:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:17:59
11:18:11
9 1
thank them, but like it wasn't the thing that was foremost on my mind at the
2
time, you know.
3
Q. 74
Yes. Did you ever thank Mr. Lynn for the contributions?
4
A.
I doubt it very much.
5
Q. 75
Did you ever acknowledge receiving the money?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 76
Did you ever meet Mr. Monahan and thank him for the money?
8
A.
I never met Mr. Monahan.
9
Q. 77
You never met Mr. Monahan?
A.
To my knowledge I never met Mr. Monahan.
Q. 78
Would it be fair to say Mr. Lynn was the only person from within Monarch that
11:18:23 10
11 12
you would have had any contact with?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 79
Did Mr. Dunlop seek your support for the Monarch proposals?
A.
Oh, I would say so, yes.
Q. 80
You did, I think, your first vote in relation to and your only vote in relation
11:18:35 15
16 17
to the Monarch proposals appears to have occurred on the 11th November 1993, if
18
we could have 7263 please.
19 11:19:06 20
This was a proposal by Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey, isn't that
21
right?
22
A.
That's right.
23
Q. 81
Do you recall that motion?
24
A.
I don't really, but you know it happened because we can see it in the minutes.
Q. 82
Yes. Well, would it have been in connection with that motion that Mr. Lynn
11:19:17 25
26
would have sought and Mr. Dunlop, would have sought your support?
27
A.
I think Mr. Dunlop would be more canvassing my support than anyone else.
28
Q. 83
I see.
29
A.
I doubt if Mr. Lynn, he may have mentioned it to me in the lobby or in the --
11:19:38 30
in one of the hotels where we went for a break and that type of thing, but Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:19:41
11:19:59
10 1
other than that I cannot remember Mr. Lynn asking me to support it as such, I
2
think Mr. Dunlop carried out most of the canvassing where I'd be concerned.
3
Q. 84
4
Yes. And you would have presumably advised Mr. Dunlop that it was your intention to support this proposal?
5
A.
I would, yeah.
6
Q. 85
You voted against, I think, a proposal that it would be, that the site would
7
retain a density of one house to the acre, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yeah, that's right.
9
Q. 86
Can I ask you why you supported this proposal?
A.
Well I didn't see the logic in it. One house per acre is very small, I
11:20:12 10
11
couldn't see how that would help develop the site as such, you know, and there
12
was a crying need at that time for people who were leaving the shore and
13
working abroad, there was a crying need for jobs, and I made no secret of this.
14
I have always been supportive of development.
11:20:39 15
Q. 87
16
If we could have 2720, this is a map Mr. Cosgrave, which sets out the site that you supported?
17
A.
Right.
18
Q. 88
You would be reasonably familiar with the area, voted in favour of this and
19 11:20:54 20
21
that? A.
Well, it's so long, the map is correct you can be sure of that.
Q. 89
It's just, I am just slightly curious Mr. Cosgrave, if you were so pro
22
development?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 90
And since the manager was proposing that the entire area coloured yellow be
11:21:10 25
zoned four houses to the acre, why you didn't support or vote that the entire
26 27
area coloured yellow be zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
Well as I say, I was pro development, I suppose if it were zoned at four to the
28
acre it opens up the site and maybe future down the road they could come back
29
in for further extension of the planning permission.
11:21:35 30
Q. 91
But why not do it at the time, why not -- if you are so pro development why Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:21:40
11:21:59
11 1
only support the Monarch end of the site, why not promote the entire site,
2
particularly since the manager was supportive of the entire site being zoned at
3
four houses to the acre?
4
A.
5
I cannot answer that one, I'm sorry. The motion would be put, there would be a debate, you listen to the debate and you make up your mind.
6
Q. 92
Yes?
7
A.
It's probably that was the popular thing in the chamber at the time to do.
8
Q. 93
But you were very much pro development you say, isn't that right?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 94
So an increase in density of lands, particularly lands that had the support of
11:22:10 10
11
the manager, was something that you would be very much in favour of?
12
A.
But this was the motion I had before me in the house.
13
Q. 95
Could you have put forward your own motion?
14
A.
Well could I have at that hour, just before the motion.
Q. 96
Could you not have put forward either a proposed amendment to the Marren Coffey
11:22:26 15
16
motion or alternatively put forward a proposal that the manager's
17
recommendations be accepted.
18
A.
The answer to your question is yes, you could have, but I didn't.
19
Q. 97
I am just wondering why you didn't Mr. Cosgrave, was it because Mr. Dunlop had
11:22:44 20
21
asked you to support only the Monarch proposal? A.
22
I don't remember him saying that to me, but he did ask me to support the proposal.
23
Q. 98
Thank you very much Mr. Cosgrave?
24
A.
Thank you very much.
11:22:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
for Monarch sometime?
11:23:04 30
A.
Just one matter Mr. Cosgrave, we know Mr. Dunlop came on board
Pardon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:23:06
11:23:14
12 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3
mid -- between 92 and 93, I think?
4
A.
5 6
Right. JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Mr. Dunlop came on board for Monarch sometime I think in
Do you recall when he first spoke to you about Monarch?
I don't really because Mr. Dunlop had several, several proposals which he was
7
involved in and like he would approach you about all his proposals, specially
8
when they were coming before council.
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:23:38 10
11
And you were Fingal, you were, that was your area, your ward
was up in North County Dublin? A.
Mine is the Howth/Malahide working area.
12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
about Monarch, did you make any inquiries yourself about the lands?
14
A.
11:23:56 15
Could I just ask you, when Mr. Dunlop would have asked you
Not that I can recall, but like I would have listened to the debate in the chamber and I may have inquired from the local councillors in that area as to,
16
you know, the merits of the property.
17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
A.
19
I don't really, but it was my habit to listen to the debate. And if I was unclear about anything, you would ask maybe the representative from the area,
11:24:18 20
you know, to clear the matter up for you.
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
CHAIRMAN:
23
Well, have you any recollection of doing that Mr. Cosgrave?
A.
Fair enough. Thanks.
All right, thank you very much Mr. Cosgrave.
Thank you very much.
24 11:24:27 25
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman, Mr. Dunlop please.
28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:24:56
11:25:21
13 1
FRANK DUNLOP, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MR. MURPHY:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. Dunlop.
6
A.
Morning Chairman. Morning.
7
Q. 99
Good morning Mr. Dunlop.
8
A.
Good morning Mr. Murphy.
9
Q. 100
Mr. Dunlop, I think you have provided the Tribunal with two statements to date
11:25:48 10
in the Monarch Module, the first being October 2000 and the second being
11
September 2003, is that right?
12
A.
That's correct, yes.
13
Q. 101
Do you wish those statements to be part of the evidence before the Members of
14 11:26:00 15
16
the Tribunal? A.
Yes.
Q. 102
Thank you. Did you have an opportunity before coming to the witness box today
17
to re read your two statements, did you read your two statements before coming
18
in today?
19 11:26:24 20
A.
Yes, I read them this morning.
Q. 103
Thank you. Did you read the private interviews that you had with the Tribunal
21
in May 2000?
22
A.
Some time ago, yes.
23
Q. 104
All right. In re reading those private interviews from May 2000 and these two
24 11:26:48 25
statements that I have just referred to? A.
Yeah?
26
Q. 105
Did you find them difficult to follow?
27
A.
Not particularly, other than in the -- some inconsistencies in them.
28
Q. 106
Did you find them confusing?
29
A.
I think confusing, Mr. Murphy, is sort of probably a polite word in the context
11:27:16 30
of the totality of this, my involvement in this Module, but for ease of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:27:22
11:27:35
14 1 2
procedure, I would say yes, confusing. Q. 107
The reason I am asking you the question is because I have read the statement,
3
the two statements and your private interviews on a number occasions and I
4
found them extremely confusing, extremely difficult to follow and quite
5
contradictory?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 108
Do you accept -- do you agree with that?
8
A.
Yes I would, I wouldn't disagree with that.
9
Q. 109
Thank you. I will come to it in a bit more detail later on.
A.
Fine.
Q. 110
Would you, do you agree Mr. Dunlop, that you have grossly understated to the
11:27:44 10
11 12
Tribunal the amount of money that you received from Monarch?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 111
Do you agree that you told, in private, the Tribunal in private interview, that
11:28:05 15
the agreement in relation to a fee did not include a success fee and that
16
subsequently you invoiced Monarch in the sum of, in, for a success fee in the
17
sum of 50,000 plus VAT?
18
A.
Correct, yes.
19
Q. 112
Do you agree that in private interview you named two councillors as councillors
11:28:31 20
to whom you, as councillors whom you bribed?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 113
And that when it came to your, the two statements I have referred to, you
23 24 11:28:45 25
dropped those two councillors and replaced them with a different two? A.
Correct.
Q. 114
Would you agree with me, Mr. Dunlop, that all of that amounts to a gross
26
misleading of the Tribunal?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 115
In what way does it not?
29
A.
Well, in the context of the private sessions and the date on which they took
11:28:58 30
place and in the circumstances in which they took place and without the benefit Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:29:03
11:29:26
15 1
of the issue that we have referred to repeatedly in this context from this box
2
and in this room, the road map and when I had time to consider it, all of the
3
issues involved, including having an audit done in relation to payments, that's
4
when we made the statement in 2003.
5
Q. 116
What for example, what bearing would that have on the councillors whom you
6
identified in private session and, as having, as you having bribed them, how
7
would what you have just, the response you have just given the Tribunal, how
8
would that have any bearing on who you would have paid money to for their vote?
9
A.
11:29:50 10
Well, in the context of the private session there is undoubtedly no, no difficulty in my mind in relation to the two named councillors in the private
11
session as being deeply involved with me on a number of occasions, and I
12
incorrectly named them in the private session in relation to this Module.
13
Q. 117
14
All right. I will have to come back to that, Mr. Dunlop, I'm afraid. I understand through Mr. Redmond, that you accept that you were paid the sum of
11:30:21 15
85,000 pounds by Monarch?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 118
All right. Now, unfortunately notwithstanding that Mr. Dunlop, I have to go
18 19 11:30:32 20
with a little bit of detail, I hope not too much, into the payments? A.
Fine, yeah.
Q. 119
And I think you will agree with me that on three occasions in the year 2000 you
21
informed the Tribunal that you had been paid the sum of 25,000 for Monarch, for
22
Cherrywood?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 120
Yes. The first occasion was on the 9th of May 2000, which was a public hearing
11:30:56 25
giving evidence on oath, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 121
When you referred to two tranches of 15,000, a cheque for 15,000 pounds and a
28 29 11:31:06 30
cheque for 10,000 pounds is that correct? A.
Correct.
Q. 122
And then you repeated that I think on a number of occasions in the course of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:31:11
11:31:19
16 1
private interviews in May 2000, is that right?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 123
And you repeated it again in your first narrative statement to the Tribunal in
4
October 2000, isn't that right?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 124
So at the end of 2000 as far as the Tribunal was concerned it was 25,000 that
7
you got?
8
A.
That's correct, yes.
9
Q. 125
All right. Now, if we just come on to 2001 for a moment and I think you will
11:31:37 10
agree with all of this, in March 2001 the Tribunal wrote to your solicitors in
11
relation to financial information generally and in particular -- sorry,
12
including Monarch, and the Tribunal was informing you in that letter that it
13
had received information from Monarch which, to the effect that you had
14
received 52,500 from Monarch, isn't that right?
11:32:06 15
16
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 126
And on the 9th May 2001 your solicitors replied to the Tribunal and enclosed a
17
letter from Coyle & Coyle, your accountants, that their letter being 8th of May
18
2001, and that letter again, I will be coming back to it, I will put it up on
19
the screen, but just in general terms, that letter set out a schedule of
11:32:30 20
payments that you were now notifying the Tribunal that you had received from
21
Monarch and it was in the sum of 75,000 pounds, isn't that right?
22
A.
That's correct yes.
23
Q. 127
Now that sum we know is -- there was a 15,000 included in that in error which
24 11:32:46 25
26
was subsequently correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 128
So throughout I will be really, when I say 75,000 there we'll short circuit it
27 28
and it's really 60,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
29 11:33:07 30
That's the point I was just going to make to you. In 2001 after the audit we confirmed to the Tribunal that we had received in the order of 60,000.
Q. 129
Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:33:08
11:33:30
17 1
A.
2 3
And notwithstanding anything that has taken place in the interim, if an audit was still done today we would still say 60,000.
Q. 130
Fine. Yes. So in summary then, in 2000 you were telling the Tribunal 25,000,
4
in response to the Tribunal's information to you about 52,500 from Monarch you
5
came back and you confirmed in 2001 60,000?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 131
That by a further letter, 21st of December 2001, from your solicitors to the
8
Tribunal, that sum of, I think it may well have been confirmed as 75,000 but it
9
means 60,000?
11:33:47 10
11
A.
It means 60,000 thousand, yes.
Q. 132
All right. Now could I just ask you Mr. Dunlop there, why did you tell the
12
Tribunal on a number of occasions in 2000 that you had received 25,000 from
13
Monarch?
14
A.
11:34:13 15
Because I did, that was in my mind. That was the -- certainly to my recollection at the time that was the agreed fee that I arrived at with a
16
representative of Monarch.
17
Q. 133
Yes. And Mr. Dunlop, what was it that changed your mind within a few months?
18
A.
Between 2000 and 2001?
19
Q. 134
Yes, between October 2000 and May 2001?
A.
Well, I think it's that you have fairly graphically outlined, when we got
11:34:43 20
21
letters from the Tribunal saying that they had information available to them
22
from the accounts of Monarch that we had got more money than the 25, we
23
conducted the audit, we conducted an internal audit or our accountants
24
conducted an internal audit and came up with the 60.
11:35:05 25
Q. 135
So, would it mean then in fact you told your accountants Coyle & Coyle that you
26
had received 25,000 but they came back to you having done the audit and said
27
you didn't you received 60?
28 29 11:35:26 30
A.
Well when we got the documentation from the Tribunal Obviously we circulated it had to Coyle & Coyle and we asked them to either confirm or disabuse the Tribunal of the truth or otherwise of the documentation. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:35:29
11:35:47
18 1
Q. 136
2 3
Well, was the Tribunal furnishing you with documentation that you didn't have yourself internally?
A.
Yes, it was. We had already supplied some documentation to the Tribunal, I
4
can't remember exactly what it was at the time now, but we had supplied some
5
invoices and some payment schedules from the accounts of Frank Dunlop and
6
Associates, but we had not done an audit.
7
Q. 137
But I think what you are saying is that for the purpose of the audit you were
8
giving your accountants documentation that had been furnished to you by the
9
Tribunal and that you didn't have yourself?
11:36:10 10
11
A.
Yes, I think that is what occurred yes.
Q. 138
Well, I'd like to know if it did occur or didn't, Mr. Dunlop, because I think
12 13
it's important? A.
14
Well, I can't absolutely say to you definitively. Certainly you are absolutely correct when you say that our statements in relation to the 25, we then were
11:36:29 15
written to by the Tribunal saying that they had indications or evidence or
16
support documentation to the effect that we had received more than 25, and I'm
17
subject to correction on this, I'm sorry I can't be more clear for you, that it
18
was on that basis that we asked that the accountants do an audit as to how much
19
exactly we had got.
11:36:59 20
Q. 139
Do you know Mr. Dunlop, for the purpose of telling the Tribunal 25,000, three
21
times in 2000, do you know what documentation you had that you referred to for
22
giving that information?
23
A.
24 11:37:18 25
Yes, I think we had -- I think I had documentation, I think I had a receipt note.
Q. 140
Would it be a remittance advice?
26
A.
A remittance.
27
Q. 141
In respect of the 15?
28
A.
In respect of two payments, one certainly of 15.
29
Q. 142
Yes, yes?
A.
And again subject to correction on the date of transmission of that
11:37:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:37:32
11:37:52
19 1 2
documentation to the Tribunal, I think we made that available to the Tribunal. Q. 143
Yes. But are you saying then that it was just in respect of those two payments
3
which bore out your 25,000 but you didn't have another shred of paper that
4
related to the balance that made up 52,500 or 60?
5
A.
6
No, we may have or our accountants may have had other documentation which -- I did not certainly examine.
7
Q. 144
Sorry to interrupt you Mr. Dunlop?
8
A.
No no, fine.
9
Q. 145
Did you Mr. Dunlop, you prepared -- sorry, you went to your accountants for an
11:38:07 10
audit in 2001 as you have told us, did you go to your accountants at all before
11
public evidence in May 2001, private interviews in 2001 and a statement in
12
October 2001?
13
A.
No, we did not.
14
Q. 146
All right. Would your accountants in that year have had documents in relation
11:38:24 15
to all of this that were not in your possession?
16
A.
They may well have had, yes.
17
Q. 147
So, you told the Tribunal three times 25,000 without referring to your
18 19
accountants? A.
11:38:39 20
Yes, I don't have any recollection of referring to my accountants prior to any of those statements.
21
Q. 148
Was it your intention to mislead the Tribunal in saying 25,000?
22
A.
No, because that was, as I said to you ten minutes ago, was my recollection as
23 24 11:38:54 25
26
to the agreed fee with a representative of Monarch. Q. 149
So Mr. Dunlop, did you think as an experienced businessman --
A.
What?
Q. 150
Just one second please, if you let me finish the question then you can
27
criticise it, do you think as an experienced businessman that to come into the
28
Tribunal three times and say 25,000 from your recollection without going to
29
your accountants is good enough?
11:39:10 30
A.
Well, that's why I was going to stop you there. Experienced businessman is a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:39:14
11:39:34
20 1
little bit excessive in my context. I would not describe myself as an
2
experienced businessman but I was asked to give evidence in relation to, on one
3
occasion in public here in making a list as to monies I had received, I was
4
asked in private session of my relationship with Monarch, I told it as best
5
could I at the time, and I was asked subsequently what my recollection was as
6
to payment. Certainly it was not my intention to mislead and you did describe
7
the totality of my relationship with Monarch as confusing and certainly --
8
Q. 151
9 11:39:59 10
No, I didn't Mr. Dunlop, what I suggested to you was that your description of it was confusing?
A.
Yes well --
11
Q. 152
Isn't that right?
12
A.
Well that's what you say, yes.
13
Q. 153
And you agreed with me?
14
A.
Well it is confusing, yes.
Q. 154
It's not that your relationship with Monarch is confusing?
16
A.
Well, that was confusing as well.
17
Q. 155
It's how it was interpreted to the Tribunal was confusing?
18
A.
Well, that was confusing as well.
19
Q. 156
But Mr. Dunlop, just coming back to this thing for a second, because you have
11:40:09 15
11:40:24 20
been in private business since '87, I think, is that right?
21
A.
Yes. '86, yes.
22
Q. 157
Nearly 20 years, 20 years, does that not constitute a considerable business
23 24
experience? A.
11:40:41 25
Well, it does to a small degree yes, but not in a very experienced businessman, I'm not in the PLC quality.
26
Q. 158
Mr. Dunlop, to use one of your own phrases, are we from different planets here?
27
A.
No parallel universe is the phrase I used.
28
Q. 159
It's a better one, I think you used both. But are we on parallel universes
29 11:41:01 30
here if 20 years doesn't make you a highly experienced businessman? A.
No, I am not going to get into a semantical discussion with you about who is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:41:05
11:41:13
21 1
and who is not a highly experienced businessman. I was a businessman and I was
2
running a small business.
3
Q. 160
Mr. Dunlop sorry, you needn't -- I am getting into this with you.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 161
If you are telling the Tribunal, on oath, that you are not an experienced
6
businessman after 20 years in private business and successful private business,
7
I mean, I'd like you just to confirm that you are saying that or are you
8
retracting it?
9
A.
11:41:34 10
No, I suppose Mr. Murphy it's sort of an innate modesty, I wouldn't describe myself as a highly experienced businessman, it's just a question --
11
Q. 162
I didn't say successful or good, I just said experienced?
12
A.
I was experienced certainly in the field that I was in, in getting clients and
13 14
servicing the clients that I had, that was certainly fairly experienced -Q. 163
11:41:53 15
put the question instead of wasting a few minutes as to what your answer is
16 17
before we come to you agreeing with me? A.
18 19
Thank you. Mr. Dunlop why don't you agree with me in the first instance when I
Well, I don't know, I can't answer that question, you are asking the questions I am just --
Q. 164
But you are the only person who can answer it, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well, I am just telling you, I would not describe myself in those terms.
21
Q. 165
You have just described yourself in those terms?
22
A.
I am an experienced PR lobbyist, I'm not in the --
23
Q. 166
That's not a business?
24
A.
I'm not in the, in the stratospheric plc category.
Q. 167
You say you didn't intentionally, sorry, I think you said you didn't intend to
11:42:08 20
11:42:29 25
26
mislead the Tribunal in saying 25,000. You didn't take even a reasonable care
27
in coming into the Tribunal with your figure of 25,000 insofar as you didn't
28
refer to your accountants, would you agree with that?
29 11:42:54 30
A.
I would agree I didn't refer to my accountants and if that is not taking reasonable care I would agree. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:42:55
11:43:31
22 1
Q. 168
2
All right. And it may be if you had gone to your accountants then they would have been able to tell you 60 thousand?
3
A.
They may well have done, yes.
4
Q. 169
Now Mr. Dunlop, if I can just ask you then about the two subsequent -- you are
5
now accepting that it was 85,000?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 170
And this is made up of two further cheques, one for 15,000 -- I will probably
8
get my sums wrong here Mr. Dunlop, one for 15,000 and one for 10,000, isn't
9
that right, you have seen those?
11:43:47 10
A.
I was just about to compliment you on your mathematics but you have obviously
11
decided no, the -- my statement was that I got 25 in tranches of 15 and 10. I
12
subsequently agreed, after the audit, that we got 60 and if the audit was
13
conducted again today in the absence of documentation it would still be 60, but
14
I agree on the provision of, I have had sight of a cheque of 15 and of 10,
11:44:20 15
which brings it to 85.
16
Q. 171
Just in relation --
17
A.
Is that not correct.
18
Q. 172
Yes, yes?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 173
I am going back just a little bit Mr. Dunlop for a second in relation to the
11:44:30 20
21
25,000 and it arises now in the difference between 60 and 85?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 174
You are someone who has given considerable evidence to the Tribunal about the
24 11:44:44 25
amount of money you have paid to different councillors? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 175
Varying from low hundreds up to thousands?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 176
How can you possibly give that evidence on the one hand and say on the other
29 11:44:59 30
that I can't remember, my best recollection throughout 2000 is 25,000, but now it's 85,000 when the documentation is shown to me? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:45:02
11:45:19
23 1
A.
Well, I don't see any inconsistency in it. I have already said to you that the
2
initial agreement with the representative of Monarch was for 25,000. Obviously
3
there were subsequent agreements or --
4
Q. 177
I wasn't asking, sorry to interrupt you Mr. Dunlop I, want to keep it as short
5
as I can. I wasn't asking you about the agreement I was asking about what you
6
were paid?
7
A.
I have said ten minutes ago that I agree I was paid 85,000.
8
Q. 178
I think you understand the question I put to you Mr. Dunlop, would you please
9 11:45:30 10
answer? A.
11
But I mean when I go to answer you Mr. Murphy you tell me that I am either digressing or holding the Tribunal up.
12
Q. 179
No. I didn't say either thing Mr. Dunlop.
13
A.
I don't see any difficulty in saying what I have said, that to the best of my
14
recollection at the time I said 25,000, let's park that. Move on, when the
11:45:55 15
audit was done by our accountants we came to 60,000. We told the Tribunal
16
that. I have no difficulty in accepting that I got 25,000 extra in tranches of
17
15 and 10, because up to this morning I have been shown the cheques, I have
18
seen sight of the cheques.
19
Q. 180
11:46:21 20
And if we come in tomorrow and give you 50, documents for 50,000 or a hundred thousand you will be saying you have no trouble agreeing with that Mr. Dunlop,
21
isn't that the position?
22
A.
No, I wouldn't say I have any difficulty in just agreeing with it.
23
Q. 181
How long will this go on for?
24
A.
Well, I am just saying to you, if you come in tomorrow morning with a cheque
11:46:34 25
saying that I got 50,000, which I'm absolutely 100 per cent certain I didn't,
26
but let's see whether you come in tomorrow morning with a cheque for 50,000, I
27
would say fine. I certainly have no recollection of getting 50,000, I did
28
invoice Monarch for 50,000 pounds but I never got it.
29 11:46:58 30
Q. 182
Now, Mr. Dunlop, so okay the position as of today is that in May 2000 you swear that it's 25,000. You agree with the Tribunal that, sorry you tell the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:47:05
11:47:17
24 1
Tribunal it's 60,000 in 2001 and now you say on oath that it's 85,000, isn't
2
that the position?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 183
All right. And you are also saying that that's it?
5
A.
I'm also saying that I invoiced the company Monarch for 50,000, but I am saying
6
to you that I did not get 50,000.
7
Q. 184
Does that mean you might get 50,000 tomorrow from Monarch?
8
A.
Well, they might be generous enough if they want to, but the invoice is still
9 11:47:33 10
out there. Q. 185
11 12
you are saying that's it? A.
13 14 11:47:53 15
Q. 186
Yes. Unless we turn up some documents?
A.
Well, if you do I will examine it and I will look at it and I will either confirm or disabuse you of the truth.
Q. 187
18 19 11:48:07 20
To the best of my recollection, yes and on foot of all of the documentation that I have reviewed I do not recollect getting anything else from Monarch.
16 17
But subject to that invoice, you are saying Mr. Dunlop, subject to that invoice
Is there any chance for example that maybe there is another firm of accountants working for you who might have papers that you haven't gone to?
A.
No, there is not.
Q. 188
No. Mr. Dunlop, could I just ask you in relation to these two payments that
21
you are agreeing this morning about, 10,000 and 15,000, they are actually two
22
payments that the Tribunal put you on notice of in 2001 as information coming
23
from Monarch, so in other words when the Tribunal wrote to you in 2001 they
24
told you about those two payments, now I just, I'm afraid I don't know off the
11:49:07 25
top of my head if you got documentation, because you certainly said the
26
Tribunal was furnishing you documentation in the other matters, but the
27
Tribunal told you that Monarch had told the Tribunal that Monarch had paid you
28
15,000 and 10,000 on respective dates. And yet you did not adopt those
29
payments in coming back to us with your 60,000?
11:49:30 30
A.
Yes. No, well similar to yourself, off the top of my head I can't recollect Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:49:37
11:49:58
25 1
when the Tribunal did or did not tell us, but if they did there was no evidence
2
to suggest that those payments been made or we were not provided, unless I am
3
wrong, we were not provided with any information as to that effect, including
4
up to in recent days in relation to a cheque for 10,000.
5
Q. 189
Yes. But Mr. Dunlop, what you are saying is Coyle & Coyle and you notified the
6
Tribunal of 60,000 because in part of new documentation coming from the
7
Tribunal, from Monarch, isn't that right?
8
A.
9
Yes, just for -- I don't wish to repeat myself Mr. Murphy, but I cannot give you the dates. You probably have them at your fingertips there.
11:50:29 10
We were
contacted by the Tribunal to the effect that evidence had been provided to the
11
Tribunal by Monarch that extra payments had been made, we did an audit and as a
12
result of that audit, including all of Frank Dunlop and Associates books, cash
13
books, receipt books, lodgements, whatever, we came up with 60 and we told the
14
Tribunal that.
11:50:52 15
Q. 190
Yes. Could I have page 491 please? This is actually -- maybe what I should do
16
would be to go to 499 first please. Mr. Dunlop, this is the schedule that
17
Coyle & Coyle came back to the Tribunal with in 2001?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 191
Uncorrected, 75,000?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 192
Now what the mistake relates to?
22
A.
The 15.
23
Q. 193
If you go up to 19th of May 1993, 15,000, that in fact was an invoice which was
11:51:28 20
24 11:51:42 25
paid by the two 7,500's below it? A.
Correct, yes.
26
Q. 194
It's included in error?
27
A.
It's included in error.
28
Q. 195
So if we now go to page 491 we can deal with the corrected schedule, so in fact
29 11:51:55 30
Mr. Dunlop what was happening there was you were telling the Tribunal that you were paid 15,000 more than you believed you were? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:51:57
11:52:06
26 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 196
But in fact we now know you were getting closer to the real figure?
3
A.
Well in the first instance it was a double count.
4
Q. 197
Yes?
5
A.
15 and two separate 7,500's. So when you take out the 15 and you account for
6 7
the two 7,500's you get the 60. Q. 198
Now, Mr. Dunlop, if you go down to the bottom of the page there you see it says
8
"accordingly the above schedule should read as follows 'Frank Dunlop and
9
Associates Limited receipts from Monarch Properties -- this is the Tribunal,
11:52:26 10
sorry --
11
A.
Where are you now, Mr. Murphy, what are you reading from?
12
Q. 199
Sorry halfway down the page 491?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 200
Accordingly the above schedule should read as follows, let's ignore the above
11:52:37 15
schedule, 'Frank Dunlop and Associates Limited receipts from Monarch
16
Properties' and it gives a date of each payment?
17
A.
Mm-hmm.
18
Q. 201
The F. D. A. L amount which is your account, Frank Dunlop Associates Limited
19 11:52:50 20
amount that you got? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 202
This is what you are agreeing you got?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 203
Then it says traced to lodgements and I think the Y letter that goes down there
24 11:53:04 25
should be under traced to lodgements, is that all right? A.
I accept your word for it, yes.
26
Q. 204
I'm afraid --
27
A.
Yes, yes.
28
Q. 205
I suppose it's -- anyway, and then --
29
A.
I don't know what Y stands for.
Q. 206
Sorry, I think what it is is that you see Y is on the right-hand side of five
11:53:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:53:19
11:53:27
27 1
of the six figures?
2
A.
Yes, yes.
3
Q. 207
I think it means that those, if you look at the asterisk on the second one?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 208
And go down below to the asterisk remittance advice from Monarch Properties but
6
not traced to F. D. A. L, I think it probably means that your accountants are
7
telling us that that Y means the others weren't traced so they didn't go into
8
the business account?
9
A.
11:53:51 10
I'm not so sure about that. That all the ones listed with Y behind it were not listed to the business account, they were.
11
Q. 209
Sorry, I beg your pardon?
12
A.
It's The opposite.
13
Q. 210
What it says is --
14
A.
What you mean to say, Mr. Murphy, with due respect, is that those payments with
11:54:01 15
the Y after it are payments that my accountant have traced as being lodged to
16 17
F. D. A. L. Q. 211
Sorry you are absolutely right, you are absolutely right. The 10,000, the
18
second one was not traced to your account, your business account, the others
19
were?
11:54:14 20
A.
That's correct.
21
Q. 212
I beg your pardon. Now the third column is per Tribunal?
22
A.
Homer nods Mr. Murphy, don't worry. Good boy.
23
Q. 213
Yes, exactly and then I think that that is -- sorry I know that's the
24 11:54:30 25
information we gave you that came from Monarch? A.
Yes, which is quite surprising.
26
Q. 214
Sorry, what's surprising?
27
A.
Well 52,500 and we are saying that we got 60,000.
28
Q. 215
What's surprising?
29
A.
It's surprising that Monarch with all it's capabilities and audit facilities
11:54:49 30
and all the rest are telling the Tribunal that I got 52,500 whereas when we did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:54:55
11:55:06
28 1 2
our audit we came up with 60. Q. 216
3 4
Right. Does that mean that two people made a bags of it, is that what you are saying?
A.
I'd prefer if both of us made a bags of it, but what I am saying is that when
5
we did our audit in all of the documentation and information available to our
6
accountants we came up with 60 and traced 60.
7
Q. 217
And when the Tribunal did its audit it comes up with 85.
8
A.
Sure, yes.
9
Q. 218
The point I want to just make here Mr. Dunlop is that as I say, the third
11:55:21 10
column per Tribunal means Monarch has told the Tribunal and the Tribunal is
11
telling you 52,500?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 219
Now you will see under per Tribunal, 26th of May 93, 10,000 pounds?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 220
And go down to the 15,000 underneath that, against the 2nd of November 1993?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 221
They -- sorry, they are, if you compare the Tribunal column, 52,500 with your
11:55:37 15
18 19 11:55:59 20
column 60,000? A.
Yes.
Q. 222
You adopt three of the per Tribunal figures and don't adopt those two figures,
21
the 10,000 and 15,000?
22
A.
From that document that you have in front of me.
23
Q. 223
From that document?
24
A.
That is palpably clear, yes.
Q. 224
And this is the, these are the two payments we are talking about this morning
11:56:17 25
26 27
that you now agree bring it up to 85? A.
Correct and these are the two payments that I have suggested to you earlier on
28
and you are absolutely correct, these are the two payments that there was no
29
documentation whatever available to us. You may point to this, saying the
11:56:38 30
Tribunal had evidence from Monarch that they had paid this, to my knowledge or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:56:42
11:56:58
29 1
recollection we had no evidence to suggest that we had received those payments.
2
Q. 225
Okay.
3
A.
Now I may be wrong, I may be wrong on that point.
4
Q. 226
I will come to that in a moment Mr. Dunlop, the only point I want to make there
5
is that when the Tribunal sends you the 52,500 figure and you come back with
6
the 60,000?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 227
You don't adopt those two figures, you do today, you are saying, I think, that
9
you had no documentation to support those figures, to confirm those figures,
11:57:19 10
but why didn't you sort of say to the Tribunal 'look could we ever have your
11
underlying documentation that you must have got from Monarch, I'm assuming now
12
the Tribunal didn't send to you and I don't know the answer to that, but I mean
13
the Tribunal is putting up 52,500, you are coming back, you are putting up 60
14
in response but omitting that 10 and the five there, surely you'd come back
11:57:42 15
through your solicitors and your accountants and say to the Tribunal 'Monarch
16
say it is paid me those two payments ten and five, please give me the
17
documentation and I will let you know, like we have done today and I will let
18
you know whether I was paid or not'?
19
A.
11:58:05 20
Well, I can't account for the sort of, the line of query that you have put in the sense that I can't speak for the way the accountants treated the matter,
21
the accountants obviously treated the matter on the basis of all of the
22
documentation they had available to them, and I had in the company, and in fact
23
we might have been quite pleased with the fact that we were able to suggest
24
that we had got 60,000 instead of 52,500 which Monarch were saying on the basis
11:58:26 25
26
of what the Tribunal was saying. Q. 228
27 28 29 11:58:57 30
Yes. I suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that at least it's a very, very casual attitude to the Tribunal?
A.
I don't think so Mr. Murphy. I don't think you can suggest that. I'm not going to have a debate about that with you, but I mean I don't think you could suggest that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:59:19
12:00:00
30 1
Q. 229
Mr. Dunlop I want to just take that 10,000 figure up with you for a second, and
2
if I could please ask for 4219, now Mr. Dunlop, this is as we have said, this
3
is one of the two cheques which you accept today were, you received from
4
Monarch?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 230
All right. And the reason you didn't accept, you didn't agree that, that you
7
had received that at an earlier stage, was because you had no documentation
8
relating to it, isn't that right?
9
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 231
Yes. Now Mr. Dunlop, if you look at 4219 that's a remittance advice?
11
A.
It is yes.
12
Q. 232
Monarch Property Services Limited paying the money?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 233
To Frank Dunlop?
A.
Yes.
Q. 234
And it says "Dear Sirs, we enclose here with our cheque number 8109 in the sum
12:00:15 10
12:00:31 15
16 17
of 10,000"?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 235
All right. Now I mean that obviously was send, you got the cheque it was
12:00:46 20
21
obviously sent to you? A.
22
Documentation -- the original or a copy of that documentation obviously was sent to me with the cheque.
23
Q. 236
And what happened to it?
24
A.
I don't know.
Q. 237
Right. But you didn't have it and you don't have it?
A.
Well obviously I am looking at it now and I have seen it in some of the
12:00:54 25
26 27 28
briefing material, but to the best of my recollection we did not have that. Q. 238
29 12:01:36 30
Yes. And if I could look at 4223 please -- excuse me, cheque payments book, if you go down, this is Monarch cheque payments book?
A.
Oh yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:01:37
12:01:49
31 1
Q. 239
2
Just to show the money coming out, or sorry recorded as being paid, if you go down five lines, you see Frank Dunlop and Associates and 10,000?
3
A.
Yes, yes.
4
Q. 240
That's Monarch saying that they paid that sum to you?
5
A.
Mm-hmm.
6
Q. 241
And if we go to 4224, which is their bank account, and if you go down to the
7
third of June 1993 you will see cheque 8109, 10,000?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 242
All right? So that's the 10,000 coming out of Monarch account, all right?
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 243
So Monarch paid the cheque of 10,000, isn't that right?
12
A.
Sorry, yes, I beg your pardon, sorry.
13
Q. 244
What are you referring to?
14
A.
No, just having my notes here, in relation to payments made and the scheduling
12:02:17 10
12:02:38 15
of documentation.
16
Q. 245
What is it you are looking at?
17
A.
Payments from Monarch.
18
Q. 246
Yes?
19
A.
And when, just as --
Q. 247
Is that the one we were looking at on the screen a moment ago?
21
A.
Yes, exactly -- no, this is an internal document my solicitors prepared for me.
22
Q. 248
Oh, I see.
23
A.
Just in relation to the payments for Monarch I was just trying to reconcile it
12:02:45 20
24 12:02:59 25
with this one here. Q. 249
Yes?
26
A.
And it's -- we don't have it.
27
Q. 250
Well it --
28
A.
We don't have it. Which --
29
Q. 251
No --
A.
Which goes back to the original of what I said.
12:03:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:03:11
12:03:27
32 1
Q. 252
Yes?
2
A.
Is that notwithstanding the fact that a remittance notice obviously was sent
3
with a cheque, I don't know what happened to the remittance notice if it was in
4
evidence in the books it would have been recorded by the accountants. I don't
5
know what happened to it, and obviously on the journey that you have started in
6
relation to tracing the payment from Monarch's remittance note to the payments
7
book of Monarch and to the withdrawal from, or the debit from the bank account,
8
and then seeing the cheque is the next item on the agenda I should imagine and
9
my signature on the back of it, that is the evidence, that is the only evidence
12:03:56 10
that I have that that payment was made.
11
Q. 253
Yes. That's why it doesn't feature in the document you are looking at there?
12
A.
Correct, yes.
13
Q. 254
And, of course, before the remittance advice there would be your invoice
14 12:04:10 15
presumably, is that right? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 255
Did you always issue an invoice?
17
A.
Yes, we always issued an invoice, yes.
18
Q. 256
And, so anyway your files are missing the invoice and the remittance advice?
19
A.
Yes, there is a gap. There is a gap in relation to two issues.
Q. 257
Yes?
A.
Just two. To summarise, if it is possible to do so in this context, to
12:04:25 20
21 22
summarise, there are two issues which are at the core of this line of
23
questioning, that you have quite legitimately adopted. One is one for 15 and
24
the other is for the ten. You are asking me about this one in relation to the
12:04:44 25
ten, I have absolutely no difficulty in recognising the remittance note,
26
notwithstanding it says Frank Dunlop as distinct from Frank Dunlop and
27
Associates. I see Dominic Glennane's signature on the top of it, who is the
28
financial officer for Monarch Properties, I see the tracing of the journey of
29
the payment through the cash book of Monarch Properties, out of their bank
12:05:10 30
account and as I said the next logical step is to show me the cheque, my Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:05:16
12:05:37
33 1
signature and it's disbursement or it's disposal in some fashion or other.
2
Q. 258
You accept there would have been an invoice?
3
A.
Yes. I would be very surprised if there wasn't an invoice.
4
Q. 259
And so somewhere along the line invoice and remittance advice have got mislaid
5 6
or lost? A.
Yes, but without getting into another area or backing into a cul-de-sac, if the
7
invoice was for ten one would automatically expect that it would be VATed so if
8
the invoice was for ten, was that inclusive of VAT or was VAT not added, or if
9
VAT was added was it not paid? That I cannot answer you.
12:06:06 10
Q. 260
11 12
not you have lost it? A.
13 14
What's that got to do with whether or not there is an invoice and whether or
I am just saying to you that if there was an invoice the logic would be that it would be VATed and if it was for ten plus VAT it would be what? 12,100.
Q. 261
12:06:29 15
Tell me what do you make of this amount of ten you were paid, is this inclusive of VAT or exclusive of VAT?
16
A.
I suspect very strongly that it was exclusive of VAT.
17
Q. 262
So where is the VAT?
18
A.
The VAT either was not paid or was not included in the invoice, that's the
19 12:06:39 20
point I am making. Q. 263
Yes, who would have had to pay the VAT, you?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 264
But I mean, so you know, you are accepting that you got the 10,000?
23
A.
I have no difficulty in saying I got the 10,000 yes.
24
Q. 265
Are you also saying that you should have paid 21 per cent on top of that to the
12:06:54 25
VAT people?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 266
Which you didn't do?
28
A.
Well obviously if this is not recorded.
29
Q. 267
Yes?
A.
In the books of Frank Dunlop and Associates as being receipted, invoiced plus
12:06:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:07:04
12:07:17
34 1
VAT and receipted, therefore there would not -- a VAT payment would not occur
2
because it wasn't recorded in the books.
3
Q. 268
It isn't recorded, isn't that right?
4
A.
As far as we are concerned it's not.
5
Q. 269
No. Did that happen much or is this a unique payment that didn't pay VAT?
6
A.
No I think I have given evidence to the effect previously that invoices were
7
issued without VAT.
8
Q. 270
Okay. So there was nothing unusual about not paying the VAT?
9
A.
I wouldn't say there was nothing unusual about it, but it wasn't, this is not,
12:07:37 10
11
this would not have been the first occasion on which it occurred. Q. 271
12
Well Mr. Dunlop, but you did, anyway normally there would be an invoice but we just don't have it here?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 272
Document 507 please for a second, this is in respect of the first 15,000 which
12:08:01 15
is part of the 25,000, that's a remittance advice, we have no invoice?
16
A.
Right.
17
Q. 273
What do you say about that?
18
A.
Obviously I received it. I thought there was an invoice for that amount
19 12:08:33 20
Mr. Murphy, no, are you sure there is not an invoice for that? Q. 274
I can't hear you?
21
A.
Are you sure there is not an invoice for that amount?
22
Q. 275
Well I am suggesting to you there isn't?
23
A.
Yes sorry no, I'm fast forwarded to another one of the same, of --
24
Q. 276
Do you think there was an invoice?
A.
Let's just --
12:08:53 25
26 27 28
MR REDMOND: Mr. Chairman there is an invoice, I think 4633? A.
29 12:09:07 30
Yes. CHAIRMAN:
A.
Can we go to 4633?
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:09:08
12:09:19
35 1
Q. 277
That, have we got it up? That's a different invoice isn't it.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
We are not talking about that, we are talking about March?
4
A.
March.
5
Q. 278
So could we go back to please, no -- well yes, we have dealt with that.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Could you go back to 507?
8
Q. 279
Mr. Dunlop, I think you think that maybe there is an invoice for that?
9
A.
Sorry, I may have been confused with that one that Mr. Redmond alluded to. I
12:09:48 10
knew there was an invoice for 15 in some context, but, no I don't have a copy
11
invoice here.
12
Q. 280
And why?
13
A.
I just don't know.
14
Q. 281
I mean I think you said a moment ago as an explanation for the other invoice
12:10:04 15
missing that it was unusual?
16
A.
Yes, yes.
17
Q. 282
So it's -- you invoiced but it's missing?
18
A.
Well, I can't see why Monarch would make a payment to me on a remittance advice
19 12:10:20 20
21
note without an invoice of some sort. Q. 283
All right.
A.
I mean I doubt very much if any of the financial representatives, controllers
22
in Monarch would issue payment on a verbal understanding.
23
Q. 284
Okay. But it just means it's missing?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 285
Could we go to 513 please, this is a cheque for 10,000, it's the second payment
12:10:35 25
26
and ten and 15, maybe they make the 25 that was in your mind, I mean I don't
27
know, but it's the second payment, 10,000, that's a remittance advice and there
28
is no invoice?
29 12:11:03 30
A.
You don't have -- we haven't supplied you with an invoice, we don't have an invoice. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:11:04
12:11:14
36 1
Q. 286
2 3
what the position is? A.
4 5
Well I don't have evidence of an invoice either. I don't have a copy of the invoice.
Q. 287
6 7
I'm suggesting to you Mr. Dunlop there is no invoice and I'd like to you say
So the three that I have taken out so far, there is no invoice notwithstanding that you invoiced and you always have them and so on?
A.
Well, again I put it to you in the context that it would be a highly unlikely
8
for Monarch to pay me 25,000 pounds or 35 thousand pounds or whatever sum of
9
money without an invoice.
12:11:30 10
Q. 288
Can we take it all these, VAT doesn't apply either?
11
A.
No, not on that one either.
12
Q. 289
Sorry it applies but you don't pay it?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 290
All right, if we go to 515 for a second that's the 15 we were talking about,
12:12:08 15
which is an invoice that is --
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 291
Taken over by the 2,000, 7500 by twice -- that invoice is paid I think in two
18
sums, tranches to use your word, 7500 and 7500, it's the one we talked about in
19
the schedule?
12:12:27 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 292
Right?
22
A.
Right okay.
23
Q. 293
So that's the sort of thing you would have been expecting in the other three
24 12:12:33 25
cases? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 294
An invoice like that and that one has VAT?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 295
And I suppose we have no idea why we have that one and we don't have the
29 12:12:41 30
others? A.
No, I can't give you a cogent explanation for that at this remove. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:12:46
12:13:21
37 1
Q. 296
And then, sorry 4219, that's the cheque we are dealing with, that's the one we
2
have already, we know we haven't got the invoice in that, could I have 4390
3
please which is a document we have received from Monarch in their discovery and
4
if you go down please to invoice 2068 where it says Frank Dunlop, then it says
5
amount 9680 and then it says copy of Dunlop's invoice. We only have one
6
invoice for 12,100 pounds even though we have made payments of 42,500, Eddie
7
and I think that's Eddie Sweeney in Monarch, is that right?
8
A.
Well, I presume, there was only one Eddie, I'm assuming.
9
Q. 297
Eddie must get invoices?
A.
Mm-hmm.
11
Q. 298
Anything to say?
12
A.
Well, Eddie must get the invoices. Eddie was the man I dealt with in Monarch.
13
Q. 299
Could you now Mr. Dunlop make a bit of sense of what you have been telling me
12:13:46 10
14
for the last ten minutes, namely that you invoice in every case and it would
12:13:59 15
only be exceptional if there wasn't an invoice and Monarch wouldn't dream of
16
paying you unless they got an invoice?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 300
Can you just explain what you were telling the Tribunal for the last few
19 12:14:11 20
minutes? A.
I will repeat it for you, we would issue invoices for our clients and I cannot
21
see a situation in which we would be paid money by Monarch, of the company in
22
stature of Monarch at the time, without invoices.
23
Q. 301
24 12:14:33 25
But what we have just read out is in the teeth of what you have just said because Monarch are saying that they paid out 42,500 without invoices?
A.
Well, you see you are asking me to put myself in the shoes of Monarch or Mr,
26
who is this, this Mr. Caslin's shoes in relation to this, I do not ever
27
recollect Mr. Sweeney asking me for invoices or past invoices or pursuing me
28
for invoices.
29 12:15:05 30
Q. 302
All right. Now can we go back to, sorry not go back to, can we turn to 4221 please. Now, this is the Monarch Property Services Limited cheque, drawn on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:15:20
12:15:37
38 1
it's account at 73 Clanbrassil Street, AIB, and it's a cheque in the sum of
2
10,000. The date is the 26 of May 1993, made out to Frank Dunlop and
3
Associates, isn't that right so far?
4
A.
Correct, yes.
5
Q. 303
And the number of the cheque 8109 and that's the cheque we are talking about
6
isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 304
Made out to you. And then if we go to just the bottom of that page where we
9 12:15:53 10
have I think your signature, is that right? A.
11
Well that is not my signature, it is my name, but I have never written my signature in that fashion before or since.
12
Q. 305
That's what I was wonder Mr Dunlop?
13
A.
Well I'm glad you made the point. I'm not -- I cannot give you an explanation,
14
I saw this this morning, I cannot give you an explanation, it is certainly my
12:16:25 15
name obviously, but my signature has come up on this screen thousands of times
16
during the course of this Tribunal, that is not my signature.
17
Q. 306
Can I just ask you, you say you saw this this morning?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 307
Was this not on, I know Mr. Redmond has told me, I think we faxed something to
12:16:47 20
you yesterday, I'm not quite sure what it was?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 308
Was this not in your brief?
23
A.
No, it was not.
24
Q. 309
I see?
A.
I saw this first thing this morning at 8 o'clock.
26
Q. 310
Right.
27
A.
In my solicitor's office.
28
Q. 311
I am sorry about the fact you didn't get it?
29
A.
No, no that's fine. I don't want to cause unnecessary confusion, but I have no
12:16:52 25
12:17:08 30
difficulty whatsoever in identifying the fact that Monarch Property Services Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:17:13
12:17:39
39 1
Limited has issued the cheque in the name of Frank Dunlop and Associates and
2
that it is a company cheque, payable to a company, that there is a signature on
3
the back of it, which purports to be mine, it is not mine. I have never used
4
that format in signing my name, ever.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
signature?
8
A.
Well, do you recognise the signature, do you recognise the
I don't. I'm sorry Chairman.
9 12:17:46 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Could it be somebody in your office?
It could well be, yes, it could well be, that is a possibility, I wouldn't -- I
12
wouldn't deny that for a minute, but at the same time the only answer that I
13
would add to that is why would it be necessary for anybody in my office to sign
14
the back of a company cheque if the company, if the cheque was being traded in
12:18:13 15
some fashion or other or was being lodged or was being cashed? I mean if I was
16
going to cash that cheque --
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
12:18:34 20
Was that cheque picked up in your lodgement?
No. We have no, we have no history of this payment or this cheque other than what the Tribunal have made available to us in recent days, sorry Mr. Murphy I
21
hope that doesn't cause unnecessary confusion, but I mean it would be
22
disingenuous of me to suggest that -- I have no difficulty about the front of
23
the cheque, there is no doubt whatsoever that that cheque is made payable to my
24
company.
12:19:01 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
Bank in Lucan, is it?
28
A.
Well, on the front of the cheque there is what looks like Ulster
Yes, there is a stamp Ulster Bank Lucan, yes.
29 12:19:09 30
CHAIRMAN:
Well, have you any association with that bank?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:19:12
12:19:27
40 1
A.
No, I have not.
2
Q. 312
And on the back of the cheque there is something written close to your name?
3
A.
You mean immediately behind it or just under it.
4
Q. 313
Kind of at right angles?
5
A.
Yes, is that cleared or cleaned or cleared? Clearing I think is the word,
6 7
clearing, C-L-E-A-R-I-N-G. Q. 314
Try again?
8 9 12:19:46 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Clearys?
A.
Cleary.
11
Q. 315
Pardon?
12
A.
Cleary. C-L-E-A-R-Y.
13
Q. 316
There might be an S at the end of it?
14
A.
Clearys -- I just don't know.
Q. 317
No, no, but what's your best attempt?
16
A.
Well, if I was asked to interpret that I would say that it's CLEARING.
17
Q. 318
How do you make CLEARING out of that, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
Well it's a question of -- it's a question of visual impact Mr. Murphy, it's
12:19:57 15
19 12:20:21 20
not a question of scientific -- it could be Cleary, it could be Cleary. Q. 319
It could be Clearys, S?
21
A.
It could be Clearys, yes it could be, yes, sorry yes.
22
Q. 320
Do you think that may be what it is?
23
A.
Yes, could be.
24
Q. 321
You'd have looked at that, is that the first time you looked at that?
A.
Why it is, yes.
Q. 322
You got that cheque this morning, sorry that page, you saw it for the first
12:20:34 25
26 27
time this morning?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 323
Did you recognise then it wasn't your signature?
A.
Yes I did.
12:20:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:20:43
12:20:54
41 1
Q. 324
You didn't look to see what other writing there was on it?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 325
That couldn't be true Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Well it's -- I mean, as I said I'm just looking at it here now and --
5
Q. 326
What's that got to do with it, Mr. Dunlop. I'm suggesting to you that it
6
couldn't be true, you having seen a cheque for the first time this morning that
7
purports to bear your signature and you didn't look at every other thing that
8
was written on it?
9 12:21:10 10
11
A.
Well I didn't and that is the truth.
Q. 327
That's what you swear to?
A.
That's exactly. I remember I am the one bringing your attention to the fact
12
that that that is not my signature. That is not my signature.
13
Q. 328
If you haven't done it Mr. Dunlop it would have been brought to your attention?
14
A.
Oh good.
Q. 329
And I want to ask you then, what's the status of the cheque and the 10,000,
12:21:26 15
16
because until this morning you were disputing having got this, then this
17
morning the Tribunal is told you accept you got it and now you are saying this
18
is not your signature?
19
A.
12:21:45 20
Yeah well I mean you take it logically if you will, which I presume is what you want to do. Up to the point of close of business yesterday there was no
21
documentary evidence to suggest that this payment had been made. This morning
22
at 8 o'clock I was presented with this document and I can attest to the fact
23
that the people who were present when they presented it with me.
24 12:22:08 25
Q. 330
I have no difficulty with that Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Fine, well if you have no difficulty with that point, let me follow on
26
logically then to suggest to you that when you put this cheque up on the screen
27
I have no difficulty in recognising that it's a Monarch cheque, it's made
28
payable to Frank Dunlop and Associates and as the Chairman pointed out there is
29
a stamp of Ulster Bank on it, which again might I add, had the Chairman not
12:22:28 30
done so, I had not averted to, I just looked upon it as evidence from the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:22:34
12:22:52
42 1 2
Tribunal that we had got 10,000 pounds from Monarch. Q. 331
Mr. Dunlop, this is nonsense. For six years, well, no, is it since 2001, for
3
five years you have told the Tribunal effectively that you weren't, you didn't
4
get this 10,000?
5
A.
There was no evidence that we got the 10,000.
6
Q. 332
Well, it's not all about evidence Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Well, what it is about then?
8
Q. 333
Because you are the person getting the money and issuing invoices?
9
A.
No, no.
Q. 334
Because clearly what you are doing Mr. Dunlop is you are not giving something
12:23:05 10
11
up until it is presented to you in a document from the Tribunal otherwise there
12
is no evidence and it doesn't exist?
13
A.
14
No no, that is -- that is a very warped version of the facts if you allow me to say so, Mr. Murphy. To go back ad nauseum from 25 to 60, there is no evidence,
12:23:28 15
we had no evidence, documentary or otherwise in relation to the receipt of
16
15,000 and 10,000. We accepted, because we saw a cheque of 15,000 -- sorry.
17
Q. 335
Yes?
18
A.
Do you want me to go back on that?
19
Q. 336
Mr. Dunlop are you saying you didn't get this page 4221 or are you saying your
12:23:54 20
solicitors didn't get it, because I want to suggest to you that that, this page
21 22
was in the brief? A.
23 24
Well I certainly haven't seen this page. This page as far as I am concerned was presented to me this morning.
Q. 337
All right.
12:24:10 25
26
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman for the avoidance of doubt those pages were not
27
included in the brief that were circulated.
28
Q. 338
Sorry I beg your pardon that's fine. I'm sorry Chairman, Mr. Dunlop --
29
A.
Mr. Murphy, it's not usual for me, I hasten to add and you have been present
12:24:25 30
here before when I have given evidence and it's quite unusual for me to adopt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:24:31
12:24:54
43 1
this attitude. I am here to cooperate as much as I possibly can with the
2
Tribunal, certainly it is obvious that the Tribunal, notwithstanding the large
3
amount of resources that are available to it, is in the category of Homer
4
nodding on occasion. I got this document this morning, it was not in the
5
brief. Now, whoever is suggesting that it was in the brief, as Mr. Redmond has
6
pointed out, is incorrect. Which is a lot of incorrections in relation to
7
what's happening this morning.
8 9 12:25:07 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 339
11
It wasn't in the brief.
It wasn't in the brief and I have apologised to Mr. Dunlop for suggesting that it was.
12
A.
Thank you.
13
Q. 340
Sorry, it was in the brief but they didn't get it, I don't know what that
14
means. But Mr. Dunlop, could I just correct this for one second, the question
12:25:23 15
of whether or not it was in the brief we have it now, the inaccuracies are
16
coming from you and we have had a litany of them this morning in relation to
17
how much you have understated your money to the Tribunal etcetera?
18
A.
Mm-hmm.
19
Q. 341
Now I think I was asking Mr. Dunlop the status of this amount because for six
12:25:50 20
years you have said you didn't get, you weren't paid this, you now say what
21
that means is there was no evidence, you were given the evidence this morning,
22
you accept you got it, now you say this isn't your signature, this would be the
23
signature that -- I mean if this isn't your signature it's forged, isn't that
24
right?
12:26:05 25
26
A.
Well, obviously somebody else wrote my name on the back of that cheque.
Q. 342
Right. Could you tell me how often in your 20 years as a businessman, you have
27
permitted somebody else to write your name on a cheque?
28
A.
Not very often. I cannot recollect, I recollect one occasion, one --
29
Q. 343
Is that it?
A.
No, no, no. The exact circumstances I cannot recall, but I can do so for you
12:26:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:26:31
12:26:56
44 1
subsequently when I think about it, but I do recollect on one occasion asking a
2
member of my staff to make a lodgement and I gather that he had to sign the
3
back of the cheque when he was making the lodgement. The reason I am pausing
4
for a moment is is that I cannot recollect whether he signed my signature on
5
the back of the cheque purporting that it was mine or that he signed his own
6
and was worried about it. I just can't recollect but it would not be my
7
practice to give anybody permission to sign the back of a cheque with my
8
signature.
9
Q. 344
12:27:12 10
I think the Tribunal can infer from what you just said that you didn't give your consent to this signature?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 345
That means it's forged?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 346
Thank you. And do you recognise the handwriting?
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 347
And does that not mean that you didn't get that cheque, that cheque went to
12:27:24 15
16 17
somebody else?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 348
Who forged your signature?
A.
No, that's a leap too far I might suggest, Mr. Murphy.
21
Q. 349
All right. Why is that?
22
A.
Well because, if we take it again, logically.
23
Q. 350
Do, yeah?
24
A.
It's a Monarch Property Services cheque, it's is made out to Frank Dunlop and
12:27:33 20
12:27:46 25
Associates for a specific amount, it's highly unlikely that it was being paid
26
to me for the benefit of somebody else. So, I mean the cheque was sent to me
27
obviously, and if there is a remittance notice or remittance advice notice in
28
Monarch Properties to that effect.
29 12:28:08 30
Q. 351
Sure we don't know anything about whether it got to you, it's is not in your books? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:28:08
12:28:15
45 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 352
Not that -- isn't that right?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 353
All right. So it may never have got to you, if may have been intercepted
5
somewhere in Monarch, it may have been intercepted somewhere else and somebody
6
wrote your name?
7
A.
It could well be. I don't have any recollection.
8
Q. 354
But Mr. Dunlop --
9
A.
I don't have any recollection of getting the cheque and I certainly have no
12:28:28 10
11
recollection whatever of giving anybody permission. Q. 355
12 13
Mr. Dunlop has to be that you didn't get that amount? A.
14 12:28:56 15
Yes but what I am suggesting -- sorry, the inference from all of that
No I don't accept that. You are not following logical line of thought Mr. Murphy, the next question is the important one.
Q. 356
16
Mr. Dunlop, I am doing my best to follow your answer but I can't follow it so could you give it to me again?
17
A.
No, it does not mean that I did not get that cheque.
18
Q. 357
Why not?
19
A.
I could have got the cheque and given it to somebody else.
Q. 358
What about the signature?
21
A.
I gave nobody any permission to forge my signature on the back of a cheque.
22
Q. 359
All right?
23
A.
And certainly, if it is a cheque to Frank Dunlop and Associates that would be
12:29:09 20
24
lodged, being lodged or even cashed or traded by me, it wouldn't necessarily
12:29:26 25
follow that it had to be signed on the back. If I was trading that cheque, if
26
I went into the bank with that cheque, known in the bank and said I want cash
27
for this, it is highly unlikely that I would be asked to sign the bank of it.
28 29 12:29:47 30
Q. 360
You see what I am wondering about just at the moment in the light of the fact that it's not your signature, you say it's not your signature Mr. Dunlop, I am wondering did you get it and I am just wondering and your response to that is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:29:51
12:30:01
46 1
the example is that maybe you gave it to somebody else, now do you think that's
2
what you did?
3
A.
I don't know. I have no recollection in relation to this cheque at all.
4
Q. 361
All right. Have you often given a cheque to somebody else?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 362
Have you ever?
7
A.
I would not say definitively, no, because that might not be the truth, but it
8 9
would be highly unusual. Q. 363
12:30:23 10
so they could make use of it, would you have done that -- sorry you -- you
11 12
And I presume if you were giving it to somebody else you would actually sign it
jesticulated in agreement with me there, isn't that right? A.
Sorry yes, if I was giving that cheque to somebody else I would sign it, I
13
don't know what the exact banking term is to ensure that this was a tradeable
14
instrument, and that it had the endorsement of the payee as to, for it to be
12:30:53 15
traded, but there is no evidence that I have done that.
16
Q. 364
No, but if you were giving a cheque to somebody else like that?
17
A.
Yes, it would be normal.
18
Q. 365
You sign it?
19
A.
Normal practice.
Q. 366
Do you think you ever did that, do you think you ever gave a cheque to somebody
12:31:02 20
21 22
and signed the back of it so they could negotiate it? A.
I may have done, I just cannot say definitively that I did not. But the only
23
thing I will say to you in ease is that if I did it would be on very, very rare
24
occasions.
12:31:18 25
Q. 367
Okay. But I think you said never would you have given it, handed over the
26
cheque to somebody and not put your signature on it, you wouldn't just hand a
27
cheque to somebody?
28
A.
Highly unusual.
29
Q. 368
Highly unusual?
A.
Yeah.
12:31:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:31:31
12:31:50
47 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
time?
Mr. Dunlop, did you ever, did you owe money to Clearys at that
4
A.
Maybe that's why I didn't recognise the name Clearys. No I did not, no.
5
Q. 369
Do you think maybe that, sorry I am just wonder Mr Dunlop is that what you are
6
saying you think maybe what happened here is you got the cheque and you gave it
7
to somebody without signing it?
8
A.
9 12:32:05 10
It could be yes Mr. Murphy, I am not going to say definitively to you that that is not the case because that would be silly.
Q. 370
All right, it could be the case?
11
A.
It could be the case.
12
Q. 371
Why would you give a cheque to somebody without signing it?
13
A.
That's what's odd.
14
Q. 372
Is it not a bit more than odd?
A.
Like? Unusual.
16
Q. 373
Now what do you know about Clearys Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
It's a shop in O'Connell Street, I have been in it a couple of times.
18
Q. 374
Do you know any other Clearys?
19
A.
Do I know any other Clearys, no I don't. No I don't, you mean a retail outlet
12:32:15 15
12:32:40 20
or a name?
21
Q. 375
Name, do you know anybody by the name of Cleary?
22
A.
No -- I don't think so it doesn't spring to mind anyway.
23
Q. 376
And in particular do you know anybody by the name of Cleary in a shop, in a
24 12:32:58 25
business, in a retail, in any place where you might buy something? A.
No I don't -- it doesn't spring to mind anyway.
26
Q. 377
You are quite hesitant?
27
A.
No, because I am trying to be, trying to help you Mr. Murphy, I don't want to
28
say automatically yes or no to anything in case, just in case there may be a
29
possibility.
12:33:16 30
Q. 378
All right. So do you know the name Cleary or Clearys in connection with any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:33:26
12:33:45
48 1
pub?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 379
Are you sure?
4
A.
It doesn't -- I may do, it doesn't spring to mind, I know the names of pubs but
5 6
I don't know, it doesn't spring to mind. Q. 380
7
Okay. You don't know a pub by the name of -- you don't know Clearys in connection with a pub?
8
A.
Where are we talking about, where is the pub?
9
Q. 381
I am just asking you?
A.
Clearys it doesn't spring to mind, is there an address?
11
Q. 382
Do you know a P and C Murphy trading as Clearys?
12
A.
No, it doesn't spring to mind.
13
Q. 383
When you say it doesn't spring to mind Mr. Dunlop, you did pause quite
12:34:00 10
14
considerably to answer a question which is very, very simple, do you know an F
12:34:33 15
and S Dunlop who own a pub, you know, do you know --
16
A.
I wish we did.
17
Q. 384
Do you know P and C Murphy trading as Cleary?
18
A.
I wish F and S did own a pub, but no, I have no -- you can come along and tell
19
me that you must have known Clearys pub in such-and-such a street or whatever,
12:34:52 20
you may well do that, I may well do, it doesn't spring to mind it's not
21
something in the forefront of my mind, as to your latter question in relation
22
to somebody called Murphy, it doesn't spring so mind.
23
Q. 385
Do you know a P and C Murphy?
24
A.
P and C Murphy. Well I know Murphys but I don't, various Murphys.
Q. 386
Are they P and C?
26
A.
P and C? No.
27
Q. 387
Difficult is it?
28
A.
A little more expansive, Peter and Camilla?
29
Q. 388
No, just, you tell me if you know a P and C Murphy, try Patrick?
A.
Paddy Murphy, Patrick Murphy.
12:35:12 25
12:35:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:35:38
12:35:42
49 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 389
Mr. Murphy is there a P and C Murphy.
Sorry Chairman.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 390
7
Do we know about P and C Murphy?
Well do you know, Chairman, if I can just maybe in this way, Mr. Dunlop, do you know a Patrick Murphy trading as Clearys in Sarsfield Road in Inchicore?
8
A.
No, I do not.
9
Q. 391
And I understand that that's a pub where Mr. Lawlor got cheques cashed for him
12:36:13 10
11
you are smiling and you are nodding? A.
No I just -- I don't know a Clearys trading as Murphys in Inchicore, I don't
12
know whether I have heard that that was one of the places that Mr. Lawlor got
13
cash, cheques cashed or not, I don't know.
14 12:36:30 15
Q. 392
No.
A.
I do know that there was some reference to some pub at some stage during
16
another Module of the Tribunal where Mr. Lawlor got cheques cashed but
17
certainly I can't recollect whether that was the one or not.
18
Q. 393
19 12:36:47 20
You can't recollect if that was the one or not, so you think that Mr. Lawlor has cashed that cheque, this cheque?
A.
No I didn't say that. I said there was evidence in another Module of
21
Mr. Lawlor cashing cheques in a pub, again the name of the pub escapes me it's
22
not relevant anyway, as far as I am concerned, it may be relevant as far as you
23
are concerned Mr. Murphy, but no. I have no evidence to suggest that this
24
cheque was traded by Mr. Lawlor in a pub.
12:37:13 25
Q. 394
26
You have no evidence again, but what about leaving aside the evidence, what you might know that wouldn't be written on a page or anything like that Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
I don't know.
28
Q. 395
Have you any knowledge as to whether or not Mr. Dunlop ever had anything to do
29 12:37:31 30
with this cheque at all, Mr. Lawlor, sorry? A.
No I haven't actually, I have no evidence. I have no knowledge. I have no Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:37:38
12:37:49
50 1 2
recollection, he may well have, he may well not have. Q. 396
3 4
But you know -- he may or may not be involved with it, but if he is you know nothing about it?
A.
No, no.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
this cheque to Mr. Lawlor?
8
A.
Well Mr. Dunlop, are you saying that you definitely did not give
No, I am not saying that Chairman, sorry.
9 12:37:58 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Surely, surely would you remember if you gave a cheque for 10,000
pounds to anyone? A.
Yes.
13 14 12:38:11 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
And particularly Mr. Lawlor or somebody, some other politician?
Yes, I fully agree with you I would, if I did that I would, it would be logical
16
to suggest and rational even to suggest that I would recollect that. I have no
17
recollection of giving a cheque for 10,000 pounds in my company's name to
18
Mr. Lawlor.
19 12:38:26 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
22
But do you think it's possible that that might have happened?
It is possible that Mr. Lawlor had this cheque by some other means, but I have no recollection of my giving this cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
12:38:43 25
But if Mr. Lawlor had this cheque and cashed it, he must have got
it from you or somebody in your business?
26
A.
That would appear logical, yes.
27
Q. 397
But a moment ago you agreed that you wouldn't, I mean it would be odd you said?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 398
That it would be odd to give a cheque to somebody without signing it yourself?
A.
Yes I did and it would be. I repeat it would be odd.
12:39:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:39:06
12:39:24
51 1
Q. 399
2
And you wouldn't give it to somebody and give your, give your consent to that person signing it?
3
A.
No, correct.
4
Q. 400
So I think that means that if a third party got that cheque they didn't have
5
your consent to getting it or to writing your name on it?
6
A.
I think that would appear to be eminently logical, yes.
7
Q. 401
And you seem to think it may have been, Mr. Lawlor, I know you can't say
8
definitively it wasn't or it was, you seem to think it may have been
9
Mr. Lawlor?
12:39:42 10
A.
No no, you are the man, Mr. Murphy, what first mentioned Mr. Lawlor's name.
11
Q. 402
Did I, that's correct?
12
A.
I didn't. I was waiting for you to do it but I didn't do it.
13
Q. 403
Why were you waiting for me to do it?
14
A.
Because when the Chairman said Ulster Bank, Lucan, which again I repeat on
12:40:00 15
sight of this cheque I had not adverted to, a red light went off in my head.
16
Q. 404
Tell us about the red light?
17
A.
Lucan, Mr. Lawlor, they are synonymous.
18
Q. 405
You didn't see any of that until now?
19
A.
No.
Q. 406
Because you didn't bother looking at the rest of the cheque this morning,
12:40:15 20
21
notwithstanding it's not your signature and when you see it now you see Lucan
22
and you think of Mr. Lawlor but you don't mention it to the Tribunal now
23
immediately in the midst of it?
24
A.
12:40:32 25
You are the man asking me the questions, Mr. Murphy, and I was waiting for you to ask me.
26
Q. 407
Mr. Lawlor, you don't ask?
27
A.
I'm not Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Dunlop.
28
Q. 408
Mr. Dunlop you are not seriously asking me to believe that, are you?
29
A.
No, no, I am telling you exactly what has occurred to the best of my ability in
12:40:45 30
relation to this cheque, when I saw it and the discussion we are now having Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:40:49
12:40:57
52 1 2
about it. Q. 409
We are having a little game Mr. Dunlop, you are a mouse and I am trying to
3
catch you, is that what it is, that you won't give me any information until I
4
ask the question?
5
A.
6 7
No. You are duty bound to ask me the question, as per the remit of the Tribunal. I am the person who answers the questions when you ask them.
Q. 410
Well I'll take issue with you on that Mr. Dunlop because you have a duty from
8
that witness box to tell the whole truth. Now I am asking you in considerable
9
detail about a forged, a cheque in respect of which there has been a forgery?
12:41:21 10
A.
11 12
Yes, well what more would you like me to tell you that I haven't told you already.
Q. 411
This precisely, Mr. Dunlop. As we went through to use your own phrase ad
13
nauseum and repeatedly Clearys and trying to work out who they were and you
14
don't know who they are?
12:41:38 15
16
A.
I don't.
Q. 412
But the explanation I have given for it may well be correct, in the meantime
17
you have spotted the Lucan thing and the red light has gone in your mind about
18
Lawlor but you haven't suggested to the three judges that this cheque, while
19
it's not your signature and you don't know who wrote it, and you don't know who
12:41:56 20
Clearys are, there is a red light in your head saying Lucan equals Lawlor?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 413
Now please tell me, please tell the Tribunal why you didn't proffer that?
23
A.
Well you are -- you are the person asking questions in relation to this cheque,
24
I have given you a time line in relation to sight of this cheque, you have
12:42:18 25
already apologised.
26
Q. 414
This is irrelevant, Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
Sorry Mr. Murphy.
28
Q. 415
This is irrelevant, would you please answer the question?
29
A.
Mr. Murphy, like you know we can expedite matters if I can answer the question
12:42:29 30
and I will expedite matters by listening to the question. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:42:32
12:42:44
53 1
Q. 416
We'll expedite matters if you answer the question but you are not doing that?
2
A.
Not to your satisfaction obviously.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
Mr. Lawlor?
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop do you suspect that cheque may have gone to
6
A.
I have, yes, I do suspect.
7
Q. 417
Now Mr. Dunlop, will you please say why you suspect that?
8
A.
Well I --
9
Q. 418
Tell us everything about it?
A.
Yes right, if you'd let me again without interrupting.
11
Q. 419
I won't say another word?
12
A.
Good man. I had first sight of this cheque this morning at 8 o'clock, to be
12:42:53 10
13
precise, a little bit after 8. I look at the cheque, my solicitor says we have
14
received this documentation from the Tribunal overnight, it proves that you got
12:43:13 15
the 10,000 that was in dispute from Monarch. I said fine. That's grand, okay?
16
We'll, if we are asked, if I am asked by Mr. Murphy did I get 85,000 from
17
Monarch I will say yes. Which I did, very early on in the course of this
18
examination. Which you will recall.
19 12:43:32 20
You put this cheque up on the screen, I bring your attention to the fact that
21
it's not my signature, although it is my name. You then go into a disposition
22
in relation to whether it's Clearys, clearings or whatever, the Chairman brings
23
my attention to the fact that there is a stamp on it from Ulster Bank Lucan and
24
I have given you the evidence without repeating it again, that a red light went
12:44:01 25
off in my mind as soon as the Chairman highlighted that, up to that point and
26
now, I have no recollection of ever giving this cheque, receiving this cheque
27
or giving this cheque to any other person, or allowing any other person to put
28
my name on the back of it.
29 12:44:21 30
Q. 420
Now Mr --
A.
Is that clear? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:44:22
12:44:48
54 1
Q. 421
Mr. Dunlop, if I might come in now and what you have just said is a complete
2
repetition of what you have been saying over the last, earlier and to what the
3
question related to, arising out of the Chairman asking did you believe that
4
this was Mr. Lawlor who had, I think, written your name and I asked you --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 422
Why you thought Mr. Lawlor was -- and I asked you to tell us in detail why you
7
thought Mr. Lawlor was involved in this and you gave us a repetition of 8
8
o'clock this morning?
9 12:45:00 10
A.
Yeah.
Q. 423
So could you now please answer the question, which is why do you, Mr. Dunlop,
11
in the witness box, believe that Mr. Lawlor is involved with this cheque that
12
you did not give to him?
13
A.
14
No sorry, when I answered the question to the Chairman I said it is possible that this cheque was traded by Mr. Lawlor and that my name on the back of it is
12:45:23 15
a forgery, whether by Mr. Lawlor or any other person. I have no recollection
16
of ever giving a cheque for 10,000 pounds in the name of Monarch Property
17
Services Limited to Mr. Lawlor or allowing him to trade it, or execute it. So
18
I have no -- I have no recollection of ever giving, receiving this cheque which
19
has been my point up to 8 o'clock this morning, and I have no recollection of
12:45:55 20
21
ever giving this cheque or allowing Mr. Lawlor to trade this cheque. Q. 424
Mr. Dunlop you are a very well educated, intelligent person, I think you
22
understand the question. You are not attempting to answer it and I am going to
23
stay here asking the question until you answer it. I want to know why the red
24
light went on in your head and why you thought that Lawlor, who was nowhere
12:46:29 25
near this cheque on the face of the back or front of it, why in your mind with
26
all your association over the years with Mr. Lawlor, why you think he comes
27
into the picture?
28
A.
29 12:46:51 30
I have already answered that question. In the context of the Chairman bringing my attention to the stamp on the cheque.
Q. 425
But Mr. Dunlop, the stamp is, I understand that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:46:58
12:47:15
55 1
A.
Good.
2
Q. 426
But why, why because Lucan equals Lawlor in your mind?
3
A.
No synonymous, I said not equal.
4
Q. 427
What does it bring -- I mean sorry, maybe if I ask you to go a bit further with
5
it, if Lucan is synonymous with Mr. Lawlor in your mind and the red light goes
6
on, why? I mean what is coming to your mind thereabout Mr. Lawlor and this
7
cheque? I mean I understand Lucan equals Mr. Lawlor, that's fine, but on a
8
cheque here, I don't understand how it comes to your mind, unless there is
9
more?
12:47:37 10
A.
More what.
11
Q. 428
You know -- more information, there is something --
12
A.
Sorry, I beg your pardon, not in relation to this cheque, not in relation to
13
this payment, not in relation to anything that I did or did not do in allowing
14
any other person, a third person or otherwise trade this cheque on a forged
12:47:55 15
16
signature of my name on the back. Q. 429
But Mr. Dunlop, if you, if someone shows you a cheque it could be from anybody
17
written out to you with any cashed -- a cheque made out to you for whatever
18
amount and because Lucan appears in the bank stamp you think of Lawlor, that's
19
fine, Mr. Lawlor, that's fine. But it wouldn't put a red light on. I mean why
12:48:33 20
do you think of -- are you thinking of Mr. Lawlor because you think what
21
happened here is that Mr. Lawlor somehow got his hands on this cheque, not from
22
you because you have told us that you didn't give it to him?
23
A.
No, I have no recollection of doing so is what I said.
24
Q. 430
No, but maybe he got, maybe he got his, he got his hands on the cheque is that
12:48:54 25
what you are thinking.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
think is you said that you have no recognise recollection of giving him the
29
cheque?
12:49:08 30
A.
Mr. Dunlop, I mean what you said there a couple of moments ago I
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:49:09
12:49:24
56 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
or more occasions when you did give Mr. Lawlor a third party cheque? Because
4
if somebody says I have no recollection of giving him this particular cheque it
5
would suggest that it wasn't unusual that you might have given him a cheque,
6
most people would be able to say I never gave anybody a cheque of that size, I
7
never gave Mr. Lawlor a cheque of that size or any cheque, can we take it that
8
you do recollect on occasion giving Mr. Lawlor third party cheques and that
9
while you don't recollect specifically giving him this one this could be one of
12:49:53 10
11
Can we take it therefore that there were occasions, certainly one
those? A.
No, no to both Mr. Chairman. No I do -- it would not have been my practice and
12
I do not recollect ever doing it, giving me Mr. Lawlor a cheque, as a third
13
party executor of an instrument made out to me and certainly I have no
14
recollection of dealing with this particular cheque in that fashion. There was
12:50:17 15
an occasion that I have given evidence before, both in private and I think in
16
public, that there was a payment to Mr. Lawlor, but that was on foot of a false
17
invoice, not on foot of a cheque made payable to me.
18 19 12:50:35 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
But could somebody in your office have given him this cheque?
Highly unlikely. Most unlikely, in fact I would absolutely and categorically rule it out.
22 23 24 12:50:47 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Q. 431
Sorry Mr. Dunlop, categorically that that --
A.
That anybody in my office would have given a cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
Q. 432
Okay. But do you think what happened here is that Mr. Lawlor, you think, do
27 28 29 12:51:15 30
All right.
you think Mr. Lawlor wrote your name on the back of the cheque? A.
Well, while you were asking me various questions there I have been trying, and I don't -- I can't remember what Liam Lawlor's handwriting was like, so I can't attest to the fact that that may well be his writing, I don't know. I just Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:51:26
12:51:44
57 1
don't know Mr. Murphy.
2
Q. 433
Now if, sorry Lucan is synonymous with Mr. Lawlor, red light flashes?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 434
So Mr. Dunlop does that mean it's a possibility in your mind that Mr. Lawlor
5
got this, Mr. Lawlor got this cheque somehow and he got the money for it?
6
A.
It is a possibility, yes.
7
Q. 435
And it wouldn't surprise you or would it?
8
A.
Well I think that's an unfair question, but I mean in the context of what we
9
are doing here, the answer has to be as straightforward as I possibly can give
12:52:03 10
11
it, it wouldn't surprise me. Q. 436
And would it be, I know, I think you have said that you wouldn't have given him
12
permission to sign your name and you wouldn't have, you wouldn't hand it over
13
anyway without signing your name, but would it be with your blessing, I mean
14
could it be that Mr. Lawlor could get a cheque like that made out to you and he
12:52:22 15
16
would have your blessing in cashing it? A.
Well, no, he wouldn't have my blessing in cashing -- well, that begs a number
17
of questions Mr. Murphy, which I think would be necessary to go through before
18
answering that question, as to how he got his hands on the cheque and as I have
19
said to you I have absolutely no recollection of ever giving Mr. Lawlor a
12:52:41 20
cheque of that amount, or and I have answered the Chairman saying it is well
21
nigh impossible to suggest that anybody in my office would have done so. So
22
it's a question of the method of acquisition of this cheque, I mean -- it
23
reinforces.
24 12:52:56 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Sorry to interrupt you, just on that point, a little while ago
26
in answer to Mr. Murphy you said it was possible that Mr, the late Mr. Lawlor
27
might have gotten this cheque by other means?
28
A.
Yes.
29 12:53:07 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think those were the words you used, perhaps you, when you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:53:12
12:53:22
58 1
gave that answer you might tell us what, if you ruled out yourself handing over
2
the cheque or anybody in your office or connected with your business handing
3
over the cheque as I understand it?
4
A.
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
mentioned he may have got it by other means?
8
A.
But notwithstanding that, you did say a little while ago you
Yes.
9 12:53:29 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12
Having ruled yourself out of the equation and ruled your
office out on your evidence, what other means then -A.
Well, he could have got it from Monarch.
13 14 12:53:38 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY: Q. 437
And had that happened previously or after?
A.
No, I have no -- certainly not as far as I am aware, that has never happened
17 18
before. Q. 438
19 12:53:52 20
I see.
Okay, could you just explain then to me, I know you are not saying that's how it happened, isn't that right?
A.
21
Exactly. Because I have -- I have no evidence to suggest that that is the way it happened.
22
Q. 439
No, but you suspect it?
23
A.
Suspicion in evidence Mr. Murphy, you know well enough, you are a senior
24 12:54:12 25
counsel that that's not sufficient, you cannot equate the two. Q. 440
26 27
And could you just explain to me, because I can't see it Mr. Dunlop, how would it come about that Monarch would give a cheque made out to you to Mr. Lawlor?
A.
I don't know, in answer to the honourable judge who asked me if I rule out
28
myself and if I rule out my office and members of my staff, the judge asked the
29
next logical question is how would this, how would it come about that
12:54:41 30
Mr. Lawlor, if this is Mr. Lawlor, that how would he have acquired or come into Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:54:48
12:55:01
59 1
possession of this cheque, which was the question that I suggested to you was
2
the logical question in relation to trying to divine some sort of sense out
3
this.
4
Q. 441
5 6
Mr. Dunlop in the ordinary way cheques that come to you from Monarch or whoever, do they go to your office?
A.
7
Oh, yes, they would go -- they would, well there would be two ways of doing it. Either by arrangement for collection or they would be sent by post.
8
Q. 442
Right and if so by post to your office?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 443
And I mean obviously they are looked after there but they could be lying around
12:55:19 10
11 12
there couldn't they? A.
Normally what happened, it doesn't happen any more because the business is by
13
way of virtually defunct, but what normally happens is the post is opened in
14
the morning, if there are cheques in them they are given to the officer in
12:55:41 15
charge of recording receipts in relation to it, they are handed back to me and
16
I lodge them, cash them or otherwise or I might ask somebody in the office if
17
you are going to the bank lodge that.
18
Q. 444
They are supervised?
19
A.
They are supervised yes.
Q. 445
Would Mr. Lawlor be somebody who would have visited your office from time to
12:55:56 20
21
time?
22
A.
Very frequently.
23
Q. 446
Very frequently?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 447
All right, so he could have got the cheque there without your permission?
26
A.
He could have, yes, but I mean I am not saying that.
27
Q. 448
No, no I know. And but really the only other, the only alternative would be
12:56:03 25
28 29 12:56:25 30
that he got it from Monarch? A.
That's why I thought that was the logical answer to the honourable judge's question. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:56:25
12:57:12
60 1
Q. 449
2
And was there, had that ever happened, were you aware before ever Monarch paying money to Lawlor in respect of, by way of a cheque to you?
3
A.
No, no I definitely did not.
4
Q. 450
Were you ever aware of that happening in other situations in respect of other
5
developments where a developer or a landowner would make a cheque out to you
6
and it would go to Mr. Lawlor or to anybody else?
7
A.
No, I don't think so.
8
Q. 451
You don't think so?
9
A.
No. I'm just, in relation to any of the, any developments that I have been
12:57:30 10
involved with, I don't think any developer would have made a cheque out to me
11 12
and it was traded by Liam Lawlor -- I don't think so, no. Q. 452
Mr. Dunlop I think that that isn't a 'I don't think so category'. I suggest
13
that it's such an extraordinary method of using to pay somebody that the
14
person, the company would make a cheque out to a consultant, somebody who is
12:58:00 15
doing work for them but in fact give that cheque to a third party who would
16
then, they know would negotiate it, so I think you should be able to tell the
17
Tribunal, definitively whether or not you have any experience of it?
18
A.
19
No, to the best -- no I don't have any other experience it have is the simple answer. But I am just attuning myself to your, your thought processes as to
12:58:22 20
what is extraordinary and not extraordinary, but no I don't have any evidence
21
that that ever occurred as far as I am concerned, that a developer or builder
22
issued a cheque to me or a company.
23
Q. 453
24 12:58:44 25
26
Mr. Dunlop if I can cut across you, this isn't a question of having evidence, whether the Tribunal has it or you?
A.
Yes.
Q. 454
You are aware of whether or not there was another instance of a company, let's
27
leave it -- sorry whether it's Monarch or anybody else?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 455
Giving a cheque made out to you to a third party?
A.
The company giving the cheque to a third party? No I have no evidence of that.
12:59:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:59:06
12:59:11
61 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
two o'clock.
All right, Mr. Murphy, it's just one o'clock we'll adjourn until
4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:59:23
14:06:44
62 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AFTER LUNCH:
2 3 4
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, the 85,000 which you accept, which you accept that
5
you got from Monarch, is that the height of it?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 456
Is that it?
8
A.
No more.
9
Q. 457
No more. And could I ask you did you ever negotiate a cheque in the Ulster
14:07:00 10
Bank in Lucan?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 458
In any -- did you ever have any dealings whatever with them?
13
A.
None.
14
Q. 459
Thank you. And Mr. Dunlop, you are still accepting that you got 85,000 from
14:07:23 15
Monarch, notwithstanding all the evidence this morning about this cheque for
16
10,000, is that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 460
So the 10,000 made out to you, your signature is forged, it's cashed in Lucan,
19
you have no recollection of it and you seem to believe that a third party,
14:08:07 20
whoever, got hold of it and cashed it. You accept that it's your ten grand
21 22
from Monarch? A.
Well, it's made out to me. It's made out to my company, it's from Monarch
23
services, there is -- it's made out to Frank Dunlop and Associates in the sum
24
of 10,000 pounds, the rest we know as of this morning.
14:08:27 25
Q. 461
26 27
payment of a sum of money in the circumstances that they didn't get it? A.
28 29 14:08:52 30
Mr. Dunlop, I have never heard of anybody accepting or agreeing that they got a
Well, Mr. Murphy, until this morning at 8 o'clock I would have said that the only issue in dispute was that 10,000.
Q. 462
Yes?
A.
Okay. You accept that? You produced a cheque this morning at 8 o'clock made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:09:01
14:09:16
63 1
out in the sum of ten thousand, made out to me. My instructions to my
2
solicitor immediately were fine, if a cheque has been produced made out to
3
Frank Dunlop and Associates we accept that we got it.
4
Q. 463
Yes. Even --
5
A.
Following on that, the cheque was put up on the screen, I immediately
6 7
identified that it was not my signature. Q. 464
And that doesn't mean you change your position in relation to the ten and lead
8
you to the conclusion that you didn't get the ten and therefore it's 75 you got
9
from Monarch and that you'd like to take it up with Monarch as to why you
14:09:41 10
11
didn't get the other ten? A.
12 13
I have no intention of taking it up with Monarch, the matter is closed, over and done with.
Q. 465
14
All right. And can I suggest to you that the reason that having got the, having seen the ten, the cheque for ten, that the reason that you agreed to
14:10:02 15
the, you agreed that the figure that you agreed with the Tribunal that the
16
figure that you got from Monarch was 85, was to avoid having to give any
17
evidence in relation to this cheque?
18
A.
Absolute rubbish.
19
Q. 466
Well why did you agree it?
A.
Why did I agree what.
Q. 467
Why did you agree that you received ten when you didn't, why do you accept now
14:10:23 20
21 22 23
vis-a-vis the Tribunal that you got it? A.
24
The Tribunal has produced a cheque from Monarch made out to Frank Dunlop and Associates, as of midnight last night the only issue in question as far as I
14:10:40 25
and my legal advisers were concerned was 10,000. This morning I was shown a
26
cheque made payable to Frank Dunlop and Associates for 10,000 from Monarch
27
Property Services Limited, I immediately indicated to my solicitor fine, they
28
produced a cheque that's it, we accept responsibility.
29 14:11:23 30
Q. 468
Mr. Dunlop, so you got 85,000 from Monarch and if I'm correct in this, five of those cheques making up 50,000 went through the office accounts, the Frank Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:11:31
14:11:46
64 1 2
Dunlop and Associates Limited accounts? A.
3 4
Are you saying that or -- I mean I don't have -- if that is, if that is the evidence produced by Coyle & Coyle my accountants that is the evidence.
Q. 469
That's my, sorry I am not too sure if it's produced. I can go through each of
5
them if you like and I understand that in respect of five of them and may I
6
have for, on the screen please, if we just go back to that schedule, 491, and I
7
will go through these individually if you like, but I understand that the,
8
looking at the bottom of the page the lower schedule?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 470
That the 15,000 went through AIB College Street?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 471
And the second one, the 10,000 did not and in fact that, there is an asterisk
14:12:19 10
13
on that which, I think is coming from your, from Coyle & Coyle that they
14
couldn't trace it and as far as I am aware that didn't go through the accounts
14:12:46 15
in any event, sorry what I wanted to - I wanted to list with you the five that
16
I understand went through the account of Frank Dunlop and Associates?
17
A.
Okay.
18
Q. 472
First one 15,000?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 473
12 of March 93. The third one, no sorry, yes, the third one for 7,500 dated
14:12:57 20
21
2nd of July 93?
22
A.
Mm-hmm.
23
Q. 474
I understand that went through College Street. I understand that the next one
24
went through College Street as well, 7,500 on 17 of September 1993. And I
14:13:31 25
understand the last two, 15,000 and five thousand went through AIB College
26
Street, the two dates there, 22 of December and 9 of August 95. Now will I
27
bring you through your bank, your account to show you that?
28 29 14:13:55 30
A.
No, I think I accept Mr. Murphy, if you are saying it is your belief it happened. It's contingent on what Y means but this is what my accountant has produced from the documents available to him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:13:57
14:14:26
65 1
Q. 475
Yes. Yes, I hope I am right in that now but I think I am?
2
A.
Okay, I accept that.
3
Q. 476
And the three, of the eight payments -- I'm sorry, maybe I need to explain
4
this, of the 60,000 there on the F. D. A. L amount right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 477
That is now going to become 85 because we are going to bring over two cheques
7
from the per Tribunal column?
8
A.
15 and the 10.
9
Q. 478
Correct?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 479
And the ten is that one there at the 26 of May?
12
A.
Mm-hmm.
13
Q. 480
And then the first of the two 15s?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 481
So if we can just imagine those in the column for your office account?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 482
Sorry now -- yes, what I mean is just imagine them in there for the purpose of
14:14:36 10
14:14:42 15
18 19 14:14:56 20
being eight payments? A.
Yes.
Q. 483
And I understand that three of those, in other words the three remaining ones
21
did not go through the company's books or account, in other words the first
22
10,000 and I will open this up to you now in a moment, the first 10,000, the
23
second of 26 May 93 which comes across from the other column and the 15,000
24
that come across on 2 of December 1993 I hope I'm not complicating that?
14:15:32 25
26
A.
No no, it's quite clear.
Q. 484
Now and in respect of those -- so I am only talking about three cheques now at
27
the moment. The first ten, the second ten and the first 15?
28
A.
Okay.
29
Q. 485
Now the first 10 is one that you have put us on notice of throughout?
A.
Yes.
14:15:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:15:51
14:16:42
66 1
Q. 486
2
And the other two are the two that Monarch told us about and we have agreed you now accept that, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes, that's correct.
4
Q. 487
And in relation to the first ten, if I could turn up page 513 please. No I'm
5
sorry, so 513 is the remittance advice from Monarch to Frank Dunlop and Company
6
Limited, the cheque number 7698 the sum is 10,000 pounds, the date of this is
7
12th March 93, all right?
8
A.
Yes, correct.
9
Q. 488
That's the remittance advice. Now and we have already established there is no
14:17:00 10
invoice?
11
A.
No invoice.
12
Q. 489
And if we could have 4063 please, six from the bottom, 12 of March 93, Frank
13 14
Dunlop and Company Limited, 10,000 in the cheque payments book of Monarch? A.
Yes.
Q. 490
Going out of Monarch?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 491
4064 please and the third last of the first column cheque 7698, 10,000 pounds?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 492
The account of Monarch Properties Services Limit, AIB, so 10,000 going out of
14:17:22 15
14:17:47 20
Monarch's account?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 493
Right. So the money so the money has been paid and there is a remittance
23
advice to you. And 4065 please, which is the cash receipts book for Frank
24
Dunlop and Associates Limited and that 10,000 isn't recorded in your book?
14:18:14 25
A.
Correct.
26
Q. 494
Is that all right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 495
Now Mr. Dunlop, sorry for delaying, really I think I probably want to ask you
29 14:19:06 30
where that 10,000 went, what you did with it? A.
Yes, are you asking me. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:19:07
14:19:22
67 1
Q. 496
Where that ten went?
2
A.
You're asking me, yes. Well, I either cashed it or it could well have been
3
negotiated elsewhere, it could have been lodged to somewhere else, but I cannot
4
definitively say that to you.
5
Q. 497
No. All right. And I have in fact four options, you know that it could have,
6
it didn't necessarily, that it could have gone into your AIB College Street
7
account, that's you and your wife, I think?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 498
And then there is another account in the INBS in Grand Parade and --
A.
Where?
11
Q. 499
INBS?
12
A.
Irish Nationwide Building Society, Grafton Street is it, no, what's the
14:19:44 10
13 14 14:19:59 15
address? Grand Parade. Q. 500
Is it Grafton Street, is it?
A.
Grand parade is the headquarters of INBS, that's what it is, yes. That's the
16
heading on the notepaper, is it?
17
Q. 501
I'm not looking at notepaper?
18
A.
All right.
19
Q. 502
These are options for possibilities as to where it went, which I'm not really
14:20:15 20
interested in, I am going to go through this one and the next two, if you can
21
tell me where, the question essentially is where the 30 grand that didn't go
22
into the Frank Dunlop and Associates account and book, account, what that was
23
used for?
24
A.
Sure yes. What's the other two.
Q. 503
The other two are the other two cheques?
26
A.
Oh the other two cheques you said you had four options.
27
Q. 504
No, no, sorry I beg your pardon. I have four options in relation to that ten
14:20:31 25
28
it might have gone into either of those two accounts and I have option in
29
relation to the other two cheques which are the other ten and other 15?
14:20:49 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:20:49
14:21:08
68 1
Q. 505
2
But my point is really is that they didn't go into your Frank Dunlop account and it amounts to 30,000 and it's monies coming from Monarch?
3
A.
Mm-hmm.
4
Q. 506
Of the 85, it's 30 out of -- it's 35 out of 50 not going through the company
5
account so maybe could you shorten things by letting me know where it would
6
have gone?
7
A.
Well it could either, in relation to your options, my options, it could have
8
either been used, some of it could have been used personally, some of it could
9
have been used for other purposes it could have been lodged into the INBS
14:21:26 10
account or and used, used for other purposes I just cannot definitively say to
11
you, but it's certainly, from a logic point of view, did not go into the
12
company account, were negotiated by me and obviously either into the personal
13
account or into INBS.
14
Q. 507
Or you might just have cashed it?
A.
It is quite likely that I might have cashed it, or cashed part of them.
16
Q. 508
All right. Of them and lodged?
17
A.
And lodged the remainder.
18
Q. 509
Some it have. But from what you said this morning you wouldn't have been
14:21:48 15
19 14:22:04 20
21
paying them to give them over to other people anyway, that wasn't a practice? A.
No.
Q. 510
No okay. And I think that those, those sums wouldn't have been declared for
22 23
tax purposes, is that right? A.
24
Well all, any receipts in relation to any lodgements made to any bank account partially or wholly have all been declared to the Revenue Commissioners but
14:22:26 25
that's a separate issue.
26
Q. 511
Would that be now though, but back then?
27
A.
Back then no but now.
28
Q. 512
I beg your pardon. But when they went, if some of this 30,000 went into either
29 14:22:40 30
your account with your wife or the INBS account then the revenue wouldn't have known? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:22:40
14:23:04
69 1
A.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy, that's my fault in misunderstanding you, yes correct. Yes.
2
Q. 513
All right. Now you said other purposes, what do you have in mind there?
3
A.
Well, I may well have used some of the money for other purposes in relation to
4
politicians, I cannot definitively say to you because as you know and as I have
5
given evidence to the fact already, that I had accounts from which I withdrew
6
money in cash for the purposes of giving to politicians.
7
Q. 514
Yes?
8
A.
Yes, this would include the -- this would include the INBS account. Yes.
9
Q. 515
And yes, and there is an account in Rathfarnham, there was?
A.
Yes but that, there was an account in Rathfarnham, yes.
11
Q. 516
But that's different is that what you want to say, you said but?
12
A.
No, no, that was used. It was part of what I described way back in May 2000 as
14:23:25 10
13 14 14:23:40 15
a war chest. Q. 517
War chest. Now sorry the same for the INBS account?
A.
Well, if I required money and it was easy accessible through the INBS account,
16 17
I withdrew cash. Q. 518
18 19
All right, would you have done it through your account with your wife in College Street, would that have been used for paying politicians as well?
A.
14:24:01 20
No. Unless I lodged money, I lodged a cheque and did not lodge the whole amount and kept some back in cash.
21
Q. 519
Yes.
22
A.
But I would not have withdrawn money the F and S account for the purposes of
23 24
paying politicians. Q. 520
14:24:18 25
Well, I can tell you certainly that in some instances there were lodgements where you did lodge amounts, in fact the very first option if, I will go into
26
it in a moment, but that account in College Street, the joint account of
27
yourself and your wife, a thousand, there is a lodgement on the 12th March 93,
28
a lodgement of a thousand?
29 14:24:33 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 521
So, if it was the ten it may that be you lodged one and kept nine in cash? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:24:41
14:24:45
70 1
A.
2
Yes, it could be, I wouldn't dispute it, the possibility, but I wouldn't definitively say so either.
3
Q. 522
No?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 523
And I think I read somewhere that you said that you had to have what you called
6
a stash of cash?
7
A.
Yes, depends where you read it Mr. Murphy.
8
Q. 524
Well I read it, I don't know whether it was interviews or evidence or was it, I
9 14:25:00 10
don't think, it wasn't your statement but it was your words? A.
Yes, so long as it was in this forum not in any outside forum.
11
Q. 525
Oh no, no?
12
A.
Right.
13
Q. 526
Sorry, do I understand does a stash of cash mean a bag of cash at home or does
14 14:25:13 15
16
it mean an account you can take cash out? A.
No, no, it means a bag of cash, ready, available cash for my use.
Q. 527
All right. Now could I -- just did you have any rule of thumb Mr. Dunlop that
17
if you got a figure from a developer, whether it's five thousand or 50,000,
18
that roughly, in rough terms a percentage of it would be kept for politicians?
19
A.
14:25:40 20
I think, sorry, I shouldn't say I think, I have given evidence to this effect before in another Module.
21
Q. 528
Yes?
22
A.
To the point that in negotiating a fee with a particular developer, builder,
23 24 14:25:54 25
client or whatever it happened to be, that certainly in my mind. Q. 529
Yes?
A.
I would know that a certain amount of money would be necessary, it was then up
26
to me to negotiate or diminish it as much as possible.
27
Q. 530
I perfectly understand that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 531
But the question I am in fact asking you is yes, in your own mind if you get
14:26:11 30
five or ten or 50 does Mr. Dunlop say to himself 'now you know, ten per cent or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:26:18
14:26:30
71 1
50 per cent of that is mine and the rest I will use for disbursements'?
2
A.
Yes, but you take it on each particular Module.
3
Q. 532
Yes?
4
A.
In some instances it was more than I anticipated and in some instances it was,
5 6
I was left with nothing. Q. 533
7 8
per cent or 40 per cent, I know it doesn't, can't apply in every case? A.
9 14:26:51 10
I am just wondering would there be a rule of thumb? You know, would it be ten
I always knew in the context of the people who approached me to, for development whether or not it was going to be required.
Q. 534
Whether or not what was going to be required?
11
A.
Monies were going to be required to politicians to get this through the system.
12
Q. 535
All right?
13
A.
Okay. I would never -- I don't think, I don't recall ever sort of saying well
14 14:27:05 15
16
ten per cent of this is going. Q. 536
Not to them now, I'm talking in your own mind?
A.
No, I am talking about my own mind. In my own mind I would never have said ten
17
per cent of this, it would depend on the negotiation with the politician who
18
asked for money.
19
Q. 537
14:27:21 20
Yes, but surely in your own mind when you were negotiating and we will come on to it in a second here as to what your fee would be, but when you are doing
21
that you must be taking into your, into account this particular Module, this
22
particular developer, the politician that it will be necessary to talk to and
23
to pay and you must build into your brief fee as it were the, whatever the
24
total of the disbursements will be as best you can calculate?
14:27:42 25
A.
In general terms, yes.
26
Q. 538
And could you tell me, what kind of -- how would you build that in?
27
A.
Well, since we are dealing with this Module let's stick with this Module.
28
Q. 539
All right?
29
A.
In this particular Module and my entry into the particular exercise, an awful
14:27:58 30
lot of work had already been done, I was aware that the work had already been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:28:01
14:28:26
72 1
done, albeit not from the company itself but from my own evidence and watching
2
what was happening, and given the circumstances in which I was introduced to
3
this particular client I probably would have said there was going to be some, I
4
am going to have to deal with some and there was a comment made to me in the
5
negotiation in relation to the fee by one of the individuals from Monarch
6
Properties to the effect that he knew that I had to do certain things.
7
Q. 540
Yes, and I will come to that Mr. Dunlop but I don't think that's quite what I'm
8
looking for, just and I was talking more in general terms, but for example if
9
we just go into this particular one just on this point for a moment, what was
14:28:49 10
in your head at the first meeting in relation to how much you'd have to pay
11 12
out, very approximately? A.
Well, gosh I couldn't -- I just -- I wouldn't hazard a guess, but I would not
13
deny on the other hand that the thought was going through my mind that this is
14
going to take, I am going to have to deal with one or two or three or four, I
14:29:11 15
16
don't know how many individuals to ensure that this gets through. Q. 541
17
All right. What I am getting back to is the 50,000 that went to the office account and the 35 thousand that didn't?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 542
I am just wondering in rough terms, this is all coming from Monarch, a
14:29:32 20
developer, and so in rough terms, of that you wouldn't have been paying
21
politicians out of the 50 that went to the office account?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 543
You'd be paying them out of the 35 that went elsewhere?
24
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 544
And what sort of, well maybe you can say, how much of it went elsewhere?
26
A.
Well only four of it went elsewhere.
27
Q. 545
Is that your evidence?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 546
Is that an unusual percentage, is that a very, very low percentage, four
14:29:43 25
14:29:58 30
thousand out of 85? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:29:59
14:30:11
73 1
A.
2
Yes, in the particular incidence it is, but you have to take the circumstances of the particular instance into account.
3
Q. 547
That's fine yes, but it's unusual?
4
A.
I would say it's at the lower end definitely.
5
Q. 548
Lower end, yeah. So, in other words then of the 85 you made 81 thousand?
6
A.
The company made 50 and I made 31.
7
Q. 549
The company made 50 and you made 31?
8
A.
Does that add up?
9
Q. 550
Yes and four for councillors?
A.
Yes.
Q. 551
All right. I think the same point Mr. Dunlop that I'm making here applies to
14:30:27 10
11 12
the other two payments. The other two cheques were cheques, if we go back for
13
a second to 491, we were looking at the first cheque for 10,000 and now in
14
respect of the other 10,000 and the other 15,000, they were two payments which,
14:31:55 15
I can go through it if you like, but as far as we can see, did not go through
16
the office account?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 552
And what you have just said in respect of the first 10,000 presumably applies
19 14:32:11 20
anyway, it's as you say, 31 thousand? A.
Correct.
21
Q. 553
Was yours, four of the 35 went to councillors?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 554
I think, I hope I'm right, I think that means I don't need to go into those
24 14:32:51 25
26
Mr. Dunlop in any further detail? A.
Okay.
Q. 555
Could I have 569 please. Mr. Dunlop on that page if you go down to line five
27
please, question 93, sorry these I should say are the interviews in May 2000
28
and Counsel for the Tribunal asked you as follows "You mentioned a success fee,
29
was it also agreed between yourself and Mr. Sweeney that in the event you
14:33:37 30
succeeded you would get a success fee? Answer: No, there was no success fee Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:33:42
14:33:59
74 1
involved on this particular occasion. Question: Right, so if you had
2
succeeded you would still have only got the 25. Answer:" that's the 25,000.
3
Answer: I was fairly confident in my own mind that this was going to be the
4
case. Question: That you weren't going to succeed. Answer: That it wasn't,
5
even if I did succeed I wasn't going to get any more?"
6
A.
Mm-hmm.
7
Q. 556
You told the Tribunal that there was no success fee, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, yes.
9
Q. 557
Now, if I could come on please to 4133. Now Mr. Dunlop I just want to ask you
14:34:48 10
for a second, could you just have a very quick look at that and I will come
11
back to it, 4133, it's an invoice, Frank Dunlop and Associates, to Monarch, 10
12
of April 93, invoice, in fact it's the one Mr. Redmond referred to this
13
morning, 12,100, I don't ask you to look at it in detail if you just take that
14
in for a second, and could we then please look at 4772 which is invoice number
14:35:24 15
955 for 31,371 Irish pounds?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 558
Isn't that right, do you see that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 559
All right. And then if we go on to 5697, which is an invoice, 6th December 93,
14:35:42 20
bearing the same number as the previous one, 955, for a different amount,
21
22,296.94?
22
A.
Mm-hmm.
23
Q. 560
And then we, and then the fourth one, the final one, is -- sorry 4839, and
24
that's an invoice 14 of December 93 invoice, number 1251 for 60,500. I want to
14:36:10 25
take the four of those invoices for one second and maybe you can explain them
26 27
for me, I don't understand where they fit into the whole pattern? A.
Okay. Right okay. Well, how do you mean you don't understand how they fit in.
28 29 14:36:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
I wonder Mr. Murphy if perhaps Mr. Dunlop might tell us at this
stage what agreement he says he entered into with the people from Monarch, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:36:38
14:36:45
75 1
because I assume these invoices followed on from that agreement in some shape
2
or form?
3
A.
Yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
he came to deal with Monarch, which presumably lead to invoices and payments
7
being made.
8
Q. 561
9
But at the moment we don't have evidence from Mr. Dunlop as to how
All right Chairman. Well then I wonder if -- yes, I wonder then could I just leave that for a second and come to it, move on to something else and come to
14:37:12 10
it when I'm dealing with his meeting with Monarch, if that's all right with the
11
Tribunal.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
invoices mean --
14:37:25 15
Q. 562
Yes it's just that if he is going to explain how, what these
You'd prefer to have it in the context of whatever --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
relationship with Monarch commenced and developed. That might be simpler.
19
Q. 563
14:37:47 20
Well, it would be easier if we were to have evidence about how his
Well I'd prefer then if I may to postpone this rather than to bring the other thing forward. And I will just be coming to what you are talking about now in
21
a moment, if I may. Mr. Dunlop, another topic, the question of payments to
22
councillors and if we look at 573 please and in fact before I just look at that
23
page Mr. Dunlop I just want to ask you how it is that in May 2000 in a private
24
interview with the Tribunal, this would have been after your public evidence in
14:38:50 25
April, a result of which I think was that you took a decision to come clean as
26
it were with the Tribunal and make full disclosure, would that be right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 564
So, in the course of a private interview in May 2000 you referred to the fact
29 14:39:19 30
that you had paid monies in this development, Cherrywood, to Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:39:19
14:39:40
76 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 565
Could you just explain to the Tribunal why you mentioned them as people you,
3 4
councillors you paid in this Module? A.
Yes. In the context of the private sessions at the time in 2000 certainly
5
those two particular politicians were in the forefront of my mind and as I said
6
to you earlier on this morning, subsequently, on foot of a review of the road
7
map, as I have referred to it on numerous occasions, and on examining all of
8
the circumstances in which this particular development took place, I realised
9
that that was wrong, and I, I changed it.
14:40:16 10
Q. 566
Yes. When you say, could you just please explain to me what you mean by when
11
you looked at the road map, I mean now in the context of what you are saying
12
about these councillors, what does that mean?
13
A.
14
Yes, well in relation to my involvement with this particular development and all that took place, my relationship with Monarch, how I was introduced to
14:40:36 15
Monarch.
16
Q. 567
Yes?
17
A.
What was required, what was being done by Monarch itself, who was doing it.
18
Q. 568
Yes?
19
A.
My particular view of what was happening, my recollection of what had occurred
14:40:48 20
as far as I was concerned and the fact that I had taken a view in relation to
21
what was happening without my involvement.
22
Q. 569
What was happening what?
23
A.
What was happening without my involvement, in other words the relationship
24 14:41:05 25
26
between others and politicians. Q. 570
Yes. Sorry is that what looking at the road map means?
A.
What looking at the road map means, looking at all of the motions, all of the
27
maps, all of the -- anything that is extant, either in my own documentation
28
which I had discovered to the Tribunal, or documentation that the Tribunal had
29
which they sent me, and viewing all of that and my relationship with Monarch, I
14:41:33 30
made the 2003 statement is it, 2003. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:41:37
14:41:54
77 1
Q. 571
No, I am thinking of the 2001, sorry October 2000?
2
A.
Yes, October 2000, I beg your pardon.
3
Q. 572
Perhaps I should have completed the picture though we discussed it earlier, May
4
2000 is your private interview and you name Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand, October
5
2000 is your first narrative statement and you name Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath,
6
correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 573
Isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes, that's correct.
Q. 574
And what I want to know Mr. Dunlop is how after the events of the public
14:42:02 10
11
hearings in April 2000 when you came in to come clean with the Tribunal you
12
make the mistake of telling the Tribunal that you paid Messrs Lydon and Hand?
13
A.
14 14:42:24 15
16
Well, I have already said to you that in the circumstances of the private interviews which were shortly after the public session.
Q. 575
Yes?
A.
In a wide review of all of the involvement that I had with Dublin County
17
Council over a period of six, five or six years, this is what I said, it was
18
wrong. And when I made my statement in 2001 or late in -- late in October
19
2000.
14:42:48 20
Q. 576
October 2000, yes?
21
A.
9th of October 2000 if my recollection is correct, I corrected that.
22
Q. 577
You didn't really correct it. You didn't refer to the fact that you had
23 24 14:43:04 25
mentioned two people incorrectly, you just simply name two different people? A.
Yes.
Q. 578
Mr. Dunlop what did you look at between May and October 2000 that reminded you
26 27
that it was Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath not the other two? A.
28 29 14:43:23 30
Well, it's a mixture of what I looked at in relation to the road map that I have outlined to you.
Q. 579
I interpret that as meaning motions and things, is that right?
A.
And my recollection and recall as to who I was dealing with and how I dealt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:43:27
14:43:39
78 1 2
with them in the particular circumstances. Q. 580
3
Mr. Dunlop, would you not have seen any of those motions before coming into the private hearings in May 2000, would you not have had a look at those?
4
A.
In the private --
5
Q. 581
Presumably before coming in to talk to Counsel for the Tribunal in private
6
hearing you would have seen the motions?
7
A.
No, I don't think so, I don't think I did.
8
Q. 582
You don't think you?
9
A.
No, in fact I am quite sure we didn't, we went into private session, at the
14:43:55 10
invitation of the Tribunal, to review my involvement with Dublin County Council
11
and politicians.
12
Q. 583
Yes?
13
A.
And during the course of the private interviews various, sorry let me just go
14
back two steps. I asked from this box in May 2000 that if the Tribunal
14:44:13 15
provided the road map, the documentation in relation to all of the developments
16
that had taken place in Dublin County Council within a given period, 1990 to -
17
from 1990 onwards, 1991 onwards, that I might be able to assist them.
18
Q. 584
You asked for that when you were in the witness box?
19
A.
It's in the transcripts.
Q. 585
Very good?
A.
And the Tribunal then invited me into private session and, I have spoken about
14:44:34 20
21 22
this before Mr. Murphy, but I mean, we then went into private session and
23
various questions were asked of me in private session some of which are
24
relevant, some of which are totally irrelevant and you have the transcripts now
14:44:55 25
as a result of a High Court case.
26
Q. 586
Yes?
27
A.
Of the private sessions.
28
Q. 587
Yes, but what you have just said I think was that in evidence in April or May
29 14:45:07 30
2000 you said that if to the Tribunal, that if you could get the road map and motions and things it would assist me to assist the Tribunal in being -- in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:45:07
14:45:23
79 1
trying to put the jigsaw together?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 588
Right. And did you get those?
4
A.
From the Tribunal, we got a huge amount of documentation from the Tribunal, not
5 6
all at once in a variety of tranches. Q. 589
7 8
to discuss, to talk, into private session? A.
9
recollection is correct, that if the Tribunal provided all of the documentation
11
in relation to developments in Dublin County Council. Q. 590
13 14 14:45:56 15
No, no sorry Mr. Murphy, unless I am making myself terribly unclear. What happened was in public session I suggested to the Tribunal, Mr. Hanratty if my
14:45:44 10
12
So, I presume you made sure that you got whatever you needed before you came in
You have said all that and I understood it Mr. Dunlop, could you move on from it please?
A.
Right.
Q. 591
You are just repeating yourself.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
No I think --
No, no, sorry Mr. Murphy.
19 14:46:00 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Wait now, I think Mr. Dunlop understood you to be wondering?
Yes.
22 23 24 14:46:13 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Why he hadn't or if he had checked that in May 2000 in May 2000.
Q. 592
Yes Chairman?
A.
He says he didn't.
Q. 593
In private session in May 2000 but he is saying in public session, in April or
27
May 2000 he asked the Tribunal for this documentation before coming in.
28 29 14:46:27 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Not before, not before May?
Not before May. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:46:29
14:46:32
80 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 594
He got it then between May and October.
I see, all right.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 595
When he gave a different account.
Then I misunderstood.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
the Tribunal in May 2000 when he came in.
14:46:45 10
Q. 596
But he didn't have it, we accept he certainly didn't have it from
All right. So the difference between May 2000 and October 2000 is that you had
11
documentation which refreshes your memory and reminds you that it was Mr. Fox
12
and Mr. McGrath and not Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand, is that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 597
Yes. And yes all right. What was the document, what was it in particular that
14:47:17 15
put on a little red light Mr. Dunlop, because you had just, you said in May
16
2000 you named two people for accepting bribes isn't that right, it's a serious
17
matter, isn't it?
18
A.
Oh, yes.
19
Q. 598
Yeah and what was it that between May and October 2000 that you looked at, that
14:47:33 20
21
said 'gosh I got that wrong, it's two other people'? A.
22
Yeah, well I never suggested and I'm not now suggesting that it was any particular document.
23
Q. 599
No?
24
A.
And what I prefaced my remarks to you earlier on by saying was that the
14:47:48 25
availability of all of the documentation reminded me of my relationship with a
26 27
variety of people in relation to particular developments. Q. 600
28 29 14:48:05 30
But Mr. Dunlop, I mean your private interviews, Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand are all over them?
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 601
So I mean, I wouldn't be able to distinguish in reading what I have from you to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:48:10
14:48:29
81 1
date, statements and private interviews, I wouldn't be able to distinguish
2
between Mr. Lydon, Mr. Hand, Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath it couldn't possibly have
3
told you, all four of them are so involved and named so often, I don't see how
4
looking at the whole lot would suddenly say it's not those two it's another
5
two?
6
A.
Well, I can't account for your understanding of that. What I am saying to you
7
is quite clearly that in the period in which I looked at a variety of
8
documentation supplied to me by the Tribunal and recollecting my relationship
9
with Monarch and what I knew was being done by Monarch themselves in relation
14:48:51 10
11
to lobbying, I made the statement I did on the 9th October 2000. Q. 602
12
All right. And without averting to the fact that it was in error that you named the two people back in May?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 603
Yes. Could I just remind you of what you said in May, 573, if we go down to
14:49:20 15
line 16 please, yes, you were correcting something, March 1993 that's about a
16
payment, line 17 "What my role in the context of coming in at that late stage
17
was in the minds of other people I do not know, I cannot account for, but you
18
can take it as certain that, notwithstanding the fact that they may have been
19
in receipt of monies from other people, I did give money to Lydon?
14:49:46 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 604
Hand was already on the books if you describe it?"
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 605
Question. What do you mean he was already on the books. Answer: He had got,
24
he was getting, he had got a substantial amount of money in 1991 question:
14:50:00 25
From you answer: Yes."
26 27
Isn't that very positive terms in which to be naming those two people without
28
looking at your road map?
29 14:50:14 30
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 606
How did you get it so wrong, Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:50:16
14:50:40
82 1
A.
Because these people were involved with me on a number of occasions.
2
Q. 607
If we move on to page 574, line 14 "Whatever Hand would have got from me, he
3
would have been getting on an ongoing basis but he was crucially involved. I
4
definitely gave money to Lydon in relation to Cherrywood?"
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 608
How can you, in May 2000, in a spirit of reconciliation with the Tribunal come
7
up with that language about these two gentlemen and a few months later say
8
that, a few months later decide that that was wrong?
9 14:51:02 10
11
A.
Six months later. That's what I did.
Q. 609
Yes?
A.
That's what I said. It's on record and my statement of 9th October 2000 is
12
also on record.
13
Q. 610
Yes. How do you rate your memory Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
Well, well increasing age, I suppose it happens to us all, but I would rate it
14:51:23 15
16
as reasonable. Q. 611
How do you explain in Monarch to take it as an example, but we have had
17
instances of it in other Modules, how do you explain not recalling that you got
18
as much as 85,000 for a, for your work in this connection and for saying that
19
you got 25,000, and how can you explain naming two wrong councillors?
14:51:57 20
A.
You can't get everything right, Mr. Murphy.
21
Q. 612
That's your explanation?
22
A.
Yep.
23
Q. 613
Does it mean you have got it right the second time?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 614
How do you know that?
26
A.
I am absolutely positive.
27
Q. 615
You see Mr. Dunlop, I can't understand how you can forget in May 2000 and
14:52:06 25
28
throughout 2000 when the serious matter of coming in here, presumably prepared,
29
and to talk about how much, among other things how much you got from the
14:52:34 30
developer, and how you get it wrong by 60,000 pounds in, and at the same time Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:52:48
14:53:08
83 1
say that you paid 50 pounds to a councillor or 250 or 300 or a thousand or five
2
thousand. I can't reconcile those two things. I don't understand how one can
3
be infallible and the other not?
4
A.
Well, you know I have just, what I have just said to you Mr. Murphy is what I
5
am saying in evidence. I have given you the history of it, you have re priced
6
the history of it and that is my evidence.
7
Q. 616
Would you agree that it's highly implausible?
8
A.
No, I would not.
9
Q. 617
And how can you, how many developments were you involved in, 20?
A.
Roughly. I think 18 if my memory serves me right but certainly in or around
14:53:27 10
11
20.
12
Q. 618
And how many councillors did you pay in the different developments?
13
A.
Well, I can't give you the exact number.
14
Q. 619
No, no?
A.
But certainly you are looking at something in the teens.
16
Q. 620
15 say?
17
A.
In or around.
18
Q. 621
Okay 20 different developments roughly?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 622
15 roughly councillors?
21
A.
Regularly.
22
Q. 623
Pardon?
23
A.
Regularly.
24
Q. 624
Yeah, no I understand the regularly, all of them regularly?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 625
They are kind of on a list?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 626
The same people cropping up?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 627
As I think you have said?
14:53:43 15
14:53:55 20
14:54:03 25
14:54:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:54:15
14:54:26
84 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 628
But when they don't appear, I can understand Mr. Dunlop if a particular
3
councillor appears in all, is paid in all 20 of them or some reason like he is
4
paid in the north side ones as opposed to the south or vice versa or two always
5
go together, but when you have gotten entirely different permutations and
6
different amounts of money I don't see how you can get that right from your
7
memory?
8
A.
Well --
9
Q. 629
Particularly, may I add particularly when you are getting 25,000 wrong by
14:54:42 10
11
60,000? A.
Well you know I can't -- I was just trying to make an analogy with you but
12
nothing comes immediately to mind, but I mean there are various things that you
13
recollect more vividly than others.
14
Q. 630
14:55:03 15
16
Now could you just go on with that please, what is it about this you recollect more vigorously than others?
A.
I will recollect for example particular events that took place in this room in
17
2000 and doubtless in five years time I will recollect this little interview
18
with you.
19
Q. 631
Yes Mr. Dunlop, but you couldn't possibly forget that a number of years
14:55:19 20
earlier, 92 to 2000, seven years earlier you picked up 85,000 pounds from this
21
developer and yet you told the Tribunal 25,000 and on the other hand that you
22
bribed Messrs Hand and Lydon when in fact you meant, when in fact it was two
23
other people, you could not get that information wrong?
24
A.
That's your view.
Q. 632
Do you think that there will be another view Mr. Dunlop?
26
A.
No, I don't think there can be another view. I have said what I have said.
27
Q. 633
You don't think there can be another view, does that mean you agree with me?
28
A.
No, I am saying that what I am saying is my evidence.
29
Q. 634
Why yes. But it's nonsense isn't it?
A.
That's about the fifth time during the course of this day that you've used that
14:55:44 25
14:56:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:56:04
14:56:24
85 1
phrase, Mr. Murphy.
2
Q. 635
But isn't it, Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
No, it's not nonsense.
4
Q. 636
I definitely gave money to Lydon in relation to Cherrywood in May 2000 and no
5
mention of him in October 2000?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 637
Mr. Dunlop, recently Ms. Olivia Mitchell gave evidence and -- I haven't got
8 9
page number, but if I can just say to you, read out? A.
Who, who did you say gave evidence.
Q. 638
Olivia Mitchell?
11
A.
Oh right yes, sorry.
12
Q. 639
Page 53 of day 645 please.
14:56:47 10
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
14:57:11 15
get a page up, it will come up on the screen then, if Mr. Dunlop wants to
16 17
Perhaps you would read out because it takes a couple of minutes to
double check. Q. 640
Page 53 and line 14, wait now probably I should go a little bit earlier, sorry
18
I will go up to line five and Mr. Quinn asks you.
19
"In that list at number 21 he identifies a payment to Olivia Mitchell, FG, 500
14:57:39 20
pounds cash, you see that?
21
Answer: I do.
22
Question: Is that the payment that you were referring to in 1992?
23
Answer: This is in 1992, he gave me a donation in 1992. Now my memory, I
24
never actually counted the money myself, my husband thinks it's less than that
14:57:56 25
and Frank Dunlop himself confirmed to me that he gave me 300 pounds" I'm at
26
line 12.
27
Question: When did he confirm that to you?
28
Answer: In the very early stages of the Tribunal.
29
Question: And in what circumstances.
14:58:13 30
Answer: He rang me up and asked me how much he gave me and I said before I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:58:18
14:58:35
86 1
spoke, he said I have a record of giving you 300 here pounds, and I said Frank
2
I thought it might be more than that, and I said no I have a clear memory it
3
was 300. My husband thought it was less. I'm not disputing it because I just
4
don't remember.
5
Question: But one thing you do dispute is that you sought it.
6
Answer: Absolutely."
7
Now this is somebody to whom you made a payment and she says, sorry first of
8
all did you ring her up in those circumstances?
9
A.
14:58:54 10
Could you invert the conversation, just invert the conversation and you will get to the reality, I am ringing her asking her how much I gave her, she is
11
ringing me to know how much she did get from me.
12
Q. 641
Sorry?
13
A.
That's not what she says, that's what I am telling you.
14
Q. 642
I'm --
A.
She is saying that I rang -- he rang me up and asked me how much he gave me.
16
Q. 643
Oh, yes, yes that's not what happened?
17
A.
Are you following me.
18
Q. 644
No, I'm not?
19
A.
But line 15.
Q. 645
Yes?
A.
Answer A "He rang me up and asked me how much he gave me and I said before I
14:59:10 15
14:59:21 20
21 22
spoke, he said I have a record of giving me 300 pounds and I said Frank I
23
thought it might be more."
24 14:59:39 25
Q. 646
Yes, sorry can I just take the slow route?
A.
I certainly never rang up Olivia Mitchell and asked her how much I had given
26
her. The --
27
Q. 647
All right that's fine?
28
A.
The panic was that politicians were ringing me up to know how much they got
29 14:59:50 30
from me. Q. 648
You didn't ring a single politician to know how much you had given them from Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:59:54
15:00:06
87 1
the time that this Tribunal was --
2
A.
I spoke to a number of politicians and we have had this out before.
3
Q. 649
Don't mind the fact that we have had it out before Mr. Dunlop, let's have it
4 5
out now? A.
Mr. Murphy please, let's proceed in a sort of a rational way. A number of
6
politicians rang me wanting to know how much money I had given them and in what
7
circumstances.
8
Q. 650
Yes. I follow?
9
A.
Right. Okay. This falls --
Q. 651
Did you ring anybody?
11
A.
This falls into the same -- I cannot say absolutely I did not ring anybody.
12
Q. 652
Come on, Mr. Dunlop. Look you are swearing to the Tribunal that you recall
15:00:22 10
13 14
politicians ringing you? A.
Yes.
Q. 653
To know had you paid them?
16
A.
Correct, yes.
17
Q. 654
And they wanted to know that like anything?
18
A.
Desperately.
19
Q. 655
Now you remember that clearly?
A.
Yes, I do
Q. 656
Are you telling all, whoever is here, that you cannot say whether or not you
15:00:35 15
15:00:43 20
21 22
rang a single politician to check with them did you pay them, how much,
23
whatever?
24
A.
15:00:59 25
spoke with a large number of politicians in relation to their request as to how
26 27
much they had got from me. Q. 657
28 29 15:01:22 30
I did not ring any politician specifically and say how much did I give you. I
Now be that as it may, Ms. Mitchell says "He said I have a record of giving you 300 here pounds" she says that you said you had a record?
A.
Yes.
Q. 658
I'd like to know what you say about that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:01:26
15:01:37
88 1
A.
I never said it, that's hearsay, she is saying this to you.
2
Q. 659
That is not hearsay Mr. Dunlop. That is her saying something and you are being
3
asked to, you are being asked to comment on it?
4
A.
Correct. Correct.
5
Q. 660
It's something, a conversation that she says took place between you and her,
6
that is not hearsay, now would you please answer the question?
7
A.
Right. No I did not.
8
Q. 661
So she makes that up. That you used the word record?
9
A.
Correct. I have no --
Q. 662
Why would she do that?
11
A.
I have no idea.
12
Q. 663
No. All right. But anyway, she has made it up, because you didn't use the
15:01:52 10
13 14
word record in your conversation is that right? A.
15:02:11 15
16
The only record of payments to politicians are those made by cheque and they were few and far between as the evidence to this Tribunal has seen.
Q. 664
Yes. Now the question was Mr. Dunlop, are you saying that you did not use the
17
word record, did you not say in your conversation with Ms. Mitchell I have a
18
record of --
19
A.
I couldn't have said it.
Q. 665
I didn't ask you could you say it?
21
A.
No, I did not say it, that's the answer, I said it to you twice.
22
Q. 666
You didn't say it. Fine.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 667
And I presume you can't think of a reason why she'd make it up?
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 668
And of course it would make complete sense Mr. Dunlop, wouldn't it, if you were
15:02:30 20
15:02:45 25
26 27
able to go to a record, whatever form that record might take, and say it was
28
Ms. Mitchell one day blank pounds, somebody else another day etcetera, that
29
would make, that would absolutely shore up your recollection of what you paid
15:03:14 30
and what you received, isn't that right if you had a record? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:03:17
15:03:30
89 1
A.
That's a hypothetical statement, if it did -- if it did, yes is the answer.
2
Q. 669
I'm not saying you did?
3
A.
No, I am just pointing out it's a hypothetical statement.
4
Q. 670
It's not hypothetical Mr. Dunlop. If --
5
A.
It is.
6
Q. 671
If you had a record that set out every bit of money you paid to politicians it
7
would be understandable that you could in 2000 or 2001 or today say how much
8
you paid each of them?
9
A.
Yes is the answer.
Q. 672
Without it, it's not understandable.
11
A.
To you it may not be.
12
Q. 673
But to you it is?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 674
And surely Mr. Dunlop, when you were making payments to people you get in a big
15:03:44 10
15:04:04 15
sum from, either you get it in before or after, you get in a big sum,
16
substantial sum or small sum from a developer, surely you need to keep check
17
yourself, if you are making payments perhaps at different times of the year so
18
that you know how much your pot of gold is being diminished by, are you
19
listening to me or have you gone and wandered off?
15:04:26 20
A.
I beg your pardon? Would you like me to repeat the question you asked.
21
Q. 675
Well you look as if you are making notes or something Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
I'm not making notes, no I am not.
23
Q. 676
Would you answer the question please?
24
A.
Yes. If you refrain from making comments other than asking questions I will
15:04:44 25
answer the question. The answer is no. I would not need to keep a record in
26
relation to - I knew.
27
Q. 677
Yeah?
28
A.
And I knew what I gave to people and I knew what I was asked for.
29
Q. 678
Yeah?
A.
Is that clear.
15:04:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:04:56
15:05:16
90 1
Q. 679
It's perfectly clear Mr. Dunlop. You knew that, you knew if you paid
2
Ms. Mitchell 300 or somebody else 3000 but you get it wrong when it's 25,000
3
from Monarch to become 85,000?
4
A.
25,000 as the agreed fee from Monarch on an audit which turns out to be very
5
correct notwithstanding your comments earlier this morning about my accountants
6
getting it, making a balls of it, 25,000 as the agreed fee, 60,000 as per the
7
accounts of Frank Dunlop and Associates.
8
Q. 680
I said no such thing this morning?
9
A.
Well you went as far as saying it.
Q. 681
Mr. Dunlop, on some day?
11
A.
On Sunday? Or some day --
12
Q. 682
On some day either someone approached you or you approached someone about you
15:06:08 10
13 14 15:06:28 15
becoming involved in Cherrywood? A.
That is correct.
Q. 683
Please tell me what that date was and who it was, whether you approached
16 17
somebody or somebody approached you? A.
Well I certainly didn't approach anybody Mr. Murphy. I was approached by a
18
representative of Monarch, Mr. Sweeney, by telephone, and I met Mr. Sweeney and
19
Mr. Sweeney explained to me the circumstances in which he and his company found
15:06:57 20
21
themselves in relation to a development in Cherrywood. Q. 684
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I'm sorry to interrupt you there, I do want to go into all of
22
that but I'm sorry the first question is, I just want to get precisely the
23
beginning?
24
A.
Yeah, yeah sure, that's understandable.
Q. 685
And it was Mr. Sweeney who phoned you?
26
A.
Mr. Sweeney who contacted me, yes.
27
Q. 686
Sorry did he phone you or what did he do?
28
A.
The only way that I can help you there Mr. Murphy is that again I have a record
15:07:12 25
29
of a meeting with Mr. Sweeney whom I did not know I hasten to add, I had never
15:07:34 30
met before, Mr. Sweeney contacted me, rang me and I went to see Mr. Sweeney. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:07:42
15:07:57
91 1
Q. 687
2
Mr. Dunlop, why did you keep records of meeting when you didn't need records of payments or receipts?
3
A.
Well, you know you like to make sure that you keep appointments.
4
Q. 688
Anyway your record, what was the contact Mr. Sweeney made with you?
5
A.
Mr. Sweeney contacted me and I met him.
6
Q. 689
No by phone or what?
7
A.
Yes, by phone.
8
Q. 690
He phoned you?
9
A.
I cannot say to you that there was any other, if what you quite understandably,
15:08:12 10
I don't mean to be offensive, if what you'd like to imply was somebody was an
11
intermediary or contacted me and said go and see Eddie Sweeney in Monarch,
12
that's not the case. I was contacted by Eddie Sweeney by phone.
13
Q. 691
How do you know by phone?
14
A.
Well there is no, I hadn't met Mr. Sweeney prior to that.
Q. 692
Can you show me, is there a telephone attendance or is there a message to ring
15:08:31 15
16
him or anything like that?
17
A.
Well, I don't have one here.
18
Q. 693
Have you seen any, have you any documentary evidence of a phone call?
19
A.
No, the only documentary evidence I have is my first recorded meeting with
15:08:45 20
Mr. Sweeney is on the --
21
Q. 694
9th March?
22
A.
The 8th March 93.
23
Q. 695
8th March 93?
24
A.
5 o'clock on 8th March 93, Monday.
Q. 696
Just go back a second. Anyway your evidence is he phoned you, Mr. Sweeney of
15:09:00 25
26
Monarch?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 697
You had never dealt with Mr. Sweeney before?
29
A.
No.
Q. 698
Had you ever dealt with anyone in Monarch before?
15:09:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:09:19
15:09:30
92 1
A.
When you say dealt, on a business basis.
2
Q. 699
Well, what do you think?
3
A.
Well, you used the word.
4
Q. 700
You tell me the basis on which did you have dealings, I don't know?
5
A.
Well I certainly, I had met Mr. Phil Monahan either socially or by accident.
6
Q. 701
I see. But business dealings?
7
A.
Oh, business dealing, no.
8
Q. 702
No business dealing?
9
A.
No.
Q. 703
With Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
With Mr. Monahan, no.
12
Q. 704
Or any of the other Monarch people?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 705
Before March 93?
A.
Not to my knowledge, no.
16
Q. 706
What does 'not to your knowledge' mean?
17
A.
Well, no is the answer.
18
Q. 707
Thank you. Sorry Chairman I'm looking for a reference and I just seem to have
15:09:46 10
15:09:54 15
19
lost it. Sorry Mr. Dunlop I'm looking for a reference there and I just can't
15:11:07 20
find it, I might get it and I might come back to it. Sorry, prior to the 8th
21
March 93, prior to the phone call from Mr. Sweeney no dealings, no business
22
dealings with anybody in Monarch?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 708
With Monarch or anybody in Monarch?
A.
No.
Q. 709
All right. At that stage, now March 93, you are very heavily involved in the
15:11:22 25
26 27
Development Plan and on behalf of developers and landowners in relation to
28
rezoning, isn't that right?
29 15:11:41 30
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 710
And you would at that stage I imagine have had quite a reputation for success Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:11:45
15:12:30
93 1 2
in, and assistance in relation to rezonings would that be right? A.
3
I can't account for other people's opinions but I would say that's probably right, yes.
4
Q. 711
All right. When Mr. Sweeney phoned you what did he say to you?
5
A.
He wanted to meet me about Cherrywood and I agreed to meet him.
6
Q. 712
What time of the day or afternoon was the phone call?
7
A.
Gosh, I can't tell.
8
Q. 713
How many days before the meeting?
9
A.
I would imagine -- sorry I shouldn't say I would imagine. I don't know to be
15:12:55 10
11
honest with you. Q. 714
12
Have you any, have you much of a recollection of the phone call, I mean do you remember it well or --
13
A.
Well, I do recall being contacted by phone by Mr. Sweeney.
14
Q. 715
Yes?
A.
I do recall going to see Mr. Sweeney.
16
Q. 716
Just leave that for a second, just the phone call?
17
A.
Yeah sure.
18
Q. 717
All right. Would you tell me, this is a difficult, this is a work, this is a
15:13:06 15
19 15:13:23 20
21
project that gets you 85,000 ultimately? A.
Yes.
Q. 718
So could you just tell us and the phone call is out of the blue, you don't
22
expect it, you have had no hint of it or expectation of it or anything like
23
that?
24
A.
15:13:40 25
No, no I have had no hint of it but I was aware of what was going on in Dublin County Council in relation to Cherrywood because I had met and had discussed,
26
had spoken with various representatives, two representatives of Monarch who
27
were lobbying at the time.
28
Q. 719
Who were they?
29
A.
Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Phillip Reilly.
Q. 720
Yes?
15:13:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:13:57
15:14:14
94 1
A.
Yeah, they were in Dublin County Council on a variety of occasions, Mr. Lynn
2
more than Mr. Reilly I hasten to add but I knew what was going on and I had
3
spoken to them about Cherrywood and what was going on in Dublin County Council.
4
Q. 721
5
Now can I just, because I don't want to go into that aspect of it just at the moment in detail?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 722
But you did, you knew what was going on in, with, in relation to Cherrywood
8 9
before Mr. Sweeney phoned you? A.
Yes.
Q. 723
Is the phone call out of the blue?
11
A.
Yes I would say so, yes.
12
Q. 724
Had you some hint from Mr. Reilly or Mr, who did you say Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
Mr. Lynn, yeah.
14
Q. 725
That they might be getting in touch with you.
A.
No I don't think I had, and I have, I find it extraordinary that nobody in
15:14:24 10
15:14:38 15
16
Monarch seems to know why I was hired or what I was doing in relation to
17
Monarch, so why would I have any hint from Mr. Lynn that I was going to be
18
hired because he said in his statement that he knew nothing about it.
19
Q. 726
15:15:03 20
Okay. And can you just, in a word or in a sentence tell me what was your knowledge of where Cherrywood was, where Cherrywood was on the first of March
21
93?
22
A.
Well, it was in --
23
Q. 727
1st of March 93?
24
A.
The 1st of March 93.
Q. 728
Well, sorry, I beg your pardon the time of the phone call?
A.
As and from the 1st of March 93, well there was a lot of controversy about
15:15:13 25
26 27
Cherrywood, there was a lot of discussion Mr. Murphy by politicians local and
28
otherwise in, at the council, not in the chamber, but at the council and in the
29
environs of the council about the difficulties that were being faced in
15:15:39 30
relation to the zoning application that Monarch wanted as distinct from what Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:15:47
15:16:16
95 1
they might get. There was a very, very carefully professionally organised and
2
orchestrated campaign against the Cherrywood Development by Monarch, organised
3
locally, some of those people were present in the council and it's environs, I
4
saw them there. Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly alluded to them, told me who they were
5
and generally speaking the whole Cherrywood issue was controversial.
6
Q. 729
7 8
Yeah lovely, okay. And was the, was what they were looking for -- I'm sorry I don't want to go into details but was there a problem for Monarch at this time?
A.
9
Yes, what Monarch -- I find this quite difficult to deal with logically in the sense that you don't want to deal with some aspects it have but let me answer
15:16:48 10
you.
11
Q. 730
No only just a short, a little summary I want?
12
A.
And if there is something that is not in accord with as you see it please tell
13
me. The situation was Monarch made an application as all developers or
14
builders had to do in relation to the Development Plan.
15:17:04 15
16
Q. 731
All right?
A.
What they had applied for and what they were likely to get were two different
17
things. Internally in Monarch there seemed to have been some dispute as to
18
whether or not what they had applied for originally could be achieved with some
19
pressure or whether or not a compromise was going to have to take place.
15:17:23 20
Q. 732
Did you know all this before talking to Mr. Sweeney?
21
A.
No, I did not know all of that.
22
Q. 733
But Mr. Dunlop this is what I am asking for, I only want your state of mind and
23
knowledge about all of this before seeing Mr. Sweeney, I just want it in a word
24
or a sentence like Monarch, the thing was in trouble, the project, you know?
15:17:42 25
A.
26
You see Mr. Murphy how difficult it is to answer your question when you leave it so open ended.
27
Q. 734
I don't think it is Mr. Dunlop?
28
A.
My understanding is simple, Cherrywood was on the books in Dublin County
29 15:17:58 30
Council, it was highly controversial and was going to continue to be highly controversial notwithstanding anything that happened by anybody. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:18:01
15:18:09
96 1
Q. 735
Okay, thank you?
2
A.
Is that clear.
3
Q. 736
Thank you. Did you know that from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and chats or did you
4 5
know if yourself from other people? A.
6 7
politicians in the council and from Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. Q. 737
8 9
Oh no, no, what I knew about Cherrywood was from a mixture of people including
Before the phone call from Mr. Sweeney had you given any advice to Monarch formally or informally or anyone on behalf of Monarch?
A.
15:18:32 10
I might have suggested various things to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, but in fact I probably did, if I was to, if I was to lean in any direction I would say, yes,
11
I probably did.
12
Q. 738
All right we'll take it you did?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 739
Was one of your suggestion that maybe you'd come on board?
A.
No I never suggested that.
16
Q. 740
Or significant like it?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 741
All right. I think I can take it now that the phone call wasn't out of the
15:18:45 15
19 15:18:55 20
blue Mr. Dunlop, is that right? A.
21
Well, it was out of the blue in the sense, I knew what was going on, like I knew about other developments in Dublin County Council.
22
Q. 742
You were half expecting the phone call?
23
A.
No, I don't think so. And I didn't get telephone calls from every developer or
24
builder who had an application before Dublin County Council even though I knew
15:19:15 25
26
what was going on. Q. 743
Was it unusual for you to get a phone call, to get a contact, a communication
27
from the actual developer as opposed to an intermediary in relation to these
28
developments. I mean you had to be introduced to them, sorry you had to come
29
to them in some way, was it usually through an intermediary or was it from the
15:19:34 30
client itself? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:19:35
15:19:55
97 1
A.
2 3
think of ones that were from the client and ones that were from intermediaries. Q. 744
4 5
Well it varied. I am just trying before I answer that, I am just trying to
Simplify it, give me an example of another developer that contacted you directly, that there wasn't an intermediary, like here?
A.
Well, we have had the recent ones where there was an intermediary for example
6
the last couple of Modules, where there was a specific intermediary who
7
introduced various clients, brought clients to me on that basis.
8
Q. 745
9 15:20:15 10
Sorry Mr. Dunlop you misunderstood me, here in this one in Cherrywood there is no intermediary. Mr. Sweeney gets on the phone to you?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 746
I want an example of another development?
12
A.
Oh, Sorry yes.
13
Q. 747
Where it was the client, it was the company, you know it was whoever they are,
14
who contacted you rather than intermediary, you have 20 developments, another
15:20:33 15
developer that contacted you directly?
16
A.
Yes, I think one we have just recently dealt with, Ballycullen Farms.
17
Q. 748
All right?
18
A.
Mr. Chris Jones rang me.
19
Q. 749
Mr. Jones rang you?
A.
Yes, but transpired subsequently that somebody else had introduced or had put
15:20:43 20
21
the notion in Mr. Jones' head but Mr. Jones --
22
Q. 750
That's fine. The phone call came?
23
A.
I can't account for who might have been suggesting that I be hired.
24
Q. 751
That's another question Mr. Dunlop but in Ballycullen, is it?
A.
Ballycullen yes.
Q. 752
Mr. Jones made -- he invited you, he was the person who phoned you and said
15:21:00 25
26 27
would you?
28
A.
He asked me to come and see him, yes.
29
Q. 753
At the instigation of?
A.
As it transpired, though I have no absolute proof of this, that Mr. Liam Lawlor
15:21:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:21:16
15:21:24
98 1 2
had suggested it to him. Q. 754
3
All right. Of the 20 developments how many did Mr. Lawlor introduce you to, roughly?
4
A.
I'd say a good few.
5
Q. 755
Five?
6
A.
Definitely five.
7
Q. 756
Ten?
8
A.
Maybe not quite ten.
9
Q. 757
Nine?
A.
I think after the introduction by law lord to various developments and other
15:21:33 10
11
developers began to realise that I was as you described it yourself, some
12
moments ago, successful, they began to make contact with me.
13
Q. 758
14
but the, Mr. Lawlor was the person who introduced you in something between five
15:22:00 15
16
I'd just like to know who they are now Mr. Dunlop because that's interesting,
and ten developments? A.
17
I don't think I have an accurate figure on that but I can go down through the list of them.
18
Q. 759
We might do that later?
19
A.
Yes of course, yes.
Q. 760
All right. And Mr. Lawlor introduced you in say between five and ten of them,
15:22:07 20
21
and because then you had success they began to come on the phone themselves to
22
you?
23
A.
Well some of them yes, and let me.
24
Q. 761
Who apart from Mr. Jones who was introduced by Mr. Lawlor?
A.
Well, let me deal with it on the basis of the more recent Modules where I have
15:22:24 25
26
given evidence to the effect that a named person brought various developers or
27
builders to me, to meet me. One was in the Lissenhall Module that we have just
28
concluded.
29 15:22:45 30
Q. 762
Would that be Mr. Collins?
A.
Correct. Then you have the Walls Module in Kinseally which is not yet Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:22:52
15:23:01
99 1
concluded.
2
Q. 763
Would that be Mr. Collins?
3
A.
Correct. There is one that has not been opened yet, but is on circulation for.
4
Q. 764
Who introduced you there?
5
A.
Mr. Collins.
6
Q. 765
That's three for Mr. Collins?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q. 766
How many more did Mr. Collins introduce you?
9
A.
I would say probably one or two more.
Q. 767
All right?
11
A.
But to go back to your original question --
12
Q. 768
No, no, sorry before do you, Mr. Dunlop, just I am not tying to you this but
15:23:12 10
13
Mr. Collins is about five developments and Mr. Lawlor is between five and ten,
14
did you put that closer to the ten or closer to the five?
15:23:27 15
A.
16 17
You know I'd prefer to just look at it, look at the list and give you an accurate figure.
Q. 769
All right. So, anyway that would be somewhere between ten and 15, would the
18
remainder be people like Mr. Sweeney where the company gets in touch
19
themselves?
15:23:41 20
A.
Yes and for example you asked me for another example.
21
Q. 770
I did?
22
A.
Yes, right, we'll say Mr. Joe Tiernan of Tiernan Homes, he rang me directly.
23
Q. 771
Mr. Tiernan?
24
A.
But it subsequently transpired without either gentlemen.
Q. 772
Yes?
A.
Indicating that it was the case, that in that instance as well Mr. Lawlor had
15:23:58 25
26 27
suggested to Mr. Tiernan that he --
28
Q. 773
Well, now is that in your five?
29
A.
Yes, that would be in my mind
Q. 774
Sorry, no, no?
15:24:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:24:12
15:24:17
100 1
A.
In my mind for Mr. Lawlor.
2
Q. 775
In the five to ten?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 776
All right?
5
A.
But notwithstanding that here is Mr. Tiernan ringing me.
6
Q. 777
Like Mr. Jones?
7
A.
Correct, like Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Jones.
8
Q. 778
And Mr. Sweeney?
9
A.
Yes, the reason I mentioned --
Q. 779
So did Mr. Lawlor introduced you, he was behind the invitation from
15:24:28 10
11 12
Mr. Sweeney? A.
13 14
As I said in my statement it subsequently transpired that Mr. Lawlor said to me you know, you have been to see Eddie or you know, you have been, so --
Q. 780
No, wait now that wouldn't mean he was responsible for bringing you in?
A.
No, no, but he may have recommended me to him.
16
Q. 781
All right, is that in your five to ten from Mr. Lawlor?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 782
All right wait now, okay you have Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Collins are the two people
15:24:48 15
19 15:25:01 20
21
who introduce you to developers and landowners? A.
Yes.
Q. 783
Is there another intermediary, is there a third person who makes those kind of
22 23
introductions? A.
24 15:25:25 25
but generally that was the, that was the method. Q. 784
26 27
15:25:42 30
Do you think you could possibly forget if there was a third person who made introduction, who was responsible for getting you into one of these things?
A.
28 29
Offhand I can't -- offhand I can't think of another, may do in a moment, but --
I mightn't immediately have remembered, I mightn't immediately recall now in a particular instance like this as you have taken this route.
Q. 785
All right but Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:25:42
15:25:52
101 1
Q. 786
2
The general things in the developments was you were introduced to the company by Mr. Collins or Mr. Lawlor?
3
A.
The general thing, yes.
4
Q. 787
Now name one development where that didn't happen and it was the company got on
5
the phone or whatever they did to make contact with you, without having been,
6
had it suggested to them by Mr. Lawlor or Mr. Collins?
7
A.
Yes, offhand, I can't.
8
Q. 788
Can I take it that the 20 or so developments that you were involved in, you
9 15:26:15 10
were introduced to all of them by Mr. Collins or Mr. Lawlor? A.
11
Or the developer made contact with me which subsequently transpired that they had been advised.
12
Q. 789
I think that's covered by the question?
13
A.
Okay fine.
14
Q. 790
Is that right, all of them -- I hesitate to say all of them, Ms. Dillon says
15:26:33 15
St. Gerard Bray may not have come into that category?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 791
And Fox and Mahony?
18
A.
Fox and Mahony we have never established whether or not Mr. Mahony was advised
19 15:26:51 20
21
by another politician other than Mr. Lawlor Q. 792
All right.
A.
But the reason Mr. Mahony made contact with me, this is reprising evidence in
22
another Module, Mr. Murphy, but I don't have any difficulty about that.
23
Q. 793
I'm sorry about that Mr. Dunlop?
24
A.
No, I don't have any difficulty about that, the reason Mr. Mahony contacted me
15:27:02 25
and I met him with Mr. Noel Fox was because Mr. Mahony said that GV had made a
26 27
mess of it, so there was a discussion -- a discussion between -Q. 794
Sorry Mr. Dunlop, Chairman.
28 29 15:27:18 30
CHAIRMAN:
I think we'll have to stick with Monarch only because we have had
all this evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:27:19
15:27:33
102 1
Q. 795
Sorry, that's probably my fault Chairman. Mr. Dunlop, if I can come back to
2
just the 20 though with the exception of say two, the two I have just
3
mentioned, 18 were introduced by Mr. Collins and Mr. Lawlor, that's fact?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 796
And if necessary, if we don't know already you can identify the ones which, who
6 7
introduced you to which? A.
But you must contextualise Mr. Murphy, I don't know when the contact is made
8
with me initially, Mr. Sweeney doesn't say listen I am ringing you because Liam
9
Lawlor told me to or Chris Jones doesn't ring me and say listen I am ringing
15:27:51 10
you because Liam Lawlor told me to or PJ Walls doesn't say listen I am ringing
11
you because Tim Collins asked me. Tim Collins rings me and says I want to
12
bring somebody to you. In the Lawlor context it's you discover subsequently
13
that Mr. Lawlor has been responsible by virtue of two things. One, Mr. Lawlor
14
looks for money or secondly Mr. Lawlor tells you something that you know he has
15:28:18 15
16
either been in discussion with the principal or had advised the principal. Q. 797
17 18
you? A.
19 15:28:34 20
Mr. Lawlor looks for money is one of the ways of finding out that he introduced
Correct, Lawlor would come along and say you know, I advise that you be brought on this there and can I have.
Q. 798
Is there a kind of a finder's fee?
21
A.
If that's the way you'd like to describe it.
22
Q. 799
An introducer's fee?
23
A.
Introducer's fee.
24
Q. 800
Is there one in this case?
A.
Sorry Mr. Murphy I need to - the kidneys are not as good as they used to be.
15:28:46 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
All right we'll rise for five minutes.
28 29
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AGAIN AS FOLLO
15:29:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:29:23
15:36:40
103 1 2
A.
Thank you Chairman.
3 4
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry Chairman.
5 6
Mr. Dunlop, I just want to interrupt that for one second because the reference
7
I was looking for a little bit earlier, I think I have just found, and I was
8
asking you a short while ago, you have never dealt with Mr. Sweeney before no,
9
had you ever dealt with anyone in Monarch before, when you say dealt on a
15:37:01 10
business basis, what do you think -- anyway, Question: You tell me the basis
11
on which you have dealings. Answer: I don't know. I met Mr. Phil Monahan
12
social see by accident, Question: I see business dealings. Answer: Oh
13
business dealing no. Question. No business dealing Answer: No Question.
14
With Mr. Monahan. Answer: With Mr. Monahan, no. Question: Or any of the
15:37:21 15
other Monarch people Answer: No. Question: Before March 93.
Answer: Not
16
to my knowledge, no. Question: What does not to your knowledge mean? Answer:
17
Well, no is the answer.
18 19
Page 572 please. Page 572 is private interviews Mr. Dunlop and at the end of
15:37:56 20
the page if you look at page, line 27 "I was paid 25,000 in two tranches, one
21
of 15 and one of then. I had got other monies from Monarch previously but that
22
was purely from public relations work, it had nothing whatsoever, it was purely
23
the public relations aspects of various things and I then kept in touch with
24
Richard Lynn. They had to reduce it down to an easy facility phrase, they had
15:38:19 25
their men in place"
26
I think you were going on to another things. You said a few minutes ago you
27
had no dealings before 93 with anyone from Monarch?
28
A.
Mm-hmm, yes, sorry.
29
Q. 801
Not at all?
A.
I don't know what that refers to.
15:38:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:38:34
15:39:05
104 1
Q. 802
All right?
2
A.
Show that to me again, go back to the previous page.
3
Q. 803
Yes, 572. If like to have a look at it there, line 27.
4
A.
Yes, I see it. Yes, I don't know what that means, previously, monies received
5
previously from Monarch? That doesn't ring a bell with me.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, did you do any other work for Monarch besides --
No, I don't.
9 15:39:15 10
CHAIRMAN:
Even subsequently?
11
A.
I don't recall doing any other work for Monarch.
12
Q. 804
Mr. Dunlop how would you say to whoever was asking you these questions in May
13
2000 "I got other monies from Monarch previously but that was purely from
14
public relations work, it was purely the public relations aspect and I then
15:39:45 15
16
kept in touch with Richard Lynn" how would you make it up? A.
I am just wondering is there a confluence here of reference. I got other money
17
from Monarch in relation to this -- I have no recollection -- I do not believe
18
I did any other work for Monarch.
19
Q. 805
You got other money from Monarch in relation to this, what is that?
A.
In relation to Cherrywood.
21
Q. 806
That's not other money?
22
A.
No and if you turn the page again, continue on. "It had nothing whatsoever, it
15:39:58 20
23
was purely the public relations aspect of various things and I then kept in
24
touch with Richard Lynn" no. I don't know. Unless the -- it refers to -- I
15:40:20 25
have no recollection of doing any other work for Monarch.
26
Q. 807
Mr. Dunlop you have to explain this, I mean we are not stupid?
27
A.
Did I suggest you were?
28
Q. 808
But you have told counsel to the Tribunal in May 2000 -- I mean --
29
A.
But there is no evidence that I have done any work.
Q. 809
Mr. Dunlop, these are your words?
15:40:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:40:43
15:41:01
105 1
A.
I know, yes.
2
Q. 810
They are your words, we don't need evidence. Your words are evidence, you are
3
studying law. Your words are evidence Mr. Dunlop. Now please explain to the
4
three Members of the Tribunal what that means when you swore a few moments ago?
5
A.
I have already said to you two minutes ago I do not know what it means because
6
in the context of Monarch my involvement with Monarch related to Cherrywood. I
7
have no -- I do not recall any other work with Monarch for which I was paid by
8
Monarch, in relation to public relations or any other matter, I'm aware of
9
Monarch, was aware of Monarch as a company, I was aware of Phil Monahan, I said
15:41:30 10
I met Phil Monahan on a number of occasions, socially or otherwise and that's
11
it.
12
Q. 811
Unless and until the Tribunal produces a document, what you call evidence?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 812
To show that that's not right?
A.
Well you have asked me the question and I am saying to you I don't know what
15:41:47 15
16 17
that means. And -Q. 813
5972 please. Sorry, I said 59, I beg your pardon 7972. Your diaries,
18
Mr. Dunlop, Thursday 1st of November, I believe it's 1990 as opposed to 91
19
that's up there for reasons that we went into it before I think?
15:42:35 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 814
9.30 The Square, what does that mean?
22
A.
Presumably it means The Square in Tallaght.
23
Q. 815
Any significance?
24
A.
I don't think so, when was The Square opened.
Q. 816
No idea, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
It was around that time I think.
15:42:44 25
26 27 28 29 15:42:52 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
It was December 1990.
Q. 817
Had you anything to do with the square Mr. Dunlop?
A.
No nothing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:42:52
15:43:17
106 1
Q. 818
That's fine, all right. Now if we go on to - sorry 7973 please, 1990, Tuesday
2
October 23rd your diary, opening of Tallaght Town Centre. I don't know is it
3
8.30 FF HQ that's a different thing, no opening of Tallaght is at 11.30, is
4
that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 819
11.30 opening of Tallaght Town Centre that's your diary, what does that mean?
7
A.
Obviously I was invited to the opening.
8
Q. 820
All right. So do you remember that?
9
A.
I remember being there, yes.
Q. 821
Remember being there?
A.
I don't think I paid too much attention to the actual opening, I was there with
15:43:31 10
11 12
another person for the specific purpose of meeting or introducing that other
13
person to a politician.
14
Q. 822
And Monarch were involved with the Tallaght centre were they?
A.
Yes, they were, yes.
16
Q. 823
All right, had you anything to do with Monarch was that why you were there?
17
A.
No, I had nothing whatsoever to do with Monarch.
18
Q. 824
Were Monarch developers of Tallaght?
19
A.
In conjunction with somebody else, maybe they hadn't joined with somebody else
15:43:55 15
15:44:11 20
at that stage but certainly they were the developers of Tallaght, yes.
21
Q. 825
Who invited you?
22
A.
Who invited me? That I cannot say specifically. I can't say who invited me, I
23 24 15:44:38 25
cannot say. Q. 826
No idea?
A.
Well no sorry I cannot say who invited me that doesn't mean I don't have an
26
idea.
27
Q. 827
I beg your pardon?
28
A.
I was there, I have already said to you I was there with another person for the
29 15:45:01 30
purpose of introducing that other person to a politician, I believe the suggestion that we be there at the opening came from Liam Lawlor to this other Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:45:10
15:45:28
107 1
gentleman and myself, that's why I can't say to you who invited me, I don't
2
remember getting an invitation, I don't remember being specifically invited but
3
we were there, but the purpose that we were there was to meet another
4
politician.
5
Q. 828
Now, okay, were you a guest?
6
A.
Well certainly if Mr. Liam Lawlor suggested we were there we were a guest, we
7 8
were guests in some fashion. Q. 829
9 15:45:44 10
would you be his guest at this? A.
11 12
Well Mr. Lawlor suggested that we be there for the purposes of meeting another politician, and we went there for that purpose.
Q. 830
13 14
How could, I don't understand, how would Mr. Lawlor be inviting you to, how
Who would have been sponsoring, who would have been issuing invitations to the opening?
A.
Presumably Monarch.
Q. 831
Monarch?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 832
Had Mr. Lawlor anything to do with Tallaght?
18
A.
That I can't say whether he had or not.
19
Q. 833
Okay?
A.
I have no evidence to that effect.
21
Q. 834
You would say Monarch were the people who were hosting the opening?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 835
And Mr. Lawlor contacted you, is that it and said come along?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 836
And the purpose being to meet somebody?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 837
A politician?
28
A.
What year again is this.
29
Q. 838
It's 19 -- I don't know.
15:46:00 15
15:46:06 20
15:46:18 25
15:46:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:46:28
15:46:32
108 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
90.
2
Q. 839
1990?
3
A.
Yes okay.
4
Q. 840
Yes?
5
A.
Yes I think I'm right, I think I have got it right yes.
6
Q. 841
You think you got what right?
7
A.
That it was suggested we be there by Mr. Lawlor, I don't recollect getting an
8
invitation from Monarch, but it was suggested by Mr. Lawlor that we be there,
9
so Mr. Lawlor organised it in some fashion or other.
15:46:50 10
Q. 842
Would that constitute an invitation from Mr. Lawlor?
11
A.
Yes, I presume in summary, yes.
12
Q. 843
When I asked you a moment ago who invited you you hadn't a clue?
13
A.
Well, I certainly don't recollect getting an invitation, one gets an invitation
14
specifically in paper form by, to an event or a function, don't recollect ever
15:47:09 15
getting that, my recollection is that I was, another person and I were
16
recommended to be there for the purposes of meeting another politician.
17
Q. 844
Who was the other person that Mr. Lawlor --
18
A.
Well he hasn't been named in this. Do you want me to write down.
19
Q. 845
Yeah sure?
A.
Do you want me to write down the name of the other politician to meet just to
15:47:31 20
21 22
expedite matters. Q. 846
Chairman.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
15:47:47 25
All right you can write it down but we're not concerned with this
at the moment.
26 27
(Mr. Dunlop writes down names)
28
A.
And this is the company for which he worked and this is the politician.
29
Q. 847
Sorry the other person, Mr. Lawlor is suggesting that you and this other
15:48:12 30
politician who worked for a company should attend? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:48:15
15:48:27
109 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 848
Is that right?
3
A.
Mr. Lawlor suggested to this other person and myself that the Tallaght Town
4
Centre was opening, that we should be there with, and a convenient method of
5
meeting this other politician would be at that.
6
Q. 849
And was this another one of these introductions like -- I'm just sorry
7
Mr. Dunlop maybe I am missing somebody, Mr. Lawlor asked, suggested that you
8
would turn up to meet a politician?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 850
You have written his name down?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 851
But there is a second name?
13
A.
That's the other person I am talking about, that the other person and I be
15:49:06 10
14 15:49:14 15
present. Q. 852
Oh, I beg your pardon?
16
A.
Is that okay?
17
Q. 853
That you and the other person?
18
A.
Yes, went at Mr. Lawlor's.
19
Q. 854
To meet the politician?
A.
Recommendation and that it would be, it would be convenient to meet this other
15:49:20 20
21
politician in a semi social context, which was the opening of the Tallaght Town
22
Centre.
23
Q. 855
And the kind of convenience is what?
24
A.
The convenience of the running into this politician and saying by the way I am
15:49:45 25
X, Y or Z and I would like to talk to you about A, B, C.
26
Q. 856
That you are, sorry that you are the person who would --
27
A.
No, the other person, the first name on the list.
28
Q. 857
Yes. Sorry, that -- yes that it would be vehement for him to meet the
29 15:50:04 30
politician? A.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:50:06
15:50:20
110 1
Q. 858
And what, say he's --
2
A.
And say to him that he was proposing or being involved in something or other
3
and that this would be a convenient method of talking to this politician in an
4
informal context.
5
Q. 859
Is this another development?
6
A.
Yes, it is but it is not a Module.
7
Q. 860
No, no fine I'm not going any further with it?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 861
But it's another Module?
A.
No, no it's not another Module.
11
Q. 862
Another development, in the Development Plan?
12
A.
No, no, it was not in the Development Plan.
15:50:30 10
13 14 15:50:40 15
CHAIRMAN: Q. 863
At the rate we are going it might become one.
Sorry Chairman.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
At the rate we are going we it might become another one.
18
Maybe get back to the meeting, Mr. Dunlop's introduction to Monarch in relation
19
to Cherrywood.
15:50:56 20
21
Q. 864
Apparently Chairman, Mr. Dunlop it may be another Module, is that right?
22
A.
No, no, it's not another Module, it is not listed as a Module, it has never
23 24 15:51:17 25
been a Module and it is outside the Development Plan. Q. 865
How do you decide all these things?
A.
Well sorry, I am just operating on the basis of the documentation that is
26
provided to me by you, not by you, I mean you collectively, this institution, I
27
mean it is not listed as a Module, I have never seen it listed as a Module, I
28
have never been asked to give evidence in relation to it as a Module, provide a
29
narrative statement in relation to it as a Module and it has never appeared on
15:51:41 30
the horizon either in this screen or any other screen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:51:44
15:51:50
111 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 866
4
All right we'll just leave.
That's fine, I don't want to be taken as accepting any of that Mr. Dunlop because I have no idea?
5
A.
You can take it as definite from me.
6
Q. 867
That's fine from you?
7
A.
Yes, from me.
8
Q. 868
The final thing I just want to ask about, why were, I can understand why --
9
sorry Mr. Lawlor wants to introduce the person with the development from to the
15:52:03 10
politician, but I can't see why you are there?
11
A.
Because I am advising, I am advising the person named first on the list.
12
Q. 869
Okay?
13
A.
I have been recruited by the person first on the list and his company to advise
14 15:52:24 15
them, Mr. Lawlor is obviously advising them as well, as per usual. Q. 870
Okay. I thought that possibly that reference in the diary might be --
16
A.
What?
17
Q. 871
Are you all right, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
Yes, I'm fine.
19
Q. 872
I thought the reference in the diary might have meant that it was connected
15:52:41 20
21
with Monarch, with Monarch and? A.
22 23
the opening of Tallaght and I am there in a different context. Q. 873
24
dealings with Monarch prior to March 93? A.
27 28 29 15:53:38 30
But we are left with you in private interview with what we've read out about monies previously and what you've said earlier this afternoon about no business
15:53:07 25
26
Understandably, yes I can understand your interpretation of that, it refers to
Yes, I fully understand why you asked the question Mr. Murphy there is no problem.
Q. 874
Oh, yes, now I'm sorry, before the short break a moment ago Mr. Dunlop, I was asking you, you said something about I think Mr. Lawlor, if he -- I can't remember specifically, if he might, I think, look for money? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:53:41
15:53:49
112 1
A.
Yeah, yes.
2
Q. 875
And I was saying finders fee and we were talking about that and for introducing
3
you to a project?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 876
And I think I was, had just asked you maybe did that happen in Cherrywood?
6
A.
No it did not.
7
Q. 877
Did Mr. Lawlor ask you for money in Cherrywood?
8
A.
No he did not.
9
Q. 878
Did you pay him money in Cherrywood?
A.
No I did not.
11
Q. 879
Did anybody else pay him in Cherrywood that you are aware of?
12
A.
I am not aware that they did.
13
Q. 880
Yes. And were, I think 18 out of the 20 developments it was you were
15:54:01 10
14 15:54:33 15
16
introduced to by Mr. Lynn, by Mr. Collins or by Mr. Lawlor? A.
Yes.
Q. 881
And I don't think you have, with is the exception of the two, those two the
17
other two, are there any other developments where in fact it wasn't either of
18
those that introduced you or brought about the introduction it was the
19
developer him or herself?
15:54:50 20
A.
Yes and again there is one other, it's name escapes me, it's on the north
21
side -- and I'm never quite sure whether this particular individual, he never
22
admitted to it, came to me, you know as it were ab initio on his own, of his
23
own volition or that another politician other than Liam Lawlor or another
24
individual other than Tim Collins had recommended him to me, it is a Module
15:55:22 25
26
that will be coming up. Q. 882
27
So you followed up the phone call from Mr. Sweeney with a visit to him in his offices?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 883
In Harcourt Street, what was the station?
A.
In Harcourt Street, yes.
15:55:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:55:48
15:56:17
113 1
Q. 884
All right. And that meeting was on what date, is that the 8th of March?
2
A.
Yes my record of a meeting with Mr. Sweeney is at 5 pm on Monday the March the
3
8th. Now -- yes, Monday March 8th.
4
Q. 885
Monday March 8th a meeting with Mr. Sweeney?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 886
And that was the first time you entered that office?
7
A.
Yes I don't believe I was ever in that office before.
8
Q. 887
How would you have been if you hadn't done any work for them?
9
A.
Yes, correct.
Q. 888
It was the first time you met Mr. Sweeney?
11
A.
Certainly the first time I met Mr. Sweeney.
12
Q. 889
And the first time you had anything to do with Cherrywood?
13
A.
Other than as I have outlined to you, meeting representatives of Monarch in the
15:56:35 10
14 15:56:50 15
lobby of Dublin County Council. Q. 890
16
And can I be clear of that, that was completely informal, it was social, it was casual, you weren't retained or anything?
17
A.
No, no, this was Richard, Mr. Lynn and Phillip, Phil Reilly.
18
Q. 891
All right?
19
A.
Just talking among ourselves and explaining our various problems or
15:57:09 20
21
commiserating one another over various problems. Q. 892
22
And I think you indicated that in either your statement or your interviews, yes and who was present at that meeting Mr. Dunlop?
23
A.
Just the two of us.
24
Q. 893
And what time did the meeting take place at?
A.
My diary says 5 o'clock.
Q. 894
5 o'clock. Now there is an important thing that I just want to clear up at
15:57:45 25
26 27
this stage Mr. Dunlop, because it was causing me some confusion in reading your
28
statements and your private interviews?
29 15:57:59 30
A.
Yeah.
Q. 895
You know that an important motion took place in May of the previous year, in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:58:05
15:58:16
114 1
the council in relation to Cherrywood, don't you?
2
A.
In May of 92.
3
Q. 896
Yes?
4
A.
Yes, which motion now?
5
Q. 897
I want to get this absolutely straight?
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 898
At this stage, because otherwise we'll waste an awful lot of time?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 899
In May 92 there was a motion, sorry there were a number of motions?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 900
I am not going to go into them in detail, Mr. Lydon proposed the manager's
15:58:33 10
11 12
motion for in relation to, in relation to which would provide for the density
13
of houses per acre for the Monarch lands?
14 15:58:54 15
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 901
Just, I'm sorry I don't, maybe I don't think you need to refer to anything just
16 17
at the moment? A.
18 19 15:59:05 20
correct. Q. 902
It's very important, it's May 92?
A.
Well on foot of you saying it's very important that's why I want to get the
21 22
I just want to get the time line right, it's important the time line is
time line right, yeah I have it. Q. 903
And I won't go into the detail but there were 11 motions that day the first one
23
was that Mr. Lydon's motion in relation to the lands was defeated 35 to 33, and
24
it ended up with Mr. Barrett's motion which provided for one house per acre for
15:59:35 25
the lands. Now that was in May 92 and I just want to make sure we're all
26 27
talking about the same thing? A.
28 29 15:59:59 30
Yeah, yes. I see -- my time line is suggesting that on the 27th of May 1992 there was consideration of DP 92/44 and there was 11 motions.
Q. 904
Yes.
A.
There was a motion in the name of Lydon and McGrath. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:00:02
16:00:12
115 1
Q. 905
2 3
I think I have said all that Mr. Dunlop. There is no need for you to repeat it to the Tribunal?
A.
4
No, I just want to satisfy myself that we are talking about the same thing, yes correct.
5
Q. 906
May 92, you are clear on that?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 907
All right. Now you were not on board, you were not on Cherrywood's board on
8 9
that date? A.
No.
Q. 908
You didn't come, and I don't mean board of a company, you weren't on the team?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 909
You didn't come in until March 93?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 910
Because you do say in your interviews, sorry in your statements and in your
16:00:21 10
16:00:34 15
interviews on a number of occasions you do say you came in the end of 92, early
16
93 etcetera and that's fine?
17
A.
Yes, that's in private sessions.
18
Q. 911
No, no. Yes private sessions and in your statement you talk about?
19
A.
Yeah, correct.
Q. 912
Between the end of 92 and March 93 and there is other evidence along those
16:00:47 20
21
lines, but certainly at one stage you say that you must have got your dates
22
wrong and you, because of Mr. Barrett's motion and that you must have been on
23
the team earlier than you thought, and I didn't, wasn't sure what the position
24
was, but you have now confirmed --
16:01:10 25
A.
No, I wasn't on board.
26
Q. 913
In May 92 you were not there and you weren't there until March 93?
27
A.
No, I was not on the board. I was aware of what was going on because I was
28 29 16:01:23 30
there. Q. 914
But that was a social casual business?
A.
Yes, correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:01:24
16:01:51
116 1
Q. 915
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 916
All right. Chairman what would you like to do?
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
won't be long I take it with Mr. Dunlop tomorrow.
7
Q. 917
I am just wondering, we can sit for another 15 minutes or so, you
I will Chairman.
8 9 16:02:06 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 918
You will? How long.
I don't know.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: Q. 919
Could you give the Tribunal some --
We have somebody fixed for 10 o'clock who will take an hour.
14 16:02:16 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
All right and then how long approximately would you be then to
finish Mr. Dunlop? Q. 920
18
I would have thought I will take the day, there is a witness specially fixed at 4 o'clock tomorrow.
19 16:02:42 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 921
22
We'll sit for another 20 minutes or so.
Now Mr. Dunlop, the meeting, the afternoon, Monday, the only people at that meeting are yourself and Mr. Sweeney, whom you haven't met before?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 922
And he was the person who phoned you, but I think you said it was -- sorry, I
16:03:17 25
think you said it was set up by Mr. Lawlor, that Mr. Lawlor was responsible for
26 27
mentioning your name to Mr. Sweeney? A.
28 29 16:03:30 30
Well, what I have said is that Mr. Lawlor said to me subsequent to the meeting that he knew that I had --
Q. 923
That the meeting had taken place?
A.
Yes and from that I -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:03:32
16:03:48
117 1
Q. 924
All right?
2
A.
I, legitimately or otherwise, deduced that, deducted that, deduced that he had
3 4
been responsible in some fashion or other for the suggestion. Q. 925
5
I think if you are deducing that I think it's possibly, and your experience in other cases, it's probably the case, is that right?
6
A.
Yes, I would accept that.
7
Q. 926
But he hadn't said anything to you about the fact of that?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 927
All right. Now 571 please, line 19 your answer in private interviews
16:04:18 10
Mr. Dunlop, is "The introduction was facilitated by Liam Lawlor with Eddie
11
Sweeney at Monarch's offices in Harcourt Street" which is what you have said "I
12
met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam Lawlor at that office. Sweeney explained to
13
me" etcetera etcetera?
14 16:04:37 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 928
Now what does that mean?
A.
Well, as I have said in my statement, I went and I spoke to Eddie Sweeney,
17
there was no other person present, I did meet with Mr. Sweeney and other
18
representatives of Monarch on various occasions with Mr. Lawlor present.
19
Q. 929
16:05:10 20
No, no, the first meeting Mr. Dunlop, you said a moment ago that you were there on your own with Mr. Sweeney?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 930
And this is the introduction, so on, you said I met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam
23
Lawlor at that office where you are saying that in fact at that first meeting
24
you met Mr. Lawlor?
16:05:24 25
A.
I know that's what it says. What I am saying is there was no other person
26
present with Mr. Sweeney when I met him first, yes I did meet with Mr. Sweeney
27
and Mr. Lawlor and others on various occasions in that office, in the board
28
room, not in Mr. Sweeney's office in particular, but in the board room.
29 16:05:52 30
Q. 931
Yes. So what you said there to the Tribunal in private interview is wrong?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:05:52
16:06:11
118 1
Q. 932
Mr. Lawlor was not present at the first meeting?
2
A.
He was not present at the first meeting, he was present at other meetings.
3
Q. 933
How many meetings did you have with anybody in relation to Monarch, in their
4
offices first of all, how many times did you go to their offices after March,
5
after this date?
6
A.
7
Well I can't give you an exact figure but I think they are all documented in, certainly in my diary.
8
Q. 934
Yes?
9
A.
And I can't put a figure on it.
Q. 935
Roughly?
A.
Let's count, that's the easiest thing to do, isn't it?
16:06:25 10
11 12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, just for the moment Mr. Dunlop was it more than six or seven?
Yes, certainly more than six or seven, certainly.
16:06:53 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well that will do?
Sorry just for clarification, there were certainly more than six or seven
18
meetings, it doesn't necessarily mean all of them were with Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
19
I had meetings with Richard Lynn, I had meetings with one of which Mr. Phil
16:07:12 20
Monahan was present and other board members of Monarch, but yes certainly
21
Chairman, more than six.
22
Q. 936
So you had more than six meetings in Monarch's office, is that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 937
The first one with was Mr. Sweeney on his own and other times with different
16:07:40 25
people?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 938
Page 576 please. Question 12 towards the bottom of the page.
28
"Question: Did you ever meetings in the offices of Monarch in relation to
29
this, apart from the initial meeting with Eddie Sweeney and Liam Lawlor?
16:08:08 30
Answer: After that first one. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:08:11
16:08:26
119 1
Question: Yes.
2
Answer: Yes I did, I was there on one other occasion, again in the presence of
3
Eddie Sweeney, Liam Lawlor and a gentleman I think whose name I mentioned
4
already Murray. Noel Murray, yes, and to which meeting Phil Monahan made a
5
fleeting visit, just came in stood in the room, said we are getting there,
6
we'll get there, we'll get what we want, I have been looking after things and
7
then he walked out" then something about Mr. Lynn participating in that
8
meeting. So, according to you Mr. Dunlop, you only had two meetings in
9
Monarch's offices, and for the second time according to this, Mr. Lawlor was at
16:08:50 10
11
the first one? A.
Right. Let me just short circuit this if I may and if it's acceptable to you,
12
the only time I ever met Mr. Sweeney was in his office, I did not meet
13
Mr. Sweeney in Dublin County Council, I have never met Mr. Sweeney socially,
14
the only place I met him was in Harcourt Street and while I was stopped doing
16:09:22 15
so I was on, in the process of counting the number of entries in my diary to
16
Mr. Sweeney and they are as the Chairman asked me, they are certainly more
17
than, they are certainly more than six or seven.
18
Q. 939
So anyway the point being anyway?
19
A.
Yes I met him more than twice.
Q. 940
In his office?
A.
In his -- I never met him anywhere other than his office. I met other people
16:09:48 20
21 22
from Monarch elsewhere but I never met Mr. Sweeney.
23
Q. 941
You are absolutely clear about that?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 942
And on the one hand you only had two meetings in his office but then you are
16:09:57 25
26
telling us now that you had more than six meetings?
27
A.
As per my diary.
28
Q. 943
Yes. Why did you say to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty, Mr. Hanratty and
29 16:10:17 30
Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 when you were coming clean with the Tribunal, why did you say to them that you only had two meetings in Monarch offices and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:10:21
16:10:32
120 1
Mr. Lawlor was at the first one?
2
A.
That I cannot tell you.
3
Q. 944
It wasn't true, isn't that right?
4
A.
No it wasn't accurate at that point, no and I did not, had not trawled through
5 6
my diaries at that stage. Q. 945
7
But sure you would have known, wouldn't you when you met them twice or more than six times, isn't that right?
8
A.
You might.
9
Q. 946
All right. So Mr. Dunlop then the conversation that you had with Mr. Sweeney,
16:10:57 10
presumably I don't know, you asked him why you were there or he said -- sorry,
11
what did he say to you on the phone, did he ask you would you come on board or
12
he wanted to take your advice?
13
A.
No he wanted to talk to me, he wanted -- and while I cannot say definitively he
14
wanted to talk to me about Cherrywood I think it would be, you know -- he
16:11:23 15
either said it or I assumed that it was Cherrywood he wanted to talk to me
16
about.
17
Q. 947
About what, did he say like any more detail?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 948
He'd like to talk to you maybe he said about Cherrywood and you said yes and
16:11:37 20
you arranged a meeting?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 949
You went in to him in his office?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 950
And how long of a conversation, how long did the meeting last?
A.
I can't tell you that, it was certainly wasn't short, but it certainly wasn't
16:11:45 25
26
excessively long either but I mean half an hour or more.
27
Q. 951
Half an hour, okay. So what did he, and what did he say to you?
28
A.
What he said to me, he explained the background to what he wanted to talk to me
29 16:12:25 30
about, he wanted to talk to me about Cherrywood and the difficulties that they were facing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:12:27
16:13:09
121 1
Q. 952
Mm-hmm.
2
A.
And in relation to Dublin County Council, he was of the view that they would
3
get some type of zoning but that it might be less than what the company
4
anticipated and if they weren't careful they might get nothing. I'm not saying
5
they were his exact words, I am giving you the culture of the meeting. And --
6
Q. 953
The what of the meeting?
7
A.
The culture of the meeting, what the subject of the discussion was Cherrywood
8
and he was outlining the difficulties that they were facing with Dublin County
9
Council, that there was some internal difference of opinion about whether or
16:13:44 10
not the company should persist in seeking to achieve what it had originally
11
looked for or whether or not they should compromise and I was left with the
12
impression that the opinion of the owner of the company, Mr. Monahan, was that
13
the company should persist or however difficult it was going to be or fight the
14
battle in the Development Plan, for what it had originally looked for, as
16:14:29 15
distinct from compromising. Now, he did say to me that Richard Lynn and
16
Phillip Reilly had extensive contacts with councillors and that they had done a
17
good job, that they had -- which was something I knew already myself because I
18
knew of the extent of the contact that they had with the councillors. And that
19
he thought I might be of help in, I think I said in my statement, in
16:15:22 20
unscrambling some of the confusion that had taken place among, at council
21
level, as a result of various things that happened up to that point which
22
brings into focus the reference that you made earlier on, to a motion in 1992,
23
which had been defeated, notwithstanding the fact if my recollection is
24
correct, that the motion on which the councillors were voting was recommended
16:15:57 25
by the manager for a specific zoning and a specific number of housing units per
26
acre, but nonetheless low and be hold, but maybe in a spirit of consistency
27
with which councillors operated in Dublin County Council they voted against the
28
manager and the motion was lost, and so another attempt to re introduce the
29
matter or to have the matter re introduced had to be undertaken.
16:16:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:16:35
16:17:21
122 1
We talked about the contact that Richard Lynn had and that Phillip Reilly had,
2
there was a comment about the extensive contact that Mr. Phil Monahan had with
3
politicians, and if the company wasn't careful the whole thing could collapse,
4
they would end up with nothing. Neither one house to the acre nor four houses
5
to the acre or a district centre or anything. Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that
6
he knew of my relationship with Dublin County Council and that I had been
7
successful in other matters and used words to the effect that you know, you
8
have to do what you have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council.
9 16:18:08 10
We had a discussion about costs, about fees and we agreed 25,000. I didn't --
11
yes I did, I mentioned that. Yes, I think that, as I say the culture and tone
12
of the conversation was along those lines, and would I, would I undertake to
13
help out and I said I would. That's the meeting I think.
14 16:19:21 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right Mr. Murphy, I think we'll leave it there and take it up
tomorrow morning. Mr. Dunlop needn't be here until when?
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
morning to facilitate Mr. Gilmore.
16:19:39 20
I think 11 o'clock, the Tribunal is sitting at 10 am tomorrow Mr Gilmore is facilitating the Tribunal by
coming at ten tomorrow and his evidence is expected to be concluded by 11.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
All right. So it's 11 o'clock for Mr. Dunlop.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
Yes, not before 11 o'clock.
16:19:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
10 o'clock for us.
27 28
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY
29
WEDNESDAY 14TH JUNE 2006 AT 10 AM.
30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
10:03:02
10:38:06
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
1ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. GV Wright, please.
9 10:38:13 10
MR. KENNEDY: Chairman, I make the usual application on behalf of Mr. Wright.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Sure.
13 MR. THOMAS GV WRIGHT, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
14
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
10:38:24 15
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Wright.
A.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. Wright.
21
A.
Good morning.
22
Q. 2
Mr. Wright, I think you were a member of Dublin County Council from 1985 to
19 10:38:43 20
23 24 10:38:55 25
1993 and thereafter a member of Fingal County Council, isn't that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 3
I think you were the whip of the Fianna Fail members of Dublin County Council
26
at some stage or the leader of the Fianna Fail members of Dublin County
27
Council.
28
A.
I was whip.
29
Q. 4
What period was that?
A.
Probably after the local elections of '91.
10:39:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:39:15
10:39:26
2 1
Q. 5
So between June, July of '91?
2
A.
Yeah, I think so.
3
Q. 6
Until, when did you cease -- were you a whip right up until December '93?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 7
So between June '91 and December '93 you were the whip of the Fianna Fail
6
councillors in Dublin County Council?
7
A.
Yes, I think you're right.
8
Q. 8
Now, I think you were written to in February of this year and again in March.
9
I hope I'm right in saying that, sorry.
If I could have 2339 in connection with lands at Cherrywood.
10:39:46 10
Isn't that
right? And you were asked a series of questions in relation to those lands and
11
you were asked to provide a statement.
12
solicitor faxed through to the Tribunal, a statement which is at 8492 of the
13
brief.
14
received approaches from Phil Monahan, Richard Lynn and Noel Murray in relation
10:40:10 15
I think yesterday evening your
And in that statement I think you say at paragraph one that you had
to the Cherrywood lands. Isn't that right?
16
A.
That's correct
17
Q. 9
And these are the people that you had contact with in relation to the
18 19 10:40:16 20
Cherrywood lands? A.
Correct.
Q. 10
I think you then went on to say that you had limited contact with Phil Monahan
21
having been approached by him on one or maybe two occasions. Most of my
22
contacts would have been with Richard Lynn whom I would describe as a lobbiest
23
on behalf of the Cherrywood project.
24
lobbying on behalf of other projects other than Monarch related projects?
10:40:35 25
Did you know Mr. Lynn in the context of
A.
At later times.
26
Q. 11
Yes.
27
A.
In later times, yes.
28
Q. 12
But in the period that you were the whip of the Fianna Fail councillors you
29 10:40:49 30
You would have known him in that period?
would have associated him with the Cherrywood project and Monarch in particular? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:40:49
10:41:01
3 1
A.
Basically, yes.
2
Q. 13
You say Mr. Lynn would have approached me on numerous occasions seeking my
3
support for the Cherrywood project and I also recall that he visited my
4
constituency office in Malahide on at least one occasion. Can you recall that
5
occasion and the circumstances under which he came?
6
A.
I can.
7
Q. 14
When did the meeting take place?
8
A.
I'm not sure.
9
Q. 15
And at whose invitation did the meeting take place?
A.
I'm sure it was Mr. Lynn's.
11
Q. 16
And was it by prior appointment?
12
A.
I'm sure it was.
10:41:09 10
13 14 10:41:21 15
I remember the meeting took place.
I think I mentioned later on that I would have known another
director of the company at the time as well. Q. 17
Yes.
A.
I would have thought if I remember correctly, that he made proposals of some
16
Can you recall what was discussed at the meeting?
sort of the ...
17
Q. 18
Of Cherrywood, in relation to Cherrywood?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 19
You go on to say that Mr. Noel Murray whom I mentioned I would have known
10:41:37 20
through mutual involvement in local community matters in the Portmarnock and
21
Malahide area, would have sought my support for the Cherrywood proposals on
22
behalf of Monarch.
23 24
So really what you are you are suggesting there I think is, that the situation
10:41:47 25
was that you were being lobbied by Mr. Murray who was with Monarch, but a local
26
supporter, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Monaghan.
Is that correct?
27
A.
That would be correct. Yeah.
28
Q. 20
And you go on then at 8493 to say that "In an earlier statement 17th of
29 10:42:08 30
November 2004 in the context of another module you identified a payment from Monarch in the sum of 1,000 pounds."
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:42:10
10:42:19
4 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 21
That's what you say you had received by way of a payment during the 1992
3
General Election.
4
Isn't that right?
I think you were a candidate in the 1992 General Election.
5
A.
I was.
6
Q. 22
Now, I think that's exactly what you also told the Fianna Fail Inquiry. Isn't
7
that right?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 23
If we could have 2295, please. I think you advised the Fianna Fail Inquiry
10:42:31 10
that in the 1992 General Election campaign, you had received a sum of 1,000
11
pounds from Monarch and that the donation was unsolicited political donations
12
for election and constituency purposes, isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 24
In a moment we'll come to this but I think the reality is that you received a
10:42:48 15
further 2,000 pounds in December of the same year.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 25
That you did not bring to either the attention of the Tribunal or that inquiry.
18 19 10:42:57 20
Is that correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 26
You go on to say that "I also acknowledge this particular payment in my
21
discussions with Fianna Fail and it's confirmed in the report issued by Fianna
22
Fail." And this report is also part of the brief of documents that relate to
23
this particular module.
24 10:43:07 25
Just in relation to that. I think in a prior module you also discovered that
26
there was a payment that you had received I think was it from Mr. Jones?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 27
That you hadn't brought to the attention of that inquiry also at that time?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 28
Since that evidence have you been contacted in any way by the inquiry or by
10:43:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:43:25
10:43:39
5 1
Fianna Fail in relation to your edition at the time?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 29
Then you go on to say that "I have also noted that in the list of payments
4
provided by Mr. Noel Smyth on behalf of Phil Monahan, with a letter of 22nd of
5
June 2000 there are two further payments for 300 pounds paid to me on the 13th
6
of June 1991, and a further sum of 2,000 pounds paid on the 16th of December
7
1992.
8
Elections expenses in the December 1992 payment is described as being in
9
respect of Senate Election expenses."
300 pounds described in the list of payments is in respect of the Local
10:44:01 10
11
It's fair to say that when you came to compile this statement you had the brief
12
and you knew that --
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 30
That the documentation was going in so to show that you had in fact received
10:44:11 15
this money?
16
A.
Yes. That's correct.
17
Q. 31
Just in relation to that.
If I could just perhaps, if we could get up the
18
actual Monarch discovery itself.
19
payment on the 13th of June.
10:44:25 20
If we could have 1581.
It's the third last from the bottom "GV Wright,
FF Local Election expenses 300 pounds".
21
And I think you know accept that that
was received by you?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 32
Would you have sought that support?
24
A.
No, I don't think so.
Q. 33
You don't believe so.
10:44:35 25
This shows a
In their discovery to the Tribunal and in their
26
correspondence with the Tribunal.
27
behalf of the Monarch interests, so to speak, have advised the Tribunal that in
28
relation to the 1991 list, which is the one we have just been looking at.
29
the contributions are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for assist to
10:44:56 30
If I could have 1579.
Solicitors on
All
defray Local Election expenses, save as set out, no records have been located Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:45:01
10:45:14
6 1
in this regard.
2
As I understand it, Monarch are there saying and in their evidence will be when
3
they come to give evidence that in fact any payment made at that time was
4
solicited.
You dispute that?
5
A.
I have no record of any request.
6
Q. 34
Well was it your practice to issue requests for payment?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 35
So you say that you didn't request?
9
A.
No.
Q. 36
Either the 300 pounds payment?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 37
They do say in that letter, they go on to say in the last paragraph in relation
10:45:26 10
Only on fundraising events.
13
to the 1992, '93 payments, that "again it is believed that these contributions
14
would have arisen on foot of requests for assistance to defray such expenses".
10:45:42 15
Did you seek?
16
A.
That wouldn't be my recollection.
17
Q. 38
That wouldn't be your recollection.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 39
Okay. So you say that Monarch in '91 gave you 300 pounds which wasn't
10:45:52 20
solicited?
21
A.
That's correct.
22
Q. 40
And in November '92 gave you a further 1,000 pounds and then in December '93
23 24
gave you a further 2,000 pounds, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 41
And none of those payments have been solicited?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 42
Just in relation to the 1,000 pounds.
10:46:03 25
28
8364, please.
29
Wright, do you see that?
10:46:19 30
A.
We see that cheque.
If I could have
This is on the 17th November 1992, a cheque made payable to GV
I do, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:46:20
10:46:38
7 1
Q. 43
2
If I could have 8365, please.
There are numbers on back of the cheque.
you recognise that No. 30013187.
3
A.
I don't recognise it.
4
Q. 44
Okay.
5
A.
I believe it was sent to the office.
6
Q. 45
Yes.
Do
Is that an account?
Do you know where this money was negotiated?
7 8
MR. KENNEDY: Chairman, I think that account has been -- just off the top of my
9
head -- I think that account has been discovered to the Tribunal long since.
10:46:48 10
I believe it to be an ICS Building Society conducted through Bank of Ireland
11
Malahide. And that's long since identified by Mr. Wright.
12
are aware of it.
And the Tribunal
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
10:46:59 15
16
MR. KENNEDY: I think that is the account in question.
17
spelling of Malahide.
You can see the
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, Bank of Ireland anyway.
10:47:08 20
21
Q. 46
22 23
MR. QUINN: This is the National Irish -- the Irish Civil Service Building Society account, is that right, Mr. Wright?
A.
Yes.
24 10:47:19 25
MR. KENNEDY: And that business is conduct the through the Bank of Ireland
26
branch in Malahide that's the way -- there is a linkage between ICS and Bank of
27
Ireland, Chairman.
28 29
Q. 47
MR. QUINN: Now, we don't have the 2,000 pounds cheque 2960, please.
10:47:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:47:32
10:47:57
8 1
This appears to be a cheque dated the 16th of December 1992 or a request for a
2
cheque of the 16th of December 1992, cheque No. 73519.
3
Do you recall receiving that payment?
4
A.
I do.
Well I make a point at this moment in time.
And for 2,000 pounds.
It may have been sent to
5
the office as well. I just make the point, I believe at that stage I was
6
probably in the Senate campaign at that stage.
7
Q. 48
Yes.
8
A.
And in the context of that, I could be out of the office for a week or maybe
9 10:48:10 10
more at times. Q. 49
11
Yes.
If we could have 3957, please.
This appears to be the internal request
and you are named second on that list.
2,000 pounds GV Wright Fianna Fail.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 50
You say that's a payment made to you at that time which had not been requested
14 10:48:32 15
or sought by you.
Did you know that the payment had been made?
A.
I now know.
16
Q. 51
I know.
17
A.
It's quite possible that I wouldn't have been in the office when that cheque
18 19 10:48:44 20
Did you know in December 1992 that the payment had been made?
arrived. Q. 52
At this time you were the --
A.
I'm basically saying I would have been on a Senate campaign and a Senate
21
campaign takes you out of the office, you could be down in the country.
22
basically a country wide campaign.
23
week.
24
Q. 53
10:49:00 25
It's
And you could be out of the office for a
You were the whip of the Fianna Fail grouping within the office at this time, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 54
You would probably have been the most influential councillor within the Fianna
28 29 10:49:07 30
Fail grouping at the time? A.
No.
Q. 55
You dispute that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:49:08
10:49:19
9 1
A.
Of course I do.
2
Q. 56
And what function did you have as whip?
3
A.
Whip basically as a secretarial basis.
4
Q. 57
You.
5
A.
There was no whip within the party system when I was there.
6
Q. 58
You had no whip at all?
7
A.
Of course there was a whip.
8
Q. 59
You were a member of Fianna Fail -- sorry.
9 10:49:36 10
You would work it as a secretary.
No whip in relation to anybody's vote. You were a member of Dublin County
council as a Fianna Fail councillor before the June '91 election? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 60
And I think Mr. Dunne had in fact been the whip at that time, is that right?
12
A.
He was, yes.
13
Q. 61
Evidence has been given here by Fianna Fail colleagues of your's including
14
Mr. Madigan.
10:49:51 15
That Mr. Dunne organised and effectively shepherded councillors
to vote on particular issues.
16
Did you see or observe or were you ever the
subject of any such --
17
A.
I think the majority of my colleagues would dispute that.
18
Q. 62
Would dispute that?
19
A.
Although basically everybody I would suspect, would vote with their own
10:50:05 20
21
intentions and that was always the way I operated. Q. 63
22
Did you organise the meetings in your capacity as whip that took place above the licenced premises in Conways?
23
A.
I would have.
24
Q. 64
Yes.
A.
I think I mentioned the last time.
10:50:19 25
26 27
10:50:37 30
The only facilities within the council was
a room that would take about 10 or 12 people. Q. 65
28 29
Yes. On the basis, can I just make the point there.
And were you instrumental in your capacity as whip in organising the agenda and when and what matters would be discussed at council?
A.
The agenda would be the agenda of the council.
Q. 66
Did the council ever liaise with you on what would be discussed? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:50:41
10:50:50
10 1
A.
No, I wouldn't be sending out any agenda.
2
Q. 67
No, no, I'm not saying you would send out the agenda. But did you ever discuss
3
the upcoming agenda and agree it with other whips or council officials?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 68
There was never any liaison?
6
A.
Other than the council itself maybe wanting a certain agenda.
7
Q. 69
Exactly.
8 9 10:51:09 10
11
might be included in an agenda with you in your capacity as whip? A.
Yeah.
Q. 70
Yes. Now --
A.
There would be based sorry, Mr. Quinn, they would be based on whether the
12 13
Did the council officials ever discuss an upcoming agenda or what
That could happen now and again but not on a regular basis.
council had some business that they wanted through at a certain date and time. Q. 71
14
If we could -- Mr. Lynn has submitted a number of expenses claim forms, which have been the subject of the, this module.
10:51:30 15
16
If I could have 4320.
17
Cherrywood Properties Limited, which is the Carrickmines company.
18
the 30th of July 1993.
19
in D Lydon/GV Wright and there is an expenses claim which I'm not particularly
10:51:54 20
concerned about.
21
This is one such form in relation to the company
It's in relation to the Draft Development Plan.
Mr. Lydon in relation to Cherrywood? A.
I have no recollection of that.
23
Q. 72
Could such a meeting have taken place?
24
A.
It's possible.
Q. 73
Had it taken place, where would it have taken place?
A.
I couldn't tell you.
26 27
Most of my contacts with Mr. Lynn would have been in
Dublin County Council itself.
28
Q. 74
Yes.
29
A.
In the offices itself.
10:52:21 30
It's
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in July '93 in the company of
22
10:52:06 25
It's dated
Other than the one or two occasions that he may have
come to the constituency office. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:52:22
10:52:28
11 1
Q. 75
Otherwise they would have taken place in the County Council office?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 76
Did you have an office in the council.
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 77
If the meetings were it take place at the council where --
6
A.
There is a Fianna Fail room.
7
Q. 78
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn or Mr. Monahan or any other representatives of
8 9 10:52:45 10
There's a party room for each party.
Monarch's in that Fianna Fail room in -A.
I would have thought I would have met Mr. Lynn, I'm sure of it.
Q. 79
At that room.
11
Did you ever see Mr. Lynn in the lobby of the Fianna Fail or of
the council sorry?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 80
Now, on the 12th of November 1993.
14
If we could have 4655, please.
Again,
there is a further expenses claim form in respect of the Cherrywood Properties
10:52:59 15
Limited.
16
Described as an expense in connection with the Draft Development
Plan GV Wright.
Do you see that?
17
A.
I do.
18
Q. 81
That would have been the day following the meeting at which the lands were
19 10:53:16 20
zoned at four houses to the acre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 82
Do you recall meeting --
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 83
Mr. Lynn or any of the Monarch representatives in or around that vote of the
24 10:53:22 25
26
11th November? A.
I couldn't give an answer to that.
Q. 84
Yes.
26th of November 1993.
I just haven't got a recollection.
If we could have 4738, please.
27
meeting Draft Development Plan, GV Wright.
28
'93?
29 10:53:40 30
A.
I could have.
Q. 85
Okay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
The further
Did you meet Mr. Lynn on November
10:53:40
10:54:01
12 1
A.
As I say, I mean, I have no -- knowing of what Mr. Lynn put in for expenses.
2
Q. 86
I'm not particularly concerned about the amounts.
3
they were spent on.
4
concerned about and the actual corroboration of meetings between you and Mr.
5
Lynn.
6
A.
7 8
He may have over the period, as you know, the file went on for so long.
Q. 87
He
But the matter had been completed at this stage on 12th, 13th of November, 26th of November '93.
Did you ever meet Mr. Lynn in Leinster House?
A.
I probably, would have, yes.
11
Q. 88
How would that have taken place?
12
A.
He that may have asked to see me.
I was the leader and chief whip of the
13
party from '91 onwards in the Senate.
14
full week in the Dail.
10:54:34 15
The dates are really what I'm
may well have been updating various councillors on that.
9 10:54:19 10
We'll ask Mr. Lynn that.
I would be anxious to what
Q. 89
I would have been very involved over a
So you actually had the dual role of being the whip of the Fianna Fail members
16
of Dublin Council after '91 and also the whip of the Fianna Fail Senators in
17
the Senate?
18
A.
19 10:54:49 20
And for a period of time the whip when I was also leader of the Fianna Fail in the Senate. Yes.
Q. 90
Leader and whip?
21
A.
No, leader.
22
Q. 91
Leader.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 92
So you were whip and subsequently leader of the Fianna Fail Senators?
A.
Correct.
26
Q. 93
And you were throughout the --
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 94
Whip of the councillors?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 95
If I could have 4926.
10:54:57 25
10:55:01 30
This is a document discovered by Monarch.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
It appears
10:55:13
10:55:35
13 1
to be from Quick Stream Couriers. And one of the items that appears to have
2
been couriered is something to you on the 7th of December 1993 at Leinster
3
House.
4
Monarch in Leinster House in December '93.
5
A.
6 7
Do you see -- sorry 4926.
Do you recall getting something from
It may have been an update of their proposals.
But I have no recollection of
that. Q. 96
Yes.
Again into early January '94.
If I could have 4951.
There is a
8
further reference to a possible meeting with you on the 21st of January '94.
9
We see there.
10:55:56 10
please.
Again on the 11th of February '94.
If I could have 4972,
Further meeting and a claim by Mr. Lynn.
11 12
Now, at this stage you were a member of Fingal County Council, isn't that
13
right?
14 10:56:03 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 97
Can you tell the Tribunal why Mr. Lynn would be meeting with you in connection
16
with Cherrywood if you are no longer a member of Dun Laoghaire -- or Dublin
17
County Council since Cherrywood fell into Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
18
Council?
19 10:56:19 20
A.
He may have had other files in the Fingal area.
Q. 98
I see.
21
He appears to be putting this to the company Cherrywood Properties
Limited?
22
A.
I can't understand that.
23
Q. 99
Did Mr. Lynn discuss other files with you in relation to other properties?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 100
And were you supportive throughout in relation to the Monarch development in
10:56:29 25
26 27
Cherrywood? A.
I took the view from the very beginning, the Manager's view that the lands, the
28
totality of the lands should be zoned both for residential and industrial and
29
employment, yes.
10:56:45 30
Q. 101
Yes.
I don't think you were present at the first meeting on the first vote in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:56:50
10:57:07
14 1
December 1990 when DP90/123 was debated.
But I think you did vote in favour
2
of the Manager's proposal as put forward by Councillors Lydon and McGrath on
3
27th of May '92.
That was unsuccessful.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 102
The manager had brought that map 92/44, right, which would have suggested four
6 7
houses to the acre on an action area plan. You voted in support of that? A.
8 9
I would say that would be consistent with everything I've done within the Development Plan.
Q. 103
10:57:29 10
But you voted against all of the motions and then the proposed low density development on the same day?
11
A.
Correct. Yes.
12
Q. 104
Including the motion by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 105
And then I think in November 1993 you supported the Marren Coffey proposal.
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 106
Which would have reinstated the lands at four houses to the acre.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 107
So your stance throughout would have been in support of the development as
10:57:35 15
19 10:57:46 20
21
being the motion by Cherrywood at that time? A.
Yes.
Q. 108
If I could just in return I've dealt with February.
22
5,000.
23
discussing Cherrywood with you in 1994?
24
11th of March '94.
There's one on March of
GV Wright again Cherrywood.
Was Mr. Lynn
A.
I don't believe so.
Q. 109
If I --
26
A.
As I say, I don't know Mr. Lynn's accounting procedures or otherwise.
27
Q. 110
Yes.
28
A.
As I say, I had no loan whatsoever at that stage.
29
Q. 111
I am just going to read these for the record, Mr. Wright, so that they will be
10:58:07 25
10:58:22 30
on record but the expenses claim forms go forward for 15th of April '94 at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:58:27
10:58:40
15 1
5057.
2
The 20th of May 1994 at 5111.
3
24th of January '94 at 5232.
4
The 25th November '94 at 5512.
5
The 31st of March '95 at 5570.
6
29th of March 1996 at 5747.
7
24th of May '96 at 5951.
8
7th of June '96 at 5974.
9
And the 18th of April '97 at 66 -- 6311.
10:59:04 10
11
Could I just have that document on screen, please.
6311.
12 13
Again, you see Cherrywood Properties Limited and you see the third line down
14
Development Plan review GV Wright?
10:59:18 15
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 112
Do you see that?
17
A.
I do.
18
Q. 113
Now, I think that you did receive on behalf of your election campaign in 1997 a
19 10:59:31 20
further sum of 1,000 pounds, isn't that right, from Mr. Lynn? A.
I'm not sure.
21
Q. 114
In fact, Mr. Murray, I should say.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 115
6323, please.
24
This is a cheque supplied by Monarch Properties Services
Limited to Fianna Fail Dublin north.
10:59:49 25
directed to you.
And the enclosure of the letter is
And it's dated the 3rd of June 1997.
26
A.
That may well have been a fundraiser for the constituency.
27
Q. 116
Yes. Well, in fairness to you, the cheque isn't made payable to you.
28 29 11:00:08 30
But the
letter enclosing the cheque is directed to you? A.
I obviously haven't got that in front of me but I suspect it would have been for a constituency fundraiser. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:00:10
11:00:21
16 1
Q. 117
When you came to the Fianna Fail Inquiry three years later you didn't mention
2
that you had received a further 1,000 pounds, three years previously from
3
Monarch?
4
A.
It may well not have been for me.
5
Q. 118
But you distinguished this 1, 000 from the earlier 3,000 in '92?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 119
In what way do you say that it's different?
8
A.
Insofar as that I suspect that it was for a constituency function.
9 11:00:35 10
I can put that down to. Q. 120
11
Now, you continued to meet with Mr. Lynn in January June '97 at 6363 again in the context of Cherrywood per Mr. Lynn.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 121
At 6376 on 15th of August 1997.
14
And I think Mr. Murray will say that you got
a contribution of 500 pounds in June 1999 towards the Local Election expenses.
11:01:04 15
16
That's all
Do you recall receiving 500 from Mr. Murray in '99. A.
I do, yes. Can I just say in the context of those meetings -- I can't answer
17
for Mr. Lynn obviously as to why he is associated with Cherrywood.
18
have had no role whatsoever.
19
Q. 122
11:01:22 20
Did Mr. Lynn ever ask you to speak to any of your colleagues in connection with his proposals in Cherrywood?
21
A.
He would have asked me to support it.
22
Q. 123
He would have asked you to support it.
23 24
I would
But did he ever ask you to seek the
support of some of your colleagues for the development? A.
11:01:36 25
No.
I mean, I think it's quite clear that he was lobbying ever single
individual, individually himself.
26
Q. 124
Did you ever lobby any of your colleagues for their support?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 125
Did you ever discuss any of matters if with your colleagues?
29
A.
I'm sure it was discussed. There was a file that was going on for three or
11:01:49 30
four years, yes, it would have been discussed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
But not in the context -- It
11:01:52
11:02:04
17 1 2
was way outside of my area and it would have been dealt with that way. Q. 126
Are you surprised that Mr. Lynn would have been so generous towards you and
3
your campaign over that period, considering that the property in question
4
wasn't within your constituency?
5
A.
No.
Insofar as Mr. Lynn and myself became good friends.
And also I
6
mentioned Mr. Murray was, I dealt with Mr. Murray on several constituency
7
files, both in community and in person.
8
Q. 127
Was Mr. Murray a supporter of yours?
9
A.
Yes.
Well I think he is.
Q. 128
Yes.
Is he, for example, in a Cumann or?
11
A.
No, no.
12
Q. 129
But you would look on him as a friend and a supporter?
13
A.
I would, yes.
14
Q. 130
And as you would Mr. Lynn?
A.
Yes.
11:02:22 10
11:02:34 15
16 17
11:02:47 20
Obviously he has been involved in many
other projects over the last number of years. Q. 131
18 19
Mr. Lynn has kept in touch.
Did you ever receive any other monies from Mr. Lynn or Mr. Murray other than the ones we have?
A.
No, absolutely not.
Q. 132
Thank you very much.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Kennedy do you want to ask a few questions?
23 24
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. KENNEDY AS FOLLOWS:
11:02:51 25
26
MR. KENNEDY: Just a few simple matters.
27
I just call up page 2339.
28
2006 asking for a statement.
29
the second paragraph where the period mentioned is January 1990 to 31st of
11:03:10 30
December 1994.
It's the letter Mr. Wright got on 6th of February And just direct the attention of the Tribunal to
I draw attention to that because Mr. Quinn has dealt with two
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:03:16
11:03:34
18 1
payments which arose outside of that period.
A cheque for 1, 000 in '97 I
2
think which was made payable to Fianna Fail Dublin north.
3
he has just dealt with that Mr. Murray gave in June 1999.
4
Just to put that on the record, Chairman.
And the 500 which
5 6
And also to refer back to the cheque that Mr. Quinn drew attention to, that was
7
a copy of which was produced this morning.
1,000 pounds in November 1992.
8 9 11:04:00 10
11
Just I remind the Tribunal that in November of 2004, if we can call up page 238 I think.
It's obliterated from my -- but it's the last page of his statement.
That Mr. Wright gave to the Tribunal.
On the 17th of November 2004.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
14 11:04:13 15
16
MR. KENNEDY: He speculated.
Page 2338.
Sorry, Chairman, it's the previous
page.
17 18
He was explaining a lodgement.
19
It includes two payments which relate to another matter which I think we are
11:04:37 20
I would prefer if the page wasn't called up.
not at liberty to disclose or to draw attention to here. But in the amounts he
21
mentions there he specifically identifies the Monarch cheque that, a copy of
22
which was produced this morning.
23
lodgement that went into that account.
As in his view possibly forming part of a
24 11:04:53 25
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
26 27
MR. KENNEDY: That we referred to earlier, the ICS account.
28
saying all of this to show that quite some time ago Mr. Wright had discovered
29
that particular account.
11:05:07 30
So I'm just
And had offered a view that that particular cheque
was in a particular lodgement.
That has now proven to be the case.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:05:13
11:05:19
19 1 2
And I think he should be given some credit for that.
3
questions of Mr. Wright, Chairman.
I have no specific
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
MR. QUINN: Chairman, just arising out of what my friend has said.
8
just two matters which I should address.
There are
9 11:05:25 10
If I could have 2341.
My friend is correct that the first letter the 1st of
11
February 2006 did refer to the period 1st of January 1990 to 31st of December
12
1994 but you received I think, a further letter on the 7th March 2006.
13
asked for payments in respect of the named persons on 1st of January 1989 to
14
date.
Which
Isn't that right? Just to correct the record in that regard.
11:05:52 15
16
I appreciate my friend's desire not to call up the letter of the 31st of May.
17
We can bring up, because it's included in the brief, the Irish Civil Service
18
Building Society account which you have disclosed to the Tribunal.
19
2328.
11:06:16 20
It's at
And if we look at page 2329 we see a composite lodgement there I think
of 20,000 odd. And I think you advised the Tribunal that the Monarch payment
21
was included in at least 15,550 pounds of that lodgement, isn't that right?
22
But we don't see the 2,000 pounds December cheque being lodged to that account.
23
A.
I couldn't tell you.
24
Q. 133
Thank you very much.
11:06:36 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
think Mr. Quinn has put it to and I think it's correct.
28
of the motion put forward by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey?
29
A.
Just going to ask you Mr. Wright.
Yes.
11:06:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Back in November '93, I You voted in favour
11:06:52
11:07:10
20 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
pointed out to me that the motion appeared to be dated 11th of November as I
3
understand it.
4
been in the council offices at any time prior.
5
A.
And I think from yesterday I think Ms. Dillon explained --
So it's not clear whether it was -- it doesn't appear to have You understand?
I do, yes.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
certainly it's dated that day.
9
A.
So it would appear that it was formulated either that day or And presumably you would have seen it or?
That's possible, yes.
11:07:20 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
can you recall?
13
A.
14
No.
Did you have any discussions with Ms. Coffey about the matter
She would have explained her position.
Anyone that would sign a motion
would explain their position.
11:07:29 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
Fianna Fail colleague.
18
A.
That's what I'm saying.
Obviously she would have been your
Yes.
19 11:07:34 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
22
And she was the local representative if you like.
She would have explained and sought her support, which would happen with any motion signed by any colleague anywhere.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:07:48 25
manager way back as far as 1990.
26 27
You told Mr. Quinn earlier that you you had supported the He had quite ambitious plans for the whole
of the Carrickmines Valley. A.
Yes. Correct.
28 29 11:07:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
As I understand it.
And again, even though he didn't get his
way with the councillors in relation to that back in '92 then when he, when the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:08:04
11:08:13
21 1
matter was brought forward again he was still trying to, if you like, bring
2
some aspect of that into his map.
3
A.
Correct.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
Now it didn't pass, we know that.
7
day.
8
A.
The 92/44 map.
And I think you voted in favour of that.
It was Mr. Barrett's motion that won the
That's right.
9 11:08:23 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that the density was reduced.
But can I just ask you,
11
given that if you like you had rolled in with the manager on those two
12
occasions --
13
A.
Yes.
14 11:08:33 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The manager on 11th of November was saying look, he was
16
recommending delete the whole of change three, which was where all of the
17
lands, including the Monarch lands, obviously a larger tract of lands was zoned
18
at one house to the acre and go back to what had gone out on the first display
19
which was four houses to the acre.
11:08:53 20
A.
Correct.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
Fianna Fail group prior to the vote, as to the merits of what the manager was
24
recommending over and above the actual motion that was put forward on the day?
11:09:10 25
A.
And did you -- was there any discussion do you recall within
I think the motion that was successful would have been seen as a compromise.
26
It would have been seen as a motion that would possibly be successful.
27
manager had tried on several occasions, as you stated, to deal with the
28
totality of the lands but there wasn't support within the council for it.
The
29 11:09:28 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
We've seen the map, indeed, and the outline of the -- it was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:09:32
11:09:38
22 1 2
the Monarch lands. A.
Correct.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
no mention of Monarch on the motion I think.
6
A.
Did you know on the 11th of November that -- because there's I think there was none.
I personally, I probably wouldn't have known that.
It was so far out of my
7
area at the time, it wouldn't have been something that I would have been
8
conscious of.
I would have known that --
9 11:09:53 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12
Well did you know that Monarch -- Monarch had put in a
representation I think. A.
Yeah.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:10:05 15
16
At some point.
Wanting the, Mr. Barrett's, what had happened
because of Mr. Barrett's motion to go, to be deleted. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
ending 12th of November -- it's not clear that it was the day obviously.
11:10:16 20
And from what Mr. Quinn tells us, you were certainly the week
Mr. Lynn's expense thing, he certainly had a meeting with you some time between
21
5th of November, that's the week ending the 12th.
22
November '93 and 12th of November.
23
In
A.
Sometime between 5th of
He may have, yes.
24 11:10:30 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26
Q. 134
Did he mention to you, do you recall, that --
27
A.
I have no recollection.
28
I'm sure he would have been lobbying.
I'm sure he
was.
29 11:10:38 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: Because as I understand it, would -- was it normally motions -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:10:44
11:10:55
23 1
would Mr. Lynn have put in a representation.
2
anyway at some point in November from Mr. McCabe, who was the planner I think
3
for Monarch.
4
A.
There was a letter gone in
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
recommending that the whole of the amendment be deleted go back to four houses
8
to the acre.
9
A.
And they were asking the council and the planners are
Yes.
11:11:05 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
motion might be put forward asking for four houses per acre for their lands?
13
A.
I don't recall that.
And do you ever recall Mr. Lynn discussing with you that a
I think the motion may have been done on the day itself.
14 11:11:24 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just on asking you that.
It was done on the day.
As I
16
understand it, the council maps -- the council map per se that the council
17
would have in the offices would be the various maps.
18
A.
Map 27.
Yes
19 11:11:39 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That was put out by the council.
21
I just want to understand this.
22
the council offices.
23
whatever.
24
A.
Now, I may be wrong here.
And obviously they would be easily got from
If somebody wanted to put in a motion and get a map or
Yes.
11:11:53 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
last few days has the Monarch boundaries, presumably, the boundaries of Monarch
28
on it.
29
A.
But we know that the map that was put up here I think in the
Yes.
11:12:04 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:12:04
11:12:19
24 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
I'm just wondering, Mr. Wright, if the motion and map is dated 11th of
3
November.
4
A.
So somebody would have had to know the Monarch boundaries.
You understand?
I do, yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
don't know, maybe I'm wrong, from a folio or a registry or some map attached to
8
the title, do you understand?
9
A.
And you know, the Monarch boundaries can only come from, I
I do. Yes.
11:12:26 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Can you explain or do you know?
Well I'm sure --
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:12:34 15
16
If it was done, we don't know if it was done on the 11th, how
this could be achieved? A.
17
Well, basically I'm sure that Monarch would have supplied all of the councillors with their landholdings. They would have supplied that.
18 19 11:12:42 20
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
So you are saying that that could come from the council?
Not just on this file this would happen --
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
representations certainly back in November.
24
A.
Well, in fairness I think Monarch had put in a map with their
Yes.
11:12:51 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
be a compromise --
28
A.
But you don't recall any discussion as to why, if there was to
No.
29 11:12:55 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Why that would have to just be --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:12:58
11:13:06
25 1
A.
No.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
sure you are familiar enough with them.
5
potion of lands just immediately above the Monarch boundary --
6
A.
Because the maps, I don't want them to come up again. You may not be indeed.
I'm
But the
Yeah.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
one house to the acre, and indeed all above that was one house to the acre.
11:13:19 10
11
That ran to what I think is the Druid's Glen, that remained
Do you understand? A.
I do.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
compromise.
11:13:30 15
16
Why somebody wouldn't say if we are going to have a
Have a compromise where there may be a more understandable
boundary between the four houses to the acre and the one house. A.
I can't give you an answer to that.
17 18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I'm just asking ...
I can't give you an answer.
11:13:38 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right. Fair enough.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Chairman.
11:13:44 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
27 28
MR. QUINN: Ms. Sheila Terry, please.
29 11:13:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:13:48
26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:13:48
11:14:19
27 1
MS. SHEILA TERRY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Terry.
5
A.
Good morning.
6
Q. 135
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Ms. Terry.
You were written to you I think like the
7
previous witness on the 1st of February 2006.
8
You were asked for a statement in relation it your dealings with a number of
9
named individuals and companies concerning Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
11:14:39 10
If I could have 2235, please.
A.
That's right.
11
Q. 136
And I think the early 1990s you were a member of Dublin County Council?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 137
I think you were at the time, a member of the Progressive Democrats, then an
14 11:14:55 15
16
independent and latterly a member of Fine Gael, isn't that right? A.
That's right.
Q. 138
Now, you responded I think on 13th of February of this year.
If I could have
17
2237.
18
And you advised the Tribunal that you had no specific memory of any servant or
19
agent of the Monarch Group speaking to you in relation to the lands.
11:15:12 20
Isn't
that right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 139
You say that you knew "Mr. Richard Lynn, Philip Reilly and the late Phil
23 24 11:15:21 25
Monahan."
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 140
I think that you say that Mr. Lynn became an independent consultant lobbiest in
26
recent times, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 141
Do you know Mr. Lynn?
29
A.
Yes, I do.
Q. 142
And do you know him in that context, as an independent lobbiest and consultant?
11:15:31 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:15:33
11:15:48
28 1
A.
I do.
2
Q. 143
You would have known Mr. Lynn back in the early '90s I presume?
3
A.
I would presume so.
As I said in my letter, I don't remember meeting Mr. Lynn
4
in the early '90s but I would have to presume that I did because he was the
5
lobbiest as I remembered on behalf of Monarch.
6
Q. 144
7 8
lands? A.
9 11:16:09 10
Do you remember anybody lobbying you in the early '90s in relation to the
I don't have any specific memory of anybody lobbying me but that's not to say that they didn't.
Q. 145
I actually would presume that they did.
Did anyone within your party or any of your colleagues, any of your councillor
11
colleagues or indeed anyone else within your party, discuss with you the
12
proposals for the Cherrywood area in the early '90s?
13
A.
14
If would have been policy within the party to discuss the agenda for the day on specific days that we were meeting.
11:16:38 15
for it.
16
But nobody would have asked me to vote
We would just have had a general discussion on the agenda for the
day.
17
Q. 146
And where would that meeting or discuss take place?
18
A.
In the party room in Dublin County Council offices.
19
Q. 147
Now, I think were you elected in June '91, is that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 148
So you were there for the earlier votes in December '90 or May of '91, isn't
11:16:56 20
21 22
that right?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 149
Your first occasion to vote on these lands came I think in May '92, isn't that
11:17:07 25
correct after they had been put up on public display?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 150
In a more recent letter then I think on 13th of March also you advised the
28 29 11:17:21 30
Tribunal of payments that you had received, isn't that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 151
In relation to the matter.
If I could have 2239, please.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:17:26
11:17:38
29 1
This appears to have been a cheque received by you in June of 1991 for 300
2
pounds, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 152
Now, you hadn't been a councillor, isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 153
You were a candidate in the June 1991 election?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 154
It would appear from that letter that you hadn't sought the contribution, isn't
9 11:17:47 10
that right. A.
That's correct.
11
Q. 155
Did you know a contribution had been sought on your behalf in June '91?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 156
Did you know Monarch Properties in June '91?
14
A.
Probably not.
Q. 157
When I say Monarch Properties.
11:18:01 15
Did you know of Monarch Properties in the
16
first instance.
17
identified in the letter to you that we have been dealing with here?
18
A.
19 11:18:22 20
Secondly, did you know any of the personnel that had been
I may have heard of Monarch Properties in the context of Quarryvale which was an issue during the Local Elections.
Q. 158
Yes.
21
A.
But I didn't know any of the lobbiests at that stage.
22
Q. 159
Did you know if contributions had been sought for Monarch in relation to other
23
candidates either by your party, either in your constituency or in other
24
constituencies in June '91?
11:18:39 25
26
A.
No, I didn't know of any such requests.
Q. 160
Yes.
27
Did you receive contributions from others in the June 1991 elections
which had been sought by others on your behalf?
28
A.
To the best of my memory right now I don't think so.
29
Q. 161
Did you ever discuss how Monarch came to be selected as someone that should be,
11:19:08 30
support should be sought for in June '91? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:19:11
11:19:22
30 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 162
But you did know sometime after June '91 that they had supported you because
3
they wrote directly to you as we see from that letter 19th of June?
4
A.
Yes, of course.
5
Q. 163
How did the enclosure of 300 pounds compare to other political contributions at
6 7
that time for that election? A.
8 9
For the June '91 Local Elections, that may well have been the biggest contribution I got.
Q. 164
11:19:50 10
Yes.
Most of my fundraising was done among friends.
So Monarch would have been the single biggest contribution that you
would have got as a candidate in that election?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 165
Now, if I could have 3657.
13
the Tribunal.
14
interpret as Sheila Terry.
11:20:13 15
This is an internal Monarch document produced to
You will see there about five from the end "ST", which we "PD", you were a member of the PDs, 300 pounds.
And you saw the 300 pounds.
Whilst we don't have the cheque.
16
you deny that that was received.
17
in the file?
18
A.
19 11:20:28 20
I don't think
And we saw the letter a moment ago enclosed
Yes, I would have been put into a specific account for the fundraising for the Local Elections.
Q. 166
Yes.
Now, you were to receive, I think, throughout your career, other monies
21
from Monarch.
Did you get to know personnel within Monarch as you went
22
forward in your political career?
23
A.
Only Mr. Lynn.
24
Q. 167
Yes.
A.
But I would have met Philip Reilly once or twice, as far as I can remember.
26
Q. 168
How did you come and get to know Mr. Lynn?
27
A.
Through his lobbying for various projects.
28
Q. 169
Yes.
11:20:44 25
29 11:21:09 30
Did Mr. Lynn ever remind you that Monarch had been probably the only
contributor outside your immediate family in 1991 to your Local Election? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:21:10
11:21:19
31 1
Q. 170
2
Did he ever make reference to the support he had given you in 1991 or subsequently in any discussions that you had with him?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 171
Now --
5
A.
As far as I can remember.
6
Q. 172
Okay.
At 5274 there is an expenses sheet for week ending 25th of July 1990
7
and I think it's probably 1995.
8
has included for the company Cherrywood Properties Limited a Development Plan
9
review expense for S Terry.
11:21:46 10
I stand open to correction.
There seem to be two entries.
Where Mr. Lynn
Do you see second
and third entry under the heading "nature of expense" Development Plan review S
11
Terry and then the next line Development Plan review S Terry?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 173
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn on successive days or maybe twice on the same
14 11:22:10 15
day in or around July 1995? A.
16 17
I don't remember those specific meetings but I would have met him many times, yes.
Q. 174
I think you wrote to him on the 16th of May '95.
18
This documentation is in the brief.
19
to read it.
11:22:31 20
21
If we could have 5626.
I don't know if you've had an opportunity
A.
Yes.
Q. 175
That's -- that appears to be correspondence from you to Mr. Lynn where you were
22
seeking a contribution to the annual draw for your party, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 176
I think a contribution was made.
11:22:51 25
If we look at 5627.
I think 100 pounds was
contributed the on the 18th of May to the Progressive Democrats.
26
Which
presumably was on foot of that previous request?
27
A.
More than likely.
28
Q. 177
And I think that you may not be aware of it but on 26th of January '95 he
29 11:23:15 30
appears to consider contributed 200 pounds to the party fundraising as well. You may not be aware of that or were you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:23:15
11:23:34
32 1
A.
In my letter I think I outlined a number of times that he contributed either to
2
fundraising events that I held and also a number of times that he bought
3
tickets for the party's draw.
4
Q. 178
Yes.
And I think you may have overlooked that particular event.
5
have 2243.
6
comprehensive disclosure in relation to these payments.
7
1991.
8
300 pounds in September 1998.
9
When you joined Fine Gael I think in 2000, is that correct?
11:24:07 10
11
This is your letter of the 13th of March.
500 pounds in March 1996.
Yes.
Q. 179
And then you went into 500 punts in October 2000. 300 Euro in spring 2004.
13
outings?
14 11:24:21 15
This is a more You say 300 pounds in
I was going to come to that in a moment.
A.
12
If we could
500 Euro in March 2002.
They are all in relation to the fundraisers or golf
A.
Yes.
Q. 180
Isn't that right? And I think 160 Euro on 2004/2005 in relation to Fine Gael
16
national draw tickets.
17
isn't that right?
These are fundraising events on behalf of the party,
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 181
Just to go back, if I may, to the payments in 1996.
11:24:41 20
21
If I could have 5750.
22
say 21st of February 1996.
23
claim in for the company Cherrywood Properties Limited for 46 pounds.
24
then on the 14th of March '96 at 5776, he asks or makes a request internally to
11:25:14 25
This is 21st of February 1996.
Again, Mr. Lynn has a Development Plan expenses And
the accountant of Monarch for a cheque for 500 pounds to Councillor Sheila
26
Terry PD.
Do you see that? Would you have sought that payment?
27
A.
Is that the one that I have referred to in my letter?
28
Q. 182
Yes, yes you have referred to it.
29
A.
Yes, yes, I would have.
Q. 183
And we see the cheque then.
11:25:31 30
Week ending I should
If we could have 5798.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
It's a cheque made
11:25:39
11:25:47
33 1
payable to you on 29th of March 1996.
2
A.
That was in respect of a golf outing.
3
Q. 184
A golf outing.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 185
Yes.
Just going back to the meeting which you had identified there at 5750.
6
For the week ending the 21st of February '96.
7
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council after '93?
You were a member of Dun
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 186
Can I ask you why Mr. Lynn would be meeting with you and submitting claim forms
11:26:12 10
for meetings with you in relation to property which fell within Dun
11
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council when you were councillor in another ward,
12
another area?
13
A.
I wouldn't have had a meeting with Mr. Lynn to discuss --
14
Q. 187
Cherrywood?
A.
The Cherrywood at that point in time.
11:26:27 15
16
If it was just dealing with Dun
Laoghaire council.
17
Q. 188
Yes.
18
A.
I wouldn't have --
19
Q. 189
Do you recall meeting with Mr. Lynn after January '94 and discussing other
11:26:39 20
developments of Monarch's?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 190
Would some of these have been within your council?
23
A.
Within Fingal.
24
Q. 191
Within Fingal?
A.
Yes, and only within Fingal.
Q. 192
We you asked in any of those discussions to approach any of your Progressive
11:26:51 25
26 27
Democrat colleagues in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in relation to
28
lands there?
29 11:27:09 30
A.
No, I was never asked to do that.
Q. 193
Mr. Lynn never asked to you do that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:27:11
11:27:22
34 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 194
Another councillor from Fine Gael, Councillor Faherty, has said that she was
3
asked.
You say that you were never asked?
4
A.
No, I was never asked.
5
Q. 195
Now, I think in March 1996.
Then if we could have 2248, please.
The letter
6
enclosing that cheque for 500 pounds while signed by Mr. Lynn is from a company
7
King of The Castle Limited.
8
King of The Castle Limited?
9 11:27:44 10
11
A.
I remember the name distinctly because it was a strange name, yes.
Q. 196
Unusual.
A.
Yes. I never really knew who the company or who was behind the company.
12 13
Mr. Lynn that I knew. Q. 197
14
Just in relation to that.
What I'm really trying to establish was did you
know that you were getting the money object on behalf of Monarch or did you
11:27:59 15
16
Do you know or were you aware of a company called
think Mr. Lynn on his own behalf was contributing to you? A.
I presumed it was from Mr. Lynn.
But I actually -- I suppose I would have
17
thought he was connected with King of The Castle and more than likely that it
18
was coming from that company.
19
realise that that was the same as Monarch.
11:28:27 20
But I didn't.
At that time, I think I didn't
Q. 198
Yes.
21
A.
I'm still not sure.
22
Q. 199
Sorry.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 200
And at some stage I think he went out on his own and became an independent
11:28:44 25
Did you associate --
Did you associate Mr. Lynn with Monarch in the early '90s?
lobbiest or consultant.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 201
This was '96.
28
A.
Um, I'm not sure.
29
Q. 202
Yes.
11:29:00 30
1997.
Was he still with Monarch in 1996? I'm not sure when he went as an independent lobbiest.
You again met him, I think, he says for the week ending 8th of August If we could have 6375, please.
Do you recall meeting him and could
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Just
11:29:09
11:29:27
35 1
you have met him in relation to the Development Plan review in connection with
2
the Cherrywood Properties Limited?
3
A.
4 5
Not in connection with anything that was being dealt with by Dun Laoghaire County Council.
Q. 203
6
Yes.
It would have been for some other project in Fingal.
Mr. Dunlop was retained in, it would appear, sometime in '93 in relation
to these lands.
Do you ever recall discussing the lands with Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
I don't recall ever discussing them with him.
8
Q. 204
Or him ever discussing them with you?
9
A.
No.
Q. 205
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop was lobbying on behalf of Monarch in 1993?
A.
Not particularly.
11:29:45 10
11 12
I mean, I knew Mr. Dunlop was around but I never really had
any dealings with Mr. Dunlop.
13
Q. 206
Yes.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 207
Just on that.
16
A.
Well with him.
17
Q. 208
And he --
18
A.
Did he discuss some other lands.
11:30:10 15
19 11:30:23 20
Well you do appear to have had meetings with Mr. Dunlop?
Was it Ballycullen? I can't remember, to be
honest. Q. 209
You do appear in his diary for meetings in April '93.
And you appear to have
21
left a message for him on 19th of April '93.
22
And there's a meeting in his diary for the 19th of April '93 at 4154.
23
think that that was in relation to other lands or other developments that Mr.
24
Dunlop was involved in?
11:30:52 25
If we could have 4152, please. You
A.
I actually don't know what that meeting was about.
26
Q. 210
But you say that you never met him in relation to Cherrywood or Monarch?
27
A.
Well I have no recollection of meeting with him in relation to it.
28 29 11:31:21 30
have. Q. 211
I don't know.
But I may
To be honest.
If we take the meeting then on the 27th of May 1992.
If we go to 7207.
The
manager had produced a map 92/44 to the council at that meeting, where he was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:31:26
11:31:36
36 1
suggesting I think that the lands in Cherrywood would be zoned A1 on four
2
houses to the acre?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 212
And I think you supported that proposal, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 213
Do you recall the debate and do you recall how you came to support that
7
proposal?
8
A.
Sorry, would you ask that question again.
9
Q. 214
Do you recall the debate in the council which led to that vote or those series
11:31:49 10
of votes that we are going to deal with?
11
A.
I just generally remember the over all debate about the lands.
12
Q. 215
Would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn would have lobbied you by this time in
13 14 11:32:01 15
relation to the lands? A.
More than likely.
Q. 216
And would have sought your support, as he had, as other councillors have told
16
us, in relation to the Monarch position in respect of these lands?
17
A.
Yes, he would have.
18
Q. 217
And you supported the Manager's proposal which would have, had it been
19 11:32:20 20
21
successful, rezoned these lands at four houses to the acre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 218
You also I think supported other proposals which possibly would have rezoned
22
the lands at one house to the acre, even on septic tank, isn't that right? If
23
we could have 7209.
24
Reeves which we see at 7210, which provided that "The council would resolve
11:32:54 25
that the lands marked AP outlined in red on the attached map which had been
At 7209 there is a motion by Councillors Gordon and
26
signed for identification purposes by the proposer of the motion be AS2." which
27
as I understand it, is septic tank one house to the acre in the review of the
28
Development Plan.
29 11:33:18 30
You voted in favour of that proposal?
A.
Yes. Yes, sorry, your question?
Q. 219
Do you recall how you came to support that proposal which seems to differ from Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:33:24
11:33:44
37 1
your earlier support for the manager's proposal that they be zoned at four
2
houses to the acre on piped sewerage?
3
A.
I don't recall how I came to make the decisions at this point in time I can't
4
remember.
5
chamber.
6
Q. 220
7 8
But obviously a lot of debate would have taken place in the
And would some debate have taken place outside the chamber amongst the Progressive Democrat members of the council?
A.
9
Well, as I said at the outset, we went -- we usually went through the agenda on the day of meetings.
11:34:10 10
Now, that didn't always happen either but generally we
would have met before the meetings to go through the agenda.
Just to discuss,
11
you know, the work of the day.
12
how we would vote but there would be general discussion about the work of the
13
day.
14
Q. 221
11:34:29 15
16
But there was never any decisions taken as to
Well, can I ask you, what was the consensus within the Progressive Democrats in relation to these lands at this time?
A.
I couldn't tell you what the consensus was right now.
I think -- there
17
wouldn't have been a consensus.
18
patterns, some people voted for motions and others voted against them.
19
there wasn't a set pattern.
11:34:57 20
Q. 222
Generally looking back over the voting Now,
Did you ever tell your colleagues, your Progressive Democrat colleagues that
21
you knew Mr. Lynn and that Mr. Lynn had sought your support in relation to the
22
proposals and indeed had been a contributor to your election campaign in 1991?
23
A.
24
I don't remember actually telling them. known.
11:35:25 25
Everybody knew Mr. Lynn.
I think it would have been generally
He would -- I would guess he had approached
everybody as to whether I told them that he had contributed to my campaigns or
26
not, it may not be something that I would specifically tell them.
27
other hand, if, when I was having a golf outing we would talk about who was
28
there or some of my colleagues may even have been at the golf outing and come
29
to the meals.
11:35:54 30
Q. 223
But on the
Or did any of your colleagues tell you that they had been supported by Mr. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:35:59
11:36:07
38 1
Lynn?
2
A.
Again, I --
3
Q. 224
You have no recollection.
4
A.
I have no recollection of that.
5 6
But I know that he would have supported other
fundraising events of other people's. Q. 225
There was I think a motion by Councillors Gilmore and O'Callaghan to have the
7
lands zoned for a town centre, isn't that right, at that meeting in May '92? A
8
proposal that you vote the against.
If we could have 7214, please.
9 11:36:24 10
Do you recall how you came to vote against a town centre for these lands?
11
A.
I don't recall how I came to that decision.
12
Q. 226
Okay.
Now, as it happened, a motion by Councillor Barrett and Dockrell which
13
you supported that the lands be zoned one house to the acre, was successful and
14
the lands went on display at one house to the acre, isn't that right?
11:36:53 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 227
Rather than the four houses, which had been the incoming map which had been
17
identified on the incoming map, isn't that right?
18
A.
Well, I can't disagree with you.
19
Q. 228
Okay. And then I think the map came back before the council on the 11th of
11:37:11 20
November 1993.
I presume you have your facts right.
And there was a further debate.
Do you recall if Mr. Lynn in
21
that intervening period had spoken to you in relation to the lands, that is
22
between May '92 and November '93?
23
A.
24
But, I mean, Mr. Lynn would have been
around, you know, if there were votes that he was -- had an interest in, I
11:37:39 25
26
I can't recall whether he did or not.
think I could safely assume that he would have spoken to me. Q. 229
Now, if I could have 7217.
This is a map and the area coloured yellow in the
27
map is an area which has been proposed for residential zoning at one house to
28
the acre.
29
Dockrell.
11:38:15 30
A.
As a result of the successful motion of Councillor Barrett and
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:38:15
11:38:37
39 1
Q. 230
And you had voted for that.
A motion was tabled at the meeting on the 11th of
2
November 1993 suggesting that the area coloured yellow within -- sorry.
3
Coloured yellow and within the red lines as we see it there, be zoned at four
4
houses to the acre.
5
one house to the acre.
And that the balance of the yellow lands would remain at
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 231
And you voted in favour of that motion.
That was a motion tabled by
8
Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey.
Now, can you tell the Tribunal how
9
you came to vote on that motion in November '93?
11:38:56 10
A.
Again, I can't remember how I arrived at that decision.
But my decisions in
11
the chamber would have been based on the debate put forward in the chamber on
12
the day.
13
Q. 232
14
Do you see any reason why if the council were
minded to zone lands at four houses to the acre, that all of the lands coloured
11:39:25 15
16
Looking at the map on screen.
yellow couldn't have been zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
Today, I mean, and looking at it there.
Without the benefit of, you know, a
17
full debate and somebody going through it as to the benefits or the lack of
18
benefits of doing so is very difficult for me to remember today why such a
19
decision would have been reached.
11:39:52 20
Q. 233
But looking at it there, looking at that map, do you see any reason why lands
21
outlined in red ought to be zoned at four houses to the acre when the balance
22
of the lands, the yellow shaded lands, should remain at one house to the acre?
23
A.
24 11:40:25 25
Well, looking at the map there, the northern part of the yellow may be on the slopes of the mountain.
Would that be correct?
Q. 234
I'm not sure but --
26
A.
If that was the case maybe one --
27
Q. 235
The planners and the manager had suggested four houses to the acre on the
28 29 11:40:37 30
northern part as well as the southern part? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 236
So presumably they wouldn't have identified four houses to the acre if they Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:40:43
11:41:05
40 1 2
believed it could take four houses to the acre and was capable of development? A.
3 4
based on the arguments put forward on the day by other councillors. Q. 237
5 6
A.
Possibly but I would have -- I mean, I would have to be taken through it in more detail before I could arrive at ...
Q. 238
9 11:41:31 10
Would you agree with me that looking at that map it's something that would require some explanation?
7 8
I don't know how I based my decision but obviously as I said it would have been
You have no recollection of the debate or the contribution of any of the parties as to this?
A.
I don't, no.
11
Q. 239
Thank you.
12
A.
Thank you, Mr. Quinn.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
11:41:43 15
motion.
16 17
Just, when you were voting for those lands or for that particular
Would you have been aware or were you aware that the motion, that the
lands to attract the higher density were Monarch lands? A.
Were Monarch lands?
18 19 11:41:57 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Um.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
O mean clearly, somebody had gone to the trouble of extracting from
23
the larger area, the smaller area.
24
the map which you'd have seen at the time you were voting.
And there's a clear boundary marked out on
11:42:16 25
26
Now, would you have been aware or were you aware or do you think you would have
27
been aware that this reduced area was in fact the Monarch lands?
28 29 11:42:41 30
A.
Again, I'm sorry that I can't be, you know, more clear for you on these specific lands but some times we did know the ownership of the lands and other times we didn't.
We may have known that from submissions, representations
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:42:49
11:43:12
41 1
that had been made in terms of material that we would have been given or, you
2
know, the reps that were sent in from the various landowners or people who
3
wrote in submissions.
4
lands outlined in red were the ones owned by Monarch, I can't tell you today
5
specifically.
But as to whether or not I knew on the day that those
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
including yourself, would have asked or wondered why this smaller area was
9
going to attract the higher density or what was so special or unique or
11:43:33 10
But do you think it would have been likely that councillors,
different about it that it was going to be treated differently to the rest of
11
the land? It wouldn't have gone unnoticed, I presume, looking at that map,
12
that this was -- that this was one piece of a larger piece?
13
A.
Yes.
14 11:43:51 15
CHAIRMAN:
So do you think you'd have asked yourself or councillors would have
16
discussed amongst themselves why is it being done like this or what's so
17
different or special about the section of land that was going to receive the
18
higher density?
19
A.
11:44:21 20
Yes, it does seem obvious today looking at it.
I'm not sure why those lands
were being dealt specifically for a higher density.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Because if not, it would suggest that the councillors were just
23
being led, either by a landowner or by people in the council.
24
suggest if they didn't know or didn't ask, it would suggest that they were just
11:44:49 25
being, somebody was coming in with a motion and people were just blindly --
26
councillors were just blindly voting one way or the other.
27
if there was discussion or --
28 29 11:45:26 30
A.
And it would
Can you remember
I can't today remember, you know, why that land was treated differently to the other land.
I don't remember the discussion on the day and I have no memory
of how this land was treated. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:45:29
11:45:39
42 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
For a higher density.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
Would it -- does it look strange to you now?
It does.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
That -- all right.
8 9 11:45:55 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
You accept that Mr. Lynn was a lobbiest, isn't that correct?
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
representative, asking for their support, surely the first thing that would
14
come to your mind is who is this lobbiest appearing for, who is he
11:46:10 15
16
representing. A.
And when lobbiests would approach somebody, especially a public
Wouldn't that be correct?
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
looking for your support.
11:46:25 20
21
So when Mr. Lynn approached you at any stage in relation to Surely, on that basis, you'd have asked him well
who are you representing? A.
Well I knew he was representing Monarch.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
had been voting on not just this motion but the motion in relation to the other
11:46:35 25
So therefore, you knew at all times then that over the period you
land, you'd have known who the owner of the lands were, whether it was a
26
developer or just an owner who might pass on the lands to a developer after
27
rezoning had been completed?
28 29
A.
Yes.
I mean, if Mr. Lynn lobbied me for any piece of land, obviously, I would
know that I would know the ownership of that land.
11:47:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:47:00
11:47:17
43 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
councillors have given evidence to the effect that A, they were never concerned
3
really about who owned the lands.
4
on them to ask who owner was or who in fact was the owner or whether it was a
5
developer or not.
6
any public representative who is approached by a lobbiest, not to ask who that
7
lobbiest represents.
8
You'd accept that?
9
A.
11:47:39 10
Yes.
You see -- I accept that.
The reason I ask is that some
And also that at the time it never dawned
And that's why I asked surely it would be very strange for
Who they were appearing for, who their client is.
But I would also have to say that I didn't at all times know who the
owners of certain pieces of lands were.
11 12 13
JUDGE KEYS: A.
But if they were --
In that we weren't lobbied for every piece of land.
14 11:47:48 15
JUDGE KEYS:
16 17
No.
But where you were lobbied, where any councillors was
lobbied by a lobbiest -A.
Yes.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:47:59 20
21
Would you find it surprising that those councillors would not
know who that lobbiest was appearing for, who they were representing? A.
Yes, I'd find that strange.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
Absolutely strange.
24 11:48:06 25
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
explained yesterday or somebody mentioned it.
29
in south Dublin, south of the county.
11:48:18 30
Just wondering, Ms. Terry.
These lands, I think it was That this Carrickmines Valley
It was basically I think the largest
tract of undeveloped land and it attracted I think as we can see, a lot of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:48:23
11:48:30
44 1 2
motions and debate? A.
Yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
new to the council in '91 so you had no input.
6
the manager after the first display.
7
an action plan.
8
'92 and you had voted initially at the beginning of that meeting with the
9
manager.
11:48:50 10
A.
You had gone from the position initially, obviously you were But by '92 you were supporting
He wanted the four houses to the acre on
And even to extend the residential zoning.
This was back in
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
after that looking for a lower density, one house to the acre.
14
A.
And then there was a number of motions in fairness to yourself
Yes.
11:48:58 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
for that and you've explained that you've said that obviously you had listened
18
to debate.
19
A.
And including Mr. Barrett's successful motion.
And you voted
Do you understand?
Yes.
11:49:13 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
best plan of action was one house to the acre.
23
A.
So by the end of May '92 you seem to come to the view that the You understand?
Yes.
24 11:49:23 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that's what I think went out on the display.
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
again to four houses to the acre on part of the lands.
11:49:41 30
And -- but by November '93, if you like, you had swung back And I'm just
wondering, why do you think you decided then in '93 to go for this? Do you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:49:51
11:50:11
45 1 2
recall any debate about the matter? A.
I don't recall and I can't explain today why I changed my attitude to that.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
All right.
Thank you very much.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
It's ten to twelve.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Colm Tyndall, please.
9 11:50:16 10
11
I know that the Tribunal normally takes a break at this time every morning. But we have two witnesses in some difficulty. Mr. Tyndall is one.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Well then we'll sit.
14 11:50:23 15
16
MS. DILLON:
And the next witness, Mr. O'Callaghan has to be finished by
lunchtime I understand also. So if it's possible ...
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:50:32
11:50:48
46 1
MR. COLM TYNDALL HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
MR. O'DONNELL: I apply for representation.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
Mr. O'Donnell.
7 8
Q. 240
9
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Tyndall. You were elected in the elections of
1991 as a member of the Progressive Democrats to Dublin County Council, isn't
11:51:01 10
that correct?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 241
And thereafter in 1994 when the council split into three you became a member of
13 14 11:51:10 15
South Dublin County Council, isn't that right? A.
That is also correct, yes.
Q. 242
So that insofar as you had an involvement in the Cherrywood lands, that is
16
confined to June 1991 to December 1993, isn't that the position?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 243
Now, you have provided a statement to the Tribunal.
19
of matters with you arising from that statement.
11:51:29 20
And I'll raise a number
But first I want to take you
through your contribution to the planning and zoning of these lands.
21
that's already, all right?
22
A.
That's fine.
23
Q. 244
Now, I think if I could show you first of all the map at 7021.
24 11:51:46 25
If
And the
decision on this map which will come up on screen beside you had been made prior to you becoming a member of the council.
But this is the map that went
26
out on the first public display.
And the yellow lands on that map are the
27
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
28 29 11:52:01 30
And the outline in red are the Monarch lands within the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
And those lands had gone out on four houses
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:52:09
11:52:20
47 1
to the acre, do you understand?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 245
The density on those yellow lands was four houses to the acre for the first
4
public display.
And after the first public display, as you know, Mr. Tyndall,
5
the matter would come back into the council for the council to consider
6
representations and submissions that had been made.
7
before the council in May of 1992.
And the matter came back
Right?
8
A.
That's correct, yes.
9
Q. 246
Now, you are recorded as being in attendance at a meeting on 13th of May 1992.
11:52:38 10
At 7912, please.
11
And at that meeting, this is in effect the introductory meeting in relation to
12
the secondary view of the Carrickmines Valley.
13
Under the heading "Carrickmines Valley".
14
And listed there is representation 001117.
11:53:02 15
16
At 7194.
A number of land owners are listed. Do you see that?
A.
I do.
Q. 247
And the landowner there is lands at Cherrywood Monarch Properties.
Now, that
17
meant that a representation had been received in connection with the Cherrywood
18
lands by Monarch Properties.
19 11:53:15 20
21
A.
That is what the record is showing.
Q. 248
Yeah. Sorry, it's either correct or it's not correct, Mr. Tyndall.
A.
Well I cannot recall.
22 23
Isn't that the position?
If that is what the record is showing so I assume that
that is correct. Q. 249
24
And other landowners in the Carrickmines Valley are also identified but certainly insofar as documents had been circulated to the councillors by May of
11:53:35 25
1992, the councillors would have been provided with any representation that had
26
been received in the course of the first public display?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 250
Included in that representation was a representation from Monarch Properties.
29 11:53:47 30
Isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:53:48
11:53:57
48 1
Q. 251
And within that representation, which I'll show you in a minute, there would
2
have been a map which outlined the Monarch Properties lands.
3
right?
Isn't that
4
A.
That is correct.
5
Q. 252
Now, the manager himself referred in the course of his report on the Cherrywood
6
area.
7
referred in the second paragraph of his report on the Cherrywood area to the
8
Monarch Properties submission.
9
Properties submission illustrates one possible option although at a higher over
11:54:22 10
At 7197 of the same meeting of which you were in attendance.
He
You see that? The manager says "The Monarch
all density whereby this sort of improvement could be achieved."
He's talking
11
about an increase in density as a result of the pipe going through the
12
Carrickmines Valley.
13
A.
I see that, yes.
14
Q. 253
So certainly for those councillors who were present at the meeting, including
11:54:34 15
yourself, on the 13th of May 1992.
16 17
existence of Monarch Properties. A.
According to the record, yes.
Isn't that right?
But I cannot recall specifically at this moment
18
in time.
19
I have no reason to dispute that.
11:54:52 20
They would have been aware of the
But yes, that is what the records of the council contain.
Q. 254
They would have received the submission --
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 255
117 from Monarch Properties.
23 24 11:54:59 25
I mean,
Because they received all of the submissions,
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 256
And the manager himself refers to the submission from Monarch Properties in his
26
report?
27
A.
That is correct.
28
Q. 257
And the lands are being dealt with under the heading of the Cherrywood area.
29 11:55:14 30
So it is a smaller area within the Carrickmines Valley that being identified in connection with Monarch.
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:55:16
11:55:31
49 1
A.
Again, that is -- I am taking it as you were saying it as of this moment in
2
time.
3
And I have no dispute about that whatsoever.
4
Q. 258
5
I cannot recall at that stage but that is what the records are showing.
Certainly what the council were considering at this stage were maps 26 and maps 27.
Maps 26 and 27 relate to the Carrickmines Valley.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 259
And when the manager came to talk about the Monarch Properties submission he
8 9
dealt with it under the heading of the Cherrywood area, isn't that right? A.
That's fine.
Q. 260
So that's a smaller area within the Carrickmines Valley.
11
A.
I accept what you're saying, yes.
12
Q. 261
And then indeed, at the same meeting at 7198.
11:55:49 10
Isn't that right?
The manager outlines a synopsis
13
of the representation that had in fact been made by Monarch Properties.
14
that right? You see there?
11:56:07 15
Isn't
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 262
Isn't that the position?
17
A.
That would appear to be the position.
18
Q. 263
So at the meeting that took place on 13th of May 1992, all of the councillors,
19
including yourself who were present at that meeting, would have been aware of
11:56:19 20
the representation.
Would have been furnished with the map that came with the
21
representation.
22
Monarch as having an interest in the Cherrywood area and would have been given
23
a synopsis of the Monarch's submission, isn't that right?
24 11:56:32 25
Would have heard the Manager's Report which identified
A.
Yes.
Q. 264
So that all of the councillors who were at that meeting would have been aware
26
of the fact that Monarch Properties was a developer that had an interest in the
27
Carrickmines Valley and specifically in the Cherrywood area.
28
right?
29 11:56:46 30
Isn't that
A.
I would have to assume, yes.
Q. 265
So I think that the manager at that meeting had put forward a map called Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:56:52
11:57:08
50 1
DP92/44 at 7203, please.
2 3
Now, this again is a portion of the map of the Carrickmines Valley.
4
the manager was proposing here in connection with this portion of the
5
Carrickmines Valley was an increase in the amount of land that would be zoned
6
residential.
And a change in the density from AP to A1P.
And what
Isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, that would appear to say, yes.
8
Q. 266
Yes. The manager in his report to the meeting on 13th of May 1992 spoke to
9
that map and recommended that it be passed by the council.
11:57:32 10
The council came
to consider it I think including yourself, on 27th of May 1992 at 7205.
11 12
And on the 7206 you will see that when the council came to consider, at 7206,
13
please.
14
manager's motion, they were dealing with representation 1117 Monarch Properties
11:58:08 15
Sorry.
Yes.
You will see when the council came to consider the
lands at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 267
And you will also see that what was agreed by the council in that paragraph
18
that "It was agreed that the manager's report and the amendments to the draft
19
plan recommended and illustrated on DP92/44, and motions number 1 to 11
11:58:25 20
contained in Section 31A of the agenda relating representation 1117 Monarch
21
Properties would be discussed together but voted on separately."
22
right?
Isn't that
23
A.
That's exactly as it says.
24
Q. 268
Therefore it must have been clear, Mr. Tyndall, to every councillor who was at
11:58:40 25
that meeting and who proceeded to vote on the subsequent motion.
That the
26
only matters that they were discussing were the Monarch lands at Cherrywood,
27
isn't that right?
28
A.
I cannot answer for any other councillor other than --
29
Q. 269
Speaking for yourself?
A.
As is stated there as a true record, yes.
11:58:50 30
I cannot recall the specifics as of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:58:55
11:59:02
51 1
that date.
2
Q. 270
But --
3
A.
I accept that it is.
4 5
I have in dispute with what you are saying in any shape
or form. Q. 271
So that what the record shows that the 11 motions that were being voted on
6
which culminated in Councillor Barrett's motion at that time.
7
these motions related to one portion of land which was the Monarch Properties
8
lands within the Carrickmines Valley, that's the heading under which they were
9
being dealt with by the council.
11:59:21 10
11
That all of
Isn't that right?
A.
That appears to be correct, yes.
Q. 272
So that it would be difficult to see, Mr. Tyndall, how somebody could assert
12
that they were unaware when they were voting on a particular motion that it was
13
not to do with the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
14
A.
11:59:42 15
Well, again, there's 11 different motions relating to it this. reading now.
Again, I am listening to, as you say it, I don't recall the
16
specifics of that date, back in 1992 I think it is.
17
saying.
18
Q. 273
19
Yes.
And I think in fact at 7207.
There were seven votes I think on that
that takes place is on the manager's proposals.
21
Lydon and seconded by Councillor McGrath.
22
the map DP92/44.
23
That's what the record shows.
24 12:00:24 25
But I accept what you're
eight votes I beg your pardon, on that particular day.
12:00:04 20
From what I'm
But the first vote
That's proposed by Councillor
What was being proposed there was
And you vote in favour of DP92/44. Isn't that right?
A.
Yes, that seems to be correct.
Q. 274
If that was so, you were in favour of increasing the residential area on the
26
Monarch lands and you were in favour of changing the density from AP to A1P,
27
isn't that right?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 275
All right.
12:00:39 30
Were you approached by anybody in connection with this from
anybody on behalf of Monarch Properties in connection with these? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:00:43
12:01:00
52 1
A.
I don't recall any specific approach relating to Cherrywood but I have no doubt
2
I would have had discussions with Richard Lynn over quite a period of time.
3
But I don't recall any specific meeting directly discussing the Cherrywood
4
lands at any stage.
5
Lynn about them.
6
Q. 276
But I'm not disputing that I would have talked to Mr.
And would you agree that Mr. Lynn as the person lobbying on behalf of Monarch
7
Properties would have an interest in securing your support and indeed other
8
councillor's support for any proposal that would favour Monarch?
9 12:01:13 10
A.
That would make sense.
Q. 277
And can you remember whether the meetings of the Progressive Democrats that
11
took place.
12
discussed?
13
A.
14
I cannot recollect any specific.
The meetings would have been haphazard.
We
wouldn't have discussed -- we would have discussed generally the agenda for a
12:01:31 15
day.
16 17
Whether you recollect the Monarch Properties lands being
Which could have consisted of numerous motions, rarely confined to one
particular piece of land. Q. 278
Your colleague or your then Progressive Democrat colleague I think, Ms. Terry
18
who gave evidence I think just before you this morning, also voted in favour of
19
DP92/44, isn't that right? That's what the record shows?
12:01:51 20
21
A.
That's what the record shows.
Q. 279
Indeed, Councillor Terry is also a person who is recorded as being at the
22
meeting on 13th of May 1992.
23
aware that the lands under discussion were Monarch Properties.
24
been informed at the time that that was the position, isn't that so?
12:02:10 25
26
And therefore, in the same way that you were She would have
A.
Well that's something for Councillor Terry.
Q. 280
If she was at the meeting and informed in the same way that you were it follows
27
It's not something for me.
that she must have been informed isn't that the position?
28
A.
Again, I can only answer for myself.
29
Q. 281
Very good. Well indeed, the second motion that came to be proposed on that day
12:02:27 30
at 7210.
There are two motions being taken together. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
The first is the
12:02:39
12:02:54
53 1
motion in the name of Breathnach, Smyth and Fitzgerald and the second motion is
2
Breathnach and Smyth.
3
The second motion, in case there was any doubt about it, relates specifically
4
to the Monarch lands.
5
the low density residential zoning of one house per acre on the Monarch lands
6
at Lehaunstown and Cherrywood."
And it was agreed that both would be taken together.
Isn't that correct? "This council resolves to retain
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 282
So it's Monarch specific.
9
And the first motion refers to the resolving that
the lands at Cherrywood marked AP, outlined in red be zoned AS2.
12:03:13 10
house per acre on septic tank.
11
Which is one
Isn't that right? So both of these motions
are proposing low density, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes, that would appear to be correct.
13
Q. 283
And you vote in favour of that?
14
A.
So the record shows, yes.
Q. 284
Now, what I would like you to explain to the Tribunal is why having voted in
12:03:26 15
16
favour of the manager's proposal for increased density immediately prior to
17
these motions, you are now voting for low density on these motions?
18
A.
19
Unfortunately, I don't have -- I can't explain to you now as to why.
But I
would have looked at each motion as it came before me at the time.
12:03:49 20
Regrettably, the minutes don't show any recollection of the debate or the
21
debates that would have taken place.
22 23
I would have tried to make as informed an opinion on each motion as it came as
24
best I could.
12:04:03 25
26
Bearing in mind that I wasn't specifically from that particular
area. Q. 285
Well would you agree, Mr. Tyndall, that there is an inconsistency in voting for
27
increased density and extended residential land on D92/44 at page 7207 of the
28
brief and then voting for low density thereafter?
29 12:04:27 30
A.
Well I would agree looking at it now.
It would appear that way.
But I'm
sure I would have had very good reason at that particular time to do that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:04:30
12:04:46
54 1
I'm sorry I can't explain it to you at this moment in time.
But as I say I
2
would have looked at each motion as it came before me and tried to make the
3
best decision as I could at that stage.
4
I suppose at that stage that's the way it was.
Planning wasn't an exact science and
5
Q. 286
So --
6
A.
I would have tried as I say to look at each motion that came before me and made
7 8
a judgement on it. Q. 287
9
believe would have been explicable at the time but that you are not in a
12:05:00 10
11
Is it the position then that you accept there is an inconsistency which you
position to explain it today? A.
Well what I'm saying is that I wouldn't have just voted forever piece of zoning
12
as it appeared in front of me.
13
appeared in front of me and tried to make a proper decision relating as to how
14
the appeared before me.
12:05:16 15
I would have looked in each motion as it
As to whether that drew up inconsistencies.
Well, unfortunately I can't
16
really respond to that because as I say I would have tried to make a decision
17
on each motion as it appeared. And made my decision accordingly.
18
Q. 288
19
Yes. From your consideration of the record, as disclosed to the Tribunal in the minutes of this meeting, Mr. Tyndall.
12:05:32 20
Do you accept that having voted for
increased density and increased residential land on the manager's map DP92/44
21
that that position is inconsistent with a later decision to support low
22
density?
23
A.
24
does not show that there would have been a debate taking place and there would
12:05:50 25
26
It is inconsistent when you look at the records as it shows now. The record
have been valid reasons, which I cannot recall, put forward as to that change. Q. 289
I think on the third vote on that date at 7211, please.
27
it's a motion by Councillor Eithne Fitzgerald.
28
page again, it's seeking density of one house per acre.
29
favour of that again, isn't that right?
12:06:11 30
A.
That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Which again is --
And at the very top of the And you vote in
12:06:12
12:06:26
55 1
Q. 290
So you are supporting low density there?
2
A.
I am.
3
Q. 291
And I think at the next vote which is on the same page Councillor Lohan and
4
Keogh.
And again, it's for low density and I think that at page 7212 you are
5
recorded as voting in favour of that low density also, isn't that the position?
6
A.
That is correct.
7
Q. 292
And I think the next motion that is dealt with by council is Councillor Smyth
8
and Breathnach and it was to extend the high amenity zoning along the river.
9
And you are recorded on the following page at 7213, as voting against that.
12:06:44 10
Isn't that the position?
11
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
12
Q. 293
And on the next motion, No. 6, at 7213.
13 14
The special area amenity order.
You
vote against that, isn't that the position? A.
Yes.
Q. 294
You will see that you are at the very bottom of that page.
16
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
17
Q. 295
And the next motion, at 7214, which came to be considered was the introduction
12:06:58 15
18
of a C zoning or a town centre zoning on the lands.
19
Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan.
12:07:16 20
And this is a motion by
And you will note that the record
records you as voting against that, as indeed your colleague Ms. Terry did
21
also.
Isn't that the position?
22
A.
That is correct.
23
Q. 296
Can you recollect now why you would have voted against the imposition of a town
24 12:07:31 25
centre on those lands? A.
Again, I can only repeat that I would have tried to look at each motion as it
26
was presented, listened to the debate both for and against and tried to make an
27
opinion at that stage.
28
it was put in front of me. At this moment I cannot recall as to why I would
29
habe done that.
12:07:48 30
Q. 297
That would have been how I dealt with every motion as
You, in voting for DP92/44 you had voted for a change in the density to A1P Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:07:54
12:08:01
56 1
isn't that right? An area action plan?
2
A.
In which vote?
3
Q. 298
In the very first vote?
4
A.
Which was four to the acre?
5
Q. 299
No, the very first vote was to vote on the manager's map at 7207.
6
A.
Again, if that is how the record shows, yes, I have no dispute with that
7 8
whatsoever. Q. 300
9
The map that you are recorded here as voting in favour of the manager's proposals, isn't that right? It's the very first vote that took place.
12:08:21 10
We've
looked at it already.
11
A.
Yes, I think we've ....
12
Q. 301
Yes.
And the map on 7207.
That that map can be found at 7203.
13
what you were voting for.
14
A1P and an increase in the amount of residentially zoned land.
12:08:46 15
And this is
You were voting for a change in density from AP to Do you see
that?
16
A.
I see the map, yes.
17
Q. 302
And the map is showing a move from AP to A1P?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 303
And as you know A1P is area Action Plan, isn't that right that?
A.
Would be correct.
Q. 304
And within an area Action Plan, as the manager had outlined on his report to
12:08:57 20
21 22
you on 13th of May 1992, provision would be made for appropriate shopping.
23
7197, please.
24 12:09:14 25
You will see here on the second last paragraph the manager in reporting to the
26
council on DP92/44 said in relation to shopping.
27
that shopping be confined to neighbourhood facilities and he had also said in
28
the third -- sorry -- in the fourth paragraph he had said the Action Plan will
29
provide for the provision of necessary community facilities, schools, shopping
12:09:40 30
etc..
It's considered essential
So the manager had said that the area action plan would provide for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:09:44
12:10:01
57 1
shopping facilities, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's what the record shows.
3
Q. 305
You had then voted in favour of the manager when you had voted in favour of
4
DP92/44.
5
or a town centre at the Cherrywood lands at 7214.
6
A.
And you are now voting against the introduction of a shopping centre
Again, I would have tried to look at each motion as it came before me.
And
7
made a decision on that basis, resulting from the debates and so forth and as
8
they came about.
9
Q. 306
12:10:25 10
And are you in a position to explain that apparent inconsistency to the Tribunal?
11
A.
I'm not at this position at this moment in time, no, I cannot recall.
12
Q. 307
And I think the last vote on that date was at 7216.
Which is Councillor
13
Barrett's motion.
14
low density zoning in the Carrickmines Valley at one house to the acre. And
12:10:40 15
And Councillor Barrett's motion was for the introduction of
you voted in favour of that, isn't that right?
16
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
17
Q. 308
As I think as did your colleague Ms. Terry.
Now, I would suggest to you,
18
subject to anything you may wish to say to the Tribunal, Mr. Tyndall, that your
19
vote in favour of low density and Councillor Barrett's motion is inconsistent
12:11:00 20
21
with your vote on the same occasion in favour of the manager's proposal. A.
It would appear when you look at it in isolation with not the full content of
22
the record there, but I would suggest that I would have looked at each motion
23
as it came up and tried to make as best an informed decision as I could with
24
what was available to me at that time.
12:11:22 25
Q. 309
Yes.
Can you now looking back on it think of any reason why at the early part
26
of the meeting you would have been in favour of increased density and increased
27
residential take on these lands and by the end of the meeting were voting in
28
favour of one house to the acre?
29 12:11:42 30
A.
Obviously it would have been influenced by the debate on that particular day and I would have listened quite intently particularly to the people who would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:11:48
12:12:08
58 1 2
have been more involved and more familiar with that area. Q. 310
3
After that vote was successful, Mr. Tyndall, the map went out on public display for a second time in mid 1993.
And the map that went out is at 7217.
4 5
Now, what had happened to the lands that were zoned residential in the
6
Carrickmines Valley.
7
town centre has been placed on a portion of the lands and the balance are zoned
8
agriculture.
9
would agree I think that certainly by this stage you and probably anybody else
12:12:28 10
A.
I would certainly have known that they were a landowner.
Q. 311
I think indeed if we were to take up some of the motions that you had voted upon and the maps signed attached to those motions show the same outline I
16
think. That you had voted on on 27th of May 1992.
17
maps attached to them, isn't that right? A.
19 12:13:06 20
21
The individual motions had
I think it must be stated also that you would have dealt with tens if not hundreds of maps.
It would be very difficult to recall a specific map.
Q. 312
Yes.
A.
And they wouldn't have been dealt with one after another either.
22 23
Q. 313
Well insofar as this particular map was concerned.
I think the record of the
minutes show the only matter that was being discussed on the 27th of May 1992
12:13:22 25
were the 11 motions relating to the Monarch lands at Cherrywood in County
26
Dublin.
Isn't that what the record shows?
27
A.
I'm quite prepared to accept what the record shows, yes.
28
Q. 314
Because you will note indeed at 7216.
12:13:41 30
There would
have been other maps and considerations in between each time.
24
29
I would not suggest
that I would have known the intricacies of the actual line.
12:12:47 15
18
And you
landowner in the Carrickmines Valley?
13 14
And you can see the outline of the Monarch lands.
A
who had been at these two meetings must have known that Monarch were a
11 12
They were all now zoned at one house to the acre.
That the last motion, which was
Councillor Barrett's motion, concluded the meeting. beginning of the consideration of map 27 to the end. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
So that from the The only matters that
12:13:46
12:14:07
59 1
were considered were those 11 motions.
2
motions identified the Monarch lands.
And that the maps attached to the
Isn't that right? Isn't that right?
3
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
4
Q. 315
And I think that what happened then was that the matter came to be considered
5
again by the council in November 1993 and at 7234.
6
3rd of November.
7
vote takes place but the manager makes a report at 7255.
8
to your attention that under the heading "change three".
9
brought about by Mr. Barrett's motion, which reduced the density to one house
12:14:29 10
per acre.
11
Properties.
12
per acre.
You were recorded as being present.
And I want to draw Which is the change
Change of zoning at lands at Carrickmines from AP to two houses That's per hectare.
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 316
That's one house per acre, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 317
The manager at the next page, 7256.
16
And at that meeting no
The heading in the minutes of the meeting are Carrickmines Monarch
13
12:14:42 15
This is the meeting of the
He records the history of the zoning and
17
he recommends deleting the amendment, isn't that right? You will see
18
recommendation delete amendment.
19 12:14:58 20
A.
Yes, I see that.
Q. 318
And what the manager is recommending there, is that Councillor Barrett's
21
amendment be deleted in its entirety.
Isn't that right?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 319
So certainly those attending at the meeting including yourself 3rd of November.
24
Before you came to consider the matter would have known that what you were
12:15:15 25
considering included Monarch Properties lands.
Isn't that right?
26
A.
I would have to assume that is correct.
27
Q. 320
And indeed, I think -- at the meeting of the 11th of November, Mr. Tyndall,
28
which came to consider the matter.
29
by the council but this was the last chance, isn't that right, to change the
12:15:47 30
A number of motions came to be considered
density on these lands? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:15:50
12:16:02
60 1
A.
If that's what you say, yes, I accept that.
2
Q. 321
No, it's not what I say.
3 4
A.
I cannot recall the specific dates as to which, when they arose.
Q. 322
The position in relation to making a Development Plan is that councillors make a plan, it's put on public display?
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 323
Representations are made to it.
A.
That's right.
Q. 324
And it came back in May of '92 to the council.
11 12
it went out on display again.
13
isn't that right?
14
If that's
what the record is showing, I fully accept that.
7
12:16:15 10
You operated
this Development Plan.
5 6
You are the councillor, Mr. Tyndall.
It comes back to the council?
You voted in a certain way and
And it comes back a second time to the council,
A.
That's correct.
Q. 325
And after this decision is made the Development Plan is made, isn't that right?
16
A.
That -- that would have been 1993.
17
Q. 326
And the Development Plan in fact was made on 10th of December 1993 by Dublin
12:16:24 15
18 19
County Council? A.
12:16:42 20
Which would have been just before the councils would have split into their own different areas.
21
Q. 327
In January of 1994?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 328
In November of 1993 what I have been putting to you was this was Monarch's last
24
chance to change the density before the plan was finalised.
12:16:53 25
Isn't that the
position?
26
A.
That would be correct, yes.
27
Q. 329
So the matter came to be considered by you and your colleagues, I think on 11th
28
of November 1993.
29
7259, please.
12:17:12 30
And there were a number of motions that were considered.
And the first motion it's not dealt with at this point in time,
that is a motion seeking to confirm change three. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And that is to confirm low
12:17:18
12:17:40
61 1
density.
It's a motion by Councillor Smyth and Buckley.
2
at 7260.
Is to confirm change three, that's low density, for all of the
3
residential lands and prepare a variation.
4
Councillor Marren and Coffey to accept the manager's recommendation for a
5
portion of the lands and confirm the manager's recommendation for the balance
6
of the lands.
7
that's proposed to the first motion.
8
Barrett's amendment at 7261.
9
7262.
12:18:16 10
The second motion
And motion No. 3 a motion by
And an amendment is proposed by Councillor Barrett. And you vote against Councillor
And on the next page, on the first motion, at
Which is to confirm low density on all of the lands.
that motion.
And
You vote against
Do you see that?
11
A.
I do.
12
Q. 330
Now, you have voted for low density in May of 1992 and you had voted for
13 14
Councillor Barrett's motion.
Isn't that right? In May of '92.
A.
That is correct.
Q. 331
And you are now voting against low density here?
16
A.
That is also correct.
17
Q. 332
It would follow from that, that you had changed your view in the period.
12:18:28 15
18 19 12:18:43 20
21
Isn't that right? A.
I think the first motion I voted for was for higher densities.
Q. 333
Yes, you had.
A.
Again, going back to, I would have listened to each debate and tried to make-up
22 23
my mind on that. Q. 334
24
But certainly, insofar as you had voted for low density. initially for higher density.
12:18:58 25
density in May of '92.
26
That was defeated.
You had voted
You then voted for low
And you are now voting for low density here, isn't
that the position?
27
A.
Well, it would appear I'm going back to the initial position that I had.
28
Q. 335
I think on the second motion, which is also low density, at 7263, you are
29 12:19:16 30
recorded as voting against low density again.
And on Councillor Coffey and
Marren's motion, which is at 7263, you are recorded as voting in favour of it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:19:24
12:19:44
62 1
Isn't that the position?
2
A.
That's what the record shows, yes.
3
Q. 336
And Councillor Coffey and Marren's motion was accompanied by a map, 7227.
4
you see that outline?
5
A.
I do.
6
Q. 337
That is the outline of the Monarch lands, Mr. Tyndall.
7 8
And that is the
outline of the lands that would have been on most of the motions in May of '92? A.
9 12:20:04 10
Do
If that's, yes, I accept -- even at this stage looking at it I wouldn't be able to tell you that was the exact map, having seen them just two minutes ago.
Q. 338
But certainly having looked at what the manager had said, at the time that you
11
were voting on these lands, you must have known that what you were voting on
12
was Monarch's lands because they had been identified in the heading.
13
A.
14
Certainly looking at it now, it would appear to be that way.
12:20:25 15
16
Well, again, I cannot answer as to what -- 'cos I cannot recall the specifics.
hindsight is a wonderful thing. Q. 339
17
Yes.
You voted in favour of Councillor Marren and Coffey's motion.
Isn't
that right?
18
A.
This is the last motion?
19
Q. 340
Yes.
A.
I'm not sure to be honest.
12:20:37 20
But again, 20/20
21
That's again -- this was the last one to increase
the densities.
22
Q. 341
This is at 7263.
23
A.
I did, yes, I did vote.
24
Q. 342
What you were voting for in favour there, Mr. Tyndall, was to increase the
12:20:59 25
This motion is Councillor Marren's.
density on the Monarch lands to four per acre and leave the balance of the
26 27
Yes, 7263.
residentially zoned lands at one per acre. A.
Again, I would have listened to the full debate and tried to make an informed
28
decision. And I think it is regrettable that the minutes don't show that there
29
would have been wholesome and fairly boisterous debates at that stage, both for
12:21:24 30
and against. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:21:24
12:21:35
63 1
Q. 343
So your initial starting position in May of 1992 was in favour of increased
2
density and increased residential zoning.
3
you changed your view and voted in favour of low density.
4
position?
5
A.
their colleagues.
7
changed my mind. Q. 344
9
11
So, yes, I have no problem with saying that I would have
And then when it came to November you were voting against low density, having voted in favour of low density in May of '92.
12:21:55 10
Is that the
There was a duty upon councillors to listen to all relevant facts, including
6
8
And in the course of that meeting
And you then voted in favour of
increasing the density on the Monarch lands. A.
I would have looked at each motion and made a decision on the basis of each
12
motion as presented to me, which would not have basically stated for or against
13
low or high density in any shape or form.
14
it came in front of me.
12:22:12 15
Q. 345
16
It would have been each motion as
Well I think in fairness to yourself, that the density is dealt with on the actual motion at 7226.
This the motion that you voted on.
17
A.
Yep.
18
Q. 346
And I think in fairness to you yourself, you can't be correct when you say you
19 12:22:29 20
weren't considering density because it was the only thing you were -A.
Sorry, just to clarify, what I was suggesting is that I would have looked at
21
each motion as it came in front of me and voted accordingly.
22
a motion there I couldn't have voted on it.
23
Q. 347
24
Now, well leaving that aside for the moment. the moment.
12:22:47 25
Just looking at the motion at
For the moment, Mr. Tyndall, would you agree that the only matter
that you are considering is density?
26
A.
On map No. 27, change No. 3?
27
Q. 348
Yes.
28
A.
If that's ... yes, it would appear that way.
29
Q. 349
Yes.
A.
Remain at two per hectare.
12:23:06 30
If there wasn't
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:23:09
12:23:18
64 1
Q. 350
2
Yes, because change three was the imposition of density at one per acre as a result of Councillor Barrett's motion.
3
A.
Uh-huh.
4
Q. 351
And what this motion is doing is it's changing the density on the lands
5
attached to the map to four to the acre and leaving the rest at one to the
6
acre.
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 352
All right.
9
Mr. Tyndall, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why or what were the
12:23:40 10
reasons that would leave the Monarch lands with the density of four to the acre
11 12
Now, if you go back and you look at the map at 7217.
and the balance of the lands zoned at one to the acre? A.
I cannot.
All I can suggest as to what was going on at that stage, which may
13
have been a compromise put forward to try and get some higher densities
14
through.
12:24:08 15
16
and where to for. Q. 353
17 18
A.
Again, if I had the benefit of the debate both for and against, well then it would be easier now to make that decision.
Q. 354
21 22
Looking at the map, can you see any reason to justify the different densities that were voted on, on the 11th of November '93?
19 12:24:24 20
But I cannot, I'm only speculating because I cannot recall as to why
Yes but looking at that map and with the benefit of your years of experience as a councillor --
A.
With my years of experience I would be a lot more familiar with lands relating
23
my own particular area and would be very much be open to the debate when it
24
came outside of my area.
12:24:43 25
at this moment in time.
So I think it's unfair -- I cannot suggest as to why I can only say to you again that I would have looked
26
at it at the particular time, listened and tried to make an informed decision
27
as best I could at that particular time.
28
Q. 355
29 12:25:01 30
Do you agree that when you voted upon that motion you, whatever about any other councillors, must have known that you were voting on the Monarch lands?
A.
I cannot surmise as to what I must or didn't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
I can only tell you what I
12:25:06
12:25:20
65 1 2
do know now and what I'm looking at, at this point in time. Q. 356
Looking at the minutes of the meeting and looking at the documentation that has
3
been outlined to you and which has been circulated, I think you would have to
4
agree that you must have known that you were dealing with the Monarch
5
Properties lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 357
You don't agree with that?
8
A.
I don't agree with that.
9
Q. 358
Then 7225.
A.
I accept that I can look at the maps now and it's very, very clearly -- I don't
12:25:32 10
11
accept and I would be only surmising if I was to state any other thing to you
12
at this moment in time.
13
have been fully aware of each boundary relating to that map.
14
Q. 359
12:25:55 15
16
I do not recall at that particular time that I would
When you were -- were you ever approached by Mr. Lynn or anybody else on his behalf in connection with supporting the Cherrywood lands?
A.
I cannot recall specifically being asked about the Cherrywood lands.
But I
17
have absolutely no doubt that I would have had discussions. I cannot recall a
18
specific meeting relating to Cherrywood.
19
wouldn't have discussed the Cherrywood lands with Mr. Lynn.
12:26:16 20
Q. 360
21 22
But again, I am not disputing that I
Did you ever receive any payment or political subscriptions from Mr. Lynn or from Monarch Properties or anybody on their behalf?
A.
Well I now understand and following documentation received from the Tribunal
23
that I received a payment in 1991 of 300 punts.
24
Local Election, which was held on 27th of June 1991.
12:26:44 25
26
It would have been before the And this payment was
made be it May or June back in 1991. Q. 361
27
Yes.
I think you informed the Tribunal on two occasions I think by letter
dated 17th of February 2006.
2268.
28
A.
That is correct.
29
Q. 362
At paragraph three, "That you never received any payment or benefit from or on
12:27:02 30
behalf of Monarch Properties Limited", a number of companies and then a number Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:27:07
12:27:21
66 1
of named people or any individual or company associated with them.
2
that you had no recollection of any person making representations to you
3
regarding the lands at Cherrywood.
4
have met Mr. Lynn and I think you would accept it's likely that he may have
5
lobbied you in connection with these lands, is that correct?
6
A.
And then
But you would now accept that you must
I have no -- as I stated in my statement, I have no recollection.
But if it
7
is shown -- I have no doubt that there's a possibility of it, I would have
8
spoken to him because I would have met Mr. Lynn on numerous occasions.
9
Q. 363
12:27:41 10
11
We are talking about whether or not he was lobbied.
And at 2272.
On the
24th of March 2006 -A.
Just to clarify something.
That particular statement.
You're right.
I
12
didn't make any reference to monies that were received which was the 300 pounds
13
which I now acknowledge did arrive in 1991.
14
I would have been new to politics, new to the party.
12:28:05 15
Just to clarify that if I may.
the party in May and I wouldn't have had any dealings.
16
June.
17
to monies that would have come from elsewhere.
18
in that because I had no recollection of it.
19
Q. 364
12:28:27 20
21
The election was in
I wouldn't have had any dealings at that particular juncture relating
Sorry, I'm following you.
That's why it wasn't disclosed
You wouldn't have any dealings with monies coming
from elsewhere, Mr. Tyndall, I -A.
22
Just trying to clarify.
I hadn't disclosed that 300 pounds at that moment in
time because I wasn't aware of it.
23
Q. 365
You had forgotten it?
24
A.
I don't believe I was ever aware of it at that stage.
12:28:40 25
I would have only joined
am not disputing that the monies.
I have no dispute.
I
I am not disputing that the monies weren't
26
received.
27
Democrats to run as a local candidate in 1991 or in May of 1991 and my energies
28
at that stage would have been towards getting elected.
29
would have had a constituency office set up.
12:29:03 30
What I am saying to you is that I would have joined the Progressive
the cheque.
It's quite simple.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And I don't recall I
I don't recall actually seeing
12:29:04
12:29:23
67 1
Q. 366
And I think on the 24th of March 2006 you provided a second statement to the
2
Tribunal at 2272.
In which you reiterated that you had never received, isn't
3
that right, any payment via or on behalf of Mr. Monahan, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Sweeney,
4
Mr. Glennane, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Frank Dunlop & Associates or Shefran
5
or Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group, save for an unsolicited payment of 250
6
pounds to Mr. Dunlop." Isn't that the position?
7
A.
Which I had previously mentioned to the Tribunal.
8
Q. 367
Yes, we're talking now about the Monarch Properties payment.
9
A.
I'm talking about the second letter -- the first letter. Just to clarify
12:29:40 10
again, the first letter asked specific dates and that is why the second
11
clarification only related to that.
12
Q. 368
Yes.
13
A.
And the dates actually changed I believe in the second letter from the
14 12:29:52 15
Tribunal. Q. 369
Yes.
In the first letter that you received from the Tribunal, I think you
16
were asked for payments to a particular date I think in fact it was in fact to
17
between the 1st of January 1990 and 31st of December '94. Isn't that right?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q. 370
Now, the payment in June 1991 would fall within that period, isn't that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 371
In the first letter you gave the Tribunal you said you didn't receive any
12:30:12 20
21 22
payments.
23
within an extended period, isn't that right?
24
And you were then asked to provide information relating payments
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 372
But still including June of 1991.
26
A.
Absolutely, yes.
27
Q. 373
And on the second occasion when you provided the information to the Tribunal
12:30:23 25
28
you were still of the belief that you hadn't received any money, isn't that the
29
position that?
12:30:33 30
A.
Would be correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:30:34
12:30:44
68 1
Q. 374
2
Now, I have just been handed a supplemental statement.
And I understand
that -- I don't think we've had a copy of this before.
3 4
MR. O'DONNELL: It was given to the Tribunal earlier on this week.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
earlier on.
12:30:52 10
I don't have a copy.
I'm not disputing that we got a copy of it
But -- It certainly I don't think it has been added to the brief
but it will be added to the brief.
11 12
MR. O'DONNELL: We have copies of it for you, Chairman, Members of the
13
Tribunal, if you wish to have copies.
14
A.
If it would be of any benefit I could explain it to you.
12:31:04 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Well perhaps is it --
17 18
MS. DILLON:
That's fine.
We can put it up on screen.
19
have to be added to the brief.
Simply that it will
12:31:10 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Is it a lengthy statement?
22 23
MS. DILLON:
No, it's not.
24 12:31:13 25
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps if it's read out then and we can add it to the brief.
26 27
MR. O'DONNELL: We'll just give you copies.
28 29
(Handed to the Tribunal)
12:31:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:31:29
12:31:42
69 1
MS. DILLON:
This will be added to the brief and circulated.
2 3
Now, at paragraph 1 of this statement it states as follows.
"It has been
4
suggested in statements tendered to the Tribunal that I received a payment of
5
300 pounds from the Monarch Group on 11th of June 1991.
6
recollection of receiving such a payment.
7
donation was made I do not dispute that it was duly received by me."
I have no
If records demonstrated that such a
8 9
And for the avoidance of doubt, I think it might be as well at this particular
12:31:56 10
point in time, Mr. Tyndall --
11 12
MR. O'DONNELL: Perhaps we could finish reading the statement.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
12:32:04 15
No, I'm sorry. I will deal with this in my own way.
Thank you
as it arises I'm taking the witness.
16 17
You seem to be saying in that paragraph that it suggested that you received the
18
payment.
19
an extract --
12:32:15 20
A.
21
In case there is any dispute about it.
If we have 3191, which is
Sorry, I don't dispute I received it. I mean I have no reason to dispute that I received a payment.
22
Q. 375
It's simply that you say and I quote from your statement, Mr. Tyndall --
23
A.
I didn't recall receiving it. That's how I stated it.
24
Q. 376
And the record I want to draw to your attention is an extract from the cheque
12:32:30 25
payments book from Monarch Properties and if you look at I think 7 from the
26
bottom on that, you will see recorded in the cheque payments book of Monarch
27
Properties a cheque in the sum of 300 pounds.
28
PD.
29 12:32:50 30
Sorry Colm Tyndall TD, do you see that?
A.
Maybe I should check.
Q. 377
Do you see that, Mr. Tyndall? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And the payee is Chris Tyndall
12:32:51
12:33:13
70 1
A.
I do.
2
Q. 378
Yes. And it's the 11th of the 6th 1991.
And I think that there are and then
3
indeed at 3193.
On 19th of June 1991 there is a debit of that cheque No. 3648
4
in the sum of some 7 or 8 up from the bottom cheque No. 3648, in the sum 300
5
pounds from Monarch Properties Services Limited.
6 7
Now, to go back to your third statement, Mr. Tyndall, if I may.
8 9 12:33:25 10
At paragraph two you say.
"Furthermore and for the avoidance of any doubt it
is also suggested that I received two further payments namely, A, a payment
11
from Richard Lynn & Associates Limited on the 25th of March 1999, in the sum of
12
500 pounds.
13
sum of 500 pounds for a golf classic.
And B, a payment from Dunloe Ewart on the 24th of May 1999 in the
14 12:33:43 15
Again, I have no recollection he have of receiving either of these payments
16
during my time in politics I organised two golf classic tournaments to
17
fundraise my election campaigning. I believe it is more likely than not that
18
the payment A above was also in respect of a golf classic."
19 12:33:59 20
I think that the records provided to the Tribunal from Dunloe Ewart show at
21
page 6752, at item 14 on that list, a golf classic in aid of Councillor Colm
22
Tyndall held on 25th of March 1999 and 500 pounds was contributed.
23 24 12:34:22 25
26
And in fact, I think subject to any correction from you, that only one sum of 500 pounds is being referred to, Mr. Tyndall.
And that you may have made an
error in your statement.
27 28
MR. O'DONNELL: No, the second payment is from Dunloe Ewart.
29 12:34:32 30
CHAIRMAN:
This is a list of Dunloe Ewart.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:34:36
12:34:50
71 1
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
This is the Dunloe Ewart list.
The payment is made by
2
Mr. Lynn on behalf of Dunloe Ewart.
So it was not being suggested that there
3
were two payments of 500 pounds.
The Tribunal is only aware of one payment
4
subject to Mr. Tyndall being able to clarify it.
5
A.
I can clarify it, yes.
6
Q. 379
Well, what you have said is that you -- it is suggested you received two
7 8
payments. A.
9 12:35:09 10
Are you telling the Tribunal you received two payments?
What is said in the statement is that I received a payment from Richard Lynn & Associates Limited of 500 pounds.
Q. 380
That's what you say you received?
11
A.
And that is correct, yes.
12
Q. 381
All right.
13
A.
Just to clarify.
14
And at paragraph three -The original letter from the Tribunal asked Richard Lynn and
that's why I felt I was trying to be helpful not to differentiate between
12:35:25 15
16
In addition to the Dunloe Ewart, yes.
Richard Lynn & Associates Limited and just Richard Lynn. Q. 382
And your records -- are you saying that you based that information on your
17
records, Mr. Tyndall, or the information you have been provided by the
18
Tribunal?
19 12:35:40 20
A.
As I understand it, I think it was from details furnished by the Tribunal.
Q. 383
And at paragraph four you said "For the avoidance of doubt, I wish to make it
21
clear that I had and still have no recollection of receiving the payments
22
received to above which is why I did not refer to them in my earlier statements
23
to the Tribunal. Nor have I any contemporaneous records now available of
24
receiving the payments in question.
12:36:01 25
26
However, if other persons records suggest
such payments were made to me I am not in a position to and do not dispute receipt."
27 28
That's dated 29th of May 2006.
29 12:36:08 30
Was that your third statement to the Tribunal, Mr. Tyndall? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:36:10
12:36:15
72 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 384
Thank you very much, Mr. Tyndall.
3
If you answer any questions anybody else
may have for you.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
anything?
Thank you very much.
Sorry, does your counsel wish to ask
7 8
MR. O'DONNELL:
9
24th of May 1999 from Richard Lynn & Associates and a payment from the 25th of
12:36:34 10
March 1999 from Dunloe Ewart? Is it through your own recollection or is it
11 12
Why is it that you believe that you received a payment on the
through documents supplied to you by the Tribunal from both these entries? A.
It is through documents supplied by the Tribunal.
That I have no dispute that
13
I did receive them.
14
any -- I never did any fundraising other than golf classics.
12:36:54 15
16
Q. 385
Yes.
A.
And I can only assume that both of those would have been for participation in
17 18
I can only assume at this moment in time, I never had
the golf outing which I would have held. Q. 386
19
So, if for example, Dunloe Ewart have misrecorded the timing of the payment and that there is only one payment, you accept that that's correct?
12:37:09 20
But you have
no --
21
A.
Absolutely.
22
Q. 387
You have no way at this stage of saying whether there were two or one or none
23 24 12:37:26 25
26
except through the records supplied to you by the Tribunal? A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 388
And that also applies in respect of the earlier payment in June of 1991?
A.
That is also correct, yes.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much.
29 12:37:26 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:37:26
12:37:30
73 1 2
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Denis O'Callaghan, please.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:37:33
12:38:00
74 1
MR. DENIS O'CALLAGHAN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. O'Callaghan
A.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
Q. 389
MR. QUINN: I know that you have an appointment in the afternoon.
6 7 8
So I will
try and get through your evidence as best I can.
9 12:38:09 10
Mr. O'Callaghan, you were written to like other witnesses who have given
11
evidence by the Tribunal.
And you supplied a statement on 19th of April 2006.
12
And that statement is to be found at pages 7617 and 7618 of the brief.
13 14
I think you were a councillor for Dublin County Council having been elected in
12:38:29 15
1991.
Is that correct?
16
A.
That's correct. June of '91.
17
Q. 390
June of 1991.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 391
Workers Party?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 392
And I think Councillor Gilmore and Councillor Rabbitte were also members of
12:38:44 20
21 22
I think you are a member of Democratic Left, is that correct?
I was elected a councillor for the Workers Party in June of '91.
that party at that time, is that right?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 393
I think you are familiar with the Carrickmines lands, isn't that right?
A.
I would have been fairly familiar, yes.
Q. 394
And I think together with your colleague Councillor Gilmore, you promoted some
12:39:01 25
26 27 28
motions in relation to the lands, isn't that right? A.
29 12:39:16 30
As were Councillor Breathnach, Billane and Tipping.
I co-signed motions with Councillor Gilmore and Councillor Breathnach, that's correct.
Q. 395
Just to return to your statement for the moment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
You said that you received
12:39:19
12:39:29
75 1
no payments or benefits from any other persons associated with Monarch.
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 396
You'd know the named persons. Nor indeed did you receive monies from Mr.
4
Dunlop or any of his companies, is that correct?
5
A.
No, I didn't.
6
Q. 397
Now, if we just deal.
7
That's correct. Your first involvement with the lands would have been
in May 1992, isn't that right?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 398
And at that stage the manager had put forward proposals in relation to the
12:39:46 10
lands, isn't that right?
And those proposals were contained on map DP92/44.
11
And it was more or less to the effect that the area where these lands were
12
situated would be zoned A1 on piped sewage four houses to the acre.
13
up a map if you like, if it would be of assistance. 7203, please.
I can put
14 12:40:06 15
This was the situation coming in after the first public display of the
16
manager's recommendations to the councillors.
And you see there that they had
17
got to public display on piped sewage four houses to the acre.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 399
He was extending the area to proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway?
A.
Yes.
Q. 400
And he was recommending or suggesting an upgrade from AP to A1P, which would
12:40:28 20
21 22
have been on an action area plan, isn't that correct?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 401
And that manager proposal was put forward based on that map.
12:40:44 25
Councillors Lydon and McGrath at that meeting in May '92.
26
7207.
27
You voted against the manager's proposals, isn't that right
28
A.
That's what the record states, that's correct.
29
Q. 402
Yes.
A.
Correct.
12:41:01 30
As did your colleagues at that time?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And proposed by
And if I could have
12:41:02
12:41:16
76 1
Q. 403
Then there were proposals I think by Councillors Breathnach and Smyth as there
2
were by Councillors Gordon and Reeves.
3
the acre. If I could have 7210.
The lands would remain at one house to
4 5
And I think you voted against those proposals, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's what the record shows, correct.
7
Q. 404
Yes. If you were against four houses to the acre and against one house to the
8 9
acre. A.
12:41:54 10
Can I ask you what you were in favour of at that time?
I think it is important to explain to you that I would have co-signed a number of motions in relation to the Carrickmines Valley which included a special
11
amenity area order, the district zoning.
12
argue had a structured plan for the valley.
13
be taken at the beginning of the date.
14
was defeated.
12:42:18 15
A number of motions which I would And we asked that those motions
Now, there was a vote on that, which
Q. 405
Yes.
16
A.
So our motions weren't taken.
17
Q. 406
Yes.
18
A.
At the beginning.
19
Q. 407
If we come to 7213, please. We come to the first of those motions.
12:42:29 20
Namely, a motion "That the council resolve that a special amenity area order be
21
made for the Shangannagh Loughlinstown Valley", isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 408
And you voted obviously in favour of your own motion there, as did your
24 12:42:42 25
26
colleagues? A.
Correct.
Q. 409
And then of we go to the next page at 7214.
We find a second motion.
27
time a proposal that there would be a land zoned C, which was I think a
28
district centre or a town centre.
29 12:42:57 30
A.
No, district centre.
Q. 410
District centre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
This
12:42:57
12:43:05
77 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 411
I think that motion was actually successful, isn't that right?
3
A.
The record shows that, that is correct.
4
Q. 412
Can I ask you just in relation to that motion.
5
with any representatives of Monarch before you came to table it?
6
A.
In relation to the particular motion?
7
Q. 413
Yes.
8 9
A.
Not to my knowledge. centre.
11 Q. 414
In relation to, specifically in relation to a district
I would have had representations from Monarch in relation to their
lands over all.
13 14
Or your proposals or your views that it should be a district centre at
this location?
12:43:25 10
12
Had you discussed that motion
I can't recall specifically in relation to a district centre.
Did you have much attraction with the representatives of Monarch in relation to the lands at this time, that's 1992?
A.
12:43:49 15
Not really.
I think I met with Richard Lynn.
He may have shown up at our
advice clinics which we held at that time across the county.
16
And he may have
shown up at one of my advice clinics and discussed his proposals.
17
Q. 415
Yes.
18
A.
With both myself and Deputy Gilmore.
19
Q. 416
Yourself and Deputy Gilmore seem to have been very close in relation to the
12:44:07 20
motions.
You seemed to propose or seconded each others motions?
21
A.
We tended to that as a party.
22
Q. 417
Yes.
23
A.
But you would understand.
24 12:44:19 25
I was a new councillor.
Deputy Gilmore was the
senior councillor. Q. 418
I appreciate that. So in any event, that was a successful motion. Would it be
26
fair to say that you were seeking to promote some sort of development or maybe
27
job creation projects in the valley at this stage?
28 29 12:44:45 30
A.
Yes.
As you know, there was an extensive PR job done by, on behalf of Monarch
Properties in the Loughlinstown and Shankill areas in relation to the development of their lands.
There would have been high unemployment in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:44:51
12:45:14
78 1
area at the time, both in Loughlinstown, Ballybrack and in the Shankill areas.
2
And yes, in putting, in supporting a district zoning there, I would have been
3
of the opinion that it was for the public good.
4
Q. 419
5
Yes, it would create jobs.
But you weren't promoting it on the basis that you had been asked to do so by Monarch?
6
A.
Absolutely not.
7
Q. 420
Or any of their representatives?
8
A.
Absolutely not.
9
Q. 421
Yes. At 7215 we see the third of your motions.
12:45:22 10
Which was a motion that the
council would seem seek agreement with the landowner or developer seeking to
11
confine the construction of the number of houses to a smaller area of the site.
12
And that having regard to the C zoning on a portion of land.
13
were seeking to concentrate the residential development close to the district
14
centre which you had just proposed?
12:45:43 15
A.
16
Is where you
That motion formed part of our initial wraft of motions which we asked to be taken first.
17
Q. 422
Yes.
18
A.
What we were attempting there was to cluster what development was permitted on
19
it.
12:46:06 20
To cluster those houses so as not to impact significantly on the
Carrickmines Valley, which was a beautiful valley, as you know.
21
Q. 423
That motion was unsuccessful I think?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 424
And then finally, there was a motion tabled by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell
24
suggesting that development would be limited to a density not exceeding one
12:46:23 25
house per acre.
26
A.
That's correct, that would.
27
Q. 425
7216, please.
28 29 12:46:38 30
I think the 1991 draft plan would have had it at four houses to
the acre. A.
Yes.
I supported.
Q. 426
You supported that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:46:39
12:46:54
79 1
A.
I supported that motion.
2
Q. 427
Yes.
3
A.
I supported that motion, yes.
4
Q. 428
And had Councillors Barrett or Dockrell asked you for their support or your
5
It was the last motion I recall on the evening.
support for their motion?
6
A.
No, they hadn't.
7
Q. 429
And had Monarch at any stage asked that you would support a motion for either a
8 9 12:47:10 10
higher density than one house to the acre or indeed four houses to the acre? A.
Not that I can recall, no.
Q. 430
In any event, I think the map went on display on the basis that these lands
11
would be zoned on the basis of one house to the acre on piped sewage, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 431
And the matter came back before the council in November 1993.
12:47:25 15
Isn't that
right?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q. 432
I think you had motions again in November 1993.
If we could have 7260.
18
Yourself and Councillor Gilmore had proposed that the lands on public display
19
change 3, map 27 be confirmed as shown.
12:47:48 20
And that the manager be requested to
prepare and submit to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council not later
21
than June 1994, a draft variation of the new County Development Plan, isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 433
That motion I think was unsuccessful?
A.
Um, if my memory serves me right it was unsuccessful.
Q. 434
You see at 7262 and 7263 the vote on that.
12:48:00 25
26
There then I think was a motion by
27
Councillors Marren and Coffey asking that the amendments be deleted, isn't that
28
right? We see there at 7263 "That Dublin County Council resolves to accept the
29
County Manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendments in respect of
12:48:24 30
the lands outlined in red on the attached map. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And that the balance of the
12:48:29
12:48:40
80 1
lands remained at two houses to the hectare."
2
If I could have 7217.
3
map.
This is the map, you will see now in a moment on the
I'm sure you've seen it already this morning.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 435
We went through it with other witnesses.
6
The area coloured yellow is an area
proposed in one house to the acre, isn't that right? And this motion --
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 436
Of Councillors Marren and Coffey is that the area encompassed by the red line
9
would revert to four houses to the acre.
12:48:59 10
But that the balance of the lands
coloured yellow would remain at one house to the acre?
11
A.
That's correct and the manager's report was also saying that.
12
Q. 437
The manager's report I think was suggesting that all of the lands --
13
A.
Sorry.
14
Q. 438
Can you put forward any reason as to why the lands encompassed by the red line
12:49:21 15
I apologise, yes.
For the whole.
which coincidentally happen to be the Monarch lands ought to revert to four
16
houses to the acre and that the balance of the lands would remain at one house
17
to the acre?
18 19 12:49:48 20
A.
I can't really.
I can surmise.
That the lands outside of the Monarch lands
marked in red are lands in the Cabinteely, Lahaunstown, Brennanstown area which were the subject of, if you like, a separate extensive lobbying earlier on by
21
the Carrickmines Valley Protection Association who had lobbied quite
22
significantly in, prior to the Local Elections of '91 and indeed after.
23 24 12:50:23 25
So it's just a surmise that public reps would be very conscious of the -- of that association who were very active in retaining a number of things.
One,
26
low density.
27
either Carrickmines or Wyatville and in fact want the to divert traffic off the
28
M50 to both Shankill and Ballinteer.
29
favour of industrial zonings around the -- around those interchanges of
12:50:59 30
Secondly, that I can recall, they didn't want any junctions at
Wyatville and Carrickmines.
And thirdly, they weren't quite in
So there was a pretty powerful lobby. So it's
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:51:03
12:51:12
81 1 2
just -Q. 439
3
But that lobby effected all of the lands coloured yellow, isn't that right? Not just the lands other than the Monarch lands?
4
A.
It did, yes.
5
Q. 440
Yeah.
6
Now, just in relation to the other than the fact that these are Monarch
related lands.
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 441
Can you give any indication or suggestion to the Tribunal any reason why these
9
lands should be singled out as lands that merited four houses to the acre,
12:51:29 10
whereas the balance of the adjoining lands which had the support of the manager
11
at four houses to the acre, ought to be retained at one house to the acre?
12
A.
No, is the answer to you.
13
Q. 442
Thank you very much.
14 12:51:49 15
16
Now, you then continued on I think as a member of Dun
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, isn't that right? A.
That's right, from '94.
Q. 443
Yes, '94.
And I think again yourself, and particularly Councillor Gilmore
17
promoted the concept I think of a science and technology park, isn't that
18
right, for this area?
19 12:52:07 20
A.
It that would be correct, yeah.
Q. 444
Particularly in May '94.
Councillor Gilmore probably more so.
If I could have 5130, please.
This is a report on
21
Councillor Gilmore's suggestion on the science and technology park for the
22
area.
23
propose the science and technology park for this area?
24 12:52:33 25
A.
Can you recall the circumstances under which Councillor Gilmore came to
Well I can recall my own. Gilmore.
Obviously, I can't speak for Councillor Deputy
There was an idea floating at the time, I recall, in relation to the
26
provision of a science and technology park in the Dublin area.
27
number of local authorities were bidding for that science and technology park.
28
Also I think the colleges, a number of colleagues, Trinity, UCD, DTI, DCU
29
obviously were interested in the idea.
12:53:07 30
And I think a
And I think there was an EU programme
also in relation to it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:53:09
12:53:30
82 1
On Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council it was thought it was a tremendious
2
idea.
3
would actually be a partner in it, I think it was if my memory's right, GRE.
We had UCD in the county.
And that it would -- Dun Laoghaire Rathdown
4
Q. 445
Yes.
5
A.
And that it would be a revenue generating base for the local authority.
6
again, would create jobs in the area.
7
idea was warmly welcomed.
And
So my recollection of it was that the
8
Q. 446
Welcomed both by the councillors and by the officials presumably?
9
A.
Certainly by the councillors.
Q. 447
And of course obviously the location of a science and technology park now on
12:53:48 10
11
the area would require an amendment or a variation to the Development Plan?
12
A.
It would require a variation of the County Development Plan, yes.
13
Q. 448
And I think as matters transpired, the issue or the motion Councillor Gilmore's
14
motion, was discussed at a tourism and planning meeting of the council in May
12:54:14 15
'94.
And again in June '94, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 449
Do you recall having any discussions with representatives of Monarch at this
18 19 12:54:29 20
time in relation to the possibility of the science and technology park? A.
No, no.
Q. 450
In any event, I think the council, as you say, were very much in favour of the
21
proposal.
22
Action Plan put on display.
23
letter would be written to a committee or a subcommittee which had been
24
established by the Taoiseach to look into the whole issue of the science and
12:54:53 25
And in June '94 I think, it was decided that there would be a Draft
technology park.
26
A delegation would meet with ministers and a
Isn't that right? 2369.
This would appear to be what the
record of the meeting of 29th of June decided.
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 451
The planning and tourism committee, that was the subcommittee presumably?
29
A.
It would be a subcommittee of the council, yes.
Q. 452
And that seemed be the steering committee in relation to the science and
12:55:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:55:26
12:55:44
83 1
technology issue and also the area action plan, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's where it was appropriate to be raised.
3
Q. 453
And I think by November of 1994, on the 14th of November 1994, the manager was
4
in a position to tell the council that agreement had been reached on terms with
5
GRE and Monarch in relation to the council's perhaps in a science and
6
technology park.
7
display, a variation to the Development Plan to cater for the science and
8
technology park, isn't that right?
9 12:56:05 10
And I think it was resolved that there would be put on
A.
If there was an official report of that I'd accept that.
Q. 454
Yes.
And also I think that that agreement which the manager brokered
11
necessitated other variations by way of an increase in density from agriculture
12
to residential of portions of the Monarch lands?
13
A.
14 12:56:25 15
I think it had a knock on effect on to certain -- maybe and to the written statement also.
Q. 455
Yes. And the written statement.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 456
And I think a map did go on public display.
18
at a meeting.
19
colleagues.
12:56:42 20
And the matter was reviewed again
You voted in favour of those proposals as did 16 other of your
I think there were only two who voted against the proposals.
And the map, 94/85A went on public display.
If we have 7464.
21 22
There are nine changes I think proposed there by way of variation.
23
effectively provide for the E1, which was now to be a science and technology
24
park.
12:57:11 25
And they
The written statement had to be amended obviously accordingly.
Some
of the lands that were being changed were one was the agriculture B 4.5
26
hectares.
27
converted.
28
I think the district centre was replaced by agricultural lands as we'll see at.
29
It's amendment No. 4.
12:57:37 30
A ten houses to the hectare.
20 hectares of that had to be
As did one hectare of C, which was the district centre.
And then
And then amendments No. 5 and 6 proposed that
agricultural land south of what had been a proposed line of the motorway would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:57:42
12:57:57
84 1
now be elevated to in the case of 0.7 hectares C.
2
hectares A, which would have been residential.
3
16 houses to the hectare.
4
A.
Uh-huh.
5
Q. 457
And I think that would went on public display.
In the case of 19.5
But this time residential on
It came back before the
6
council in April 1995 when it was voted on.
7
And again, I think you were one of the 23 Councillors who vote in the favour of
8
the proposal.
9
that right?
12:58:22 10
If I could have 2427, please.
There being only one councillor who voted against them, isn't
A.
If that's what the record says.
11
Q. 458
And 2428.
12
A.
I accept that.
13
Q. 459
And again, throughout this period, did you have any contact with
14 12:58:38 15
16
representatives of Monarch in relation to the matter? A.
That period '95 to the best of my knowledge, no.
Q. 460
Yes.
Now, I think that you were to loose your colleagues Councillors Rabbitte
17
and Gilmore.
18
late '94?
19 12:59:00 20
They became ministers or junior ministers in the Government in
A.
In late '94, '95 to June '97.
Q. 461
Yes.
21
But unfortunately, I think the science and technology park wasn't given
to this district.
22
A.
No, that's correct.
23
Q. 462
Did that come as a disappointment?
24
A.
Yes, for me personally, yes.
Q. 463
Were you involved in seeking to have the park given to the site in Cherrywood?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 464
You didn't lobby for the site to be designated as --
28
A.
Only in my contributions on my own council.
29
Q. 465
Only on your contributions to your own council.
A.
Yes.
12:59:15 25
12:59:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:59:38
13:00:03
85 1
Q. 466
I think, I don't want to go through it now.
I think the plan did, that is the
2
1993 plan as varied did come up for review then in 1996.
3
were produced.
4
variation of the plan.
5
that right?
I think by January 1998 there was on display, a draft Which again had submissions from Cherrywood, isn't
6
A.
If that's what the record states.
7
Q. 467
The '93 plan as --
8
A.
As varied in '97.
9
Q. 468
As varied back in 1995.
A.
Yes.
You asked me in relation to representations in '97.
Q. 469
Yes.
No.
13:00:17 10
11 12
And in 1997 maps
That's for the review of --
I'm jumping ahead of myself.
I'm not taking it in stages.
I'm
trying to keep an eye on the time, so to speak.
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q. 470
The '93 plan as varied --
A.
Yes.
Q. 471
And you have seen the variation and I think it was approved in '95. Isn't that
13:00:36 15
16 17
right?
18
A.
Yes. That's correct.
19
Q. 472
And then I think the review took place of the 1993 plan as varied in 1996.
13:00:46 20
other words in 1996 the plan went up for review again in the normal course.
21
A.
Yes, the process was commenced.
22
Q. 473
And I think in early '97 maps were produced.
23 24 13:01:02 25
And an indication given of time
frames etc. A.
Yes.
Q. 474
But on 26th of March 1997 I think another issue came up for debate in the
26
council.
That was the line of the Southeastern Motorway, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 475
I think you were instrumental in putting forward the motion in relation to
29 13:01:18 30
In
that. 1997.
If we could have 6291.
This is at a meeting of the 26th of March
You had proposed and Councillor Pat Fitzgerald had seconded it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
That
13:01:26
13:01:43
86 1
there would be an adjournment of the council until a full Environmental Impact
2
Statement was given and considered by the members in relation to the effect of
3
the motorway.
4
from early 1990?
5
A.
6 7
Isn't that right? The line of the motorway had been an issue
The line of the motorway had been, yes, a major issue both in the Stepaside area and indeed in the, from the Carrickmines -- in the Carrickmines area, yes.
Q. 476
And it was hugely ifferential in that it had been long since agreed that
8
development would take place to the eastern side of that motorway line.
9
the further west the line went, the further the greater the area that had
13:02:05 10
11
opened up for development, isn't that right? A.
12 13
I certainly had a view that the line of the motorway should determine development, yes.
Q. 477
14 13:02:21 15
So
Back to the sea side --
At this stage, that is March '97, you are seeking to stall matters until a full Environmental Impact Statement is reached on the line of the motorway.
A.
That would be the purpose of the motion, yes.
16
Q. 478
Unfortunately, that motion was lost, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 479
16 votes against four for and there were no abstentions.
Then I think in
19
April '97 your colleagues had put forward the proposal that perhaps the
13:02:40 20
densities would be reinstated in relation to the maps, isn't that right? I
21
think that there were motions, particularly the motion in the name of
22
Councillor Dillon-Byrne, that density on the valley or on the proposed maps
23
would be shown and that they would try and limit the density of the residential
24
density on the development of the Carrickmines area.
13:03:13 25
Do you recall that
debate?
26
A.
If I can see it on the monitor.
27
Q. 480
If we take the meeting of the 2nd of April 1997.
If I have 2556, please.
28
You see there the meeting which had been held on 4th of February 1997.
29
motion that the density zoning of all of the maps with the Dublin Draft
13:03:47 30
In a
Development Plan be restored to that density which was designated and in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:04:02
13:04:07
87 1
same manner as Development Plan presently in being, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 481
Okay.
I notice I wasn't present at that meeting. In any event, I think that motion was unsuccessful.
But the manager
4
did give an indication and an undertaking we'll see at 2560 at the same
5
meeting.
6
the relevant maps showing the changes proposed in the Development Plan which
7
had presented at previous meetings.
8
number of minor updates of drafting amendments would be made to the written
9
statement and maps before they would be put on public display.
That he would make available to members a written list together with
He also informed the members that a
13:04:25 10
11
I think the maps went on public display.
12
relation to -- or on behalf of Monarch in relation to their lands.
13
submissions were considered at a meeting of the council I think in January 1998
14
and voted upon, isn't that right?
13:04:42 15
16
Submissions were received in And those
A.
If the record shows that, I'll accept that.
Q. 482
Yes. Did you ever receive any offers or suggestions of money from anyone
17
connected with Monarch in relation to your approach to these lands?
18
A.
Absolutely not.
19
Q. 483
Did you know of, what appears to be widespread political support by Monarch of
13:05:05 20
your fellow councillors when you were you were a member of the council?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 484
Was it ever referred to at any of the meetings of which at various motions were
23 24 13:05:16 25
discussed? A.
No, not to my knowledge.
Q. 485
Thank you very much.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much,
28 29 13:05:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:05:23
13:05:40
88 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
were dealing with the 11th.
3
sure if Mr. O'Callaghan has indicated how he voted.
4
he voted against the Marren/Coffey proposed motion.
5
well for it to be put on the transcript. This was in relation to the 1993
6
plan.
7
A.
8 9
Just one thing, Mr. Quinn.
Just something I noticed when you
The confirmation meeting in November.
I'm not
I think the records show But it might just be as
That's correct, my recollection is that I voted against the Marren/Coffey motion.
Q. 486
MR. QUINN: You voted against the Marren Coffey motion?
A.
That's my recollection.
11
Q. 487
You were anxious to retain the zoning at one house to the acre?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 488
And I think you voted in favour of a motion by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell
13:05:56 10
14
which was amending a Smyth/Buckley motion to add a draft variation by June
13:06:19 15
'94.
I may or may not have dealt with that.
And then there was one other
16
vote.
I think there was a vote that by Councillors Smyth and Misteil to
17
reduce the district centre to agriculture and you voted against that.
18
A.
I did, yeah.
I was promoting the district centre.
19
Q. 489
You were promoting that. Yes.
Thank you.
13:06:38 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you, Mr. O'Callaghan.
Ten past two.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:07:33
14:15:58
89 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Ned Ryan, please.
6 7
MR. NED RYAN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
8
MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:16:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good afternoon, Mr. Ryan.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
12 13 14 14:16:36 15
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Ryan.
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 490
I think that you were a County Councillor between 1991 and 1993.
16
Is that
correct?
17
A.
That's correct, yes.
18
Q. 491
And you are a member of the Fianna Fail party, isn't that correct?
19
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 492
In 1994 what council did you become a member of?
21
A.
Fingal County Council.
22
Q. 493
So that your interest in the subject lands finished in December '93?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 494
Now, I think the Tribunal wrote to you and asked you for certain information
14:16:45 20
14:17:00 25
26
earlier on this year. February 1996.
And you initially replied by letter of the 13th of
At 2069, please.
27 28
And you had been asked in the correspondence from the Tribunal to provide
29
information in relation to contacts with certain people from Monarch Properties
14:17:15 30
and information in relation to political donations, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:17:18
14:17:35
90 1
A.
Is right, please.
2
Q. 495
2069, please.
Now, in your reply you said that you had known the late
3
Mr. Phil Monahan and Richard Lynn for a number of years.
You had had numerous
4
conversations with Mr. Lynn on the golf course and on social occasions because
5
he lived in the area.
6
sure that Cherrywood came up for discussion on some of these occasions.
You had met Mr. Monahan at functions and that you were
7 8 9
So would you say that you met Mr. Richard Lynn fairly frequently? A.
14:17:53 10
You know, he resided in the area.
And I'd have bumped into him, you know, on social occasions and probably on the
11 12
I would say I met him fairly frequently.
golf course and, you know, in or around the general area. Q. 496
You say "That you do not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group
13
but however if there is evidence to the contrary of any contribution expressed
14
as a political donation for election purposes, I would accept such evidence as
14:18:21 15
I have no record of same."
16
A.
Yeah, well, actually, I couldn't recall the details until when I got the --
17
Q. 497
The brief from the Tribunal.
18
A.
The brief from the Tribunal.
19
Q. 498
So prior to you getting the brief from the Tribunal you didn't remember
14:18:29 20
21
receiving any money from Monarch Properties? A.
22 23
I knew I got some donations but I couldn't remember any of the details, you know, of the final details.
Q. 499
24
With respect, what you had said is you could not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group but if there was evidence to the contrary you'd accept
14:18:47 25
it, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 500
I think then you were subsequently supplied with a brief of documentation from
28
the Tribunal, including documentation relating to the payments you had received
29
from the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
14:18:57 30
A.
That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:18:58
14:19:09
91 1
Q. 501
2
I think you then did, the day before yesterday provide an additional statement to the Tribunal. Isn't that the position?
3
A.
That's the position.
4
Q. 502
And in that statement you confirmed receipt of an election donation on the 5th
5
of June 1991, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's correct, yes.
7
Q. 503
A donation of 2,000 pounds on the 16th of December 1992.
8
A.
That's for the Senate.
9 14:19:19 10
CHAIRMAN:
What's the one on the 5th of June '91?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
The one on the 5th of June, I think it's 1,000 pounds.
13
A.
1, 000. 1,000 pounds for Local Elections.
14
Q. 504
A 1,000 pounds on the 5th of June 1991.
14:19:36 15
2,000 pounds on 16th of December
1992. And 1,000 pounds on 28th of March 1996.
Isn't that right?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q. 505
Now, is it fair to say that you extracted that information from the brief of
18
documents with which you had been furnished and following your consideration of
19
those documents you put in this statement to the Tribunal?
14:19:55 20
A.
21
Yes, my solicitor actually -- he hadn't a chance either looking at the brief. So that was the reason for it.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
13th of February 2006 that you had received substantial donations?
14:20:12 25
A.
Mr. Ryan, you must have known when you wrote to the Tribunal on the
Well I knew I'd got donations.
I wasn't --
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
Tribunal that you could not recall any donation.
29 14:20:29 30
A.
But they were substantial donations.
Well I didn't intend to mislead the Tribunal. I wasn't sure of the detail.
I didn't have --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And yet you told the
As I said, Chairman, it was --
14:20:34
14:20:56
92 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
can't recall the precise amounts.
3
that you received nothing.
4
A.
5
But you could have said that I recall substantial donations but But the clear impression from the letter is
But, Chairman, I did say that I'd accept, you know -- yeah, I did say if there was evidence of any contribution as a political donation for election purposes.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
in extracting information from people whom it is obliged to investigate.
9
we get letters of this nature indicating that nothing, little or nothing, was
14:21:20 10
But it's an example of the difficulty the Tribunal frequently has When
received and then it transpires that the true position is that substantial
11
donations were received.
All right.
12 13
Q. 506
14
MS. DILLON:
Now, I think your second letter is at page 8484, please.
At paragraph subparagraph 1, 2 and 3 of this, you confirm the receipt of three
14:21:45 15
donations.
16
The first is of 1,000 pounds, the second is of 2,000 pounds and
the third of 1,000 pounds.
Isn't that the position?
17
A.
That is the position.
18
Q. 507
And that information is extracted from the documentation the Tribunal has
19 14:21:58 20
21
furnished to you.
Isn't that right, Mr. Ryan?
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 508
So that you are not coming to the Tribunal with any information that you are
22
providing to the Tribunal.
23
independently established.
24
A.
14:22:15 25
26
Rather you are confirming what the Tribunal has Isn't that the position?
Well, as I say, I was aware of the fact that I got contributions.
But as I
mentioned, the detail, you know, I wasn't -- I didn't have the detail. Q. 509
27
Well prior to you getting the brief from the Tribunal, Mr. Ryan, where did you confirm to anybody that you had actually got money from Monarch Properties?
28
A.
Well I wasn't able to confirm.
29
Q. 510
And in June of 2000, at page 2066, Mr. Ryan, you attended at an inquiry by
14:22:48 30
I couldn't really get confirmation.
Fianna Fail, isn't that the position? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:22:50
14:23:03
93 1
A.
Yeah, that's correct.
2
Q. 511
And you are recorded there at the second paragraph as saying that "Ned Ryan
3
informed the committee that he received nothing from Frank Dunlop nor did he
4
receive any from Green Properties.
5
developers in excess of 500 pounds."
6
A.
He did not receive donations from Now, is that a true statement, Mr. Ryan?
Well, I don't recall making that statement because at the -- when I went to
7
that inquiry actually my brother, who I was very close to, had only died, was
8
some days prior to that.
9
making that statement.
14:23:30 10
Q. 512
11
So actually I wasn't focused and I don't recall
Be that as it may, it's in the published document, isn't that right, Mr. Ryan? It's in the published final Fianna Fail report?
12
A.
It is, yes.
13
Q. 513
It is incorrect?
14
A.
That is incorrect. Yeah.
Q. 514
And since you received the brief of documents from the Tribunal that reminded
14:23:40 15
16
you that you had received at least 4,000 pounds from Monarch.
17
any step to set the record straight in relation to this inquiry?
Have you taken
18
A.
Well the letter that came in the other day would have set the record straight.
19
Q. 515
To the Tribunal?
A.
To the Tribunal.
21
Q. 516
Based on the information the Tribunal gave you?
22
A.
Well, and based on what my own recollections were.
23
Q. 517
You misunderstand my question.
14:23:58 20
24
I'm asking you in light of the fact that the
Fianna Fail report contains what you now know to be a factual inaccuracy, since
14:24:19 25
you remembered you had received this amount of money from Monarch.
26
taken any step to inform the Fianna Fail Inquiry that this material is
27
incorrect?
Have you
28
A.
I haven't, no, not yet.
29
Q. 518
Now, if we just move very briefly through the payments. I think in June of
14:24:37 30
1991.
At 3247.
You received a sum, you see there, I think, approximately
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:24:47
14:25:00
94 1
half way down the way page, Mr. Ryan, a sum of 1,000 pounds.
2
Elections.
Isn't that the position?
3
A.
Yeah, that's right, yeah.
4
Q. 519
And you accept now that you received that money?
5
A.
I do, yes.
6
Q. 520
Yes.
7
And I think that in March of 1992 you wrote yourself to Monarch
Properties.
3582, please.
Asking Mr. Richard Lynn for golf sponsorship.
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 521
You will have seen that in the brief.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 522
And --
12
A.
Well, I never actually ran any golf classics or fundraisers myself.
14:25:27 10
For the Local
That was
13
basically for the Lenihan Cup, which is a golf competition that's played for
14
among all of the golfing societies in Dublin west or it was then.
14:25:48 15
Q. 523
16
You knew Mr. Lynn well enough to approach him to ask him for a donation or to support the golf classic, isn't that right?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 524
And indeed, at the following page at 3583.
19 14:26:06 20
21
You thank him in anticipation and
you hope everything is going well for him, isn't that right? A.
Yeah. That's -- yeah.
Q. 525
And there's a notation there that they did in fact support -- they did accede
22
to your request and support the golf classic, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 526
Isn't that the position?
A.
Yes, that's the position, yeah.
Q. 527
And I think at 3371, Mr. Ryan, the document records second from the bottom that
14:26:17 25
26 27
on the 16th of December 1992, you received 2,000 pounds for the Senate Election
28
campaign.
29 14:26:38 30
A.
That's correct, yes.
I accept that, yeah.
Q. 528
Now, can I ask you, Mr. Ryan, in December 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
What was the average
14:26:42
14:26:58
95 1 2
political donation you would have received at that time? A.
3 4
Well, I'd say it would be quite small.
It would be only, you know, maybe a
few 100 pounds. Q. 529
5
What was the biggest donation you got for that Senate campaign can you remember?
6
A.
Well that would certainly be the biggest.
7
Q. 530
Yes.
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 531
And notwithstanding that, Mr. Ryan, you had forgotten all about it, is that the
14:27:08 10
11
That was the biggest?
position? A.
Well I hadn't forgotten about it.
In actual fact, I was aware of the fact
12
that I had got a contribution but I thought actually until I got the brief from
13
the Tribunal, I thought that it would be in the region of, you know, I wasn't
14
sure.
14:27:29 15
Q. 532
I thought it would be in the region of one at most.
And when you got the first letter from the Tribunal and when you made your
16
first reply.
17
1,000 pounds from Monarch for that election?
18
A.
19 14:27:54 20
Was it your belief at that stage that you'd received at least
Well I reckoned if I'd got -- if I had got a donation, you know, which I accepted I had, I reckoned it would be in that region, you know.
Q. 533
21
Notwithstanding that belief, you told the Tribunal that you didn't recall any donation at all.
Isn't that the position?
22
A.
Well, no.
23
Q. 534
Yes.
24
A.
Sorry.
Q. 535
Is that you do not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 536
But I think in March of 1996, at 5777.
14:28:09 25
28 29 14:28:38 30
Actually, I didn't recall the details, you know.
I see.
It's just that what you say in your letter at 2069 --
I didn't actually.
It's the details I hadn't -There's a payment of 1,000 pounds in
connection with by-election expenses, isn't that the position? A.
That's correct, yeah.
Q. 537
And indeed, at 5780 I think a copy of the cheque is available. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Isn't that
14:28:38
14:28:44
96 1
right?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 538
And I think the back of that cheque at 5781, that records your signature.
4
Isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right, yeah.
6
Q. 539
And when you received that documentation, did that assist you in recollecting
7
that you had received the money?
8
A.
It did, yes.
9
Q. 540
And I think in addition, you got a fifth payment in May of 1999.
14:29:00 10
from Dunloe Ewart through Mr. Lynn at item 27.
11
At 6753,
You are recorded as receiving
500 pounds?
12
A.
That's for the Local Election in '91.
13
Q. 541
In '99.
14
A.
Yeah, '99.
Q. 542
Now, can I ask you just specifically about that item there at item 27.
14:29:14 15
I beg your pardon. You
16
were asked in earlier this year about any payments you had received from
17
Mr. Richard Lynn.
18
received that sum of 500 pounds through Mr. Lynn?
19
A.
14:29:41 20
And am I correct in understanding that you would have
Yeah, well, obviously it came through Mr. Lynn.
But again, as I said, until
such time as I got the detail, you know, I didn't -- I didn't recall the --
21
that it was Monarch or -- well Monarch were no longer operating at that stage.
22
So --
23
Q. 543
Sorry do you want to finish?
24
A.
Yeah because well I associated Mr. Lynn more with Monarch than any other
14:30:07 25
26
organisation, yes. Q. 544
But indeed in the correspondence you got from the Tribunal you were asked about
27
any payments from Mr. Lynn and you didn't disclose this payment either, isn't
28
that right, Mr. Ryan?
29 14:30:19 30
A.
Yeah.
Q. 545
So it wasn't until you got all of the documents from the Tribunal that you then Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:30:23
14:30:37
97 1
confirmed to the Tribunal what the Tribunal had given to you, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yeah.
3
Q. 546
So if you received another payment from Monarch of which the Tribunal is
4
unaware, that still hasn't been disclosed wouldn't that be the position
5
Mr. Ryan?
6
A.
Well that would be the position.
7
Q. 547
Insofar as they've been provided to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties?
8
A.
That's correct, yeah.
9
Q. 548
Now, you have also been provided in the documentation with the records in
14:30:53 10
But you have the details --
relation to your voting at local council meetings in connection with the
11
Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
12
A.
That's correct, yeah.
13
Q. 549
May the Tribunal take it, Mr. Ryan, that you at least would have appreciated
14
that when the lands at Monarch.
14:31:09 15
The Monarch lands at Carrickmines or
Cherrywood came up for voting, that you knew those lands were owned by Monarch?
16
A.
I would have known them, yeah.
17
Q. 550
And indeed --
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 551
Did you ever receive any cash payments from Monarch?
A.
No, certainly not, no.
Q. 552
Did you ever, throughout your political career, receive political donations in
14:31:22 20
21 22
I would, yeah.
cash?
23
A.
Well I received small political donations around election time.
24
Q. 553
What would you regard as small, Mr. Ryan?
A.
Maybe around 200 to 300 pounds.
Q. 554
And in the votes that have taken place in connection with the Cherrywood lands.
14:31:37 25
26 27
Insofar as you have voted, would you accept in general that you voted in favour
28
of the Monarch interests?
29 14:31:58 30
A.
Well, no, I wouldn't accept that.
At that particular time, I mean, you had
mass emigration, you had mass unemployment and when this proposal came along I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:32:05
14:32:19
98 1 2
thought it was a very good idea. Q. 555
3
In May of 1992, on the first votes that took place.
You voted in favour of
the Manager's map. Isn't that right, DP92/44?
4
A.
I assume so, yes.
5
Q. 556
That is the map that was most favourable or the position that would have been
6
most favourable to Monarch.
It didn't pass in the event, isn't that right?
7
A.
I'm not sure.
8
Q. 557
And I think in November of 1993, when the matter came back before the council
9
No, I don't think so, that's right.
that you voted in favour of Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey's motion.
14:32:40 10
Isn't that the position?
11
A.
Yeah, that would be correct. Yeah.
12
Q. 558
And the effect of that was to increase the density on the Monarch lands.
13 14 14:32:50 15
Isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 559
Yes.
16 17
Monarch lands should be increased, Mr. Ryan? A.
18 19 14:33:11 20
Now, why did you believe that the Monarch -- that the density on the
Well I suppose at that stage, you know, I expected that, you know, whatever was the original, one to the acre, which was very low density, you know.
Q. 560
Yes.
A.
So I would have accepted, you know, an increase, like.
It was still in
21
general terms, you know, the increase, you know, compared with the densities
22
I've seen around since. It's still very low density.
23
Q. 561
24
Yes.
If that was your position, Mr. Ryan, why then did you not promote or
suggest that all of the residentially zoned lands in Carrickmines be zoned at
14:33:35 25
four to the acre?
26
A.
I can't recall.
27
Q. 562
Why did you agree to the singling out of the Monarch lands for increased
28 29 14:33:47 30
density? A.
I can't recall now.
Q. 563
Did you disclose to anybody in Dublin County Council at that time that you had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:33:51
14:34:10
99 1
been in receipt of significant sums of money from Monarch prior to your voting
2
in November 1993?
3
A.
No, I didn't, no.
4
Q. 564
Right.
5
Nor I didn't try to influence any other councillors.
And you didn't disclose to anybody that you had been a beneficiary of
Monarch's largesse, as it were, before you came to vote in November 1993?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 565
I see.
8
Thank you very much, Mr. Ryan.
Would you answer any questions
anybody else may have for you.
9 14:34:21 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Ryan.
Thank you, Chairman.
12 13
MS. FOLEY:
Mr. Liam Creaven, please.
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:34:44
14:35:25
100 1
MR. LIAM CREAVEN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. FOLEY AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Creaven.
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 566
MS. FOLEY: Good afternoon, Mr. Creaven.
6 7 8
Could you give the Tribunal a brief outline of your political history starting
9
from when you were first elected to Dublin County Council?
14:35:36 10
A.
I'm sorry?
11
Q. 567
When were you first elected to Dublin County Council?
12
A.
Oh, I can't remember the date.
13
Q. 568
Would it be in 1985?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 569
And then again in 1991.
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 570
And then you moved to Fingal County Council --
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 571
In 1993.
A.
Correct.
Q. 572
Could I have page 7633, please.
14:35:46 15
14:35:58 20
21 22
I was elected twice.
And you are a member of the Fianna Fail party.
1st of February 2006.
The Tribunal wrote to you in February, the
And your solicitor replied on the 19th of May.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
I think it's ...
MS. FOLEY:
Following the opening of the module you indicated that you had no
14:36:17 25
26
Q. 573
27
detailed recollection of the Cherrywood lands or of their location.
28
map on screen there now, Mr. Creaven, gives you a rough idea of the location of
29
the Cherrywood lands.
14:36:31 30
A.
Not really. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
So the
14:36:36
14:36:51
101 1
Q. 574
Sorry, Mr. Creaven.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 575
That's a rough outline of the Cherrywood lands.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 576
8151, please. This is an extract from your statement to the Tribunal.
6
Can you see the black area in that map?
And
through your solicitor you say that to the best of your recollection --
7 8 9 14:37:06 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
Q. 577
MS. FOLEY:
That's the wrong page.
8151, please.
11
The first indented paragraph there you say "That to the best of your client's
12
recollection" or your solicitor replying on your behalf says.
13
person that you ever met from the Monarch Group is Mr. Richard Lynn whom you
14
met on a number of occasions.
"That the only
Each time in the council chambers."
14:37:34 15
16
Do you know how you first with Mr. Lynn?
17
A.
I can't remember the first time.
18
Q. 578
And was it in connection with the Cherrywood lands?
19
A.
I presume it was.
14:37:49 20
21
It was during the Draft Development Plan.
He was in the council chamber, in the environs of the
County Council talking to everyone and anyone that he met. Q. 579
22
He certainly says that he had contact with you in respect of these lands, the Cherrywood lands?
23
A.
Sorry?
24
Q. 580
He says that he had contact with you in respect of these lands?
A.
I don't recall him meeting me specifically to talk about the Cherrywood lands.
26
Q. 581
Do you recall talking, discussing the lands with him at all?
27
A.
No. But he may well have.
14:38:03 25
I'm sure, you know, in the corridor or whatever he
28
might have said Liam, I hope you support me on this.
29
taken place.
14:38:24 30
Q. 582
That could well have
Your solicitor also indicates that you have no recollection of receiving any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:38:28
14:38:33
102 1
benefit or payment?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 583
On behalf of the Monarch Group?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 584
Could I have page 3255, please.
This is an extract from the cheque journal of
6
Monarch Properties. And it indicates on 13th of June '91 a cheque was written
7
to you.
And at page 3241, please.
8 9 14:39:03 10
MR. MORAN: Chairman, I mention that in the body of my letter ask for any documentary evidence in relation to payments.
I asked for it very
11
specifically.
Sorry my name is Robert
12
Moran, I appear for Mr. Creaven.
13
brief that was furnished to me. I would have thought in response to my letter
14
that it could have been indicated where these payments were.
Now, it may have been contained.
It may have been contained in the vast
14:39:23 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
But the information is in the brief.
We would expect normally
17
that people and their legal advisors would read the brief.
18 19 14:39:40 20
MR. MORAN: Chairman, I think that you would appreciate that the brief is vast. You know, I don't think it would have been too much difficulty for the legal
21
team of the Tribunal to notify -- just to drop me a line back to say this is
22
where the payments are.
23 24 14:39:54 25
I recollect when we were dealing with the, I think it was the Cloughran Module, that there was a set of payments made known to my client that there were
26
queries being raised about. I don't think that there would have been any
27
difficulty to notify me that there was queries in relation to specific
28
documents.
29 14:40:08 30
CHAIRMAN:
Well, first of all, how better off would you be if the Tribunal had
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:40:12
14:40:35
103 1
in fact -- as it were, spoon fed that material back to you, you having earlier
2
received the brief? I mean, it's the duty of any witness to give information
3
to the Tribunal in response to a request for information.
4
furnished with the brief.
5
recalling information about payments received, they have a particular duty to
6
read the brief and familiarise themselves.
They are then
And if they feel that they have a difficulty in
7 8
But you can raise, I mean, we'll take your point.
It still doesn't take from
9
the fact that we have to hear this evidence from your client today.
14:40:58 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, before my friend does that.
12 13
I understand from Mr. King that he did in fact write and indicate that
14
information in relation to the payment could be found on page 3197.
14:41:09 15
I think
that's the position, Mr. King? He did in fact respond to my friend.
16 17
MR. MORAN: Well I merely say that I have no recollection or I did not receive
18
that.
19 14:41:19 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Well we'll see how we get on.
21 22
Q. 585
MS. FOLEY: And according to Monarch Properties, this payment is listed as one
23
of the donations that they made on 13th of June, 1991.
24
yourself, Mr. Creaven?
14:41:38 25
300 pounds to
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 586
You have no recollection of receiving this payment?
27
A.
I have no recollection.
28
Q. 587
I think you have previously given evidence to the Tribunal in respect of
29 14:41:48 30
political donations, Mr. Creaven. A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:41:48
14:42:01
104 1
Q. 588
2
Where I think initially to put the Fianna Fail Inquiry your position was that you had never received any donations other than from your family?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 589
And then subsequently you informed the Tribunal that you had in fact received a
5
donation of 1,000 pounds from a developer.
6
A.
Yes. Yes.
7
Q. 590
You informed the Tribunal of this in 2003.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 591
And at that point your position was that this was the only donation that you
14:42:10 10
had ever received.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 592
And then subsequently in the Ballycullen Module you said that you had perhaps
13
received 1,000 pounds from the Jones Group.
14
you had received that amount in February of this year?
14:42:25 15
A.
16
So that that was possible that
Well, no, I have no recollection of saying I received 1,000 pounds from the company, the Jones --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think he said he received that.
MS. FOLEY:
I believe I said that he may have.
19 14:42:35 20
Q. 593
That the Jones Group
21
indicated that this donation and that you didn't recall it but that you may
22
have.
23
A.
24 14:42:52 25
I said I may have. have accepted that.
If there was evidence to show that I did, then I would But personally I have no knowledge of that at all.
Q. 594
And it is the same with this donation?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 595
You have no recollection of it?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 596
But now you accept that you may have received it?
A.
Um.
14:43:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:43:05
14:43:15
105 1
Q. 597
Or is that your position?
2
A.
I have no recollection of receiving it.
But if there is evidence to the fact
3
that I did, that it was given to me, I'll accept that.
4
knowledge.
But I have no
I have no recollection of receiving it.
5
Q. 598
Thank you.
6
A.
I remember even ringing the company first there was, pardon me.
It appeared
7
in one of the daily papers that Monarch Properties had given so much to all
8
councillors.
9 14:43:37 10
And I remember calling them at that time.
Q. 599
Was this very recently, Mr. Creaven?
A.
Oh, no, it's some time ago.
11
call me back and they didn't.
12
was true.
13
Q. 600
14
I asked them to
I just wondered if what they said in the paper
I wanted to familiarise myself with that fact.
But they didn't.
And could I have page 7762, please. This is a note from the Fianna Fail Inquiry, Mr. Creaven, where you indicate
14:44:02 15
that you recall meeting Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, a lobbiest around the council
16 17
But they never responded to me.
chambers. A.
Just, he was at the door as we walked in the chamber he met me, like he met
18
everybody else as they were about to go into the chamber.
19
him as such.
14:44:23 20
But no meeting with
And I don't think he -- I can't even recollect what he said to
me.
21
Q. 601
You can't recall if he spoke to you about the Cherrywood lands?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 602
The lands in question in the 1983 plan were zoned AS1, which is one house to
24 14:44:51 25
26
the acre on septic tank? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 603
Above the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway on page 6677, please.
27
And do you see the square line going through the red lands there?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 604
The lands above that were zoned one to the acre on septic tank and the lands
14:45:04 30
below that line were agriculture. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:45:05
14:45:15
106 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 605
And that line was at the time the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway.
3
A.
Pardon me.
4
Q. 606
Could I have 6937, please.
5 6
This is a map proposed by the manager in late 1990 to develop these lands.
7
included residential with an action area plan industrial and a district centre.
8
These were discussed at a number of meetings but I think, Mr. Creaven, you were
9
not present for those meetings.
14:45:39 10
11
It
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 607
But this is the position as of December 1990 whereupon this map was rejected by
12
the council.
13
This is the map that was put to the council in May of 1991, and I think you
14
were present, Mr. Creaven, at the meeting.
14:46:15 15
Could I have 7019, please.
And the proposals on this map
include upgrading of the residential to four to the acre.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 608
And there's a movement there of the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway.
18 19 14:46:29 20
You voted against this map.
Do you have any recollection of this?
A.
No.
Q. 609
This in essence, is what went on the first public display. Could I have page
21
2661, please.
22
I think the General Election -- the Local Election took place in 1991.
23
think Mr. Gilbride spoke to us about donations received by councillors during
24
this election.
14:47:06 25
26
And including donation you received yourself.
A.
In what?
Q. 610
One of the number of councillors that received a donation during this election
27
campaign?
28
A.
He said?
29
Q. 611
From Monarch. No, you were.
14:47:17 30
And I
Mr. Gilbride spoke about the councillors
speaking about donations from Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:47:19
14:47:22
107 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 612
Do you recall this?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 613
In the council chambers?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 614
Could I have page 3596, please. This is an expenses claim form submitted by
7
Mr. Lynn
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 615
Which indicates that on the week ending 3rd of April 1992 he indicates that he
14:47:51 10
had some contact with yourself, I think it's Mr. Kennedy and A Davitt, which
11
may be Devitt.
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in the company of these other
12
people in April '92?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 616
In May 1992 the manager presents a new map.
14:48:20 15
proposing further development on the lands.
7203, please.
Which is
You supported this map.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 617
And all of the other motions that took place that day to decrease density, you
18
were against those motions.
19
reason why you voted for the development of these lands.
14:48:38 20
A.
Would that be your normal policy or is there any
I have no recollection other than they are the -- I got a video, I think it was
21
in the mail.
It was certainly a very good presentation of what they proposed.
22
And I know I said to myself then I will support that.
23
Q. 618
And did any of your fellow councillors speak to you about these lands?
24
A.
No.
Q. 619
We have heard evidence from other councillors, in particular, say,
14:49:05 25
26
Mr. Geraghty, that there was a whip in the Fianna Fail party on some of these
27
rezoning motions?
28
A.
29 14:49:25 30
No, there wasn't a whip as such.
You could have been asked and we were asked
I'm sure by one of the party members but it wasn't a binding thing. Q. 620
But would there -- would meetings have taken place before council meetings more Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:49:31
14:49:44
108 1 2
informal meetings? A.
There would be informal meetings in the party room but you didn't have to
3
attend it or you could leave if, when any subject was being discussed.
4
was no whip to stay there.
5
Q. 621
There
And it has been suggested that there would be a consensus of opinion at these
6
meetings about the way people were going to vote.
7
this is not the case?
Is this your position, that
8
A.
I'm sorry.
9
Q. 622
Before going into the chamber that there would be some agreement on how people
14:50:05 10
Would there be a consensus of opinion?
were going to vote?
11
A.
I would say that was true, yes.
12
Q. 623
But you are saying it would be done by agreement rather than by instruction
13 14 14:50:14 15
from a particular individual? A.
Yes.
Q. 624
Between the time of this first vote in May 1992 and the confirming votes in
16
11th November 1993, Mr. Dunlop was engaged by Monarch Properties.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 625
And during this period there were a number of telephone contacts between
19 14:50:49 20
21
yourself and Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 626
Which have already been discussed here at the Tribunal and a number of
22
meetings?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 627
Did Mr. Dunlop ever discuss the Cherrywood lands with you?
A.
I'm sure he did.
14:50:50 25
I'm sure he asked me to support it.
If he did I'm sure I
26
said I would 'cos I'm on the record for saying that Frank Dunlop and myself
27
were close friends.
28
Q. 628
So you have no specific recollection that you believe that it is --
29
A.
Oh, yes.
14:51:12 30
I have no specific recollection but I believe that would be the
case. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:51:12
14:51:37
109 1
Q. 629
Could I have page 4215, please.
2
This is a further expenses claim form of Mr. Lynn for the week ending 21st of
3
May 1993.
4
and N Ryan.
5
A.
6
Q. 630
Where he has recorded Draft Development Plan review Liam Creaven Do you ever recall meeting Mr. Lynn in the company of Mr. Ryan?
No. And then on the 11th of November 1993.
There were a number of votes, again,
7
effecting the Cherrywood lands.
8
Variation Plan being proposed for the lands.
9
confirm two houses per acre and for the motion proposed by Mr. Marren and
14:52:06 10
And in these you voted against a Draft And against the motion to
Ms. Coffey.
11 12
I'll get that motion for you now.
Sorry, Mr. Creaven.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7263.
14:52:22 15
16
MS. FOLEY:
Thank you, Judge.
17 18
7263, please.
19 14:52:36 20
And the motion is at 7226.
This is a motion proposed by Donal Marren, signed
21
also by Larry Lohan, Betty Coffey Liam T Cosgrave and Anne Ormonde that Dublin
22
County Council hereby resolves to accept the County Manager's recommendation
23
and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined in red on the
24
attached map.
And that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare.
14:53:08 25
26
Could I have the maps side by side, please.
27
A.
Sorry?
28
Q. 631
Just the map is going up on screen now.
29 14:53:28 30
At 7227.
At the time of this motion,
Mr. Creaven, the lands were all zoned at one to the acre following the May 1993 meetings.
You had not voted in favour of this.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
At this point now the
14:53:34
14:53:44
110 1
motion is being put forward here to restore four to the acre on the lands
2
outlined in red?
3
A.
Uh-huh.
4
Q. 632
But that the other surrounding lands remain at one to the acre?
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 633
Can you assist the Tribunal with any reason that you believe this might be so,
7
that these lands were singled out in this motion for increased density but that
8
the surrounding residential lands remain at a low density?
9
A.
14:54:02 10
Other than that I was asked to do that.
That's the only reason I can give
you.
11
Q. 634
You voted on the motion as it was put to you?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 635
Did anybody speak to you about this motion, can you recall?
14
A.
I can't recall that.
14:54:11 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
18
Who asked you to vote?
I don't know, your -- Chairman. I'm not certain.
But I would imagine maybe Mr. Dunlop did but
He would be the one I would imagine that did ask me.
19 14:54:23 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
And would that be sufficient for you to ....?
A.
Coupled with the fact that I had seen the video that I liked.
Q. 636
MS. FOLEY:
22 23
Could I have page 5536, please.
24 14:54:37 25
This is a further expense claim form by Richard Lynn to Cherrywood Properties
26
Limited, dated the week ended the 13th of January 1995.
27 28 29 14:54:55 30
At this point you are a member of Fingal County Council? A.
Yeah.
Q. 637
It indicates that L Creaven and an amount of 3.60 written beside I think might Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:55:03
14:55:08
111 1
be Ongar Developments?
2
A.
Sorry?
3
Q. 638
It might be Ongar.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 639
At this point you are a member of Fingal County Council?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 640
And Mr. Lynn appears to be in contact with you.
8 9 14:55:28 10
Do you recall ever having
contact with Mr. Lynn about lands other than the Cherrywood lands? A.
No.
Q. 641
Could I have page 5753, please.
11 12
This is a letter signed by yourself, Mr. Creaven, and addressed to Mr. Richard
13
Lynn, I think would be Mr. Richard Lynn of Monarch.
14
Can you see that there?
14:56:03 15
A.
16
Don't -- I can't remember that letter, now.
Dated February 1996.
But it's possible that Liam
Fitzgerald asked me.
17
Q. 642
To contact Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
To give him a name.
19
Q. 643
I think you may have signed the letter.
A.
I'm not too sure it's my signature.
Q. 644
The second paragraph of the refer, Mr. Creaven, reads.
14:56:18 20
21
And I could well have done that. It indicates, it's in your name?
22 23
"I am well aware of your extremely busy schedule but I would regard it as a
24
great favour to me personally if you would accept my invitation to sponsor a
14:56:31 25
team and to participate in the event".
26 27
Why would you have used that wording, Mr. Creaven, that it would be a great
28
favour to you personally?
29 14:56:44 30
A.
Well Liam Fitzgerald was a very close friend of mine.
Q. 645
Was your relationship with Mr. Lynn such that personal favours? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:56:49
14:57:02
112 1
A.
Ah, no.
I hardly knew Mr. Lynn.
2
Q. 646
And do you recall whether -- that the bottom of the letter indicates that a
3
cheque would be sent forward in the sum of 400 pounds.
4
was ever --
5
A.
No, no, I have no recollection at all of that.
6
Q. 647
You don't.
7
A.
Sorry.
Do you recall if that
Thank you, Mr. Creaven.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Do you wish to ask?
MR. MORAN:
Sorry, Chairman.
14:57:14 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN:
You can sit down, if you wish.
14 14:57:19 15
MR. MORAN: Just in relation to --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Could you just pull the microphone.
18 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. MORAN AS FOLLOWS:
19 14:57:26 20
21
Q. 648
MR. MORAN: In relation to the last letter.
I think the reference to the
22
recipient of the 400 is, is it Mayfield Fianna Fail or? If you just look at
23
the letter there at the very end?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 649
You see the handwritten note?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 650
I mean, you are certainly not the recipient of the 400?
28
A.
No, no.
29
Q. 651
Who is it?
A.
Oh, yeah.
14:57:37 25
14:57:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:57:44
14:58:03
113 1
Q. 652
Airfield, Fianna Fail?
2
A.
To Ayrfield, Fianna Fail.
3
Q. 653
Thank you.
And that's not even my Cumann.
In relation to Mr. Richard Lynn.
You said in your evidence that
4
you met him on occasion at the Council chambers.
5
prior appointment?
Did you ever meet him by
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 654
Would it be fair that say that all of your meetings with him were of a casual
8 9 14:58:11 10
nature? A.
Exactly.
Q. 655
Now, Mr. Creaven, evidence has been adduced here of payments being made to you.
11
You've never received any evidence of any such payment, other than the notes of
12
Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
13
A.
No, that's correct.
14
Q. 656
You've never seen a cheque stub?
A.
That's right.
Q. 657
You've never seen a copy of a cheque made payable to you, nothing of that
14:58:31 15
16 17
nature; isn't that right?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 658
Now, if page 363 could be called up.
14:58:42 20
21 22 23
Q. 659
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
MR. MORAN:
Sorry.
I'm -- I may have taken down the page incorrectly.
It
was the first of those expense sheets.
24 14:58:52 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
26 27
MR. MORAN:
Mr. Lynn's expense sheets.
28 29 14:59:09 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3956, I'm not sure if that was the first one or not.
56 not 46. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
3956.
14:59:15
14:59:22
114 1
MR. MORAN:
No.
This was just a page of expense.
2 3
MS. FOLEY:
3596 I think.
4 5
MR. MORAN:
6
I think if you look at that, Mr. Creaven, I don't know what information you
7
have about Mr. Lynn's expense accounts and what documentation he had to support
8
them.
9
made to you there is no payment in any column across from you? Isn't that
14:59:46 10
My apologies about this.
But wouldn't it appear clear from that, that whilst there is reference
right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 660
I think it says Draft Development Plan Liam Creaven but no payment whatever,
13 14 14:59:52 15
isn't that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 661
Tell me Mr. Creaven, have you any idea of how Mr. Lynn incurred expenses or
16
what he expended money on to incur expenses.
Have you any idea of that?
17
A.
No, I've no idea.
18
Q. 662
Did he ever spend any money on you?
19
A.
No.
Q. 663
Did he give you a bottle of gin once?
21
A.
Oh, at Christmas time, yes.
22
Q. 664
And you have acknowledged that in your correspondence with the Tribunal?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 665
Now, it would be fair to say in relation to your voting at particular meetings
15:00:07 20
15:00:22 25
in favour of zonings or whatever, that in general you would have a
26
prodevelopment ethos, wouldn't that be fair to say?
27
A.
True, yes, I've said that.
28
Q. 666
And would it also be fair to say in general you would vote along party lines.
29 15:00:37 30
Isn't that correct? A.
True. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:00:38
15:00:48
115 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Sir, just before Mr. Creaven concludes.
3 4
In fairness to Mr. Donal King, arising out of the objection that was made by
5
Mr. Dore in relation to the lack of information supplied. A letter dated 23rd
6
of May 2006 was sent by Mr. King. And I just wanted to quote from that letter
7
for the transcript.
8 9 15:01:04 10
He acknowledges receipt of the fax from Mr. Dore of 19th ins the contents of which have been noted.
11 12
"With regard to the payment of 300 pounds from the Monarch Group to your
13
client.
14
circulated to you.
15:01:15 15
16
I refer you to page 3197 of the brief which has already been
Tribunal's part.
Thereby nullifying any suggestion of surprise on the
Indifference to your request the Tribunal will schedule your
client's attendance to 2 p.m. on Thursday the 1st of June. Yours sincerely."
17 18
So the query was raised.
The query was answered
19 15:01:34 20
CHAIRMAN:
Did you receive that letter?
21 22
MR. MORAN:
23
get confirmation that it was all right to come here at 2 o'clock today. Now, I
24
operate a busy one man practice.
15:01:40 25
Just by way of reply. I did telephone Mr. King yesterday just to
I am not saying that a letter may not have
come in. But I certainly was unaware of the contents of the letter.
And I
26
did telephone Mr. King, as I think he will freely acknowledge, yesterday
27
afternoon, to confirm that it would be all right for me to show up today at 2
28
o'clock today with my client.
29 15:01:53 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:01:58
15:02:09
116 1
MR. MORAN:
Chairman, I have been advised that it's in order for me to apply
2
for limited representation costs on that basis in relation to this module.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Well, I can't deal with costs at this stage. I certainly -- I
5
thought we had done so.
6
And costs are a matter which won't arise until some time in the future.
Well certainly you can have limited representation.
7 8
MR. MORAN:
9
Obliged.
I appreciate that. I just thought I'd mention the matter.
15:02:24 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Larry Butler, please.
12 13
MR. ROCHFORD: Chairman, I am solicitor for Larry Butler.
14 15:02:32 15
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:02:48
15:02:55
117 1
MR. LARRY BUTLER HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Butler.
5 6
Q. 667
7
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Butler. You were first elected to Dublin
County Council in 1991.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 668
After 1993 and in January 1994 you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
15:03:05 10
County Council.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 669
Your involvement in relation to the Cherrywood lands therefore spans three
13
separate, albeit related matters.
14
Plan.
15:03:21 15
One was the making of the 1993 Development
The second was the making of the variation for the science and
technology park.
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 670
And the third was the review of the 1993 plan culminating in the making of the
18 19 15:03:29 20
1998 plan, isn't that correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 671
Now, would it be fair to say from your consideration of the documentation in
21
relation to your time in Dublin County Council, that you appear to have from
22
your voting adopted a pro low density, anti-high density stance in relation to
23
these lands?
24 15:03:54 25
A.
Yeah.
I think I made it quite clear in previous evidence here that the
Carrickmines Residents Association were very worried at the time about the
26
proposals from the manager for industrialising the complete valley there.
27
you previously pointed out, with other witnesses you have here, that the
28
manager's proposal was overturned in council before I went in there in '91.
29
So, therefore, the people who I was representing in the Carrickmines area and
15:04:28 30
kind of Foxrock and all of that area there were very pro low density at that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
As
15:04:37
15:04:43
118 1
time.
2
Q. 672
Yes.
3
A.
So I supported that.
4
Q. 673
Yes.
5
I think the record shows that at the meeting in May of 1992 that you
voted against the manager's map which was DP92/44?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 674
And that after that, that you voted in general in favour of low density and
8 9 15:04:56 10
that you supported I think Mr. Barrett's motion? A.
That's correct.
Q. 675
And that you were in favour of one house to the acre for the entire of the
11 12
lands, is that correct? A.
13 14
That would be correct.
But I think in fairness, and I want to expand a little
bit there -Q. 676
Please do.
A.
If I could.
16
Q. 677
Yes, yes.
17
A.
I think it's important to bear in mind at the time that there was no
15:05:09 15
18
infrastructural development there on that particular land at that particular
19
time.
15:05:24 20
There was no Carrickmines Valley sewer.
hadn't been developed into the Carrickmines area.
21
infrastructural development at the time.
22
in following that particular line.
23
Q. 678
24 15:05:46 25
There was no M50.
The N11
And with the lack of
I felt I was doing the correct thing
And were you also of the view or did you hold the view, Mr. Butler, that development should stop at the 1983 line of the Southeastern Motorway?
A.
Well, I wasn't hung up too much about where the line stopped but I felt that it
26
was important to make sure that there was a line on the plan for the motorway.
27
Even though it was an imaginary line and could be moved one way or the other.
28
But it was vitally important that the N11, before development took place you
29
probably could see in the Dun Laoghaire, when Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
15:06:17 30
Council came into being that there was huge infrastructural development allowed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:06:25
15:06:54
119 1
to take place and it was subject to planning permission actually that the
2
access in and out of the Cherrywood lands would be subject to the N11 access.
3
Q. 679
And in fact, I think it was in clear that the opening up or development of the
4
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley required putting in place
5
infrastructure including the Wyattville Road extension, is that right?
6
A.
And the Wyattville Road and the kind of, Wyattville fly over.
Also it
7
included the actual inner relief road from Wyatville to link eventually with
8
the M50. That was envisaged at that time.
9
Q. 680
15:07:17 10
And would it be fair to say, Mr. Butler, that from early in your political career from your attendance at public meetings.
People would have become
11
aware of the stance that you had adopted in relation to the development of the
12
Carrickmines Valley?
13
A.
Pretty much, yeah.
14
Q. 681
And that it would have been known that you were in favour of low density in the
15:07:30 15
16
valley. A.
Yeah.
But I think it has to be bear in mind, that it was subject to the
17
actual infrastructural development while I was proposing low density because if
18
you had high density there at that time and you had major traffic problems, you
19
know, there was no proper sewerage, there was no water.
15:07:54 20
21
All of these things
were deficient in the earlier proposal in the '91 proposal. Q. 682
And when the matter came back before the council on 11th of November 1993, you
22
voted against the Marren/Coffey motion to increase the density on the Monarch
23
lands only, isn't that right?
24 15:08:13 25
A.
That's correct.
Q. 683
Now, you had voted in favour of Councillor Barrett's motion in May of '92,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 684
At one house to the acre.
29 15:08:27 30
And does it follow from that approach, that it was
your view that development of the Carrickmines Valley was premature at that particular point in time? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:08:28
15:08:45
120 1
A.
Yes, I did.
2
Q. 685
And it was your view that the pipe needed to go in, is that correct, for sewage
3 4
It is premature at that particular time.
before it could be developed? A.
Sewerage, water.
You know, the development of the N11 access on and off.
5
And as I say, we hadn't decided at that particular time for the M50 line
6
completely.
7
basis of that I felt that, you know, development was premature.
8
Q. 686
9
There was a line there but it hadn't been fixed.
And on the
And that appears to have been the view that you held from 1991 from your election to the making of the Development Plan in December 1993, isn't that
15:09:11 10
right?
11
A.
More or less, yeah.
12
Q. 687
Now, in that period, can I ask you, Mr. Butler, were you approached by anybody
13 14 15:09:19 15
on behalf of Monarch seeking your support? A.
I was, yeah.
Q. 688
And would you outline to the Tribunal who it was that approached you and how it
16 17
arose? A.
Well Mr. O'Herlihy came to my house when I was first elected to the County
18
Council and I think Mr. Lynn, I can't be sure.
19
And as I say, I can't be that sure.
15:09:39 20
else.
There was two people with him.
I think it was Mr. Lynn and somebody
I didn't know the other gentleman.
And, you know, I think I outlined
21
my case pretty well in comparison to what they were talking about.
22
asked all of the various searching questions like, you know, that I felt that
23
it was premature.
24
making at that time unless I seen, you know, new proposals as to how they were
15:10:07 25
I wouldn't be supporting the proposals that they were
going to deal with traffic and the water problem and the sewerage and the roads
26 27
And I
at that time. Q. 689
And I think in your statement to the Tribunal.
At page 134.
You date that
28
meeting with O'Herlihy and the men who came with him at happening shortly after
29
your election in June of 1991?
15:10:26 30
A.
Can you repeat that again, please? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:10:31
15:10:39
121 1
Q. 690
2
Sorry.
In your statement, which is on screen.
You date that meeting as
happening shortly after your election?
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 691
In June of '91?
5
A.
That's correct, yes.
6
Q. 692
It would follow from that, would it not, Mr. Butler, that your position or your
7
stance in relation to the development of the Carrickmines Valley would have
8
been known to Monarch and its representatives from the date of that meeting?
9
A.
15:10:59 10
Yeah.
Well I think I was, you know, reasonably forth coming in terms of
letting the developer know that there was a lot of deficiencies within his
11
proposal.
12
Q. 693
And --
13
A.
And they hadn't satisfied certainly what I was looking for or indeed the
14 15:11:14 15
Carrickmines Residents Association. Q. 694
Yes.
Indeed, you say in the second part of paragraph 1 "I told them no.
16
That my first concern was that I was supporting my local residents association
17
point of view" and that you felt that the application was premature.
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 695
So that your made your position very clear at that meeting.
A.
I would have said so, yes.
Q. 696
And indeed, your voting subsequently replicated that position, isn't that
15:11:31 20
21 22
correct?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 697
Can I ask you, were you in receipt of any payments or political donations from
15:11:47 25
26
Monarch Properties or anybody on their behalf? A.
27 28 29 15:11:58 30
As far as I know, I don't believe I ever got any donations from Monarch Properties, now to the best of my knowledge, yes.
Q. 698
Indeed, in the documentation that has been discovered to the Tribunal, and with which you have been furnished, Mr. Butler, in common with other people. is no record of any payments to you from Monarch Properties, isn't that the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
There
15:12:02
15:12:20
122 1 2
position? A.
No.
I think I gave a very comprehensive list of my donations.
I think we
3
went to a lot of trouble to produce everything and try and get it as accurate
4
as possible.
5
Q. 699
6
I think we have done that quite successfully.
You have produced all of that documentation, isn't that the position, Mr. Butler?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 700
And you produced it on request from the Tribunal when you were initially asked
9 15:12:29 10
11
for matters unrelated to Monarch Properties, isn't that right? A.
Oh absolutely, yes.
Q. 701
And you have made full disclosure of the receipt of payments and itemised and
12
detailed the persons and parties from whom you received donations, isn't that
13
the position?
14 15:12:39 15
A.
That's correct.
Q. 702
And not included in that, if I may put it like that, is Monarch Properties or
16
any of their representatives?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 703
And indeed, Monarch Properties on their side do not suggest that they made any
19 15:12:51 20
21
payments or donations to you.
Isn't that the position also?
A.
That is the position.
Q. 704
Yes. Now, I think in early 1994 when you were a member of Dun
22
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, which became a smaller council, isn't that
23
right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 705
You came to consider the matter of the science and technology park.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 706
And not wanting in any way to put words in your mouth but would it be a fair
15:13:02 25
28
assessment to say that the science and technology park was initially driven by
29
the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
15:13:19 30
A.
It was driven by the manager but I have to say there was a lot of support by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:13:23
15:13:46
123 1
the councillors.
The science and technology park, as you know, Dun
2
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and the Dun Laoghaire area have a very high
3
third level educational system.
4
and technology park would play a major role in ensuring, you know, good, high
5
paid jobs in the future.
6
was that Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was going to be a one-third,
7
have a one-third ...
And it was felt at that time that the science
And also the important thing I think to bear in mind
8
Q. 707
Interest?
9
A.
Investment in the science and technology park.
And I believed that was the
15:14:05 10
right way to go because we would be able to, shall we say, direct operations
11
and ensure quality in the science and technology park that we were going to
12
develop.
13
Q. 708
14
In essence, if I can summarise it.
We'll look at a map in a moment,
Mr. Butler, and you can correct me if I'm wrong. The manager had had
15:14:26 15
negotiations or discussions with GRE and had come to an agreement with them
16
about effectively a joint venture including Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
17
Council?
18
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
19
Q. 709
And I think when the matter was initiated by way of a motion from Councillor
15:14:41 20
Gilmore.
21
There was almost universal acceptance amongst the councillors for
the idea of a science and technology park?
22
A.
Absolutely, yes.
23
Q. 710
Because it was believed at the time that it would increase industry and it
24
would increase employment in an area that needed such an increase; isn't that
15:14:57 25
26
the position? That is correct.
There was 70% unemployment in the immediate area at that
27
particular time.
It was -- there's no doubt about, it, like, there was
28
crisis.
29
many ways, like, hoping that things would get better.
15:15:19 30
A.
Q. 711
And, you know, we were, I suppose, people were clutching at straws in
At that time? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Things were very bad.
15:15:20
15:15:32
124 1
A.
At that time.
2
Q. 712
And this was seen.
I think when the manager spoke in his Reports to the
3
proposed variation.
It was seen as a chance for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown to get
4
ahead in the employment stakes?
5
A.
Indeed, yes.
6
Q. 713
And there was almost universal acceptance amongst the Councillors for it.
7
Isn't that the position?
8
A.
Oh, absolutely, yeah.
9
Q. 714
Yes?
A.
I think when the Councils broke up I think was a very good thing really.
15:15:42 10
11
Because you were dealing with land and development in your own particular area.
12
It was very difficult in Dublin County Council to kind of be focused on
13
anything because it's so vast. In lots of cases didn't concern you when it was
14
outside of your own area.
15:16:09 15
I have said before you depended, to a large extent,
on the councillors in particular areas.
In this case we were able to have our
16
fingers know the pulse all the time and we knew what was happening.
17
the land and we knew how the development was going to happen.
18
down there now and see the linkage between, say, the N11, the science and
19
technology park, the M50 and the new housing schemes that's going up and town
15:16:37 20
centre plan for eventualities.
21 22
good planning. Q. 715
23
We knew
When you walk
So, I mean, that's what I call particularly
And I think that's the way it has panned out there in the end.
If I could show you the map in relation to that, at 7464, Mr. Butler.
Not to
delay on this now.
24 15:16:56 25
The area coloured purple, or dark red, is the area that was designated for a
26
town centre; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 716
And that had a cap on retail development in the 1993 plan?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 717
The area coloured blue immediately to the north of that was zoned agriculture?
15:17:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:17:11
15:17:19
125 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 718
But it is now being proposed, in this variation, that it will become
3
residential at 16 houses to the hectare?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 719
The area across the black dotted line, shaded cream or yellow.
6
already zoned residential in the 1993 plan at ten to the hectare.
7
right?
That was Isn't that
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 720
And then if one moves down to the line of the road, which is by way of circles
15:17:36 10
across the page.
11
The line of that road, which is the Wyatville extension, is
being moved slightly; isn't that right?
12
A.
Where are we now? Are we change No. 1?
13
Q. 721
If you were to look at change No. 3.
14
A.
Change No. 3.
Q. 722
And change No. 7.
16
A.
7 and 3?
17
Q. 723
7 and 3.
18
A.
Yeah, I see 7, yes.
19
Q. 724
That the town centre lands beneath those black dots was going to become science
15:17:51 15
15:18:11 20
Sorry.
Okay.
Change No. 3 is moving the town centre.
Do you see the black dots?
and technology?
21
A.
Yes, yes.
22
Q. 725
And a small portion to the northern end of the town centre was going to become
23 24 15:18:18 25
residential? A.
Right.
Q. 726
Okay.
26
So there was, it's going to be a quid pro quo.
What was being lost to
science and technology was to be gained at the other end in terms of acreage?
27
A.
Yes, that was the change made, yes.
28
Q. 727
And then the area beneath the town centre, which was partially agriculture and
29 15:18:39 30
partially residential, was going to be rezoned E1, science and technology? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:18:39
15:18:56
126 1
Q. 728
2 3
So the effect of this from Monarch or GRE's point of view, was they would be left with no lands that were zoned agriculture?
A.
4
More or less, yes.
But there was also a golf course planned for that
particular area as well.
5
Q. 729
But not on those lands?
6
A.
Not on those lands.
7
Q. 730
That was on the adjoining blue lands which were owned by Mr. Galvin; isn't that
8 9 15:19:03 10
the position? A.
That's correct.
Q. 731
On the Monarch lands outlined on that map.
The end result of the variation
11
was that Monarch Property was left without any lands that could not be
12
developed for something or other; isn't that the position?
13
A.
That is correct, yes.
14
Q. 732
Whereas they had commenced the process with two portions of agricultural land
15:19:19 15
which were not available for development; isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 733
And the density that was given under the agreement to Monarch Properties was
18 19
higher than the density on their adjoining lands? A.
15:19:33 20
Well I think the densities had changed as well.
I think it's fair to say,
densities had changed in the meantime.
21
Q. 734
But that was the end result.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 735
That was passed by the Council?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 736
And I think you came to consider all of that again in early 1997 when you
15:19:42 25
That was passed?
26
mentioned the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council review of the 1993 Dublin
27
Development Plan; isn't that the position that?
28
A.
Would be correct, yeah.
29
Q. 737
I think that what happened in the early stages of that plan, Mr. Butler, was
15:20:01 30
that the densities were removed; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:20:04
15:20:16
127 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 738
From --
3
A.
Yes, yes.
4
Q. 739
From the -- if you could just look at the map at 7465, please.
5 6
And you will see there the Monarch lands outlined in red?
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 740
And the changes 13 and 14 relate to the removal of density there. And that was
9 15:20:28 10
11
something that was being suggested by the manager; isn't that the position? A.
Yes.
Q. 741
And I think motions were brought objecting to that.
12
But they were
unsuccessful?
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 742
What was your own view in relation to the removal of the densities on those
15:20:38 15
16
lands, Mr. Butler? A.
Well, I mean, things were happening, I suppose, they were beginning to come
17
right in terms of the actual development onto the N11.
And I had softened my
18
approach somewhat in terms of opposition to the thing and certainly with a
19
science and technology park coming in.
So I certainly had softened my
15:21:09 20
approach at that stage.
And also I had contact with the residents association
21
in the area at the time.
And they seemed to, if they were going to be good
22
class housing, and that sort of thing, they were happy enough at that
23
particular time, you know.
24 15:21:31 25
26
Q. 743
That there would be a change in the density?
A.
Yes.
Q. 744
Yes.
And I think if you look at 7285, please.
27 28
In the course of the display of the first display a number of representations
29
were received by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council from Monarch Properties.
15:21:47 30
There was a representation No. 359.
And that was an application to extend the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:21:52
15:22:00
128 1
science and technology zoning into the lands that have the words "rep 359" on
2
that map?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 745
And that was into the Sean Galvin golf course lands?
5
A.
That's right.
6 7
15:22:13 10
I was
ahead of you there for a minute, I'm sorry. Q. 746
8 9
That's where -- that's the one I was talking about.
That's okay.
Those lands had been acquired by Monarch Properties in the
intervening period; isn't that the position? A.
That's right.
Q. 747
And they were now seeking to move the science and technology zoning across the
11
Wyattville Road into those lands?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 748
And immediately north or to the side of that you see the words "rep 362".
14
A.
I two, yeah.
Q. 749
And that's on the town centre, the existing town centre zoning.
15:22:26 15
16
seeking to remove the cap on retail development?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 750
And then you see "rep 360".
19 15:22:44 20
21
That was
And that was an application by Monarch to extend
the town centre zoning into the adjoining 11 acres? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 751
And you will be aware then that a meeting took place in January of 1998 of Dun
22
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, at which these matters came to be
23
considered, isn't that right?
24 15:22:54 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 752
And a number of motions were brought before the Council relating to these
26
matters, including at 2624.
27
technology park across the road, as we saw. And there is an amendment; without
28
prejudice to the advancement of the Council's objective to develop a public
29
golf course on the lands.
15:23:24 30
This is in relation to moving the science and
That was an amendment signed by you, isn't that
correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:23:24
15:23:34
129 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 753
At page 2588.
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 754
At 2588 you signed the amendment without prejudice to the advancement of the
5
council's objective to develop a public golf course on the lands.
6
go back to 2624.
7
objection to the extension of the science and technology park into the lands
8
across the road, across the Wyattville Road provided it go not interfere with
9
the development of the golf course?
15:23:56 10
And if we
May the Tribunal take from that, Mr. Butler, that you had no
A.
Correct, yes.
11
Q. 755
I think that was passed on a show of hands?
12
A.
It was, yes.
13
Q. 756
Can I ask you, maybe you could help the Tribunal, Mr. Butler, why is it that a
14
large portion of the minutes of the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council don't
15:24:07 15
16
record who actually voted for or against anything? A.
17 18
Well I don't know. know why.
Q. 757
19
All right.
I have to be just honest with you and say I really don't
It's down to the people who were taking the minutes presumably.
And again at 2624 you will see representation 360 and I think
there was a motion in relation to representation 360 by Councillors Lowry and
15:24:32 20
Conroy at 2625.
21
And that was extending the -- sorry at 2625.
That was
extending the district centre zoning into the adjoining lands.
22
A.
Uh-huh.
23
Q. 758
And that was passed I think on a show of hands also.
24
A.
Right.
Q. 759
And I think the third application by Monarch as representation 362 which sought
15:24:46 25
26
to change the cap on retail.
27
that was that the manager suggested an alternative at 2628.
28 29 15:25:15 30
A.
Yeah.
And I think that what happened in relation to
I think there just to elaborate a little on that, would be that I think
we were -- I mean a lot of councillors were very concerned about having, you know, major, major, shopper centre or town centre in Cherrywood. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
What effect
15:25:21
15:25:36
130 1
it might have on Dun Laoghaire.
2
well.
3
against.
And we had to take that into consideration as
I think that was one of the things that were the arguments for and So I think that's where the manager made adjustments I think.
4
Q. 760
Yes.
5
A.
When we brought that to his attention.
6
Q. 761
Yes.
7
And the manager suggested an alternative wording that in fact was
adopted by the councillors?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 762
And effectively what it permits is of retail element that will compliment the
15:25:49 10
adjoining uses.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 763
And the adjoining uses would have been the science and technology park, the
13 14 15:25:59 15
existing retail and the increased density residential. A.
Yes.
Q. 764
Isn't that right? I think that these were all passed ultimately are contained
16
in the Development Plan 1998 at 7292.
17
science and technology zoning has come across the Wyattville Road.
18
area for the town centre has increased and that there is a new objective in
19
relation to retail in place.
15:26:27 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 765
Yes.
And you will see on that map that the That the
Do you have any comment at all on the fact that it would appear from
22
that sequence, Mr. Butler, that Monarch Properties succeeded in getting
23
everything that they asked for?
24
A.
15:26:44 25
Well I think there was a question at time because a lot of what they were looking for was very, very good but it was premature, as I think you went
26
through in the beginning when you were asking me the questions.
27
Q. 766
Yes.
28
A.
By the time that the N11 had been developed access on and off and then the
29 15:27:04 30
internal road and the M50 coming on stream. development now.
I mean, this is all very good
I mean, I think if anybody goes down there and have a look
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:27:08
15:27:29
131 1
at how the planning is working out there.
2
we'd be able to plan other areas like it.
3
it's working out at the moment.
4
but as the development and infrastructural development came in more or less
5
hand in hand with the development, it improved the whole situation down there.
6
Q. 767
I think it's excellent.
I wish
I think it would be a model the way
I certainly had my reservations to begin with
Can I just take you back, Mr. Butler, and ask you, that in 1991 when you were
7
elected and throughout your period up to the end of December of 1993, were you
8
aware that a substantial number of your colleagues in Dublin County Council
9
were in receipt of political payments or indeed payments of any sort from
15:27:52 10
11
Monarch Properties or its related companies? A.
12
Oh, no.
I mean, I never discussed nor nobody has ever discussed payments with
me.
13
Q. 768
I see.
14
A.
Any of my colleagues.
Q. 769
Do you think that it is proper that councillors should receive money from
15:28:03 15
16
developers and then subsequently vote on or make decisions in relation to that
17
developer's lands?
18
A.
19
Well, I mean, I have to be honest with you.
I think if we have a code brought
in now, as you very well know, which all donations has to be registered.
15:28:25 20
think if it's done properly it's fine.
I
I mean, I have received donations
21
myself but I think you will, if you look back on some of the records there, it
22
didn't influence me one way or the other.
23
I voted for some development and I voted against others.
24
bad. It just didn't influence me.
15:28:47 25
Q. 770
If I thought it was
Do you think it's better that people should disclose monies that they receive
26
in circumstances where they are subsequently in a position of power in relation
27
by way of voting or otherwise?
28 29 15:29:06 30
A.
Yes, I certainly would. regulations.
But, I mean, let's put it this way.
There was no
We can all kind of look back and say, you know, great but there
was no regulations there at that particular time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And I think we have
15:29:11
15:29:29
132 1
regulations now.
2
that's -- if you put regulations there and I think that's the good thing about
3
this Tribunal, it has kind of got people thinking and it's got people to do
4
things properly.
5
that.
6
Q. 771
7
And everybody is adhering to the regulations.
Which wasn't done in them years.
Thank you very much, Mr. Butler.
I mean,
There is no doubt about
If you would answer any questions anybody
may have for you.
8 9
MR. ROCHFORD:
Nothing, Chairman.
Thank you.
15:29:37 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much
Thank you very much.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
That's the witnesses then.
15:29:43 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, Sir.
Sorry.
I beg your pardon
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten tomorrow?
19 15:29:48 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Or are we sitting earlier?
23 24
MS. DILLON:
No, half ten.
15:29:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten.
Thank you.
27 28
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
29
FRIDAY, 2ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
15:30:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:30:30
133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
09:25:28
10:25:04
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
15TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:15 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
5 6
MR. MURPHY:
Good morning, Chairman.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop.
9 CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP BY MR. MURPHY
10:25:14 10
11 12
AS FOLLOWS: A.
Hello.
Sorry. Do you mind if I take off my jacket?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Oh, certainly. You don't want to take off your jacket, Mr. Murphy.
10:26:06 15
16
MR. MURPHY:
17
suits.
A little bit later, Chairman. Like the high jumpers in the track
18 19 10:26:16 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
All right.
No, it got a bit intemperate here yesterday.
The temperature I mean not the
exchanges.
22
Q. 1
MR. MURPHY:
23
A.
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
24
Q. 2
I'm hoping to finish my examination of you by lunch hour.
10:26:37 25
26
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
cross-examination can start after lunch. A.
Excellent.
You mean after, I understand that there is another witness.
27 28 29
So the
CHAIRMAN: A.
There is a short witness at two o'clock.
What time can we expect to be back after that then?
10:26:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:26:48
10:27:00
2 1
CHAIRMAN:
It would be about a quarter past two then.
2
A.
Lovely.
3
Q. 3
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, just one little thing that occurred overnight.
4
relation to.
5
that date, the important meeting.
6
recall that meeting.
In
If I could go back to May '92 the County Council meeting and And you were there, you remember, you
You weren't acting for Monarch at that stage?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 4
And do you have any recollection of Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon having a contact in
9 10:27:24 10
the course of that day, in the course of that meeting? A.
Well I -- well my answer to that would have to be no.
11
Mr. Lydon talking to Mr. Lynn I think.
12
--
13
Q. 5
Yes.
14
A.
-- in the council.
10:27:44 15
exchanges between various people's took place. conversations.
17
wanted to know what had happened. Q. 6
19 10:28:14 20
There was a lot of confusion that day
In fairness to everybody concerned and to say that
16
18
I didn't witness
There was a lot of
People were, didn't quite know what had happened.
So do you say, Mr. Dunlop, sorry.
People
And explanations were being sought.
So you don't actually recall seeing Mr.
Lynn and Mr. Lydon together during that time? A.
21
I wouldn't say definitively that I do or I did not.
I do know that certain
comments were made, right across the board.
22
Q. 7
All right.
23
A.
And comments were made to me as well.
24
Q. 8
I want to turn something up maybe in your statement and I'll put it to you.
10:28:28 25
Mr. Dunlop, just to help, you remember Mr. Lydon proposed a motion that was
26
defeated 35 - 33?
27
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
28
Q. 9
And then he withdrew a motion.
29
A.
That is correct, yes.
Q. 10
Does that help your recollection in any way?
10:28:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:28:42
10:29:03
3 1
A.
Well, let me put it this way to you, Mr. Murphy.
2
definitive or unfair to anybody.
3
would have had to take instructions.
Without being either
What was happening there was that Mr. Lydon
4
Q. 11
Yes.
5
A.
And now, that sounds somewhat dismissive or ...
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
have had to do.
9
A.
Well, sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I think rather than say what he would
Yes.
10:29:15 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Perhaps if you just tell us what you know he did or saw him do.
Well the motion was put forward.
The motion was defeated.
13
the other motion.
14
instructions being given to him that that should take place.
10:29:34 15
He then withdrew
That took place, I cannot say definitively, that I saw But certainly in
the melee that followed, there was a lot of contact between a lot of people.
16
Q. 12
And what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon?
17
A.
Yes, I would say there was contact.
18
Q. 13
Did you see it?
19
A.
No, I can't say I definitively saw it. No.
Q. 14
I'll try and find what I'm looking for, Mr. Dunlop and come back to you on it.
10:29:50 20
21
Mr. Lynn, was Mr. Lynn in the chambers all of the day or in the environs all of
22
the day or in and out?
23
A.
24
Well that I can't attest to because for one simple reason, and I'm subject to correction on this.
10:30:10 25
I think the public gallery in that particular chamber
format as it existed then, I think at maximum, at maximum, held ten people.
26
And the press gallery, which was right beside it, inside the door, can --
27
facilitated a maximum of six or seven people.
28
chamber and I can only give you my own experience.
29
necessary to be in the chamber.
10:30:36 30
Q. 15
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
So if you wanted to be in the On occasion it was
10:30:36
10:30:57
4 1
A.
And if you wanted to be in the chamber, you got in there, you took your place,
2
you sat there and you didn't come out because if you came out you couldn't get
3
back in.
4
Q. 16
5 6
I see.
You would know if he was stuck in the chamber for the whole day or
stuck in and around the chamber for the whole day or whether he was ...? A.
The only way I can answer that, Mr. Murphy, is that if I had a motion of
7
enormous importance going through council, that I was controlling or attempting
8
to control, I would be in the chamber.
9
Q. 17
10:31:22 10
11
Mr. Dillon has just found what I was looking for Mr. Dunlop. A.
12 13
All right. Page 589, please.
I knew this was what you were looking for.
I mean, I couldn't recall the
exact detail myself. Q. 18
14
Question 61, "Who would make a decision that a particular motion should be withdrawn."
10:31:45 15
A:
-- private interviews.
"I remember on one particular occasion Richard
16
Lynn signalling Don Lydon to come out of the chamber after he had made a
17
disastrous speech in relation to why this was required and not required and he
18
came back in and he withdrew.
19
Q: Withdrew the motion?
10:31:59 20
A: Yes. The motion."
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 19
Now, can you just say in the light of what you said a moment ago, that you
23
didn't have a recollection seven years ago, no what is it, six years ago you
24
told the Counsel for the Tribunal that you have a recollection of that.
10:32:14 25
A.
Yes. I don't have any difficulty about it, Mr. Murphy.
As I said to you,
26
putting myself in the shoes of Mr. Lynn.
27
chamber, I would be controlling the thing and I would signal Mr. Lydon to come
28
out --
29 10:32:31 30
Q. 20
Well --
A.
Yes, what I did say -- No, I'll continue on.
If I was Mr. Lynn I would be in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
What I did say is that I
10:32:33
10:32:45
5 1
remember an occasion when I saw Mr. Lynn signalling to Don Lydon to come out
2
and subsequent to that --
3
Q. 21
Mr. Dunlop, I want to finish this by lunch hour.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 22
Did Mr.-- you agree that you said that --
6
A.
Oh, I do absolutely, yes.
7
Q. 23
You said to the three judges a few moments ago, that you had no recollection of
8 9 10:33:00 10
11
Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon? A.
Yes, I have no difficulty about it.
Q. 24
Do you now have a recollection because you've been seen this?
A.
I knew I had said something in private session along the lines that Richard
12
Lynn had made a signal to Don Lydon to come out.
13
Q. 25
Why didn't you tell us that?
14
A.
Well, look it, Mr. Murphy, why didn't I -- why don't I say a lot of things.
Q. 26
Exactly.
16
A.
Look it --
17
Q. 27
Why don't you tell us everything, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
I've told you everything so far.
10:33:18 15
19
number of days and you alone can count the number of pages of evidence, so you
10:33:30 20
can make up your mind.
21 22
I've been in this box, for I can't count the
But, yes, there was a relationship between Don Lydon
and -Q. 28
That's not the question, Mr. Dunlop, the question is quite simple.
Why did
23
you tell three Judges here in the Tribunal a few minutes ago that you didn't
24
see that happening?
10:33:45 25
A.
No.
26
Q. 29
You don't have a recollection of it?
27
A.
No, I don't have a recollection of it, it's quite simple.
28
Q. 30
Did it happen?
29
A.
Yes, it did happen.
Q. 31
Now, Mr. Dunlop, yesterday --
10:33:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:33:57
10:34:09
6 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
Are you saying, Mr. Dunlop, that you recollect this occurring on this occasion,
4
the occasion of this particular motion?
5
A.
6
Sorry, just before, because this is important.
In the circumstances that obtained that day, yes.
With the confusion in, the
melee that took place in the chamber and outside.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
being signaled by Mr. Lynn to come out?
10:34:25 10
A.
Are you saying that on that you did of that occasion see Mr. Lydon
Yes.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
So you do recollect it?
I do recollect it, yes.
14 10:34:30 15
MR. HUMPHREYS: Gerard Humphreys with Seamus O'Tuathail, for Mr. Don Lydon.
16 17
What the witness said was that I have no recollection. If he has no
18
recollection he cannot go on to say what occurred. Now, there has to be --
19 10:34:42 20
CHAIRMAN:
Well he said that's something you can take up with him in
21
cross-examination.
That's why.
It concerns us as well.
22
He said in private session that he or it would appear that he had a
23
recollection.
24
he's changed his position again and he says he now has a recollection.
He said this morning that he had no recollection.
He says now
10:35:01 25
26
I mean, that's a matter, you can take up with him certainly.
27
can see the ....
But I mean, I
28 29
MR. HUMPHREYS:
The difficulty is that he said he had no recollection.
10:35:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:35:11
10:35:22
7 1
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, I can't hear you.
2 3
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Sorry the mike is on again.
The difficulty is that he said
4
that he had no recollection of this event.
5
what occurred.
6
Now, he either remembers it or he doesn't remember it.
And now he is continuing to say
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
9 10:35:27 10
MR. HUMPHREYS:
11
I'll take it up in cross-examination as indicated. But I do
see a difficulty with this even at this stage.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
the evidence here today. He said earlier that he had no recollection.
10:35:41 15
Absolutely.
And I share that concern. But I mean, we're taking You
now say you have a recollection.
16 17
I mean, it's important for Mr. Lydon's position that, I mean, that you be
18
absolutely truthful about this.
19
recollection or no recollection or a recollection?
10:35:58 20
A.
I mean, is it that you have a half a
Well, with respect, Chairman, I don't think there's any distinguishing
21
between -- what I've said to Mr. Murphy.
22
relationship with Mr. Lynn.
Mr. Lydon, because Mr. Lydon's
Mr. Lydon would not --
23 24 10:36:16 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
26
No, no, it doesn't matter what --
-- do anything without instructions from Mr. Lynn. Mr. Lawlor --
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Lydon, sorry.
10:36:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
In the circumstances where
10:36:26
10:36:34
8 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
day.
3
A.
We're only interested in what you saw happen on that particular
Not what you assume happened or think should have happened.
I accept that.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
out Mr. Lydon or did you not see or can you remember one way or the other?
7
A.
Now, can you clarify the position.
Did you see Mr. Lynn calling
Well the simple answer to that is yes.
8 9 10:36:48 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
I did see Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon to come out.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
You can deal with it in cross-examination.
13 14
MR. HUMPHREYS:
10:37:05 15
I'll take it up in cross-examination.
It was the difficulty
in what he said and then going on to say something else.
16
Thank you.
17 18
Q. 32
19 10:37:14 20
21
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, we were talking about your meeting with Mr. Sweeney
on the 8th of March. A.
Yes.
Q. 33
And just one thing in relation to that.
I want to put to you because I'm not
22
quite sure that you pitched it quite as high as this yesterday. But in your
23
statement, 425 please.
24 10:37:26 25
And if you go down towards the end of the first substantial paragraph.
26
it says "The only discussions".
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 34
Do you see that?
29
A.
Yes, sorry.
Q. 35
"The only discussions with regard to payments to politicians was with
10:37:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Where
10:38:01
10:38:13
9 1
Mr. Sweeney.
With my original meeting with him indicated that he knew that I
2
would have to make payments to councillors to achieve success."
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 36
I just want to stop there for a second "and he said that he knew that this was
5
the only way that things could get done".
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 37
This might be my inaccuracy in recollection because you were saying something
8 9 10:38:26 10
that you couldn't recall what words he said. A.
Yes.
Q. 38
"He indicated to you."
11 12
Is that correct in your statement that he indicated to
you that he knew that you would have to make payments to councillors? A.
Yes.
What I -- I thought I clarified that, particularly with the Chairman
13
yesterday.
14
Mr. Sweeney did not say I know that you have to make payments to politicians.
10:38:47 15
When he asked me in relation to -- I said specifically that
Q. 39
You did.
16
A.
Did I not say that?
17
Q. 40
You did say that.
18
A.
I also said.
19
This was a point that the Chairman raised with me in relation to
saying, you have to do what you have to do or I know what you have to do, it is
10:38:58 20
the only way of getting things done.
21
Q. 41
Yes.
22
A.
And from that, which I described as the culture of the meeting to you on day
23
one, sorry, not day one, day whatever it was.
24
of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge.
10:39:12 25
That that was my interpretation
Q. 42
Yes.
26
A.
Day one of your cross-examination -- of your examination, yes.
27
Q. 43
Oh yes, sorry, I thought you meant meeting.
28 29 10:39:27 30
It was day one wasn't it?
You say in the statement "He said
that he knew that this was the only way that things could get done." A.
Yes.
Q. 44
So he said that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:39:28
10:39:40
10 1
A.
2
He said that he knew.
The phrase when I went on to -- when I was asked by the
Chairman what phraseology --
3 4
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Murphy has just read
5
out a an extract from the statement where it clearly says "indicated that he
6
knew".
He is now paraphrasing it and said that he knew.
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
9
sentence is and what I said was that he knew that this was the only way that
10:39:50 10
No. The next sentence.
things could get done.
11
He said that.
I'm sorry Mr. Redmond, the next
I'm sorry, Mr. Redmond, that's what I
mean.
12 13
MR. REDMOND: My misinterpretation and I want just for the purposes of
14
clarification was; It was very clear to me that what Mr. Murphy was saying
10:40:01 15
whether through error or otherwise was that "he said that I would have to make
16
payments to councillors".
17
throughout.
That he was using "said" instead of indicating
18 19
Q. 45
10:40:15 20
MR. MURPHY:
Well, Mr. Dunlop, what I'm suggesting to you is that in your
statement, your words are "he" being Mr. Sweeney "said that he knew that this
21
was the only way that things would get done".
22
Mr. Sweeney said that part of it to you?
23
A.
24
Is that correct that
I know what you -- what I said to the Chairman yesterday was that you have to do whatever you have to do or phraseology to that extent.
10:40:34 25
That is the only
way that things can be done.
26
Q. 46
All right.
27
A.
And I specifically made it clear, Mr. Murphy, and I hope -- I had hoped I had
28
and I want to make it absolutely clear again here now.
29
said to me, Frank, I know that you have to pay X, Y, or Z: he never said I know
10:40:53 30
That Mr. Sweeney never
that you have pay Mr. Murphy, Mr. Redmond, Ms. Dillon, you know, whoever. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He
10:40:58
10:41:07
11 1
never said anything of that nature.
2
have to do with these politicians.
He said I know you have to do what you That is the only way things can be done.
3
Q. 47
Well is that all he said?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 48
Said that gave you to understand --
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 49
-- that he knew that politicians would have to be paid?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 50
Mr. Sweeney -- you gave us a lot of evidence yesterday.
A.
Dunlop.
Q. 51
Mr. Dunlop, you gave us a lot of evidence yesterday afternoon about the
10:41:30 10
11 12
meetings with Mr. Sweeney, the first one and on subsequent occasions and going
13
back to Mr. Sweeney about an increase in your fees, isn't that right?
14 10:41:44 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 52
Now, do you expect that Mr. Sweeney will agree with that?
A.
Well, firstly, my first immediate answer to that is I don't know.
17
And
secondly, I have seen some documentation in relation to --
18
Q. 53
Yes.
19
A.
-- what Mr. Sweeney has said by way of either preliminary statement or
10:42:05 20
narrative statement and Mr. Sweeney seems to have a completely hazy notion of
21
where I came from or how I came to be involved at all.
22
Q. 54
All right.
23
A.
Now, that is my --
24
Q. 55
If I can take you to page 2199, please. Now, the third paragraph.
10:42:26 25
If I can
read this.
26 27
"The next contact -- the next contact with Liam Lawlor was in 1993/1994 during
28
the Cherrywood campaigns."
29
public relations consultant Frank Dunlop, who was employed as a consultant
10:42:52 30
Sorry. "When he advised on zoning strategy with
around the time of the second Cherrywood rezoning was attempted by Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I
10:42:56
10:43:10
12 1
have no knowledge of when exactly or who appointed Frank Dunlop but can recall
2
that some of the Liam Lawlor/Frank Dunlop meetings were related to the
3
promotion of a number of developments in the Checz Republic especially the Alfa
4
project in Prague."
5
know when exactly you were appointed or who appointed you.
Mr. Sweeney apparently is going to say that he doesn't
6
A.
That's the point I was referring to myself.
7
Q. 56
You believe that he appointed you?
8
A.
Well --
9
Q. 57
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 58
You believe Mr. Sweeney appointed you?
12
A.
Correct. Yes.
13
Q. 59
And if we go on to page 2200, please. The paragraph heading Frank Dunlop and
10:43:19 10
14
Bill O'Herlihy.
10:43:35 15
16
This is Mr. Sweeney's statement "Spanning a period of about one and a half
17
years I would have met Frank Dunlop about six times."
18
second, that bears out what you were saying in your evidence about meeting
19
Mr. Sweeney on a number of occasions.
10:43:50 20
A.
21
If I pause there for a
It's double that actually, according to my rough count yesterday for his references to Mr. Sweeney in my diaries.
22
Q. 60
Would you have met him other than in the Monarch offices?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 61
Because -- all right.
10:44:02 25
in the offices.
Because what you had said in your interviews is twice
"Some of the meetings would have been about the proposed
26
develop in Prague and some of the meetings would have concerned Frank Dunlop's
27
role as public relations advisors in relation to land rezoning, particularly in
28
Cherrywood to which he was introduced some time after the services of Bill
29
Herlihy were no longer required (road show).
10:44:20 30
I can recall no part in any
agreement with Mr. Bill O'Herlihy -- that's irrelevant -- or Frank Dunlop for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:44:23
10:44:33
13 1
the services that they provided -- for the services that they provided to
2
Monarch but I believe that such consultancy agreements would probably have been
3
formalised in writing.
4 5
I personally however, at no time negotiated any agreement or agreed any
6
payments or certified or recommended any payments to Frank Dunlop or Bill
7
O'Herlihy whatsoever.
8
such appointments."
Philip Monahan or Richard Lynn would have dealt with
9 10:44:46 10
11
Now, would you like to comment on that in the light of what you told us? A.
Yeah. We'll take it from the top.
Spanning a period of about one and a half
12
years.
13
can refer to the diary if you so wish and give the exact --
14
Q. 62
10:45:06 15
16
I met with Frank Dunlop about six times.
I'm not interested in that Mr. Dunlop.
I've dealt with that.
We
I'm not interested in the next bit, if
you go down "I can recall no part". A.
Okay.
"I can recall no part".
I think I told you yesterday or the day
17
before, I'm not quite sure, if you go through the names of the people in
18
relation to Monarch that I ever met or dealt with. Philip Monahan, I met on a
19
number of occasions socially or accidentally and he attended one meeting and
10:45:29 20
stuck his head in to another.
I never negotiated any fee.
I never had any
21
writing communication with Mr. Monahan in relation to the Cherrywood project.
22
He never negotiated a fee with me.
23 24 10:45:51 25
Mr. Lynn:
Mr. Lynn and I never discussed my relationship with Monarch
Properties in relation to the Cherrywood project other than in circumstances of
26
strategy as to who he should talk to, who he should lobby, who he should
27
campaign, what type of attitude we should adopt.
28
appoint me.
29
appoint me.
Neither -- he did not
I don't know who told him I was appointed.
10:46:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He certainly did not
10:46:12
10:46:19
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well --
Mr. Philip Reilly.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
that you stand over your evidence to the effect --
6
A.
7
Mr. Dunlop.
Sorry, all Mr. Murphy wants from you is confirmation
I certainly do, Chairman, yes.
But he asked me, just in ease of Mr. Murphy,
he did say is there any comment you wish to make.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:46:37 10
want to in any way alter the evidence you have given, given that Mr. Sweeney
11 12
Yes but we don't need to know, we just want to know whether you
will say what he apparently -A.
13
Let me put it another way, Mr. Chairman.
I totally disagree with that
statement.
14 10:46:48 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
16 17
Q. 63
18 19
MR. MURPHY: Page 4839, please. Now, Mr. Dunlop, I think this is where we were yesterday.
A.
Yes.
Q. 64
I think we were at the bottom of the page "okay" with initials?
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 65
Now, what would "okay" convey to you there?
23
A.
Well, okay would confirm to me that the person who initialled that said this is
10:47:01 20
24 10:47:15 25
okay for payment. Q. 66
Right.
26
A.
That would be my interpretation of it.
27
Q. 67
That's your best effort at working out who that initial is?
28
A.
Oh well my best effort at that is as I said yesterday, it looks to me as either
29 10:47:29 30
Ed or an elaborate Yes. Q. 68
Would you be inclined to think that it's Mr. Sweeney? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:47:33
10:47:44
15 1
A.
2 3
Having seen it yesterday and looking at it now I don't have any doubt that it is Ed Sweeney.
Q. 69
4
Okay.
Right.
Which in fact having regard to what I've just read out to you
about his statement --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 70
-- may not be consistent with what he's saying about not having any dealings
7
with fees about you?
8
A.
Sorry, give me that again, Mr. Murphy.
9
Q. 71
If that's Mr. Sweeney's signature --
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 72
He is okaying your invoice?
12
A.
And then he is saying in his statement he had no dealings with me.
10:47:55 10
13 14
Yes, I
accept that point. Q. 73
10:48:05 15
So if the signature there, his signature there bears out what you are saying that you did have your chats with him about money?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 74
Anyway, that's his signature and what that conveys to you is that he has okayed
18 19 10:48:16 20
this fee, isn't that right? A.
Yes, sorry.
Q. 75
Yes.
Now -- this.
And you told us yesterday that you had this conversation
21
on the phone with one or other of these two gentlemen and they said send it in
22
and we'll see what we can do?
23
A.
See how far you would get.
24
Q. 76
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
10:48:38 25
So then you sent out this invoice on the 14th of
December 1993, which is shortly after, whatever it is, a few weeks after the
26
successful motion.
27
A.
A month I think was it, three weeks, yeah.
28
Q. 77
And -- right.
29
A.
Actually --
Q. 78
Is there something?
10:49:06 30
So he had said to you he'll see how far --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:49:07
10:49:16
16 1
A.
No, no, no, just on the time line.
I was just interested in your reference to
2
how long after the successful motion it was.
3
the successful motion was.
I was just looking up what date
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The 11th of November.
A.
I said a month, yeah.
Q. 79
MR. MURPHY:
We know that from the record.
7 8 9
it? I mean, you had this conversation, you wanted a success fee, 60,500.
10:49:32 10
know that you had no intention of paying the VAT.
11 12
Can you just take us through what happened then in relation to
So success fee is 60,500
and he says -A.
Excuse me, Mr. Murphy, sorry, you cannot say that I had no intentions of paying
13
VAT.
14
which would, if it was received to Frank Dunlop & Associates with the VAT
10:49:51 15
attached go through the books as other invoices had from Frank Dunlop &
16 17
This was Frank Dunlop & Associates Company invoice with VAT attached
Associates to Monarch. Q. 80
18 19
No, I understood from what you said yesterday when you were agreeing the 25,000 at the beginning --
A.
Oh that was a different invoice. This is an invoice with VAT attached --
Q. 81
All right.
21
A.
-- through the company books.
22
Q. 82
All right.
10:50:03 20
23 24 10:50:15 25
We
So success fee, this is your invoice success fee 50,000 is the
success fee.
The rest is VAT and you're going to pay the VAT on it?
A.
Yes.
Q. 83
And it's -- and it says "okay".
So Mr. Sweeney said to you.
And I keep
26
forgetting what you say he said to you which was he said he'll see how far it
27
would go or whatever.
28
A.
Yes. See how far you'll get.
29
Q. 84
See how far you'll get. Yeah, so it's looks as if you're getting pretty far at
10:50:32 30
this stage? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:50:32
10:50:41
17 1
A.
By virtue of that reference on it, yes.
2
Q. 85
So what happened?
3
A.
I didn't get it.
4
Q. 86
You didn't get it?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 87
Is there a reminder letter?
7
A.
No, I don't think so.
There's -- if there was we would have discovered it.
8
I don't think so.
9
whether or not it was going to be paid or not.
10:50:59 10
I think there were some discussions subsequently as to But it just -- it wasn't paid
as far as I'm concerned.
11
Q. 88
You regarded it as outstanding.
12
A.
Putting it clinically, yes, it is a live debt.
13
Q. 89
Is there some other way to put it?
14
A.
No, there's not.
Q. 90
Monarch Properties owe you 60,500.
16
A.
No, I sent this invoice.
17
Q. 91
Was it a joke?
18
A.
We sent this invoice after a discussion that I had with one or other of
10:51:14 15
19
Putting it clinically is what I said.
Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane.
10:51:40 20
It's a live debt?
And you now show me the invoice from the Monarch
file which it as "okay" on it.
21
Q. 92
So you hadn't seen it before, had you not?
22
A.
Well, no I cannot absolutely say that we hadn't seen it before if it was in the
23 24
brief. Q. 93
Can I stop you there for a second, I want to know when you first saw that page?
A.
I can't tell you that.
26
Q. 94
When did you get your brief?
27
A.
Some time ago.
28
Q. 95
Uh-huh.
29
A.
Some time ago.
Q. 96
Uh-huh.
10:51:54 25
10:52:00 30
And had you never seen that -- you hadn't seen it I suppose until you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:52:05
10:52:10
18 1
got the brief?
2
A.
I couldn't have seen it until I got the brief.
3
Q. 97
Well, presumably in the last number of weeks you have seen it, it's not new to
4
you?
5
A.
No, it's not new to me in the sense, it's not in the forefront of my mind.
6
Q. 98
Just tell us please, how you followed up a debt of 60,500.
7
Sorry.
asked you?
8
A.
You did.
9
Q. 99
Is that still -- oh Monarch owes you that and you said not really.
A.
Well that invoice was not paid.
10:52:29 10
A number of conversations took place with
11
Mr. Sweeney and/or Mr. Glennane about the payment of it.
12
some stage that I wasn't going to get paid.
13
money.
14 10:52:51 15
16
It was indicated at
Or I wasn't going to get the
Q. 100
Why not?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 101
They must have given you a reason and you must have protested and said I can't
17 18
I think I
But you'll have to ask Monarch that.
afford to be without 60,000? A.
19
I'm going to have to say to you again, Mr. Murphy, you're going to have to ask Monarch why they didn't pay.
10:53:13 20
I know, or at least from material that I think
is in the brief, that it is -- that certainly indicates that Monarch may have
21
claimed payment of this from somebody else or half of this from somebody else,
22
I don't know.
23
Q. 102
24 10:53:33 25
But, I mean, certainly I didn't get it.
No, no, that's fine.
What's the follow-up to it, sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I asked
you a second ago -A.
Yes.
26
Q. 103
-- do Monarch owe you 60,500?
27
A.
Well, I don't regard that they do any more.
28
Q. 104
Why not?
29
A.
Well there is not much likelihood of my getting 60,500 from Monarch when I sent
10:53:47 30
an invoice in on the 14th of December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And we are he now at whatever it
10:53:52
10:54:02
19 1 2
is of June 2006. Q. 105
3 4
But it's bad debt, isn't it?
It's money they owe you but they won't pay you
and you can't get? A.
I don't regard it as a bad debt.
It was something that we discussed.
We
5
sent it out on foot of a conversation with the gentleman that I, one or other
6
of the gentlemen that I alluded to.
7
circumstances that I've outlined to you, maybe a couple of telephone
8
conversations.
9
I never followed it up other than in the
Q. 106
Nothing in writing?
A.
Not that I --
11
Q. 107
No reminder?
12
A.
I don't -- I certainly have no documentation extant to me to show that I sent
10:54:16 10
13 14 10:54:27 15
16
them a reminder. Q. 108
No.
A.
When this module is opened this is the first --
Q. 109
When did you write it off? Tell me the date, the month or the year when you
17 18
and Monarch agreed that they didn't owe it to you any longer? A.
19 10:54:47 20
Well I don't think I ever made a conscious decision saying I'm writing this off.
I just wasn't paid and that's it.
Q. 110
Did you get it any other way?
21
A.
No, I did not.
22
Q. 111
Did you get it in cash?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 112
Did you get it from somebody else, not Mr. Sweeney.
A.
No, I never got any money from Mr. Monahan.
26
Q. 113
You never did?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 114
No.
29
A.
And just for ease of your line of questioning.
10:55:00 25
10:55:06 30
Monarch either. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did Mr. Monahan pay you?
I never got any cash from
10:55:16
10:55:48
20 1
Q. 115
Now, could I have, please, 4832.
2
This is an invoice.
This is a document on Monarch Properties Services Limited
3
notepaper.
4
It says invoice No. 2186.
It's a fee note I think.
It says "fee note" in the middle of it.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 116
It says date 10th of December 1993.
Project Cherrywood/Loughlinstown, County
7
Dublin in account Guardian Assurance Plc. This is GRE I think, isn't it? And
8
it says Frank Dunlop success fee.
9
instead of sending on your invoice, would that be right? They have sent --
10:56:14 10
So obviously what they've done is they've
they have incorporated in their own document Frank Dunlop success fee --
11
A.
What is?
12
Q. 117
"ES letter of the 2nd of September '93 and paragraph 1 of MB's letter of 28th
13
September 1993.
14
30,250.
10:56:41 15
Fee 50,000.
50 per cent GRE 25,000, VAT 5,250; total
This is not an invoice for VAT purposes.
A VAT invoice will issue
on receipt of payment and it's stamped by GRE authorised for payment 20th of
16
December 1993.
Can you explain that?
17
A.
No, that's a matter for Monarch.
18
Q. 118
Pardon?
19
A.
That's an internal Monarch document. I mean, I've only seen this in the brief.
10:56:57 20
I know nothing about this.
21
Q. 119
All right.
22
A.
Yes, we discussed that yesterday.
23
Q. 120
That in relation to certain disbursements, I think or expenses that they would
24 10:57:09 25
You know that there is an arrangement between Monarch and GRE?
get back 50 per cent? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 121
Your fees was one of those things?
27
A.
So I understand.
28
Q. 122
And so if there was a success fee, there may be an arrangement -- it may cover,
29 10:57:18 30
that agreement between GRE and Monarch may cover the success fee? A.
That may well be the case. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:57:20
10:57:31
21 1
Q. 123
Yes. All right. That is obviously what is going on?
2
A.
Well, I mean it is intriguing, but that is obviously what is going on.
3
Q. 124
Well, what's intriguing about it?
4
A.
Well, I mean I'm fascinated to know the next element of it.
5
Q. 125
Well, what's fascinating about it?
6
A.
Did they get 25 per cent out of it? Sorry did they get 50 per cent out of it?
7
Q. 126
But before that.
8 9
I mean, wouldn't you expect that your fees would be passed
on to the tune of 50 per cent to GRE? A.
If that is the arrangement with GRE, yes.
Q. 127
Oh, you didn't -- you weren't aware of that?
11
A.
I was never told --
12
Q. 128
That's fine?
13
A.
-- by Monarch that they had an arrangement with GRE that any fee note that I
10:57:43 10
14 10:57:54 15
would send in would be paid half by them. Q. 129
All right.
All right.
I never got any money from GRE.
But, Mr. Dunlop, how is it that -- do you know what
16
this is about? Do you see? If you just compare the information there, invoice
17
No. 2186 with your invoice.
18
A.
19
Yes.
Your invoice is 1251.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't say yes, well it's gone off the screen there now.
Let me see can I get it in my own brief. But I take --
10:58:23 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You can put it up again.
832.
Would you put it up beside it, put the two documents side by side.
23 24
MR. MURPHY: I think that's 4839 and 4832.
10:58:39 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: Yes, 4839 is the next one. A.
Yeah okay.
Q. 130
MR. MURPHY:
A.
Yes.
28 29 10:58:49 30
Your one is on the right-hand side.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:58:50
10:59:02
22 1
Q. 131
It's dated 14th of December 1993.
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 132
The Monarch one to GRE is dated -- I don't know whether that's the date of the
4
invoice or whether it's the date of the fee note.
5
A.
Well that's exactly the point that struck me forcibly when I saw this stamp.
6
Q. 133
Yeah. Well, Mr. Dunlop, we'll take it one by one.
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 134
If that information invoice number and date is referring to your document,
9 10:59:22 10
which it should be, because it's your information further down. A.
No -- sorry, Mr. Murphy.
11
you're trying to do.
12
from Monarch to GRE.
For ease of what you're trying to do and I know what
This, as I interpret it, from Monarch, is an invoice
13
Q. 135
All right.
14
A.
And the Monarch number is 2186.
Q. 136
Excellent.
16
A.
I suspect that --
17
Q. 137
No, I was going to suggest that as an alternative.
18
A.
It may be.
19
Q. 138
Just for one second we'll take that.
10:59:37 15
10:59:48 20
All right.
I'll live with that.
So that this Monarch, it says fee note
and -- where does fee note come from.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
This is Monarch's.
23
A.
This is Monarch's.
24
Q. 139
MR. MURPHY:
11:00:02 25
Mr. Murphy, this is Monarch's invoice.
Why would they say fee note.
their invoice, Mr. Dunlop, for a second, it's their invoice No. 2186.
26
fine.
27
that's another matter.
28
is four days before your one.
29 11:00:15 30
Anyway, it doesn't matter.
It's
That's
I don't understand why they don't just simply send on your one but And the date of this is 10th of December 1993.
A.
Correct.
Q. 140
Now, how do you explain that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Which
11:00:17
11:00:31
23 1
A.
I mean, I don't have to offer any explanation for this at all.
This is an
2
internal Monarch document to another entity known as GRE and there are various
3
dates on it.
Obviously --
4
Q. 141
You --
5
A.
Let me just fast track this for you as possible.
6
evidence that I have given to you.
7
success fee.
8
company.
9 11:00:47 10
Q. 142
Yes.
A.
Okay.
11 12
11:00:58 15
I had a conversation in relation to a
I draw up an invoice and I send the invoice.
It's dated and there is an invoice number on it.
What Monarch did either in the interim or subsequently, I cannot
Q. 143
But Monarch would wait until they get your invoice to see what's it's for, isn't that right?
A.
Presumably.
Q. 144
But they have dated their invoice for 50,000 and well VAT because they've
16
included the VAT for GRE for their half.
17
their invoice before they get your's?
18
A.
19
So they've sent, prepared anyway
Well there's a number of thing that strike you forcibly when you look at that. There are three separate dates on it.
11:01:22 20
One is the 10th of the 12th '93.
Which is four days before the date of my invoice.
The second one is
21
authorised for payment the 20th of December, 1993.
22
another stamp of the 15th of January, 1994.
23
Q. 145
And where is 57 Harcourt Street -- oh that's Monarch.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 146
Okay.
26
A.
So I -- while I --
27
Q. 147
All right.
28
A.
-- I would wish to help you.
11:01:38 25
29 11:01:48 30
It's from the
account for.
13 14
I obviously on foot of the
And on top there is
Right.
I cannot help you in the context of an internal
document. Q. 148
But if it's authorised for payment by GRE on the 20th of December -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:01:52
11:02:02
24 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 149
-- the 15th of January is irrelevant for the moment.
3
A.
That's irrelevant, yes, yes.
4 5
three separate dates on that document. Q. 150
6 7
11:02:16 10
A.
You are going to have to ask Mr. Sweeney or whoever -- I don't see any authorisation signature on any of this.
Q. 151
All right.
A.
Other than ES, which presumably means Eddie Sweeney, that's a matter for
11 12
How do they write your invoice, this invoice about your fee to get their half back from GRE without getting your invoice first?
8 9
I'm just pointing out to you that there are
Monarch. Q. 152
Page 3403, please. A letter, Mr. Dunlop, from GRE to Mr. Sweeney.
13
is dated 7th of July, 1993.
14
Excuse me. Invoice No. 2064.
11:02:47 15
16
The letter
Paragraph four. This is GRE saying to Monarch --
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 153
"Although at our meeting in May I agreed the appointment of Frank Dunlop on the
17
basis of 4, 000 per month with no success fee.
18
to invoice for 25,000 which would imply over six months work when Mr. Dunlop
19
was only appointed in May."
11:03:03 20
I therefore find it difficult
A.
I find that paragraph quite gratifying.
21
Q. 154
In what way?
22
A.
First of all, you suggested to me that Mr. Sweeney -- you put up a note know
23
the monitor saying that Mr. Sweeney knew nothing about my appointment or had no
24
negotiations with me.
11:03:23 25
Here is a note from GRE Properties to Mr. Sweeney
saying -- discussing fees in relation to me.
26
Q. 155
I totally accept that, Mr. Dunlop.
27
A.
Thank you.
28
Q. 156
On to the next thing that you find gratifying about it?
29
A.
The next thing I find gratifying about it is I don't know anything about 4,000
11:03:40 30
per month. The next thing I find gratifying about it is -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:03:41
11:04:00
25 1
Q. 157
Yes.
2
A.
I have already said in evidence that there was no discussion about a success
3
fee.
4
it is; that is 25,000 which is what I've always said was agreed between
5
Mr. Sweeney and myself.
6
Q. 158
7 8
That seems to be confirmed there.
All right.
And the 4th or 5th thing, whatever
The 25,000 may well go back to the 25 that you were paid in March,
which was 15 and 10, isn't that right? A.
That's what I am referring to, yes.
9 11:04:10 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Mr. Dunlop, just before we leave that point.
Sorry, Judge.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
invoice for the first two tranches.
11:04:20 15
A.
I understood yesterday I may be wrong, that there was no
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
there was no invoice for the 25.
19
A.
So this is a letter in July 7.
So you've said yesterday
No.
11:04:28 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
invoice could refer to the first tranche of money, two tranches that you got.
23
A.
24
So I'm now at a loss to understand how you can say this
No. With respect, Judge, I didn't say this invoice.
I said the 25,000. I
don't know anything --
11:04:49 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I just wanted to, in fairness --
I see the point you're making and it's quite correct.
I find it gratifying
28
that it's the 25,000 that's referred to which is what I have always said was
29
the agreed fee.
11:04:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:04:52
11:05:02
26 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
an invoice in relation to the first tranche but certainly you didn't raise it
3
anyway.
4
A.
Well we'll have to wait and see whether somebody else raised
No, I did not.
5 6
MR. REDMOND: Chairman, I think again just to clarify the issue in relations to
7
the invoices.
8
If that letter is dated September, by that time Mr. Dunlop has raised an
9
invoice for 10 and for 15 making a total of 25.
11:05:14 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
first 25,000.
I appreciate that, Mr. Redmond.
We were talking about the
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Which we'll have to hear from Monarch.
11:05:22 15
16
Q. 159
MR. MURPHY:
It does say Although at a meeting in May, GRE and this gentleman
17
agreed the appointment, your appointment.
18
you first came on the scene in March certainly from GRE's point of view.
19 11:05:37 20
A.
Thank you.
Q. 160
But you know nothing -- your arrangement for fees had nothing to do with 4,000
21 22
That ties in with you saying that
a month. A.
Were you aware of this arrangement and between GRE and Monarch?
I've already said to you I don't know anything about any arrangement. I don't
23
even know who signed this letter is there another page? I don't know who
24
signed this letter or at least --
11:05:53 25
Q. 161
26
Page 4304.
"Yours sincerely M Baker managing director GRE Properties Limited,
cc G Beng."
27
A.
Never heard of either of them.
28
Q. 162
Good. 4412, please.
29 11:06:19 30
A further letter from GRE to Mr. Sweeney. Eddie, Cherrywood Cabinteely.
28th of September 1993.
With reference to your letter of 2nd of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
"Dear
11:06:23
11:06:34
27 1
September and you are meeting on 27th of September I would confirm approval to
2
the following additional costs.
3
payable 50/50 between GRE and Monarch.
All costs are in Irish pounds and will be
4 5
1.
F Dunlop: A retainer of 4,000 per month from April to December 1993
6
inclusive plus a success fee of 50,000 pounds."
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 163
Now, the first part of that you know nothing about, the 4,000 per month.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 164
But this letter is evidence that GRE agreed with Mr. Sweeney to pay you a
11:06:45 10
11 12
success fee of 50,000 pounds? A.
Well I had no discussion with anybody from the outset about a success fee until
13
towards the end of the project, which we've already discussed ten minutes ago,
14
a conversation with Mr. Sweeney and/or Mr. Glennane some time after the
11:07:12 15
success, after the vote.
I don't know.
I cannot account for --
16
Q. 165
Yes.
17
A.
-- how --
18
Q. 166
Uh-huh.
19
A.
-- any of these internal documents between Monarch and GRE were drawn up.
11:07:24 20
mean, I wasn't party to them.
Certainly there was never any question about
21
4,000 per month.
22
to you earlier on this morning in the conversation with either Mr. Sweeney or
23
Mr. Glennane.
24
Q. 167
11:07:51 25
26
A.
Any idea
Billed and paid.
No.
Well it's in sort of capital letters isn't it,
Mr. Murphy, it might be difficult to decipher? Q. 168
29 11:08:04 30
Mr. Dunlop, the words -- it seems to me to read "billed and paid". whose handwriting?
27 28
And the success fee was in the circumstances that I outlined
That doesn't really matter whether it's difficult or not. it?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did you recognise
I
11:08:05
11:08:19
28 1
Q. 169
2
No. Okay.
And I can't be certain about this.
But it looks as if it seems
to indicate that those figures were paid by GRE to Monarch?
3
A.
Oh, to Monarch.
4
Q. 170
Yes, yes, to Monarch.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 171
And if it was -- so we have what seem to be the words "billed and paid" there
7
written by somebody.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 172
And then on the invoice that went from Monarch to GRE, if you recall, it said
11:08:54 10
"authorised for payment" on the 20th of December by GRE, do you remember that?
11
A.
That I do, yes, that was on the top -- the bottom of the page, yes.
12
Q. 173
So I don't know whether that means that this 50 was billed and paid by Monarch
13
or paid by GRE to Monarch back in September and again in December or whether
14
they are one and the same.
11:09:16 15
16
And you don't know that?
A.
I don't know that.
Q. 174
All right. But it appears anyway, Mr. Dunlop, that you billed Monarch for
17
50,000 plus VAT?
18
A.
No question of that.
19
Q. 175
And somewhere along the line.
11:09:39 20
payment and okay and so on.
And we know the invoice marked authorised for And somewhere along the line GRE may well have
21
paid Monarch once or twice -- presumably half of 50,000 once or twice.
22
seems, on the paperwork, to be the case until Monarch tell us, isn't that
23
right?
24 11:10:06 25
26
A.
It's pretty annoying to discover that.
Q. 176
Right.
A.
Well it's annoying.
That
It's annoying? I mean, if Monarch was sending an internal invoice to GRE
27
on foot of an agreed success fee with me or a success fee that I was told to
28
send in and see how far you'd get.
29
leaves me looking a little bit silly that I didn't get my, what I had invoiced
11:10:25 30
for, which I didn't.
And they got it paid to them or part paid,
I don't know what was going on.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I can't account for it
11:10:31
11:10:41
29 1 2
but I don't know what was going on. Q. 177
Of course, if that was the case that would have been what was happening at a
3
time when they were saying that -- I mean, you were writing it off or what was
4
you were doing, your discussions with Monarch?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 178
They were saying they weren't going to pay you or whatever.
7 8
Maybe they'd been
paid half? A.
9
Now you've got to the core of it now as to the annoyance. actual reality, it is annoying.
11:10:59 10
If that is the
It's been indicated to me that send it in and
see how far you get and then it's not paid.
And now we discover that from
11
internal documentation that it may well be the case that 50 per cent of it was
12
paid to Monarch.
13
Q. 179
Right.
14
A.
Well it's news to me in the context of the brief.
11:11:25 15
But that is of latter days,
you know, I have no knowledge of what the internal relationship between Monarch
16 17
Anyway, that's all news to you, isn't that right?
and GRE were, particularly in relation to my fees. Q. 180
Now, there's a possible explanation on the figures maybe, Mr. Dunlop.
I don't
18
know but I'm just suggesting this to you and see.
19
arrangement with Monarch was 25,000 and then your subsequent visits for
11:11:54 20
Because we know that your
increases?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 181
And we know at the end of the day, at the end of December you got 80, 000.
23 24
There was 5,000 in 1995. A.
11:12:05 25
Which was a long overdue invoice which had been issued in 1993 and wasn't paid until 1995.
26
Q. 182
At the end of December you had received 80,000 from Monarch?
27
A.
Correct, correct.
28
Q. 183
And we know from what we've just seen here, there was an invoice -- this
29 11:12:20 30
invoice for the success fee to GRE and we've seen this that whatever that's all about.
But if you -- if we did the sums in relation to Monarch's apparent Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:12:28
11:12:43
30 1
arrangement with GRE, namely, 4,000 a month?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 184
And if, as according to -- if I could have -- I have it.
4
screen.
5
Nine fours are 36.
The letter on
A retainer of 4,000 per month from April to December is nine months. And if you add a success fee of 50,000 you get 86.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 185
Now, we know you got 86 in 1993.
And this is a letter in September 1993, by
8
which time you haven't got that money, of course.
9
which time GRE are writing to Monarch saying confirming these additional costs
11:13:14 10
11
But by which time GRE -- at
a retainer of 4,000 for those months plus a success fee? A.
I -- with respect, Mr. Murphy, I think we're square pegs around holes here.
I
12
can see what you're trying to tie up loose ends but that may well be some sort
13
of internal financial computation on the part of Monarch.
14
Q. 186
Yeah.
A.
Let me assure you again, the 4,000 per month never arose.
16
Q. 187
I know.
17
A.
Okay. The 25,000, the payment as we discussed yesterday, within four days of
11:13:42 15
Uh-huh.
18
the meeting with Eddie Sweeney, revisits for various amounts.
19
Monarch treated that internally, with respect, I have to suggest to you is
11:14:03 20
21
Now, how
matter for Monarch. Q. 188
22
Yeah.
Okay.
Thanks.
All right.
Yes.
All I'm just trying to point out
there --
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 189
-- is that on the one hand --
A.
Sure.
26
Q. 190
-- you got 80,000 in 1993.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 191
You hadn't got it all by September but you got it.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 192
If you add the Monarch GRE arrangement of 4,000 per month for nine months and
11:14:18 25
11:14:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:14:31
11:14:47
31 1
add 50, it's the same amount.
2
Monarch, you billed them accordingly and then they had a totally different
3
arrangement with GRE and that billing was on the basis of a different
4
arrangement?
5
A.
6
Is it possible that you had an arrangement with
No, no. That would not accord with the arrangement that I had with Mr. Sweeney.
7
Q. 193
Can you even hazard an explanation for this?
8
A.
Again, could I just say to you that observing the good legal protocols, I
9 11:15:06 10
11
should not even hazard a guess, because that would be speculation on my part. I have no explanation for that whatsoever.
I have to suggest to you that you
must ask people from Monarch what the meaning of this is.
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, again on behalf -- Mr. Murphy has posited a theory
14
that four nines being 36 plus 50,000 brings you to 86 and that may have been an
11:15:27 15
internal arrangement. The documentation as appears on page 4112 make it
16
patently clear that GRE were only to pay 50 per cent of the success fee which
17
is 25,000 which brings it to 61,000.
18
theory, it should at least be limited to 61 and not 86.
So if Mr. Murphy wants to posit a
19 11:15:46 20
CHAIRMAN:
Where do you say it says yeah, they were to pay.
21 22
MR. REDMOND: Page 4412.
23 24 11:15:55 25
CHAIRMAN:
Yes. But the suggestion is that though that there was a 50,000
success fee, half of which GRE would pay.
26 27
MR. REDMOND: That's what I mean, Chairman.
But Mr. Murphy is suggesting that
28
if Monarch were collecting 50 plus 36.
29
of Mr. Dunlop's fee but they weren't collecting 50 plus 36.
That would have covered the entirety
11:16:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:16:12
11:16:18
32 1
CHAIRMAN:
No, that's right.
2 3
MR. REDMOND: At best they were collecting 25 plus 36.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
Q. 194
MR. MURPHY:
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 195
Now, this is another letter that we have to take up with Monarch.
11:16:37 10
look at that.
Mr. Dunlop, 4815, please.
But if you
You will see it's a GRE letter?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 196
It's to Monarch and the stamp is the 5th of January.
Received presumably on
13
5th of January 1994.
And it says "Dear Sirs we have pleasure enclosing cheque
14
for 52,030 pounds in payment of invoice numbers as follows."
11:17:01 15
16
2186: Being one of the invoice numbers which is the -- which is the invoice we
17
were looking at dated 10th of December 1993, from Monarch to GRE.
18
show that to you in a moment again if you want.
And we can
19 11:17:16 20
"We have pleasure enclosing a cheque for 52,030 pounds on payment of a number
21
of invoices" including 2186 which is their one on your behalf in relation to
22
50,000.
23
cheque for payment will be appreciated."
"In respect of attached copy invoices.
Early presentation of the
24 11:17:34 25
And underneath that then -- underneath that is a cheque, 20th of December 1993.
26
GRE's cheque to Monarch, pay Monarch the sum of 52,030 pounds.
27
of this means that by cheque dated 20th of December 1993, GRE paid 52,030
28
pounds to Monarch.
29
The invoice 2186 sent by Monarch to GRE in December '93 in respect of your
11:18:18 30
success fee.
So I think all
Which included their half of the invoice dated -- sorry.
That is, that seems to be clear; is that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:18:22
11:18:44
33 1
A.
Well that seems to be the broad structure of it, as to the actual details and
2
how this was computed or organised I don't know.
3
also a stamp on the bottom of 4815 which obviously is a lodgement stamp.
4
the 21st of December 1993.
5
presumably into the Monarch Properties Services bank account.
6
Q. 197
7
But sorry.
I just notice that there is
So this cheque was lodged with obvious --
All I'm just saying.
I know, this seems to back up that the
December invoice --
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 198
You invoiced Monarch.
11:19:01 10
your invoice.
Monarch then invoiced GRE in December, in respect of
And then we say we found it was authorised for payment.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 199
So this seems to back up the position that GRE paid that success fee, took
13 14
their half of the success fee to Monarch. A.
To Monarch, yes.
Q. 200
Doesn't it?
16
A.
Oh, it does, yes.
17
Q. 201
And you didn't -- all right.
11:19:16 15
18 19
On
Uh-huh.
Mr. Dunlop, can you bring that any
further? A.
11:19:57 20
I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
I'd like to, in the circumstances that I've
outlined to you but I don't think I can.
21
I'm -- I'd be fascinated with the
explanation.
22
Q. 202
And does it -- what conclusion do you come to from it?
23
A.
Well, again, sorry to sort of indicate some sort of ...
24
Q. 203
From your point of view, what do you think it means?
A.
Sorry to indicate some sort of kneafied knowledge of the law but observing the
11:20:19 25
26
protocol to be speculation on my part.
27
of it, unless there is another cogent explanation, is that Monarch indicated to
28
GRE that a success fee was agreed by Monarch.
29
including the success fee.
11:20:47 30
But I mean, what it means on the face
They sent an invoice to GRE,
And that the success fee was paid on the basis of
a 50/50 between GRE and Monarch.
And that Monarch is -- was in receipt of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:20:53
11:21:12
34 1
that money, as per the cheque of the 20th of December, 1993.
2
it, I'm no forensic lawyer, but that -- on the face of it, that looked to be
3
what the explanation is.
4
explanation to the contrary.
5
Q. 204
6
On the face of
And as I said to you, I look forward to an
And finally, that you have not been paid your success fee of 50,000 in the circumstances that Monarch have received half of it from GRE?
7
A.
It's pretty annoying.
8
Q. 205
Now, just to finish with invoices Mr. Dunlop.
9
Could I have -- you've seen the
one about the success fee 14th of December.
11:21:30 10
11
Could I go to 4133, please for a second.
12
Now, this is one we've seen before.
13
yesterday.
There are three other invoices.
And Mr. Redmond brought to our attention
14 11:21:41 15
In your invoice dated 10th of April 1993 to agreed fee re republic affairs
16
strategy and its implementations 10,000 pounds.
17
those initials.
Again, it says okay with
And it says paid on the 1st of June.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 206
And I'm going to skip on to the other two.
A.
Yes.
Q. 207
Because I want to see if you can explain these four Frank Dunlop & Associates
11:22:01 20
21 22
invoices to me in a global way.
That's 4133.
23 24
Could we please have 4772.
11:22:26 25
and it sets out.
Which is your invoice of 6th of December No. 955
And it comes to 31 well, to agreed professional fees re
26
republic affairs strategy and implementation of same.
27
seems to be the same phraseology?
It's the same -- that
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 208
25,000 plus VAT and then to miscellaneous costs etc. a figure and then the
11:22:42 30
total is 31,371.94. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:22:46
11:23:08
35 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 209
And then we go to page 5697, please.
3
Maybe you can explain how this invoice has the same number invoice no. 955, the
4
same number as the previous one and it's for the same stuff -- well in fact
5
actually, yes -- sorry.
The change in it is the 25,000 goes down to 17,500.
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 210
And the total is 22,296.94 pounds and then the fourth one I'm interested in is
8 9 11:23:25 10
the success fee. A.
Yeah.
Q. 211
Now, could you just -- I'm completely at sea in relation to these invoices.
11
The first one is actually marked paid but doesn't seem to relate to any of the
12
payments in that schedule from Coyle & Coyle that we talked about for a while.
13
A.
Does it not?
14
Q. 212
That's the first one.
11:23:50 15
The second one is for 31,000.
Is an invoice No. 955.
And it's the same invoice number as the next one and seems to be the same
16
content except there's a reduction in the fee.
And then you've the success
17
fee.
18
and the four of them together come to 126,000.
And the total of those, three of those are December 1993.
One is April
19 11:24:10 20
So if I take the four of those invoices.
21
three of them are in December.
22
pounds.
23
what they relate to.
You have invoiced three invoices --
You have invoiced Monarch for 126,000 Euro --
So, Mr. Dunlop, these are your invoices so perhaps you can tell me
24 11:24:26 25
26
Three of them in December '93 are at a time when you have already received 80,000 pounds from Monarch.
27 28
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Dunlop takes up that question.
29
it only fair insofar as Mr. Murphy is dealing with these invoices that he also
11:24:44 30
specifically refers to a credit note.
This credit note was generated on the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I think
11:24:49
11:25:18
36 1
31st of October 1995 in the sum of 2296.94.
If you go to the invoice of
2
22,296.94 that nets that invoice down to 20,000.
3
were payments of 15 and 5.
4
clear that the 22,296.94 was paid net a credit note.
5
be involved with the analysis of the invoices.
6
of 20,000 was paid.
7
least has to be taken into consideration along with that particular invoice.
And subsequent thereto there
So in order to make sense of the invoices, it is And a credit note has to
Because it is clear that a sum
And a credit note was given for 22,96.94 and that at
8 9
Q. 213
11:25:38 10
MR. MURPHY:
I think Mr. Redmond is absolutely correct on that.
Looking at page 5697.
Yes, we have it.
11 12
That is invoice number 955 for 22,296.94.
That was paid in two tranches,
13
15,000 in December '93.
14
about. Mr. Redmond is absolutely correct about that.
And the other 5,000 in August 1995 we were talking
11:26:00 15
16
That explains -- so, in other words, that invoice was paid and settled, as it
17
were.
18
August '95.
19
may have been written off, I don't know. That accounts for that invoice.
A lesser figure was paid.
And a further sum of 5,000 was paid in
Leaving a small balance I think, which I think was never paid and
11:26:23 20
21
MR. REDMOND: Again, I just have to point out to Mr. Murphy.
22
specific credit note generated for that sum.
23
A.
There was a
For the small sum.
24 11:26:32 25
MR. MURPHY:
How much was the sum?
26 27
MR. REDMOND: 22,096.64 is the balance left over and a credit note was
28
generated for that.
29 11:26:40 30
MR. MURPHY:
That's fine. That's fine. Yes.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:26:43
11:27:15
37 1
Q. 214
So, Mr. Dunlop.
We have -- that explains that invoice.
2
the 6th of December.
3
which is the same number and is for a higher sum.
4
that for a second?
Invoices raised on
It doesn't explain why the previous invoice exists, Could you just deal with
5 6
Could you look at 4772 please, I wonder could we put that on the screen for a
7
second. You invoiced -- 6th of December, you invoiced Mr. Sweeney invoice No.
8
955 for what's set out there and the amount is 31,000.
9 11:27:30 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 215
And the same date you give him another invoice with a different -- with the
11
same number for the same business with the sum -- for a figure of 22,296.94?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 216
Can you explain that?
14
A.
No, I can't explain to you why the same invoice number is on the two invoices
11:27:57 15
for two separate amounts, other than that there may have been some discussion
16
between Mr. Sweeney and myself.
17
Could you put up? Would it be possible, Mr. Murphy, could you put up the other
18
invoice --
19 11:28:15 20
21
Q. 217
Yes.
A.
-- of the same number.
Q. 218
5697.
I don't know, is the answer.
Just for clarification.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
11:28:39 25
Yes, sorry.
Side by side? Thank you, Chairman.
Why, Mr. Murphy -- yes, sorry.
document 5697, is that a copy or where, what's the genesis of that document?
26
That's our document?
27
Q. 219
I think we got it from you.
28
A.
That's our document, right, okay.
29 11:28:50 30
Is this
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, it is.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:28:54
11:29:08
38 1
Q. 220
MR. MURPHY:
Yes, it was provided by you, Mr. Dunlop.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 221
Oh, yes.
4
A.
You see, that's the point I want to make.
The other one is provided by Monarch. The one on the left now I may be --
5
please accept my assurances on this that I'm just speaking, which I know I
6
shouldn't do, speaking -- thinking out loud as it were.
7
Q. 222
I think it would be a very good idea if you were to talk out loud.
8
A.
To think out loud? No, I think barristers shouldn't speak out loud, Mr.
9 11:29:25 10
Murphy. Q. 223
I think it would get us closer.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop, the one on the left is the one that Monarch got.
Correct.
14 11:29:32 15
16
CHAIRMAN: The one on the right is an internal -A.
That's exactly the point that I wanted to make.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
That seems to explain that.
Are we at one?
11:29:40 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
No but -- now, you can explain why that, the two were generated.
A.
Yeah well the point I want to make is was the one on the right sent?
Q. 224
MR. MURPHY:
A.
I don't think so.
Q. 225
Well why are they generated, the two of them? On the same day.
23 24 11:29:56 25
26 27
Maybe you can tell us.
day?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 226
Two invoices the same number, different amounts.
A.
Well that's the one that they received.
11:30:09 30
On the same
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
One okayed by Mr. Sweeney.
11:30:13
11:30:25
39 1
Q. 227
Why do you have a second one for 10,000 less?
2
A.
As of this moment I can't explain that to.
3
Q. 228
Could you find out over lunch?
4
A.
Yes, yes. Well I'll try, yes.
5
Q. 229
All right.
You see, what I'm wondering is, Mr. Dunlop, did it come about in
6
some way.
7
126,000 roughly.
8
5,000 in '95.
9 11:30:53 10
What I'm saying is if you add these four figures they come to You -- the four invoices.
You were paid 80,000 in '93 and
A.
Yes. In '95.
Q. 230
And I'm wondering is there some way -- does this mean that you in fact billed
11
Monarch for 126,000? Did you bill them with these four invoices?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 231
Well presumably you billed -- which one did you not bill?
14
A.
Well you have the one receipted by Monarch, which is stamped as receipted and
11:31:15 15
okayed for payment.
16
Q. 232
Yeah.
17
A.
That's what you, five seconds ago, you said could you find out over lunch and
18 19
And the other one.
So you think you didn't bill them?
that's what I undertook to do. Q. 233
11:31:29 20
Yes, all right.
But do you accept -- all right.
So they got that one for
31,000?
21
A.
Obviously.
22
Q. 234
And they got the one for the success fee which was for 60,000?
23
A.
Obviously.
24
Q. 235
And they got the one, which was the first one, which is marked okayed and
11:31:38 25
marked paid for 12,100?
26
A.
Yes, because they have -- it's their documentation.
27
Q. 236
Thank you.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 237
Thank you.
And then we'll come back to that one when you've made an inquiry.
Certainly.
11:31:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:31:56
11:32:18
40 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
ten minutes.
Do you want a break, Mr. Dunlop? All right.
Well we'll break for
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
6
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
7 8
A.
Mr. Chairman, I do apologise.
9 11:51:13 10
CHAIRMAN: All right.
11
A.
I got into a conversation out there.
12
Q. 238
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry.
Mr. Dunlop, in relation to these invoices.
Do you remember
13
yesterday and the day before, whenever it was, that we were looking at the
14
transactions that ended up with you being paid 80,000 in 1993?
11:51:39 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 239
And I think the position was, in fact, if I just read it very quickly deal with
17
this and hopefully finally.
18
In respect of the first invoice 15,000 -- sorry.
19
the second one 10,000.
11:51:56 20
First payment 15,000.
And
That's the initial 25,000.
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 240
All right.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 241
We then come on to -- we then come on to an invoice in May which is for 15,000,
24 11:52:15 25
26
There are no invoices from you, isn't that right?
which is subsequently paid by two installments of 7,500, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 242
All right.
27 28
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, if we are taking this matter chronologically, it
29
appears, yet again the invoice in April for 12,100 has been omitted.
11:52:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:52:26
11:52:35
41 1
MR. MURPHY:
And for the reason that I was coming to it at the end.
2
I can't relate that to anything.
3
it so I will.
Because
But Mr. Redmond, would like me to deal with
4 5
There is the invoice dated 10th of April 1993 for 10,000 and VAT of 2,100.
6
Total of 12,100.
7
may be wrong.
But I think that doesn't relate to the 15 and 10.
But I
8 9
So just we have the payment of 15,000.
11:52:55 10
Totalling 25,000.
We have the payment of 10,000.
We have this payment that Mr. Redmond is referring me to,
11
the invoice for 12,100, which is in April.
12
I've just referred to, which is paid by two installments of 7,500.
13
payment of 10,000.
14
with the signature that isn't your's.
11:53:25 15
16
We have a payment of 10,000 in May.
A.
Correct. Well the endorsement.
Q. 243
The endorsement.
17
We have a
That's the cheque
We have a cheque -- we have a payment of 7,500 in July.
And again in September.
18
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
19
Q. 244
All right.
11:53:51 20
We have an invoice in May, which
And they'll go back to the invoice in May for 15,000.
And then there's an invoice in November for 15,000.
2nd of
November 1993 for 15,000.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 245
And then we have the invoice in December, 955, for a total of -- well it's for
23
17,500 and others which come up to 22,000.
24
August 1995.
11:54:13 25
I'm going to ignore that for the moment.
A.
Which is an overhang.
26
Q. 246
Which is what?
27
A.
Which is an overhang.
28
Q. 247
It was invoiced two years earlier.
29
A.
It's an overhang.
Q. 248
All right.
11:54:20 30
And then we have a 5,000 paid in
And we know -- I opened to you that document from Monarch that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:54:28
11:54:43
42 1
said that Eddie would have to get invoices from you because they paid out
2
40,000 odd without invoices, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes, you did yesterday, yeah.
4
Q. 249
Is it in summary the position that Monarch paid you without invoices on
5
occasions?
6
A.
Certainly in the case of one.
7
Q. 250
Well that's two payments isn't it?
8
A.
Sorry, there were two payments.
9
Q. 251
Yes.
A.
But the agreement was for 25,000.
11
Q. 252
Yes?
12
A.
Certainly there are no invoices extant other than the advisory remittance
11:54:58 10
13 14
The 25,000.
notices from Monarch which I discovered to the Tribunal.
So --
Q. 253
The first 15 and 10 no invoices?
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 254
Yes.
17
A.
-- that were issued were issued by Frank Dunlop & Associates.
18
Q. 255
Yes.
19
A.
By the company.
Q. 256
Yes.
21
A.
So there were invoices.
22
Q. 257
Yes.
23
A.
Concluding with the highly disputed and dis-- 50,000 pounds success fee, which
11:55:13 15
11:55:27 20
24 11:55:34 25
Then all of these other invoices --
Yes.
was an invoice. Q. 258
26
Yes.
But there was no invoice for the payment where the cheque, your name was
forged by way of endorsement, isn't that right? There was no invoice for that?
27
A.
Yes, there was an invoice.
28
Q. 259
Is that the one that Mr. Redmond was referring to?
29
A.
Yes, it is.
Q. 260
You see, that was a cheque for 10,000 pounds but the invoice was for 12,100
11:55:53 30
There was an invoice for 10,000 pounds.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:56:05
11:56:11
43 1
including VAT?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 261
So what does that mean? How do they relate?
4
A.
You must ask Monarch that.
5
Q. 262
Well why don't ask I ask you because you invoiced 10th of April 1993, 10,000
6
for the work.
7
presumably you were paid 12,100.
8
controversial cheque is for 10,000 which don't relate?
9 11:56:32 10
11
2,100 for the VAT total 12,100 and it's marked paid so
A.
Well I wasn't paid and the cheque for the 10,000 --
Q. 263
Uh-huh.
A.
-- as we've discussed backwards and forwards, over a number of days, was
12
endorsed in my name by another person.
13
Q. 264
Yes.
14
A.
And indeed not.
Q. 265
Anyway.
11:56:45 15
The cheque we are talking about, the
Was not received by me.
16 17
MR. REDMOND: Chairman, again, before Mr. Murphy continues for the purposes of
18
clarification.
19 11:56:51 20
The invoice for 12,100.
Which was issued in April '93.
21
1st of June 1993 by Monarch.
22
was debited from the account of Monarch.
Is stamped "paid"
And that is also the date that the 10,000 pounds And that's how they relate.
23 24
Q. 266
11:57:15 25
MR. MURPHY:
Right.
Is it the position, Mr. Dunlop, that on occasions you
were paid, as appears from the Monarch document, where there was a note that
26
Eddie should get invoices because 42,000 plus had been paid to you without
27
invoices.
28
invoices from Monarch and that at some point Monarch insisted on invoices
29
because they needed them for GRE?
11:57:40 30
A.
So is it the position that for a time you were being paid without
No, I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
In fact, I shouldn't say I don't think so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:57:43
11:57:53
44 1
That is not the case.
I have -- there was no discussion ever between anybody
2
from Monarch and myself.
3
Q. 267
Uh-huh.
4
A.
About -- you sort of please send me an invoice or give me the invoice.
5
Q. 268
Exactly.
6
A.
Now, put it another way which, let's look at the converse.
There was no
7
situation in which I received money unsolicited without an invoice and Monarch
8
ringing me up and saying, you know, we've given you the payments so send us the
9
invoice.
11:58:11 10
Q. 269
The invoices that we saw, the three in December 1993, could they have been
11
issued, raised by you at the instigation of Monarch? Could Monarch have said,
12
Mr. Dunlop, we'd like invoices now so ...?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 270
You don't think so or they weren't?
A.
No, they weren't.
11:58:31 15
16
I mean, you sent -- you send the invoice.
And normal
practice would be --
17
Q. 271
I'm not interested in normal practice?
18
A.
Sorry.
19
Good.
Right.
don't get payment.
11:59:00 20
You send the invoice.
You wait for payment.
You ring up and say where's the payment.
You
As I've said to
you earlier, there was no discussion ever between any representative of Monarch
21
and myself saying send us the invoice.
22
Q. 272
Right.
23
A.
Because we have already sent you the money.
24
Q. 273
So that note that I read you the out to you yesterday that we saw on the
11:59:14 25
So --
screen, that you'd been paid 40,000 and the note that Eddie must get invoices
26
from Frank, that's not correct, sorry they never came to you on foot of that
27
and said --
28 29 11:59:30 30
A.
No, no, they never came to me.
There was no such discussion ever took place.
I cannot account for, again, as we other documentation that you have shown me this morning in relation to Monarch.
I cannot account for the internal --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:59:34
11:59:48
45 1
Q. 274
All right.
2
A.
-- communications between Monarch and GRE.
Or the internal communications or
3
memos between representatives, between various officers of Monarch. I would
4
like to know.
5
Q. 275
6
Well except that, I'm not asking you to account for their documentation. There aren't invoices for the first 25,000 which was paid in two cheques.
7
A.
That's correct, yes.
8
Q. 276
Is it possible that the success fee that was billed to GRE on foot of your
9 12:00:23 10
December invoice, and that was paid, which GRE paid half of it to Monarch? A.
That what?
11
Q. 277
Is it possible that?
12
A.
What?
13
Q. 278
That was Monarch getting their half from GRE in respect of the 25 that they had
14 12:00:35 15
paid you back in March 1993 without invoices? A.
I don't want to suggest to you that you should open the documents again,
16
Mr. Murphy, but I don't know is the simple answer.
17
much as you would like to know.
18
Q. 279
19 12:00:52 20
Well I'll just help you in this way, Mr. Dunlop.
I would like to know as
Because we know that you got
paid the two the 15 and the 10? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 280
Without raising an invoice?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 281
And we know then that Monarch passed on to GRE a fee note for your success fee
24 12:01:08 25
at 50.
We know they were paid.
We've seen all of that.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 282
You've no --
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 283
-- jurisdiction over that.
29
A.
No.
Q. 284
There is a fee note for 50,000 and VAT in December '93.
12:01:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:01:19
12:01:28
46 1
A.
From me?
2
Q. 285
From you.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 286
Did you raise that in response to somebody in Monarch saying we want a fee note
5
so that we can get back from GRE?
6
A.
Absolutely not.
7
Q. 287
We'll delete the so that we can get back from GRE?
8
A.
Absolutely not.
9
Q. 288
Yeah.
A.
No arrangement for a success fee.
11
Q. 289
Yeah.
12
A.
I --
13
Q. 290
Because, Mr. Dunlop, if I can summarise for you, it would be perfectly
12:01:43 10
14
So that we can get back? Absolutely not.
It's as is or was, as I outlined to you.
consistent, you didn't agree on 8th of April -- 8th of March '93 with
12:01:56 15
Mr. Sweeney, you didn't agree a success fee?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 291
There was no success fee?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 292
You told the Tribunal that there was no success fee?
A.
No. I did, sorry, I beg your pardon, yes.
21
Q. 293
And suddenly in December '93 a success fee arises.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 294
And conveniently, or not, it's the figure -- it's double the figure which you
12:02:03 20
24
got from them in March '93.
12:02:27 25
26
So that the money that Monarch paid to you in
March '93, 25,000, would come back from GRE? A.
Yeah, well I don't know about you, Mr. Murphy, but certainly there is
27
absolutely no doubt about it that I'm not -- not only am I not a mathematician,
28
I'm not a forensic accountant.
29
or if not all of this, it can be elucidated by the person responsible in this
12:02:52 30
But I mean I think, with respect, most of this
instance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:02:52
12:03:08
47 1
Q. 295
Yeah.
2
A.
Which we have now established, inconsistent with my evidence, that he was the
3
man with whom I dealt.
And he is the man that everybody seems to be writing
4
to.
5
writing to in relation to a 50/50 arrangement in relation to fees not
6
withstanding the fact that he says he doesn't know why I was -- or who
7
appointed me or what arrangements --
He is the man that I am issuing invoices to.
He is the man that GRE is
8
Q. 296
I think we know all of that, Mr. Dunlop.
9
A.
Fine.
Q. 297
But all I'm saying to you is and I'm just -- what I'm focussing on is your
12:03:21 10
11
input in December '93, I'm not interested in Monarch and GRE.
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 298
Monarch got an invoice for 50,000 plus VAT from you in December.
14
A.
No, but with respect, Mr. Murphy --
Q. 299
In respect of something which you have told us you did not agree back in March?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 300
So it comes out of the blue, a success fee?
18
A.
As per discussion with a representative of Monarch.
19
Q. 301
Yes but in that sense it comes out of the blue, you suddenly in December '93,
12:03:33 15
12:03:47 20
you have a chat with somebody in Monarch about a success fee.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 302
And it so happens that back in March you got 25,000 without an invoice from
23 24
Monarch. A.
12:04:06 25
Yeah.
Well, I think you are trying to tie up desperate loose ends.
hesitate to say that to you, Mr. Murphy.
And I respect what you are trying to
26
do but yes, the circumstances as I have outlined.
27
documentation.
28 29 12:04:26 30
Q. 303
I really
We have seen the
We have seen the clearance and the okay.
Could we just for one second look at 4390 again, please. We looked at this yesterday, Mr. Dunlop. Monarch document.
This is the document that says, the
27th of September 1993.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:04:31
12:04:47
48 1 2
Monarch are referring to a copy of Dunlop's invoice.
I don't know what
3
invoice this is.
4
that Mr. Redmond is talking about I think.
5
12,100 even though we have made payments of 42,500, Eddie must get invoices.
Well actually sorry no, I beg your pardon.
It's the one
We only have one invoice for
6 7
I mean, I totally accept you didn't make this entry.
8
A.
Sure.
9
Q. 304
It may be a fabrication.
12:05:06 10
On the face of it it appears that -- on the face of
it appears that Monarch want Eddie to get invoices from you because they paid
11
out 42 without invoices.
12
A.
Fabrication?
13
Q. 305
What?
14
A.
Fabrication?
Q. 306
Yes.
16
A.
By whom?
17
Q. 307
It may be a fabrication or it may have been invented by somebody in Monarch.
18
A.
Oh, I see.
19
Q. 308
What I'm saying is you're not responsible for that entry.
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 309
But the entry is suggesting that Monarch have been paying you --
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 310
-- considerable sums up to -- payments of 42,000 prior to the 27th of September
12:05:11 15
12:05:21 20
24 12:05:37 25
26
I beg your pardon, yes.
1993 without invoices and therefore except for one invoice, and Eddie must get invoices.
Now, that seems -- we'll find out more from Mr. Sweeney and all of
the Monarch people.
27 28
But just from your point of view, because you are in the box at the moment, Mr.
29
Dunlop.
12:05:50 30
It does appears that Monarch have a problem, they're not getting
invoices and suddenly they are showered with them in December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:05:54
12:06:07
49 1
A.
But that would seem to fly in the face ot the-if you look at the time line of
2
the documentation of invoices that were issued within that period prior to the
3
date of this memo.
4
Q. 311
Well there's none anyway for the first two which make up the 25,000.
5
A.
We're agreed on that.
6
Q. 312
Now, we know the two 7,500 are covered by an invoice?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 313
You have an invoice. Yes.
9
A.
And, yeah, go on.
Q. 314
Yes.
11
A.
We know that there's another.
12
Q. 315
Monarch seem to have a problem with invoices.
12:06:14 10
Okay.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:06:28 15
Sorry.
It might be simpler, because we seem -- I don't think
we're going to solve this mystery and there is a mystery about these invoices.
16 17
It might be simpler if Mr. Dunlop was recalled after Mr. Sweeney and the other
18
witnesses from Monarch because obviously we really will have to hear what they
19
say.
12:06:45 20
21
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Sorry, Chairman.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think we're really going to progress on this point.
24 12:06:50 25
Q. 316
MR. MURPHY:
On that point.
The final question, Mr. Dunlop.
Did -- in any
26
shape or form did Mr. Sweeney request you to raise an invoice or invoices in
27
December '93?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 317
For work that had already been done and paid?
A.
No.
12:07:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:07:04
12:07:28
50 1
Q. 318
Okay, thank you. Now, Mr. Dunlop, can we go back to the meeting.
8th of
2
March 1993 in -- excuse me -- in Monarch's offices with Mr. Sweeney.
3
want to ask you, first of all, you were telling us -- you told us yesterday a
4
little bit about Mr. Monahan.
5
I want to know precisely what Mr. Sweeney said to you about what Mr. Monahan
6
was up to.
7
doing that was causing alarm for Monarch?
Now, Mr. Monahan wasn't at that meeting.
And I don't mean that in a sinister way.
A.
Well --
9
Q. 319
That Mr. Sweeney told you.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 320
Sorry -- Mr. Dunlop, before you start what's complicated about this?
12
A.
The relationship.
13 14 12:08:11 15
But
I just mean what was he
8
12:07:45 10
And I
That -- how complicated can it get?
I can't account for all of the internal relationships
between people in -Q. 321
I --
A.
What I'm saying to you is that Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that Phil Monahan
16
was unhappy, dissatisfied, aggressive in the context of what could be achieved
17
and what he did not see --
18
Q. 322
Yes.
19
A.
-- was being achieved or he felt that not enough was being done to achieve what
12:08:33 20
he thought should be achieved.
21
Q. 323
So what was he doing about it himself? What had he been doing historical?
22
A.
What had Mr. Sweeney been doing about it?
23
Q. 324
No, no. What did Mr. Sweeney tell you that Mr. Monahan had been doing?
24
A.
He didn't know what Phil was at.
Q. 325
What does that mean? He didn't know what he was at.
12:08:48 25
26
he at?
In other words, what was
You knew, what was he at?
27
A.
The only way I can deal with this is to say --
28
Q. 326
Yeah.
29
A.
-- that from the tone of the conversation and the, what Mr. Sweeney said, that
12:09:03 30
it was obvious and from an -- I did say this to you previously as well from an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:09:10
12:09:24
51 1
anecdotal point of view and from conversations outside of ever being appointed
2
by Monarch.
3
level.
4
Q. 327
That Mr. Monahan had considerable political contacts at a high
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
were you told by Mr. Sweeney or anyone of the sort of matters that Mr. Monahan
8
was dealing with which Mr. Sweeney saw as causing problems? Were you given any
9
direct information as to what Mr. Monahan was doing that was upsetting
12:09:52 10
11
Wait now.
Mr. Dunlop, we've heard this before.
Do you know --
Mr. Sweeney? A.
12
Yes.
He feared that whatever it was that he suspected Mr. Monahan was doing
would cause a the whole thing to collapse and it would end up --
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:10:08 15
16
No but -- yes, you've said that.
But did he tell you what Mr.
Monahan was doing? A.
No, he didn't say I know that Phil is ....
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
information, indirectly, about what Mr. Monahan was doing? Did you know what
12:10:20 20
21
Well did you understand him to be saying, to be giving you
Mr. Monahan was doing as a result of the conversation with Mr. Sweeney? A.
No.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 12:10:25 25
26
Q. 328
MR. MURPHY:
A.
It would be wrong to say that I had no idea but I do not know in specific
27
You had no idea?
detail.
28
Q. 329
Well give us an idea of what he was doing.
29
A.
My idea.
Q. 330
You used the phrase yesterday a broad brush because we can be quick about it.
12:10:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:10:42
12:11:00
52 1
A.
Quick! We won't be quick.
2
Q. 331
What's the broad brush?
3
A.
Broad brush was that Phil Monahan was conducting a separate parallel lobbying
4
exercise with politicians unnamed status, stature or otherwise, unspecified, in
5
relation to what could or could not be done or what he wanted in relation to
6
Cherrywood.
7
Q. 332
8 9
Broad brush. Yes.
Now, nobody told you.
Sorry, you didn't gather or have
any idea of who those politicians were? A.
No.
Q. 333
By name?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 334
They were outside the council, they weren't just councillors?
13
A.
Well --
14
Q. 335
Politicians?
A.
-- since I didn't know -- I don't know whether they were councillors or senior
12:11:15 10
12:11:22 15
16 17
politicians but just -Q. 336
18 19
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop. politicians.
A.
12:11:41 20
To take your own words you've said a few times by senior
What did you understand by that?
My understanding about senior politicians is that yes, it was well known that Mr. Philip Monahan had very good contacts with senior politicians, Government
21
ministers, let's be specific.
22
Q. 337
Yes. Government ministers.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 338
Ministers who were current - Ministers at that time?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 339
You're talking about 1993?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 340
Okay.
12:11:51 25
29 12:12:02 30
And wouldn't you -- you'd have to know all of this to do your job
properly wouldn't you.
You'd have to know.
As you said to us yesterday you
you'd have to know what councillors had been spoken to. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did you not make an
12:12:06
12:12:19
53 1
inquiry -- as somebody who has come from the Fianna Fail party and Government
2
in the '70s.
3
A.
4
Did you not know?
Did you not know that I worked for another Government as well.
So why are you
picking out Fianna Fail.
5
Q. 341
Because I mentioned the '70s.
6
A.
Right, okay well just for clarification we worked for other Governments as
7 8
well. Q. 342
9
And did you -- I mean -- Mr. Dunlop, the position you were in. concerned about Monarch.
12:12:32 10
You were very
Monarch getting their act together and then you go
and talk to the councillors etc..
You had to know look who is talking to
11
whom? You must have pursued that, who were the senior ministers.
12
know the senior ministers he was talking about?
Do you
13
A.
No, I don't.
14
Q. 343
You've no idea?
A.
That's a different question, Mr. Murphy.
16
Q. 344
You have an idea?
17
A.
You keep doing this. You ask a specific question and then you open it up into
12:12:47 15
You keep doing this.
18
a broad open ended question and you cut me off when I start to answer.
19
course I have an idea.
12:13:04 20
21 22 23
But it would have been a widely held idea by people as to the identity of senior ministers?
A.
24 12:13:15 25
It's no substantiation whatsoever into what my idea is
or the basis for it. Q. 345
Lots of business people had very, very close contacts with senior political figures.
Q. 346
There's nothing wrong with that is there?
26
A.
I hope not.
27
Q. 347
No.
28
A.
No, I'm not prepared to ...
29
Q. 348
Not prepared to what?
A.
I'm not prepared to speculate.
12:13:25 30
Of
But yet you don't know who those ministers were?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:13:28
12:13:43
54 1
Q. 349
Oh, yeah.
All right.
So anyway, one of the things Mr. Monahan was doing --
2
sorry.
One of the things you knew about Mr. Monday has was he had good
3
contacts with senior -- with ministers?
4
A.
Yes.
Mr. Murphy, before you go any further.
5
Q. 350
Yeah.
6
A.
Just keep on this broad brush quickly.
And I know the Chairman is going to
7
intervene very shortly and say Mr. Dunlop we know all of this.
8
do.
He may well
If he does I'll stop.
9 12:13:55 10
But Mr. Monahan was a great man to sing his own cause.
In other words, he was
11
going to rebuild Dublin, he was going to rebuild the world.
12
line contact with Taoiseachs, ministers, civil servants, planners, the lot.
13
He knew everybody and everything.
14
evidenced by Mr. Sweeney's comments to me and evidenced by comments to me by
12:14:33 15
16
And that is the context in which fear, as
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, as to what Phil was up to. Q. 351
17 18
I can't understand why the company would be afraid of the boss of the company having contacts with Taoiseachs and ministers?
A.
19
You see, I think the success of the company was probably notwithstanding Phil's operations.
12:14:48 20
The company was being run as an entity while Phil was doing all
of these things with other people.
21
You know, that is the way the thing seemed
to me to being run at the time.
22
Q. 352
But I'm lost, Mr. Dunlop.
23
A.
You're lost.
24
Q. 353
This is a huge company --
A.
Yes.
Q. 354
-- being run by its Board and Mr. Sweeney and others.
12:15:02 25
26
He had direct
What was it?
Well I was lost!
And it seems as if it
27
was the Monarch people and Mr. Monahan is out on the wing on his own, is that
28
right?
29 12:15:15 30
A.
Well ...
Q. 355
It seems to be Mr. Monahan as one representative of the company. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And the
12:15:19
12:15:31
55 1 2
other employees, like Mr. Sweeney. A.
3
Well I think.
Is that right?
As I said to you yesterday, I think there was a proposal if we
could go back to Cherrywood.
4
Q. 356
Don't please for a second.
5
A.
There was a proposal.
6
Q. 357
Don't mind that for one second.
7
A.
This will elucidate the point that you are making.
There was a proposal and
8
there was a specific strategy obviously adopted to try and achieve this
9
proposal in conjunction with another party.
12:15:46 10
Officers of the company were
appointed to conduct this or to see to it that this could happen.
11
Q. 358
Uh-huh.
12
A.
This did not happen.
13
Q. 359
Uh-huh.
14
A.
Much to the annoyance, obviously, of Mr. Monahan.
Q. 360
Uh-huh.
A.
Much to the annoyance of the officers who were given the responsible for the
12:15:56 15
16 17
It fell.
strategy.
18
Q. 361
Uh-huh.
19
A.
There then eventuated a scenario where Mr. Monahan had to be controlled in case
12:16:12 20
21
anything that he did would upset the apple cart further. Q. 362
Now, I cannot understand in the context of Cherrywood or in the broader context
22
which we were talking about a moment ago, how Mr.-- what it is that Mr. Monahan
23
was doing that was going to mess up the plans and hopes for Cherrywood.
24
Mr. Monahan, how his contacts with ministers and Taoiseachs could upset the
12:16:42 25
Cherrywood plan. ?
26
A.
Well I don't know that.
27
Q. 363
Of course you do?
28
A.
No I don't.
29
Q. 364
Well, Mr. Dunlop, you go in on the 8th of March, this huge case.
12:16:53 30
What
I don't know whether anybody from Monarch.
to make a fortune out of it, there's problems. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
You're going
The big problem is Mr. Monahan
12:16:59
12:17:13
56 1
is loose and can't be controlled.
2
thing is that he has all of these contacts with the senior ministers and the
3
Taoiseach of the day, I presume that includes the Taoiseach of the day, whoever
4
that was?
5
A.
The one clue that you give to the whole
I did that deliberately, Mr. Murphy, because, I mean, I don't know whether
6
Mr. Monahan -- I prefaced all of this by saying that Mr. Monahan was a great
7
man to sing his own cause.
8
Q. 365
9
But, Mr. Dunlop, please explain to the Tribunal how Mr. Monahan having
great contacts with ministers can be, cause danger to the attempts to get the
12:17:37 10
11
Yes.
density increased that they were looking for? I don't understand. A.
The only explanation that I can give you for that.
12
you of the notion that I do know.
13
to that question is that any contacts that Phil might have with senior
14
politicians might result in those senior politicians either talking to
12:17:59 15
I do not.
First of all, I disabuse
The only answer that I can give
councillors of their own party, or whatever, to try and tell, to influence them
16
as to what they might or might not do.
17
Q. 366
In favour of an increased density, which is what Mr. Monahan wanted?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 367
How does that not help the cause?
A.
The -- you asked me.
12:18:14 20
I have no answer.
21 22 23
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Mr. Dunlop, I wonder could I ask you.
Yes, Judge.
24 12:18:22 25
JUDGE KEYS:
Could it possibly be that Mr. Monahan's interventions with the
26
politicians were such that that could come to the notice of the public.
27
that could create a political scandal resulting in his project being undermined
28
entirely?
29 12:18:41 30
A.
That is a possibility.
Certainly a possibility, Judge.
And
And to that I would
add also, that there is a possibility, and I, I'm using the word because you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:18:47
12:19:02
57 1
used it "a possibility" that if there was a contact with a senior politician
2
and any senior politician did attempt to make contact with somebody to
3
influence what might happen at a council meeting, that that could be counter
4
productive.
5 6
JUDGE KEYS:
7
atmosphere of the time that councillors resented senior politicians intervening
8
in the Development Plan and attempting to get them to vote a certain way?
9
A.
12:19:24 10
I was just going to follow on and ask you that.
Was it the
Well I think and I -- I'm subject to correction on this, Judge, but I think by this stage we had had a public intervention by a senior Government Minister who
11
had described the activities of -- at Dublin County Council as debased coinage.
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
12:19:42 15
Correct.
This was regarded with hilarity by the councillors.
That's a polite way of
describing what was the general impression of the gentleman who actually made
16
that comment.
It's none of his business.
He keeps his nose out of this
17
business we're not going to be listening to him telling us what we're going to
18
do.
19 12:19:57 20
JUDGE KEYS:
Thank you very much.
MR. MURPHY:
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you told us yesterday that one of the -- the
21 22
Q. 368
23
first thing that had to be dealt with was Mr. Monahan.
24
going to do that.
12:20:29 25
A.
26
And that you weren't
Mr. Lawlor was going to do that, isn't that right?
Just again for absolute clarity, Mr. Murphy.
I did not say that it was agreed
between Mr. Sweeney and myself that that would be done.
27
Q. 369
All right.
28
A.
What -- it became quite apparent at subsequent meetings at which Mr. Lawlor
29 12:20:48 30
attended that this is what Mr. Lawlor was doing. intermediary role. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Mr. Lawlor was doing an
12:20:52
12:21:07
58 1
Q. 370
2 3
That that wasn't actually outlined or agreed between you at that meeting on the 8th of March?
A.
4
No, no.
The meeting between on the 8th of March if I could incapsulate it was
there was a strong element of frustration on Eddie Sweeney's part as to what
5
had happened and how they were going to get out of the situation that they
6
found themselves in.
7
what Phil was or was not doing.
8
Q. 371
All right.
9
A.
Jack Whelan was an employee of Ambrose Kelly, is that right? The name is
12:21:49 10
familiar.
11
Yeah.
One of the components of that scrambled situation was
Did you know anything about Mr. Jack Whelan, Mr. Dunlop?
It doesn't strike a great deal of -- it has some resonance but it
doesn't mean very much to me.
Jack Whelan.
An employee of Ambrose Kelly's?
12
Q. 372
Apparently he was a consultant with the company.
13
A.
Right.
14
Q. 373
Retained to carry out various tasks on behalf of the company.
A.
Yes.
Q. 374
In dealing with issues that arose including the Cabinteely lands, according to
12:22:10 15
16 17
Mr. Monahan's statement.
18
A.
Mr. Monahan's statement?
19
Q. 375
Yes.
12:22:23 20
21
A.
No, no, you asked me.
You throw out a name and you asked me for my response.
I gave you my response. Q. 376
24 12:22:42 25
No, it doesn't -- it -- I know of --
I take it that you don't really have anything relevant to add about Jack Whelan?
A.
No.
26
Q. 377
Yeah.
27
A.
-- who I recollect working with Ambrose Kelly.
28 29 12:22:58 30
You are kind of not
very clear as to whether you did know him or not know him?
22 23
Did you -- just tell us what you know about him.
The only Jack Whelan that comes to mind to me is somebody who --
And if it's the same Jack
Whelan, fine. Q. 378
All right. So you know a Jack Whelan who worked in Ambrose Kelly's office, is that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:22:59
12:23:10
59 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 379
All right.
3
A.
I can't recall.
4
Q. 380
You are very, very hesitant Mr. Dunlop.
5
A.
Because I can't recall.
6
Q. 381
Tell us what you know about Mr. Jack Whelan and Cherrywood and Monarch and
Had he anything to do with Monarch? I can't recall.
7
Mr. Monahan.
8
to you that -- before --
9
A.
Why is that?
Tell us everything you know about it now before we put something
You are going to put something to me.
Well, I mean, I'm telling you.
12:23:34 10
would prefer you would put it to me before I tell you.
11
that, the name Jack Whelan means something to me.
12
Q. 382
Now, tell us everything --
13
A.
Sorry.
14
But notwithstanding
The name Jack Whelan means something to me, as far as I recollect,
Mr. Whelan was an employee of Ambrose Kelly's.
12:24:04 15
And I
In what capacity I don't know.
And apart --
16
Q. 383
Mr. Dunlop, may I just say?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 384
I can't understand for a moment how this is such a struggle.
19
You either know
virtually nothing about Mr. Whelan, in which case could you tell us in two
12:24:16 20
seconds.
21
Or you know something or a lot about him.
In which case, would you
tell us in a minute?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 385
In relation --
24
A.
No.
12:24:26 25
It's quite different to that Mr. Murphy.
You asked me a question and
I --
26
Q. 386
What was the question?
27
A.
Endeavouring -- what I know about Jack Whelan.
28
Q. 387
How can that be difficult?
29
A.
First of all I identified Jack Whelan as somebody that I think worked with
12:24:44 30
Ambrose Kelly's, I'm subject to correction. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I don't know.
You've obviously
12:24:44
12:24:59
60 1
indicated to me Jack Whelan, according to Mr. Monahan, worked with Monarch
2
Properties in relation to Cherrywood.
3
Q. 388
I didn't ask you.
That didn't register with me.
Mr. Dunlop, it's as clear as daylight that you know
4
something about Mr. Whelan.
5
here for another hour until you tell me?
6
A.
I have no idea what it is.
But do I have to sit
Mr. Murphy, --
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop.
No.
12:25:04 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Other than the fact that you think he worked with Ambrose Kelly.
Yes.
13 14 12:25:10 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Did you have any dealings with him?
It doesn't register with me, Chairman.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
19
In relation to Cherrywood ?
Subject to somebody saying yes, I met him or spoke to him or whatever. doesn't register.
It
It's not on my horizon.
12:25:22 20
21 22
Q. 389
23 24 12:25:30 25
MR. MURPHY: Sorry, Chairman.
Dealings with him, as the
Chairman asked you, doesn't register with you? A.
No, it doesn't.
Q. 390
You then went on and have the nerve to say until somebody puts something to
26
you.
In other words, we're back to evidence and documents?
27
A.
Sorry.
28
Q. 391
You are a person.
29 12:25:44 30
Mr. Dunlop.
giving evidence. A.
You are in the witness box.
You are on oath.
You know something about Mr. Whelan.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
You are
12:25:44
12:26:00
61 1
Q. 392
Would you please tell those --
2
A.
I'm very impressed, Mr. Murphy.
You were the one who said "before I put
3
something to you".
You seem to forget every time that you make these throw
4
away remarks.
5
said "before I put something to you".
That's the reason I used the phrase to the Chairman because you Put something to me.
As I sit here --
6
Q. 393
No, Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Fine.
8
Q. 394
For the reason that I want to know what Mr. Dunlop remembers about this man.
9
It may be significant, or it may not.
12:26:14 10
11
If Mr. Dunlop has no recollection he
should tell the Tribunal. A.
12
I have no recollection other than what I've already told you about my identifying the name and the possibility that he worked with Ambrose Kelly's.
13
Q. 395
I'm perfectly happy with that, Mr. Dunlop.
14
A.
You didn't indicate that two seconds ago.
12:26:28 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
He says he doesn't have any recollection.
17
vague recollection that he worked with a particular firm.
He has a
18 19 12:26:34 20
Q. 396
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, on the evening of the 8th of March,
21
as you left Mr. Sweeney's cluttered office in Harcourt Street Station and you
22
knew that Monarch had to get their act together in relation to what they should
23
look for in November '93.
24 12:27:15 25
That was one thing I think; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 397
And the second thing was that once they get their act together, that would be
26
communicated to you as to what they wanted.
27
business of lobbying the Councillors; isn't that right?
28
A.
There would be a unified approach.
29
Q. 398
Did you hear the second bit?
A.
Yes, go to Councillors, yes.
12:27:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And then you'd go about your
12:27:34
12:27:47
62 1
Q. 399
Okay.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 400
Now, you -- so the next thing on your agenda is to meet Mr. Lynn and
4
And the second bit is what applied to you?
Mr. Reilly.
And we know you met them the following day?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 401
We know you met Mr. Lawlor subsequent to that meeting.
7
And I think you said
yesterday it could have been that night or the following day or whatever?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 402
Did you meet Mr. Lawlor before meeting Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
A.
It is quite possible but I cannot say absolutely definitively that I didn't.
12:27:59 10
11
It is quite possible.
12
Q. 403
All right.
13
A.
That's correct, yes.
14
Q. 404
It doesn't matter.
A.
Yes, I did.
16
Q. 405
Just the three of you?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 406
And you know what the task is, presumably, you had a chat with them about the
12:28:11 15
19
You met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
The following day?
difficulties with Mr. Monahan and you probably had a chat with them then about
12:28:27 20
how you were going to swing the vote in November; is that right?
21
A.
Yes, we had a chat about how we proceed from here.
22
Q. 407
Right.
Just tell us, broad brush, what that all amounted to?
23
A.
Right.
Um.
24
Q. 408
Do you think this is funny, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
No, no, I'm just very, very interested in the approach that one minute you want
12:28:44 25
26
a specific answer to a specific question and then you throw up these broad
27
brush questions and as soon as I begin to answer them you jump on me.
28 29 12:29:01 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop, there's no need to engage with Mr. Murphy to that
degree. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:29:02
12:29:06
63 1 2 3
Just answer the questions. A.
I'll follow your advice, Chairman.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
A.
Yes, we had discussion with -- I had a discussion with Richard Lynn and Phil
8
Reilly.
9
resentment on Mr. Lynn's part that I had -- that I was being brought on board.
12:29:26 10
I indicated to you yesterday that I detected a certain amount of
In fairness to him, as I knew already from my presence in Dublin County
11
Council, he indicated the level of activity that he and Philip Reilly were
12
conducting, or had conducted with Dublin County Councillors.
13
about the necessity for being clear, absolutely clear as to what was needed to
14
be done, by way of what Monarch wanted.
12:30:00 15
achieved.
And we spoke
The possibility of that being
And how it was going to be achieved and who would deal with whom.
16
Q. 409
Yes.
17
A.
And it -- I think -- as I said in my statement, Mr. Lynn indicated that he had
18
contact with a number of cross party representatives, including Mr Gilmore.
19
can't remember whether Gilmore was Democratic Left or Sinn Fein, The Workers
12:30:22 20
Party at that time.
21
He was one of those parties.
I
He wasn't the Labour Party
I think at the time, I think.
22
Q. 410
Uh-huh?
23
A.
And that I would -- and that.
24
Sorry.
That Philip Reilly had contact with
certain members of Fine Gael because of contact that he had in Fine Gael.
12:30:42 25
that Mr. Lynn had direct contact with Don Lydon.
And
And that I would contact as
26
many of the Fianna Fail people as I thought was necessary.
27
indicate that I was on board and to gather any support that was required when
28
we had a unified approach.
29 12:31:18 30
Is that -- that's excellent.
First of all, to
Q. 411
Okay.
That's the broad brush.
A.
I've just -- as I hesitated once or twice there, Mr. Murphy, to you, whether I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:31:24
12:31:38
64 1
had deleted some things.
I know -- we spent some time going down.
2
Q. 412
Yep.
3
A.
Through names as to what the attitude of various people would be.
4
Q. 413
Okay.
Right.
And I'll come back to that now in a second. It was important.
Just one thing
5
while it occurs to me, Mr. Dunlop.
6
and we spoke about the necessity for being clear, absolutely clear as to what
7
continued to be
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 414
You just said.
A.
I beg your pardon, yes.
Q. 415
And we spoke about the necessity for being clear.
12:31:53 10
11 12
Absolutely clear as to what
was needed to be done by way of what Monarch wanted.?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 416
Now, what did that entail?
A.
That entailed looking at what had happened.
12:32:06 15
You said that in --
What the proposal had been.
16
difficulties that had arisen in relation to the May 1992 collapse.
17
withdrawal of another motion.
18
Sean Barrett motion in relation to one per acre.
19
Monarch could offer to assuage any of the political fears that any of
12:32:45 20
The
The passing of the motion in relation to the Discussion about what else
councillors might have because of the impact that this was going to have know
21
on their vote, particularly in the local area, district centre or town centre,
22
I don't doubt that it was town centre, district centre.
23
there?
24 12:33:14 25
Q. 417
Try adding reigning in Mr. Monahan.
A.
Sorry.
And what else was
Well not in -- not in those terms but expressions -- there was no
26
question of Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly or myself reigning in Mr. Monahan.
27
Certainly, I wasn't having any meetings with Mr. Monahan or could have any
28
influence on him.
29 12:33:39 30
The
Q. 418
No, no, but it was terribly important as to how Monarch's united front, you discussed this with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:33:39
12:33:49
65 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 419
What conclusion did you come to as to how Mr. Monahan was going to be dealt
3 4
with? A.
I didn't come to a conclusion as to how Mr. Monahan would be dealt with.
To
5
add to the expression of unease that had been expressed to me by Mr. Sweeney
6
this was replicated by comments from Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
7
way that Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly and I or any of us individually, could reign in
8
Mr. Monahan.
9 12:34:04 10
11
There was no
Q. 420
Sorry.
I understand perfectly.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 421
And Mr. Dunlop, how did you understand the three of you in chat there, very
12
important.
13
did you understand that would be done? I mean, before you go and talk to
14
Mr. Fox or whoever it is --
12:34:19 15
Your first two meeting with these two gentlemen formally.
What
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 422
-- about the whole thing --
17
A.
Yep.
18
Q. 423
-- you need to know this united front.
19
A.
Yes, well --
Q. 424
It's of huge urgency to you on the 9th of March 1993 with these gentleman to
12:34:24 20
21
know how are we going to get that united front and when are we going to have
22
it.
23
A.
24
Well, there was a certain amount of mechanics involved in the context of the second display, what was entailed, whether or not further submissions needed to
12:34:52 25
26
What did the three of you say, did you agree finally about that?
be made. Q. 425
27
Whether or not --
No, no, Mr. Dunlop, I don't think that has anything to do with the united front.
You have to decide what is the united front is.
28
A.
What does Mr. Monarch want.
29
Q. 426
What did Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop (SIC) say about that on that day,
12:35:03 30
on that evening on that day? Were you three in agreement that it should be the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:35:07
12:35:28
66 1 2
more modest proposal of four houses per acre? A.
Well, I think -- no, sorry, Mr. Murphy.
I would say that on the basis of what
3
was now on the books, as it were, in Dublin County Council as a result of what
4
had happened in May 1992 and remember what is now on the books, as you pointed
5
out to me yesterday.
Had Mr. Barrett not done what he did --
6
Q. 427
Yes.
7
A.
-- it would have --
8
Q. 428
Yeah.
9
A.
It would have reverted to four houses per acre. Now --
Q. 429
Are you going to say that if in November '93, the motion to confirm Mr.
12:35:41 10
11
Barrett's motion failed?
12
A.
If that --
13
Q. 430
Monarch would now have what it wanted from Mr. Sweeney's point of view and
14 12:35:54 15
Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn? A.
Or the alternative that on the basis of Mr. Barrett's motion --
16
Q. 431
Yes.
17
A.
-- as to one per acre, whether or not that could be built on by another motion
18
or by putting in a motion saying look it, it is recommended or it has been
19
voted on positively that it be one house per acre.
12:36:14 20
Q. 432
Yes.
21
A.
Here is another motion saying it should be higher density.
22
Q. 433
Yeah.
23
A.
Revert to X, Y and Z.
24
Q. 434
Can I take it from that from March '93.
12:36:25 25
From earlier but from your point of
view, Mr. Dunlop, that with a view to November '93, what is crucial is -- I
26
mean, your spring board is Mr. Barrett's motion because that said one per acre
27
--
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 435
-- 35 vote in the favour 33 voted against.
A.
Yes.
12:36:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:36:40
12:36:45
67 1
Q. 436
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
3
Q. 437
Isn't that right? That's the spring board, isn't it?
4
A.
Yes, it is, yes.
5
Q. 438
You don't want less than that.
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 439
You want an improvement of that?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 440
You know in no way can you get what Mr. Monahan is looking for?
A.
Whatever that is.
11
Q. 441
Right.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 442
What I asked you was.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 443
Can you just say in a a general way were the three of you gentleman sort of
12:36:56 10
12:37:01 15
You don't want a repeat of that?
Whatever that is?
16
agreed on the four per acre.
17
could get to the position where you'd have been in had Barrett not brought in
18
his motion or if you could get -- yes.
19
Look, I'm not saying Monarch are going to be ecstatic but they would be happy?
12:37:25 20
That if you could get back to -- sorry.
If you could get to that position.
A.
Yes, I would say in general terms, yes.
21
Q. 444
Was that the goal from March '93?
22
A.
The goal -- first of all.
23 24
If you
There were two goals.
certain that nothing further went wrong.
One was to make absolutely
That there was no other cock ups.
Q. 445
Uh-huh.
A.
Secondly, that if the possibility existed to increase the density, to whatever.
26
Q. 446
Uh-huh.
27
A.
In the totality or in specific areas of the lands.
28
Q. 447
Uh-huh.
29
A.
Added in with other, what I might loosely refer to as inducements.
Q. 448
Yes.
12:37:40 25
12:37:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:37:58
12:38:17
68 1
A.
Like educational facilities, district centres, whatever.
2
Q. 449
Yes.
3
A.
Yes.
That once that occurred, and the general thrust as with other
4
developments, and I think I've attested to this previously.
5
don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
6
what you were looking for, at least take the half so that you can then build on
7
it.
8
Q. 450
9
That's fine.
That, you know,
That if you're only getting half of
I think we're agreed on all of this, Mr. Dunlop.
And
essentially, I know that there are trimming, inducements and so on to get the
12:38:36 10
thing through but essentially what we're talking about is a density of four
11
houses per acre is what our aim is.
12
A.
Yes, restore the higher density.
13
Q. 451
For November. Yeah. All right. Crucial to that, before -- to get the united
14
front was to find out, somebody to talk to Mr. Monahan, and have a chat with
12:38:52 15
him, tell him the realities and to get him to go along, he had to agree I
16
presume, had he?
17
A.
Well that would have been -- one would expect that he would have had to, yes.
18
Q. 452
Now, I just want to know, were the three of you there.
19 12:39:07 20
21
The first -- Mr. Lynn
and Mr. Reilly have been over the course for a year? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 453
They know all about it.
They've done the lobbying etc..
22
face.
23
to add to their work.
24
know what the front is to go to Mr. Fox and others about?
12:39:23 25
26
And you are going to do to your bit to add to, as you said yesterday, But before you can get out of the blocks you have to
A.
Yes.
Q. 454
Now, just it must have been a huge concern to you who is going to do what with
27
Mr. Monahan, when are we going to find out.
28
to happen?
29 12:39:41 30
You are the new
A.
What did you understand was going
Well what I understood was going to happen is that Philip Reilly, Richard Lynn and myself would certainly cooperate with one another, liaise with one another Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:39:46
12:40:00
69 1
to the best of our abilities to ensure that Mr. Monahan was going to be
2
controlled.
3
Q. 455
4
No, no, you're talking nonsense, Mr. Dunlop. how was he going to be controlled.
What I'm asking you is, what,
The three of you were --
5
A.
No, no.
6
Q. 456
-- were in complete unanimity about controlling Mr. Monahan.
7
None of the
three of you could do it.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 457
How was it going to be done?
A.
That's correct. That's the point I was just going to make and you interrupted
12:40:08 10
11
me.
12
Q. 458
Well, is the answer that you had any part --
13
A.
None of us had any power to control Phil Monahan.
14
day to the next where Phil Monahan was, or what he was doing or who he was
12:40:21 15
16
We wouldn't know from one
talking to. Q. 459
Can we take it, Mr. Dunlop, that your exercise is put on hold then.
You can
17
do nothing about Mr. Monahan.
18
Mr. Sweeney maybe, and say now we've got Mr. Monahan, we've hauled him in and
19
everything is fine, off you go.
12:40:39 20
21
Somebody is going to have to come back to you,
A.
Yes, yes, in general terms, yes.
Q. 460
Were there -- there had been previously obviously two campaigns going on, isn't
22
that what you were talking about? Mr. Monahan out on his own doing his bit?
23
A.
Yes, yes, sorry.
24
Q. 461
All right. But you agree with what I'm saying.
12:40:58 25
Sorry and I don't want you to
agree just to keep me happy.
26
A.
I wouldn't do that, Mr. Murphy.
27
Q. 462
Mr. Dunlop, it is that -- the three of you were powerless vis-a-vis
28 29 12:41:08 30
Mr. Monahan. A.
That is absolutely correct.
Q. 463
So you have to wait until Mr. Sweeney comes back and tells you what the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:41:12
12:41:40
70 1
position is about Mr. Monahan?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 464
Okay.
Thank you.
Now, I just want to know, Mr. Dunlop, what Mr. Lynn and/or
4
Mr. Reilly said to you in relation to knowledge that you would have to pay
5
councillors?
6
A.
Nothing.
7
Q. 465
Nothing.
Did you have any understanding -- we know your position vis-a-vis
8
Mr. Sweeney.
9
was -- of whether or not they had any knowledge of the need to pay councillors?
12:41:53 10
A.
Did you have any understanding of what their understanding
Well I -- again, yes.
I did have um, a suspicion.
Certainly from a comment
11
that had been made to me, not at this meeting but previously, on the margins of
12
a council meeting by Mr. Lynn to the effect that you'd think these idiots would
13
get their act together it's costing so much.
14
Q. 466
Now, what did that mean?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 467
Mr. Lynn may have another.
17
A.
Oh, they conveyed to me quite specifically that Monarch, in some fashion, or
12:42:15 15
18 19
I know they are the words.
What did they convey to you?
other, recognised and was paying monies to politicians for their support. Q. 468
Politicians or councillors?
A.
Well yeah.
21
Q. 469
You mean councillors?
22
A.
Councillors, yeah.
23
Q. 470
Did Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever tell you, directly or incorrect directly, that
12:42:38 20
24 12:42:56 25
expressly or implicitly, that they had paid money to councillors? A.
No.
26
Q. 471
So you didn't know that they had done this?
27
A.
No, no, no knowledge.
28
Q. 472
But you had a -- sorry?
29
A.
No, no, they did not say directly I have paid.
12:43:11 30
forward a bit. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Other than again if I may move
12:43:11
12:43:19
71 1
Q. 473
Yes.
2
A.
Maybe you are coming to this, I don't know, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q. 474
No.
4
A.
Another comment that was made to me by Mr. Lynn was, you know, these are
5
costing so much.
6
Q. 475
Yes.
7
A.
Councillors.
8
Q. 476
Who said that to you?
9
A.
Mr. Lynn.
Q. 477
On a subsequent occasion?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 478
The councillors are costing so much?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 479
All right.
12:43:25 10
12:43:35 15
16
What are costing so much?
And did that, all of that convey to you that Mr. Lynn knew that
councillors had to be paid and that Monarch were paying councillors? A.
Well, let me put it this way to you.
Yes, it did.
Because Mr. Lynn, as I
17
have -- I haven't met Mr. Lynn since 19 -- certainly a long, long time since I
18
met Mr. Lynn.
19 12:43:52 20
Mr. Lynn is an intelligent man and to quote the phrase that we've used earlier.
21
He was not living on a parallel universe he was living in the real world.
22
I mean, you know, anything that he said in those terms, I understood to mean
23
that Monarch, in some fashion, capacity, or otherwise, recognised the need for
24
and were paying councillors.
12:44:24 25
Q. 480
And so -- you took that understanding from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
Mr. Lynn is the only person's name I've mentioned so far.
27
Q. 481
I beg your pardon.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 482
You didn't get that understanding from Mr. Reilly?
A.
No, I did not.
12:44:39 30
From Mr. Lynn?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
So,
12:44:40
12:44:47
72 1
Q. 483
How is he different?
2
A.
I don't -- he never made a comment like that to me.
3
Q. 484
All right.
4
A.
What I have --
5
Q. 485
Would Mr. Lynn have made the comment in Mr. Reilly's presence?
6
A.
No, no, sorry?
7
Q. 486
All right. You took that understanding from Mr. Lynn?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 487
You also got similar a sort of understanding from Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 488
Mr. Monarch -- Mr. Monahan, sorry.
12
A.
No, no, no.
12:44:58 10
Again, to say to you.
I have no comment from Mr. Monarch --
13
Mr. oh, dear -- you shouldn't do this Mr. Murphy, we are all falling into the
14
same trap.
12:45:23 15
From Mr. Monahan because I was only at one meeting that
Mr. Monahan attended and as I said to you, he stuck his face around the corner
16
of a room there was a meeting going on.
17
comment to that effect.
But he made no -- never made a
18
Q. 489
You were only at one meeting that Mr.-- Mr. Monahan stuck his head in?
19
A.
Mr. Monahan, as I recollect, Mr. Monahan was at a meeting in Monarch House or
12:45:44 20
Monarch Properties, or whatever it is.
21 22
And that on another occasion called in
briefly or said something to the effect, you know, just carry on or whatever. Q. 490
Mr. Dunlop, your statement says "This disparity and objectives became obvious
23
to me as time progressed and after a number of meetings in Monarch's offices in
24
Harcourt Street with Mr. Monahan, Mr. Noel Murray, Liam Lawlor and I --
12:46:07 25
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 491
Though not always in this format were present."
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 492
It suggests a lot of -- you know, Mr. Monahan was at a number of meetings?
29
A.
Yeah, well, I think the qualifying phrase is though not necessarily in this
12:46:23 30
format. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:46:23
12:46:30
73 1
Q. 493
That was your private interview not your statement.
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 494
Sorry what did you say?
4
A.
Though not necessarily in this format is the operative phrase.
5
Q. 495
Okay.
6
So you knew -- you didn't get -- Mr. Monahan never said anything that
gave you the understanding that councillors were being paid by Monarch?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 496
Did you ever have any suspicion that Mr. Monahan was out paying councillors
9 12:46:50 10
himself? A.
A suspicion is the phrase now that you've used?
11
Q. 497
Yes.
12
A.
I could not deny that the suspicion did not enter my mind.
13
Q. 498
Well did you have a high suspicion that Mr. Monahan was doing that?
14
A.
Low suspicion, suspicion, high suspicion.
12:47:12 15
You use -- I would be dishonest if
I did not say to you in answer to your question that did I not have a suspicion
16
that Mr. Monahan was doing something of that nature.
I have no basis other
17
than the nature of your question for answering in that way.
18
Q. 499
Did you ever get a payment yourself from Mr. Monahan?
19
A.
No.
Q. 500
Now, I take it, Mr. Dunlop, while there is a problem at that meeting at the 9th
12:47:37 20
21
of March in that at that stage you don't know what Mr. Monahan is going to do
22
and what's going to happen about him etc..
23
imagine that notwithstanding that you had a chat with -- well in fact you
24
touched on it, with these two gentlemen about whom they had already spoken to?
12:48:20 25
26
But I'd say that not -- I'd
A.
Yes.
Q. 501
And as a matter of interest, did you at that meeting or later ever get a record
27
of the minutes of the meeting in May '92 or anything that would tell you who
28
voted for and who voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
29 12:48:46 30
A.
My immediate response to that -- well on reflection, no. meeting you say? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I don't -- at that
12:48:47
12:48:55
74 1
Q. 502
Yes.
2
A.
Subsequently I may well myself have looked up --
3
Q. 503
Yes.
4
A.
-- the record of the people who did or did not vote.
5
Q. 504
Yeah.
6
A.
But just for ease of reference -- ease of proceeding.
7
Q. 505
Yes.
8
A.
It might not necessarily be absolutely required that you check the way
9
everybody voted.
12:49:13 10
I mean, Phil Reilly and Richard Lynn would be completely au
fait as to the way everybody voted.
11
Q. 506
Well that's fine.
12
A.
All right.
13
Q. 507
Can I take it that it would be -- I mean, the most important thing you could do
14 12:49:39 15
16
would inform yourself, now when you're getting ready to go out and do your job? A.
Yes.
Q. 508
Would be to inform yourself of everything about May '92 meeting but in
17
particular about how they lined up for Mr. Barrett's motion?
18
A.
Yes, I would accept that, yes.
19
Q. 509
So.
12:49:45 20
And can I take it.
It doesn't matter to me whether you've gone into the
minutes or whether you spoke to Mr. Richard Lynn or Mr. Reilly about it.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 510
But can I take it that at some stage that you had a discussion with Mr. Lynn
23 24 12:49:58 25
and Mr. Reilly about who voted which way? A.
Oh, yes.
Q. 511
And that you would have known the entire of the vote on that day.
You would
26
have apprised yourself of all of the councillors who voted for and all who
27
voted against?
28
A.
Yes, I would.
29
Q. 512
Because the key to it is you've got to swing the against -- the people who are
12:50:16 30
The answer is yes.
against, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:50:17
12:50:32
75 1
A.
Well not quite, Mr. Murphy.
What we had to do, and it's a point that you
2
haven't come to, I know, but you may well be coming to it.
What we have to
3
do, not only may we have to swing people who are against.
We have to
4
consolidate anybody who is in favour --
5
Q. 513
Yes.
6
A.
-- of development in Cherrywood.
7
Q. 514
Yes.
8
A.
And assuage any difficulties that there might be.
9
Make sure that they are on side.
And like, for example, I do
recall that there was some concern about the attitude of, we'll say, Betty
12:50:51 10
Coffey.
Because Betty Coffey was advising caution --
11
Q. 515
Yes.
12
A.
-- about how to proceed.
The reason that that was occurring, and she wasn't
13
the only one.
14
particular locality and they were getting it in the teeth from a highly
12:51:07 15
16
The reason that that was occurring was that these were in the
organised campaign against. Q. 516
Well obviously, Mr. Dunlop, you were going to have to retain the people who
17
voted against Mr. Barrett's motion and turn the heads of a sufficient number of
18
those who voted for it?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 517
Isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 518
I mean, that's what your task is now for the next eight months?
23
A.
Our task is simple.
12:51:27 20
24
recognise we can get.
12:51:43 25
26
Success on the basis of what we want.
Can it be achieved. Q. 519
Yes.
That's the simple task.
And what we
What is it that we want.
What do we do to achieve it.
Now, and -- at that meeting did you carve up the councillors among you
27
and of the 70 plus, agree that Mr. Reilly had already spoken to or was happy
28
about whatever, whoever or whatever and Mr. Lynn the same and that now you can
29
reduce the 70 plus to a lesser number that you can deal with?
12:52:14 30
A.
Yes.
Well, I think that -- I don't know whether I said it here yesterday or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:52:19
12:52:41
76 1
I've said it at some stage.
Probably most likely in my statement.
That
2
obviously because this was a tighter type of operation at this stage and a lot
3
of work had already been done by Philip Reilly and Richard Lynn.
4
point in everybody tripping over one another as to who they were going to
5
contact.
There was no
We knew --
6
Q. 520
I think my question covers that possibility Mr. Dunlop.
7
A.
Right.
8
Q. 521
What I want to know is did you agree at that meeting that Mr. -- in other
9
Okay.
words, from your point of view, could you delete a number of names and say Mr.
12:52:53 10
Lynn and Mr. Reilly are dealing with them?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 522
All right.
13 14
And you meant -- yes, all right.
And did you go away then with a
list of people that would be your's? Did you go away with your list? A.
12:53:14 15
Well not a physical list, no, no, we didn't write down names or didn't produce a list and say listen what was agreed.
What was agreed was that I would
16
concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors by and large I was going to
17
concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors.
Richard Lynn was going to
18
continue with his contact with Don Lydon.
And I would concentrate on Fianna
19
Fail and that it would become known in certain circles that I was now involved.
12:53:37 20
21
Q. 523
And how would that help things?
A.
Well, let me come at it backwards, if I may.
I recall we'll say, for example,
22
Therese Ridge was a Fine Gael councillor expressing satisfaction that I was now
23
involved.
24 12:53:55 25
Q. 524
Right.
A.
So it would help things in the context.
And I'm loathe to put it in this
26
fashion but because it sounds very modest but, I mean, I put it in this way
27
because people were happy that they could communicate with me and say look it,
28
what's going on, what are we going to do or what should we do.
29 12:54:21 30
Q. 525
Uh-huh.
So your -- so now you're lobbying job has actually been reduced.
It's been reduced down to the Fianna Fail side of the fence? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:54:34
12:54:35
77 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 526
Though maybe Therese Ridge was an exception to that was she?
3
A.
Well Therese Ridge was a Phil Reilly contact.
4
I think I explained that to you
yesterday.
5
Q. 527
Yes.
6
A.
But Therese Ridge at that time was a friend of mine.
7
I was close to her at
that time.
8
Q. 528
Yes.
9
A.
For a variety of reasons in relation to -- I don't mean in relation to other
12:54:46 10
developments but I mean in relation to a lot of matters.
11
Q. 529
You were a friend of her's in relation to a number of other developments?
12
A.
She was involved in the context of lobbying.
I was involved with her in the
13
context of lobbying, particularly in the context of Quarryvale because it was
14
in her backyard.
12:55:03 15
Q. 530
16 17
lobby the Fianna Fail councillors and Therese Ridge? A.
18 19 12:55:16 20
All right. But anyway, sorry -- did you agree the three of you that you'd
No, no.
I agreed that I would concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors.
It would become known, as it was inevitable. Q. 531
Yes.
A.
And as I have I have just given evidence that it did.
That I was involved.
21
And that it was necessary that I would speak to other people.
22
be agreed as we proceeded.
23
Q. 532
24 12:55:32 25
Okay. How many Fianna Fail councillors were there at that time, roughly. don't want to count them?
A.
26
Well this was after the 1991 election so they were decimated in the '91 election, so there was 20 odd.
27
Q. 533
25.
28
A.
In or around figure.
29 12:55:45 30
But that would
Sorry, let's look at it.
councillors. Q. 534
76. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
70 what odd members of the
I
12:55:46
12:55:56
78 1
A.
76, yeah.
2
Q. 535
I'm happy.
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 536
25.
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 537
And but you did say that maybe it would become necessary to talk to others but
7 8
Roughly say.
So your brief now is to lobby 25 councillors, isn't that right?
you'd work that out between the three of you as you went along? A.
9 12:56:13 10
25 that's all right.
Yes and I did say that it was agreed between us that Richard Lynn would continue to have his contact with Don Lydon.
Q. 538
Why is that?
11
A.
Because he had very close contact with Mr. Don Lydon.
12
Q. 539
Did you know Mr. Lydon?
13
A.
Oh, yes.
14
Q. 540
Does that mean that you wouldn't talk to him at all?
A.
Oh, absolutely not.
16
Q. 541
He was very heavily committed to all of this?
17
A.
Oh, he was, yes.
18
Q. 542
He wasn't moving off side, was he?
19
A.
Oh, no.
12:56:22 15
12:56:36 20
I think he was feeling a little bit aggrieved, understandably so, in
the context of the amount of contumaligning that was being heaped on his head
21
for what had occurred in May 1992.
22
Q. 543
What was heaped on his head?
23
A.
Sorry.
24
Q. 544
Oh, yes, yes, yes.
A.
Yes, and members of Fianna Fail itself.
26
Q. 545
I see.
27
A.
And other councillors.
28
Q. 546
Right.
29
A.
He was a sort of a, a bit of a, unfairly, in my view, but nonetheless --
Q. 547
Yes.
12:56:50 25
12:57:03 30
You know, people were very unhappy with him. Who, Monarch?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:57:03
12:57:18
79 1
A.
-- a cock up was made.
And when a cock up is made everybody looks for a
2
scapegoat and Don was the scapegoat in the instance because he didn't think on
3
his feet on the day.
4
Q. 548
How does that explain that you wouldn't talk to him as well?
5
A.
Well --
6
Q. 549
Do you remember you used the phrase yesterday to add support to Mr. Lynn and
7 8
Mr. Reilly? A.
9
relationship between Richard and Don, of long-standing, that that would
12:57:32 10
11
It doesn't necessarily mean that I wouldn't speak to Don but because of the
continue. Q. 550
Now, of the Fianna Fail councillors, the 25 or so, presumably, again at this
12
first meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, you discussed which of them Mr.
13
Lynn and Mr. Reilly had already spoken to.
14
A.
Oh, they would have lobbied.
Q. 551
Yes.
16
A.
They would have lobbied everybody.
17
Q. 552
Yes.
12:57:49 15
They would have lobbied them all?
They would have lobbied them all, yes.
Were you able to rule out a number of them -- did Mr. Lynn and
18
Mr. Reilly say there's no need to talk to the following half a dozen or ten or
19
something like that because they're sick to death of us and they're with us or
12:58:07 20
against us or whatever?
21
A.
Well it's not as simple as that, if I may suggest to you, Mr. Murphy.
22
Q. 553
No.
23
A.
Because of what had happened there was a lot of disaffection among all parties
24
but I'm sticking now with Fianna Fail, within the Fianna Fail organisation.
12:58:23 25
As I said to you two minutes ago, somewhat unfairly, but nonetheless, that was
26
the way the cooky crumbled.
27
saying, look it, for God's sake what are we going to do here.
28 29 12:58:47 30
Q. 554
Don was being blamed for it.
And people were
I understand you, Mr. Dunlop, then to be saying that you had to talk to all of the Fianna Fail councillors, it was your brief to talk to all the Fianna Fail councillors and bring them home? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:58:47
12:59:03
80 1
A.
2 3
And talk to them, as many as possible, in view of what was -- what was going to be um, put forward or agreed.
Q. 555
Yes.
And can you just tell me.
I know about the internal difficulties in
4
Monarch.
And I know how this affected the councillors that they ended up
5
confused.
What does Monarch want.
6
who were in favour of Monarch would be upset with the failure of Mr. Lydon's
7
motion.
And that I can see that obviously people
8 9
Why would there be so much dissatisfaction within Fianna Fail, among the Fianna
12:59:23 10
Fail councillors? I mean, these are councillors who are independently voting
11
on whether or not lands should be rezoned or not.
12
speaking in this particular case I'm saying that it doesn't matter but it
13
increased the density.
14
elected representatives and at the moment I'm talking about the 25 or so Fianna
12:59:50 15
Fail ones.
And sorry -- generally
I mean, so that's what they are voting on.
And the vote went against what Monarch were looking for in May
16
'92.
17
in-fighting among the Fianna Fail councillors about the whole thing?
18
A.
19
So it did.
Okay, fine.
Why would that end up with kind of
Well, my immediate reaction -- and I do apologise in advance, Chairman. don't mean to be engaging with Mr. Murphy.
13:00:21 20
These are
And I
But God bless your naiviety.
Fianna Fail councillors obviously were committed to doing what was required in
21
May 1992.
And it didn't happen.
22
Q. 556
What was it sorry to interrupt you -- what was it they were committed to do?
23
A.
The motion that was defeated.
24
Q. 557
Mr. Lydon's motion?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 558
In other words, the Fianna Fail councillors of the 33 --
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 559
-- who lost that motion?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 560
Were committed to it?
13:00:36 25
13:00:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
13:00:43
13:00:59
81 1
A.
Well subject to correction and to a list of who --
2
Q. 561
No, no?
3
A.
We're not going to go into that detail.
But I mean they were mightily annoyed
4
that this had happened.
And as I've said to you five minutes ago, they looked
5
for a scapegoat and they blamed Don Lydon.
6
Q. 562
Why would they be mightily annoyed?
7
A.
Well because of the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Monarch and them
8
and commitments that they had entered into and obviously assurances that had
9
been given that this would be successful.
13:01:18 10
Q. 563
11 12
Now, what are the assurances and what are the commitments.
What are the
commitments that they had entered into? A.
Well, the commitments that they had entered in would be to support it and the
13
assurances that they would do everything possibly within their power to make
14
sure that it was passed.
13:01:37 15
16
Q. 564
And what would that be?
A.
Voting for it.
17 18
CHAIRMAN: Right, Mr. Murphy, it's gone one o'clock. We'll rise until two
19
o'clock. At two o'clock Ms. Harney is giving evidence and so Mr. Dunlop can
13:01:49 20
21
resume at -- if you're here at ten past two.
Not before ten past two.
Hopefully we will resume soon after that.
22 23
Those parties who might -- if we come to that stage in the afternoon, who might
24
want to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop might, it would be helpful if they could agree
13:02:06 25
amongst themselves the order in which they will cross-examine him. All right?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
I think we've already agreed an order I understand.
28
Shipsey is probably going to go first, I understand.
I think Mr.
Subject to correction.
29 13:02:26 30
MR. DULACHAIN: Chairman, just before you rise, there was a matter we raised on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
13:02:29
13:02:53
82 1
day 625, 23rd of March.
And it related to whether there were any records of
2
our account of what was said in the private meetings when the private meetings
3
went off record and it was indicated A, whether anything was available and B,
4
whether that that would then be made available.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Well we can deal with that after lunch.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
to write us a letter and we'll respond by way of correspondence. We are at a
13:03:01 10
I think in fact the proper thing to do would be for Mr. Dulachain
certain stage -- It's not necessarily information that would be opened in
11
public at this stage as this is a matter of which certain decisions have to be
12
made by the members.
13 14 13:03:15 15
16
But if the query that Mr. O'Dulachain has, can be sent in a letter in so far as we are in a position to provide information to Mr. O'Dulachain in relation to that matter it will of course be provided.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
we can come to some agreement as to how the matter is dealt with.
13:03:30 20
Well just for the moment if yourself and Mr. O'Dulachain can see if
not possible you can raise it in the afternoon.
All right?
21 22
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
23 24
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13:04:25 25
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
If that's
13:04:25
14:02:35
83 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Sir.
4 5
Ms. Mary Harney, please.
6 7
MS. MARY HARNEY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
8
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:03:04 10
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Ms. Harney.
11
A.
Good afternoon.
12
Q. 565
Quinn good afternoon, Ms. Harney.
13
Ms. Harney, you have been written to on two occasions by the Tribunal in
14
relation to these lands at Cherrywood and the Monarch Property Group.
14:03:16 15
And I think your first response is dated 15th of February 2006.
16
And is to be
found at pages 1008 and 1010 of the brief.
17 18
And your subsequent and most recent response of the 18th of April 2006 is at
19
8713 and 8715 of the brief. If I just take that second response first.
14:03:38 20
21
And if we could have 8713, please.
22
You referred to the Tribunal correspondence and the earlier letter.
23
said that "As you have outlined the nature of your contacts with Philip Monahan
24
and Philip Reilly and his wife Martha, and that you had met Mr. Richard Lynn at
14:03:54 25
And you
a fund-raising event."
26 27
Can I just ask you in relation to your knowledge of and meetings with
28
Mr. Philip Monahan, did you know Mr. Monahan?
29 14:04:08 30
A.
I first met Mr. Monahan around the time The Square opened in Tallaght, that was to the best of my knowledge, the first time I ever met him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I probably met
14:04:13
14:04:26
84 1
him no more than three times in all I think.
2
Q. 566
You also I think, knew Mr. Reilly, is that right?
3
A.
Yes, I had a lot of dealings with Mr. Reilly.
Because he was the, I think
4
public affairs person for The Square in Tallaght.
5
functions in the area.
6
occasions.
7
not twice but he attended a lot of functions.
He attended a lot of
And I was seated at the same table as him on many
He won the Tallaght person of the year on at least one occasion if
8 9
I also held a weekly constituency clinic for about two years in an office in
14:04:42 10
The Square and he was often around on a Saturday and I often spoke to him and
11 12
met him. Q. 567
13 14
He was somebody I knew quite well.
Was that a facility provided by the Tallaght Shopping Centre or the Monarch Group?
A.
14:04:59 15
Yes. It was provided on a day-to-day basis it was used by the Catholic Marriage Advisory Council to the best of my recollection. It was also used by
16
other community groups and a number pf politicians and I used it because it was
17
convenient from a transport point of view for people to come and see me there.
18
Q. 568
And I think you also knew Mr. Richard Lynn, is that correct?
19
A.
I met Mr. Lynn at fundraising events.
14:05:15 20
Certainly, I think I sent you
documentation about three fundraising lunches I organised and I know he
21
attended one of them and he may have attended other fund-raising events that
22
other people organised that I was in attendance at, yes.
23
Q. 569
24 14:05:31 25
26 27
And I think you say that these are the only people associated with Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group that you could recall having met?
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 570
You had been asked I think for details of any contributions received from the Monarch Group and if I could rather than taking you through your statement.
28 29 14:05:46 30
If I take you through a series of documents which you will have been furnished with and which are in the brief.
I think the first contribution, although we
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:05:49
14:06:08
85 1 2
don't have records of it, may have been received in 1990, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I think I -- from a company called JC, which I understand now or I
3
understood I wrote to you in April was a Monarch company.
4
donation of 1,000 pounds to the Progressive Democrats national election.
5
Q. 571
Yes, that would have been in the early 1990s?
6
A.
Yes, I think I gave you the date there, yes.
7
Q. 572
If I could have 8714, please.
They sent a
8 9
I think the Tallaght Town Centre opened on 23rd of October 1990 and you've told
14:06:20 10
us you didn't know Mr. Philip Monahan prior to that date.
Would you have
11
known Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly prior to that date.
12
When I say -- I don't know when I first met Mr. Monahan but it was in
13
connection with The Square.
14
that year.
14:06:40 15
The official opening may have been the end of
But the Square was in an almost finished state for a while before
it actually officially opened.
And I think it was actually used for events.
16
I would say I met Mr. Reilly around the same time when he came to work would at
17
The Square, yes.
18
Q. 573
19 14:06:55 20
So do you think you might have requested or solicited that contribution of 1,000 in early 1990?
A.
I don't believe I would have but I can't be certain.
The national collection
21
was generally organised by the treasurers in each constituency.
And I think
22
70 per cent of it or so went to the party nationally and 30 percent was held in
23
the constituency.
24
practice to write to anybody looking for money for myself.
Until I became leader of the party it would not have been
14:07:16 25
26
I would have written to people in connection with fundraising events.
27
terms of donations for myself, and I think there's one letter there where I
28
wrote on behalf of a boxing club and I began by saying I don't like writing
29
these letter which would be true. When I became leader, it was customary for
14:07:30 30
But in
leaders, although I don't do it now, it would have been customary to write Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:07:35
14:07:49
86 1
letters seeking financial support.
2
Q. 574
You weren't leader, were you, in June 1991?
3
A.
No, I wasn't.
4
Q. 575
If I could have 2239.
This is a letter written to Sheila Terry from Monarch
5
Properties Services Limited.
6
brief.
7
A.
Yes, I did.
8
Q. 576
It's from Mr. Lynn.
9
Again, it's a letter you might have seen in the
And it says "We have been contacted by Minister Mary
Harney on your behalf and have pleasure in enclosing a contribution towards
14:08:03 10
your Local Elections expenses."
11 12
And if we have 1581 we see the contribution there of 300 pounds.
13
is an internal Monarch document discovered to the Tribunal.
14 14:08:13 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 577
There are in fact, I think other contributions to PD candidates.
16
gets 300 pounds.
Catherine Quinn is 300.
17
then Progressive Democrats function 300.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 578
And you will have seen them.
14:08:34 20
21
Again, this
Helen Keogh
Colm Tyndall I think at 300.
And
You will see those on the screen?
Can I just ask you about the circumstances under
which you came to ask for funds on behalf of Ms. Terry? A.
I think what happened was Mr. O'Reilly approached me and said he wanted to
22
support the Local Election campaign of some of the candidates and asked me for
23
recommendations. And the people I recommended were the people I had head
24
hunted into the party just a few months earlier.
14:08:51 25
Sheila Terry was one,
Catherine Quinn was another and a third was Colm Tyndall.
They had no track
26
record in the party and I felt it would have been more difficult for them.
27
they were the ones I recommended. I want wasn't involved in recommending Helen
28
Keogh but I was involved in the recommendation of Colm Tyndall, Catherine Quinn
29
and to the best of my knowledge Breda Cass.
14:09:10 30
So
But her donation was to the party
as I remember or to a function she was having or something rather than to her. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:09:13
14:09:25
87 1
Q. 579
2
These -- just to put this in context.
This was the 1991 Local Elections.
You had been a councillor up to 1991 yourself?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 580
But you weren't going forward on that election.
5
These were candidates in the
election.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 581
They were going to become councillors if they were successful --
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 582
-- at election time?
A.
Yes.
Q. 583
The Tribunal has heard evidence from a councillor who was successful in the
14:09:30 10
11 12
elections but who declined an offer of money towards his campaign by Mr. Lynn
13
or the Monarch interest.
14
you think that there might have been a conflict in seeking or soliciting
14:09:51 15
support from some interest such as Monarch which would have an interest in the
16 17
I'm just wondering with the benefit of hindsight do
Development Plan? A.
Well soliciting.
I didn't solicit he came -- to the best of my recollection,
18
Mr. Reilly came to me and said he wanted to support the Local Election campaign
19
and asked me for ideas.
14:10:08 20
money.
21
I think a lot depends on the motivation when you take
I have received financial support from companies that I subsequently
opposed things that they wanted done.
That is a fact.
22 23
Um, so the fact that somebody gives you political donation in an open fashion,
24
should not be assumed, in my view, that that means that you're going to do
14:10:28 25
whatever that company or individual would wish you to do.
So I think a lot
26
depends.
27
changed a lot in the light of this Tribunal and other Tribunals in terms of the
28
perception of situations of that kind.
29 14:10:44 30
Some people may feel conflict I think perhaps the circumstances have
But certainly --
Q. 584
Did you --
A.
I was never motivated by money somebody gave me to do something for somebody. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:10:49
14:11:03
88 1
Q. 585
2 3
political parties in the June '91 and November '92 General Election? A.
4 5
Did you know that Monarch Properties had been such generous sporters to all
No, I think the sums of money half a million or something.
Not at all, no.
It was a considerable amount of money. Q. 586
Now, that was 1991 and then I think we have a document.
Could I have 3763.
6 7
This is an invoice which is passing between Monarch and GRE.
8
to expenses incurred and which should be shared with GRE.
9
concerned in relation to the first paragraph under the heading The Square "2
14:11:26 10
And it relates
But I'm just
BW" which I presume black-and-white photograph reopening of captain venture by
11
Mary Harney TD Minister for State and Department of the Environment to include
12
proofs prints and captions."
13 14
Did you you perform any in your capacity as Minister any functions in Tallaght
14:11:42 15
16
or otherwise for Monarch? A.
17 18
Clearly, I performed that function for people in need, yes, I would have.
The
photographs weren't given to me, as you can imagine. Q. 587
19
Yes.
I can appreciate that and I think then you wrote again.
have 3544 to Mr. Reilly this time, in January 1992.
14:12:02 20
If we could
And I think you got a
contribution or your party got a contribution of 200 pounds towards a business
21
lunch that was addressed by the leader of your party at the time, isn't that
22
right?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 588
And then I think in November 1992, at 3910 you yourself I think received 1,000
14:12:20 25
pounds from Mr.-- from Monarch but I think Mr. Reilly may have been the contact
26
for that and you'll have seen that in the brief?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 589
Can you recall --
29
A.
I sent you the compliments slip I think I had in my records.
14:12:33 30
Phil Reilly's signature that's on it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I think it's
14:12:35
14:12:47
89 1
Q. 590
And that's at 1012.
Can I just ask you, do you recall whether that money was
2
sought on your behalf or by you from Monarch or whether it was given by
3
Monarch?
4
A.
No, it wasn't sought because I'm fairly certain I never wrote looking for money
5
for myself nor for the constituency.
I did write for fundraising events
6
frequently but not for actual donations.
7
Q. 591
Yes. But you would have known Mr. Reilly at in stage?
8
A.
Yes, I would have known him quite well. Yes, I did.
9
Q. 592
And you acknowledge that as we see at 1011 on 20th of November 1992.
14:13:03 10
I think in -- if we move to 1993.
And then
If I could have sorry -- just before I
11
leave 1992.
12
think there was a contribution of 200 pounds in January of 1992.
13
fundraiser to the Progressive Democrats.
14
Election contribution of 400 pounds on the 20th of October, as we see there.
14:13:31 15
16
At 1582 I As a
And I think Mr. Lohan got a General
Isn't that right? A.
17 18
I think there were other contributions by Monarch.
Well clearly you have the records, yes. Mr. Lohan's donation, yes.
Q. 593
19
But the fund raising, yes.
And I think at 3975 there was a hamper later that year which was given by the Monarch interest.
14:13:49 20
I wouldn't haven't aware of
I think if we go to 1993.
At 1583 there was Helen Keogh I
think had a fund-raising event and may in fact have received a contribution of
21
100 pounds.
22
In May 1993 if we have 4200.
23
pounds towards the cost of two tickets for again a luncheon was provided.
24 14:14:12 25
26
And I think there was a further letter from you to Mr. Reilly.
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 594
Now --
A.
Normally every year I have a fund-raising lunch and it would be .... well known
27
to people.
28
Q. 595
Sorry, I've interrupted you.
29
A.
Sorry.
Q. 596
I didn't mean to.
14:14:21 30
Where it would appear from the records that 200
Sorry.
I think you wrote also to Mr. Monahan at that time
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:14:25
14:14:46
90 1
later in May at 4217.
And we see the contributions.
Then in 1994 at 1584, I
2
think the Progressive Democrats again through Helen Keogh, had an interest free
3
loan of 2,000 pounds given on the 1st of February 1994.
4
were tickets on the 5th of May to the tune of 200 pounds given.
5
in December 1994 as we see at 5517 there was a hamper I think, maybe given to
6
you in relation to -- by the Monarch interest.
7
was 200 pounds given on the 26th of January 1995 to the Progressive Democrats
8
fund-raiser.
And I think there And I think
At 1585 for 1985 I think there
9 14:15:03 10
And on the 18th of May of that year a further 100 pounds.
And then in 1996 I
11
think at 1586, there were just a series of payments.
12
quickly.
13
Sheila Terry, Local Election expenses of 500 pounds.
14
On the 25th of April Progressive Democrats fundraiser 500 pounds.
14:15:25 15
I'll just do them very
You will see them there on the 29th of March '96 to councillor
May, Progressive Democrats, tickets 50 pounds.
16
Keogh lunch 200 pounds.
17
250 pounds.
On the 2nd
On the 27th of June, Helen
On the 23rd of August Councillor Larry Lohan, tickets
18 19
And I think Helen Keogh wrote to Mr. Lynn in relation to a further event.
14:15:39 20
see there at 5815 on the 22nd of April '96.
You
And I think you wrote to
21
Mr. Reilly yourself on the 29th of October 1996.
22
letter I think that you may have referred to earlier in your capacity as leader
23
of the party.
24 14:15:55 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 597
And you will have seen that.
A.
Can I just say in relation to the hampers.
That's at 6115.
That's a
There's a further hamper I think. I see from your documentation to a
27
large number of hampers were given.
28
used to give them away because at Christmas in the past, not so any more, one
29
would get a lot of hampers at Christmas time.
14:16:18 30
generally, I would give away.
They were food hampers and I actually
And certainly food hampers
I just want to clarify that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:16:29
14:16:33
91 1
Q. 598
Just for completeness obviously you will appreciate that --
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
At 1587 for 1997 on the 28th of February Helen Keogh fundraiser 500.
4
of March Councillor Helen Keogh, PD tickets 100 pounds.
5
of June 1997, progressive Democrats Dublin southwest General Election
6
contribution 3,000 pounds.
7
in May 1997 which took place in early June '97.
8
A.
9
And then on the 3rd
I think there had been a General Election called
And that donation was given for my election campaign and that of Colm
Tyndall but because the sum was large I gave it into the party centrally, which
14:16:57 10
11
Yes.
On 14th
I think I've acknowledged. Q. 600
Yes.
So it didn't go into the constituency in fact.
And in fact at 6436, just for completeness, I think the cheque was made
12
payable to Progressive Democrats Dublin south -- it wasn't a cheque made
13
payable to you, isn't that right?
14 14:17:11 15
A.
No, that's right.
Q. 601
And we'll see it going through there.
And then I think in more recent times.
16
Either Mr. Lynn on behalf of another company or through another company I think
17
made contributions to the party.
18
you will see there "Contribution to Dun Laoghaire adult education board
19
requested by councillor Larry Lohan of 800 pounds."
14:17:36 20
If we have 1375.
I think there is at No. 7
And then at No. 8 you
will see Progressive Democrats, grand draw 400 pounds contributed on the 25th
21
of February 1999.
22 23
And then at No. 13 there's a national fundraising draw tickets for Progressive
24
Democrats, 500 pounds on the 15th March 1999. And at 14 a golf classic in aid
14:17:52 25
of Colm Tyndall held on 25th of March 1999, 500 pounds.
And then at 1377
26
there was a business lunch for the Progressive Democrats organised through
27
Senator Helen Keogh of 600 pounds contributed in October 1999, isn't that
28
right?
29 14:18:09 30
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 602
Would it be fair to say that the Monarch interest was a source of political Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:18:16
14:18:28
92 1
contributions to individual members of the party and to the party over the
2
period in question, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's correct, yes.
4
Q. 603
Did anybody within the party ever canvass or lobby you for support either for
5 6
yourself or through, for any of your councillors for any of theirs projects? A.
No, not to the best of my knowledge.
As I told this Tribunal on a previous
7
occasion, once I left the council if somebody lobbied me for a developer I
8
would automatically refer them to the councils.
9 14:18:43 10
I just didn't get involved.
Q. 604
Yes.
A.
And the only planning I would have got involved in was either individual once
11
off housing for constituents, which I'd still be involved with.
12
made to rezone green belts which I was very involved with but other than that.
13
So if somebody did, if for example Mr. Reilly, who I saw frequently, mentioned
14
Cherrywood to me I would have told him to talk to the councillors, in this case
14:19:03 15
it would have been Helen Keogh and Larry Lohan who were in that area. I
16 17
Or attempts
certainly don't have any recollection of that. Q. 605
Of that.
Okay.
And you may not be familiar with the Cherrywood proposals.
18
Because you had left the council I think in June '91.
19
with the rezoning process and the publication of the draft maps and that.
14:19:21 20
21
A.
Sure.
Q. 606
If I could have 7216.
On 27th of May 1992.
But you are familiar
The Cherrywood areas with up for
22
review by the council.
23
Dockrell that the lands in question would be zoned at one house to the acre.
24
In other words, the Manager's proposals were four houses to the acre.
14:19:40 25
And there was a motion by Councillors Barrett and
And the
manageress proposals had been unsuccessful and Councillor Barrett seconded by
26
Dockrell had suggested one house to the acre on the lands.
27
if you look at the councillors who voted in favour of those proposals.
28
are on screen now.
29
Lohan, Morrissey, perhaps Quinn, Tyndall and Terry would have been Progressive
14:20:06 30
And we see there They
Would I be right in thinking that Councillors Cass, Keane,
Democrat councillors at that time or ...? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:20:08
14:20:26
93 1
A.
2 3
I'm not sure about Larry Lohan because he left the party around that time. But certainly the others, yes.
Q. 607
Now, if we go then to the 11th of November 1993.
At 7259, you will see there
4
a motion by Councillors Smyth seconded by Councillor Buckley.
5
which has just now been voted in favour of been confirmed effectively at low
6
density housing at two houses to the hectare or one house to the acre.
7
other words you've had the draft plan containing a change No. 3 in accordance
8
with that successful motion.
9
it comes back for further debate.
14:20:52 10
That the change
So in
And then that plan is put on public display and
Councillors Smyth and Buckley.
And the first motion up is a motion by That that change be confirmed.
The actual text of the motion is at 7259.
And that
11
motion at 7261.
But if we look at
12
7261 you see at the very bottom of the page "The motion proposed by Councillor
13
Smyth, seconded by Councillor Buckley was put and on a division the vote
14
resulted as follows."
And if we look at 7262.
14:21:17 15
16
Councillors Cass, Keane, Keogh, Lohan, Morrissey, Quinn, Terry and Tyndall all
17
vote against it.
18
they would have adopted the previous year.
19
a proposal the previous year that the lands be zoned at one house to the acre.
14:21:37 20
Which appears to be a total reversal of the position that
A motion a year subsequently comes before the council confirming that prior
21
position and the vote against it.
Do you know anything about that or?
22
A.
No, I don't.
23
Q. 608
Was there any discussion within the party?
24
A.
Definitely not.
14:21:54 25
In fact, even since the Tribunal began I haven't discussed it
with them, to be honest with you.
26
And I know you've had most of them here
before you.
27
Q. 609
Okay.
28
A.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
29 14:22:00 30
In other words, they had supported
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:22:02
14:22:05
94 1
A.
Thank you very much.
2 3
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP BY MR. MURPHY
9
AS FOLLOWS:
14:22:39 10
11
Q. 610
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
12
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, I would like to just resume with an answer you gave just
13
before lunch.
14 14:23:22 15
The answer is on screen -- sorry.
I'll just read out the answer.
"Why would
16
they be something annoyed? That's the councillors.
And the answer is well
17
because of the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Monarch and them and
18
commitments that they had entered into and obviously assurances that had been
19
given that this would be successful."
14:23:44 20
21
"Now, what are the assurances and what are the commitments? What commitments
22
that they had entered into?" And your answer is "The commitment to support it.
23
And the assurances that they would do everything within their power for it.
24
What would that be? Voting for it."
14:24:01 25
26
So what I was asking you about is why these people, these Fianna Fail
27
councillors would have been very distressed with the result of the May '92
28
motion.
29
they gave.
14:24:17 30
Mr. Barrett's motion.
And you've -- I've asked you what commitments
What you meant by that.
And the commitments you were referring
to would have been commitments to support it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:24:19
14:24:30
95 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 611
To support the motion.
3
Which the Manager's proposals proposed by Mr. Lydon
earlier that day, they would have supported it in that way, isn't that right?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 612
That would have been your commitment.
Now, could you tell me what the
6
assurances and obviously assurances that had been given that this would be
7
successful.
8 9
What assurances would have been given to Monarch that the proposal to increase
14:24:46 10
the density as they wished would be successful.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
These are assurances that Mr. Dunlop would know of his own?
13 14
MR. MURPHY: Yes.
14:24:54 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Of his own rather than what he might have heard on the grapevine.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
19
like, he says that one of the reasons they're very distressed is because they
14:25:06 20
Well both beginning with -- chairman, I'm just coming back to --
would have given assurances that the motion would be successful.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
came to be aware of that.
24
was told to you?
14:25:18 25
26
A.
Well is that something that -- just explain, Mr. Dunlop, how you Is that something you knew of your own knowledge or
No, that was something that was told to me.
Obviously, the -- thank you,
Mr. Redmond.
27 28
That was something that was told to me by Mr. Lynn and/or Mr. Reilly.
29
not have been aware of any assurances that would have been given prior to the
14:25:42 30
point -- to my arrival on the scene but given the method of lobbying of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I would
14:25:51
14:26:10
96 1
councillors, people would -- anybody worth his salt lobbying a councillor would
2
do the sums, would do the figures.
3
going to vote and who was not.
Would add up the heads and say who was
4 5 6
MR. HUMPHREYS:
7
Just one point for clarification.
8
What was referred to yesterday as the Manager's motion, if you like.
9
motion that was defeated, 35 - 33.
14:26:26 10
Sorry, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Humphreys on behalf of Senator Lydon.
Was referred to as the Manager's motion
which is what it was because it was the Manager's Report for the whole valley.
11
But just before lunch it was referred to as Mr. Lydon's motion.
12
be just some just clarification.
13
The
A.
There could
Do you know, I think that is correct.
14 14:26:44 15
16
MR. MURPHY: A.
That's my fault.
I think that's correct.
17 18
MR. HUMPHREYS:
19
please the Tribunal.
Sorry to interrupt.
It just needed clarifying. May it
14:26:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
That's all right.
22 23 24
MR. MURPHY:
It's the manager's --
A.
Yes.
Q. 613
Proposals and motion proposed by Mr. Lydon I think is ...
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 614
Mr. Dunlop, the only reason I'm asking you this is because you gave a sworn
14:26:47 25
28
answer that these councillors, you've painted the picture of these people being
29
very, they are looking for a scapegoat.
14:27:04 30
well -- I can't quite read what it is.
They blame Don Lydon.
They might
They were might well -- might really
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:27:08
14:27:25
97 1
annoyed that this has happened.
2
used.
3
be so annoyed.
4
Monarch and them.
I'm not sure what the words are that you
But anyway, you were clearly very annoyed.
I ask you why would they
And you say that the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Perhaps just look at that.
That comes first.
5 6
What are you referring to there ?
7
A.
The heavy lobbying?
8
Q. 615
Yes.
9
A.
I think I have alluded to and directly given evidence in this, to this effect
14:27:33 10
over the course of the last two days.
One is that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly
11
conducted a very professional campaign with the councillors right across the
12
political divide in relation to what Monarch wanted.
13
Q. 616
Now, pause.
14
A.
Okay.
Q. 617
But I don't think that because the Monarch people put a lot of work into
14:27:54 15
I accept that.
16
something and a lot of lobbying, which would make it understandable that when
17
the motion failed they'd be very upset.
18
be upset.
19
talking to the councillors.
14:28:12 20
21
I don't think the councillors would
Simply because Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly had spent a lot of time I don't see why the councillors would be
extremely upset with the defeat of the motion. A.
No.
Unless there's something else.
I don't think there is. There is something else.
But as I said to you
22
just before lunch.
23
councillors in this area -- when a motion is put forward at the council and
24
commitments are entered into or assurances given as to support, councillors
14:28:41 25
want to move on.
When I was admiring your nativity in this matter, is that
They want to deal with that issue and move on to other
26
issues or move on to other motions or to move on to other commitments or
27
assurance that is they have given to other people.
28
because Monarch was upset and because Monarch's upset was transmitted to them
29
through Richard or Philip.
14:29:01 30
Q. 618
They would be upset
When you say they were upset, which you say they were very upset and because of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:29:04
14:29:16
98 1
the heavy lobbying.
2
they had been paid a lot of money?
3
A.
4
Is it obvious -- what you're really saying there is that
No, I did not say that.
And I don't think that's an inference that I can
make.
5
Q. 619
All right.
6
A.
Certainly you can make it because it's your privilege to make it.
7
Q. 620
All right.
8
A.
But I can't make it because I can't sustain that.
9
Q. 621
But you're not hinting at that.
A.
No, no, sorry Mr. Murphy, let me be absolutely clear here now.
In dealing
11
with County Councillors you will get a cross-section of society.
You will get
12
people who when they say yes mean yes.
13
mean yes or no, you will get people when they say yes mean no and you will get
14
people who when they say yes mean maybe.
14:29:30 10
14:29:53 15
difficult exercise.
You are talking about genuine heavy lobbying?
You will get people when they say yes
And lobbying these councillors was a
So Richard Lynn and Phil Reilly had done a very good job
16
in calculating what support would be available.
17
really committed to it and who had assured Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly in an
18
unqualified way in an uncategoric way that they would support him were bloody
19
annoyed that the thing happened the way they did, legitimately.
14:30:18 20
Q. 622
Who were?
21
A.
Any councillors who gave --
22
Q. 623
The councillors, yes.
23
A.
Councillors who gave support.
24
Let's stand into, if I may do so for a second,
the shoes of either Richard Lynn or Philip Reilly.
14:30:33 25
assurances that they would support it.
27
voted for it.
29 14:30:58 30
I would be bloody annoyed.
And I would express my annoyance to all sections including people who had given
26
28
And the people who were
Q. 624
Notwithstanding that they may have
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I know you're talking about assurances.
The commitment to
support it and assurances that they would do everything within their power to -- sorry for it.
But a question earlier you said "And obviously assurances
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:31:03
14:31:20
99 1
that had been given that this would be successful."
So you've said to the
2
three Judges that councillors had -- councillors had given assurances that
3
this -- that this -- that what Monarch was looking for would be successful?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 625
What do you -- I don't -- what does that mean?
6
A.
The councillors that Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly had lobbied in the context
7
of any motions by Monarch -- on behalf of Monarch or the Manager's Report that
8
Monarch was supporting, taking Mr. Humphreys' point, that was put down in the
9
name of or for voting on behalf -- by Don Lydon and others.
14:31:48 10
11
That they would
say yes. Q. 626
No, no, that's not what that's saying.
I mean, a councillor can give an
12
assurance to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly that he will vote for it and support it
13
and he can carry that out.
14
successful is a different matter?
14:32:04 15
But he gives an assurance that this will be
A.
Sorry.
16
Q. 627
How does an individual councillor.
17
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon.
18
Q. 628
How does an individual councillor give an assurance to Mr. Lynn that the
19 14:32:15 20
You know what I mean?
Manager's motion will be successful? A.
In the vote? That would take place on it.
21
Q. 629
Yes.
22
A.
Because these councillors talked to one another.
23 24
Some councillors would
operate as surrogate lobbiests within their own party -Q. 630
Yes.
A.
-- on behalf of Richard Lynn.
26
Q. 631
Yes.
27
A.
Or Phil Reilly and would talk to other councillors of their acquaintance and
14:32:28 25
28 29 14:32:38 30
say look I'm voting for this. Q. 632
Uh-huh.
A.
This is a matter that would have been discussed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Notwithstanding any evidence
14:32:41
14:33:02
100 1
that you've heard to date.
This would be a matter that would be discussed in
2
party rooms prior to a vote.
3
to get.
4
clear that they were 100 percent in favour of it and there would be councillors
5
who would say well, you know, without reducing matters at absurd -- well if
6
Henry is in favour of that well I'll be in favour of that because I know
7
Henry's judgement in this is good.
As to its status and what support it was going
And the people who would be 100 percent in favour of it would make it
8
Q. 633
Yes.
9
A.
And Henry may well be the local councillor.
Q. 634
All right.
14:33:20 10
11
So obviously, it makes an awful lot of sense.
There are chats
and discussions that go on among the councillors informally?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 635
And on the day there's a meeting, isn't that right? There's a party meeting
14 14:33:34 15
Fianna Fail would have a party meeting? A.
Well just to be absolutely certain about that.
16
Q. 636
Yes.
17
A.
It depends on the particular meeting.
There may not be a meeting on the
18
particular day because there were a succession of meetings.
19
have been a meeting at some stage.
14:33:45 20
Q. 637
All right.
21
A.
Which would discuss various motions which were coming up.
22
Q. 638
Yes.
But there would
And does that mean then that there's a sort of eventually by the time
23
the day of the motion comes up there's a party, a Fianna Fail consensus as to
24
how they vote on a particular motion?
14:34:00 25
A.
There's a Fianna Fail whip.
26
Q. 639
A whip?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 640
All right.
29 14:34:13 30
Now, wait now.
relation to November '93.
I'm just jumping a little bit now, but in Does that mean that on the day then that the Fianna
Fail councillors will all vote the same way? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:34:16
14:34:33
101 1
A.
2
Oh, unless you have a Maverick in the camp or you may have more than one Maverick in the camp.
3
Q. 641
All right.
4
A.
The whip.
5
Q. 642
There is a whip.
6
A.
Well it depends on who the whip was at the particular time.
7
Q. 643
Who was the whip in May '92.
8
A.
Was it GV Wright?
9
Q. 644
I don't know.
14:34:46 10
11
May '92. A.
12 13
And who imposes the whip? The person who is the whip of the group. Who is the whip?
Who was it anyway when you were there -- well you were there in
Who was it when you were there in November '93?
Um, I'm virtually certain it was GV Wright.
I'm not 100 percent about that
now because there was a succession of people. Q. 645
Mr. Wright you think was the whip.
14 14:35:01 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
I'm just concerned.
Where are you getting
this knowledge? A.
Which knowledge?
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:35:10 20
21
I mean, you were never a member of the Fianna Fail party as a
councillor. A.
I was never a member of the Fianna Fail party per se, Chairman.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
councillors as to what went on or what didn't go on at these meetings or
14:35:23 25
28
We've had evidence directly from
whatever there was a whip or the extent of the whip.
26 27
So I'm just wondering.
presumably, just hearsay. A.
Well the -- sorry.
These meetings took place in the upper room in Conways, if
you'll forgive the description.
There was a party room as such.
29 14:35:51 30
But your knowledge is,
CHAIRMAN:
We know that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:35:51
14:35:59
102 1
A.
I was often in Conway's pub while these meetings were going on.
2
they concluded I would be told.
3
now.
4
adopted.
And after
I'm not specifically speaking about this one
But I would be told what had been decided.
What attitude had been
And we're for it or whatever.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
the --
8
All right.
So you didn't have direct knowledge of what went on in
A.
No, I didn't attend these meetings.
Q. 646
MR. MURPHY:
Never attended any such meeting.
9 14:36:09 10
All right.
So we're kind of anticipating November '93 back in
11
March when you are at these meetings with Mr. Lynn and Reilly.
12
that's what's going to happen is on the day.
13
go into the room upstairs in Conways and somebody and they'll agree things and
14
somebody will come out and tell you what's happened?
14:36:27 15
A.
Yeah.
But with respect, Mr. Murphy.
And you know
The Fianna Fail councillors will
You haven't followed through on what I
16
said.
It may not necessarily be that that meeting took place on that day.
17
That meeting could have taken place two days earlier.
18
Q. 647
That doesn't really matter does it?
19
A.
No it doesn't but it is of importance in this sense; that it would have been
14:36:44 20
known therefore maybe a day, two days, a week beforehand what the attitude of
21 22
the Fianna Fail party was going to be. Q. 648
All right.
But what I really want to know is, Mr. Dunlop, if that's the
23
situation -- your target now are these 25 or so Fianna Fail councillors for the
24
next eight months?
14:37:06 25
26
A.
Yeah.
Q. 649
And you know that more than likelihood on the previous practice they'll meet
27
some day or days before the council meeting and they'll agree a strategy which
28
will be which way they're going to vote on the various motions, isn't that
29
right?
14:37:21 30
A.
Correct. Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:37:22
14:37:28
103 1
Q. 650
And you'll be told all of that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 651
All right. Now, I presume a very influential person is the person you are
4
referring to as the whip?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 652
And I understand that Mr. GV Wright has been in evidence here.
I know he has.
7
But he has said that I think he referred to himself as being the leader of the
8
council.
9 14:37:37 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 653
Right.
A.
Yes.
12
And I take it that the leader would be very influential? Sorry.
necessary.
Just I really don't mean to delay this any longer than is But the leader of the group might be something of a figure head.
13
Q. 654
Okay.
14
A.
The whip is the person, what the -- that's why the word is the whip.
14:37:57 15
16
out the whip and he whips them in. Q. 655
17 18
Its like bringing hounds to the hunt.
I thought when I was putting to you about GV Wright being the leader that he was the whip?
A.
19 14:38:15 20
He takes
Whoever is actually the whip who goes out to Conways, who goes out to the hotel next door and says listen lads get in there's a vote on.
Q. 656
Mr. Dunlop, the whip is the important person?
21
A.
The whip is the important man. Yes.
22
Q. 657
Not the leader?
23
A.
Not really.
24
Q. 658
The whip.
14:38:24 25
Would you have known between March and November who the whip would
have been at the November meetings?
26
A.
Oh, yes I would at the time, yes.
27
Q. 659
Who was the whip?
28
A.
As I said to you earlier on, GV Wright's name comes to mind immediately.
29
Q. 660
Oh sorry it's still GV Wright?
A.
Yes.
14:38:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:38:36
14:38:52
104 1
Q. 661
Oh, right.
2
A.
I don't mean to suggest again that there was any further complications.
But
3
the whip -- when you are a whip at one particular time doesn't mean that you
4
stay whip all of the time.
5
years.
For example, Pat Dunne was the whip for years and
6
Q. 662
I'm only talking about '93?
7
A.
Exactly.
But it changes.
8
Q. 663
Uh-huh.
GV was a key person.
9
and Reilly.
14:39:15 10
GV was a key person. Now, Mr. Dunlop, at this meeting with Mr. Lynn
You've told me now when that's over you know, you've got the
Fianna Fail 25 or so councillors to concentrate on.
11
And it seems that the
whip was GV Wright?
12
A.
Subject to correction.
13
Q. 664
Subject to correction.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 665
Now, so they were going to be -- that was your brief then was it for the next
14:39:28 15
16
That's all correct, isn't it?
while then? You were the person going to discuss it with these people?
17
A.
I was going to approach them and talk to them about it.
18
Q. 666
All right.
19
And now the day after your meeting with Mr. Sweeney, for the first
time, you've a clear picture as to how many councillors are involved and how
14:39:53 20
many Fianna Fail people and what your brief is and getting to the heart of it
21
then.
You know roughly how much money you're going to have to spend to turn
22
this around for, on behalf of Monarch, isn't that right?
23
A.
Sorry, at which stage are you? Sorry.
24
Q. 667
This meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 668
You now you've to concentrate on the 25 Fianna Fail councillors?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 669
So you now have fairly good idea.
14:40:14 25
29 14:40:26 30
You must have a fairly good idea as to how
much you're going to have to spend? A.
No, not necessarily. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:40:28
14:40:36
105 1
Q. 670
Why?
2
A.
Because the system was in one sense relatively simple, you approach somebody,
3
councillor.
You talk to him about support or otherwise.
4
Q. 671
Yes.
5
A.
And you wait.
6
Q. 672
Yes.
7
A.
Or you don't wait.
8
Q. 673
Yes.
9
A.
-- inducement --
Q. 674
All right.
A.
Is referred to.
14:40:47 10
11 12 13
You're asked or money is mentioned or some sort of --
And then a discussion takes place or an agreement is made.
And that is when you know. Q. 675
14
All right.
And you had a team of 15 or so I think you said in the teams I
think you said yesterday of councillors to whom over the years of the
14:41:03 15
Development Plan you had paid money?
16
A.
Yes, 10 to 15. Yes.
17
Q. 676
And I think you said you did paid them in a lot of the --
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 677
I don't think you said in all of the developments but a lot of them?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 678
I think you said on other occasions that it was 1,000 or 2,000 pounds each?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 679
Is that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 680
So you paid either 1,000 or 2,000 to them?
A.
Yes.
14:41:12 20
14:41:18 25
26 27
And there were instances earlier than 1993 where other bigger larger
figures were paid.
28
Q. 681
All right.
29
A.
Five and three and ...
Q. 682
All right.
14:41:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:41:30
14:41:46
106 1
A.
And we've gone through that in another module.
2
Q. 683
And you know from your experience.
You could go down the list of those 25
3
councillors and say those people have never asked me before so I can cross them
4
out.
5
calculation in five minutes as to how many councillors are going to ask you for
6
money.
7
whether it's going to be 1,000 or 2,000.
8
were able to make the sums as to how much you're going to have to pay out?
9 14:42:02 10
11
These are the people who always ask me.
So you can make a simple
You are going to pay them, because you have to.
So I suggest to you that evening you
A.
No.
Q. 684
Why not?
A.
Again, going back to what I said to you earlier on.
12
approach.
And you know what,
Is that you make the
You talk to the individual councillor and you wait.
13
Q. 685
You are repeating yourself, Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I know I am because that's the answer to the question.
Q. 686
There's no reason.
16
A.
You've asked the same question again twice.
17
Q. 687
Please tell the intelligent people in this room how on that occasion you, the
14:42:16 15
18
experienced lobbiest, the person who has paid out a fortune, who has got a
19
fortune, huge experience of the Development Plan of all of these meetings and
14:42:34 20
how much has to be paid out, of vital importance has to be to anybody getting a
21
fee to something how much they are going to have to spend.
22
second day.
23
up against.
You have all of the information you need.
It's now the
You know what you're
You must know how much you're likely to spend on councillors.
24 14:42:51 25
For example you have to pay 25 councillors the Fianna Fail fellas and say it's
26
2,000 each you're going to have to spend 50 grand but you know that's never
27
happened.
28
your own family and everything, back then in March 1993, what conclusion you
29
came to about how much this was going to cost you?
14:43:12 30
A.
So please tell me, Mr. Dunlop, looking after your own business and
I've already answered the question.
And let me give you the answer again.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:43:16
14:43:35
107 1
No, in the mechanics of the operation you approached the councillors, you talk
2
to them.
3
in relation to support and by support I mean financial support.
4
discussion takes place, negotiation takes place.
5
Q. 688
6
You seek their support.
And if a discussion is initiated by them Then
Had you ever gone to Mr. Tony Fox, on your evidence, in any other module, in any other development, that he didn't ask you for money?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 689
Of the 25 how many did that apply to?
9
A.
Oh, gosh. Um, um, I would say -- something similar to the answer I gave you
14:43:57 10
yesterday.
10 to 15.
11
Q. 690
In other words, the core of the Fianna Fail councillors who were on your team?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 691
Let's take them at 15 -- let's take 12 for a second.
14 14:44:10 15
It's in the middle is it
between 10 and 15? A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 692
We'll take 12 of the councillors have always asked you to pay?
17
A.
Yes, in a large -- not all -- not always in the same development.
18
Q. 693
Okay.
19
A.
Particularly relating where the development was.
14:44:23 20
21
And the level of lobbying
that you would do with them and what you required them to do. Q. 694
22
I'm not going to ask you just at this moment.
If I put up a list on the board
of 25 councillors?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 695
And we came down to 10 to 15 that are your team?
A.
Yes.
Q. 696
And if we said.
14:44:35 25
26 27
Take just and you're saying that, you know, usually in the
developments they ask for money?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 697
And how many of them would be 1,000 how many of them would be 2,000?
A.
Well, as I said to you earlier there, the vast majority of them are in the
14:44:49 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:44:54
14:45:04
108 1
region of 1,000 it to 2,000.
2
Q. 698
All right.
3
A.
There were instances where five was paid and instances where three was paid.
4
Q. 699
For going to just for convenience leave that out for a second. I'm going to
5
leave that out and take it at 1,500 as an average between the 1,000 and 2 down.
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 700
1,500 Mr. Dunlop.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, this is me knowing nothing about this and
8
not having any interest in your financial affairs.
9
very few minutes how much you're bribing of these councillors is going to cost
14:45:23 10
in March '93.
And it's going to be an average of 1,500, because it's either
11
1,000 or 2,000.
12
Because that's the outer.
13
highest number of your team.
14
and a half.
14:45:53 15
Working out with you in a
So it's 1,500.
And we're going to take 15 councillors.
That's the highest.
That's the most -- that's the
All right? So that's 15 councillors.
I make that 22,500.
councillors to ask you for money.
15,000
You would normally expect 15 of these 25 You would normally give it to them.
You
16
would be giving them 1,000 or 2000 so that this development is going to cost
17
you in or around 22,500.
Is that right?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 701
No.
A.
I would not have made that calculation.
14:46:11 20
21 22
to you in relation to approaching them. Q. 702
23 24
I'm going back again to what I said
Please don't repeat for the sixth time the nonsense that you gave me as an answer ago a moment ago?
A.
Mr. Murphy --
14:46:24 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
Don't.
28 29 14:46:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
Wait now.
Could we just stop there.
Could Mr. Dunlop tell us in
relation to Monarch how he went about, assuming he did, how you went about Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:46:38
14:46:47
109 1
assessing the numbers of councillors that you might have to pay or would have
2
to pay and what sort of money might be involved.
3
A.
Right.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
decide --
7
A.
And then if we could go from there to the point where you actually
Yes.
8 9
CHAIRMAN -- who you are going to pay and then tell us how you went about that
14:46:57 10
11
and who said what to whom. A.
Yes.
Right.
That's relatively simple, Chairman.
12
I knew that I was going to be asked for money by some people, whether it was
13
going to be 10, 15, 1 or 2.
14
calculation.
14:47:18 15
I did not know.
So therefore I could not make a
As I said to Mr. Murphy, it depended on the actual interface
with councillors, individual councillors.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Just explain then what happened.
Yes.
19 14:47:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
How that came about then that interface?
With a councillor.
Well we're moving forward fairly rapidly as to the number
22
of councillors that I spoke to, which would have been the vast majority of the
23
Fianna Fail councillors on the council at the time and talked to them.
24
them know that I was involved.
14:47:48 25
Now involved with Monarch.
Let
And that whatever
needed to be done they would support it or continue to support it on the basis
26
that they had supported it heretofore.
27
two people.
In the event I was asked for money by
That, in summary, is what occurred.
28 29 14:48:10 30
Mr. Murphy's point about sitting down and calculating after my meeting with Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Reilly leaves out one key ingredient. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And that is,
14:48:15
14:48:25
110 1
evidence that I have already given to Mr. Murphy and to the Tribunal.
2
yes, I had a suspicion that some of these people were paid already.
That,
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But you say only two asked for money?
Correct.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
Does that mean the other whatever number it is --
Didn't.
9 14:48:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN -- didn't ask for money? A.
Correct.
Only two asked and the others didn't.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
All right.
Go on.
Is that okay?
14:48:38 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
So what happened then?
Well then I agreed with the two.
I had a discussion with the two.
18
being Tony Fox and Colm McGrath.
19
a comment in relation to Monarch to the effect that they were pretty mean.
14:49:02 20
I had a discussion with them.
The two Mr. Fox made
Which I understood to mean that there had been some discussion or negotiation
21
or an attempt by him to get money from Monarch prior to my involvement and that
22
he may have got some.
23
Mr. McGrath's case, Mr. McGrath entered into negotiation and we ended up at
24
two.
But I had no evidence to that effect.
And in
Mr. McGrath was looking for more than what I was prepared to give him.
14:49:29 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
27 28
Q. 703
29 14:49:53 30
MR. MURPHY:
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you say you paid these two councillors.
what happened when you went to them and I understand that. A.
Yes, sorry, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That's
14:49:53
14:50:06
111 1
Q. 704
And I understand the situation can change when you go to them.
You are going
2
to lobby the 25 Fianna Fail councillors.
3
your money, maybe less.
4
businessman's mind as to what the expenses will be out of his fee?
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 705
And he's on day two.
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 706
He knows the picture.
9
A.
Yep.
Q. 707
Page 7263.
11
A.
What's this.
12
Q. 708
I think if I'm right.
14:50:35 10
13 14
Maybe more than your 15 will ask for
All I'm talking about is the calculation in the
Now, could I have, please, page 7263.
I hope I'm right now.
Mr. Dunlop --
The following motion
proposed -- this is November '93 the big meeting. A.
14:50:53 15
This is the motion presented by Councillor Marren to increase the density? Sorry.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
19 14:51:03 20
Yes, it is it is, yes. This is the motion, it was the final motion that opened the door for the higher density, is this correct?
Q. 709
21 22
Yes.
MR. MURPHY:
It's the motion that reversed the Barrett motion.
Is that
right? That's what I'm looking for anyway. A.
I'll give it to you.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:51:12 25
Mr. Murphy, this is the 11th of November.
This the Donal
Marren/Betty Coffey motion.
26 27 28
MR. MURPHY: A.
Yes.
Thank you.
Judge Faherty is right.
It is the motion to delete change three.
29 14:51:20 30
MR. MURPHY:
All right. That's enough.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:51:21
14:51:36
112 1
A.
And restore the high density that the Manager was requesting.
2
Q. 710
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 711
In November '93 and as a result of that, we are now back in a situation.
5 A.
Yes.
7
Q. 712
Right.
8
14:51:50 10
It's
successful Monarch and it's 44 -- it's four houses per acre?
6
9
This motion is passed 44 to 27.
So now this is -- this is the high point.
passed we're very happy.
I mean, when this is
Isn't that right?
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 713
Now, just as quickly as you can, Mr. Dunlop.
I want you to look at those, the
11
names of those who voted for.
12
And I want you to call out only the names of the Fianna Fail councillors, the
13
15 or so on your team.
14 14:52:14 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 714
Now, just go through it.
16 17 18
The 44 is for, isn't it? The 44 who voted for.
Okay. Start with S Ardagh, go on to C Boland.
Go through
each line as quickly as you can. A.
Well, Ardagh is Fianna Fail; the answer is no. Cathal Boland is --
19 14:52:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
I'm just concerned.
We're concerned about the term "team".
mean, when you say" team" you're talking about Mr. Dunlop's team.
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
24 14:52:33 25
CHAIRMAN:
Just what do you mean to suggest, Mr. Dunlop, by that term?
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
This is the core team.
This is his team.
28
Fianna Fail 25 or so Fianna Fail County Councillors to whom regularly in
29
developments, Mr. Dunlop has paid money.
14:52:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Core team of the
I
14:52:51
14:53:00
113 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 715
MR. MURPHY:
4
A.
Okay.
5
All right.
That's fine.
Clear? Yes.
Ardagh Fianna Fail.
Cathal Boland Fine Gael.
No.
No.
6
Q. 716
Don't bother reading.
7
A.
Sorry I thought you meant go through each of them individually.
8 9
that.
Pick a team?
A.
T Cosgrave.
11
Q. 718
What line is Fox on?
12
A.
Three.
13
Q. 719
Three.
14
A.
Cyril Gallagher.
Q. 720
Sorry.
14:53:33 15
16
Tony Fox.
Thank you.
Cyril Gallagher.
Oh, yes.
Sean Gilbride.
Thank you. Tom Hand.
I haven't marked any of those.
Fianna Fail.
Fox is the only one I've taken.
A.
Do you want all of the team or just the Fianna Fail team.
18
Q. 721
Fianna Fail team?
19
A.
Okay.
Q. 722
Oh wait now Mr. Dunlop for one second.
Let's start again. A early when we were talking about the
21
meeting of the 9th of March between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
22
there was a Fianna Fail team?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 723
Are there others?
A.
As per --
26
Q. 724
Don't mind --
27
A.
No, no, the Chairman asked you a question.
14:53:58 25
Are
you calling those names out as people of your team?
17
14:53:48 20
You said
Sorry.
Q. 717
14:53:14 10
Just go along until you find one of your team?
I understood
28 29 14:54:07 30
CHAIRMAN:
I just want us all to understand what is meant by the term "team".
There's a Fianna Fail party. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:54:09
14:54:18
114 1
A.
Yes.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Now, when you say "team".
Sorry, Chairman.
Mr. Murphy is the man who mentioned team.
My understanding
5
of what Mr. Murphy mentioned by team is the people right across the political
6
divide to whom I ever gave money in support of their vote or whom --
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who you would normally approach.
Correct.
14:54:29 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13 14
Correct.
And you might end up giving them money or not giving them money.
That includes people outside of Fianna Fail.
That's why I began
the way I did. So, Mr. Murphy, do you want me to stick to the -Q. 725
14:54:47 15
MR. MURPHY:
No, I don't, Mr. Dunlop, because for one second I'm going to
divide it up.
16
A.
Good.
17
Q. 726
Because when I was asking you earlier.
What I put to you was out of the 70 or
18
so councillors as a result of the disaster in 1991 it came to 25 or so Fianna
19
Fail councillors.
14:54:59 20
around 15.
21 22
Of which you had a Fianna Fail councillor team of in or
Now, that's what I understood.
And I believe you understood me.
Do you understand it now? A.
No, I don't understand it now.
I do understand it now.
23
trying to be obstreperous or anything like that.
24
to councillors you asked me the other day.
14:55:23 25
councillors to whom I paid money.
But and I'm not
When you mentioned payments
I said 10 to 15 people,
They were right across the board.
26
want me to specifically deal with Fianna Fail ones, which I will do now.
27
then if you want me to deal with others.
28
Q. 727
No, I don't, Mr. Dunlop, because I can make it simpler.
29
A.
Okay.
Q. 728
Because at the meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
14:55:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
If you And
You leave that meeting.
14:55:41
14:55:50
115 1
Your brief is to persuade the Fianna Fail councillors.
2
A.
All right.
3
Q. 729
Everybody else is left to somebody else?
4
A.
Forget everyone else except Fianna Fail.
5
Q. 730
Brilliant.
6
A.
And deal only with those people in Fianna Fail that I ever gave money to and I
7 8 9
expected that I might need to pay money to. Q. 731
Just one second.
Does that mean the team that I am referring to which is
councillors --
14:56:02 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
There is one thing.
We don't want people named who have no idea
12
that they are going to be named or haven't been named.
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
No. I understand that these are on the witness list.
I hope.
14:56:13 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Well we don't know.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
19 14:56:18 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Isn't it simpler to approach it on the basis of who he had in mind
in relation to Monarch?
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
That is what I'm talking about, Chairman.
Yeah.
24 14:56:29 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
28
all right.
Chairman, sorry.
If I put the question to you to see if it's
29 14:56:35 30
Excuse me.
I want to ask Mr. Dunlop.
I'm talking about his team.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I'm not
14:56:41
14:56:56
116 1
talking about the party.
I'm talking about the Fianna Fail councillors who,
2
to whom he has paid money regularly.
3 4
And I understood that was 15 or so councillors.
5
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
6 7
MR. MURPHY:
In other words, 15 or so Fianna Fail councillors to whom he
8
regularly paid money.
9 14:57:04 10
CHAIRMAN:
No, I don't think so.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
questioning was arising from the 9th of March, as I understand it, the meeting.
14
And the discussions held with Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn.
14:57:19 15
I think in fairness, Mr. Murphy.
In response, all of your
And Mr. Dunlop has
said here and in fairness to yourself that his brief, if you like, was to go
16
out and deal with Fianna Fail County Councillors.
But in the course of those
17
answers he gave an answer to you.
18
the course of the Development Plan 10 to 15 County Councillors.
And my own note said that he had paid over
19 14:57:37 20
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Though he didn't specifically designate those as being all
23
Fianna Fail County Councillors.
24
have arisen as a result.
And I think that's where some confusion might
14:57:46 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
That's my mistake.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
as a result.
14:57:52 30
A.
Is that -- I think in fairness, some confusion may have arisen
That's correct, absolutely correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:57:53
14:58:13
117 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Well a solution might be if Mr. Dunlop looks at the list and
3
identifies those who he says he approached seeking support in relation to
4
Monarch.
5
any of the councillors you can name in those circumstances.
And, I mean, there's no ... I mean, there's no shame involved for
6 7
Q. 732
MR. MURPHY:
8
A.
Yes.
9 14:58:33 10
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop, could you answer the Chairman then?
Could I make a suggestion to you.
speed is.
The Chairman, again, for ease of
My answer, if I was responsible for the totality of the Fianna Fail
team, to use Mr. Murphy's phrase, or the Fianna Fail Party, the Fianna Fail
11
members of the council, that would mean from the outset, from the meeting with
12
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, that I would go to virtually all of those and as I
13
said this morning, there was an agreement between Mr. Lynn and myself and
14
Mr. Reilly that he would keep up the link with Don Lydon because he had that
14:58:59 15
relationship.
Don Lydon is Fianna Fail.
That does not necessarily mean that
16
I would not have had a chat with Don Lydon about Cherrywood.
17
be stupid to suggest otherwise.
Because it would
18 19 14:59:24 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Mr. Chairman, if I may -- Gerard Humphreys on behalf of
Senator Lydon.
21 22
With respect, I would request that the question that is asked be more specific.
23
Because to group people into a team in a situation like this where it would be
24
some days or weeks before we get an opportunity to clarify it.
14:59:29 25
cause further damage, particularly to members of the Oireachtas.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We're going to drop the term "team".
28 29
Will only
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Please.
14:59:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:59:37
14:59:46
118 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
Fianna Fail connection or to deal with the Fianna Fail councillors?
3
A.
No.
Sorry.
Can you -- you say that you were engaged really because of your
I see the point you're making, yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
Can you identified the ones that you did not approach in any shape or form
7
seeking support? No mention of money now.
8
A.
Can you -- of all of the Fianna Fail councillors that were there.
Okay.
9 14:59:57 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Can you identify the ones, if there are any, of the Fianna Fail
councillors who you did not approach seeking support from Monarch? A.
Okay.
I think Chairman, it's because of the World Cup that we've got involved
13
in this, Mr. Murphy, the word "team".
14
not approach him.
15:00:22 15
Q. 733
No.
Sean Ardagh, I don't think so. I did
Betty Coffey.
Yes.
Who are you talking to?
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Ardagh you said no. No.
Yes.
18 19 15:00:28 20
Q. 734
MR. MURPHY:
You dropped your voice?
A.
Oh sorry, I dropped my voice.
I beg your pardon. No.
Right, let's start again.
21
Sean Ardagh who is Fianna Fail.
In other words, when I say no I mean I
22
did not approach him or lobby him in relation to the Monarch property.
23 24 15:00:43 25
Um, Seamus Brock.
No.
Q. 735
What about Boland and Brady?
26
A.
They are Fine Gael.
27
Q. 736
Oh yes.
28
A.
Oh, Mr. Murphy, please.
Sorry.
29 15:00:50 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop, there's no need for that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Mr. Dunlop, if you go
15:00:54
15:01:03
119 1
through the list identifying those in Fianna Fail who you did not contact in
2
relation to or lobby.
3
A.
Well Chairman, with respect that is what I am trying to do.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
7
That's history now.
Sean Ardagh, no. Hanrahan.
Start again.
Seamus Brock, no.
Mr. Ardagh.
Hannon, no.
Sorry that's the wrong
What's his first name?
8 9 15:01:33 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who are you talking about?
Hanrahan, no.
11 12
MR. MURPHY:
13
A.
Is this?
14
Q. 737
MR. MURPHY:
Hanrahan?
What about Mr. Fox and?
15:01:42 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
No.
These are ones he didn't contact.
Mr. Chairman, can I please.
This is like driving me crazy.
18 19
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
15:01:51 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Let's.
You said Mr. Hanrahan.
Go on.
Starting from the beginning.
23 24 15:01:59 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
26
No, no, no we won't start from the beginning.
Are you asking me Chairman to name those people who I did not approach in Fianna Fail.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And start with Mr. Hanrahan
That was my understanding.
15:02:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:02:08
15:02:15
120 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Now, who is the next?
Mr. Murphy, don't interrupt me now.
3 4 5
A.
CHAIRMAN:
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop.
Ardagh, no.
Brock, no.
CHAIRMAN:
And are you saying of all of the others there, you did --
Hannon, no.
Hanrahan, no.
That's it.
6 7 8
A.
I made some -- I made some contact.
I made some approaches to them.
9 15:03:02 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
On the basis of my involvement.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
lobby?
15:03:09 15
A.
And the non-fianna Fail members.
You named those that you did
That I did lobby.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
19
Right.
Okay.
Anne Devitt.
15:04:08 20
The non-fianna Fail members that you did lobby.
Mary Elliott.
Therese Ridge.
Tom Hand.
Olivia Mitchell.
John O'Halloran.
I think that's it.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
are the against --
24
A.
All right.
Could you go to the next page then.
7264.
These
Yes.
15:04:19 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN -- are there any there that you did make contact with from any party? A.
From any party?
28 29 15:04:26 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Right.
Okay.
Yes. Um.
Sean Barrett.
Larry Butler.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
No, not Eamonn Gilmore.
15:04:43
15:05:08
121 1
Stanley Lydon.
Who is that sorry? No.
Pat Rabbitte, definitely not.
2 3 4
A.
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry?
Um, Shatter.
No.
That's it.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And of that group, two you say asked for money?
Yes.
8 9 15:05:20 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
That's -- and they are who?
Fox and McGrath.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
13 14
Q. 738
15:05:43 15
MR. MURPHY:
Does going through that list help you as to what might have been
in your mind as to how much it would have cost you back on the 9th of March,
16
Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
Not particularly.
18
Q. 739
No.
19 15:06:21 20
Mr. Dunlop, did somebody come back to you at some stage about Mr.
Monahan? A.
21
About Mr. Monahan? Um, in relation to? I presume you mean in relation to the role he was playing that nobody could identify or control.
22
Q. 740
Correct.
23
A.
Correct.
24
No.
But as is evident from my statement and from the level of
diary references in relation to meetings with Monarch.
15:06:49 25
Mr. Monahan attended at least one.
As I have said
But nobody else came back to me in
26
relation to what -- other than -- other than ongoing comments which continued
27
on for quite a period.
28
Q. 741
All right.
29
A.
As to, you know, we hope Phil doesn't --
Q. 742
Rock the boat?
15:07:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:07:09
15:07:25
122 1
A.
Well it was a little more graphic than that.
2
Q. 743
Right. Okay. So.
So I think then probably what's happening is that there
3
isn't a quick resolution of that problem.
4
November '93 at the same time as you're doing your job?
5
A.
6 7
So that's travelling towards
Yes, I don't think there was ever a resolution of that problem if I hasten to add, Mr. Murphy.
Q. 744
Okay.
I take it at some stage it was resolved to the stage that the united
8
front was finalised and you were able to present to the councillors that
9
Monarch would be satisfied by four houses to the acre?
15:07:42 10
A.
11
Yes.
I think, I think that the role of Liam Lawlor and his relationship with
Philip Monahan had some calming effect on Mr. Monahan.
12
Q. 745
Yes.
13
A.
Oh, yes, I did.
14 15:08:04 15
Did you ever discuss this with Mr. Lawlor? Mr. Lawlor was at a number of, quite a number of meetings at
which other members of Monarch were present. Q. 746
All right.
So at some point.
16
November '93.
17
four houses per acre.
I take it getting close to the date in
Monarch had a united front, an agreement in relation to the Is that right?
18
A.
Yes, I would say.
19
Q. 747
Well, for example, presumably, these councillors who were very concerned were
15:08:23 20
Yes, I would say so, yes.
asking you when you were lobbying them well what does Monarch want?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 748
Were you saying that you'd be happy with four houses per acre?
23
A.
We'd be happy with what the original had been had this hiatus not occurred.
24
Sorry, I would never have used the word hiatus.
15:08:44 25
happened.
26
Q. 749
That's four houses to the acre?
27
A.
Whatever increased density could be achieved.
28
Q. 750
Okay.
29
A.
Plus other --
Q. 751
Yeah.
15:08:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That this trauma never had
15:08:53
15:09:12
123 1
A.
-- what, I described before lunch as inducements, like a district centre.
2
Q. 752
I'm not sure if I'm correct in this but I'm going to take you, Mr. Dunlop, as
3
agreeing that some time before the date of the meeting in November '93 the
4
Monarch got its act together.
5
say to them, councillors, who would be interested in the difficulty, that
6
Monarch knows what it wants and look, we're really trying to get four per acre
7
you know and we'll be happy with that.
You and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were able to
8
A.
Something along those lines, yes.
9
Q. 753
Now, so eventually that gets resolved anyway to some extent, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 754
All right.
12
A.
No, I won't make any comment here.
13
Q. 755
Now, at the same time, your lobbying is going on.
15:09:33 10
14
swing the people who voted.
15:09:49 15
to me.
The crucial thing is to
Sorry, it's to hold on to as you rightly point on
It's to hold on to the 27.
I'm on the wrong motion.
It's to hold
16
on to the people who voted against Mr. Barrett's motion in May 1992 and
17
convince the people who voted for Mr. Barrett's motion to come on your side.
18
That's the job.
19
A.
15:10:15 20
Well the job is to use what's on the record, which is one per acre, as to open the door to get the increased density.
So whoever voted whichever way --
21
Q. 756
Yes.
22
A.
-- whoever is doubtful, for whatever reasons, local, political or otherwise.
23
Look it, we can assure you that you're going to get a district centre or we are
24
going to assure you that you'll get a science park or we'll assure you that
15:10:34 25
26
you'll get X Y or Z, whatever is required to make them less unhappy. Q. 757
27
Yeah. Mr. Dunlop, in November '93 the motion to confirm Mr. Barrett's motion failed.
28
A.
Yes, that is correct -- wait now.
29
Q. 758
How do you keep having to look at this every time, Mr. Dunlop?
15:10:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:10:55
15:11:09
124 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well he has to --
Mr. Murphy, with the greatest of respect you have fall fallen into the trap a
3
couple of times.
4
not --
5
CHAIRMAN:
6
A.
Chairman, I do apologise. circumstances.
8
Barrett's motion.
15:11:26 10
11
13
Now, sorry, Mr. Murphy.
You did say what in relation to Sean
Sean Barrett's motion --
I wasn't talking about that at all?
A.
All right.
Q. 760
I was asking that in relation to a motion in November '93 reversed Mr. Barrett's motion.
A.
14 15:11:36 15
It's very difficult to carry on in these
Q. 759
12
I'm
Witnesses are entitled to look at.
7
9
So try not to get me into the trap as well with you.
Yes.
To de -- yes, that's correct.
A motion in the name of Marren and
Coffey? Q. 761
I don't want any information on it.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 762
And then in fact at that point we go back to the 1991 draft plan and it would
18 19
Isn't that right?
mean four houses per acre? A.
Yes.
Q. 763
If there was no further motions?
21
A.
If there was no further motion.
22
Q. 764
And in fact, what happens is another motion comes in which reduces what would
15:11:47 20
23 24 15:12:00 25
otherwise have happened four houses per acre to the Monarch lands? A.
Yes.
Q. 765
And it makes Monarch lands four houses per acre and the rest one house per
26
acre?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 766
So that final motion is an exclusively pro-Monarch victory?
29
A.
Yes, it is.
Q. 767
Now, all I want -- that's fine.
15:12:16 30
Now, all I want to do, Mr. Dunlop, just for a
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:12:21
15:12:34
125 1
second is.
You had to -- that was your goal.
2
you wanted to achieve that.
3
of Mr. Barrett's motion, isn't that right?
And between March and November
In particular you wanted to achieve the reversal
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 768
And to do that you have to talk to -- your brief was to talk to the Fianna Fail
6
councillors.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 769
And your important person was Mr. Wright because he was the leader.
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 770
Or the whip.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 771
Now, after your meeting with Mr. Lynn and Reilly did you then go and meet
15:12:43 10
13
Mr. Wright? Or what did you do, Mr. Dunlop?
14
the steps you took vis-a-vis the councillors to get the success you achieved in
15:12:58 15
16
November '93? A.
17
Yes.
Well in summary form.
I would have either made direct contact, rang
them up --
18
Q. 772
Please don't say "would have."
19
A.
Sorry.
15:13:14 20
21
Did ring them up, arrange to meet them.
Q. 773
Mr. Dunlop, who was the first councillor.
A.
Can't tell you that.
24
Q. 774
No idea?
A.
Can't tell you that.
26
Q. 775
All right.
27
A.
I would like to but you can't.
28
Q. 776
Was there a group of them.
15:13:34 30
The first Fianna Fail councillor
that you rang after the 9th of March to discuss Cherrywood with?
23
29
Met them in the council
with --
22
15:13:24 25
You take the Tribunal back to
Would there have been maybe it's difficult to say
whether it was Mr. Fox or Mr. Wright.
Would there have been -- can you give
me your top? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:13:35
15:13:41
126 1
A.
Sorry.
2
Q. 777
Top three?
3
A.
Well if you're ... top three.
4
Q. 778
Well whatever the appropriate number is?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Well.
Certainly.
Gallagher.
Tony Fox, Colm McGrath, Sean Gilbride, Cyril
People of that nature.
7
Q. 779
All right.
8
A.
Who had -- with whom I had regular contact.
9
Q. 780
All right.
15:13:59 10
have waited until the summer, maybe you were busy with some other project or
11 12
what? A.
13 14
And would you say you approached those in March '93 or would you
No, I can't say that I approached them in March '93 but can I say to you that very shortly after my appointment by Monarch.
Q. 781
Yes.
A.
And after my meeting with --
16
Q. 782
Yeah.
17
A.
-- Richard Lynn and Phil it became known.
18
Q. 783
Yeah.
19
A.
That I had become involved.
15:14:11 15
15:14:21 20
21
afternoon. Q. 784
Yes.
And as I have already said to you earlier in the
At least one person expressed satisfaction.
That's great.
Does that mean that you didn't approach them.
They
22
came to you is that what it was when you say it became known immediately.
23
Maybe they queued up to you looking for the money?
24
A.
15:14:39 25
No, no, no.
You have an extraordinary ability to look at things from another
perspective.
26
Phil.
But no, what happened was I was appointed.
Richard and Phil agreed a broad strategy as to who should do what.
27
Q. 785
We know that.
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 786
Answer the question, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Right.
15:14:53 30
I met Richard and
It was -- it was virtually immediately known. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:14:59
15:15:03
127 1
Q. 787
We've had that.
2
A.
That I was on board.
3
Q. 788
We've had that?
4
A.
Right.
5
Q. 789
Mr. Dunlop, when did you approximately approach your top few.
6
You've named
off a list of a few of them?
7
A.
I would say within a week or ten days.
8
Q. 790
All right.
9
Mr. Dunlop, will you please tell me for a moment, at what point
you decided 25,000 wasn't enough and you wanted to go back to Mr. Sweeney to
15:15:21 10
get an extra whatever it was, 15?
11
A.
Um, that I cannot tell you specifically.
12
Q. 791
Well now you've got to, Mr. Dunlop, because what's happening now is you've
13 14 15:15:34 15
agreed 25,000 -A.
Yeah.
Q. 792
-- in March.
16
You now know everything about it.
You know now all you have to
do is to talk to at most the 25 Fianna Fail councillors?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 793
And this is the job you've done in a number of other developments.
19
know -- it's not an enormous job.
15:16:00 20
These are people.
paid money on previous occasions?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 794
So it doesn't seem to me that it's now a very big job.
24
26
29 15:16:34 30
So if you go back to
Mr. Sweeney in, whenever it was, a month or two? A.
Yeah.
Q. 795
To give this extra money.
27 28
You have -- we're not
allowed to use the word "team", but within the 25 there's a core to whom you've
21
15:16:17 25
So you
It was either because it was going to cost you more
money or the job was a much bigger job than you anticipated. A.
Well, it's certainly not the latter. latter.
In the sense that -- I shouldn't say the
Not in sense that it was going to cost me more money.
As I said to
you yesterday, that it was more complicated than we thought at initial stages Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:16:40
15:16:54
128 1
because of the -- the um, um, um, what's the word.
2
Q. 796
Well, with Mr. Monahan.
3
A.
Yes, and the disaffection that there was amongst certain parties in the
4 5
council. Q. 797
I understand that.
You are not going to be doing anything with Mr. Monahan.
6
You may have to do a little bit more convincing of people, of councillors that
7
Mr. Monahan is on side.
So it might mean a few more meetings or a bit more
8
persuasion or whatever.
But I cannot for the life of me, see how that means
9
suddenly in May, April or May you need another 15,000.
15:17:16 10
the end of the year you need more.
And then come towards
At the end of the day you need 25,000 has
11
to go up to 80,000.
12
in this brief over these eight months that meant that 25,000 should go to
13
85,000?
14
A.
15:17:35 15
Would you please explain to the three judges what it was
Yes well I think I answered that yesterday in relation to another question. Was two things.
One the difficulties that have arisen in relation to support
16
among various councillors.
17
that if this was successful this was going to be of major benefit to Monarch.
18
And that I should have part of the success.
19
Q. 798
15:18:03 20
21
And at what had happened from the May 1992.
Tell us as much as you know, Mr. Dunlop, about your meeting with Mr. Fox for the purpose of obtaining his support for the motion?
A.
Yes.
Well I met Mr. Fox regularly.
I cannot say specifically that I met him
22
in a specific location in relation to this particular development.
23
approached him.
24 15:18:25 25
I
Q. 799
You don't know where?
A.
The likelihood is it was in the council because I had arrangements with Mr. Fox
26 27
And
to meet him in a variety of locations. Q. 800
When you say in the council.
When would the date of that -- would that be
28
around the time of the meeting in November '93 or would it be in May 93 I don't
29
know?
15:18:42 30
A.
No, no, no.
What I said to you earlier on is that I would have begun to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:18:48
15:18:59
129 1
approach councillors within a week or ten days.
2
Q. 801
All right.
3
A.
So the likelihood is.
4
I'm not putting it any stronger than that.
That I
would have been in touch with Tony Fox and the other people that I have named.
5
Q. 802
Yes.
6
A.
Very early on.
7
Q. 803
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you must have, I suggest to you, a clear recollection of
8 9 15:19:10 10
Mr. Fox because he was very much on your books, isn't that right? A.
Oh, yes, he was, yes.
Q. 804
And you knew him very well from a business point of view, from these meetings,
11
the council and the developments and so on, isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 805
And you paid him on a number of occasions?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 806
And you knew at this stage when you went to meet him for the first time that he
15:19:21 15
16
was one of the people holding out for the higher density I think, isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
19
Yes.
His attitude -- his attitude was, as I think I said yesterday, not
aggressive but, I mean, he would be for going for the whole hog, whatever the
15:19:43 20
whole hog has to be.
21
Q. 807
Like Mr. Monahan?
22
A.
Yes, and Mr. McGrath.
23
Q. 808
Yes.
24
A.
Both of them.
Q. 809
Now, you must have a clear recollection of having a chat with him?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 810
When these difficulties would be exchanged and you'd be trying to reassure him
15:19:48 25
28
over the months and so on over Mr. Monahan's position.
29
well, you know, you knew this person.
15:20:08 30
And you must remember
You knew how easily he would likely to
come on side in different developments and so on? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:20:11
15:20:30
130 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 811
And so how can you not remember where it was, the meeting about Cherrywood to
3 4
persuade Mr. Fox to agree to the more modest density? A.
5
Well, hardly a week passed that I would not have discussed matters with Tony Fox.
6
Q. 812
All right.
7
A.
And, you know, you have summer months. As I said to you already, that within a
8
week or ten days I would have begun the process.
9
parallel it was known or became known via others that I was involved.
15:20:43 10
Q. 813
All right.
11
A.
So I would have been in touch with Tony Fox.
12
Q. 814
Yeah.
13
A.
At a relatively early stage after.
14
Q. 815
All right.
A.
The --
16
Q. 816
You met him anyway on some occasion?
17
A.
Yeah, can we.
18
Q. 817
We don't know where and we don't?
19
A.
Can we take a break.
Q. 818
Sorry.
A.
Just two minutes.
15:20:51 15
15:20:59 20
21
Contemporaneously and in
Could we break, Chairman?
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 15:21:18 25
26
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I wonder, Sir, before Mr. Murphy resumes with Mr. Dunlop.
29 15:29:12 30
Just for housekeeping purposes.
Could I indicate something that I've just
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:29:17
15:29:27
131 1
been told very shortly.
Mr. Dunlop is not available to the Tribunal
2
Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of next week.
3 4
It's likely that Mr. Murphy will go through I'd say until the close of business
5
this evening.
6
behind me that there's at least a day if not two days in the cross-examination
7
of Mr. Dunlop.
And it would also appear likely from my colleague sitting
8 9 15:29:39 10
If Mr. Murphy were to conclude this evening, Tuesday would be available for cross-examination.
But I understand that one of my colleagues who, based on
11
the predictions we have been making, has taken up other commitments for next
12
week and wishes to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
13 14 15:29:55 15
16
So there will have to be some adjustments made to the schedule in relation to that.
Because it doesn't look like that it's now going to be possible to
conclude Mr. Dunlop's evidence in a piece, as it were.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Well is it suggested that Mr. Dunlop would spend Tuesday here being
19
cross-examined?
15:30:08 20
21
MS. DILLON:
By whoever is available to cross-examine him.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
future.
And then, yes, he would return on some date to be agreed in the
15:30:17 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I'm not suggesting anything.
27
so that my colleagues behind me who don't know it would have an opportunity to
28
consider it because they may wish to say something to the Tribunal about it
29
maybe at the close of business this evening.
15:30:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I'm really just telling you this
15:30:28
15:30:35
132 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
Dunlop.
All right. Well we will try and facilitate everyone, including Mr.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Yes. May it please you, Sir.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
So we'll deal with it at four o'clock.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Fox.
9 15:30:47 10
Q. 819
No.
Okay.
You don't know where you met
11
him and you don't know the date.
12
remember having a chat with him about this matter and about the difficulties on
13
both sides?
14
Just but tell us about -- I mean, but do you
A.
Yes, I do.
Q. 820
And at what stage, how long was that chat?
16
A.
15 minutes.
17
Q. 821
And at what stage did he say something about money?
18
A.
Fairly soon after the conversation began and he identified me as the person
15:31:09 15
19 15:31:25 20
operating for Monarch. Q. 822
And it was no surprise to you that he was going to be looking for money?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 823
What did he look for?
23
A.
Um, he said I'll have to be -- you'll have to give me something for this and I
24
said fine what did he want and he said what are you offering and I offered him
15:31:41 25
2,000 and he said grand.
26
Q. 824
Was that before or after Mr. McGrath?
27
A.
That was before Mr. McGrath.
28
Q. 825
And would you remember if you went, approached any other councillor first for
29 15:31:55 30
their support before you agreed to pay Mr. Fox 2,000? A.
It is likely that I did again in the circumstances of meetings in Dublin County Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:32:00
15:32:30
133 1
Council.
It is likely that I did have discussions with others before Mr. Fox.
2
Q. 826
Was Mr. Fox one of the main people to go and to get on side?
3
A.
Well Mr. Fox, yes.
And can I just again for the purposes of clarification.
4
When Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn, sorry, we're all getting tired.
When Mr. Lynn
5
and Mr. Reilly and myself discussed who would look after what allocation of
6
councillors, reference was made to the support that would come from --
7
Q. 827
Yeah.
8
A.
-- reference was made to the support, the strong support that would be coming
9 15:32:51 10
from various councillors. Q. 828
Yes.
11
A.
Well Mr. Fox -- Mr. Fox had been lobbied.
12
Q. 829
Yes.
13
A.
By Mr.--
14
Q. 830
Yes?
A.
By Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
16
Q. 831
And you'd have a high suspicion that he was paid by them?
17
A.
Well I would have had some suspicion from the remark that he passed to me that
15:33:07 15
18 19 15:33:20 20
Was Mr. Fox an important person to get behind this?
I've already -Q. 832
That Mr. Lynn passed?
A.
No, no, no that Mr. Fox passed.
21
That I alluded to when I was answering the
Chairman.
22
Q. 833
Yes.
23
A.
In relation to, you know, that they were pretty mean.
24
Q. 834
Yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 835
Why would it be necessary to pay him money then, I mean he voted against
15:33:32 25
26
All right.
Mr. Fox had voted against Mr. Barrett's motion.
27
Mr. Barrett's motion and you you are now wondering, you are now hoping that
28
he'll stay on side and discussing it with him and presumably tactics.
29
did you not --
15:33:48 30
A.
And why
Because that's not what Monarch wanted -- was one house to the acre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:33:53
15:34:04
134 1
Q. 836
Mr. Fox voted against that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 837
Yes.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 838
Doesn't matter along with anything.
6
A.
Along with a lot of others.
7
Q. 839
Just stay with this now for a send precisely?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 840
Mr. Fox is a king pin as far as you're concerned?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 841
He has voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 842
You have a high suspicion he was paid and probably handsomely by Monarch?
14
A.
That is not something I can say.
Q. 843
You have a high suspicion that he was paid by Monarch?
16
A.
I have a suspicion, yes.
17
Q. 844
Now, he asked you for money?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 845
I mean, why do you even approach him?
A.
He is, from experience, dealing with Tony Fox, he is relatively important in
15:34:13 10
15:34:24 15
15:34:36 20
If you -- Mr. Fox voted against Sean Barrett's motion.
Along with, where is --
He's on side.
21
the context of, and I've already given evidence in another module in which he
22
has said that, you know, not that he controls other people but that he would
23
speak to other people within the --
24
Q. 846
All right.
A.
He never made that clear.
26
Q. 847
All right.
27
A.
Yes, I did.
28
Q. 848
When?
29
A.
After the vote in November.
Q. 849
After the vote in November.
15:34:56 25
15:35:05 30
Who was he going to speak to that would help?
And did you pay him 2,000?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:35:06
15:35:10
135 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 850
Not before?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 851
I thought they always insisted on it before?
5
A.
They didn't always insist on it.
6
Q. 852
Did Mr. Fox not always get paid before?
7
A.
Yes, sometimes he did.
8
Q. 853
So you paid him afterwards?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 854
When, where?
A.
As I said in my statement I paid one of the locations, I cannot specifically
15:35:22 10
11 12
tell you which one.
13
him he was paid.
14
Q. 855
15:35:37 15
That's fine.
But when I entered into an agreement with Tony Fox to pay
And so after the vote he's done the business.
honour your side of it.
16
locations.
Sometimes I agreed, sometimes I disagreed.
2,000.
You don't know where.
You are going to
One of the
And did you turn up by appointment to meet him or did you --
17
A.
I would have arranged to meet him, yes.
18
Q. 856
Just to pay him this figure.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 857
Nothing else.
21
A.
A few what, a few councillors?
22
Q. 858
No.
23
A.
No, not in this instance.
24
Q. 859
No. How do you know?
A.
That is how it occurred.
Q. 860
How do you know, Mr. Dunlop? You don't know where, you don't know when.
15:35:47 20
15:35:55 25
26 27
Would there be a few of them together?
A few payments?
do you know in this instance you just paid him a one off?
28
A.
Well an arrangement between us in relation to meeting to make the payment.
29
Q. 861
All right.
A.
So you make the payment.
15:36:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
How
15:36:10
15:36:27
136 1
Q. 862
Uh-huh.
And tell us how you paid him?
2
A.
Cash.
3
Q. 863
An envelope or a newspaper?
4
A.
No, not -- not a newspaper.
The likelihood is an envelope but I cannot be
5
absolutely say to you that it was in an envelope.
6
not in a newspaper and not in an envelope.
I've given him money before
7
Q. 864
Right.
8
A.
So I cannot absolutely say to you that it was in an envelope.
9
Q. 865
So it was probably an envelope?
A.
I would -- I would -- for good --
11
Q. 866
Yeah.
12
A.
-- for good presentational reasons I would say it was a good envelope.
13
Q. 867
And tell me this.
14
A.
No, no, no.
15:36:41 10
15:36:58 15
How would you -- where in -- it wasn't in his home was it?
I was only in his home.
I've outlined the number of times I was
in his home in the past.
16
Q. 868
Or his work?
17
A.
Or his work. No.
18
Q. 869
All right.
19
A.
-- on a number of occasions.
Q. 870
No, no, no.
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 871
All right. It was Conways was it or the council building?
23
A.
It could have been any one of the locations that I regularly met him.
24
Q. 872
Okay.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 873
What kind of an envelope?
27
A.
Don't ask me.
28
Q. 874
Well you must have had a supply of them, Mr. Dunlop.
29
A.
Well when people make this -- say this remark to me, of course we had a supply
15:37:04 20
15:37:17 25
15:37:30 30
I did call to his workplace --
You know I'm talking about this occasion?
And you turn up with 2,000 pounds in cash in an envelope?
of envelopes in an office. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:37:33
15:37:53
137 1
Q. 875
Well it wouldn't be much use having a little white one, sure it wouldn't?
2
A.
You mean one with a window or just an ordinary white one?
3
Q. 876
Would it, Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
I don't understand what you mean by --
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
If it was an envelope, Mr. Dunlop --
Yes.
8 9 15:37:54 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Can you give us a description of the envelope?
Well.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
If you can.
If you can't, you can't.
13
A.
No I --
14
Q. 877
MR. MURPHY:
A.
I'm flabbergasted by the line of questioning.
16
Q. 878
You're flabbergasted by the line of questioning?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 879
You're alleging that you bribed a councillor 2,000 pounds in cash and you are
15:38:00 15
19 15:38:16 20
21
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 880
Mr. Dunlop, I take it more than likely it was the same type of envelope as you used for all of your other payments to Mr. Fox and other councillors?
A.
24 15:38:35 25
26
29
On occasion used envelopes, on occasion did not, on occasion used another method.
One of them you've referred to wrapped in a newspaper.
Q. 881
You did a newspaper once?
A.
And another councillors have given evidence that I left money on his desk in a
27 28
What is an envelope.
flabbergasted that you'd be asked what sort of an envelope it was?
22 23
You can't?
newspaper which I dispute. Q. 882
All right. That's twice newspaper, maybe one twice yes or no.
And the
envelope and what did you say something about another method.
15:38:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:38:53
15:39:04
138 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
No, no.
3
Q. 883
MR. MURPHY:
4
No, no, that was --
Well there's something else.
the newspaper.
There's the envelope and there's
Was there any way that you delivered it?
5
A.
I -- um, to Mr. Fox?
6
Q. 884
To anybody.
7
A.
Um, um, I delivered it in various locations in various formats within.
8
Q. 885
Formats.
9
A.
With, in envelopes, not in envelopes.
Q. 886
That's what it was.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 887
If it's not in an envelope and it's not in a newspaper what is it in?
13
A.
Bundle of cash.
14
Q. 888
You would take out 1,000 in cash or 2,000 and give it to the person?
A.
You would not believe, Mr. Murphy, the speed with which that would disappear.
15:39:24 10
15:39:39 15
16 17
Q. 889
A.
(gesturing).
Just tell me one place where you did that -- where you did it in cash, was it
Well I gave various? I certainly gave nobody money in a bus. that one out.
21
cash. Q. 890
23 24
There you are.
in a pub, was it in a bus, was it in a -- where did you?
15:40:02 20
22
Not in envelopes?
Your eye would not be able to account for it.
18 19
Wrapped in newspaper etc.
That remark.
I gave councillors money straight forwardly in
I gave them in the Dail Bar wrapped in a newspaper.
Mr. Dunlop, did you hear the question? Where did you pay money to a councillor in cash?
A.
In lots of places.
Q. 891
Cash without an envelope, without a newspaper?
26
A.
Yes, in lots of places.
27
Q. 892
Okay. In public sight?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 893
Or would you be behind a tree in a carpark?
A.
Not behind a tree in a carpark, no.
15:40:21 25
15:40:29 30
So let's leave
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:40:32
15:40:41
139 1
Q. 894
2
All right.
You'd have this 1,000 or 2,000 in your pocket and you would take
it out and hand it over?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 895
All right. Back to Mr. Fox.
5
Was this in an envelope, cash, or was it without
an envelope and it wasn't a newspaper?
6
A.
It wasn't a newspaper.
7
Q. 896
All right.
8
A.
I've already discussed the issue in relation to an envelope.
9
Q. 897
Now, no envelope is that what you're saying?
A.
What I said to you is in reply to the Chairman.
15:40:52 10
11
It was in cash.
I cannot be absolutely
certain whether it was in an envelope or not.
12
Q. 898
No, if it was an envelope, you made many of these payments with an envelope?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 899
From your office?
A.
Yes.
Q. 900
Now, just visualise for a second the room in your office from which you took
15:41:02 15
16 17
these envelopes.
18
particular sized envelope and you'd need a bit of a stack of them there in a
19
corner or in a shelf that you could take for your payments?
15:41:19 20
A.
Because I imagine if you are paying 1,000 or 2,000 it's a
The stack of envelopes that were available in my office are not there
21
specifically for putting money into.
22
by a professional office.
They are there for normal stationary use
23
Q. 901
Now.
24
A.
They are all size of envelopes. Large, small, medium size and otherwise.
Q. 902
The 2,000 pounds that you got from Mr. Fox, where did it come out?
26
A.
It came out of cash that I had available to me.
27
Q. 903
Available to you.
28
A.
If I hadn't cash available to me I withdrew cash.
29
Q. 904
No, no, you just told me cash available to you.
A.
Cash available to me is in a briefcase at home.
15:41:34 25
15:41:51 30
And where did you keep that cash?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Which is it, Mr. Dunlop?
15:41:54
15:42:04
140 1
Q. 905
Right.
2
A.
Rathbeg, in Dunboyne.
3
Q. 906
I'm sorry in 1993 I'm talking about?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 907
And a briefcase is full of cash?
6
A.
Well it's not necessarily always full of cash but there's some cash available.
7 8
And if that is depleted I may well go and -Q. 908
9 15:42:22 10
You have a briefcase at your home in where, Dunboyne?
I'm not asking you that.
What was the maximum you ever had in that briefcase
roughly? A.
11
Well in the early stages of the Development Plan going back to 1991, I certainly would have in excess of 50,000 pounds.
12
Q. 909
What size briefcase was it?
13
A.
I had it here.
14
Q. 910
I'm sorry. I beg your pardon. 50,000.
A.
It's a briefcase that you carry documents in.
16
Q. 911
You kept it the at home.
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 912
All right.
15:42:35 15
19 15:42:49 20
21
I showed it in evidence. All right. You have some --
And you'd go to that and get your money, your 2,000?
And did you have those in five pound denominations or ten or fifty
or what? A.
Mixture.
Q. 913
Sorry, Chairman.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: Q. 914
15:42:56 25
MR. MURPHY:
We've had this evidence from Mr. Dunlop. All right.
And so you paid him 2,000.
26
And now, Mr. Dunlop, when did you pay -- tell us
about meeting Mr. McGrath for the first time.
27
A.
Well for the first time in relation to Monarch.
28
Q. 915
In relation it to this payment?
29
A.
In relation to this payment, well when I first approached Colm McGrath in
15:43:15 30
relation to Monarch and I told him I was on board. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He seemed to be quite
15:43:22
15:43:47
141 1
happy with that.
2
he knew already.
3
there was a relationship there, in the sense of lobbying.
4
cannot attest to.
5
resolved.
6
quite aggressive about what could be done or what should be done.
7
remarks about why we were in the situation we happened to be in.
8
needed his support.
9
And I ended up giving him two.
15:44:18 10
Q. 916
11
All right.
I had a suspicion that he knew already.
He didn't say that
I knew from Richard Lynn that he had been lobbied. Anything else I
I said that we were going to try and get the matter
He was quite aggressive.
Not with me, I hasten to add.
He said fine, it'll cost you.
He was Made some I said I
We began a negotiation.
Agreeing to give him two, I should say.
Now, and why were you doing that when he voted against Mr.
Barrett's motion as well?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 917
Yeah, yeah?
14
A.
He was going to be.
Q. 918
Yeah?
A.
A key -- at this stage Mr. McGrath -- I don't mean to suggest that -- but
15:44:32 15
16
That
Because he was a key figure.
He was going to be, along with Fox.
17
presented himself as being a person who was, um, capable of doing quite a lot
18
during the course of the Development Plan and was very, very -- a person who
19
admired Liam Lawlor very much and said well if Liam can do it I can do it.
15:45:06 20
he was presenting himself to developers as somebody that could achieve things
21
for them.
22
Q. 919
And what did Mr. Lawlor have to do with that? He admired Mr. Lawlor?
23
A.
He admired Mr. Lawlor.
24
Q. 920
And how did he know Mr. Lawlor was involved in this?
A.
No, no, no sorry you misinterpreted me.
15:45:23 25
26
He admired Mr. Lawlor's ability.
He admired Mr. Lawlor politically and
advising builders developers and otherwise.
27
Q. 921
How did he know Mr. Lawlor was involved in Cherrywood?
28
A.
I'm not suggesting he knew that Mr. Lawlor was involved in Cherrywood.
29
Q. 922
But you said he admired -- that was one of the reasons why he admired --
A.
He admired Mr. Lawlor's ability to advise developers and builders while
15:45:37 30
So
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:45:43
15:45:59
142 1
Mr. Lawlor was a member of Dublin County Council.
2
Q. 923
What's that got to do with it, Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
Well you seem to be very interested in why Mr. McGrath admired Mr. Lawlor.
4 5
And when I answer you then you say what's it got to do with it. Q. 924
6 7
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. McGrath voted against Mr. Barrett's motion and you felt he was influential and that's why you gave him 2,000?
A.
Yes, because that's what Monarch wanted --
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just on that point before, Mr. Murphy leaves it.
15:46:12 10
11
I understand not only did Mr. McGrath vote against Mr. Barrett's motion on the
12
27th but he had voted in favour of the motion proposed by Senator Lydon and I
13
think he proposed it himself the Manager's Report?
14
A.
He was a co-supporter with Mr. Lydon.
15:46:28 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
If my memory serves me right.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
15:46:36 20
21
Yes, he was.
You don't have to look at it. He co-proposed
the motion I think on the 27th to adopt the Manager's Report? A.
Yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: Which wasn't entirely on all fours with Monarch's proposal.
24
But incorporated a lot of it in terms of four houses to the acre etc; Isn't
15:46:49 25
26
that right? A.
27
Yes.
Excuse me, Judge.
Vastly more important than any of that was the fact
that this was the Manager's Report.
28 29 15:46:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
The what the motion in May 1992 related to what the Manager was agreeing to do. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:47:03
15:47:18
143 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
Contrary to what normally occurred, as I think I said to Mr. Murphy yesterday.
4
Normally -- certainly some of the Fianna Fail Councillors would instinctively
5
vote against what the Manager's Report suggested.
6
whatever reason, would not agree.
7
the Manager was proposing on this particular occasion, as you quite rightly
8
say, went a long way towards meeting what Monarch wanted, or at least a section
9
of Monarch wanted.
Because they would, for
Say much more can be achieved.
But what
15:47:38 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
12 13 14
Q. 925
MR. MURPHY:
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 926
Why, if Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 927
Had co-signed or co-proposed this motion?
19
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 928
Yes?
21
A.
With Mr. Lydon?
22
Q. 929
Yes.
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 930
Why would you have to be paying him 2,000?
A.
Well we now have to move forward.
15:47:44 15
15:47:53 20
15:48:00 25
26
But I imagine, Mr. Dunlop, and Judge Faherty wants to know?
And voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
Fianna Fail to take a stand.
And we need Colm McGrath internally in
I mean, I have approached him.
27
Q. 931
He would have been doing that already.
28
A.
Well he may well have done.
29
Q. 932
Mr.--
A.
He was one of the people who was put aside -- not put off side but was
15:48:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:48:22
15:48:34
144 1
disaffected by what had occurred in May 1992.
2
people who proposed the motion.
3
Q. 933
4
Yes.
Because he was one of the
Mr. Barrett -- Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Wright you said was very important.
Did
you go to him?
5
A.
Yes, I spoke to GV, yes.
6
Q. 934
And?
7
A.
Yes, GV, um, went into a long outline, not that I needed it made to me, about
8 9 15:48:52 10
why, what occurred had occurred.
Why it had occurred.
Q. 935
All right.
A.
And that certainly from Fianna Fail's point of view, if he had anything to do
11
with it, they would support Monarch.
12
Q. 936
Yes?
13
A.
And wanted to continue to support Monarch.
14
Q. 937
Yes?
A.
But that there was confusion.
16
Q. 938
Yes.
17
A.
And that he was in particular.
18
Q. 939
Yeah.
19
A.
Concerned about individual Fianna Fail Councillors maybe running individual
15:49:01 15
15:49:13 20
All right.
campaigns that he didn't know anything about.
21
Q. 940
Mr. Dunlop, was there a whip eventually in November 1993 for this?
22
A.
That I cannot absolutely say to you.
23
Q. 941
How do you not know that, Mr. Dunlop?
24
A.
I cannot absolutely say to you.
15:49:32 25
But it was the absolute norm that when a vote
took place and it involved Fianna Fail people, a discussion took place prior to
26
the meeting as to what the attitude and stance would be.
27
Q. 942
And as you told us earlier, somebody comes out and tells you what happened?
28
A.
Yes, that happened on this occasion.
29
Q. 943
On this occasion, which you were vitally interested, as you've told us, you
15:49:49 30
spent the whole day down there because it's so important to you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Who came out
15:49:56
15:50:05
145 1 2
to you and did he or she tell you that there was a whip? A.
Well I don't recollect anybody in particular came out to me on that particular
3
occasion. What I said to Judge Mahon, when he asked me as Chairman.
4
what happened on occasion.
5
Q. 944
Yeah.
Mr.-- all right.
Mr. Dunlop, what about yeah.
6
now told us about you went to Mr. Wright.
7
motion.
8
Barrett's motion.
This is
Mr. Dunlop, you've
He had voted against Mr. Barrett's
You paid money to Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath, who were against Mr.
9 15:50:22 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
We haven't heard them.
Exactly, we have not heard that.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Paying Mr. McGrath.
About the circumstances.
14 15:50:31 15
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Sorry, Chairman.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
pounds?
19
A.
Yes.
You said you negotiated with Mr. McGrath.
And you agreed 2,000
After there was a negotiation I agreed 2,000 pounds.
15:50:43 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes, I did.
All right.
Did you pay him?
In cash.
23 24 15:50:47 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
When?
After the vote.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Was that in November?
After it took place, in November, yes.
29 15:50:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
And what do you remember about actually paying him?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:50:55
15:51:20
146 1
A.
Well I know I paid him because I committed to pay him.
I cannot absolutely
2
say to you where the location was.
I've listed in my statement the locations
3
in which I have met Mr. McGrath, including his own office in Clondalkin, in the
4
Royal Dublin Hotel, the environs of the Council.
5
the Gresham Hotel.
And in that I would include
And I also met him in the Green Isle Hotel.
6 7 8
Q. 945
9
MR. MURPHY:
And, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the two payments, Mr. Fox and
Mr. McGrath 2,000 each.
15:51:33 10
the figure.
All you remember is that you paid them and that was
And in respect of both, in this very important allegation against
11
both of them, while you've such a tremendous memory about hundreds of things,
12
you can't remember where or the date or whether there was an envelope or what?
13
A.
14 15:52:04 15
I've already said to you, after the vote in one of the locations that I normally met them being cash.
Q. 946
Did you contact Betty Coffey?
16
A.
Yes, I spoke to Betty Coffey.
17
Q. 947
And what was her attitude?
18
A.
Well Betty was.
19
I think I gave you some indication of this already.
was in -- because she's Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council.
15:52:21 20
type of person in relation to controversy.
Betty
Betty was a nervous
And she was advising caution in
21
the sense that she did not want something to happen in the sense that would
22
cause difficulties for her.
23
Q. 948
Did she ask you for money?
24
A.
No.
Q. 949
All right.
A.
No.
15:52:37 25
26 27
Did she ever ask you for money?
She asked me for support for a -- various political functions that she
ran.
28
Q. 950
Did you ever give her money?
29
A.
I gave her money for support, yes.
Q. 951
How much?
15:52:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:52:51
15:53:02
147 1
A.
2
I cannot tell you off hand.
But they were various amounts, I think ranging
from the low hundreds to 1,000.
3
Q. 952
Did you pay her 2,000 for the 1991 Local Elections?
4
A.
Yes, it's quite possible, yes.
5
Q. 953
All right.
6
A.
In fact, no -- yes.
7
Q. 954
Yes.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 955
That, isn't that right, in public evidence?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 956
She's on a list that you made out?
12
A.
She's on a list that I made out, yes.
13
Q. 957
All right.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 958
For payments in 1992?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 959
So was she on your books?
18
A.
In the context of paying her money for votes?
19
Q. 960
Yes.
A.
No.
21
Q. 961
Yes.
22
A.
No.
15:53:12 10
15:53:20 15
15:53:28 20
23 24
That's -- you told the Tribunal?
And also on the 1992 list?
In the context of a bribe?
In the context of seeking support for political purposes at election time
or fundraising events, yes. Q. 962
15:53:52 25
Yes.
All right.
This list was the Rathfarnham.
out of the Rathfarnham account, Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
26
A.
Which list?
27
Q. 963
You gave the Tribunal -- it's page 433.
28
A.
That's the 1991 Local Elections.
29
Q. 964
Yeah.
15:54:14 30
The withdrawals that came
We'll just have a look at it.
Isn't that the -- isn't that the withdrawals from the Rathfarnham
account, which is the war chest, which is for paying Councillors? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:54:18
15:54:32
148 1
A.
Yes, part of.
2
Q. 965
All right.
3 4
So that's got nothing to do with -- I mean, that's -- isn't that
money for paying Councillors in return for their vote? A.
No.
It's 1991 Local Elections contributions it's headed.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
No, that's a separate.
That's not ....
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
Pardon?
9 15:54:41 10
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think that's correct.
11 12 13
Q. 966
MR. MURPHY:
Could I ask for page 432, please, for a second.
14 15:55:10 15
Question 96.
16 17
"Q: And could I, therefore, ask you to make out a separate list itemising in
18
respect of each disbursements starting with the 6,001 on the 18th of April 1991
19
to identify the parties or persons or entities to whom those payments were
15:55:26 20
made.
21
A: I would just like to seek your guidance, Mr. Hanratty. I will give you
22
where the disbursements were made and the monies applied to it and give you the
23
amounts in each case.
24
account in cash for that purpose.
15:55:35 25
Obviously, these monies were withdrawn from that
Q: Have you established that they were all withdrawn in cash?
26
A:
27
endeavouring to assist. I'm presuming, maybe wrongly, that they were all
28
withdrawn in cash but that is a presumption that I am making.
29
Q: Is it your present belief they were all withdrawn in cash?
15:55:49 30
I haven't established that they were all withdrawn in cash. I am
A: It's my present belief. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:55:52
15:55:58
149 1
Q: Are you in a position to identify the parties or entities to whom those
2
payments were made?
3
A: Yes, I am.
4
Q: Perhaps could you make that list now. Please.
5
Paper handed to Mr. Dunlop.
6
Mr. Dunlop proceeds to make list.
7
List handed to solicitor to the Tribunal.
8
List then handed to Mr. Hanratty."
9 15:56:08 10
Mr. Hanratty says,
11
"Mr. Dunlop, you have written a list of names numbered 1 to 16, opposite each
12
name you've written a number.
13
thousands of pounds?
14
A: Yes."
Does the number opposite the name represent
15:56:20 15
16
Q. 967
And I run out of script there.
17 18
Isn't that the Rathfarnham account and isn't that withdrawals for cash to pay
19
Councillors in return for their vote, Mr. Dunlop?
15:56:28 20
A.
No.
I pointed out to you already, that is a list that was drawn up in the
21
box.
I don't know what date it was.
Did you say what date it was? May 2000
22
headed political contributions, Local Election contributions to politicians.
23
Q. 968
All right.
24
A.
Well why?
Q. 969
But you did pay her the 2,000 pounds in 1991?
26
A.
Local Elections contribution, yeah.
27
Q. 970
And then later another -- money -- 1,000 pounds in 1992?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 971
Yes?
A.
Sorry, yes.
15:56:48 25
15:57:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:57:01
15:57:36
150 1
Q. 972
Yes.
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, what about had been -- Mr. Lydon and
2
Mr. Hand, the gentlemen to whom, in your interviews, you so graphically say
3
that you paid monies?
4
A.
Yes, that is a point.
I'm glad you brought that point up, Mr. Murphy.
5
Because contrary to any perception that the Members of the Tribunal might have,
6
as a result of what you said.
7 8
I want to bring your attention to the fact that you said that in my statement
9
of 2003 I mentioned Messrs. Fox and McGrath and did not make any reference to
15:57:59 10
Messrs. Hand and Lydon.
11 12 13
In fact, that statement was made on the 9th of October, 2000. Q. 973
14 15:58:13 15
16
That was perfectly clear, Mr. Dunlop, as we went through it.
Not 2003.
Your private
interview -A.
It wasn't.
Q. 974
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Hand and Lydon are referred to clearly in private interview.
17
what did you say "I certainly paid Mr. Lydon in Cherrywood" something like
18
that?
19 15:58:21 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 975
How come, with all of this important thing coming up, vote coming up, you go
21
and you pay Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath 2,000 each who have been paid -- you have a
22
high suspicion have been paid by Monarch.
23
voted in favour. And yet you don't go to Mr. Lydon, Fianna Fail, and you don't
24
go to Mr. Hand?
15:58:42 25
A.
I did not say I didn't go to them.
26
Q. 976
Sorry.
27
A.
Correct.
They are already on side.
They
What I mean is you didn't pay them? I mean, as per the Chairman's request, I went down through the list
28
of the people that I did approach.
29
of March 1993 with Phil Reilly and Richard Lynn, it was agreed that Richard
15:59:03 30
Yes.
And as per the meeting on the 9th
Lynn would continue to make contact with Don Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That does not mean that I
15:59:10
15:59:39
151 1 2
did not speak to Don Lydon about the matter. Q. 977
3
Mr. Dunlop, if I have -- wait now.
Is this right? Sorry.
Mr. Dunlop, I
want to just name the people who voted for Mr. Barrett's motion.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 978
And voted against and voted -- and voted against the confirmation of it.
6
A.
The confirmation of it? In other words, they didn't vote for it.
7
Q. 979
They voted against the motion?
8
A.
Right.
9
Q. 980
Brought by Smith Buckley to -- in relation to for change three?
A.
On what day?
11
Q. 981
On the 11th of November, 1993, Mr. Dunlop.
12
A.
Oh, yes okay.
13
Q. 982
B Cass voted for Barrett.
16:00:00 10
14
Voted against Smith Buckley.
16:00:12 15
Keane C voted for Barrett.
16
Voted against Smith Buckley.
17
Keogh H voted for Barrett.
18
Against Smith Buckley.
19
Lohan L voted for Barrett against Smith Buckley.
16:00:26 20
Mitchell O voted for Barrett against Smith Buckley.
21
Morrissey T voted for Barrett.
22
Against Smith Buckley.
23
Quinn C voted for Barrett.
24
Voted against Smith Buckley.
16:00:47 25
Terry S voted for.
And for Barrett.
And voted against Smith Buckley.
26
And Tyndall C voted for Barrett and voted against Smith Buckley.
27
Now, --
28
A.
You haven't mentioned a Fianna Fail representative yet.
29
Q. 983
Could I please have 7216 and 7262 on the screen together.
16:01:13 30
confirm the way that vote went. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That's just to
16:01:15
16:01:55
152 1 2
Now, the vote in May '92 for Barrett was -- was voted -- 36 voted for Mr.
3
Barrett's motion.
4
against. In November '93 ...
5
A.
24 against.
36 voted for one house per acre.
24 voted
And virtually all of the Fianna Fail representatives on the Council at that
6
stage in that vote with the exception of one or two Mavericks.
7
the wrong words.
8
exception, as I look at it immediately with the exception possibly of Paddy
9
Madigan.
16:02:21 10
Q. 984
Sorry.
I don't mean to be dismissive.
Sorry, that's
Voted against.
With the
And Larry Butler.
And then in November '93.
11 12
This is page 7262, please.
13 14
In November '93 the motion to confirm Mr. Barrett's motion was defeated by 44
16:02:36 15
votes to 26.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 985
Yes.
18
A.
Yep.
19
Q. 986
And the people who changed their votes are the people I read out to you there.
16:02:51 20
Can I have the other one on the same? Sorry.
That I read out in a list to you a few moments ago?
21
A.
Right.
22
Q. 987
They are the key to your success in November '93; isn't that right?
23
A.
Give them to me again.
24 16:03:03 25
be. Q. 988
B Cass?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 989
C Keane?
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 990
H Keogh?
A.
Yeah.
16:03:07 30
Read them out to me again.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Sorry, I don't mean to
16:03:07
16:03:11
153 1
Q. 991
L Lohan?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 992
O Mitchell?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 993
T Morrissey?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 994
C Quinn?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 995
S Terry?
A.
Yeah.
11
Q. 996
And C Tyndall?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 997
Aren't they the people who swung the vote?
14
A.
Yeah, on the vote basis, yes.
Q. 998
Doesn't that mean, or am I missing something.
16:03:13 10
16:03:24 15
They changed their minds and voted for. That it's because of them the
16
vote was changed and Mr. Barrett's motion was voted down and now we're back to
17
four houses per acre?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 999
Did you talk to any of those?
A.
I think I listed Olivia Mitchell when I was going down through the list when
16:03:48 20
21
the Chairman asked me to go down through the list.
22
Q. 1000
Have you any idea how their change of mind was brought about?
23
A.
Well, let me just get this as accurate as I possibly can.
24
In the vote we're
talking about here in November of 1993 is the Sean Barrett motion.
16:03:59 25
Right.
Is it?
Okay.
26
Q. 1001
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, what did you say?
27
A.
The motion that we're talking about in November 1993 is the Sean Barrett
28 29 16:04:06 30
motion. Q. 1002
Yes.
A.
Sean Barrett. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:04:07
16:04:19
154 1
Q. 1003
May '92 is Sean Barrett?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 1004
November '93, the vote to confirm Barrett.
4
A.
To confirm Barrett.
5
But I'm asking you --
Exactly.
Mr. Barrett.
Fine Gael.
So it would
certainly be understandable that the type of.
6
Q. 1005
Yes.
It's a Smith Buckley motion to confirm the change?
7
A.
To confirm the change, yes.
Exactly.
Smith Buckley put forward a motion to
8
preempt everybody by confirming the change that had been made by -- as a result
9
of.
16:04:36 10
Q. 1006
Yeah?
11
A.
The Barrett motion.
12
Q. 1007
Yeah.
13
A.
Coming back off public display.
14
We now have a series, if my recollection is
correct, of something of a dozen.
16:04:48 15
Certainly ten motions in a variety of
formats from a variety of people in relation to the Cherrywood development.
16
Q. 1008
Uh-huh?
17
A.
A lot of motions.
18
Q. 1009
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Some to confirm.
16:05:03 20
centre.
Some to increase.
Some to limit size.
Some to deal with the -- the town
A variety of motions.
So this motion that
21
you're talking about, these are the people who voted to confirm the Barrett
22
motion.
23
Q. 1010
Yes.
24
A.
To confirm what Barrett had done in May 1992.
Q. 1011
And if they'd won that was the end of Monarch; isn't that right?
26
A.
Well if they had won one house per acre would have been confirmed.
27
Q. 1012
Yes.
28
A.
They lost, yes.
29
Q. 1013
And the people who swung it were the people whose names I read out to you?
A.
Because they did not appear on the list of May 1992.
16:05:18 25
16:05:32 30
They lost?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:05:35
16:05:46
155 1
Q. 1014
All right.
Okay.
2
A.
Can we?
3
Q. 1015
Mr.--
4
A.
I have to go?
All right.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
appointment.
A break.
We're going to stop now anyway because I have an
8 9
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman, I have to questions.
16:05:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Two questions.
12 13 14
Q. 1016
MR. MURPHY:
568, please. I'm sorry.
567. I hope this is right.
16:06:45 15
16
574, please.
17 18
A.
Sorry.
19
Q. 1017
Mr. Dunlop, your private interviews.
A.
Question 5, yeah.
Q. 1018
"Q: Did they, the people that you were dealing with in Monarch know that you
16:06:58 20
21 22
had done that?
23
A:
24
This is the 25,000.
16:07:10 25
26
It was -- it was never.
Question 5.
The fee was agreed".
A.
Yes.
Q. 1019
"And this was agreed sometime in advance.
27
the fee out of Monarch".
We had some difficulty in getting
We've been through all of that?
28
A.
We've been through that, yes.
29
Q. 1020
"So anything that I did was in advance of actually getting the money in
16:07:20 30
which -- in which was a thing that happened". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:07:24
16:07:31
156 1 2
And that's wrong.
3
that right?
You weren't doing things in advance of getting paid; isn't
4
A.
No, I wasn't doing things in advance, no.
5
Q. 1021
"Not regularly but it did happen on occasion.
6
I was dipping into my own funds
and my own war chest in anticipation of getting monies that had been promised"?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1022
I want to suggest to you that what you said there suggests to me that you're
9
dipping into your war chest in the Cherrywood case in anticipation of getting
16:07:52 10
monies from Monarch, you are dipping into your war chest to make disbursements?
11
A.
To make disbursements to whom? To Mr. Fox and to Mr. McGrath?
12
Q. 1023
Councillors.
13
A.
Well they are Councillors.
14
Q. 1024
I suggest to you that what you have said there to Mr. Hanratty and to
16:08:13 15
Mr. Gallagher does not for a moment mean, suggest that you could only have been
16
dipping into -- you were dipping into your -- you were dipping into your "own
17
funds and my own war chest in anticipation of getting monies".
18
you means much more than dipping into your briefcase for 4,000 to pay two
19
Councillors?
16:08:33 20
21
A.
No.
Q. 1025
And if I could have 5 -- that's the first question.
I suggest to
22 23
And 547.
24 16:08:44 25
I think, Mr. Dunlop, if I'm correct.
26
I think you said that you didn't know
anything from Mr. Lynn directly about Monarch paying monies; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1026
547.
Question 109.
29 16:09:04 30
"You mentioned yesterday that, at least I took you to mention, I perhaps I took Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:09:07
16:09:19
157 1
you up wrong.
There were other people distributing money to Councillors apart
2
from yourself. Am I right about that? It May have been in the context first
3
of all of Richard Lynn.
4
A:
5
suspected, as it may gave been widely suspected about me by others.
6
was solely suspected in the context of Cherrywood there was money being
7
disbursed.
8
Q: Who is an alleged facilitator.
9
A:
I have no doubt but I mean I just can't prove it. It was widely But it
Richard Lynn".
16:09:27 10
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1027
Isn't that right?
13
A.
He's the facilitator between Monarch and the Councillors.
14
Q. 1028
"Facilitator" means paying money; doesn't it?
A.
Well I have no -- and I don't think -- I don't think I'm saying there.
16:09:37 15
16 17
no evidence, ever, or that Mr. Lynn gave money to -- to Councillors. Q. 1029
18 19
I have
I'm only just going back over what you said to the Tribunal.
I mean, it's a
question of if you believed what you said at the time. A.
16:10:01 20
Well I'm not going to go into a disposition with you, Mr. Murphy, about these private interviews.
21
That's for another day and for another forum.
And
probably we'll get a result of it quite soon.
22 23
But what I have been asked here and what I have said.
24
that there was wide suspicion.
16:10:19 25
been about me by others.
26 27
It was widely suspected.
Page 548, please.
28 29
And it could have
It was widely suspected in the context of Cherrywood
that there was money being disbursed. Q. 1030
That there was wide --
The last sentence on that page.
16:10:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:10:35
16:10:47
158 1
"But in my mind I have no doubt that Richard Lynn was facilitating certainly
2
Lydon, certainly no doubt about this".
3 4
A.
Well let me go back and say.
5
motions.
6
(Mr. Dunlop reading document to himself)
7
Well, I mean, unless I'm wrong.
8
facilitating Don Lydon.
9
Lydon was the main proposer of what Monarch wanted.
16:11:15 10
11
He had a relationship with Don Lydon, in which Don
With money, is that what you're asking me to? Is that what the core of this question is? Is that what you're asking me?
Q. 1032
Is that your answer? You're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn facilitated Mr. Lydon with money?
A.
I have no evidence that Mr. Lydon -- sorry.
That Mr. Lynn ever gave money to
Mr. Lydon. Q. 1033
18 19
I'm not suggesting that Richard Lynn was
A.
16 17
Excuse me.
Now, just -- you're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn facilitated Mr. Lydon?
14 16:11:32 15
Withdrawals of
Q. 1031
12 13
Sorry.
It goes up a bit further.
So what did you mean when you said you'd no doubt that Richard Lynn was facilitating "certainly Lydon, certainly no doubt about this"?
A.
16:11:47 20
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon had a close relationship, as is obvious if you look at the record of Dublin County Council and what Senator Lydon did, or tried to do.
21
To infer further from that, as I have said on a variety of occasions during the
22
course of the last three days, has it been three days? Yes.
23
course of the last three days.
24
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
16:12:13 25
That there was a close relationship between
And after the meeting with Mr. Lydon -- with Mr. Lynn
it was agreed that it he would continue to have that close relationship.
26 27
went on between them, I don't know. Q. 1034
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
28 29 16:12:26 30
During the
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
Tuesday at half ten.
Am I? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Perhaps ...
What
16:12:27
16:12:37
159 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Well ...
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps parties who wish to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop on Tuesday
5
could talk to the Tribunal legal team.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Okay.
8 9 16:12:45 10
CHAIRMAN:
And arrange.
Make some arrangements.
And those who can't manage
it on Tuesday will be facilitated on another day.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
13 14 16:12:55 15
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder if I could just raise an issue?
Mark Sanfey,
for the Monarch contingent, if I could put it that way.
16 17
There are a number of people lining up to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
And there
18
may be a concern, which perhaps could be explored now very briefly.
About the
19
wisdom of having that cross-examination broken up.
16:13:13 20
21
I understand that Mr. Dunlop is not available on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday
22
of next week.
23 24
Now, that means that certainly -- I think Mr. Shipsey may not be available on
16:13:23 25
Tuesday.
It may be that other parties are available to cross-examine on
26
Tuesday.
But it wouldn't appear that Mr. Dunlop will finish on Tuesday.
27 28
I know various of my clients it's proposed to examine on Wednesday, Thursday or
29
Friday.
I have a slight concern about that.
16:13:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:13:42
16:13:57
160 1
CHAIRMAN:
Well the difficulty that we have, and we have had it on other
2
occasions as well.
3
it's not always possible to run a witness from start to finish without a break.
Is because of the large number of legal teams involved,
4 5
So, at the same time, equally important or very important is the fact that the
6
Tribunal can't, if you like, not sit on Tuesday.
7
isn't that right, Ms. Dillon, for Tuesday?
We have no other witnesses
8 9
MS. DILLON:
At the moment that's the position.
16:14:24 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
I mean, we certainly wouldn't ask, we wouldn't ask people to start
12
cross-examination on Tuesday who can't finish on Tuesday.
13 14 16:14:29 15
MS. DILLON:
Would it meet the case, and I don't know.
with my colleagues.
I've had a brief word
I don't want to hold them to anything.
It seems to me
16
the most the cross-examination would be, from what I've heard, would be maybe a
17
day, a day and a half.
18
don't know about Mr. Shipsey's available.
19
is or isn't available on Tuesday.
If the Tribunal were to sit early on Tuesday.
I
I can't remember whether he said he
16:14:46 20
21
Would one very long day conclude Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination I wonder on
22
Tuesday?
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Are you available, Mr. Shipsey, on Tuesday?
16:14:56 25
26
MR. SHIPSEY:
Sorry, Chairman, I'm not available on Tuesday of next week.
27 28
I had not understood that we weren't sitting tomorrow.
29
afraid.
But I'm not available on Tuesday.
16:15:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That was my error, I'm
16:15:06
16:15:32
161 1
CHAIRMAN:
Well, I think what we'll have to do is to try and fit in as many
2
people.
3
people who aren't here on Tuesday will have an opportunity to see the
4
transcript, and they will be afforded every opportunity to go back over.
I know it's not ideal. And people will have an opportunity to,
5 6
I think that's the best thing to do.
Otherwise we're going to run into
7
difficulty the following week and the following week after that.
8 9 16:15:43 10
So I think we'll sit on Tuesday and we'll do as much as possible.
We won't
ask parties to start on Tuesday who can't finish on Tuesday.
11 12
All right?
13 14
MS. DILLON:
All right.
16:15:50 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
17 18 19 16:20:22 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, TUESDAY, 20TH OF JUNE, 2006.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
09:40:04
10:35:46
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
21ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
8 9 10:35:54 10
Just on a housekeeping matter.
You will recollect yesterday that the issue
about Mr. Sweeney's legal team informed the Tribunal when they would be
11
available to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop and you had directed that they were to
12
contact the Tribunal by close of business yesterday and indicate a date.
13 14 10:36:12 15
Well, they contacted the Tribunal to indicate that they couldn't, they had no date available.
Now, I understand from speaking to Mr. Redmond that he is
16
available Thursday week, which is the 29th.
17
circuit matters or concentrate people's minds if you were to fix the 29th for
18
the resumption of the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop and that might lead to
19
any subsequent application that might be considered necessary by Mr. Sweeney or
10:36:34 20
And I wonder it might short
his advisors but at the moment it's just hanging
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We'll fix the 29th then.
23 24 10:36:44 25
MS. DILLON:
That's Thursday week.
For the resumption of the
cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
That's the 29th of June?
28 29 10:36:53 30
MS. DILLON:
We will inform Mr. Tony Fox's legal team also that that date has
been fixed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:36:54
10:36:56
2 1 2
May it please the Tribunal.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Ms. Ann Gosling, please.
7
MS. ANN GOSLING, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DIL
8 9 10:37:21 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Ms. Gosling.
Good morning.
14 10:37:35 15
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Ms. Gosling.
16 17
I believe that you were the secretary for a long period of time to the late
18
Mr. Philip Monahan who ultimately became Chairman of the Monarch Group; is that
19
correct?
10:37:46 20
21
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 1
You commenced your employment in 1969 as a secretary to Mr. Monahan.
22
You
continued with him in that position until after 2000; isn't that correct?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 2
Now, throughout that period the business initially commenced and had its
10:38:01 25
offices in Dundalk, County Louth but it subsequently moved to Dublin; is that
26
right?
27
A.
Yes, it moved to Dublin.
28
Q. 3
Now, when it moved to Dublin it initially moved into offices it had in Harcourt
29 10:38:16 30
Street; isn't that correct? A.
Well before the offices in Harcourt Street there had been offices in Earlsfort Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:38:22
10:38:35
3 1
Terrace.
There had been a presence in Dublin.
2
Q. 4
Yes?
3
A.
When they moved completely to Dublin it was to Harcourt Street.
4
Q. 5
Yes.
At the time -- when the offices moved initially to Dublin an office
5
continued to be maintained in Dundalk and you in fact stayed in Dundalk; isn't
6
that correct?
7
A.
The head office remained in Dundalk.
When they set up an office in Earlsfort
8
Terrace it was a Dublin office but head office remained in Dundalk until
9
whenever Harcourt Street opened.
10:38:53 10
Q. 6
Yes.
And I think that Mr. Monahan, that's Mr. Philip Monahan, bought a house
11
which became known as Somerton in or around 1988.
12
substantial grounds and he moved himself at that stage to live in Somerton;
13
isn't that right?
14 10:39:11 15
It was a large house and
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 7
And at that time he converted a suite of rooms in Somerton to be his own
16
offices; isn't that right?
17
A.
That's true, yes.
18
Q. 8
When that move took place, I understand, Ms. Gosling, that you also moved to
19 10:39:26 20
21
Dublin at that time; is that right? A.
I did, yes.
Q. 9
But you continued as personal secretary to Mr. Philip Monahan throughout that
22
period?
23
A.
I did.
24
Q. 10
But you were based at that stage in Somerton; is that right?
A.
I was.
Q. 11
Now, at that time and from 1988 onwards would it be fair to say that there were
10:39:36 25
26 27
a number of offices dealing with the Monarch Group business.
28
been an office in Dundalk; is that right?
29 10:39:55 30
There would have
A.
There was an office in Dundalk which was gradually closed down.
Q. 12
It was winding down? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:39:56
10:40:10
4 1
A.
It was winding down.
2
Q. 13
There was an office in the Tallaght Town Centre, a site office?
3
A.
Yes, there was.
4
Q. 14
And that office was mainly dealing with the development of the town centre;
5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 15
And then there was an office in Harcourt Street, the old railway building; is
8 9
that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 16
Mr. Philip Monahan's office in the house in Somerton?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 17
Now, from 1988 onwards ultimately the main two offices became the house, the
10:40:17 10
13
premises in Harcourt Street and Mr. Philip Monahan's private offices in
14
Somerton?
10:40:34 15
16
A.
Yes, that's true.
Q. 18
There was a winding down of the Dundalk business.
17
And there became obviously
a winding down of the Tallaght office once the Tallaght Town Centre opened?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 19
So that there were two separate offices being -- from say 1988 to 1990 onwards
10:40:51 20
being run by the Monarch business.
Would that be fair to say?
21
A.
Yeah, I'm not sure of the exact dates.
22
Q. 20
Yes?
23
A.
But in or around that time, yes.
24
Q. 21
Well, if I ask you to date it in this way, Ms. Gosling, if you can.
10:41:03 25
From the
time of the Cherrywood development, of the purchase of the Cherrywood lands in
26
1989/1990, was the substantial business of the Monarch property being conducted
27
between the offices in Earlsfort Terrace and Mr. Philip Monahan's offices in
28
Somerton?
29 10:41:22 30
A.
In Harcourt Street and Somerton.
Q. 22
In Harcourt Street and Somerton? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:41:24
10:41:34
5 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 23
In Somerton, can I ask you to outline to the Tribunal what the setup was in
3
Somerton.
4
conducted there?
5
A.
Okay.
What offices were there, who worked there and what business was
Well, in those early days there was Philip Monahan and myself and
6
another executive, John Sherwood.
7
difficult to describe.
8
was partly the reason for his move at that time to Somerton.
9
of hospital and he was sort of semi retiring, in a sense, while the main thrust
10:42:21 10
Um, and it was it was -- it's rather
It's a long time ago but Phil hadn't been well, which
of the office, of the business, had moved to Harcourt Street.
11
operated from there.
12
just describe.
He had come out
It was being
So ... it's hard to put myself back in those days and
13
Q. 24
Well, you were based in Somerton; isn't that right?
14
A.
I was.
Q. 25
And obviously you had a full-time job in Somerton?
16
A.
I had, yes.
17
Q. 26
Now, what were you doing?
18
A.
I was continuing basically what I had been doing in Dundalk in answering
10:42:40 15
19
letters, typing whatever needed to be typed and generally doing what I'd always
10:43:09 20
done, making sure that people did what they were meant to do.
21 22
My role was a
support role. Q. 27
When you say that it was your job to make sure that people did what they were
23
supposed to do.
24
at which it would be decided what people were to do and it was your job to
10:43:31 25
Does that pre suppose that first a meeting would take place
follow-up to ensure that those things were done?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 28
Thank you. Is that what was going on?
28
A.
Yes, that's what was going on.
29
Q. 29
So, it would have followed that you would have attended meetings at which
10:43:39 30
decisions were made.
It was your job to make sure those decisions were
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:43:44
10:44:01
6 1
implemented or carried forward; is that right. Not necessarily.
2
have attended.
3
afterwards in the majority of cases, 90% of the time I'd say.
4
Q. 30
5
I wouldn't
I'd have been-- the minutes would have been dictated
Would it have been fair to have described your role throughout this period and earlier that you were probably Mr. Philip Monahan's right hand person?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 31
And I think you've outlined in your statement and I believe, indeed, that there
8
is no dispute on this, you had possession of Mr. Monahan's, one of
9
Mr. Monahan's personal cheque books for example?
10:44:17 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 32
And you would have written cheques on that account and there would have been a
12
monthly reconciliation?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 33
So you would have been a person, you know, in a very trusted position insofar
10:44:28 15
as Mr. Monahan was concerned.
Would that be fair it say?
16
A.
That's true, yes.
17
Q. 34
And while Mr. Monahan may have had ill health would it be fair to say that
18
throughout the period from 1988, 1990 and the Cabinteely development, that he
19
had a continuing interest and took an active part in seeking the development of
10:44:46 20
the Cherrywood lands?
21
A.
Oh, yes.
22
Q. 35
And after the development of the Town Centre in Tallaght, which was a huge
23
success, would it also be fair to say that the purchase of the lands at
24
Cherrywood and their subsequent development was the next biggest project on
10:45:01 25
hand by the Monarch Group in the early 1990s?
26
A.
Yes, it is.
27
Q. 36
And it follows from that, that the development of that project would have
28 29 10:45:13 30
consumed a lot of time of the professional staff of the Monarch Group? A.
Yes.
Q. 37
Now, if I could ask you.
If I give you a number of names of persons if you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:45:18
10:45:32
7 1
could outline, as best you understand it, the various roles that were carried
2
out by these people within the Monarch Group structure.
3 4
Would you outline, first of all, what the function or role carried out by the
5
late Mr. Philip Monahan was?
6
A.
Well, he was the -- he was the entrepreneur, he was the man with the visions,
7
he was the Chairman of the company and the Managing Director of the company and
8
the team leader.
9 10:45:57 10
11
Q. 38
Was he a person who would have been involved in making serious decisions?
A.
Very much so.
Q. 39
So, for example, the decision to buy the Cherrywood lands.
12
Was that a
decision which would have had to have been approved by Mr. Monahan?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 40
Can I ask you about Mr. Dominic Glennane and his function within the group?
A.
Okay.
10:46:10 15
16
He was the financial director and in charge of all the financial
aspects of the company.
17
Q. 41
Was he a shareholder?
18
A.
He was a shareholder, yes.
19
Q. 42
And did you work closely with Mr. Glennane?
A.
I did, yes.
Q. 43
And in terms, if you could outline briefly to the Tribunal, Ms. Gosling, from
10:46:29 20
21 22
your own knowledge, what happened when expenses were incurred on behalf of,
23
say, Monarch Properties or Monarch Properties Services Limited? What was the
24
process whereby these outgoings or expenses were accounted for?
10:46:51 25
A.
Everything had to be vouched, you know, there had to be receipts and there
26
would be -- they would be attached to an expenses claim form, signed by the
27
person who incurred them and passed to that person's direct boss, whoever that
28
was, who would sign them and then they would go to Mr. Glennane for payment.
29 10:47:28 30
Q. 44
So, would it be fair to say that any expense that was incurred in connection with any project would have to be supported with a voucher or a document? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:47:33
10:47:41
8 1
A.
Oh, yes, absolutely.
2
Q. 45
And that prior to payment issuing, there would have to be an invoice, a
3
document, a receipt of some sort?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 46
And while you were there, was that the practice?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 47
Right.
8 9
Mr.-- if you could outline - had - and did Mr. Glennane have a
professional qualification do you know? A.
Yes.
Q. 48
And was that an accountancy qualification?
11
A.
Sorry, an accountancy qualification, yes.
12
Q. 49
And if you could outline to the Tribunal the functional role of Mr. Eddie
10:47:55 10
13 14
Don't ask me to tell you what it is but yes.
Sweeney? A.
10:48:14 15
Well, Mr. Sweeney was the technical director and he was responsible for all the technical aspects, the way -- he had quite a team under him of both architects
16
and engineers, quantity surveyors.
17
aspects.
18
was very much a close knit team.
19 10:48:49 20
He was the -- he controlled the technical
He planned what needed to be done and ensured that it was done.
Q. 50
And Mr. Philip Reilly.
A.
Phil looked after the shopping centres and the management of the shopping
What was his function within the group?
21
centres.
22
parts in Dundalk, in Athlone, Navan, Nutgrove, some other small ones around.
23
And so Phil's role was to manage the Managers of the shopping centres.
24
Q. 51
10:49:19 25
By that stage there were, you know, shopping centres in different
So he would have been responsible for the day-to-day separation of the shopping centres?
26
A.
I think yeah.
27
Q. 52
Overall responsibility?
28
A.
Overall, yes.
29
Q. 53
And would he also have been in charge in that role in Tallaght Town Centre?
A.
Um, yes.
10:49:31 30
It
I think he was more involved in -- at that stage Tallaght was only Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:49:37
10:49:52
9 1
being developed so he played a more active role there, I think, in the
2
marketing as well as the management.
In setting up the systems, uh-huh.
3
Q. 54
And had he an active role in the development of the Tallaght Town Centre?
4
A.
To the best of my recollection, yes.
5
Q. 55
And was the company that developed Tallaght from the Monarch point of view a
6
company called L&C Properties Limited?
7
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
8
Q. 56
And was the L&C Properties partner in the development of Tallaght a combination
9 10:50:13 10
11
of English companies generally known as Guardian Royal or GRE? A.
Yes, I think so.
Q. 57
And was that the same English company that became involved in the subsequent
12
development of the Cherrywood lands at Cabinteely?
13
A.
Yes, I think so.
14
Q. 58
And was that the same English company that became involved in the subsequent
10:50:21 15
development of the Cherrywood Lands at Cabinteely?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 59
So that there was a history of dealing, as it were, between Monarch on the one
18
part and Guardian Royal on the other that predated the purchase of the
19
Cherrywood lands?
10:50:31 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 60
Right.
22
And obviously there would have been agreements in place in Tallaght in
relation to expenses and invoicing and charging out of costs; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 61
Between the two companies?
A.
Yes.
Q. 62
And who was the person that would have been in charge or had overall
10:50:43 25
26 27
responsibility for that function in the development of the Tallaght Town
28
Centre?
29 10:51:00 30
A.
Probably Mr. Glennane, but I'm not sure.
Q. 63
And there would have been agreements between L&C Properties Limited and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:51:05
10:51:19
10 1
Tallaght and the GRE group in relation to Tallaght; isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 64
And did Monarch Properties Services Limited provide project management services
4
to the Tallaght Town Centre?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 65
And was the position effectively the way the operation in Tallaght was run,
7
subject to anything any other witness may say, that there was an agreement
8
between GRE and Monarch about the development, the joint development of
9
Tallaght.
10:51:34 10
11
Is that right?
A.
I believe so, yes.
Q. 66
That the project manager that was appointed managed the project for Monarch on
12
the one hand and GRE on the other was a company called Monarch Properties
13
Services Limited?
14 10:51:50 15
A.
I'm not sure on that one but probably, yes.
Q. 67
And was MPSL, or Monarch Properties Services Limited, the company within the
16
Monarch Group whose function it was to provide project management to projects
17
coming up?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 68
So that --
A.
Yes, yes, it would have been.
Q. 69
So that what Monarch Properties Services Limited would do, is that it would
10:52:05 20
21 22
enter into an agreement to do a project on behalf of Monarch and GRE in this
23
case in Tallaght, and it would charge to both of those companies expenses it
24
had incurred and fees in respect of the job that it had done; is that right?
10:52:27 25
26
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 70
And do you know whether that was the type of relationship that continued into
27 28 29 10:52:53 30
the development of the Cabinteely lands? A.
I presume so but I didn't -- I didn't have the sort of -- I wasn't so active in the company at that stage.
You're asking me to remember things that -- you
bring me to things that I've forgotten all about. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:52:56
10:53:06
11 1
Q. 71
Uh-huh?
2
A.
But I presume yes.
3
Q. 72
You would have known obviously from your general knowledge within the group
4
that the services that were being carried out in connection with the
5
Tallaght -- the development of the Tallaght Town Centre were being carried out
6
by Monarch Properties Services Limited and invoiced to GRE?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 73
And that a similar type relationship developed or grew up or was agreed in
9 10:53:22 10
11
connection with the development of the Cherrywood Lands? A.
I would expect so, yes.
Q. 74
So that Monarch Properties Services Limited was expending monies and paying
12
expenses, including fees to professional persons, for which it subsequently
13
sought to recover those fees from GRE; isn't that right?
14
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 75
And in a general way, that was your understanding of the relationship?
16
A.
I think so, yeah.
17
Q. 76
Can you -- help the Tribunal as to what input, if any, Mr. Philip Reilly would
10:53:41 15
18
have had in relation to the creation of invoices or the seeking of recoupment
19
of funds in connection with the development of Tallaght Town Centre?
10:54:03 20
A.
I don't honestly remember.
It would have been similar I think to what I
21
described, you know, that everything had to be invoiced and passed for payment
22
and authorised for payment and then cheques would be issued.
23
Q. 77
And did you know at that time a Mr. Richard Lynn?
24
A.
Um, yeah, he was an employee.
Q. 78
He was an employee of what company, can you remember?
A.
Um, o off the top of my head I can't.
10:54:33 25
26
Probably Monarch Property Services.
27
That was the company who employed, you know, my employment was with Monarch
28
Property Services Limited.
29 10:54:59 30
Q. 79
And what was Mr.-- your understanding of Mr. Lynn's function?
A.
He was involved with the Cherrywood project. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I don't know what his title was
10:55:05
10:55:24
12 1
but he was -- he came on board to help with the Cherrywood project.
2
Q. 80
And who hired Mr. Lynn?
3
A.
I presume Mr. Monahan.
4
Q. 81
Did you know a Mr. Jack Whelan?
5
A.
Vaguely.
6
Q. 82
And what was Mr. Whelan's function or role?
7
A.
Oh, he was an agent or an auctioneer, I'm not sure which.
8
Q. 83
And who did Mr. Whelan deal with in the Monarch Group?
9
A.
I think he possibly would have dealt with the directors but probably
10:55:42 10
principally with Mr. Monahan.
11
Q. 84
That's Mr. Phillip Monahan?
12
A.
Sorry, if I say Mr. Monahan, there was only one Mr. Monahan and that was
13 14
Mr. Phil. Q. 85
10:55:58 15
So you said Mr. Jack Whelan would have dealt in the main with the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
16
A.
Yeah, I think so.
17
Q. 86
And would Mr. Richard Lynn have dealt mainly with the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
18
A.
I think he would have dealt with all three, with Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Monahan, and
19 10:56:15 20
21
Mr. Glennane. Q. 87
Can I show you on the screen beside you what Mr. Eddie Sweeney apparently will tell the Tribunal about the various relationships between these people.
22 23
2138, please.
24 10:56:32 25
And Mr. Sweeney in his statement to the Tribunal outlines, and we're talking
26
about the same period now, this is commencing in 1988/1989, 1990 onwards
27
thereafter. He says that in Somerton Mr. Monahan had his own office in
28
Somerton and he outlines the people who were there.
29
Sherwood, Ms. Ann Gosling, Mr. Colm Monahan and Mr. Paul Monahan who I'll come
10:56:54 30
back to in a moment and then he says that Somerton would have been regarded by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Mr. Philip Monahan, John
10:56:55
10:57:13
13 1
many as Mr. Philip Monahan's main office and would have been visited by some of
2
his close associates including Jack Whelan, Cathal McCarthy, Richard Lynn and
3
Gerry Enright who spent much of their time in the offices of Somerton.
4
these people have would be regarded as advisors to the Monarch Group they would
5
not in his opinion have gone through the normal strict interview process of
6
Monarch.
7
have been made by Philip Monahan personally.
While
Rather their appointments, remuneration and job specifications would
8 9
He then says that he would have been summoned out to meetings with other
10:57:27 10
members of the team to Somerton with Philip Monahan and he says that during
11
those years the management of Monarch was spread out and it would be fair to
12
say that communications within the company, I think is what he means, were not
13
great making relations between the various functions of staff at Monarch rather
14
difficult.
10:57:46 15
16
Leaving aside the last two paragraphs which I don't want you to comment on Ms.
17
Gosling, can I direct your attention to what he says there about Mr. Jack
18
Whelan, Cathal McCarthy, Richard Lynn and Ger Enright, in which he says they
19
were appointed outside the normal interview process within the Monarch Group
10:58:00 20
and were appointed directly by Mr. Monahan.
And do you agree with that?
21
A.
No, I'd have to disagree with that.
22
Q. 88
Right.
23
A.
Well they were not employed by the company, to the best of my knowledge.
24
Q. 89
Well is that --
A.
By Richard Lynn.
10:58:17 25
26
So do you say then they were not appointed directly by Mr. Monahan?
He was an employee.
And the other people were ... Jack
Whelan was an agent.
27
Q. 90
By an agent you mean he was an independent contractor?
28
A.
I think he was an auctioneer or an, you know, he was somebody who would come
29 10:58:44 30
with projects that he thought might be of interest to the Monarch Group. Q. 91
And would Mr. Whelan have invoiced, as an agent would, the Monarch Group? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:58:49
10:59:00
14 1
A.
2
I would think so.
I didn't -- I wouldn't be involved in the actual financial
end of things.
3
Q. 92
Uh-huh?
4
A.
But I would assume yes.
5
Q. 93
But in looking at those two people now.
Mr. Jack Whelan and Mr. Richard Lynn,
6
would you say that their terms of employment or engagement within the Monarch
7
Group were different from each other in that Mr. Lynn was an employee and
8
Mr. Whelan was not?
9
A.
10:59:21 10
11
Yes, I would.
Richard Lynn was an employee and Jack Whelan to the best of my
knowledge was never an employee. Q. 94
Would you agree with Mr. Sweeney in which he says that Mr. Jack Whelan would
12
have gone out to Somerton to visit Mr. Monahan and that he would have dealt
13
directly with Mr. Monahan?
14 10:59:33 15
16
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 95
Now, what exactly was Mr. Whelan doing for Mr. Monahan, can you assist?
A.
No, I don't think so.
Except insofar as he -- I think he tried to sell Phil
17
various properties, get him interested in various developments.
18
that, I don't really recall.
19
few times okay.
11:00:03 20
I didn't know the man very well.
Q. 96
Yes?
21
A.
I don't know what his role was.
22
Q. 97
But you met him with Mr. Monahan.
23
A.
Yes.
24
26
Q. 98
You know, he would come to Somerton and I'd make the tea and if there The absolute
Well, would you have discussed what had Mr. Whelan was doing for the Monarch Group with Mr. Monahan?
A.
29 11:00:46 30
Is that right?
detail, I'm sorry, I don't really recall.
27 28
I met him a
was minutes to be typed afterwards I'd do minutes or whatever.
11:00:19 25
More than
At the -- it's difficult for me to remember things because I didn't have to remember things, you know, I would write them down and put them on the file.
Q. 99
What file is that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:00:47
11:01:04
15 1
A.
Any file.
I mean, my -- for me to go back and remember things is very
2
difficult because I have nothing to refer to.
3
mind.
I wouldn't carry things in my
They would be put down on paper and ...
4
Q. 100
Well, what file would you have put Mr. Whelan on, for example?
5
A.
Whatever he happened to bring at the time.
6
I mean, if he brought a little
parcel of land in Dundalk or ...
7
Q. 101
And did he bring parcels?
8
A.
I'm sorry, but I'm not -- I'm trying to be very helpful but I don't honestly
9 11:01:18 10
remember. Q. 102
11
Well, if I showed you some documents then in connection with Mr. Whelan and they might assist you?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 103
Fine.
14
A.
I didn't have to remember.
Q. 104
If we could have page 8574, please.
11:01:28 15
I work -- I always worked with paper.
16 17
This is an invoice, apparently, which is recorded as being received in April
18
1992 by Monarch Properties and it's dated the 16th of April 1991.
19
that is a mistake or not, I can't assist you.
Whether
11:01:49 20
21
Do you see the document?
22
A.
I see the document, yeah.
23
Q. 105
And it's a fee to services in relation to residential consultancy in Cherrywood
24
in the sum of 150,000 pounds together with 30,000 pounds VAT.
11:02:01 25
Do you see
that?
26
A.
I do.
27
Q. 106
Now, can I draw your attention first of all to the circulation stamp on the
28 29 11:02:07 30
document? A.
Yes.
Q. 107
And can you see the initials PM and DG? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:02:11
11:02:18
16 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 108
PM I assume is Mr. Monahan and DG is Dominic Glennane?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 109
Who made those entries?
5
A.
It looks like my writing but I can't say I recall it.
6
Q. 110
Now, in your statement you have told the Tribunal, I think, that it was your
7
job to have circulated the mail to everybody.
8 9
8530, please.
11:02:33 10
11
We'll just explain that system.
8530 please.
12 13
Now, if you just look there. this is your statement to the Tribunal.
14
second last paragraph and you outline in outlining your duties you say "I would
11:02:51 15
The
have overseen the circulation of all mail that was delivered to the Monarch
16
Group at the Dundalk office during this period.
17
I would have opened most if not all of the correspondence and date stamped each
18
letter or piece of mail.
19
a circulation stamp signifying who the mail should be circulated to, for
11:03:09 20
A system was in place whereby
I would have reviewed the contents there of and used
example PM would have meant that the incoming correspondence should have been
21
reviewed by Mr. Monahan.
22
reviewed by Dominic Glennane and ES would have meant that the correspondence
23
should have been reviewed by Mr. Sweeney.
24
have to be reviewed by all three directors and also Senior managers of the
11:03:26 25
DG would have meant the correspondence to be
Quite often an item of mail would
company.
26 27
That's your statement isn't it
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 111
Now, if we go back to 8574.
11:03:36 30
This is the document dealing with Whelan land.
Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:03:36
11:03:44
17 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 112
And it's -- the circulation stamp is the circulation stamp you were talking
3
about in your statement; isn't that right?
4
A.
It is, yes.
5
Q. 113
It is likely that if this was delivered to Somerton that the initials were PM
6
and DQ -- DG were placed on it by you; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 114
It would follow that you have seen this document?
9
A.
If would.
11:04:03 10
11
have. Q. 115
12
Yes.
I can't say that I recall it.
It certainly looks as if I should
That's not unusual for me not to remember, sorry. It would also mean that Mr. Whelan was putting in a fee of 150,000
pounds?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 116
To Monarch Properties in connection with residential consultancy at Cherrywood?
A.
Okay.
Q. 117
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to what Mr. Whelan might or might
11:04:18 15
16 17
not have done prior to April of 1992 that would have entitled him to 150,000
18
pounds in connection with the residential consultancy at Cherrywood?
19 11:04:38 20
A.
No, I'm sorry.
Q. 118
Is it likely that the person with whom Mr. Whelan would have dealt was the late
21
I don't recall at all, I don't, sorry.
Mr. Monahan?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 119
Would he have dealt with anybody else in the group?
24
A.
Probably not.
Q. 120
Would it be fair to say then that there was a separate and special relationship
11:04:52 25
26
between the late Mr. Jack Whelan and the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
27
A.
I don't think so.
28
Q. 121
You were there, isn't that right, Ms. Gosling, on the ground, as it were?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 122
And you were there at the time this invoice was created and submitted; isn't
11:05:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:05:24
11:05:29
18 1
that right?
2
A.
That's true, yes.
3
Q. 123
It's a very substantial invoice?
4
A.
It's a very substantial invoice.
5
Q. 124
You have already told the Tribunal that Mr. Whelan was never an employee of the
6
Monarch Group; isn't that right?
7
A.
To the best of my knowledge, yes.
8
Q. 125
So, if this invoice is accurate it suggests that Mr. Whelan felt that he had
9
done 150,000 pounds worth of work for the Monarch Group in connection with
11:05:41 10
Cherrywood up to at least April 1992; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's what it certainly suggests, yes.
12
Q. 126
Now, Mr. Whelan dealt, you have told the Tribunal, with the late Mr. Philip
13 14 11:05:52 15
Monahan? A.
Yes.
Q. 127
Now, what could Mr. Whelan have done in connection with Cherrywood for
16
Mr. Monahan that would have entitled him to 150,000 pounds by April 1992?
17
A.
I don't know.
18
Q. 128
Do you know who else in the -- who if anybody in the Monarch Group could assist
19 11:06:12 20
21
the Tribunal as to what exactly Mr. Whelan was doing? A.
Well, I would -- I would think probably Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Glennane.
Q. 129
If I could show you a document at 3999.
Which is a Cherrywood document.
22 23
And I want to draw your attention the last six or seven entries on that.
24
this is an internal document.
11:06:47 25
It's headed Cherrywood Village.
And
So it's in
connection with the Cabinteely development
26
A.
Okay.
27
Q. 130
And you will see there entered Whelan Land Specialists 150,000 pounds?
28
A.
Okay.
29
Q. 131
According to the NL, which is the nominal larger.
11:06:58 30
Golf Club, 1,650? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And beneath that Killiney
11:07:00
11:07:16
19 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 132
The Tribunal has heard evidence that there were attempts made to swap land with
3
a golf club in the area between Cherrywood and a local golf club.
Do you know
4
whether Mr. Whelan had anything to do with any proposed land swap with Killiney
5
Golf Club or any other golf club?
6
A.
I don't.
7
Q. 133
Do you know what project Mr. Whelan was involved in in connection with
8 9
Cherrywood at all? Do you have any idea? A.
11:07:38 10
11
Off the top of my head I've no idea.
No.
At this moment in time no.
you know, a fee of that calibre. Q. 134
I don't recall him as being someone who had, But I just don't know, sorry.
Can I show you another document.
At 5040, please.
12 13
This is also in connection with -- it's an internally generated Monarch
14
Properties document.
11:08:05 15
with GRE.
It's a 1994 or 1995 document and it's itemising balances
In other words, a summary of the amounts due.
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 135
This would be amounts due by GRE to Monarch?
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 136
And I want to draw to your attention the third last item?
A.
Okay.
Q. 137
And there is an entry.
11:08:16 20
21 22
Another entry in relation to Mr. Whelan which is Jack
Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan 121,000 pounds?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 138
So the first invoice that Mr. Whelan has put in is 150,000 pounds.
11:08:33 25
And now
there is a separate amount of either 100,000 plus VAT or 121,000 pounds.
26
you see that?
27
A.
I see that, okay.
28
Q. 139
That would suggest, if that's accurate, Ms. Gosling, that between 1992 and
29 11:08:56 30
Do
1994/1995 Mr. Whelan did around 250,000 pounds worth of work for Monarch Properties, according to himself in connection with Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:08:58
11:09:07
20 1
A.
It would certainly suggest that, yes.
2
Q. 140
Yes.
3
A.
It certainly suggests that, yes.
4
Q. 141
Do you have any idea at all as to what Mr. Whelan was doing?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 142
You agree, I think, that Mr. Whelan would have met Mr. Philip Monahan and had
7
Isn't that right?
Sorry, I don't.
meetings in Somerton with Mr. Philip Monahan.
Is that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 143
Did you ever know him to attend a meeting with anybody else in the Monarch
11:09:26 10
Group?
11
A.
I think he would have, yes.
12
Q. 144
I'm not asking you now what he would have.
13 14 11:09:49 15
But -I'm asking you other than
Mr. Monahan do you know of Mr. Whelan having meetings with anybody else? A.
No.
Q. 145
Can I show you another document.
At 5180.
16 17
This is a document created in June of 1994.
18
being provided to GRE of forthcoming costs, do you understand?
19 11:10:06 20
And these are estimates that are
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 146
And listed under the heading "zoning costs" and under the heading "staff
21
success bonus" there is R Lynn 100,000 pounds and in brackets beside that
22
similar to JW whom I suggest to you is Mr. Jack Whelan?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 147
So, in June of 1994, in addition to the other two payments, this document is
11:10:28 25
recording or seeking going forward into the future from GRE agreement to the
26
payment of 100,000 pounds success fee to Jack Whelan in connection with zoning.
27
Do you see that?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 148
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to what input the late Mr. Jack
11:10:43 30
Whelan might have had into the zoning of Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:10:47
11:11:23
21 1
A.
No, I'm sorry.
I can't.
It wouldn't be -- I would -- it probably seems very
2
strange to say that I don't remember but I don't.
3
the level of being involved.
4
to be typed up and -- so I don't know.
5
getting success bonuses and such.
6
Q. 149
7
I wasn't, um, I wasn't of
I was in the level of typing up whatever needed I certainly -- I've never heard of him
It's news to me.
I just want to draw to your attention what's outlined in the document as giving rise to the success bonus to the staff?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 150
It says over the next six months it will be necessary for the above staff and
11:11:36 10
the above staff are in fact Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lafferty and others to be
11
available on a seven day basis to meet with local politicians, community
12
representatives, sporting groups and others who will have a vested interest in
13
the outcome of the move towards the variation of the Development Plan.
14
will have to be suitably briefed and be available to arrange and attend
11:11:56 15
Staff
functions, meetings and briefings and be sufficiently alert to counter adverse
16
representations which will be made to the local politicians.
17
addition to attending meetings with the local authority officials?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 151
And a success fee there.
11:12:12 20
The above is in
The total amount of success bonus being sought in
respect of the Monarch staff there comes to 180,000 pounds excluding Mr.
21
Whelan?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 152
And Mr. Whelan is, this document suggests that prior to June of 1994 there was
24
a separate arrangement in connection with Mr. Whelan for the payment of 100,000
11:12:30 25
pounds success fee.
Do you understand the point?
26
A.
I understand the point, yes.
27
Q. 153
Do you agree that's what the document says?
28
A.
That's certainly what the document is suggesting, yes.
29
Q. 154
And have you any knowledge of any other arrangement or agreement to pay a
11:12:43 30
success fee of 100,000 pounds to Jack Whelan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:12:46
11:13:02
22 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 155
Do you have any knowledge of an involvement in Prague, that the late
3
Mr. Monahan had an interest for some time in connection with a possible
4
development in Prague.
Were you aware of that?
5
A.
There was certainly something about Prague, yes.
6
Q. 156
Who was the person who introduced the Prague project to Mr. Monahan?
7
A.
That might have been Jack Whelan.
8 9 11:13:30 10
I don't know.
It's possible.
But maybe
I'm just thinking that because what you ... I don't know. Q. 157
Do you know whether Mr. Whelan was involved in the Prague project or not?
A.
You are certainly giving me questions that I wasn't expecting.
I mean, I
11
don't really remember what Prague was but I think possibly, yes, that Jack
12
Whelan was involved with Prague.
13
Q. 158
Did you ever meet the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
14
A.
Once or twice.
Q. 159
Where did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
16
A.
Um, probably at Somerton, yeah.
17
Q. 160
And in whose company was Mr. Lawlor?
18
A.
With Mr. Monahan.
19
Q. 161
Did Mr. Monahan introduce Mr. Lawlor to you?
A.
Yes, yes.
21
Q. 162
And approximately what period of time would this have been.?
22
A.
That would have been after the move to Somerton, which was sort of the end of
11:13:54 15
11:14:09 20
23 24
the 80's, beginning of the 90's. Q. 163
11:14:32 25
Were you aware of any payments made by either Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group or any of those companies to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
26
A.
Not off the top of my head, no.
27
Q. 164
Were you aware of any assurances or any undertakings given by the late
28 29 11:15:01 30
Mr. Monahan on behalf of Mr. Lawlor or any of Mr. Lawlor's companies? A.
I'm not quite sure what you mean.
Q. 165
For example, an undertaking to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing that if Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:15:07
11:15:24
23 1
defaulted on the repayments of his motorcar that they would be paid by Monarch
2
Properties Limited?
3
A.
Yeah, there was a vague recollection, yes, yeah.
4
Q. 166
And what exactly do you remember about that, Ms. Gosling?
5
A.
I presume it's, it would have been a case where the man couldn't raise a loan
6
for a car in his -- from his own circumstances and so Phil would give a
7
guarantee that if, if Phil believed in someone, that they would, you know,
8
honour a commitment like that but because of their personal circumstances they
9
weren't, they wouldn't qualify under the banking laws, he'd guarantee.
11:16:05 10
11
It
wouldn't be unusual. Q. 167
12
Can you think of anybody for whom Mr. Monahan provided this service other than the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
13
A.
Off the top of my head, no.
14
Q. 168
Well, if it isn't unusual it means that he did it for more than one person.
11:16:26 15
But it wouldn't be unusual.
He was ...
Do you understand, Ms. Gosling?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 169
Leaving you aside.
18
A.
Yeah, he would have done it for people he knew well.
19
Q. 170
Would it follow then that by doing this for the late Mr. Liam Lawlor that at
11:16:40 20
He would have done it for me. You would have worked for him; isn't that right?
the time that the document or at the time that the undertaking was given the
21
late Mr. Monahan must have known the late Mr. Liam Lawlor fairly well?
22
A.
Oh, he wouldn't have done it otherwise, yes.
23
Q. 171
7594.
24 11:16:52 25
This is a document dated June of 1988.
26 27
It's a letter of undertaking to Woodchester Hamilton leasing on behalf of
28
Advance Protein Limited and Advance Protein Limited was a company beneficially
29
owned by the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
11:17:14 30
And it gives an undertaking to Hamilton
Leasing in the event that Advance Protein Limited defaulted on the loan that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:17:20
11:17:33
24 1
Monarch Properties Limited when called upon will re pay the loan?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 172
Do you understand?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 173
So, effectively, what is happening there is that this is Mr. Phil Monahan
6
signature; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 174
Mr. Monahan true the medium of Monarch Properties Limited is guaranteeing the
9 11:17:36 10
11
repayment of the loan by Mr. Lawlor.
Do you understand?
A.
Yes.
Q. 175
And is it your situation -- your evidence that he would not have done so unless
12
he had known the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor well at that stage?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 176
Uh-huh?
A.
He obviously trusted the man.
16
Q. 177
By June of '88?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 178
I would suggest then that the relationship between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor
11:17:52 15
19 11:18:07 20
21
must have predated June of 1988? A.
Yes.
Q. 179
What exactly was the relationship between Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Monahan.
22 23
So, yes.
assist the Tribunal? A.
24
I don't think I can except insofar as there would have been a mutual respect, I suppose, between them.
11:18:37 25
I don't know how the relationship came about or how
long it was in existence.
26
Q. 180
Did you know that Mr. Lawlor was a member of Dublin County Council?
27
A.
I think I knew him as a TD.
So to answer the question, the answer is I don't
28
think I -- I wouldn't have -- I wouldn't have distinguished him as a
29
councillor.
11:19:09 30
Can you
Q. 181
I would have thought of him as a TD.
You would have known he was an elected representative? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:19:12
11:19:21
25 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 182
And certainly the documentation would suggest that Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor
3
knew each other prior to June of 1988?
4
A.
Yes, yes.
5
Q. 183
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you Mr. Lawlor?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 184
Never?
8
A.
Not that I'm aware of, no.
9 11:19:34 10
He wasn't in the habit of discussing people with
me. Q. 185
Did Mr. Lawlor come out to Somerton to visit Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
I don't -- I think that when I met him it was at Somerton.
12
Q. 186
And how many times would you have met him?
13
A.
I think only once or twice.
14
But I think there -- I think there was a
friendship there and they were neighbours or, you know, Mr. Lawlor also lived
11:20:11 15
in a house called Somerton.
His was in Lucan.
It caused a bit of confusion
16
at times insofar as, you know, occasionally a letter would come addressed to
17
Liam Lawlor, Somerton House, Lucan.
18
So ...
19
Q. 187
11:20:39 20
It would arrive in Somerton, Castleknock.
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Lawlor when he was in communication with the Tribunal prepared a list in which he indicated the people who had made
21
political donations and included in that list was Monarch Properties?
22
A.
Was I aware?
23
Q. 188
Uh-huh.?
24
A.
No.
Q. 189
And that Mr. Lawlor indicated to the Tribunal he believed that the amount that
11:20:53 25
26 27
11:21:17 30
But it wouldn't surprise me.
he had received was an amount in the order of 40,000 pounds? A.
28 29
No.
I wasn't involved in the actual payment out of company monies so, if that's what the company says was paid that's what was paid.
Q. 190
That's not what I said.
I said that Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal that he had
received of the order of 40,000 pounds from Monarch Properties but that Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:21:21
11:21:51
26 1
Properties indicated that their records did not show payments of that amount.?
2
A.
No, I wasn't aware of that, sorry.
3
Q. 191
Did you ever hear of a company called Comex Trading Corporation?
4
A.
Not off the top of my head, no, it doesn't ring a bell.
5
Q. 192
The -- I think the late Mr. Liam Lawlor told the Tribunal that he used the name
6
I wasn't.
Comex in order to create invoices on foot of which he would seek payment?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 193
It doesn't ring a bell with you?
9
A.
Not at all.
Q. 194
Can I show you a document at 1255, please.
11:22:12 10
It doesn't ring a bell with me, no.
Not at all.
11 12
Do you recognise the handwriting on that document?
13
A.
Um, no.
14
Q. 195
And I want to draw to your attention, five from the bottom, two entries of the
11:22:32 15
Somebody in the accounts office, but no.
16th of October 1990?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 196
Do you see those two?
18
A.
Yeah, I don't know.
19
Q. 197
And you will see there that on the 16th of October 1990 two cheques are written
11:22:50 20
It's, um, it's not name I recall at all.
to Comex Trading Corporation?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 198
One is for 28,000 and the second is for 28,300 pounds?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 199
And the company who makes the payment is L&C Properties Limited?
A.
Okay.
26
Q. 200
That was the company that developed Tallaght; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 201
Isn't that right?
29
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 202
And I think the bank statements are at 3013 and 3014.
11:23:06 25
11:23:13 30
I think so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
They needn't be taken
11:23:20
11:23:34
27 1
up at the moment.
The debits are there?
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 203
And I think if I show you 1256.
4 5
And this is an extract from the current account of Economic Reports Limited, a
6
company owned and operated by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
7
your attention a lodgement on the 26th of October 1990 in the sum of 28,300.
8
Second from the bottom.
9 11:23:46 10
And I want to draw to
Do you see that
A.
Yeah.
Q. 204
And that appears to be the proceeds of one of the cheques drawn by L&C
11
Properties in favour of Comex Trading Corporation?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 205
That would suggest that in October of 1990 that two cheques one of 28,000 and
14
one of 28,300 were written by L & C Properties Limited in favour of the late
11:24:06 15
Mr. Liam Lawlor's company or in favour of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor through a
16
medium of Comex Trading corporation.
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 206
Right that.
19 11:24:25 20
21
Do you understand?
Would mean that a sum, at that stage 56,300 pounds was paid to
Mr. Lawlor, I think, in October of 1990 is the reality? A.
Okay.
Q. 207
Did the late Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you making any payment to Mr. Lawlor
22
in 1990?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 208
Were you aware of the fact that such a payment was apparently made to
11:24:36 25
Mr. Lawlor or his company in October 1990?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 209
If such a payment had been authorised by Mr. Monahan.
28 29 11:24:47 30
Is it something you
would have expected he would have discussed with you? A.
No.
Q. 210
Are you saying that Mr. Monahan did not in general discuss payments made with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:24:54
11:25:03
28 1 2
you? A.
3
That's what I'm saying.
He wasn't in the habit of discussing payments or
things with me.
4
Q. 211
Did he ever discuss any political payments with you?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 212
Never?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 213
And I want to show you then at 1267.
9 11:25:11 10
An entry in the general ledger in relation to L&C Limited.
11
And if we could
look at the first four lines of that.
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 214
And what I want to draw to your attention there -- if we could just increase
14
the first four lines, please.
11:25:33 15
Of the entries commencing 'interior design'.
You will see the second and third entry are the payments of 28,300 and 28,000.
16
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 215
Will you just read out to the Tribunal the attribution that are given to them.
19 11:25:49 20
How are they described? A.
Strategy plan.
21
Q. 216
Yeah?
22
A.
Strategy plan.
23
Q. 217
Who is the person that would have made the decision to donate those two
24 11:26:00 25
payments as strategy plan? A.
Sorry, I don't know.
26
Q. 218
Who was the accountant in L&C Properties at the time, in 1990?
27
A.
I don't know who the accountant would have been.
28 29 11:26:22 30
The financial director was
Mr. Glennane but who the actual accountant was at that stage, I don't know. Q. 219
So are you saying that Mr. Glennane is the person who would be able to tell the Tribunal why the two payments to Comex Trading Corporation are described as Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:26:24
11:26:47
29 1
strategy plan in the books of L & C Property?
2
A.
I would think so.
3
Q. 220
Would Mr. Philip Reilly, for example, who was also involved in L & C and in
4
Either he or Mr. Sweeney.
Tallaght be able to assist the Tribunal as to how that designation came about?
5
A.
Possibly.
6
Q. 221
Were you ever aware of any requests being made by the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor to
7
I don't know.
Mr. Monahan for money, for finance or for support?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 222
And you were never involved in or connected with making any payment; is that
11:27:09 10
right? Any political payment?
11
A.
No, I wasn't involved, no.
12
Q. 223
Are you being fair to yourself there, Ms. Gosling?
13
A.
I don't know.
14
Q. 224
Were you involved in the 25,000 pounds payment to Mr. Charles Haughey?
A.
No.
Q. 225
I think that, if I can show you 3100.
11:27:28 15
16
Maybe not.
17 18
This is a cheque for 25,000 pounds made out to Charles Haughey, Party Leader's
19
Fund
11:27:45 20
A.
Okay.
21
Q. 226
Signed by Mr. Monahan.
22
A.
Uh-huh, that's right.
23
Q. 227
Whose writing is the main part of the cheque in?
24
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 228
Is it your writing?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 229
Did you know anything about that payment?
28
A.
No, I didn't.
29
Q. 230
If I could show you 8716, please.
11:27:52 25
Is that right?
11:28:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:28:01
11:28:22
30 1
And if I can draw to your attention the fifth entry on that.
And do you see
2
there, Ms. Gosling, Paul Kavanagh re CJH and it looks like snack or a word such
3
as that and then beneath that 25,000 pounds
4
A.
Okay.
5
Q. 231
And that entry is on a diary dated the 15th of January 1991?
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 232
Is that your handwriting?
8
A.
The Paul Kavanagh on Harcourt Street looks like mine, yes.
9
Q. 233
Mr. Monahan when he gave evidence to the Moriarty Tribunal said that that was
11:28:39 10
your handwriting and that he would have provided that information to you.
11 12
you agree with that? A.
13 14 11:28:59 15
Do
No, the Paul Kavanagh is my writing.
The re CJH snack, that's Phil's own
writing. Q. 234
Right.
If I show you exactly what Mr. Monahan told the Moriarty Tribunal.
At 7823.
16 17
At question 40.
He confirms that it's in his secretary's handwriting.
18
he's asked at 41.
19
A:
Yes
11:29:15 20
Q:
And who would have given her that information
And
"Is that whose writing it is your secretary's?
21
A: Me but I have no recollection of having a snack or what the snack consisted
22
of.
23
Question 43: But it's fairly detailed to this extent.
24
limited note it appears to be re CJH which we must assume to be Charles J.
11:29:29 25
Although it's a
Haughey you would agree.
26
A:
Yes.
27
Q 44: And 25,000.
28
diary would you agree
29
A:
Yeah.
11:29:39 30
Q:
And you say you would have imparted that information to the secretary to
So there's a fair amount of detail in that note in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:29:43
11:29:54
31 1
enable her to fill up the diary?
2
A:
3
And the part I don't have any recollection of having a snack with Paul
4
Kavanagh"
I don't think she'd write it without me without me imparting it to her.
5 6
So do you agree with what Mr. Monahan told the Moriarty Tribunal, that the
7
entry in the diary would have been made by you as a result of information
8
given to you by him?
9
A.
11:30:06 10
11
Yes and no.
Yes, in that you showed me my handwriting.
Kavanagh's' in my handwriting. Q. 235
And at 8716.
The 'Paul
But the others was Phil's own writing.
Which is the document in question.
Can I ask you, are the
12
words 25,000 pounds in your handwriting and the words Harcourt Street in your
13
handwriting?
14 11:30:31 15
A.
Harcourt Street is my writing.
25,000 is not.
That's Mr. Monahan's writing.
Q. 236
And I think it is also mentioned in a diary at 8717.
Which is of February the
16
6th.
17
third from the bottom on the first page if it could be increased, please.
18
Third from the bottom.
19
PM, cheques 8 - 9, Somerton.
11:31:05 20
A.
21 22
11:31:19 25
And some
There is an entry Paul Kavanagh 25,000 pounds.
Paul Kavanagh is my writing.
Is any of that in your handwriting? And 8 - 9 Somerton is my writing.
I don't know
Q. 237
It certainly would appear to be in connection with a cheque for 25,000 pounds isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 238
Can I ask you then about the cheque itself.
3100.
26 27
This is written on the personal account of the late Mr. Monahan isn't that
28
right?
29 11:31:28 30
By
what that meant 8 - 9.
23 24
Which is apparently the day that the cheque was handed over.
A.
Yes.
Q. 239
And is that the account that you would have reconciled on a monthly basis? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:31:35
11:31:45
32 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 240
Because I think in your statement you told the Tribunal that you would have had
3
responsibility for the personal bank account of Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
Well I reconciled it.
5
Q. 241
So you would have reconciled this cheque, obviously?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Well when I say I reconciled it, I did it in retrospect, when the bank
statements came in.
8
Q. 242
Yes?
9
A.
So I didn't necessarily know -- there were two cheque books.
11:32:11 10
one and I had one in the office.
Mrs. Monahan had
But I didn't have access to Mrs. Monahan's
11
cheque book to put names against what they, you know, what the cheques were.
12
So I -- bank reconciliation would show a lot of blank spaces.
13
Q. 243
Uh-huh?
14
A.
Because I would just put the amounts in.
Q. 244
But certainly Mr. Monahan would have trusted you.
11:32:36 15
16
that.
17
book; is that right?
There's no question about
But to the extent that you had possession of a second domestic cheque
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 245
And you also carried out the reconciliation for Mr. Monahan?
A.
Yes.
Q. 246
And so you would have been in a very trusted position with Mr. Monahan.
11:32:49 20
21 22
Wouldn't that be fair to say?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 247
Yes.
11:33:00 25
Notwithstanding that.
pounds to Mr. Haughey.
You know nothing about this payment of 25,000
Is that right?
26
A.
No, I don't.
27
Q. 248
And other than the entries that you acknowledge in the diary are in your
28 29 11:33:10 30
handwriting.
You don't know anything about it?
A.
No.
Q. 249
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan was accustomed to keeping amounts of cash at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:33:15
11:33:20
33 1
Somerton or elsewhere?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 250
No, you don't know or he didn't?
4
A.
He didn't.
5
Q. 251
How do you know that?
6
A.
Well I don't believe -- I don't know that he did.
7
Q. 252
Uh-huh.
8
A.
I can't be sure but I don't believe he did.
9
Q. 253
Approximately how many companies was Mr. Monahan involved in?
A.
Quite a large number.
11:33:42 10
11
I don't think so.
Are you sure about that?
I know at one stage it was like the Heinz 57 variety,
it's, so ...
12
Q. 254
And did all of those companies have bank accounts?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 255
And how did Mr. Monahan fund his own activities out of his personal bank
11:34:13 15
account?
16
A.
I don't honestly know.
17
Q. 256
I mean, Mr. Monahan was in a position to write a cheque for 25,000 pounds in
18 19 11:34:24 20
February of 1991 to Mr. Charles Haughey; isn't that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 257
Yes.
21
Now, do you know what were the source of the funds that came into the
bank account that enabled Mr. Monahan to write that cheque?
22
A.
They would probably have come from --
23
Q. 258
No, no?
24
A.
From Monarch.
Q. 259
No, no.
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 260
Do you know whether or not therefore Mr. Monahan had access to cash or large
11:34:37 25
28 29 11:35:02 30
Do you know where the source of the funds?
amounts of cash? A.
I don't believe he had.
Q. 261
You don't know where the money came from that financed the account of which you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:35:07
11:35:20
34 1
had a cheque book; isn't that right?
2
A.
It came from one of the Monarch accounts.
3
Q. 262
Uh-huh.
4
A.
Probably MPSL.
5
Q. 263
No, no, which one?
6
A.
Sorry, I can't say for definite.
7
Q. 264
Can I just take you back to something.
Which one?
I don't know.
8 9
8717, please.
On the diary.
11:35:31 10
11
On this subject, I just want to draw to your attention to an entry that I think
12
is partly made, subject to correction, by yourself by Mr. Monahan.
13
down the page the 6th of February
14 11:35:45 15
Half way
A.
Okay.
Q. 265
Do you see there PM? I think it's S Murphy, subject to correction, 100,000
16
pounds cash.?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 266
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why Mr. Monahan would be making
19
an entry about 100,000 pounds cash on the 6th of February 1991, the same date
11:36:08 20
that he's paying 25,000 pounds to Mr. Haughey?
21
A.
Absolutely no idea at this moment in time, no.
22
Q. 267
Well do you know anything about that entry for 100,000 pounds cash on the 6th
23 24 11:36:31 25
of February 1991? A.
I have to truthfully say no.
Q. 268
And if Mr. Monahan had acquired or had in his possession 100,000 pounds cash in
26
I don't remember.
February of 1991, you didn't know about it; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 269
And you don't know where it came from, if he had it; isn't that right?
29
A.
That's right.
Q. 270
And you can't assist as to whether Mr. Monahan is paying Mr. Murphy 100,000
11:36:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:36:53
11:37:01
35 1
pounds cash or Mr. Murphy is paying Mr. Monahan 100,000 pounds cash; isn't that
2
right?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 271
Do you know who Mr. Murphy is?
5
A.
Is I have no idea who Mr. Murphy is.
6
Q. 272
No idea?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 273
All right.
9
But it would certainly appear to suggest, the entry being in
Mr. Monahan's own handwriting, that on the same date as he writes the cheque
11:37:14 10
for 25,000 pounds to Mr. Haughey out of his domestic bank account, he is also
11
involved in some transaction that involves 100,000 pounds cash; isn't that
12
right?
13
A.
It suggests that all right.
14
Q. 274
Uh-huh.
11:37:36 15
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had ever had any dealings in cash or
negotiated with people in cash or dealt with cash at all in the course of his
16
business?
17
A.
I don't think he did.
18
Q. 275
Yes.
19
Can I show you a document at 8105, which is dated May of 1986.
By
which time you would have been in the employment of Mr. Monahan; isn't that
11:37:56 20
right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 276
And this is a discussion about what's going to happen to money that's raised as
23
a result of the Tesco transaction.
24
Ms. Gosling?
11:38:07 25
26
A.
Vaguely, vaguely.
Q. 277
Uh-huh.
27
Do you remember the Tesco transaction,
I'd forgotten all about that.
This is a meeting that takes place between -- would you have typed up
the minutes of this meeting?
28
A.
I don't believe so.
29
Q. 278
Uh-huh?
A.
It was probably typed by Sean Mooney but I've -- well or in Sean Mooney's
11:38:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:38:29
11:38:46
36 1
office.
2
probably by Sean Mooney.
3
Q. 279
I don't know.
All right.
Anyway.
I don't remember this, so I would think it was
Paragraph one records that Monarch is in funds because
4
of the completion of the Tesco transaction and PM, that's Mr. Philip Monahan,
5
wants now to make disbursements to Dominic Glennane, Eddie Sweeney and to
6
himself?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 280
Right.
9
And then he goes down -- number -- and he says he outlines the money
that he wants people to get.
At paragraph two the following is recorded.
11:39:00 10
11
From his own viewpoint, Mr. Monahan wants to ensure that there is sufficient
12
cash available to him and to his wife in the event of his death and that this
13
cash is free and not tide up with Monarch.
14
1 million and one and a half million from Monarch tax free.
11:39:17 15
PM would like to withdraw between This money would
not be required all at once but it would be available on loan account to
16
Mr. Monahan as and when he required T
17 18 19 11:39:35 20
Were you aware of that proposal? A.
Well, I would have seen these minutes at some stage but.
Q. 281
Well, were you aware of Mr. Monahan's desire in 1986 to have either one million
21 22
or one million and a half available to himself in cash? A.
23 24
I must have been but, yeah, I suppose I have to answer yes.
I don't remember.
You know, I don't actually remember but, yes, the answer would have to be yes. Q. 282
11:40:04 25
And was there a system in Monarch or an agreement or an understanding in Monarch that when things came good on developments people would be paid
26
bonuses?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 283
And that those bonuses would be paid either in cash or what's described I think
29 11:40:17 30
in the documentation as a tax efficient manner? A.
A tax efficient manner, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:40:19
11:40:25
37 1
Q. 284
Is that right?
2
A.
Uh-huh.
3
Q. 285
And were you yourself a recipient of such a bonus?
4
A.
Um, yes.
5
Q. 286
And were other members of Monarch recipients of such bonuses?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 287
Including payments in cash?
8
A.
Not in cash.
9
Q. 288
Well, Mr. Sweeney swore an affidavit in the High Court in proceedings when he
11:40:39 10
instituted proceedings against Monarch Properties.
11
You will remember those
proceedings between Monarch Properties?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 289
And at page 8056 of this affidavit, Mr. Sweeney's sworn document.
14 11:40:53 15
He records at paragraph 10.
He is talking about an ex gratia payment.
"I
16
requested that any such agreement would be implemented on a professional basis
17
and accordingly, it would be agreed that Mr Sean Mooney of the company's
18
auditors and accountants, Stokes Kennedy Crowley, would be asked to make the
19
necessary arrangements.
11:41:11 20
Various meetings were held between Mr. Monahan and
myself at which we discussed the mechanism for the implementation of this
21
arrangement and it was agreed that ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds would be
22
notionally paid to me".
23 24
That's 8057.
11:41:26 25
"For which I would receive a cash sum of 50,000 pounds in a tax
efficient manner with the balance of 50,000 pounds being paid to Mr. Monahan as
26
consideration for the acquisition of a tranche of his existing shareholding
27
equivalent to 15% of the issued shared capital of the Monarch Group.
28
see that?
29 11:41:41 30
Do you
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 290
What Mr. Monahan is apparently swearing there is that he had an agreement to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:41:47
11:41:57
38 1
receive 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner.
Now, when Mr. Sweeney comes
2
to give evidence we can deal with the efficiency of the manner in which he was
3
paid that sum.
4
A.
Uh-huh.
5
Q. 291
What I'm drawing to your attention here is an apparent agreement according to
6
Mr. Sweeney for the 50,000 pounds in cash.
7
of bonus system that operated in Monarch whether those payments were in cash?
8
A.
9 11:42:17 10
I'm asking you whether the system
Well they were in a -- they would be in a cheque that maybe said cash rather than the person's name.
Q. 292
Well, who would the cheque be made out to?
11
A.
I would think the person concerned.
12
Q. 293
Did you ever receive a bonus?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 294
And who was your cheque made out to?
A.
Ann Gosling.
16
Q. 295
Did you ever receive a cheque by any other mechanism?
17
A.
I don't think so, no.
18
Q. 296
Do you have any involvement in a company called Circinus?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 297
Was that a company in which you had a beneficial interest?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 298
How much of that company did you own?
23
A.
Um, I think it was 50 percent.
24
Q. 299
Did that company receive a disbursement by way of a bonus following on a share
11:42:29 15
11:42:45 20
11:43:05 25
deal involving export sales relief?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 300
And was your share of that a share of 5%?
28
A.
Probably, yeah.
29
Q. 301
And how were you paid that?
A.
I got cheques on two subsequent years I think.
11:43:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:43:28
11:43:42
39 1
Q. 302
Uh-huh?
2
A.
Of a small amount.
3
employment.
And I didn't actually get the remainder until I left my
It was a tax scheme.
4
Q. 303
Uh-huh?
5
A.
Tax scheme to -- but myself and the other person involved, we didn't
6 7
actually -- we just got a small proportion in ... Q. 304
8 9 11:44:01 10
Were the beneficiaries of that particular scheme Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Tom Monahan and yourself?
A.
Yes.
Q. 305
And did you all receive payments made as a result of the profits generated by
11
that scheme?
12
A.
Eventually.
13
Q. 306
And were the shares in that scheme held in a company called Circinus Limited?
14
A.
My share and Mr. Tom Monahan's share was.
Q. 307
Yes.
16
A.
That was one company that had a bank account so the cheques were from Circinus.
17
Q. 308
So that the payment or the profit was paid initially to a company called
11:44:18 15
18 19 11:44:38 20
And were the cheques made payable to Circinus Limited?
Circinus Limited and Circinus paid you? A.
Yes.
Q. 309
And you were a director and I think indeed secretary, together with Mr. Philip
21
Monahan, of Circinus Limited; isn't that right?
22
A.
I think it was Mr. Tom Monahan.
23
Q. 310
I show you a document which is not in the brief but which will be added to the
24
brief.
11:44:55 25
Circinus which records Mr. Phil Monahan and not Tom Monahan as being the
26 27
director? A.
28 29 11:45:31 30
Which is an extract from the company's registrar in relation to
That might be after Tom died (document handed to witness). Thank you. Okay. When -- the original directors were Tom Monahan.
Q. 311
And then --
A.
And then Tom died. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:45:32
11:45:43
40 1
Q. 312
And Mr. Philip Monahan became a director?
2
A.
I think so, yeah.
3
Q. 313
But was Circinus, if I understand it correctly, a vehicle that was designed to
4
take your share of a profit in a scheme.
Is that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 314
And was the entire of the profit, designed to pay out an aggregate sum of 1.8
7
million; is that right?
8
A.
In total to all of the directors.
9
Q. 315
Is that right?
A.
Um, I don't remember the sum sums but probably, yes.
Q. 316
And that Mr. Glennane was to receive 20%, which was 450,000 pounds.
11:45:55 10
11
And
12
Mr. Sweeney was to get 270,000 pounds for his share and Mr. Monahan, I think,
13
was in fact to get 1.08 million for his shares?
14
A.
11:46:17 15
16
Possibly, yeah.
I don't remember the figures.
I'd forgotten the scheme
until now but yes. Q. 317
17
The shares of the profit that were taken by the employees on foot of this agreement were taken in various companies; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 318
So that Mr. Glennane had his company, which I understand was called Aspentree
11:46:32 20
Limited and Mr. Sweeney had his company called Isotope limited and Mr. Monahan
21
had his company; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 319
What was Mr. Monahan's company?
24
A.
You'll have to remind me because I don't -- I'm sorry, I don't remember.
Q. 320
Did Mr. Monahan take his share through Circinus Limited?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 321
But the division that was being paid out at that particular time was a sum of
11:46:45 25
28 29 11:47:01 30
1.08 million to Mr. Phil Monahan; isn't that right? A.
I don't know.
I don't know what the figures were.
Q. 322
Well according to the affidavit sworn by Mr. Sweeney in the proceedings at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:47:05
11:47:23
41 1
8058.
2 3
At paragraph 17.
4
financial success of The Square Shopping Centre the group agreed to pay an
5
aggregate dividend in a tax efficient manner, devised by Stokes Kennedy
6
Crowley, to myself and Messrs. Monahan and Glennane.
7
through Anglo Irish Bank corporation to various especially formed nominee
8
companies.
9
Limited and he describes that as 15 percent of 1.8 million.
11:47:44 10
He says in January '92 as a result of the outstanding
The monies were paid
In this regard I received a dividend of 270,000 pounds via Isotope Mr. Glennane
received 450,000 ie 20 percent via Aspentree with a balance of 1.08 million, 65
11
percent, being paid to Mr. Monahan via Monarch Properties Holdings Limited and
12
Circinus, that is Sirinus but it should be Circinus Limited.
13
A.
14 11:48:07 15
Now --
I don't think his -- I'm not too sure that he is totally accurate there in how it was done.
Q. 323
16
So you say that what was paid to Circinus would have been your share of the bonus or the profit; is that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 324
And there is a dispute on the affidavits between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Sweeney.
19
I don't think the amounts are disputed.
11:48:25 20
payments.
21
What's disputed is the purpose of the
Whether it was by way of an investment or matters such as that
sort?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 325
But do you agree that out of these monies you received a sum equivalent of 5%
24 11:48:48 25
and you took it through a company called Circinus Limited? A.
26
No.
No, I think Circinus was earlier than that.
one you mentioned earlier I think the Tesco one.
27
Q. 326
It was as a result of the Tesco?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 327
Did you receive a second payment?
A.
No.
11:49:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And it was from, from the
11:49:03
11:49:10
42 1
Q. 328
In '92, no?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 329
It was following the Tesco payout?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 330
But certainly if Mr. Sweeney is correct in what he sets out in paragraph 17.
I only received one.
So ...
6
In 1992 Mr. Monahan was receiving 1.08 million which was being taken through a
7
corporate structure.
Did you know anything about that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 331
Well, would you outline to the Tribunal?
A.
But I don't know exactly what I knew.
11:49:34 10
11
There was a -- I know that there's a
scheme set up and handled tax efficiently.
12
Q. 332
Uh-huh?
13
A.
But that's really as much as I can at this moment remember anyway.
14
Q. 333
Certainly it would appear that there was a disbursement because that doesn't
11:49:57 15
appear to be disputed?
16
A.
There was definitely a disbursement, yes.
17
Q. 334
And if the figures are correct then the amount disbursed in 1992 to Mr. Monahan
18 19
through a corporate structure was a sum of 1.08 million? A.
Okay.
Q. 335
No idea?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 336
But you have a recollection of the transaction?
23
A.
There was a transaction of that nature, yes.
24
Q. 337
Do you have any idea what Mr. Monahan would have done with his share?
A.
No.
26
Q. 338
Do you know where he'd have put that money?
27
A.
No, off the top of my head, now, no, I don't know.
28
Q. 339
Did Mr. Monahan have any offshore trusts?
29
A.
Not to my knowledge.
Q. 340
Did Mr.-- did you ever hear of a trust called the Aynsley Trust?
11:50:26 20
11:50:27 25
11:50:42 30
I'm sorry.
I have no idea on the amounts.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:50:51
11:51:06
43 1
A.
The name rings a bell.
2
Q. 341
Do you know what it was?
3
A.
I think it was something to do with Ansbacher.
4
Q. 342
Uh-huh.
5
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had any involvement in the Aynsley
Trust?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 343
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan ever made direct payments himself to people or
8 9 11:51:25 10
to individuals? A.
In what sense?
Q. 344
Did he make payments directly to people, individuals, oversee or supervise
11 12
payments himself? A.
13 14
No.
He'd his own cheque book but anything that was done was done from the
company. Q. 345
11:51:48 15
Uh-huh.
You see, in July of 1992 Mr. Philip Monahan wrote to Mr. Martin Baker
in connection with Tallaght and the Cherrywood Development and at page 3781 of
16
that letter he says the following and he's talking about Tallaght.
17 18
He says "paragraph five: Additional Marketing Costs.
19
of the joint venture key additional marketing costs were incurred.
11:52:06 20
To ensure the success These
costs which were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring
21
the tax status and appropriate tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre".
22 23
Now, stop there for the moment.
24
letter appears to be suggesting two things.
11:52:25 25
He appears to be suggesting that
costs were paid directly by him A, in connection with the tax status of
26 27
And Mr. Monahan who was the author of the
Tallaght and B, the appropriate tenant profile. A.
Would you agree with that?
I wouldn't think that was what was actually intended.
You could take that
28
interpretation from that okay but I don't think that was the ... I think the
29
idea supervised directly by Mr. Monahan simply to ensure that they got done.
11:53:02 30
Q. 346
Well if we look now at what's being said the money is being paid for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:53:08
11:53:22
44 1
A.
Okay.
2
Q. 347
Do you agree that according to this letter that the payments that were
3
supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were those in connection with the tax status
4
of the Tallaght Town Centre and the tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre?
5
A.
Well I think Mr. Monahan, as the boss, had the overall responsibility.
So
6
it's -- just reading this in isolation and not being aware of what else was
7
being said in the letter you could take that interpretation but I think it's
8
probably, you'd need to see the whole big picture.
9 11:53:48 10
11
Q. 348
Yeah?
A.
And that he as the -- as, you know, as the Chief Executive was --
Q. 349
Well, this might be an appropriate time to take a break and while of course
12
Ms. Gosling has this letter and has had it for some time can refresh herself
13
and read the letter.
14 11:54:06 15
CHAIRMAN:
We'll take a ten minute break.
16 17 18 19 11:54:18 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
21 22 23 24 12:12:56 25
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Ms. Gosling.
26 27
Could I have page 3781, please.
28 29
3781.
Sorry.
It's on screen.
12:13:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:13:08
12:13:26
45 1
And looking at paragraph 5 of that letter.
Which dealt with costs in relation
2
to Tallaght.
3
was the first paragraph in which what was set out there is that certain costs
4
were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan and were critical to ensuring the tax
5
status and appropriate tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre.
6
right?
And what I had been asking you before the break, Ms. Gosling,
Is that
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 350
And I was suggesting to you that what was being said there was that Mr. Monahan
9
had made direct payments in connection with tax status and appropriate tenant
12:13:41 10
profile.
11
Isn't that right? Now, do you agree with that? That that's what
the letter says?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 351
Right.
14
The letter goes on.
the 1989 Finance Act.
12:14:00 15
"The Square was included as a designated area in
This dramatically increased its value and led to a
large level of private and institutional investors expressing interest in the
16
project. Institutional sales of 24 million were made before the centre had
17
even opened.
18
area particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght".
He then says significant professional fees were incurred in this
19 12:14:16 20
Now, could you assist the Tribunal at all as to what professional fees were
21
incurred in relation to obtaining the tax status in Tallaght
22
A.
No, I'm sorry.
23
Q. 352
Do you know anything about any programme or strategy about getting tax
24 12:14:29 25
designation for Tallaght? A.
No, I don't.
26
Q. 353
Was this ever discussed by you by Mr. Monahan?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 354
All right.
29 12:14:43 30
On the following page, 3782.
Continuing the same paragraph.
"The Square had sever anchor tenants, Crazy Prices, Dunnes Stores, Pricewise, Hickey's, A wear, UCI and Roches Stores. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
To ensure that these company were
12:14:49
12:15:04
46 1
successfully encouraged to acquire a unit in Tallaght required the personal
2
input involvement of Mr. Monahan which in certain circumstances required
3
compensation payments for changes in contractual trading arrangements.
4
of 850,000 pounds should be allocated to cover the foregoing".
A sum
5 6
And I suggest to you that Mr. Monahan in this letter is seeking a sum of
7
850,000 pounds to cover his outgoings in connection with ensuring the tax
8
status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile.
9
Isn't that right?
A.
It certainly suggests that, yes.
Q. 355
And that's what the letter is seeking.
11
A.
Possibly, yes.
12
Q. 356
So what Mr. Monahan is saying in this letter is I have spent 850,000 pounds
12:15:20 10
Isn't that right?
13
securing the tax status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile for the
14
Tallaght Town Centre and I want you, GRE, to pay me that money.
12:15:41 15
Isn't that
right?
16
A.
Possibly.
17
Q. 357
If Mr. Monahan spent 850,000 pounds securing the tax status of Tallaght and
18 19
ensuring the appropriate tenant profile where did he get the money? A.
From the company.
Q. 358
What company?
21
A.
Whichever one was involved.
22
Q. 359
So that would be L&C Properties in Tallaght; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 360
So you say that the books and records of L&C Properties would show
12:15:55 20
12:16:06 25
disbursements to the sum of 850,000 pounds made directly by Mr. Philip Monahan
26
to ensure the tax status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile?
27
A.
I would expect so, yes.
28
Q. 361
Insofar as the appropriate tenant profile is concerned, is what was being
29 12:16:26 30
discussed in this letter the practice, whereby, in order to encourage multiples to come into a shopping centre you paid them what has been described in other Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:16:31
12:16:41
47 1
venues as "hello money?"
2
A.
I wasn't involved in that aspect of things.
3
Q. 362
Were you aware of that aspect of things?
4
A.
Not really.
5
Q. 363
Do you know whether or not monies were ever paid in connection with encouraging
6
So I can't answer that.
people to take up units in Tallaght town centre?
7
A.
I don't.
8
Q. 364
You don't?
9
A.
No.
Q. 365
Do you know what monies might have been paid or who they might have been paid
12:16:50 10
11
to in order to ensure the tax status of Tallaght?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 366
Do you know whether Mr. Philip Monahan himself had direct contact with senior
14 12:17:03 15
16
politicians? A.
No.
No, I don't know.
Q. 367
Do you know what was the basis for this letter, for seeking this money in
17
connection -- could I have 3781 again, please.
18
850,000 pounds in connection with these two items being the tax status of
19
Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile?
12:17:31 20
For seeking this sum of
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 368
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss any of this with you?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 369
Who is the person in the Monarch Group who could assist in relation to this
24 12:17:41 25
26
letter? A.
Well presumably once again back to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney.
Q. 370
And what about Mr. Philip Reilly who was the man on the ground, as I understand
27
it, in Tallaght.
Would he know all about this?
28
A.
I don't know.
29
Q. 371
Do you know who was involved in any of the transactions that are the subject
12:17:59 30
matter of this paragraph? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:18:00
12:18:19
48 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 372
Now, I want to draw to your attention to the response of GRE.
GRE denied that
3
they had any liability under this heading and they never ever deal in their
4
correspondence with the whole element of tax status but in their reply they do
5
address the tenant profile issue.
6 7
3823, please.
8 9
And the heading is -- 3823.
12:18:31 10
Yes.
And the heading is "paragraph 7 Additional
Marketing Costs in respect of Sales to Owner Occupiers" and it says the source
11
is Section 5 of P Monahan's letter of 22nd July 1992.
12
Mr. Monahan's letter of 22nd of July 1992 is the document at 3781 to which we
13
have just been referring, Ms. Gosling
14 12:18:51 15
Section 5 of
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 373
That was headed Additional Marketing Costs in Mr. Monahan's letter.
It's now
16
being called Additional Marketing Costs in respect of Sales to Owner Occupiers.
17
There is no reference in this reply to the tax status of Tallaght.
18 19
What I want to draw to your attention is what is is said there in relation to
12:19:14 20
item C.
In respect of Dunnes a net price was achieved for the joint venture
21
on the basis that 1 million Irish pounds was paid to Monarch outside the joint
22
venture agreement to reflect deals elsewhere.
23 24 12:19:20 25
26
Do you see that? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 374
What GRE are saying there, apparently, is that in connection with Dunnes
27
Stores, it would appear, I will just say Dunnes in case it's not Dunnes Stores
28
that outside the joint venture a sum of 1 million pounds was paid to Monarch.
29
Do you understand that?
12:19:36 30
A.
Uh-huh. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:19:37
12:19:44
49 1
Q. 375
And it's to reflect deals elsewhere?
2
A.
Uh-huh.
3
Q. 376
Do you know what the deals elsewhere were for which the sum of 1 million pounds
4
was paid?
5
A.
No, I don't.
6
Q. 377
Was any of this ever discussed with you by Mr. Monahan?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 378
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had contact with any ministers?
9
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 379
Do you know that Mr. Monahan may have met with Mr. Flynn, who was then Minister
12:20:01 10
11
for the Environment?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 380
Were you aware of that?
14
A.
No.
Q. 381
Were you aware that in June of 1989 Monarch Properties Limited paid 16,000
12:20:22 15
16
pounds to Fianna Fail?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 382
Okay.
19 12:20:43 20
At 2864.
Mr. Philip Monahan sent 16,000 pounds to Fianna Fail; isn't
that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 383
Were you aware of that?
22
A.
I just said I wasn't.
23 24 12:20:54 25
the letter.
But I see that's -- my reference is on the bottom of
So I would have typed the letter.
Q. 384
Uh-huh?
A.
I'm sorry; you know, I don't remember.
But when I see something like that.
26
I mean, it's probably difficult for you to appreciate that I don't remember,
27
but I don't.
28
Q. 385
29 12:21:13 30
Would you have known in a general way about the political donations that were made by the Monarch Group?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:21:14
12:21:25
50 1
Q. 386
2
So other than typing the correspondence you wouldn't have been aware of the fact that 16,000 pounds was paid?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 387
And these matters wouldn't have been discussed with you?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 388
All right.
7
Were you aware that in May of 1989 that Mr. Monahan apparently had
a meeting with Mr. Padraig Flynn?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 389
At 7661.
12:21:44 10
11
It would appear that on the 24th of May 1989 Mr. Monahan met Mr. Flynn,
12
according to Mr. Padraig Flynn's ministerial diary.
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q. 390
Do you see the entry there for the 24th of May, P Monaghan?
A.
Well our Mr. Monahan didn't have a G in his name but .... if Mr. Flynn says
12:22:07 15
16 17
that's Mr. Monahan that's Mr. Monahan, obviously. Q. 391
18 19 12:22:29 20
Do you have any idea why Mr. Monahan would have been meeting Mr. Flynn in May of 1989?
A.
No, I'm sorry, I don't.
Q. 392
In November of 1989 Mr. Padraig Flynn's personal diary records a meeting.
21
7662, with Mr. Monahan.
22
You just see there it says "Phil Monahan 4:15".
23
is Mr. Monahan.
24
Mr. Flynn?
12:22:59 25
At
Which is also replicated in the ministerial diary. I think Mr. Flynn agrees it
Do you have any idea why Mr. Monahan would have been meeting
A.
No.
26
Q. 393
In 1989?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 394
Do you know whether there were concerns within the Monarch Group at that time
29 12:23:12 30
about anything to do with Cherrywood that might have necessitated a visit to Mr. Flynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:23:15
12:23:29
51 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 395
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you any of his concerns in connection any
3
problems that arose on the Cherrywood Development?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 396
In February of 1991, at 7664.
6
There is an entry in Mr. Padraig Flynn's
ministerial diary for Philip Monahan of Monarch.
Do you see that?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 397
That must be Mr. Philip Monahan; isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 398
Do you have any idea what that's about?
11
A.
No, I don't, sorry.
12
Q. 399
It's five days after the 25,000 pounds was paid to Mr. Haughey.
12:23:53 10
13 14 12:24:06 15
Do you think
those events may have been connected? A.
I don't know.
Q. 400
Do you think the visit in May 1989 of the 24th of May may be in any way
16
connected to the 16,000 pounds on the 9th of June 1989?
17
A.
I don't know, sorry.
18
Q. 401
Were you aware that 15,000 pounds was paid in September 1994 by Monarch by way
19 12:24:29 20
of a pick me up to Fianna Fail? A.
No.
21
Q. 402
Were you aware at the time, did you subsequently become aware of it?
22
A.
Only from the recent newspapers.
23
Q. 403
Did you have any involvement yourself in it?
24
A.
No.
Q. 404
Can I show you page 8514, please.
12:24:42 25
26 27
This is a memorandum from yourself, Ann Gosling, to Sean Mooney dated the 7th
28
of January 1999 following a telephone call you had from the Revenue
29
Commissioners instituting an inquiry into the payment of the pick me up by
12:25:07 30
Monarch; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:25:07
12:25:11
52 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 405
Is that right?
3
A.
That's -- yeah.
4
Q. 406
So you told the Tribunal two minutes ago you'd nothing whatsoever to do with
5
the pick me up; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 407
Then or later; isn't that right?
8
A.
Well I was answering as then.
9
Q. 408
Well the payment to Fianna Fail?
A.
No.
12:25:23 10
I hadn't even heard the term "pick me up."
At the time of the payment I knew nothing whatsoever about it. Obviously
11
I had -- I had this call.
12
but even then I didn't hear 'pick me up' until recent newspapers.
13
Q. 409
14
Yeah, but you knew about the payment.
You knew about the fact that the
revenue had telephoned you about a payment that was made by Monarch of 16,000
12:25:47 15
16
At that stage I had to find out something about it
pounds isn't that right or 15,000 pounds? A.
Sorry.
But I didn't make the connection, yeah, okay.
17
memo, yes.
18
MR RYAN: Sorry, Chairman.
19
Jarlath Ryan, I am counsel for Ms. Gosling.
12:26:05 20
I've written this
I had this conversation. May I make an interjection here. My name is I think we just should draw
attention to the date on this memo which is 1999 which is several years, I
21
think nearly eight years after the initial payment was made that Ms. Dillon is
22
alighting on.
I think that should be drawn to the attention of the Tribunal.
23 24 12:26:26 25
26
Ms. Gosling was a secretary of the company at this point but I think when the picking up payment, as characterised, was made she was not an officer of the company.
I just want to make that point.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
has about it, whether it was acquired after the event or ...
12:26:39 30
Yes.
We're just trying to identify what, if any, knowledge she
MR RYAN: I understand it was characterised initially as a pick me up and then I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:26:44
12:26:51
53 1
don't think my client would have characterised the payment in such a way.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Well she can explain that.
4
MR RYAN: Thank you, Chairman.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
7
pick me up, whether you had any involvement or knowledge in any political
8
payments by Monarch and you said no; isn't that right?
9 12:27:03 10
I asked you earlier this morning, Ms. Gosling, leaving aside the
A.
I did, yes.
Q. 410
We looked then at Mr. Monahan's diary for 1991 in connection with the 25,000
11
pounds payment to Mr. Haughey; isn't that right?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 411
And your answer was that you had nothing to do with any political payments;
14 12:27:16 15
16
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 412
It would appear in 1999 following communication from the Revenue Commissioners
17
you had an involvement in connection with the payment that was made in 1994 to
18
Saatchi & Saatchi by Monarch; isn't that right?
19 12:27:41 20
A.
Only in the sense that I'm being asked to account for it.
Q. 413
So you received a telephone call from the Revenue Commissioners and you
21
contacted Mr. Sean Mooney and you cc'd the correspondence to Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 414
You received a letter subsequently, at 8517, from the Revenue Commissioners.
24
In which you are described as the secretary of Monarch Properties Limited.
12:27:59 25
that correct?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 415
You were then the secretary of Monarch?
28
A.
At that time, yes.
29
Q. 416
So you were an officer at that stage; isn't that right?
A.
At that stage, but I hadn't been earlier.
12:28:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is
12:28:09
12:28:22
54 1
Q. 417
Grand.
But certainly you were also an officer when you received the telephone
2
call from the Revenue Commissioners on the 7th of January 1999.
3
also right?
Isn't that
4
A.
Yes, because he had gone looking to see who the secretary was, yes.
5
Q. 418
And at page 8517.
Mr. Brendan O'Brien from the Inspector of Taxes refers to
6
previous correspondence, your letter of December and the phone call in January
7
and he wants to know how the invoice or payment relating to the Saatchi &
8
Saatchi was recorded in the books of the company?
9 12:28:38 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 419
And he asked you to provide the information.
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right.
13
Q. 420
And you receive a draft letter.
14 12:28:52 15
And he looks for a response;
At 8515.
From Mr. Sean Mooney of KPMG;
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 421
And I attach a draft letter for the Revenue?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 422
That's the 8th of February 1999?
19
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 423
And that contains a -- it's a draft letter for you to send setting out the
12:28:59 20
21
explanation for how the Saatchi & Saatchi advertising contribution was dealt
22
with in the books of Monarch?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 424
And how political contributions were dealt with; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 425
And you sent off that letter?
27
A.
I did.
28
Q. 426
So that you dealt with two items in that letter.
12:29:14 25
29 12:29:26 30
The first thing you dealt
with was the Saatchi & Saatchi advice advertising and the second thing was the political contributions; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:29:28
12:29:38
55 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 427
Talking about November 1992.
3
And presumably you sent that letter as an
officer of the company?
4
A.
I did.
5
Q. 428
So that you were aware of the fact that there was a Revenue investigation isn't
6
that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 429
And that revenue investigation extended to other payments that had been made
9
including the payment of 16,000 pounds to Fianna Fail in June of 1989; isn't
12:29:54 10
that right?
11
A.
Uh-huh.
12
Q. 430
So that when you told the Tribunal earlier this morning you had no knowledge or
13
information about political payments.
14
that right?
12:30:03 15
That in fact was not correct; isn't
A.
Well, at the time they were made I had no knowledge of them.
16
Q. 431
Well I think if you look back you will see the question was "at any time".?
17
A.
I'm sorry if I misled you I'm sorry.
18
Q. 432
So --
19
A.
It certainly wasn't intentional.
Q. 433
Insofar as the revenue investigation was involved.
12:30:19 20
You were the person with
21
whom the revenue dealt and you obtained the information from the auditors and
22
you provided that information; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 434
Can I show you a document.
12:30:35 25
At 8728, Ms. Gosling.
You might be able to
assist.
26 27
This is a remittance slip from Monarch Properties.
28
Mr. Liam McParland.
29
generate a cheque; isn't that right?
12:30:49 30
A.
And it's addressed to
And this is the document that's filled in in order to
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:30:49
12:30:57
56 1
Q. 435
2
And it's a cheque in the sum of 5,000 pounds and the description is 'expenses re Tallaght zoning'?
3
A.
Okay.
4
Q. 436
Do you see that?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 437
You will see it says Ref - AG.
7
Do you see that handwriting on it just above
the word "amount 5,000 pounds?"
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 438
Would you agree that that is likely to be a reference to yourself?
A.
I don't know why but it would certainly suggest it was me.
11
Q. 439
Well, who else might it be?
12
A.
Are we in 1984 or 1989, sorry?
13
Q. 440
1989.
14
A.
I think at that stage we had another employee with the initials AG in Dublin.
Q. 441
Who is that?
16
A.
She was a lady called Ann Griffin.
17
Q. 442
Griffin?
18
A.
Griffin, Griffith, Griffin, I forget which.
12:31:19 10
12:31:48 15
19 12:32:06 20
If you look at the top of the document.
The 11th of the 7th 1989.?
It caused a little confusion for
a while when we realised there was two AGs around. Q. 443
And similarly then there is a document at 8834.
21 22
Which is a memo to Mr. Glennane from Mr. Lawless of May '88 and was this second
23
person with the initials AG employed in 1988
24
A.
I'm sorry.
Q. 444
This is a payment of 15,000 pounds.?
26
A.
Yeah, I've --
27
Q. 445
And you --
28
A.
I don't think that's me.
29
Q. 446
You don't think that's you?
A.
No, I don't think so.
12:32:32 25
12:32:42 30
I don't remember the dates.
AG ...
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:32:43
12:32:55
57 1
Q. 447
Do you see the reference ANG at the bottom?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 448
WH.KANG, isn't that the reference you've identified previously as being yours?
4
A.
No, no, that was Ann Gilmore.
5
Q. 449
That's not you?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 450
All right.
8 9
So you are saying that the reference to Tallaght Town Centre
zoning that AG mentioned reference to T T C zoning is not you? A.
12:33:12 10
No.
I don't think so.
In fact I'm nearly certain of it.
There were --
there were actually three AGs at one stage so.
11
Q. 451
Uh-huh?
12
A.
This girl, we got her to put AMG because we were in the same building so the
13 14
other girl was in Dublin so. Q. 452
And did you have any involvement with Mr. Frank Dunlop?
A.
No.
16
Q. 453
Were you aware that Mr. Dunlop had been retained by the Monarch Group?
17
A.
No, I wasn't.
18
Q. 454
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you the appointment of Mr. Dunlop?
19
A.
Never.
Q. 455
Were you aware that prior to Mr. Dunlop's involvement Mr. O'Herlihy had been
12:33:33 15
12:33:43 20
21
involved in the Cherrywood Project?
22
A.
Yes, I knee Mr. O'Herlihy.
23
Q. 456
Did you know Mr. O'Herlihy independent of his involvement in Monarch or?
24
A.
No, no, I just knew of him.
Q. 457
You knew of the fact that he had been retained in connection?
26
A.
That he had been retained, yes.
27
Q. 458
You were unaware of the fact that Mr. Dunlop had been retained.
12:33:59 25
28 29 12:34:08 30
correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 459
Why would that have been? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is that
12:34:12
12:34:32
58 1
A.
I never heard of him, Mr. Dunlop being involved with Monarch.
2
Q. 460
And if we can go back just the to the question of cash and I show you a letter
3
that was drafted by Noel Smyth & Partners.
At 8516.
4 5
And this is in connection with a potential swap in connection with the golf
6
course lands.
7
that's being put forward there. The deal with Dun Laoghaire simply is there to
8
receive 150 acres of land approximately at Cherrywood.
9
be developed into a first class golf course at the cost of the developer.
12:34:57 10
And I want to draw to your attention to the last two paragraphs
thousand square feet is to be built.
That 150 acres is to 10
All cost will be responsibility of the
11
developer and in addition the sum of half a million pounds cash would have to
12
be paid to the club on the actual hand over.
13 14
Were you aware of any such proposal which would have included a proposal to pay
12:35:15 15
half a million pounds in cash to the golf club?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 461
In your statement to the Tribunal, Ms. Gosling, you describe yourself as being
18 19 12:35:32 20
a person in a position of trust within the organisation.
Is that correct?
A.
Yes, I believe so.
Q. 462
And you are a person who is the person who worked solely and completely with
21
Mr. Philip Monahan; is that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 463
At all stages from the time that you were employed in 1969?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 464
And you would have been privy to, certainly from the point of view, at a
12:35:45 25
26
minimum of typing correspondence or dealing with matters such as that sort of
27
Mr. Monahan's affairs; is that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 465
All right.
12:36:04 30
So now -- and insofar as you are here to assist the Tribunal and
correct me if I'm wrong, your position appears to be the following. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
You are
12:36:08
12:36:19
59 1
unaware of any political payments made by Mr. Monahan other than the fact that
2
you might have had latterly some involvement in sorting out revenue matters.
3
Is that correct?
4
A.
That's correct, yes.
5
Q. 466
You are unaware of the involvement of Mr. Jack Whelan in any development other
6
than the fact that he was an agent?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 467
You were totally unaware of the fact that Mr. Dunlop had been retained in
9 12:36:31 10
11
connection with Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 468
You met Mr. Lawlor on two occasions but were unaware that substantial sums of
12
money had been paid to him?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 469
You were aware of a bonus system which you yourself benefited -- by the way,
12:36:45 15
16
how much did you get can I ask you out of the bonus? A.
I'm not -- I honestly don't -- I can't tell you because I don't remember.
And
17
that probably sounds really weird.
18
MR RYAN: Chairman, may I assist the Tribunal as well.
19
pay out in question was part of Ms. Gosling's retirement package from the
12:37:21 20
Monarch Group in early 2000 and as such was used.
And just say that the
That shareholding in that
21
company, the liquidation of that shareholding by way of solventary organisation
22
of the group was used as part of the settlement or retirement lump sum which
23
Ms. Gosling was given.
24 12:37:39 25
CHAIRMAN:
26 27 28
Well, was that the only bonus you received, this one that your
lawyer refers to as having been paid as part of your retirement? A.
Um, well I would probably have received some small amounts for Christmas, through the years.
29 12:38:03 30
CHAIRMAN:
What, hundreds?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:38:05
12:38:15
60 1
A.
Yeah.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Just on that point.
4
look at 8037.
Which is the affidavit sworn by the late Mr. Philip Monahan in
5
the High Court proceedings.
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney which was Mr. Sweeney's share of the pay out of 1.8 million.
7
And Mr. Sweeney takes his share via a company called Isotope, Mr. Glennane
8
takes his via Aspentree and then there is a share to Circinus
9 12:38:39 10
It might assist you, Ms. Gosling.
If you
He is discussing the payment of 270,000 pounds to
A.
Okay.
Q. 470
And in discussing that, what Mr. Monahan says is "in 1991 an opportunity arose
11
to purchase a company with substantial export sales reliefs and profits.
12
Decision was taken to purchase the company and involve in the company a number
13
of individuals who had significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch
14
Group over the years.
I set out below the persons involved.
is getting 40 percent.
Mr. Dominic Glennane 35 percent. Mr Sweeney 15
12:39:00 15
16
Philip Monahan
percent, Mr. Tom Monahan 5 percent and Ms. An Ann Gosling 5 percent?
17
A.
Okay.
18
Q. 471
And if that is correct and the growth -- gross sum being discussed here is the
19
share out as Mr Sweeney sets out in his Affidavit of 1.8 million then you are
12:39:22 20
being attributed as the person who will get five percent of 1.8 million which I
21
calculate at 90,000 pounds; is that right?
22
A.
That sounds right, yes.
23
Q. 472
So are you telling the Tribunal that you'd forgotten that your share of this
24 12:39:38 25
26
I'd say that's right.
scheme, whatever it was, was £90,000? A.
Yes.
Q. 473
Right.
And as I also understand what's being set out in these two affidavits.
27
This disbursement took place in 1991.
28
company called Circinus Limited?
29 12:39:59 30
And you took your share through a
A.
Yes.
Q. 474
And that share may have stayed in that company until such time as you did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:40:10
12:40:11
61 1
something else with it but it was paid in 1991; is that right?
2
A.
Into the company.
3
Q. 475
Yes?
4
A.
I didn't actually receive it then.
5
Q. 476
And at that time Mr. Monahan would have received his share which was 1.08
6
million paid into whatever corporate structure he wanted; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 477
And you have no idea what Mr. Monahan did with his 1.8 million?
9
A.
No.
Q. 478
Other than the fact that it was paid to him.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 479
What exactly were you doing, can I ask you, Ms. Gosling, in your employment for
12:40:26 10
13 14
A.
letters. Q. 480
18
12:41:22 20
Basically typing, filing, phoning people to do whatever they were to do, just general day-to-day, you know, taking the post, circulating it, answering
16
19
That's right.
that period of time with Mr. Monahan?
12:40:58 15
17
Is that right?
You were intimately acquainted with the late Mr. Monahan's business; is that fair?
A.
That's fair, yeah.
Q. 481
Okay.
21
You have no idea what he was doing with Mr. Liam Lawlor from 1988
onwards; is that the case?
22
A.
That's the case.
23
Q. 482
Yeah.?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 483
And you don't know what Mr. Jack Whelan was at, other than he was dealing
12:41:30 25
26
directly with the late Mr. Philip Monahan; is that correct?
27
A.
That's correct, yes.
28
Q. 484
You kept Mr. Monahan's diary for him, according to your statement; is that
29 12:41:51 30
right? A.
No, he kept his own diary but. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:41:55
12:42:11
62 1
Q. 485
Yes?
2
A.
I would be aware what was in it.
I wasn't keeping his diary for him.
But
3
he'd put the entries in and I would make sure if he was going to meet someone,
4
that he had whatever he needed with him to go to the meeting.
5
Q. 486
According to Mr. Monahan, in the affidavit that he swore in the High Court,
6
that people who were entitled to share in the 1.8 million were those who had
7
significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch Group over the years?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 487
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 488
Now, how did you, on the basis, as you've just outlined what you've been doing,
12:42:28 10
11 12
the clerical job.
13
Ms. Gosling, but what you have outlined to the Tribunal here this morning as
14
your job in Monarch is that of a clerical assistant.
12:42:45 15
£90,000? A.
18 19 12:43:11 20
Now, what did you do or
what assistance did you give to Mr. Monahan that entitled to you in 1991 to
16 17
I'm not in any way trying to denigrate what you were doing,
Simply it was a share out of the profits.
It was reflecting my long service
as much as anything and the fact that they could depend on me I think. Q. 489
Depend on you for what?
A.
For whatever.
I mean, I -- I was available whenever I was needed.
It
21
wasn't, you know, I didn't go home if a letter or a report had to be typed up
22
at five to six I didn't go home at six o'clock on the dot, as was the finishing
23
time.
24
So, um, I was a part of the team.
Q. 490
Well, was Mr. Lafferty part of the team?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 491
And was Mr. Lynn part of the team?
27
A.
But at that stage, no.
28
Q. 492
Was Mr. Reilly part of the team?
29
A.
At that stage not really, no.
Q. 493
Who else was part of the team in 1991?
12:43:45 25
12:43:57 30
I helped out wherever was needed.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:44:03
12:44:23
63 1
A.
2
I think that was basically the -- that was the core group that had been there from the beginning.
We were all there, you know, this was ...
3 4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Sorry, Ms. Gosling.
Was Mr. Sherwood there in 1991?
In 1991 yes, Mr. Sherwood was there.
6
JUDGE FAHERTY: I think earlier he was described in a document.
7
put together by Mr. Sweeney as I understand.
8
personal assistant and you were described as a personal assistant.
9
A.
Now, it was
He described Mr. Sherwood as a
Yes.
12:44:37 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I think Ms. Dillon is asking, you got this disbursement I
12
think in 1991. Yes.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:44:50 15
16
And I think what Ms. Dillon is asking you is, obviously
certain people got a disbursement; is that correct A.
Yes.
17 18 19 12:44:57 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
From the 1.8 million
Yes. MS DILLON:
May I just correct something.
that disbursement being made in 1991.
I think a reference was made to
As I said, the beneficial ...
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
yes.
12:45:11 25
I understand that absolutely.
It was put into the company,
I accept that.
MS DILLON:
Thank you.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But it doesn't appear, unless Ms. Dillon is going to go on
28
with it, that Mr. Sherwood would have got ...
29 12:45:21 30
MS. DILLON:
It's not recorded as a person who shared.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:45:24
12:45:41
64 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3
the question she's putting.
4
would have been at the same level, if you like, of terms of employment as
5
Mr. Sherwood.
6
think described you both as personal assistants.
7
A.
I think really what Ms. Dillon is asking you in the context of That you would appear to have gotten it but it
Now, that may not be the case.
But Mr. Sweeney certainly I
Okay.
8 9 12:45:44 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
Well I think that was Mr. Sweeney's description.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14
Yes.
Mr. Sherwood's role was to -- Mr. Sherwood was an engineer. I mean, mine was the -- I was a support role.
12:46:07 15
So his role was,
I was the back room person.
Mr. Sherwood would have had more of an input into projects.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I see.
And technical aspects.
19 12:46:14 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
No, not at all.
Thank you.
23
Q. 494
You were a director of a number of the companies; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 495
Can you list the companies of which you were a director within the Monarch
12:46:23 25
26
Group?
27
A.
Um, in the list that I gave you?
28
Q. 496
No, no, just tell the Tribunal the companies of which you were a director.?
29
A.
Oh. Um, well there was Monarch Properties.
12:46:45 30
the end of the '90s? Monarch Properties. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
This is towards the end? Towards
Monarch Properties Services.
12:46:53
12:47:11
65 1 2
Circinus. Q. 497
3
Without a list it's rather difficult, sorry.
Well the list that -- you provided a schedule of companies attached to your statement?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 498
And are you suggesting that you were at some stage a director of all of those
6 7
companies? A.
8 9
Not -- no, I'm not suggesting I was a director of all of them.
But at
different stages I probably played a role in a number of them. Q. 499
All right.?
A.
But it's the only -- I didn't have any other records.
11
Q. 500
Well where did you -- how did you make up the list?
12
A.
I had made up that list at some stage at the end of my period of employment,
12:47:29 10
13
because I had to unwind, I had to make sure that I was unwound from all of the
14
companies that I was involved in.
12:47:51 15
Q. 501
So I did a list.
So when you say the companies that you were involved in, does that mean that
16
you were involved in insofar as you were either an officer or you were a
17
shareholder?
18
A.
No, as an officer.
19
Q. 502
As an officer?
A.
Yes.
Q. 503
So at 8534.
12:48:02 20
21
In your schedule of companies which is entitled 'with which AG
22
was associated' and they are listed out there. Are you saying that you were at
23
some stage a director or a secretary of those companies?
24
A.
12:48:27 25
I don't know if I was -- of all of them but certainly of a number of them I would have been the company secretary.
26
Q. 504
And insofar as Circinus Limited was concerned, was that your own company?
27
A.
I was 50 per cent shareholder in that with Tom Monahan.
28
Q. 505
And you were a director of all of these companies you think or a shareholder or
29 12:48:46 30
a secretary; is that right? A.
A secretary more so than a director. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:48:49
12:49:19
66 1
Q. 506
And at 8535.
And at at bottom there's Monarch Property Holdings, Monarch
2
Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services International Limited, Monarch
3
Properties Services Limited and on the next page, 8536, Monarch Retail Limited.
4
And then Pallarang.
5
Do you see all of those companies?
Other companies Pearl Investment, Ping Golf Equipment.
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 507
You think that you were involved in those companies as an officer.
8 9 12:49:33 10
So that
you had fiduciary duties in relation to those companies; is that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 508
Insofar as any of these companies made payments or any monies were paid out,
11
for example, to politicians.
12
right?
You know absolutely nothing about it; is that
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 509
You do, however, deal with it in your statement.
12:49:56 15
just want to take you through this.
You say at page 8531.
The second last paragraph of this
16
statement, Ms. Gosling and see.
17
the company.
18
businessmen, politicians or other principals.
19
from that, that when you say you didn't undertake direct negotiations with
12:50:20 20
politicians.
21
I
You say mine was not a commercial role within
I did not undertake for instance direct negotiations with Is the Tribunal to understand
That such direct negotiations did take place but you weren't
involved?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 510
So who did you understand had the direct negotiations with politicians?
24
A.
This, I made this statement in the light of the knowledge that's in the media
12:50:51 25
etc. I've learnt a lot from the media reports that I never knew at the time.
26
And my role was a support role.
27
was there in support.
28 29 12:51:30 30
Q. 511
I didn't negotiate directly with anybody.
I
You have already said that you accept that, from the statement you've made, that you didn't undertake direct negotiations with politicians.
But it
follows from your statement that somebody did; isn't that right? So who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:51:30
12:51:44
67 1
negotiated directly with politicians, who in the Monarch Group dealt directly
2
with politicians, Ms. Gosling?
3
A.
I cannot answer that question for you because I don't know.
4
Q. 512
Well you know that Mr. Monahan dealt with the late Mr. Liam Lawlor; isn't that
5 6
right? A.
7 8
So if you call that negotiations then Mr. Monahan dealt with Mr. Liam
Lawlor. Q. 513
9 12:51:55 10
Yes.
But you don't know what Mr. Monahan dealt with with Mr. Lawlor isn't that right because you --
A.
I don't know the detail of it so --
11
Q. 514
So --
12
A.
It's hard to sit here and, you know, be truthful about things that you don't
13
know about.
14
know what they actually talked about I have to answer no.
12:52:14 15
Q. 515
16 17
I can say yes, people talk with politicians.
Forget about what they talked about.
But if you don't
Let's establish first of all who talked.
Isn't that the -- who do you know spoke with politicians? A.
Um,.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
12:52:43 20
21
Ms. Gosling, did -- when you worked in Somerton presumably people
came to see Mr. Monahan? A.
Yes.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
From time to time?
From time to time, yes.
12:52:48 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
or?
28
A.
And would you have seen, physically seen these people call or leave
Um.
29 12:52:55 30
CHAIRMAN:
I mean, to get to see Mr. Monahan would they have had to pass
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:52:59
12:53:04
68 1 2
through your office? A.
They wouldn't have to pass through my office.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But would you know that they were --
I would know when someone would be expected.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
TD or a Minister or anyone of that nature coming to see Mr. Monahan?
9
A.
No.
Yeah.
Now, did you ever know of a politician, a councillor, or a
With the exception of Mr. Liam Lawlor.
12:53:24 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Is he the only one you think?
I can't recall other politicians coming to Somerton.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:53:40 15
And did you know of Mr. Monarch seeing politicians outside of
Somerton either because you had access to his diary and you would have known or
16
that he might have mentioned to you or that you might have made appointments
17
for? Irrespective of whatever reason.
18
A.
Okay.
19 12:53:54 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
22
Would you have known?
Well at the time I would have to -- I would know because it would be in his diary.
23 24 12:54:01 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yeah.
But here, now, it's impossible to remember.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
No.
Can you recall the names of any of these people?
I'm sorry.
I've always had a poor memory as regards to names and faces.
29 12:54:15 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just can I add, just to follow on from what the Chairman was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:54:20
12:54:29
69 1
asking you.
2
would have been on the receiving end of telephone calls, I take it and things
3
like that?
4
A.
Obviously you were Mr. Monahan's personal assistant.
And you
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
been in Somerton ?
8
A.
And how did you, Mr. Monahan, I take it, wouldn't always have
Sorry.
9 12:54:36 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
He wouldn't always have been in the office himself I take it
Um.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
He'd have been out and about
Yes.
12:54:43 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
his day or you'd have to report to him I presume at the end of a day; isn't
18
that correct?
19
A.
And if people were ringing him or calls.
How did you arrange
Oh, yes.
12:54:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
have to be accounted for?
23
A.
So that if there were phone calls or people calling that would
Yes.
24 12:55:01 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And how did you do that, Ms. Gosling?
Phone.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Sorry?
Via the phone, obviously.
12:55:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:55:10
12:55:19
70 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
it Mr. Monahan would have received telephone calls
3
A.
Yes.
But if you are in the office, for example.
And I take
Yes, but he also had his own mobile.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
you put memos on his desk or did you have, we know other witnesses who had
7
secretaries had a telephone call ledger where they would recall the time a call
8
was made and then convey the message to them.
9
A.
12:55:44 10
Okay.
Yes.
If there were people looking for him, for example, did
No, I would generally make a note of it and leave a list of notes on
his desk.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
Mr. Monahan at his house in Somerton that you might have taken the call?
14
A.
And do you ever recall politicians or councillors telephoning
I'm sure there must have been.
But no one stays in my mind or sticks out.
12:56:03 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
the name of any politician to you at all during the period of time you were
12:56:15 20
21
I wonder could I.
Ms. Gosling, did Phil Monahan ever mention
employed by the company? A.
Well I'm sure he must have done.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
names?
12:56:35 25
A.
I'm sorry.
Well, now, must have done.
Can you think now.
I don't have any names to give you.
26 27 28
A.
JUDGE KEYS:
Well is it that you won't tell us
No, I'm sorry.
I really do wish to be as helpful as I can be.
JUDGE KEYS:
Well, so far all you've said is I can't remember.
29 12:56:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Can give us the
12:56:40
12:56:53
71 1
A.
2
And that's the case.
I didn't know I was going to have to remember
everything.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
5
there for quite a number of years
6
A.
You were a highly regarded employee of the company.
You were
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
There's already been evidence given that Mr. Monahan was politically well in,
12:57:06 10
You were intimately involved in the business of the company.
in the sense that he knew a lot of politicians.
And the only name you can
11
give us of a politician is Liam Lawlor? Is that your evidence to this
12
Tribunal?
13
A.
Um, well I'm sure he would also have known several other politicians.
14 12:57:28 15
JUDGE KEYS:
16 17
Well, let's have the names, that's what you've been asked.
You're under oath. A.
Yes, sorry.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
12:57:38 20
that you know or even the names he might have mentioned to you, the people he
21 22
And you're being asked to name the politicians that he met or
knew. A.
Over the years?
23 24 12:57:48 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
Okay.
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Other than Liam Lawlor.
Sorry.
29 12:57:52 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Other than Liam Lawlor.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:57:54
12:58:06
72 1
A.
Okay.
Most of them would have been Dundalk people.
2 3 4
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All right.
Who are they?
Um, there's Mr. Dermot Ahern.
5 6 7
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Well that's one politician.
Now we've two politicians.
Um, and I'm sure he -- he would have dealt with all the people.
8 9 12:58:25 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All the people? What do you mean by all the people?
All the TDs for County Louth.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
period of time we can at least identify them.
14
isn't that right later on?
12:58:38 15
A.
In County Louth.
So at least if we do a search during that Now, he moved to Somerton,
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
in the Dublin area he had met?
19
A.
Okay.
Now, since he moved to Somerton can you tell us what politicians
Um, well I know Mr. Brian Lenihan was a neighbour.
12:58:52 20
21 22
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All right.
He lived down the road.
23 24 12:58:59 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Are you saying then that he knew Mr. Brian Lenihan
He was a neighbour.
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Do you say that he knew Mr. Brian Lenihan?
Yes, I presume.
29 12:59:08 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Well that's another politician.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Why didn't you say that in the
12:59:11
12:59:19
73 1 2
beginning when you were asked these questions, Ms. Gosling A.
I'm sorry.
3 4 5
JUDGE KEYS: A.
You've said sorry on a number of occasions now.
Okay.
6 7
JUDGE KEYS:
8
memory.
9
number of politicians. Well let's continue on.
12:59:32 10
A.
Every time you've been asked a question you say you have no
I have pushed you and pushed you and now you suddenly recollect a What other politicians?
I --.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
respect.
14
and think about it seriously and after lunch come back and tell us what other
12:59:47 15
Can we put it -- can you perhaps over lunch could you just sit down
politicians in the Dublin area.
16 17
Maybe I should be -- maybe I'm being unfair to you in this
you. A.
You can make a list if you wish, to assist
And give the evidence after lunch.
Could I say to you --
18 19 12:59:59 20
JUDGE KEYS: A.
21
Would that be okay?
May I please suggest.
Could you give me a list and then I'll tell you those
ones that ring a bell.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, I think we'd prefer if the evidence came from yourself.
I mean --
13:00:11 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
names.
28
them down.
29
prompt you to remember some names.
13:00:36 30
Over the space of an hour you might be able to think of other
And if you wish you can write them down because, I mean, you can write And you have access to the brief of documents as well.
That may
So have a break about it anyway and we'll
sit again at two o'clock. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
13:00:38
13:00:52
74 1
A.
Okay.
2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
13:00:56
14:05:34
75 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3 4 5 6
MS. DILLON:
Ms. Gosling, please.
7 8
I understand that over lunch, with the assistance of Mr. Ryan, that Ms. Gosling
9
has prepared a statement that she would like your permission to read to the
14:05:45 10
Tribunal.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Certainly, yes.
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Dillon, Judges.
Firstly, I would like to start about by
apologising because I misunderstood the context of some of the questions.
14:06:01 15
I
thought we were simply talking about Cherrywood and I now understood you are
16
really asking me about the culture of Monarch.
17 18 19 14:06:17 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
And basically, I mean, Mr. Monahan was a businessman and he met with anyone, politicians, businessmen, community organisations, anyone who would really help the interests of his Monarch Group of companies.
22 23
So, you know, he makes donations to politicians, businessmen.
24
fundraisers, eg golf outings, sports nights.
14:06:39 25
26
He attended
He supported local community
events and as such, support for politicians was basically, it was a way of life which was directed really by Mr. Monahan through, downwards.
27 28
And while I'm saying that I didn't know, couldn't answer questions because I
29
didn't really know the total context.
14:07:06 30
But if you're asking me, you know, did
he meet with politicians on a regular basis, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And he, he was a man who
14:07:13
14:07:48
76 1
had a marvelous memory for people.
He only had to meet a person once and he
2
would remember them.
3
level.
4
didn't know or had met at some stage.
5
come to mind and if you wish me to read them or give it to you later.
So he mixed with politicians, local level, national
And so there is probably not a politician in the country that he I've made a list of ones that sort of
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll just have a look at the list.
8 9
(Document handed to Tribunal)
14:08:03 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN:
I'll just give it to Ms. Dillon.
14 14:08:35 15
(Document handed to Ms. Dillon)
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Which of -- would any of those have come to Somerton?
The only person I actually remember meeting at Somerton was Liam Lawlor.
19 14:08:49 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
And the others, do you believe he met at different functions?
He'd meet them at different functions or maybe at Harcourt Street or, when we
22
were in Dundalk, in the Dundalk office.
23
to be as helpful as I can.
24
asked if, you know, if I actually knew the context in which he'd meet those
14:09:20 25
people.
And I did -- I mean, it's my desire
And I did also misunderstand that I was being
I wouldn't know the absolute detail.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
politicians.
29
which might be put into writing, are you in a position to identify in more
14:09:40 30
Insofar as you are in a position to name these people, these Can you, not necessarily today, but as part of a new statement,
detail the circumstances in which these various people were met by Mr. Monahan Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:09:45
14:10:01
77 1
and in relation to any, would you be in a position to say what you understand
2
business was transacted or discussed between them?
3
A.
I'm not sure if I ... how much I would know.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well you've given a large list of ...
6 7
MR. RYAN:
Chairman, may I interrupt.
I beg your pardon again.
8 9 14:10:14 10
Just to assist the Tribunal.
Perhaps we can revisit this point as to whether
or not it would be useful to add another additional statement to the brief from
11
my client after perhaps I have led my client through her statement and explain
12
the context in which she took part in the business.
13 14 14:10:29 15
Maybe at that point we can revisit the issue as to whether or not it would be useful.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Because the Tribunal would obviously be interested to know the
18
circumstances and the reasons why meetings with these politicians ...
19 14:10:39 20
MR. RYAN:
I understand.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Were held and where they met and details of that nature.
23
that may be better done in the form of a written statement.
Now,
24 14:10:50 25
MR. RYAN:
Absolutely.
And I defer to your written judgement.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Unless Ms. Dillon wishes to return to that subject immediately,
28
we could deal with it in that way.
29 14:11:01 30
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
Sir, there are names on this list which are not part of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:11:04
14:11:13
78 1
this Module and therefore it's probably better to leave the list for the
2
moment.
3 4
But arising from Ms. Gosling's statement I have one or two further short
5
questions.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
Leaving aside the context.
8
MR SANFEY: Chairman, before Ms. Dillon goes much further.
9 14:11:21 10
I also represent the estate of Mr. Monahan.
I wonder would it be possible for
11
us to see the list.
It may be that we could cast some light on it in some
12
way. Now, obviously we can't take instructions from Mr. Monahan.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
14:11:33 15
Yes, I can't see any problem with that. Obviously if Mr. Sanfey
wishes to cross-examine, he can't put anything ...
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
see the names.
19
Monarch in general, then obviously this witness might have to be recalled and
14:11:52 20
At this stage it would be on a confidential basis that you would If there is another statement made of relevance to this, or to
you would then be entitled to cross-examine her.
But you could certainly see
21
the statement for the purposes of identifying those who Ms. Gosling says met
22
with Mr. Monarch.
23
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
24 14:12:08 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Or Mr. Monahan.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
understand your position to -- your recollection of the late Mr. Monahan to be
29
that he would have done anything he could to help his company?
14:12:26 30
A.
Ms. Gosling, in the light of what you have just said, do I
Yeah, he was a man of vision.
He had -- he -- he could anticipate the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:12:39
14:12:57
79 1
finalisation of a project.
2
completion.
3
Q. 516
He could conceive the idea and see it through to
Well, was Mr. Monahan a man who would have approached any person whom he
4
thought could assist his company in whatever endeavour his company was involved
5
in?
6
A.
Yes, I, yes.
7
Q. 517
And in 1990 the Tallaght Town Project was substantially complete and the
8
biggest project on the books of Monarch was the Cherrywood Development; isn't
9
that right?
14:13:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 518
And there was a problem in Cherrywood which you, in connection with the sewer.
12
You will have seen that from the documentation?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 519
And if the solution to that problem lay in the Department of the Environment
14:13:23 15
and the Minister for the Environment.
16
From your knowledge of Mr. Monahan, is
that where he would have gone in order to effect a solution to his problem?
17
A.
It would be one of the ways, yes.
18
Q. 520
Well what would be the other ways?
19 14:13:37 20
MR. RYAN:
Judge, may I interrupt here.
21 22
In terms of the ways in which my client is seeking to assist the Tribunal.
I
23
don't know if that's a fair question to ask her as to what other ways he may
24
have been involved in diverting a sewer pipe in south Dublin.
14:13:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well Ms. Gosling herself said it would be one of the things.
27
if she's thinking of another way.
And we say one way would be to deal through
28
the Department of the Minister.
She obviously has other ways in mind.
29
want to know what they are.
14:14:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
So
So we
14:14:10
14:14:18
80 1
MR. RYAN:
Thank you, Judge.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
5
You said that was one of the ways?
That would be one of the ways.
But the other way would be to deal with the
people on the ground.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
8 9 14:14:22 10
MS. DILLON:
That would be the officials?
A.
The officials.
11
Q. 521
The officials of the local authority?
12
A.
Yes, to co-operate with what would be best for the area.
13
Q. 522
And to deal with the councillors who had the decision making process in
14 14:14:36 15
16
relation to the land in question, doesn't that follow? A.
It -- you can't take a piece in isolation.
Q. 523
Yes.
So in 1989, it is clear from the documentation that's been supplied to
17
the Tribunal, the Monarch property had purchased land, which was zoned at one
18
house to the acre on septic tank and their first step on the process to
19
realising the potential of the land was to change the zoning of the land?
14:14:59 20
A.
21
Um, I'm not sure if that was the first step.
But it would be one of the
steps.
22
Q. 524
Yes?
23
A.
The land was zoned residential but it -- in order to be developed the services
24 14:15:12 25
had to be provided. Q. 525
The land was zoned residential at one house to the acre?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 526
And in order for it to be developed at a commercial level the zoning density
28 29 14:15:24 30
had to be changed to greater than one house to the acre? A.
Yes.
Q. 527
The only people who could effect the change in the zoning density were the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:15:28
14:15:41
81 1 2
councillors in the review of the Development Plan; isn't that right? A.
3 4
I don't know if they are the only people.
I think that the officials have a
... Q. 528
The officials would have to make a material contravention which in turn would
5
have to come before the county councillors and a majority of 75% of the
6
councillors would have to vote in favour of it.
That is the position?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 529
So one way or other, in order to effect a change in the zoning on the land it
9
was necessary either by way of a change in the Development Plan or by way of
14:15:59 10
material contravention to deal with councillors?
11
A.
Okay.
12
Q. 530
Do I understand from what you've outlined in your statement to the Tribunal
13
that if it was necessary to deal with councillors to increase the value of his
14
land that Mr. Monahan would have done so?
14:16:11 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 531
And would he also have instructed his staff and employees in, who were handling
17
the Cherrywood Development, to do so also?
18
A.
Yes, I believe so.
19
Q. 532
Do you know whether or not it was Mr. Lynn's function within Monarch to lobby
14:16:27 20
the support of councillors for the Cherrywood Development?
21
A.
I believe it was, yes.
22
Q. 533
And was he assigned that task by Mr. Monahan?
23
A.
I would assume so.
24
Q. 534
When requests for monetary support came in from politicians who were the people
14:16:47 25
26
who normally dealt with such requests? A.
It would depend on who they were addressed to.
I mean, most of them would
27
come in addressed to somebody.
28
would be the one who would make a recommendation.
29
stages Mr. Monahan was the one who said yes or no.
14:17:11 30
Q. 535
So, the person to whom they were addressed You know, in the final
And would Mr. Monahan have dealt with a political donation of the order of 200 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:17:13
14:17:36
82 1
pounds, 300 pounds or 500 pounds?
2
A.
Possibly yes.
3
Q. 536
If -- if it was desired to make a political contribution for a Local Election
4
Depending on the context.
would Mr. Monahan personally have to clear every single political donation?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 537
Who in the companies would have had authority to clear political donations?
7
A.
I think most of the Senior staff probably had.
8
Q. 538
And would that have included Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Glennane?
9
A.
Oh, yes.
Q. 539
And would it have included Mr. Reilly?
11
A.
I would think so, yes.
12
Q. 540
And Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 541
And insofar -- was it your understanding of Mr Lynn's job that it was part of
14:17:51 10
14:18:02 15
his job to have contact with and deal with councillors in connection with the
16
Cherrywood Lands specifically?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 542
How did you come about by that understanding of Mr. Lynn's job, can I ask you?
19
A.
I suppose I would have been told.
Q. 543
Who would have told you?
21
A.
Mr. Monahan.
22
Q. 544
And would it be fair then to describe Mr. Lynn's role or one of Mr. Lynn's
14:18:24 20
23
roles within the Monarch Group as the political lobbiest for Monarch in
24
connection with the Cherrywood Lands?
14:18:40 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 545
Do I understand you to tell the Tribunal that Monarch would have been prepared
27
to provide political support to the people with whom they were dealing on the
28
County Council?
29 14:18:59 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 546
And would that have been because Monarch would have viewed it, as you describe Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:19:04
14:19:15
83 1
in your statement, as a necessary evil?
2
A.
I think so, yes.
3
Q. 547
Is it your understanding of the culture that existed within the Monarch Group
4
at the time of the Cherrywood Development that the Monarch Group would never
5
have refused an application for a political donation because it would have seen
6
it as necessary to support financially those politicians who were in turn
7
supporting or dealing with their lands?
8
A.
Yeah, that's my understanding.
9
Q. 548
And from whom did you get that understanding?
A.
That would -- it would -- it was the culture.
Q. 549
That Monarch would always have paid politicians because Monarch considered it
14:19:34 10
11 12 13
was necessary for its business to pay politicians; is that correct? A.
14
I wouldn't describe it as paying politicians.
These people were -- they are
elected representatives of their area and in supporting them you were
14:20:00 15
supporting the community which had elected them.
16 17
It was always that way.
So, my personal view was
that we were supporting the community as against politicians. Q. 550
Page 8531, Ms. Gosling.
In the light of your answer that you've just given to
18
the Tribunal, will you explain why you describe payments to politicians as a
19
necessary evil in your statement at the second last paragraph.
14:20:27 20
sentence.
Fourth last
You state "I believe that if donations were solicited by
21
politicians I think Monarch would have regarded such payments as a necessary
22
evil or something that would have to be done".
23 24
And I suggest to you that that is entirely different to the answer that you
14:20:41 25
have just given where you have said that they would have been supporting the
26
local politicians and supporting the community.
27
A.
Um, that was the culture of the time.
28
Q. 551
Look, Ms. Gosling.
29 14:21:13 30
Will you just tell the Tribunal what it is you're trying
to say in your statement and if you could just do it unambiguously and without equivocation? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:21:13
14:21:28
84 1
A.
Sorry.
2
Q. 552
Either it was a necessary evil or they are supporting the democratic process
3 4
and that's the culture in Monarch. A.
5 6
Okay.
But you can't have it both ways.?
I think my personal view was that they were supporting the community
but the culture was that it was a necessary evil. Q. 553
7
And by a necessary evil, do you mean that it was believed within Monarch that when a politician asked for money they had to pay it?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 554
So that there was no element of freedom of choice within the Monarch Group when
14:21:48 10
it came to making a political donation because these people had power over
11
decisions that would effect Monarch, they always had to be kept on side.
12
that what you're trying to say?
Is
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 555
So that really what you're talking about here is a pragmatic decision that was
14:22:03 15
made within the Monarch Group to support anybody on the political process who
16
requested support in order to keep those people on side for the better good of
17
Monarch?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 556
And if what they are doing is seeking to support, to keep people on side for
14:22:17 20
the better good of Monarch.
Then you're not talking about supporting the
21
democratic process in general; isn't that right? You're talking about making
22
politicians payments in order to benefit Monarch.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 557
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
14:22:35 25
Isn't that right?
If you would answer any questions anybody
else might have for you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
questions
All right.
Mr. Sanfey do you want to ask? Do you want to ask any
29 14:22:42 30
MR. RYAN:
Yes, Chairman, I want to ask a few questions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:22:47
14:22:51
85 1 2
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. RYAN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
MR. RYAN:
5
8529.
I want to rely on the statement of Ms. Gosling, which I gather is
6 7
I just want to, Ms. Gosling, set out the context in which you had a role in the
8
Monarch Group over a period of nearly 30 years.
9
to get a sense of what you did in the group.
And also particularly I want
14:23:08 10
11
You say in your statement that you were a messenger and a facilitator for
12
Mr. Phil Monahan; is that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 558
How did you carry out this role in the Monarch Group, Ms. Gosling?
A.
By ensuring that meetings were held and decisions were taken and people were
14:23:20 15
16 17
assigned tasks that I would present each person with a schedule of those tasks. Q. 559
Thank you.
Can I just go to page five or 8531.
If you wouldn't mind.
18 19 14:24:01 20
I want to go to the fifth paragraph in there if you wouldn't mind enlarging it, please.
21 22
This is your statement, Ms. Gosling.
And I just wish to read it out to you.
23 24 14:24:10 25
26
This is the fifth paragraph. company.
"Mine was not a commercial role within the
I did not undertake for instance direct negotiations with
businessmen, which has been alighted to earlier on."
27 28
When you say that you hadn't a commercial role in the company.
29
indicated earlier on that you were a director of various companies.
14:24:26 30
You've In what
circumstances initially did you become a director of the company? Was it on a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:24:31
14:24:49
86 1
structural basis or can you explain the way in which you initially became a
2
director of a company in Monarch?
3
A.
4
Okay.
It wasn't on a structured basis but occasionally people maybe were
going to be absent on holidays and maybe documentation would need to be signed.
5
Q. 560
So essentially you were an alternate director?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 561
So your role grew from a messenger, facilitator.
8 9 14:25:04 10
You would have become an
alternate director purely to facilitate the basis of the company? A.
Yes.
Q. 562
Thank you.
In terms of your -- your role which you played towards
11
Mr. Monahan, Mr. Phil Monahan.
12
Mr. Sweeney in his statement has pointed out that you were his personal
13
assistant.
14
as you said typing and ordinary secretarial work around Somerton and
14:25:30 15
You were his personal assistant and
The tasks which you would have been involved in on a daily basis,
particularly in later years and before that in Dundalk?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 563
Did you have an executive role in terms of when -- did you attend any board
18 19 14:25:46 20
meetings in an official capacity as a director? A.
No.
Q. 564
Thank you.
21
In terms of meetings where strategy of the group was decided.
Did you ever attend any of those meetings?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 565
Did you ever attend any meetings where a commercial decision was taken?
24
A.
No.
Q. 566
Was your view ever taken into an account or were you ever asked your view on a
14:25:59 25
26
development, should we do this development, should we not do this development?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 567
Your view wouldn't have been sought?
29
A.
No, I would be told what was being done.
Q. 568
So, essentially you would have taken your orders from the top, Ms. Gosling?
14:26:18 30
No, I wouldn't have been, my view wouldn't have been sought.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:26:22
14:26:43
87 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 569
Also, in terms of an executive function.
Would you have seen yourself, whilst
3
it is self evidently the case that you had a position of trust in the business.
4
but you would not even yourself have seen yourself with an executive function
5
within the Monarch Group?
6
A.
I didn't see myself really as an executive as I was a support.
7
Q. 570
I see.
8
Thank you.
So I just want to alight on various points in time,
Ms. Gosling.
9 14:26:56 10
At the time in which the company moved from Dundalk to Castleknock, to Somerton
11
in Castleknock.
12
offices.
13
time between the offices that Phil Monahan had in Castleknock and the offices
14
that the company essentially had in Harcourt Street
14:27:20 15
16
Essentially at that point, and there were various different
Essentially there was a division in the working of Monarch at the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 571
In terms of that division, whilst it's the case that you said that various
17
people would have visited Mr. Monahan, it was around this time as well, late
18
'80s or early '90s that essentially the suggestion that Cherrywood would first
19
be developed; isn't that right?
14:27:41 20
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 572
In your view, did the overall management, the project management of Cherrywood,
22
where did that occur, in Somerton or in Harcourt Street?
23
A.
Oh, that was very much in Harcourt Street.
24
Q. 573
And can you just reiterate again where your position was, where your centre of
14:27:56 25
gravity was let's say, and the centre of gravity of the group as far as you're
26
concerned, where you were located in terms of the services that you rendered to
27
the Monarch Group?
28
A.
Well I was located in Somerton, in Castleknock.
29
Q. 574
And so at that point, Ms. Gosling, since it is the case that you say that you
14:28:12 30
were located in Castleknock.
How did this let's say, did you feel that you,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:28:17
14:28:33
88 1
since the project management in Cherrywood was involved in the Harcourt Street
2
office.
Did you feel at the centre of the Cherrywood project?
3
A.
No, I was very much in the periphery.
4
Q. 575
Were you aware let's say of the members of the project management team of the
5
Cherrywood project?
6
A.
No, I wasn't.
7
Q. 576
I see.
8
Can we go to again I don't know if it's up on the screen 5831.
It
may be there already.
9 14:28:47 10
But also when you say I believe that if donations were solicited by politicians
11
I think Monarch would have regarded such payments as a necessary evil or
12
something that would have had to have been done.
13
don't believe that Monarch would have initiated or proposed such payments to
14
politicians.
I want to continue.
I
14:29:05 15
16
You agree with that still, Ms. Gosling; don't you?
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 577
Monarch Group or Mr. Monahan, I believe, would not have wanted to have been
19
associated in any way with corrupt payments or bribery.
14:29:17 20
You still agree with
that?
21
A.
I still agree with that, yes.
22
Q. 578
Sorry, isn't that page on the screen?
23
A.
It's off.
24
Q. 579
It is now. Thank you.
A.
Yeah, my personal belief is you know, it wasn't -- I didn't see it as corrupt
14:29:28 25
26
It's 8531?
payments -- at that time I didn't see it as corrupt payments or bribery.
27
Q. 580
Thank you.
28
A.
It was the culture of the day.
29
Q. 581
You have explained that already to Ms. Dillon, Ms. Gosling.
14:29:45 30
to alight on the last paragraph of page 8531. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I just also want
The very last sentence.
Where
14:29:50
14:30:08
89 1
you say that you had -- "I would have had responsibility for the personal bank
2
account of Mr. Monahan.
3
a cheque book for the personal account of Phil and Mary Monaghan since I would
4
have been responsible for discharging household and other personal business".
I, along with his late wife Mary, would each have had
5 6
This essentially would have been a domestic role you occupied for Mr. Monahan;
7
is that right?
8
A.
Partly, yes.
9
Q. 582
Thank you.
14:30:17 10
And it also says "I would have no function though in determining
who the payee of such cheques would be".
Is that correct?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 583
Earlier on in the proceedings a cheque was brought up on screen.
I don't want
13
to bring it up again but you were essentially asked about your handwriting and
14
whether or not it was your handwriting but just generally the policy would have
14:30:35 15
been if you had access to a cheque book for Mr. Monahan.
16
You never would have
determined who the payee would be on any occasion?
17
A.
Oh, well I'd pay someone like the ESB or phone bills or something like that.
18
Q. 584
But purely in a domestic context?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 585
Thank you.
14:30:53 20
Also can I bring up page 8716, please.
21 22
At the second paragraph on -- in the third page, the diary.
23
want to just read part of your statement again.
24
would have kept his own diaries but occasionally I and others would have made
14:31:18 25
Yes.
Where I
"I recall that Mr. Monahan
entries in those diaries for him".
26 27
You have identified already your own handwriting on this piece of paper; isn't
28
that right
29 14:31:27 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 586
So this is entirely consistent with your statement that you would have made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:31:29
14:31:40
90 1
entries in Mr. Monahan's diary?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 587
You say, you would like you to -- well, can you reiterate again that the entry
4
re CJH and 25,000 that was not your handwriting?
5
A.
No, my handwriting is Paul Kavanagh and Harcourt Street.
6
Q. 588
Thank you.
Can I bring up page 8514, please.
7 8
This is the letter which is written to Sean Mooney and Dominic Glennane, sorry,
9
this is a memorandum.
14:32:08 10
"I had a phone call this morning from Brendan O'Brien
from the Revenue Commissioners to say that he just received our letter dated
11
21st December", can you read out the date of that memorandum, please,
12
Ms. Gosling
13
A.
The 7th of January 1999?
14
Q. 589
Yes, it's the 7th of January 1999 and you were the secretary of Monarch at this
14:32:27 15
point; weren't you?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 590
Monarch Properties?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 591
When did you become the secretary of Monarch Properties occupying the office of
14:32:41 20
secretary?
21
A.
Um, I think it was the end of the previous year.
22
Q. 592
I see?
23
A.
It was when Mr. Glennane had resigned.
24
Q. 593
I see?
A.
And.
Q. 594
And I have the company office printout in front of me.
14:32:45 25
26
The day in which he
27
resigned was the 23rd of December 1997.
28
Ms. Gosling, you became secretary of Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
29 14:33:01 30
At that point and at that point only,
A.
That's right, the end of '97.
Q. 595
So the context in which the revenue would have been sending or communicating Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:33:04
14:33:16
91 1
with you was purely in the context of being an office holder or being the
2
secretary of Monarch Properties?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 596
So can you just talk us through exactly what happened, e sequence of events?
5
This was in respect of, I think Ms. Dillon referred to this earlier on as a
6
'pick me up' payment?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 597
That there was an inquiry about an accounting procedure?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 598
Say, how the accounting procedure for a political donation to Fianna Fail
14:33:26 10
11
occurred in 1991, at least eight years earlier?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 599
And just for the sake of clarifying the record.
14
payment to Fianna Fail was made in 1991.
14:33:43 15
At the point in which the
You had no knowledge of that payment
did you?
16
A.
I had no knowledge of that payment then, no.
17
Q. 600
And there was also I think a reference to a VAT invoice to Saatchi?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 601
But you had no knowledge of that payment being made out?
A.
I didn't.
Q. 602
So your involvement with this payment was purely in the context of let's say a
14:33:58 20
21 22
mopping up exercise from the point of view of revenue compliance, Ms. Gosling,
23
wouldn't that be correct?
24 14:34:13 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 603
So, in terms of corresponding with the Revenue, did you contact your advisors
26
in terms of how to deal with this inquiry from the revenue, Ms. Gosling?
27
A.
I did, yes.
28
Q. 604
Who did you contact?
29
A.
I contacted Sean Mooney.
Q. 605
And?
14:34:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:34:28
14:34:38
92 1
A.
I also made contact with Mr. Glennane as well.
2
Q. 606
And can you just talk us through exactly what happened after that?
3
A.
Um,.
4
Q. 607
Did they give you advice?
5
A.
Yes, they -- I mean.
6
Q. 608
So they guided you through?
7
A.
They guided me through it and they drafted the letter which I duly signed
8 9 14:34:57 10
I hadn't known what had happened.
So they ...
having ... Q. 609
I see?
A.
You know, he -- consulted with Mr. Monahan and -- so that I signed the letter
11
on the understanding that the people who had prepared the accounts and dealt
12
with the matter were the best people to explain how they had done what they
13
did.
14
Q. 610
14:35:31 15
If you just bear with me a moment, Ms. Gosling.
Could you go to page 8513,
please.
16 17
This is the letter which you wrote in your capacity as secretary to Brendan
18
O'Brien Esquire, Senior Inspector of Taxes of the Revenue Commissioners, Nassau
19
Street, Dublin 2.
14:35:55 20
"Dear Mr. O'Brien, we refer to your recent telephone call
as a result of our letter of the 24th of November.
21
As we explained to you
during that conversation properties and stuff to Dunloe Ewart".
22 23 24
So that's the start of the letter.
This letter was drafted for you by KPMG
A.
Yes, it was.
Q. 611
And they were the company's auditors?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 612
And this is the context in which you've dealt with that inquiry from the
14:36:08 25
28
Revenue in your position as secretary to the company and purely on advice of
29
the auditors?
14:36:21 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:36:22
14:36:41
93 1
Q. 613
Thank you, Ms. Gosling.
And you have no further knowledge of any payments to
2
Fianna Fail or to Saatchi & Saatchi.
3
dealt with this?
4
A.
Yes, it was.
5
Q. 614
Can I bring up page 8058, please.
That was purely the context in which you
This is the explanation in the affidavit of
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney as to how a lump sum payment was purported to be made to you
7
over time.
8 9
This was to do with a bonus system effectively due to the success of The Square
14:37:07 10
in Tallaght.
11
And Ms. Dillon asked you earlier on how much you were to receive
from that, which is effectively 5% of 1.8 million I gather.
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 615
Which was 90, 000.
14
This was suggested -- this scheme by which you would be
remunerated over time was suggested in 1991.
14:37:32 15
Can I, Ms. Gosling, ask you.
And the Tribunal has asked you and Ms. Dillon has asked you.
That you were a
16
trusted member of the team.
17
I inquire about what your remuneration would be over time in the Monarch Group,
18
let's say when this would have happened in 1991, what would your remuneration
19
be?
14:37:50 20
A.
21 22
Can
I think at that stage it was probably somewhere in the region of 10,000 punts per annum, yeah, punts.
Q. 616
23 24
And you say so yourself in your statement.
And just in the context of the times.
You did you consider that to be an
overpayment or underpayment? A.
Underpayment.
Q. 617
A significant underpayment?
26
A.
Yes, it was.
27
Q. 618
So in the context of this scheme, which has been alighted on by the Tribunal
14:38:05 25
28
and put to you.
29
were a beneficiary or purported beneficiary on this scheme?
14:38:24 30
A.
Can you explain how that arose? How it came to pass that you
Well I think actually the, Mr. Sweeney has got a little bit muddled in his Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:38:34
14:38:48
94 1
description.
2
was --
My loyalty payment came out of the Tesco situation.
And it
3
Q. 619
Well, notwithstanding --
4
A.
I think it was '89 rather than '91.
5
Q. 620
And you have been very candid with the Tribunal in highlighting this, what you
6
see to be a muddle but notwithstanding the source of the funds, whether they
7
came from The Square or from Tesco?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 621
Can you explain -- was it suggested to you, you didn't think up this tax
14:39:04 10
efficient scheme yourself, Ms. Gosling?
11
A.
No, I was very chuffed when I discovered I was part of it.
12
Q. 622
I see.?
13
A.
So ....
14
Q. 623
Can you explain perhaps as to how you were approached or who approached you?
A.
Well, I was basically told by Phil that he had agreed to do this.
Q. 624
I see.
14:39:18 15
16
In the context of the -- of how you were told.
Were you told that
17
this payment, this lump sum would some how augment your regular salary, which
18
we see was significantly lower than average?
19
A.
14:39:45 20
Yeah, well, I would have made various representations looking for a salary increase.
21
Q. 625
And this lump sum, which you were flattered to be a part of frankly?
22
A.
Uh-huh.
23
Q. 626
This would have been seen perhaps as an answer to these representations?
24
A.
Yes, it was.
Q. 627
I see.
26
A.
No, I didn't.
27
Q. 628
And over time, over throughout the whole '90s when you were still working, you
14:39:54 25
And did you receive the lump sum immediately?
28
were working for Monarch.
29
was reference made to this lump sum over time?
14:40:15 30
A.
Did you receive a significant uplift in salary or
I didn't receive a significant uplift, no.
It was always, you know, well, you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:40:22
14:40:40
95 1
know, the Circinus monies are there for you when you need them.
2
Q. 629
I see.
3
A.
Not until I actually left.
4
Q. 630
When was that exactly, Ms. Gosling?
5
A.
That was in February 2003.
6
Q. 631
I see.
7
And ultimately when did you receive the full benefit of the sum?
And up to that point can you explain perhaps the reasons that you
left?
8
A.
Um, basically I left to pursue my own interests.
9
Q. 632
I see?
A.
The company had -- I mean, the situation had changed back in '97 when it was
14:40:56 10
11
sold off to Dunloe and the culture was different.
12
begun to become interested in complimentary therapies and so basically I left
13
to pursue those interests.
14 14:41:25 15
16
Q. 633
And you are currently pursuing those interests?
A.
Yes.
Q. 634
I see.
17
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
And at that time I had
If you answer any other questions
which anyone may have.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:41:41 20
Ms. Gosling, I just want to ask you a couple of things.
In a
couple of the answers that you gave to Ms. Dillon you appeared to be fairly au
21
fait with what Monarch were looking for regarding Cherrywood in the 1990s.
22
You knew they bought the land?
23
A.
Yes.
24 14:41:55 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that it was zoned one house to the acre; is that correct?
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
where would that have come from?
14:42:13 30
A.
And when you would have had this information back in the 1990,
Probably from Mr. Monahan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:42:14
14:42:17
96 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Right.
And the other directors.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
evidence, and we haven't yet heard from any of the Monarch people, in fairness.
7
That he was told when he was being retained in 1993 that there was, if you
8
like, some difference of opinion going forward in 1993 as between Mr. Phil
9
Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan and other people in Monarch.
14:42:48 10
11
Right.
And could I ask you.
Mr. Dunlop has told us in
Do you know
anything about that, Ms. Gosling? A.
I don't recall that.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
that there was a vote which effected, if you like, the Monarch lands?
14:43:02 15
A.
Do you recall -- 1992, would you have been aware of the fact
Yes, I would have --
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
been seeking I think from day one increased density; isn't that correct?
19
A.
There were a number, in fairness to yourself, but Monarch had
Yes.
14:43:23 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And you knew that
I knew that.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:43:23 25
26
Did you know at some point that there had been a vote which
was effectively to keep the land at one house to the acre ? A.
There were various different votes, yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
you or his reaction to those votes at any point?
14:43:34 30
A.
Yes.
Did the late Mr. Monahan ever discuss those votes with
I think the general reaction was, you know, one of disappointment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:43:38
14:43:56
97 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
No.
Uh-huh.
You can't be any more specific?
Perhaps I should say that, just on a personal level, at that time my
4
father wasn't well.
So my concentration -- not only was I not involved in
5
Cherrywood as such but my concentration at that time was more on my home scene
6
back in Dundalk.
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
Thanks.
So ....
14:44:07 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
Thank you.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Thank you very much.
14:44:15 15
16
I think probably the best thing to do in relation to the list.
17
will write to Ms. Gosling's solicitors in relation to the matter.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
14:44:24 20
21 22
MS. DILLON: A.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Gosling.
Thank you.
23 24 14:44:28 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28 29 14:44:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is that we
14:44:30
14:44:45
98 1
MR. QUINN: Mr. Philip Reilly.
2
MR. PHILIP REILLY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QU
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Reilly.
14:45:01 10
11
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Mr. Reilly.
12
A.
Good afternoon.
13
Q. 635
Mr. Reilly, you were written to by the Tribunal and you responded.
14
And
supplied a statement, which is to be found at pages 8303 and 8304 of the brief;
14:45:15 15
isn't that right? If I could just put those on screen.
And I'll just take
16
you through that statement and I'll ask you one or two questions arising from
17
it.
Is that all right?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 636
I think you told the Tribunal that you joined the Monarch Properties in late
14:45:28 20
1987?
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 637
And had worked previously in the United States from 19 -- I think that's 1983
23 24
is it to 1987? A.
That's a mistake, sorry.
Q. 638
And you were recruited by Mr. Phil Monahan?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 639
Had you known Mr. Monahan?
28
A.
On and off.
14:45:38 25
29 14:45:50 30
I knew he had developed Navan Shopping Centre, I lived in Navan
at the time. Q. 640
So you had known Mr. Monahan before he recruited you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:45:53
14:45:59
99 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 641
Had you been headhunted by Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 642
You go on to say that the title to your position was Group Shopping Centre
5
Manager and you were responsible for shopping centres and other properties at
6
Dundalk, Navan, Finglas, Greystones, Hartstown, City Centre, Athlone,
7
Rathfarnham and Tallaght. Your duties included general day-to-day running of
8
the shopping centres, provision of staff, collection of rents, service charges,
9
dealing with tenants, maintenance issues, budgets, cashflows, marketing
14:46:19 10
promotions and other administrations?
11
A.
That's correct, yeah.
12
Q. 643
Did your duties change at any stage from your initial involvement with Monarch?
13
A.
Not really, no.
14
Q. 644
Were you appointed to that position from day one?
A.
From the beginning, yes, I was, yes.
Q. 645
You say you remained with Monarch until the company was transferred to Dunloe
14:46:31 15
16 17
House plc in 1997 and remained with Dunloe until the end of 1998?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 646
Thereafter you went into partnership with Mr. Glennane?
A.
That's right.
21
Q. 647
Are you still in partnership with Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yes, yes.
23
Q. 648
You say you have no records on your involvement with Cherrywood and you
14:46:49 20
24
prepared this statement based on your memory of events and subject to any
14:47:02 25
necessary corrections should further information arise?
26
A.
Correct, yeah.
27
Q. 649
You may or may not be aware of this, Mr. Reilly.
There's a brief containing a
28
large portion of the documentation, in fact all of the documentation would have
29
been circulated to your solicitors.
14:47:20 30
A.
You would have seen that I take it?
I got a disc from the Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:47:22
14:47:32
100 1
Q. 650
2
Subject to what's contained in that disc.
You have access to no other
documentation?
3
A.
That's correct, yes.
4
Q. 651
You have read what's in that disc I take it?
5
A.
Out of the 8,000 pages or whatever I got I read as much as I could, yeah.
6
Q. 652
Yes.
You go on to say that the Town Square, Tallaght, which at the time was
7
Ireland's largest shopping centre, commenced construction in 1989.
8
would have been two years with the Monarch Group before the construction of the
9
Tallaght Town Centre?
14:47:50 10
So you
A.
About a full year.
11
Q. 653
About a full year?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 654
You say over the next 18 months building period to October 1990 you spent a
14
considerable amount of time as part of the project team.
14:48:03 15
Prior to the opening
of The Square you were responsible for building community relations with the
16
people of Tallaght who were very frustrated with the number of delays in the
17
project.
18
site tours, educational awards, newsletters etc. is that right?
19 14:48:20 20
You go on to describe your organisation of tree planting ceremonies,
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 655
You say that The Square was opened in 1990.
21
Can I just ask you had Mr. Dunlop
any involvement in the opening or organising of the opening of the square?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 656
Had he involvement in organising the opening of the cinema complex?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 657
How long after the opening of The Square?
26
A.
I think it was six weeks.
27
Q. 658
So in November 1990 Mr. Dunlop had been presumably retained by the cinema?
28
A.
UCI.
29
Q. 659
UCI?
A.
Yep.
14:48:34 25
14:48:46 30
Sometime in November.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:48:46
14:48:55
101 1
Q. 660
He was at the opening of the shopping centre, I think?
2
A.
I didn't see him at it.
3
Q. 661
You didn't see him at it?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 662
You would have known Mr. Dunlop?
6
A.
Didn't know him, no.
7
Q. 663
You say that the square opened in 1990 and certain of the units were disposed
8
of to various fund investors at the time. Monarch Properties Services Limited
9
were retained to provide management services to the overall square.
14:49:11 10
management came under your responsibility.
This
The project was a tremendous boost
11
to the area and won both national and international awards and you advised the
12
Tribunal that you were voted Tallaght Person of the Year in 1990 and again in
13
1998; is that correct?
14 14:49:29 15
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 664
Monarch acquired certain lands in Cherrywood in 1989 and, like other employees
16
in the group, you were involved in the marketing and road shows in the late
17
1991, early 1992 period when details of the development and models were brought
18
to various schools and community halls in the area and there was an interaction
19
between the local community to deal with their potential concerns?
14:49:48 20
21
A.
Correct.
Q. 665
Based on your experiences with the community groups in the Tallaght area you
22
were involved with community liaison and outlining the proposals of the scheme.
23
You say that you organised a number of tours to The Square, Tallaght for
24
community groups.
14:50:02 25
Coming up to November 1993, Development Plan vote, you
canvassed a number of politicians you had come to know through your involvement
26
in Tallaght.
And you set out and explained to them Monarch's proposals in
27
respect of the Cherrywood lands when these opportunities arose.
28 29 14:50:21 30
At 8304 you conclude by saying that you had a very limited role in relation to Cherrywood as any of your responsibilities related to shopping centre Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:50:26
14:50:36
102 1
management which took up most of your working days.
And you say that you had
2
no active part in the Cherrywood project team which was led by Mr. Sweeney.
3
Is that correct?
4
A.
Correct, yes.
5
Q. 666
Now, you have heard the evidence of the previous witness, Mr. Reilly?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 667
You have been here this morning?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 668
Before I deal in detail with one or two matters arising in relation to your
14:50:46 10
evidence, is there anything you want to say to the Tribunal or anything extra
11 12
you want to say to the Tribunal in relation to any matter? A.
Well, other than it's focused very much obviously in Tallaght, in terms of the
13
management that I had.
14
which were mentioned earlier in the scheme.
14:51:06 15
16
I was managing. Q. 669
17
I actually managed eight or nine other properties So, it just wasn't only Tallaght
I was managing, as I said, what I listed there myself.
Now, since you are the second Monarch witness.
I think perhaps it might be
best if I could have 8699.
18 19 14:51:23 20
21
Just to start at the beginning, so to speak. A.
Okay.
Q. 670
This is a statement provided to the Tribunal by Arthur Cox Solicitors, who were
22
involved -- who were involved in relation to the acquisition by Guardian
23
Assurance Plc and Ackwood Estates Limited in relation to the Cherrywood site?
24 14:51:46 25
A.
Okay. MR SANFEY: I'm terribly sorry to interrupt Mr. Quinn.
I may be being
26
pedantic here but I think Mr. Quinn referred to Mr. Reilly as being the second
27
Monarch witness.
28 29 14:52:02 30
I wonder if that's a reference to Ms. Gosling. Ms. Gosling is separately represented Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I don't represent Ms. Gosling.
14:52:05
14:52:13
103 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
I think he meant he was the second witness from Monarch.
3
MR SANFEY: I would just like it clarified.
Perhaps I was being pedantic.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
You're not acting for ...
6
MR SANFEY: I don't act for Ms. Gosling.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
other Monarch staff.
14:52:28 10
She is a witness from Monarch.
MR SANFEY:
Indeed, Chairman.
But not represented by with the
Thank you.
11 12
MR. QUINN: You are familiar with the acquisition of this site, Mr. Reilly, I
13
take it and the background to it
14
A.
14:52:40 15
Not really.
I don't know what you mean by "familiar".
site was bought but I wasn't involved in any of the negotiations.
16
Q. 671
Yes.
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 672
Just to put it in context.
19 14:53:00 20
I was aware that the
I'm not going to deal with the negotiations?
I think that by 1989 it appears that the Tallaght
site was going to get off the ground; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
21
Q. 673
And construction had commenced?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 674
And obviously Monarch were looking towards new pastures; isn't that right?
24
A.
Correct.
Q. 675
And for whatever reasonings, the Cherrywood lands, the property of
14:53:07 25
26
Mr. Gallagher were identified as potential investment property; isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
I would assume so.
29
Q. 676
And the position in Tallaght would be that there had been a successful
14:53:22 30
partnership between Monarch and GRE? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:53:24
14:53:43
104 1
A.
I understand that, yes.
2
Q. 677
And that had been coming to fruition and the lands in Cherrywood having been
3
identified I think there was agreement at some stage between Mr. Monahan and
4
Mr. Gallagher that Mr. Monahan would acquire the lands; isn't that right?
5
A.
That was our understanding, yeah.
6
Q. 678
And I think there was some publicity attaching to the acquisition of the lands
7
in or about May or June.
June in fact I think 1989; is that correct?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 679
We can put on screen if necessary?
A.
I'll accept that, yeah.
Q. 680
8510.
14:53:58 10
11
This is an article in the Irish Times on the 12th of May 1989.
12 13 14
And I think it advices that these lands had been acquired. A.
Right.
Q. 681
Were you aware that these lands were about to be acquired?
16
A.
I don't remember exactly but I probably heard about it in the company itself.
17
Q. 682
Yeah.
14:54:10 15
18 19
Okay.
You were very high up with in the company; isn't that right? At that
time? A.
14:54:31 20
I wasn't -- I was an employee of the company.
Shopping Centre Manager managing shopping centres.
21
Not on the development
side.
22
Q. 683
Yes.?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 684
If we could have 2165.
14:54:45 25
This is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's statement where
he attempts to give the management team structure for The Square in Tallaght.
26
I think Mr. Monahan is the Chairman and managing director; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
28
Q. 685
And finance director Mr. Glennane?
29
A.
Dominic Glennane, yes.
Q. 686
Your current partner.
14:54:59 30
I was given the role of Group
And Mr. Sweeney who is the development director?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:55:03
14:55:10
105 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 687
Under Mr. Glennane was Mr. Murray who was the Marketing and Sales?
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 688
And then immediately after him?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 689
Was the shopping centre management?
7
A.
Correct, yes.
8
Q. 690
And that was you?
9
A.
Yes, that's me, yeah.
Q. 691
So you held a fairly responsible position?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 692
And a fairly senior position within the company; isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 693
And you held it before, during and after the development of these lands; isn't
14:55:15 10
14:55:26 15
that right?
16
A.
Yes, of Tallaght, yes.
17
Q. 694
So you would have known that Mr. Monahan or the company were about to acquire
18 19
these lands and enter into negotiations of the acquisition of these lands? A.
14:55:45 20
Not necessarily, no because I was very much focussed. Just to explain.
I
arrived in '87 and in '88 I had to revamp most of the shopping centres around
21
the country, I'd quite a bit of staff changes to make etc..
22
difficulties as well within that year.
23
into the job and I brought people back, my family back from America.
24
Unfortunately, my two parents died very suddenly during the middle of the whole
14:56:14 25
Some personal
So I was very much focused on settling
thing. So I really didn't become involved in Tallaght until early '89, '89.
26
But I wasn't in the mainstream of -- can't in terms of what was happening I was
27
...
28 29 14:56:36 30
Q. 695
So you're saying that, like everybody else, other than Mr. Galvin and Mr. Monahan, you didn't realise that Monarch had acquired these lands until you read about it in the newspaper? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:56:37
14:56:54
106 1
A.
2 3
Well, I might have heard about it in the office. discussions.
Q. 696
4
I wasn't at any meetings or
Nobody came and asked me.
Now, I think that the lands once acquired, posed a number of difficulties; isn't that right, from a development point of view?
5
A.
Well, again I wasn't really aware of that itself.
6
Q. 697
Were you not even curious to know what the potential of the site was after it
7 8
was acquired? A.
9 14:57:15 10
I wasn't involved as I say.
Curious yeah but not into any great detail. shopping centre on it.
I was told we wanted to build a
That was extent of it, that was the extent of mine.
Q. 698
Shopping centres were the track record of Monarch?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 699
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 700
But this was a Greenfield site; isn't that right?
A.
Correct.
16
Q. 701
It had no access?
17
A.
Again, at that time I wasn't familiar with it.
18
Q. 702
When did you become familiar with the site?
19
A.
Well I suppose the first time I went to it might have been at the end of '91.
Q. 703
So you had no involvement with this site?
21
A.
Not --
22
Q. 704
Between 1989 when it was purchased?
23
A.
Not really.
24
Q. 705
And the end of 1991, did you say the end of 1991?
A.
Well I'm trying to remember.
Q. 706
So between 1989 and 1991, even though you were the Manager in charge of
14:57:22 15
14:57:46 20
14:57:46 25
26
Sometime in '91.
27
shopping centres in the group, you knew nothing about the site and hadn't
28
visited?
29 14:58:02 30
A.
No, it's not that I knew nothing about it.
I knew something about it.
didn't get into any of the detail of .... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
But I
14:58:05
14:58:22
107 1
Q. 707
Did you know that it had been zoned for shopping centre development?
2
A.
Well I knew it was zoned for something.
It was for development.
But, again,
3
sorry, and I don't mean to keep repeating myself.
4
shopping centre and trying to get a new development off the ground, which was
5
tough.
6
Q. 708
7
You know, I was running a
Did you know that there was a moveable line vis-a-vis the proposed Southeastern Motorway running across.
8
A.
I wasn't involved in any of that, no.
9
Q. 709
Did you know that there was no immediate access to the site?
A.
No, I don't recall that.
11
Q. 710
Did you know that there was no planning on the site?
12
A.
Well, planning to start building tomorrow, no, there was no planning.
14:58:33 10
13 14 14:58:45 15
that. Q. 711
And you knew that there was no sewage to the site?
A.
I wasn't familiar with it now.
16 17
Again, I'm sorry, as I say, I wasn't familiar
with that. Q. 712
18 19
I knew
Can I just ask you.
At what stage did you get involved in relation to
shopping centre management, is it after or is it before its constructed? A.
14:59:04 20
I suppose to follow the line was -- in Tallaght for instance it had planning permission.
I arrived in '89.
Work had already commenced on the site itself
21
in '88 we started putting in the foundations.
22
to start setting up the management structures and to get to know the people in
23
the community.
24 14:59:28 25
26
That's when I really get involved in projects.
Q. 713
So you say that you didn't arrive in Tallaght until 1989, is it?
A.
'89.
Q. 714
And Tallaght I think was being run at that time, was it, by L & C Properties
27
Correct, yeah.
Limited?
28
A.
L & C Properties.
29
Q. 715
L & C Properties?
A.
Yeah, L & C Properties.
14:59:41 30
I arrived in '89 and that was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:59:42
14:59:52
108 1
Q. 716
And did you have authority to ask that monies be drawn on that company?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 717
I see. So any cheques drawn on L & C Properties?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 718
Did not go through you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 719
So if you wanted, for example, to expend money in relation to Tallaght.
8 9
was the procedure? A.
15:00:05 10
Well, I would obviously check with the project Manager that I was going to spend certain money.
11
I would then -- obviously we'd raise an invoice.
Q. 720
So you did have approving rights?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 721
On expenditure?
A.
Sorry, yeah, on expenditure.
16
Q. 722
Did you a moment ago tell me that you didn't?
17
A.
No, sorry.
18 19
The
invoice sorry from the company, third party, would be approved by me and paid.
12
15:00:19 15
What
I was interpreting that I could write a cheque.
I wasn't
involved in that end of it. Q. 723
You didn't have signing authority on the cheque?
A.
No, absolutely not.
21
Q. 724
But you could ask that a cheque be paid?
22
A.
Drawn, yes.
23
Q. 725
And you could approve a request by others, that is a cheque be paid?
24
A.
Yeah, if a third party, if one of the team came along and said that they wanted
15:00:31 20
15:00:43 25
something paid, yes.
26
Q. 726
So whilst your signature wasn't recognised by the bank?
27
A.
Correct, yeah.
28
Q. 727
Nonetheless you could approve a payment?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 728
And your approval wasn't questionable by anybody higher; isn't that right?
15:00:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:00:56
15:01:11
109 1
A.
Oh, it would, yeah.
I mean, I would have cleared it with somebody that this
2
was a legitimate expense, Eddie Sweeney probably, as he was the Project
3
Manager.
4
Q. 729
And other than Mr. Sweeney, would you have to clear it with anybody else?
5
A.
Depending on the circumstances.
6
Q. 730
Yes.?
7
A.
Or Noel Murray, depending on what --
8
Q. 731
In what circumstances might you go to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Murray as opposed to
9 15:01:27 10
Perhaps Dominic Glennane.
Mr. Sweeney in relation to the approval your payment? A.
Well, I suppose I wanted to take on some staff, for instance.
And to do that
11
I would have had to go to, we would set out an interview process and set out a
12
salary etc. because Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray were on the marketing and
13
commercial side.
14
Q. 732
15:01:50 15
Yes.
Now, do I understand your evidence to the Tribunal to be that because of
the particular role you had in Tallaght, you had occasion to come in contact
16
with the community leaders and local organisations?
17
A.
Correct, yes.
18
Q. 733
And in that regard, did you also come in contact with local politicians?
19
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 734
And did you build up a rapport with local politicians in Tallaght?
A.
Not initially.
15:02:09 20
21
My initial contact was with the Tallaght Community Council and
22
the Get Tallaght Working Group and some other groups, the Tallaght Welfare
23
Society and the schools and people like that.
24
approach on Tallaght.
15:02:29 25
Q. 735
26
Can I just ask you.
Where were you, where were you operating from? Where
were your offices?
27
A.
Part of my time was in the project office itself.
28
Q. 736
In Tallaght?
29
A.
And my other office was in Tallaght.
Q. 737
Yes.
15:02:40 30
That was the main thrust of the
So you were in Tallaght throughout the development of Tallaght? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:02:45
15:02:52
110 1
A.
Some of the time, not all of the time.
2
Q. 738
After it was opened in October 1990 did you continue to have a presence in
3
Tallaght?
4
A.
Yes, I spent a lot of time there.
5
Q. 739
Yes?
6
A.
For the first three or four years.
7
Q. 740
So that would be up to '93, '94?
8
A.
And after it, I don't know, Mr. Quinn.
9
Q. 741
Did you ease off on it after your attendance in the other office at that stage?
A.
No, I still maintained an office in town as I was running other projects for
15:03:05 10
11 12
other investors and institutions. Q. 742
13 14
And was it usual to have group strategy meetings in Tallaght in relation to the development of the site there?
A.
Um, sorry.
Q. 743
Yes?
16
A.
Which were the shopping centre management team.
17
Q. 744
What about the other teams?
18
A.
On occasion I would join some of the technical team meetings.
15:03:24 15
19 15:03:46 20
I had meetings with my own team.
On occasion.
But I didn't
attend the main board meetings between the two properties L&C and Monarch. Q. 745
We know, for example, by October 1990.
If we could have 1255.
This is at a
21
time when you would have been well bedded in in Tallaght.
22
payments to a company, Comex Trading Corporation in the sums of 28,000 and
23
28,300 pounds respectively.
24
There were two
You'll have seen those?
A.
Correct.
Q. 746
In the documentation which you received?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 747
And you will have heard evidence in relation to them this morning?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 748
Did you approve those payments?
A.
No.
15:04:04 25
15:04:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:04:12
15:04:23
111 1
Q. 749
Did you know those payments had been made?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 750
When was the first time you heard that those payments had been met?
4
A.
A few minutes ago, earlier in the Tribunal.
5
Q. 751
Are you saying that up to the evidence of the last witness you had never heard
6
that two payments totalling 56,300 pounds had been made to a company called
7
Comex Trading Company?
8
A.
No, I didn't even know who they were.
9
Q. 752
I was going to ask you that now.
A.
Sorry, I'm jumping ahead.
Q. 753
As somebody intimately involved in the development of Tallaght, can you tell
15:04:39 10
11 12
the Tribunal what contribution a company Comex Trading Corporation would have
13
made to the development of the site in Tallaght?
14
A.
I had no knowledge.
Q. 754
The 16th of October 1990. What was the opening date of the?
16
A.
The 23rd of October.
17
Q. 755
Seven days before Tallaght was opened?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 756
You can't tell the Tribunal about an expenditure of 56,300 pounds?
A.
No, no, absolutely no idea.
21
Q. 757
Did you know Mr. Lawlor?
22
A.
Yes, I met Mr. Lawlor, yeah.
23
Q. 758
When did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
24
A.
I was trying to remember that.
15:04:49 15
15:05:03 20
15:05:17 25
I met him socially.
26
Q. 759
Yes.
27
A.
I didn't really know him.
28
Q. 760
Where did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
29
A.
At a social party.
Q. 761
In Tallaght?
15:05:31 30
Probably sometime in '90.
How well did you know Mr. Lawlor by October 1990? I'd only met him at one stage.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Sometime in 1990
15:05:32
15:05:38
112 1
A.
No, in Sandyford.
2
Q. 762
Well, taking that expenditure as we see it there.
3
Who would have approved
that expenditure?
4
A.
I don't know.
5
Q. 763
Does that document on screen give you any indication of who would have approved
6
it?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 764
Who in your opinion might have approved it or had the power to approve an
9 15:05:51 10
expenditure of 56,000? A.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Obviously the people who were in Tallaght, the
11
project leader was Eddie Sweeney.
But, you know, other people would have
12
approved payments for John Sisk or other people like that.
13
Q. 765
Well what other people would have approved?
14
A.
I don't know.
15:06:14 15
I mean, obviously, for instance, the certificate for John Sisk
and Sons was raised every month, although I wasn't involved in that.
16
Q. 766
That's an architect's certificate?
17
A.
Yes, an architect's certificate.
18
Q. 767
And who would receive that architect's certificate?
19
A.
It would probably go to the Project Manager.
Q. 768
That's Mr. Sweeney, is it?
21
A.
Yeah, Mr. Sweeney.
22
Q. 769
What about Mr. Glennane?
23
A.
No, I don't believe it would have gone to him.
15:06:28 20
24 15:06:49 25
Maybe eventually for when the
cheque was written but not initially. Q. 770
26
Somebody would have had to approve the payment and somebody would have to make the payment; isn't that right?
27
A.
Correct, yes.
28
Q. 771
And what was the procedure in Tallaght in October 1990 for the making of
29 15:06:49 30
payments? A.
Well once an invoice was passed it was sent to our office in town and they drew Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:06:54
15:07:02
113 1 2
the cheque. Q. 772
3
So an invoice would have had to have been received from Comex Trading corporation in Tallaght or in town?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 773
It would have had to have been addressed to someone?
6
A.
I assume so.
7
Q. 774
It would have had to have been passed and a direction that the monies had been
8 9 15:07:10 10
paid? A.
Correct.
Q. 775
So whoever engaged a company such as Comex would know that they had been
11
engaged?
12
A.
I assume so.
13
Q. 776
Whoever received the invoice for the works done would know that the works were
14 15:07:23 15
done; isn't that right? A.
Correct, yeah.
16
Q. 777
Somebody would have had to approve the invoice isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 778
And then somebody would have to give a direction presumably the same person,
19 15:07:33 20
that the monies be expended? A.
Correct, yeah.
21
Q. 779
A cheque would have to be drawn; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes, that was the procedure.
23
Q. 780
A payment made on foot of that invoice?
24
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 781
And then was there a procedure for auditing from time to time or cashflow
15:07:42 25
26 27
projections? A.
Yeah.
I assume there were.
Maybe just to back up a bit again.
I wasn't
28
involved in the accounts end of it. If I had an invoice I wanted paid I got it
29
approved having cleared it with the relevant supervisor or manager or whatever
15:08:05 30
else.
It was sent into town and after that it was paid or otherwise. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:08:09
15:08:28
114 1
Q. 782
2
And are you saying that an expenditure such as this would never have come to your attention?
3
A.
No, no.
4
Q. 783
Do you ever recall any discussion about a payment to Mr. Lawlor or indeed to
5
Sorry, no, absolutely not.
Comex Trading company?
6
A.
No, absolutely not.
7
Q. 784
It was never mentioned in Tallaght?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 785
Was his name ever mentioned in connection with any other project involving
15:08:39 10
His name was never mentioned in Tallaght.
Monarch?
11
A.
No, not that I ever heard of, no.
12
Q. 786
Did you ever hear mention of Mr. Lawlor's name at any stage in relation to
13 14
Cherrywood or other projects? A.
There was one in Prague, Mr. Lawlor was involved in.
Q. 787
You weren't involved in that project?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 788
How did you know that Mr. Lawlor was involved in it?
18
A.
Probably somebody in the office told me that he was organising it through --
15:08:53 15
19 15:09:04 20
probably Ambrose Kelly was the architect. Q. 789
And you had no involvement in it?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 790
Other than Mr. Monahan, who else was involved in the?
23
A.
I don't know.
24 15:09:16 25
I think the project architect was -- Ambrose Kelly was involved
in it. Q. 791
26
I think you yourself, I think received PR payments in 1990, 1989 and 1990; isn't that right?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 792
If we could have 8596, please.
29 15:09:31 30
This is an L&C payment by accounts.
Do you see this document?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:09:40
15:09:54
115 1
A.
I can, yeah.
2
Q. 793
If you go about two-thirds of the way down you see Phil Reilly, PR work? For
3
the month of April 1989?
4
A.
I never got that payment.
5
Q. 794
You never got that payment?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 795
Did you make that claim for that payment?
8
A.
No, absolutely not.
9
Q. 796
Can you you give any indication to the Tribunal as to why your name would
15:10:03 10
appear in such a list for a claim for PR work?
11
A.
Other than it's allocated as public relations work which I was doing.
12
Q. 797
Did you make a claim for the public relations work which you were doing?
13
A.
No, I did not, no.
14
Q. 798
You were an employee; is that correct?
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 799
Did you ever get any of the bonuses that we have heard evidence of this
15:10:21 15
16 17
morning?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 800
Or any similar type bonus?
A.
No, absolutely not.
Q. 801
So you can't tell the Tribunal why Phil Reilly, PR Work, claim for 50,000
15:10:29 20
21 22
pounds in April 1989 would have been made?
23
A.
Absolutely not, no.
24
Q. 802
You certainly made no such claim against L&C Properties?
A.
No, certainly not.
Q. 803
Therefore, can I take it, if we could have 8597.
15:10:41 25
26 27
A claim for 150,000 for
April 1990 was also not made by you?
28
A.
No, that's the first time I've seen these.
29
Q. 804
These are documents supplied to the Tribunal by Monarch.?
A.
Yeah.
15:11:02 30
Again, all I can say is that it's public relations work but I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:11:08
15:11:20
116 1
absolutely never got these payments.
2
Q. 805
You did public relations work?
3
A.
Well, sorry the work I did.
4 5
public relations field. Q. 806
6
I managed shopping centres but I was in the
But I was talking to various community groups etc.
You see, I understood your evidence to be that you were effectively in charge of shopping centres?
7
A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
8
Q. 807
So would the designation PR work apply to you at all?
9
A.
For that element of it I mean, for instance, we had educational awards, there
15:11:39 10
was 40,000 Euro for or 40,000 pounds given out to schools for scholarships etc.
11
There would have been other public relationships work launching the scheme and
12
whatever but .... you know.
13
Q. 808
You can't help the Tribunal as to why there would be?
14
A.
Absolutely not.
Q. 809
There would be documentation showing claims or payments to you?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 810
Totalling 300,000 pounds in 1989 and 1990?
18
A.
No, absolutely not.
19
Q. 811
And you say that you never received those monies?
A.
No, absolutely not.
21
Q. 812
You didn't know of Mr. Lawlor's claim either through Comex or otherwise?
22
A.
No, absolutely not.
23
Q. 813
For any monies on Tallaght?
24
A.
No, absolutely not.
15:12:01 15
15:12:13 20
15:12:20 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn, I think it's 200,000.
27 28
MR. QUINN: It's 50,000 and 150,000 -- sorry 200,000.
29
could have 3061, please and it maybe a further error on the author of this
15:12:38 30
Yes.
In fact, if we
document, Mr. Reilly, but like me, he has totalled the 150 plus the 50 to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:12:44
15:13:01
117 1 2
300,000 as you can see there. A.
Sorry, I saw that document and I got the disc and I queried it with my own
3
solicitor to find out what was that all about but I haven't heard back from
4
him.
5
50's, absolutely.
6
Q. 814
7
I can certainly assure this Tribunal that I got no 300,000 or 100 or
Did you know that Mr. Monahan was making a claim for additional management costs in relation to Tallaght in July of 1993, 1992
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 815
If I could have 3781.
15:13:21 10
11
You heard the evidence of the previous witness in relation to a letter written
12
in July 1992 by Mr. Monahan on Monarch Property Limited's paper to GRE, its
13
partner.
14
the Tallaght project
15:13:44 15
A.
16 17
15:14:00 20
I had no involvement in that.
I never attended any meeting with
Mr. Monahan or with GRE. Q. 816
18 19
Yeah.
Where there is a claim for in excess of 7 million pounds on foot of
Leaving aside the meetings between Mr. Monahan and GRE, this is a claim in relation to a project that you certainly were involved in; isn't that right.
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 817
And you would have been involved when the site was designated for tax purposes;
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
I don't know when it was designated for tax purposes.
23
Q. 818
It appears to, according to this letter.
24 15:14:16 25
It had been included in the
designated area in the 1989 Finance Act? A.
Yeah, I think --
26
Q. 819
I think you told us were employed from 1987; is that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 820
So you would have been employed when it was designated; isn't that right?
29
A.
Well obviously, yeah.
Q. 821
Well it's not just obviously?
15:14:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:14:28
15:14:38
118 1
A.
Sorry, yeah.
2
Q. 822
I suggest to you that Mr. Reilly, there's no need to be coy about this?
3
A.
I'm certainly not, no.
4
Q. 823
This is something that you would remember as a course; isn't that right? It
5
would have meant a huge uplift in the value of the centre that you were
6
involved in?
7
A.
I'm sorry.
If I can just restate what my particular role was in the
8
particular scheme itself.
9
for The Square Town Centre, Tallaght.
15:14:59 10
I came in 1989 to set up the management structure Okay? I didn't -- I was not involved
in the overall project management of the scheme.
11
relations with the community groups.
12
the scheme in October, 23rd of October 1990.
13
designation or whatever else.
14
Q. 824
15:15:29 15
My role was to build
Okay? I, what do you call it, I opened I was not involved in any tax
I had heard designation had been granted.
And this would have been something that would not have gone unnoticed by anybody in the Monarch team in Tallaght; isn't that right?
16
A.
Tax designated, yeah.
17
Q. 825
It was a huge uplift to the shopping centre?
18
A.
It was good for the area.
19
This I understood from -- this was I understood
having lobbied by the Tallaght Community Council and on the various other
15:15:48 20
groups as a necessary part of getting the scheme off the ground.
21
Q. 826
Had your employers, Monarch Properties Limited, lobbied for it?
22
A.
I would assume they had.
23
Q. 827
Had you lobbied any of the councillors you were getting to know at this time
24 15:16:00 25
26
for it? A.
No.
Q. 828
When you say that it had been lobbied by community groups.
27
any of the community groups, on behalf of your employers, to lobby for it?
28
A.
I wasn't involved in that end of it, no.
29
Q. 829
If we look at 3781.
15:16:32 30
Had you encouraged
This is, as I say, a letter from Mr. Monahan to GRE under
the heading Additional Marketing Costs.
This is the type of thing, I suggest
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:16:32
15:16:41
119 1
to you, Mr. Reilly, that you would know about.
It says "to ensure the success
2
of the joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred.
3
costs which were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring
4
the tax status and appropriate tax profile for the Tallaght Town Centre.
These
5 6
Were you involved with the tenant profile for the town centre?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 830
Do you know -- are you familiar with the phrase 'appropriate tenant profile'?
9
A.
Yeah, appropriate tenant profile would be the tenant mix, I would call it.
Q. 831
Was there any discussion in Tallaght in your time about who might be an
15:16:57 10
11 12
appropriate tenant for the shopping certainty? A.
When I arrived a deal had been done with, it was Quinnsworth or Crazy Prices in
13
the day.
14
on board and then they let the rest of the scheme.
15:17:19 15
And then UCI came on board, as I recall, and then Dunnes Stores came
Q. 832
Did Dunnes Stores come on board when you were with the company?
16
A.
Yeah, it would have been, yeah, I think so.
17
Q. 833
Were you involved in the negotiations coming on board?
18
A.
No, no.
19
The only negotiations I was
involved in with Dunnes Stores was the service charge, which I was responsible
15:17:35 20
for the cost of running the scheme when it was open.
21 22
The only -- just to clarify that.
That's the only meeting
I had with Dunnes Stores on that. Q. 834
It says The Square was included as a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act.
23
In fact the designation may have occurred as a result of a government decision
24
in '88.
15:17:58 25
This dramatically increased its value and led to a large level of
private and institution investors expressing interest in the project.
26 27 28
Do you recall, first of all, the increase in value as described here A.
29 15:18:12 30
I wasn't involved in values.
I had no idea what values were.
first thing I say to you. Q. 835
Okay.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
That's the
15:18:13
15:18:32
120 1
A.
Just to explain to you about Tallaght.
When I got there in 1989.
We arrived
2
on 100 acres site which was full of scrap cars and it was a tip.
3
lot of frustration in the community in terms of the scheme not having got off
4
the ground.
5
particular role within it was to change the whole perception of Tallaght and
6
hence my involvement, which was my main involvement in Tallaght, was dealing
7
with the community and getting to know the people, getting support for the
8
project and stopping the absolute aggravation that these people had against
9
Monarch for taking so long to get the scheme off the ground.
15:18:57 10
There was a
Tallaght at that stage was getting very bad press.
in the project.
My
That was my role
I then recruited people, set up the systems and opened the
11
scheme.
12
I was not involved in negotiations with the tenants, other than when a tent
13
would arrive to start to fit out, to show them where their shop was etc..
14
that was my role.
15:19:18 15
Q. 836
16
But I was not involved in the overall management at main board level.
But
The letter goes on to say "significant professional fees were incurred in this area particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght"
17 18 19
Did you know that significant professional fees ... A.
No.
Q. 837
Had been incurred in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 838
From your expertise and knowledge of Tallaght and generally as a shopping
15:19:30 20
23
centre manager, can you identify for the Tribunal what type of fees you think
24
might be incurred in obtaining a tax status for a shopping centre?
15:19:51 25
26
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 839
Well under what headings could one look to to find significant fees for that
27 28
type of activity? A.
29 15:20:12 30
I really don't know.
I don't know how you'd go about getting tax designation.
I really don't. Q. 840
And can you give any indication to the Tribunal of how one might incur any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:20:18
15:20:38
121 1
fees, never mind significant or significant professional fees, to obtain tax
2
status for a development?
3
A.
Well I suppose what you might do, if you were to, maybe you'd employ an
4
accountancy firm or KPMG or somebody to do a study or a marketing study or
5
whatever.
6
Q. 841
7
I don't know.
I was never involved.
To your knowledge was any such investment undertaken by L & C Properties or indeed any of the Monarch interest in relation to Tallaght?
8
A.
I have no knowledge.
9
Q. 842
We know, for example, from 3782.
15:20:55 10
heading is 850,000.
11
That the sum being claimed under that
Although some of that appears to relate to encouraging
various interests to acquire a unit in the centre; isn't that right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 843
Yes?
14
A.
No, I know nothing about this.
Q. 844
So other than commissioning a firm of accountants to prepare some sort of data,
15:21:14 15
16 17
you can think of no other ...? A.
Sorry, yeah.
I mean, no, I'm being asked here for something that I don't
18
really know anything about.
19
it and I've given my honest answer.
15:21:31 20
Q. 845
21
I would have to think it how would you go about
Now, you say that you got involved in the Cherrywood site sometime towards the, was it the end of 1991?
22
A.
The end of 1991, yeah.
23
Q. 846
And how did you manage to avoid being involved with the site prior to the end
24 15:21:45 25
of 1991? A.
It wasn't my job to be involved in it.
26
Q. 847
But you did become involved?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 848
How and how did it become your job to get involved?
29
A.
Well, what happened was, first and foremost, Tallaght was our show case, all
15:21:59 30
right.
It was a very big and successful launch office scheme, that was very Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:22:06
15:22:29
122 1
well received in the market.
It was practically fully let when it opened.
2
It traded well at the start.
3
it was our show case.
4
asked by Richard Lynn to go to meet with Bill O'Herlihy to talk about marketing
5
and PR which I had been involved in, in the community aspect, in the launch in
6
Tallaght.
It was like, as I say, the travelling salesman,
My recollection of having got involved in '91 was I was
7
Q. 849
That would have been around November 1991?
8
A.
I think it was around that.
9
Q. 850
When you went to that meeting with Mr. O'Herlihy at the invitation of Mr. Lynn,
15:22:44 10
were you aware of the zoning status of the site?
11
A.
Yeah, it was zoned one house to the acre, as I recall.
12
Q. 851
And did you visit the site?
13
A.
I probably drove around it but I don't ....
14
Q. 852
Had you attended any of the meetings in relation to the strategy that might be
15:23:09 15
It was a low zoning.
employed?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 853
To change the zoning status of the site?
18
A.
No, I hadn't.
19
Q. 854
Did you know why Mr. O'Herlihy was being retained?
A.
Well there was a campaign against Cherrywood itself and the view was, to
15:23:17 20
Not that I can recall.
21
counter that argument, that they were taking on a public relations firm that
22
would counter that argument.
23
Q. 855
Presumably that firm had to be briefed on the zoning status of the site?
24
A.
Yeah, I would think so, yeah.
Q. 856
And you say that was towards the end of 1991, I believe that was towards the
15:23:34 25
26
end of '91. And you attended at least one meeting, did you, with
27
Mr. O'Herlihy?
28
A.
Yeah, I did.
29
Q. 857
Well, presumably, having made your contribution to the marketing aspect of the
15:23:58 30
With Richard Lynn and Bill O'Herlihy in his office.
brief from Mr. O'Herlihy that ended your involvement? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:24:02
15:24:27
123 1
A.
No, it didn't.
What was discussed at that meeting, as I recall, was the
2
various approaches to the media, obviously press releases, news letters and
3
some other, you know, media, what do you call it, the road shows, that have
4
been mentioned, were one of the particular avenues that they decided that they
5
would use, to go out and tell the public exactly what was proposed for the
6
scheme itself.
7
Q. 858
This was a strategy to advise the public on what was proposed for the site?
8
A.
To try and get a balanced message out, yeah.
9
Q. 859
Did you get more and more involved then thereafter in relation to the site?
A.
No, not really.
11
Q. 860
I see?
12
A.
I did attend the road shows and go to some of them, not all of them.
13
Q. 861
In what capacity did you attend the road shows?
14
A.
It was just to try and help out and just watch what people were saying.
15:24:44 10
15:24:57 15
The
whole office went out to it, from secretaries to the people in marketing. We
16
even brought our tea lady out to it.
17
weren't the three headed monsters that perhaps we're being painted as in the
18
media.
19
So, I mean, it was really a -- we
Q. 862
So who else attended at the meeting between yourself and Mr. O'Herlihy?
A.
Just myself and Richard Lynn.
21
Q. 863
And was that your very first involvement in relation to the Cherrywood?
22
A.
That was as I recall it, yeah.
23
Q. 864
So after November 1991 did you know that planning submissions were being
15:25:19 20
24 15:25:35 25
received by the council in relation to the site? A.
26 27
side of it or what was being submitted to the local authority itself. Q. 865
28 29 15:26:03 30
I wasn't really familiar with that side of it, with the canvassing or lobbying
It wasn't lobbying at this stage, it was planning permission put in by planning experts on behalf of Monarch?
A.
I wasn't involved in any of that. I didn't attend.
Q. 866
Did you know what Monarch wanted on the site? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:26:03
15:26:05
124 1
A.
At that stage they wanted a shopping centre on it.
2
Q. 867
Were they also trying to prove the density on it?
3
A.
I believe they were, yes.
4
Q. 868
Who told you about that?
5
A.
I suppose Richard Lynn or Eddie Sweeney.
6
Q. 869
Did you attend many meetings with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney in relation to the
7
site?
8
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
9
Q. 870
So you had this one meeting with Mr. O'Herlihy where you may or may not have
15:26:21 10
learned of the zoning on the site?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 871
And you attended a few residential meetings thereafter; is that right with the
13 14
other staff of? A.
15:26:35 15
Yeah, well what happened effectively was from that meeting a model was made, a video was made and it explained the whole development itself.
16
Q. 872
Did you have a contribution to make to the video?
17
A.
No, I don't think I was involved in it.
18
Q. 873
So you weren't involved in the video and you weren't presumably involved in the
19 15:26:50 20
making of the model? A.
No.
21
Q. 874
So what was your involvement?
22
A.
Sorry.
23 24 15:26:58 25
From that I learnt about the scheme itself.
Where it was, what was
proposed for it. Q. 875
Yes?
A.
As I recall, there was a designer who worked on The Square.
He did some
26
sketch schemes as well about building an underground shopping centre and a
27
village on top of it.
28
thoughts etc. that were put together.
29
about it.
15:27:20 30
Q. 876
And these were some of the, what do you call it
Did you know this much.
And that's as much as how I learned
Did you know that it would require a vote of the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:27:24
15:27:36
125 1
councillors to change the zoning on the site?
2
A.
I knew there was something happening in '92 all right, yeah.
3
Q. 877
When you say you knew there was something happening?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 878
Did you not know that from the outset of November '91?
6
A.
Well my recollection of '91 was, what do you call it, it had been proposed as
Sorry.
I knew that it had to go through a process, yeah.
7
industrial and that was rejected.
8
with Richard Lynn.
9
balanced view as there was opposition from some residents to the scheme itself.
15:28:00 10
That was from a conversation that I had
And then the attack was to go out and try and get a
Q. 879
And some councillors I think perhaps?
11
A.
Oh, councillors, yeah, there was.
12
Q. 880
Did you know that there was councillors opposed to the scheme?
13
A.
Yeah, there was some media coverage at the time as I recall.
14
Q. 881
Yes?
A.
And the plan then was to get Bill O'Herlihy on board to try and get a balanced
15:28:10 15
16 17
view. Q. 882
18 19 15:28:26 20
21
Yes.
And Mr. O'Herlihy produced a video and that was distributed.
Had you
any input as to who was to see video? A.
No, I don't remember sending it out to anybody myself.
Q. 883
How many meetings did you attend?
A.
I was trying to remember that for today.
22
Probably, sorry, these are the road
shows?
23
Q. 884
Yes.?
24
A.
Probably three or four.
15:28:42 25
One was in the Royal Dublin, which was presented to
the councillors.
26
Q. 885
Who attended -- did you attend that meeting?
27
A.
I did, yeah.
28
Q. 886
Did you meet any councillors at that meeting that you would have known from
29 15:28:50 30
Tallaght? A.
I can't say I did, no.
I might have known one or two.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
But I didn't have any
15:28:55
15:29:06
126 1
conversation with them as such.
2
Q. 887
And in what capacity did you attend the meeting then?
3
A.
I was just an observer as much.
4 5
make any ... Q. 888
6 7
I wasn't familiar enough with the scheme to
Did you at any stage become familiar with the scheme to the extent that you could advice those interested on which way you would like them to have voted?
A.
Well I suppose we were trying -- my role in this again, I suppose, as somebody
8
said to me one day, I was the friendly face.
9
great scheme over in Tallaght.
We were -- it was, what was proposed was a
good scheme for Cherrywood.
They were a prominent, successful, professional
15:29:30 10
Monarch were after doing a
11
company.
12
models, showing houses, showing what was proposed.
13
then to bring that out to the public.
14
At this stage there was a lobby group against the scheme itself.
15:30:02 15
That they were trying, I suppose, to get the message across, showing One to the councillors and
To try and get the public reaction. And they
were trying to get a balance in the thing.
16
Q. 889
And you were heading up that with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney; is that right?
17
A.
No, I wasn't heading it up at all.
18
Q. 890
You were just helping out?
19
A.
I was just helping out when I had time.
Q. 891
Okay.
15:30:16 20
Did you know that the Manager had proposed in DP92/44, for example,
21
that there would be an increase in density in the site or that the density
22
would be at four houses to the acre?
23
A.
I don't remember.
24
Q. 892
You don't remember that?
A.
No, I don't remember.
Q. 893
Did you know that two councillors had proposed that the Manager's proposals be
15:30:30 25
26 27 28
adopted at a meeting in May '92? A.
29 15:30:43 30
I knew there was a vote in May '92 but I wasn't involved as I can recall in that end of it itself.
Q. 894
You weren't involved in that.
When you say that end of it what do you mean?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:30:48
15:31:00
127 1
A.
Meeting councillors or talking to councillors.
2
Q. 895
Well, was Monarch involved in meeting councillors?
3
A.
I assume they were, yeah.
4
I assume if you had two councillors.
Well Richard
Lynn was out talking to councillors.
5
Q. 896
Was there anybody else out talking to councillors?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Perhaps he might have brought some of the technical people with
him to try and explain.
8
Q. 897
Did he ever tell you how he was getting on in his chats with the councillors?
9
A.
It wasn't -- certainly I don't remember it.
Q. 898
You have given me the impression, Mr. Reilly, as somebody who had no great
15:31:15 10
11 12
interest, if you don't mind me saying o? A.
13 14
Sorry, that's not true. I don't mean it to come across like that to this Tribunal.
Q. 899
15:31:34 15
16
Maybe a conversation --
I can assure you of that. I was busy running my business.
I accept all that. I'm really anxious to find out your involvement in relation to Cherrywood.?
A.
Yeah.
What my involvement was.
I went to the road shows.
I tried to help
17
out and explain to anybody who asked me a question about what I knew about
18
houses, about where the valley was, there was Tully Church, how would they get
19
into the place, when would it be built.
15:31:56 20
from the public at large.
There was a very positive response
Each member of the public was asked to sign a
21
comment sheet on the way out.
22
were mainly 90% for it.
23
said, the anti-development stance that some of the neighbours were taking and
24
on that basis that it was, what do you call it, to try and get support from the
15:32:25 25
There was a stack of them in the office that
The objective of this road show was to balance, as I
councillors.
26
Q. 900
Exactly Mr. Reilly?
27
A.
So sorry, I'm not ...
28
Q. 901
You were involved in the road show and you attended three road shows including
29 15:32:36 30
one where you tried to brief councillors; isn't that correct? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:32:36
15:32:41
128 1
Q. 902
In the Royal Dublin?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 903
And we know that there was a meeting in May 1992?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 904
You should have known, I suggest to you?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 905
That the support of the councillors was vital; isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 906
And apart from allaying fears amongst locals, the big push coming up to May '92
15:32:55 10
would have been to get the support of councillors; isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct, yes.
12
Q. 907
And Monarch required a motion to be put down by at least two councillors isn't
13 14
that right? A.
Well yes.
Q. 908
And we know that Councillors Lydon and Hand did table a motion?
16
A.
I wasn't aware who was tabling what.
17
Q. 909
You weren't aware that there was a motion being tabled?
18
A.
I didn't know what the process was.
19
Q. 910
You didn't know what the process was even though you were intimately involved
15:33:03 15
15:33:19 20
with it at the time?
21
A.
Intimately is too strongly a word I believe.
22
Q. 911
You were able to tell anybody who asked you where access was likely to be,
23 24 15:33:31 25
where the development was likely to take place? A.
Yes.
Q. 912
You were on the road shows. For any disinterested person or any interested
26
person you were representing the Monarch interest?
27
A.
I didn't.
28
Q. 913
You were at the top table for any of these road shows?
29
A.
Not the top table as such.
Q. 914
And you knew that the councillors would have to vote?
15:33:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:33:50
15:34:00
129 1
A.
Yeah. I knew it would have to go through a process.
2
Q. 915
Were you not just curious as to how it was going, how it was going to be tabled
3 4
or likely to get on the agenda? A.
Sorry.
I had never been involved in planning before in terms of the process
5
itself.
6
process that it was..
7
Q. 916
8 9
I knew that the councillors had a vote on it.
I didn't know the
Did you never discuss the process with the others from within Monarch who were involved in it?
A.
15:34:18 10
Sorry, I did, yeah.
My understanding was that the Manager was proposing that
this scheme would go ahead in a certain way and that was with four houses to
11
the acre. Maybe -- I'm trying to be clear , actually at the time it was four
12
houses to the acre.
13
Q. 917
14
But you also knew that for the matter to be debated that there would have to have been a vote or a motion; isn't that right? We know that Councillors Lydon
15:34:42 15
and Hand did table a motion.
If we could have 7209, please.
This is a
16
motion that had been put forward by Councillors Lydon and Hand.
17
didn't proceed in the event because the Manager's proposals were unsuccessful.
18
When did you first discover that that motion, for example, had been signed and
19
was tabled for the meeting in May' 92?
15:35:01 20
A.
Sorry.
Just to be clear.
21
happened to it.
22
proposal was put up.
23
Q. 918
24 15:35:19 25
I didn't know the process.
Now, it
I didn't know what
I thought that you just went to a meeting and that the I didn't understand the process of motions or whatever.
Were you ever at a meeting with Mr. Lynn or Mr. Sweeney at which there was discussion on what was likely to happen?
A.
Not at that stage, no.
26
Q. 919
Not at that stage?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 920
Did your involvement become greater at a later stage?
29
A.
Yes, it did.
Q. 921
Who was spearheading, from within Monarch, the Monarch position at this stage?
15:35:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:35:31
15:35:46
130 1
A.
Well Richard Lynn certainly was doing all of the public relations work and all
2
of that.
3
Sweeney was the project Manager.
4
Q. 922
5
And he was dealing with the councillors and I was aware and Eddie
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn were directly involved and you to a lesser extent at this stage?
6
A.
Well I was very periphery, very periphery.
7
Q. 923
After Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn, other than yourself, who was the most senior
8 9
other Monarch person involved at this time, even in a peripheral way? A.
15:36:08 10
11
Well in a peripheral way I suppose you had the in-house project team, which there were a number of architects working on that.
Q. 924
12
Did you ever attend any meetings with Mr. Monahan in relation to the development at this time?
13
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
14
Q. 925
Did you ever attend any meetings between Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney Mr. Hand, Mr.
15:36:24 15
Lynn?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 926
Did you meet any councillors at this stage in relation to the matter, other
18 19
than the meeting that you referred to earlier where the video was produced? A.
15:36:40 20
I -- my -- I have a very good friend, Therese Ridge, who I would have spoken to a couple of times about it.
But there was no great detailed discussion about
21
what was coming up for a vote and as I recall the Manager was proposing
22
something.
But I didn't do anything really at that stage or.
23
Q. 927
At that stage you didn't ask her to support a proposal?
24
A.
Well I said the scheme looks good to me or something like that.
Q. 928
Sorry?
26
A.
The scheme looks good to me.
27
Q. 929
You said?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 930
And did you look for her support?
A.
I hope you can support it. Something like that I would have said to her.
15:37:01 25
15:37:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:37:11
15:37:17
131 1
Q. 931
2
Did you ask her would she seek to get the support from some of her colleagues for the scheme?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 932
Just her support only?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 933
Now in, the event we know that the Manager's proposal as proposed by
7
Councillors Lydon and McGrath was unsuccessful?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 934
We see that at 7207?
A.
Is this it here now yeah?
Q. 935
It should be coming up now.
15:37:31 10
11 12 13
the proposal? A.
14 15:37:49 15
Did Councillor Ridge say that she would support
Well yeah, I think she said if it was the Manager. as I recall.
She said she'd look at it
Yeah, I think she did.
Q. 936
She did support it; isn't that right?
16
A.
Did she? Sorry, Ridge I see it, yeah, T Ridge.
17
Q. 937
Are you saying that you didn't know until just now that Councillor Ridge ...
18
A.
No, no, sorry I'm trying to remember.
19
Q. 938
It's the type of thing you would remember whether your friend had supported it
15:38:04 20
or not?
21
A.
No, you're right, yeah.
22
Q. 939
So you did know?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 940
So it's not a surprise to you to discover now that she did support it?
A.
No, absolutely not.
26
Q. 941
Were you at that meeting?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 942
You didn't go to that council meeting?
29
A.
No.
Q. 943
Were you not curious to know what went on at the meeting?
15:38:13 25
15:38:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:38:23
15:38:42
132 1
A.
Again it wasn't my primary job.
I don't want to go back to saying I was busy
2
at other things.
3
helped as I understand, as I was asked to do.
4
Q. 944
5
I was very busy at other things.
It wasn't my job. I had
Did you know for example that councillors O'Callaghan and Gilmore had a motion for the shopping centre or for a town centre, or neighbourhood centre?
6
A.
Which one was this now?
7
Q. 945
In May '92 for the site.
8
A.
Yeah, I had.
9
Q. 946
7214.
A.
Probably Richard.
11
Q. 947
So he had told you about one motion but not about the other; is that it?
12
A.
That's not fair to say.
15:38:56 10
13 14
Who told you about that?
centre on it. Q. 948
15:39:15 15
What was being proposed was that there be a shopping
That was my keen interest.
You knew that there was going to be a proposal that there be a shopping centre there?
16
A.
I thought it was the Manager's
17
Q. 949
You thought it was the Manager's?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 950
Now, Councillor Ridge supported that proposal also. Presumably you had asked
15:39:25 20
her to support the shopping centre?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 951
Did you know that there was a proposal also for the meeting that the site be
23 24 15:39:47 25
26
zoned at one house to the acre? A.
Yeah, that was Sean Barrett's motion, yeah.
Q. 952
Did you know of that in advance?
A.
Yes, I knew Barrett was opposed to the development that had been discussed in
27
the office.
28
Q. 953
That had been discussed in the office?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 954
Had you been at the discussions on that?
15:39:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:39:47
15:40:01
133 1
A.
No, it was just, I'd say it was just said we have to get over Barrett's motion.
2
Q. 955
So you knew that there was at least one motion which would, if successful,
3
would have adversely effected the site?
4
A.
Well it wouldn't have changed the zoning on it.
5
Q. 956
Would it have reduced the density on the site?
6
A.
I think it was still only one to the acre wasn't it.
7
Q. 957
No, it was four to the acre at this stage.?
8
A.
Was it.
9
Q. 958
On piped sewage.
15:40:19 10
On the manager's proposal. On DP90/1249 A voted on in May
1991?
11
A.
Sorry, I thought it was always ...
12
Q. 959
Had you asked Councillor Ridge to vote against Councillor Barrett's detail?
13
A.
I didn't get into that detail, sorry.
14
Q. 960
Did you know that she voted against his proposal?
A.
I suppose I did, but I don't recall.
Q. 961
So in any event, it was now one house to the acre coming out of that meeting in
15:40:31 15
16 17
May '92, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 962
Despite the road shows and all of the different various meetings; isn't that
15:40:45 20
right?
21
A.
It didn't work.
22
Q. 963
It didn't work?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 964
So were you at any strategy meetings thereafter as to how matters might
15:40:51 25
26
proceed? A.
Well what happened after that.
My recollection is that within probably a
27
couple of weeks after that either Eddie Sweeney, probably Eddie, called me into
28
the office one day, as Richard had said look, the only way we're going to get
29
these lands through is to get support from the local councillors.
15:41:14 30
And Eddie
said since we've been involved in Tallaght, since you have been involved in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:41:17
15:41:46
134 1
Tallaght, one of my architects lives in Loughlinstown, would you join him at a
2
meeting with the Loughlinstown Community Council and tell them what we're
3
trying to do.
4
We went to a meeting that night at the Loughlinstown Community Council.
5
he talked to them about what the proposal was and whatever else.
6
recollection of that meeting is that they were a bit sceptical about us, what
7
are you coming near us for.
8
that somebody suggested, and it probably was myself, that perhaps they might
9
like to see, as I said earlier, a show case in Tallaght.
15:42:12 10
And explain to them.
And Michael Cassidy was the man's name.
My
And it evolved over the next couple of months
And we organised
tours to bring them over to Tallaght to see the project.
And it was at least
11
two, maybe three, on a Saturday.
12
scheme etc, most of them hadn't been there, because it was -- the area was
13
pretty deprived from Loughlinstown and Ballybrack.
14
the Tallaght Community Council, who made a short presentation on their
15:42:39 15
And
And apart from taking them through the
We also introduced them to
experience with the Monarch Company in Tallaght, with their frustrations and
16
delays etc. getting the scheme up and running.
17
suppose change that it brought to the whole Tallaght area and it had given a a
18
great boost to the community.
19
council went back and thought about it and were very invigorated about what
15:43:05 20
But with the marvelous -- I
And my recollection is that the community
they had seen and what they'd heard in Tallaght and they'd spoken to the
21
community council people.
And they then went back to their local councillors
22
to say look, we want this development to proceed.
23
Q. 965
In early 1993 I think Mr. Dunlop got involved; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yeah, sometime in March.
Q. 966
March '93?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 967
Mr. McCabe, who was the planner dealing with the site said he did not know Mr.
15:43:27 25
28 29 15:43:39 30
Dunlop was involved? A.
Yeah.
Q. 968
And the last witness, Ms. Gosling, said she did not know that Mr. Dunlop was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:43:43
15:43:52
135 1
involved?
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 969
Is there any reason that you can proffer to the Tribunal why both of those
4
witnesses would not know that Mr. Dunlop had become involved with the project?
5
A.
I don't know.
6
Q. 970
What involvement had you with Mr. Dunlop becoming involved in this site?
7
A.
None.
8
Q. 971
Did you know Mr. Dunlop was involved in it?
9
A.
I did.
Q. 972
Well when were you told.
A.
I was told when I was called into a meeting sometime, again, in March, into the
15:44:09 10
11 12
I don't know.
I can't help you there, sorry.
To be honest with you.
Well, sorry, I knew when I was told.
board room and ...
13
Q. 973
Who was present at that meeting?
14
A.
Well Richard Lynn was there certainly.
Q. 974
Yes?
16
A.
And Eddie Sweeney, was there.
17
Q. 975
Yes?
18
A.
I was there.
19
Q. 976
Yes?
A.
And I believe one of our architects was there, pat Lafferty, and there may
15:44:21 15
15:44:26 20
21
have been one or two others there as well.
22
Q. 977
Was Mr. Monahan at the meeting?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 978
And had the decision been made at that stage to involve Mr. Dunlop?
A.
He seemed to have been appointed.
26
Q. 979
Sorry.
27
A.
He was there to help.
28
Q. 980
Was Mr. Dunlop at that meeting?
29
A.
He was, yeah.
Q. 981
So before that meeting which Mr. Dunlop attended you did not know Mr. Dunlop
15:44:44 25
15:44:49 30
He was already appointed?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:44:54
15:45:01
136 1
was going to be involved?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 982
You did not meet Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Oh, I had.
5
Q. 983
You had met him in the council?
6
A.
In the council offices on a number of occasions.
7
Q. 984
So you had been attending the council had you?
8
A.
Sorry, I was never at a council meeting.
9 15:45:17 10
Sorry.
Sorry, I had met him at the council.
I was never inside the chamber.
Monarch had two other projects.
Q. 985
Yes?
11
A.
Somerton and Ongar.
12
Q. 986
Yes?
13
A.
Which, I was outside the council at those meetings and I believe that's where I
14 15:45:29 15
16
met Frank Dunlop for the first time. Q. 987
What were you doing outside the council at those meetings?
A.
Well I was, what do you call it, I had spoken to a couple of councillors
17
telling them that there was a couple of projects comes up and if they could
18
help us with it, if they could support it, we'd appreciate it.
19 15:45:47 20
21
Q. 988
Were you lobbying for the rezoning of those projects?
A.
Well, I would have to debate with myself what's lobbying or canvassing.
Q. 989
We'll take the neutral.
22
Were you canvassing support for both of those on
behalf of your employers?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 990
Presumably you must have been familiar with the old process?
A.
Not really.
26
Q. 991
You didn't know what was required to change the zoning on a particular site?
27
A.
I knew that you had to get the majority of councillors to support a project.
28
Q. 992
Yes?
29
A.
Okay.
15:46:06 25
15:46:24 30
And in relation to Ongar.
and Somerton.
That was some lands outside of Clonsilla
Obviously one in Castleknock.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I knew that you had to have a
15:46:29
15:46:46
137 1
majority of councillors to support those.
2
Q. 993
When did you get involved with Ongar and the other project?
3
A.
It wasn't that long, a couple of weeks before that.
4
Q. 994
So '92, '93 you became more and more involved with canvassing councillors for
5 6
their support to change zoning on behalf of Monarch? A.
7 8
I go back.
My job was running shopping centres.
whole scheme of things. Q. 995
9
This was a side show in the
I spent very little time doing that.
You spent very little time doing this.
But yet Mr. Dunlop has given evidence
to the Tribunal, and from what I understand you to be now saying, you don't
15:47:08 10
dispute it.
11
That he would have met yourself and Mr. Lynn outside the council
chamber during council meetings?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 996
Which were considered rezonings of lands around Dublin?
14
A.
Yeah.
15:47:22 15
But Mr. Dunlop also gave the impression that I was working full-time on
this and whatever.
I was not.
It was only a very small part.
And the
16
reason for that was I knew some councillors from Tallaght and got on well with
17
them.
18
suppose, there to remind them that we were good developers.
19 15:47:42 20
They knew we had done a good development over there and hence I was, I
Q. 997
You could have written to them?
A.
Yeah, I suppose I could have.
21
But I think the personal touch is always
better.
22
Q. 998
And you kept on attending various meetings; isn't that right?
23
A.
Not that many, no.
24 15:47:57 25
No, sorry, I never went to a meeting.
I would go to
the -- either the lobby to meet them ... Q. 999
Yes?
26
A.
Sorry.
27
Q. 1000
I'm not saying that you physically attended a council meeting?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 1001
Attended a council meeting, Mr. Reilly?
A.
No.
15:48:04 30
Just a moment.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:48:05
15:48:19
138 1
Q. 1002
But you know what I?
2
A.
I went to where the meetings were taking place, sorry.
3 4
And obviously you'd
meet them in either Toddy's or Royal Dublin. Q. 1003
And yet you did not know that it was the intention of your employers,
5
notwithstanding on your involvement on behalf of this and other sites with
6
councillors, to retain the services of Mr. Dunlop until his services were
7
actually retained; isn't that correct?
8
A.
That's correct, yeah.
9
Q. 1004
Even though you might have met him from time to time at meetings you must have
15:48:34 10
been tremendously surprised to turn up at a meeting and find him present?
11
A.
I was surprised, yeah.
12
Q. 1005
Did you ask him who employed him or why he was there?
13
A.
I didn't, no.
14
Q. 1006
Did you make any inquiries from your employers why he was there or how he came
15:48:50 15
16
to be there? A.
17 18
No, I didn't to be honest with you.
It was just another, somebody added to
the team. Q. 1007
If we could have 4045, please.
19 15:48:59 20
This is an entry in Mr. Dunlop's diary for the 9th of March 1993.
21 22
You will see that Mr. Dunlop had a meeting at five o'clock on the previous
23
evening with Mr. Sweeney.
24
Have you seen that?
A.
E Sweeney is it?
Q. 1008
Yes.?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 1009
And then on the 9th of March he has a 5:15 meeting with Richard Lynn/Philip
15:49:15 25
28 29 15:49:25 30
Reilly.
Do you see that there?
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 1010
There's no mention there of Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Lafferty? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:49:28
15:49:34
139 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 1011
Is that the first meeting that you had with Mr. Dunlop or do you say?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 1012
That meeting never took place?
5
A.
That meeting never took place.
6
Q. 1013
That meeting never took place?
7
A.
I believe that meeting was sometime in the morning.
8
Q. 1014
In the morning?
9
A.
Some day.
Q. 1015
Rather than?
11
A.
And then.
12
Q. 1016
Yeah.
13
A.
I don't know it's just my memory.
14
Q. 1017
What was discussed at the meeting?
A.
What was discussed was the meeting had started when I got in and as I recall,
15:49:41 10
15:49:50 15
Why was it in the morning do you believe?
16
as I said, Richard was outlining, I suppose, the current status of the project
17
and as I said there was a general discussion on how it would move forward and
18
there was a vote coming up later, what year was that? '93.
19
coming up later, in fact, at the end of the year.
15:50:21 20
There was a vote
And what we discussed then
was I had been talking to, as I say, my good friend Therese Ridge and a couple
21
of councillors, and after that then it was, I'm a bit fuzzy on it other than I
22
think I was going to continue doing what I was doing.
23
from it.
24
Q. 1018
Which was to?
A.
Just to talk to the people I knew about the project.
26
Q. 1019
Yeah.
27
A.
Therese Ridge, some of the other councillors.
28
Q. 1020
Perhaps now is the time to name the councillors?
29
A.
Well if I can remember them all.
Q. 1021
Yes?
15:50:37 25
15:50:52 30
That's what I remember
So the people you knew included Therese Ridge, who else did you know?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:50:52
15:51:14
140 1
A.
I would have known quite a number of the Tallaght people.
2
Q. 1022
Let's name the councillors that you were going to talk to, Mr. Reilly.?
3
A.
I was going to talk to Breda Cass. Olivia Mitchell.
I was going to talk to probably Mary
4
Elliott.
Who else was there? I was going to talk to, I
5
knew some the lads in the labour party, Eamon Walsh, some of the Fianna Fail
6
people like John Hannon, Charlie O'Connor whom I knew.
7
some more.
I'm just speaking from memory, you know.
8
Q. 1023
Yes.
9
A.
Not necessarily my responsibility.
15:51:38 10
And there was probably
These were going to be your responsibility? But I would say 'look I'll keep talking to
these people, you know'.
11
Q. 1024
Yes.
12
A.
Well, I suppose he was going to talk to some of the people that he knew.
13
Q. 1025
Did he identify the people that he knew?
14
A.
I don't believe he did, no.
Q. 1026
He mention no names?
16
A.
I don't believe so, no.
17
Q. 1027
Did you know the circumstances of Mr. Dunlop's engagement?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 1028
Did you know how much he was being paid?
A.
No.
21
Q. 1029
Did you not inquire?
22
A.
No, I didn't, no.
23
Q. 1030
I see.
24
A.
Well Monarch would have employed him.
Q. 1031
No, but who within Monarch?
A.
I suppose Eddie Sweeney was the project Manager but I don't know, I can't
15:51:54 15
15:52:02 20
15:52:15 25
26 27 28
And I don't believe he mentioned the names.
It was none of my business.
Who would have employed Mr. Dunlop?
answer that. Q. 1032
29 15:52:29 30
And what was Mr. Dunlop going to do?
You don't know who employed him.
If anybody was to employ him Mr. Sweeney was
the most likely person? A.
Or Phil Monahan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:52:30
15:52:43
141 1
Q. 1033
2
Or Phil Monahan.
You didn't inquire of the circumstances under which he came
to be employed?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 1034
How long did Mr. Dunlop stay employed with Monarch?
5
A.
I think up to the end of the year.
6
Q. 1035
How many meetings did you attend with Mr. Dunlop during that period?
7
A.
I believe I dropped plans down the following day or a day or two afterwards to
8
his office that he asked.
9
recall.
15:52:57 10
And that was the only formal meeting that I can
Q. 1036
What plans did you drop to his office?
11
A.
Well the Cherrywood plans.
12
Q. 1037
And how did you?
13
A.
Sorry.
14
Q. 1038
Did you brief Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well the architect briefed Mr. Dunlop.
16
Q. 1039
In your presence?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 1040
So yourself and the architect attended in Mr. Dunlop's office with a set of
15:53:07 15
19 15:53:19 20
21
One of the architects came with me to explain him.
plans and you briefed Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Pat Lafferty briefed him.
Q. 1041
If we could have 4049. This is a telephone attendance of Mr Dunlop on the 10th
22
of March 1993 where you appear to have rang looking for Mr. Dunlop and giving a
23
telephone number.
24
Is that correct?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1042
Is that you?
26
A.
Yeah, I could have been returning his call either.
27
Q. 1043
And at 8832.
15:53:30 25
28 29 15:53:58 30
This is a further telephone attendance for the 16th of March.
Where you seem to have rang twice on the same day? A.
I could have been bringing the plans, I don't remember.
Q. 1044
So having briefed Mr. Dunlop on the plans. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Can I ask you.
Was there any --
15:53:58
15:54:09
142 1
any divergence or view within Monarch at that stage as to what was required on
2
this site?
3
A.
No.
I think, sorry.
My recollection of it was what we needed to do, what
4
the company needed to do was to obviously get enough councillors to vote in
5
favour of the --
6
Q. 1045
Well in favour of what, Mr. Reilly?
7
A.
Well that's a good question.
8 9 15:54:24 10
11
I suppose in favour of the proposal for four
houses to the acre. Q. 1046
Did you hear Mr. Dunlop's evidence, Mr. Reilly?
A.
Some of it, yeah.
Q. 1047
Did you hear his evidence in relation to that meeting with Mr. Sweeney when he
12
first became involved?
13
A.
If you'd maybe repeat it, please.
14
Q. 1048
Well his evidence.
A.
Sorry.
Q. 1049
That Mr. Monahan was doing his own thing in relation to the matter, the
15:54:36 15
16
I'm going to summarise it.?
17
circumstances under which he came to be engaged effectively to reign in
18
Mr. Monahan?
19 15:54:51 20
A.
Yeah, I heard that, but I didn't understand what he meant.
Q. 1050
I see.
21
Are you saying that there was no divergence or view within Monarch at
that stage as to what was required?
22
A.
I wasn't aware of it.
23
Q. 1051
You weren't aware of any?
24
A.
No.
Q. 1052
As far as you were concerned, the concept was to get increased density from one
15:55:01 25
26
to four houses to the acre and to proceed with the shopping centre; was that
27
right?
28
A.
Yeah, that was my understanding, yeah.
29
Q. 1053
Now, you continued, you say, to liaise with your councillors; is that right?
A.
Yeah.
15:55:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:55:22
15:55:37
143 1
Q. 1054
In the lead up to the November '93 vote.
I think there had been a proposal at
2
some stage, had there, to move the golf club from Dun Laoghaire to Cherrywood;
3
isn't that right?
4
A.
I wasn't aware of that.
5
Q. 1055
You weren't aware of that?
6
A.
No.
7 8
aware of it. Q. 1056
9 15:55:53 10
11
I knew there was some talk about moving golf clubs somewhere but I wasn't
I take it this vague talk somewhere about moving golf clubs. Can you tell the Tribunal vaguely when you might have heard about that sort of talk?
A.
Maybe it was sometime over the summer, I don't know.
Q. 1057
If we could have 8516, please.
This is a letter from Mr. Noel Smyth who
12
appears to have been acting for Mr. Monahan and the Monarch interest at this
13
time.
14 15:56:09 15
You'll have seen this brief written in August 1993.?
A.
Right.
Q. 1058
Do you see a reference there to a deal with Dun Laoghaire to transfer the golf
16
course to Cherrywood?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 1059
Yes?
19
A.
I see that all right, yeah.
Q. 1060
Did you know in August 1993 that there was a suggestion that the golf course
15:56:21 20
21
would --
22
A.
Probably heard about it, yeah.
23
Q. 1061
Who was promoting that at the time?
24
A.
I don't know.
Q. 1062
Yes.
15:56:33 25
It could have been Phil himself.
It's unlikely that Mr. Monahan would have been promoting that idea
26
without bringing it to the attention of the rest of the board and particularly
27
those who were involved in seeking the rezoning of the site?
28
A.
That's right, yeah.
29
Q. 1063
That's the type of information that might be of interest to councillors,
15:56:48 30
That's Noel's job.
particularly those in the Dun Laoghaire area; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:56:54
15:57:06
144 1
A.
Perhaps, yeah.
2
Q. 1064
It would be of benefit to those canvassing those councillors for their support
3
I'm not saying it would.
for the Cherrywood site; isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah, I suppose it could be, yeah.
5
Q. 1065
That would include you; isn't that right?
6
A.
Well it could include me, yeah.
7
Q. 1066
It's the type of information I suggest to you that you would know about not
8 9
just in a vague way -A.
Sorry.
Q. 1067
You would have been briefed on it?
11
A.
I wasn't briefed on it, no.
12
Q. 1068
You weren't briefed on it?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 1069
Who would have told you about it?
A.
I would have probably heard about it in the office.
16
Q. 1070
Were you surprised you weren't briefed on it?
17
A.
Not really.
18
Q. 1071
I accept it wasn't your full-time job, Mr. Reilly.?
19
A.
You keep saying that. Sorry, I do.
Q. 1072
You attended the meetings.
15:57:16 10
15:57:23 15
15:57:38 20
Again, this was not my full-time job.
I was only --
You were bringing the architect to Mr. Dunlop who
21
has been recently appointed.
22
that you have identified You are updating them on what's happening.
23
are saying that you don't know the proposal to move the golf course to
24
Cherrywood?
15:57:55 25
You are talking to at least eight councillors
A.
I heard about it in the office but I had no detail on it.
26
Q. 1073
Did you not acquire or seek detail on it?
27
A.
No, not really and just to be clear about talking to seven or eight
28
councillors.
29
whenever the, what do you call it, the summer intervened.
15:58:26 30
And you
What happened, as I recall, was in April, May or whenever,
little contact, as I recall, with the councillors etc.. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
There was very
What happened then
15:58:26
15:58:38
145 1
was it was coming back up for a decision in, later in the year, in October or
2
November, I think it was November in the end.
3
came back to me and said look we're going to go this, that or the other or
4
anything else.
5
Q. 1074
There was no -- nobody ever
Do you not think that the councillors that you were talking to, Mr. Reilly,
6
would be very disappointed if you weren't able to tell them the proposals of
7
Monarch in relation to the transfer of the golf course?
8
A.
I never spoke to them about it.
9
Q. 1075
I accept that.
15:58:56 10
Had they heard what you heard. Do you not think they would be
very disappointed that you couldn't brief them on it?
11
A.
I'm not sure they heard it.
12
Q. 1076
You only heard it by the by in the office?
13
A.
I think there was some talk about it, yeah.
14
Q. 1077
Well who spoke about it?
A.
I don't know.
16
Q. 1078
Yes.
17
A.
Oh, I don't know about that.
18
Q. 1079
Was that something that was being promoted by Mr. Monahan himself?
19
A.
It could have been, yeah.
Q. 1080
Did you know Mr. Whelan?
21
A.
I'd met Jack, yeah, on a few occasions, yeah.
22
Q. 1081
What was Mr. Whelan's involvement with Monarch?
23
A.
He was a land agent as I understand it.
24
Q. 1082
Do you know why he would have sought a quarter of a million pounds in the early
15:59:06 15
15:59:18 20
15:59:37 25
It could have been Richard Lynn.
I don't remember.
Had it board approval?
1990s from Monarch in relation to the Cherrywood project?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 1083
Did anybody tell you anything about that in the office Mr. Reilly?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 1084
Did Mr. Lynn ever discuss it with you?
A.
No.
15:59:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:59:49
16:00:00
146 1
Q. 1085
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss it with you?
2
A.
No, absolutely not.
3
Q. 1086
If we could have 8574, please.
4
You'll have seen this document on the screen
earlier, Mr. Reilly?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 1087
You will see the claim there 'fees to services in relation to residential
7
consultancy at Cherrywood 150,000 plus VAT' making a total of 180.?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 1088
Do you know anything about that?
A.
No.
11
Q. 1089
When was the first time you saw that document?
12
A.
A few minutes ago.
13
Q. 1090
You had never seen it before this morning?
14
A.
No.
Q. 1091
Yet you knew Mr. Whelan?
16
A.
I knew Jack.
17
Q. 1092
How well did you know Mr. Whelan?
18
A.
Not very well.
19
Q. 1093
When did you first get to know Mr. Whelan?
A.
Oh, I don't know.
21
Q. 1094
Yes.
When you say before that.
22
A.
'92.
I can't say exactly.
23
Q. 1095
And in what context did you get to know Mr. Whelan?
24
A.
He was working for Phil Monahan doing some work.
Q. 1096
What was he doing for Mr. Monahan?
26
A.
I don't know.
27
Q. 1097
What was he doing for Mr. Monahan that would have enabled him to submit a fee
16:00:12 10
16:00:19 15
16:00:28 20
16:00:46 25
Maybe a year or two before that.
He'd been a land agent.
Before 1991 or 1992?
I just can't say exactly.
28
for 150,000 in 1991 or 1992 in relation to the Cherrywood residential
29
consultancy?
16:00:59 30
A.
No idea.
Absolutely no idea. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
16:01:02
16:01:15
147 1
Q. 1098
2
Even now, are you not curious, Mr. Reilly, to know how that claim might have arisen?
3
A.
I am, but I don't know what he did.
4
Q. 1099
Well, what might he have done, from your knowledge of him and his association
5 6
with Mr. Monahan? A.
7 8
I don't know. Q. 1100
9 16:01:33 10
11
I don't know. Unless he was trying to buy extra land or something out there. I'm speculating.
Mr. Reilly? A.
I assume as a fee.
Q. 1101
Why would you pay somebody to help you buy land. relation to selling land.
13
land?
16:01:51 15
I'm sorry.
Why would Mr. Monahan pay somebody nearly 180,000 pounds to help him buy land,
12
14
I can't help the Tribunal.
I don't understand the fee in relation to acquiring
A.
I think agents can earn fees both ways.
Q. 1102
Yeah.
16
I can understand a fee in
If we can have 5040.
introducing Dwyer Nolan.
They can act as an agent to acquire.
This is a claim for a further 121,000 for
Do you see that? This is a claim on GRE by Monarch?
17
A.
Oh, I see it down near the end, yeah.
18
Q. 1103
Do you know anything about that?
19
A.
No, absolutely not.
16:02:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
o'clock.
23
A.
Sorry.
Mr. Quinn, it's four o'clock.
Or it's after four
So we might adjourn now until half ten tomorrow.
Okay.
24 16:02:23 25
26 27
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, THURSDAY, 22ND JUNE
28
AT 10:30 A.M..
29 16:03:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
09:57:53
10:42:21
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
22ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
7 8
Mr. O'Halloran, please.
9 10:42:25 10
JOHN O'HALLORAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS
11
FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE:
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. O'Halloran.
Good morning.
10:42:52 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Good morning.
17 18
Q. 1
19 10:43:04 20
MR DOYLE: Mr. O'Halloran, I believe that you were first elected on the 22nd of June 1991 to the Lucan ward of Dublin County Council, isn't that correct?
A.
That's correct.
21
Q. 2
And I think that you are a member of the Labour Party at that time?
22
A.
I was.
23
Q. 3
You subsequently left the party, isn't that correct?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 4
What I propose to do, Mr. O'Halloran, is just briefly bring you through some of
10:43:11 25
26
the statements and or correspondence you've sent to the Tribunal and any
27
matters arising out of those and then go through some of the planning in
28
relation to the Development Plan up as far as 1994.
29 10:43:33 30
A.
That's grand.
Q. 5
Okay.
All right?
Now, I think that you sent a statement to the Tribunal on the 20th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:43:39
10:43:57
2 1
December, 2000.
And that was sent on foot of a letter from the Tribunal of
2
the 22nd of November, 2000.
3
you directly in relation to your statement so that there's no confusion.
And in your letter to the Tribunal, I'll quote
4 5
You made a number of points in your statement.
6
1775.
7
"I did not receive any payment from Frank Dunlop in the course of the review of
8
the 1993 Dublin County Development Plan."
9
"you had received a donation of 3,500 in 1996 election, by-election."
10:44:22 10
11
And just to, as I say, page
I think that you have said there's no allegation in this module that A,
And I think you went on to say that
A.
That's right.
Q. 6
I think at D then, at page 1776 you said "I do confirm that I did not seek or
12
obtain sums of money from Phil Monahan of Monahan Properties in 1996/1997 on my
13
on behalf whether connected to or in the proposed rezoning or planning matter.
14
I recall on one occasion approaching Mr. Monahan for a contribution to the
10:44:38 15
Multiple Sclerosis Society which I raised funds during this period and I
16
further recall receiving a donation from Mr. Monahan of approximately 100
17
pounds by way of cheque which I believe I transmitted onward to this society.
18 19 10:44:56 20
I may have sought other small donations from Mr. Monahan."
1777.
"On behalf
of the Multiple Sclerosis Society during this period."
21 22
I think you go on and your solicitor, a letter sent by your solicitor to the
23
Tribunal dated 25th of November 2002, and that's page 1779.
24
clarify in relation to your recollection of a payment.
10:45:16 25
And I think you
And at the second
paragraph there your solicitors Cullen & Co. state that "Our client has now
26
brought to our attention that he has a recollection of receiving a political
27
donation from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of approximately 500 pounds."
28 29 10:45:33 30
And further on you say "Between June 1991 and December 1993 at or in the environs of the council headquarters in upper O'Connell Street, he believes Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:45:37
10:45:52
3 1
that the donation was made by Mr. Dunlop following a conversation.
You
2
further state that the donation was a straight forward political contribution
3
without any express or implied agreement or understanding that -- accept in was
4
in return for agreeing to support any land rezoning proposal in the Dublin
5
Draft Development Plan either concerning lands in Carrickmines or otherwise.
6
And it was with a matter of considerable embarrassment to our client that he
7
did not recall this political contribution at an earlier stage."
8 9
I think the Tribunal wrote to you in relation to this module on the 7th of
10:46:10 10
April 2006.
And that's at 1789.
11
And I think you having suffered an unfortunate bereavement very recently, your
12
solicitors advised us of this.
13
today is effectively your evidence and/or in the absence of a statement your
14
views of what transpired in relation to the Development Plan and Cherrywood.
10:46:39 15
16
And in the circumstances your evidence here
A.
Yes.
Q. 7
Now, I propose just to deal with the planning then, Mr. O'Halloran.
I think
17
when you were elected it was late, June 27th of June 1991.
18
you came into the council the previous May, around the 24th of May, the council
19
had already voted on a Development Plan and map proposal and that is at page
10:47:06 20
And I think when
7019.
21 22
And that was map DP90/129A.
23
once again with this area.
24
it's clear from the map that there, if you can see there the Monarch lands are
10:47:26 25
Maybe just to re -- or to familiarise yourself
You can see the map on screen there.
And I think
outlined in red.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 8
Do you recollect this map? Does it make any sense to you?
28
A.
No, no.
29
Q. 9
No. The Cherrywood lands are on this map here, the Monarch lands are outlined
10:47:44 30
in red as I've stated.
There's a line going through, a dotted line going
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:47:44
10:48:11
4 1
through the Monarch lands.
And that was the proposed line of the Southeastern
2
Motorway.
3
proposed change in residential density on the lands and that was from a density
4
of one house per acre to a four houses per acre on piped sewage.
5
was the map that was in existence when you came to the council?
And on the map you can see AS 1 to AP.
Now, that was a change
And this map
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 10
Is that right?
8
A.
I accept that.
9
Q. 11
Yeah. And I think then that this map was put on public display between
10:48:22 10
September 1991 or a version of if.
And that's at page 7021, was put on public
11
display between September '91 and December '91. That was put on public display
12
and again, you can see a very similar map, the Monarch lands/Cherrywood lands
13
are outlined again in orange.
14
Southeastern Motorway transecting the lands there.
10:48:49 15
relation again it's quite small.
There are a number of proposed lines of the You can see that in
If we could bring up, if it's possible to
16
bring up the size of the map again.
17
densities are outlined on this map.
Again the residential zonings and
18 19
So a number of objections and representations were received and you would have
10:49:08 20
been in attendance in a meeting of the County Council on 13th of May 1992.
21
Have you any recollection of that meeting?
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 12
You don't.
24 10:49:25 25
And I believe it was at that meeting that the manager reported on
the representations and objections received and made a number of recommendations regarding the proposed lands and zoning and density in the
26
Southeastern Motorways, the line of the Southeastern Motorway.
27
ultimately led o to DP92/44.
And that
And that's at 7203.
28 29 10:50:01 30
Now, as you can see from that map, there's a - and I will deal with that in a moment.
This map was a map that arose out of and by reason of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:50:07
10:50:21
5 1
representations received from the County Council from various parties.
2
remember any of the representations or the manager discussing any of the
3
proposals or objections?
4
A.
I don't recall them offhand, no, I'll be honest.
5
Q. 13
All right.
6
A.
Although I'm aware of the density question but not with regard to any
7
Do you
specifics.
8
Q. 14
Right.
9
A.
There was, I remember the one per acre and then somebody else had suggested
10:50:39 10
more houses per acre but I can't recall specifically any particular argument
11 12
for or against. Q. 15
13 14 10:50:56 15
And when you say you're aware of the density --
Do you remember the manager reporting on a particular representation being representation 1117, this was representation of Monarch Properties?
A.
No, no I don't, no.
Q. 16
And which it was proposed by Monarch that there be a higher density on the
16
lands.
That some of the lands be rezoned from agricultural to residential and
17
the line of the Southeastern Motorway be moved.
18
A.
No, I'm really sorry.
19
Q. 17
Not to worry.
10:51:17 20
I can't remember the specifics.
If you can see from the map there, the proposal in DP92/44 was
that the lands go from AP, that is four houses to the acre, to A1P, piped
21
sewage no density limitation.
22
going through that.
23
Motorway.
24
agricultural land as previously zoned would be A1.
10:51:45 25
And if you can see there's a big black line
That would be the proposed route of the Southeastern
And if you can see west of that B to A1 and that would be the That is residential and no
density limitation.
26 27
Have you any recollection of this map or having discussed this map?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 18
In any event, this meeting, there was no decision made at this meeting.
10:51:59 30
think that there was a meeting held on the 27th of May 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I
And that's at
10:52:04
10:52:14
6 1
7205, please.
2 3
Again, you were at this meeting, Mr. O'Halloran.
4
of being at this meeting, which DP92/44 was discussed?
5
A.
6
Sorry, I know it sounds evasive.
Do you have any recollection
It's a long time ago I wouldn't have a
particular recollection of individual meetings to be honest with you.
7
Q. 19
Other than the density meeting as you say?
8
A.
Other than, I accept the record shows I was there and ....
9
Q. 20
Yeah.
10:52:29 10
All right.
Now, I can I can advise you or maybe help your memory in
relation to this meeting:
there was 11 motions considered and obviously I
11
don't intend dealing with all of them.
12
important motions.
13
McGrath.
But there were and No. 3 in particular
And the first motion was a motion of Councillor Lydon and
That's 7207, please.
14 10:52:50 15
And if you can see there "It was proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded by
16
Councillor McGrath that the manager's report proposed amendments to the draft
17
plan and recommended therein shown DP92/44 be adopted and approved."
18
to approve the zoning density in relation to the lands and the rezoning of
19
certain of these lands from agricultural to residential.
That is
10:53:14 20
21 22
Now, do you remember voting on this motion? A.
23 24
Again, I'm sorry.
Not particularly.
But I'm looking at the record and I
accept that's an accurate record so ... Q. 21
10:53:30 25
And you'll see that there for and against the motion was lost. for the motion.
26
And as I say, it was lost.
You did vote
You have no recollection of
voting on that are you saying?
27
A.
I don't, no.
28
Q. 22
Do you remember any -- anything about this motion, any discussion about this
29 10:53:44 30
motion? A.
No but going back to that time, I mean, it was a good hectic time in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:53:49
10:53:54
7 1
council.
2
Q. 23
Uh-huh.
3
A.
So there was a lot of activity.
4
had records.
5
Q. 24
Uh-huh.
6
A.
Which, I don't have.
7
Q. 25
Of course.
8
A.
I accept.
9 10:54:02 10
11
It would be difficult to recall unless you
This, as we've heard -I would have been generally in favour of development within the
county. Q. 26
Sure.
A.
In fact, I would have supported a motion of a higher density.
If somebody
12
lives in an area where there's 12 and 14 houses per acre it didn't seem to be
13
sensible to be building houses one to the acre and indeed four to the acre.
14
So I think I would have been generally in favour of a higher density.
10:54:18 15
Q. 27
Right.
This particular piece of land where it was the largest tract of
16
development land in South County Dublin at the time.
17
wondering did it not stand out in your mind.
18
there was many maps being dealt with over the months --
19 10:54:36 20
Yeah.
Q. 28
-- this would have been a significant piece of land, a significant tract of land and did involve considerable debate and a lot of media reporting?
A.
Well I can recall debates around those subjects but not in any specific way.
23
That's all I was trying to say.
24
indeed votes specifically.
10:54:53 25
In that it wasn't -- I know
A.
21 22
That's why I, I'm
Q. 29
Right.
All right.
I can't recall meetings specifically or
As I say, you voted for that.
26
on, another motion amongst the 11.
27
motion.
There was another, moving
And that was the Gilmore O'Callaghan
And that is at 7214, please.
28 29
And that motion proposed that Dublin County Council resolve that the lands on
10:55:19 30
map 27 be zoned C, so that was -- they were seeking to have a town centre on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:55:22
10:55:37
8 1
the lands.
2
this motion which was carried by the council.
3
that?
4
A.
And again, I can say that you voted and you voted in favour of
Again, I'm really sorry.
Have you any recollection of
I don't have a specific recollection but I accept --
5
I'm looking at the records here and I accept the record is accurate and I voted
6
for it. Yeah.
7
Q. 30
And I think then there was a motion, the final one, around that motion.
8
meeting was the Barrett Dockrell motion.
9
density residential density to one house per acre.
10:56:06 10
This
And that motion was to reduce And can we have that,
7216, please.
11 12
And you can see there that "Dublin County Council hereby resolves that the
13
lands indicated in red stretching from Glenamuck Road to Cherrywood Road,
14
Loughlinstown be zoned for residential development at a density not exceeding
10:56:24 15
one house per acre.
You voted against this motion.
16
A.
Well, as I said a few minutes ago --
17
Q. 31
Yep.
18
A.
-- I mean, that would have been in line with the way I would have thought or
19 10:56:34 20
believed, yeah. Q. 32
Yes.
And I think in fairness to you, Mr. O'Halloran, I think there were a
21
number of other motions.
22
density on the land and in each of those motions you voted against lower
23
density.
24
prodevelopment and proincreased zoning density.
10:56:54 25
26
I won't go into but they were seeking a lower
As we can see from the record here, you would have voted
A.
Yes.
Q. 33
Now, in relation to your voting, and I accept it's some time ago and you're
27
saying you seem to have a vague recollection of it.
28
remember being approached by anybody or being asked for your views on how you
29
might vote in relation to these motions at this meeting?
10:57:20 30
A.
Notwithstanding, can you
I was lobbied by a couple of people from Monarch Property but I honestly can't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:57:25
10:57:52
9 1
remember their names because it would have been early on in my council career,
2
who showed a proposal and whatever.
3
Like, I can't remember their names.
4
by fellow councillors and, you know, councillors for the area, whatever, you
5
know, in a similar fashion.
But I cannot remember the two gentlemen.
That's -- but I would have been lobbied
6
Q. 34
Councillors for the area being whom?
7
A.
Whoever, I mean, it was the normal process if there was a motion effecting your
8
area if you were in support of it you would try and secure support from your
9
fellow councillors.
10:58:00 10
Q. 35
11
All right.
Going back to what you just said in relation to certain persons
from Monarch.
If we could have 1414, please.
12 13
It might assist you in relation to this matter.
14
Mr. Richard Lynn dated the 14th of June 2000 regarding the lands to Cherrywood
10:58:25 15
and you can see there at one.
This is a statement from
"I met" Mr. Lynn states in the statement "I met
16
with most members of Dublin County Council up to 1993 and all members of Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council after 1993.
18
I attach an extract from the County Council meeting on the 16th of October 1992
19
and have placed a tick against those members that I recollect having met in the
10:58:47 20
As a sample of those I have met
context of Cherrywood."
21 22
And 1416, please. 1416.
23
by Mr. Lynn as an example of his contacts.
24 10:59:04 25
Now, this was a document handed in, Mr. O'Halloran,
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 36
And this relates to one meeting only but from his statement, as you can see,
26
this is just an example of his general form over this period.
27
you can see, is the meeting held on the 16th of October 1992.
And he has
28
ticked off a number of names as he has said in his statement.
And he has
29
placed a tick against those names I recollect having met.
10:59:32 30
name there is a tick.
Now, this, as
Again, beside your
Does this help your memory in any way?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:59:35
10:59:48
10 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 37
No memory of meeting Mr. Lynn in particular?
3
A.
No, not at that time.
4
Q. 38
So are you saying you don't remember meeting Mr. Lynn or you don't remember --
5
A.
Meeting him in connection to this development.
6
Q. 39
Do you know Mr. Lynn?
7
A.
I do. I subsequently would have got to know him but I mean that's 14 years ago
8 9 11:00:01 10
Q. 40
When you would you have first met Mr. Lynn?
A.
Well, if he claims that he spoke to me in 1992, I presume that's the first time.
Q. 41
13 14
I just have no memory.
so I wouldn't have --
11 12
Again, I'm not refuting it either.
I can't remember absolutely.
Well would it have been during the '80s or the '90s or when would you have got to know Mr. Lynn?
A.
11:00:17 15
Oh no. No, it would have been after I got elected, some time after I was elected to the council.
16
Q. 42
Sometimes after June '91?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 43
And how do you or do you remember the circumstances under which you met Mr.
19 11:00:28 20
Lynn? A.
Again, I can't really, I mean.
21
Q. 44
Well you know him well now, isn't that right?
22
A.
Well I would have gotten to know him because he was involved in other projects,
23 24 11:00:40 25
I think, you know, at a later stage. Q. 45
All right.
A.
So I don't know, he would be around the council and whatever.
26
wouldn't have known many of these people.
27
far as I was concerned.
28
Q. 46
In 1992 I
You know they were only faces as
If I could have page 571, please.
29 11:00:54 30
This is an interview Mr. Dunlop was engaged in with the Tribunal on the 25th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:01:07
11:02:41
11 1
May 2000. And Mr. Dunlop is asked by Mr. Gallagher to discuss his relationship
2
with Monarch.
As you can see there at the top.
And at page 578, please.
3 4
And this is in relation to, as I say, Monarch and persons involved in Dublin
5
County Council.
6
other words, that persons has agreed to.
7
A:
8
that he or she has been paid that that person was on the payroll but you would
9
not want again to remember what was exactly said.
11:02:41 10
At 20 there.
It could be two things.
Question 20.
At page 578.
"It's okay.
In
It might not always mean that when it was said
But you would not want an
IQ of more that one to know that there was a specific list and it is a small
11
list all the time.
12
would have been very close contact between Richard Lynn and Liam Cosgrave.
13
Between Richard Lynn and Tony Fox.
14
others that he would need to come on board then like some of the independents
11:02:43 15
It is the same people.
For example, I'm aware that there
Between Richard Lynn and Don Lydon and
Lyons, O'Halloran, who may well have been still in the Labour Party at that
16
stage, had not come out of it but even though he was in the Labour Party he was
17
operating on an independent basis."
18 19
That was Mr. Dunlop.
11:02:43 20
21
Regarding your relationship with Mr. Lynn. Would you
like to comment in relation to that? A.
22
No. Mr. Dunlop has made allegations, with suggestions that he approached me on different projects and I said here on a number of occasions --
23
Q. 47
That's correct --
24
A.
And I never ever discussed anything with Mr. Dunlop.
Q. 48
Right.
26
A.
Well I have no comment.
27
Q. 49
You accept you had a relationship with Mr. Lynn?
28
A.
No, no, no.
29
Q. 50
No.
11:02:57 25
11:03:07 30
But this is Mr. Dunlop about your relationship with Mr. Lynn.
Would you accept that you were close to Mr. Lynn, as this would seem to
indicate? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:03:07
11:03:26
12 1
A.
No.
I mean, it depends.
I mean, I wasn't close to him.
I would have met
2
him on several occasions because he was around the council and whatever but I
3
wouldn't suggest there was a close relationship.
4
Q. 51
5
That you might have come on board as a result of Mr. Lynn's relationship with you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 52
Who introduced you to Mr. Lynn?
8
A.
I'm not sure.
9
Q. 53
You were aware that Mr. Dunlop was a lobbiest at this time?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 54
You have given that evidence on previous modules.
12
A.
Not for the project.
13
Q. 55
I accept that's --
14
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 56
For another matter, Quarryvale I believe.
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 57
Could Mr. Dunlop have introduced to you Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
He could have, but I don't remember.
11:03:41 10
11:03:53 15
19
21
But, as I said before I was --
or he didn't.
11:04:07 20
He probably introduced himself to me, I'm not sure.
He could have again, I can't say he did
To deny it would be wrong.
In the same way to suggest he did
would be also wrong because I don't remember. Q. 58
22
Right.
So you certainly would have known Mr. Dunlop at this time as a
lobbiest?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 59
In or around the environs of the City Hall.
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 60
And you came to know Mr. Lynn around this time.
27
A.
Around 1992?
28
Q. 61
Yes.
29
A.
I can't remember back that far.
11:04:18 25
11:04:30 30
Again, I know I sound vague but there were so
many people around South Dublin County Council, Dublin County Council as it was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:04:34
11:04:48
13 1
then, that it's not possible at times to remember when people appeared first or
2
whatever.
3
have been one of them.
4
Q. 62
5 6
But where people would have a constant presence, Mr. Lynn could
Right but you have no specific memory but you accept that you would have known him at this time?
A.
7
Oh, yeah.
Probably at that time.
I've no memory of when I first would have
met him.
8
Q. 63
Did Mr. Lynn lobby you in relation to Cherrywood?
9
A.
I mean, I've been asked this and I have thought about it. I can never remember
11:05:02 10
him asking me anything about Cherrywood.
11
gentlemen came to me.
And I don't think one of them was Richard Lynn.
12
Q. 64
You don't think?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 65
Who was the other man?
A.
I can't remember their names.
11:05:13 15
16
I remember two different -- two
I mean it was only a fairly brief fleeting kind
of a conversation and presentation or whatever.
17
Q. 66
Would you have met Mr. Lynn with, say, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 67
You're certain of that?
A.
Positive, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Q. 68
You can't remember meeting -- you can't remember much detail but you can say
11:05:26 20
21 22 23
that you are positive you didn't meet Mr. Lynn with Mr. Dunlop? A.
24 11:05:47 25
26
Certainly in relation to Cherrywood, no.
In relation to Cherrywood.
If you're asking me did I meet both of them at the
same time on any occasion, I could have. Q. 69
And so you could have in Cherrywood?
A.
Yeah but Mr. Dunlop would never have approached me or spoke to me about
27
Cherrywood or any other project.
28
Q. 70
So you are certain of that.
29
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 71
You're not certain that you could have met Mr. Dunlop with Mr. Lynn.
11:05:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
It's a
11:06:01
11:06:10
14 1
possibility, isn't it?
2
A.
In a casual way, yeah.
3
Q. 72
This was in the environs of the City Hall.
4
A.
Yeah, in the County Council offices, yeah.
5
Q. 73
Where you would be meeting Dunlop as you've said in previous evidence in
6 7
relation to another development? A.
8 9
No, no, meeting with him is a casual hello, goodbye it wasn't a meeting set up to discussion anything, you know.
Q. 74
11:06:27 10
Right.
And likewise, Mr. Lynn would have been around the environs of City
Hall and you would have been discussing --
11
A.
He would have been.
12
Q. 75
And it's possible you discussed Cherrywood with Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
It is possible, yeah.
14
Q. 76
And possibly in the company of Mr. Dunlop.
A.
It's unlikely.
16
Q. 77
Yes.
17
A.
Because as I say, I wasn't aware of Mr. Dunlop's involvement.
18
Q. 78
Right.
11:06:37 15
19
That's all I'm saying.
Now, I think arising out of the meeting of the 27th of May 1992.
further, and that is map page 7217.
11:07:10 20
You can't say you didn't?
A
And this is the map that went ultimately
on public display and I'll deal with that in a moment in relation to the lands.
21
And I'll come back to that.
22
the 27th of May and as you say yourself, you haven't a great recollection but
23
you certainly know that you were there and we know how you voted; and that was
24
pro the rezoning and pro the increased density?
11:07:29 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
Right.
Just to conclude, as a result of the meeting of
Now, just in -- could I have page 4041, please.
27 28
There are a number of meetings and whilst I accept that some of these have been
29
dealt with in previous modules. I don't think your evidence was that you could
11:07:49 30
recollect.
But we're -- having dealt with some of the evidence here already Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:07:55
11:08:18
15 1
today.
I'm hoping that maybe you will remember.
These are meetings and/or
2
contacts with Mr. Frank Dunlop between March and June of 1993.
3
after the vote in May 1992 in relation to the Development Plan and prior to the
4
next meeting on the 11th of November '93.
So this is
5 6
And at 4041.
7
John O'Halloran in Dublin County Council this afternoon".
8
through them briefly and you can comment.
9
1993. 10:30 John O'Halloran don't send out cheque for football gear."
11:08:39 10
11
The 8th of March 1993, telephone attendance "Mr. Frank Dunlop
A.
Sorry.
Q. 80
It's what is written in.
12
It's a telephone attendance 10:30 John O'Halloran.
13
A.
I see it a.
14
Q. 81
At 10:30 do you see that? 10th of March. That's a 12 noon, that's 4049. again later."
17
4096.
23rd of March 1993.
18
4179.
3rd of May 1993.
19
looking for him." That's at 240. On the 13th of May.
21
see you in council tomorrow."
22
17th of May.
23
And finally.
24
numbers given there.
4198. 4254.
"12:55 John O'Halloran."
"2:40.
4196.
That's at 4046.
Page 4049, "12 noon John O'Halloran will call
16
11:09:31 20
"9th of March 1993, 4046, 9th March
I didn't get the last piece of that.
"Don't send out cheque for football gear."
11:08:56 15
I'll just go
John O'Halloran in the centre.
13th of May 1993.
FD
11:15 "John O'Halloran will
"John O'Halloran in DCC hall parter." 17th of June 1993.
9:20 John O'Halloran and two
11:09:57 25
26
Now, in relation to that and those contacts, does it surprise you that there
27
are so many?
28
A.
Well it does really, yeah, yeah.
29
Q. 82
And have you any explanation as to why Mr. Dunlop would have contacted you over
11:10:15 30
this period of time, on certainly not a frequent basis but certainly a regular Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:10:20
11:10:30
16 1 2
basis? A.
3
Well I refer back to the cheque for the football gear.
Mr. Dunlop would have
been very --
4
Q. 83
You mean March, is that correct?
5
A.
Generous. Presumably it would have been money with regard to donations to
6
clubs in the area.
7
Q. 84
Uh-huh.
8
A.
I would have on occasion contacted Mr. Dunlop in the hope of getting some
9
support for whatever club it might be, whether it be football or indeed any
11:10:43 10
other club.
11
Q. 85
Sure.
12
A.
So I would have had contact with him, you know.
13
Q. 86
During this period did you ever have any contact with Mr. Lynn for similar
14 11:10:52 15
projects? A.
No, no.
16
Q. 87
And you're certain of that?
17
A.
Positive, yeah.
18
Q. 88
And is it possible that these contacts with Mr. Dunlop were in relation to the
19 11:11:00 20
Cherrywood lands? A.
No.
21
Q. 89
You're certain of that?
22
A.
Positive, yeah.
23
Q. 90
But you can't tell us exactly why they might have been other than ...?
24
A.
No.
Q. 91
All right.
11:11:11 25
Moving on to the map, 27, at 7217.
We'll go back to that.
This
26
map, as I say, was as a result of the vote taken on the 27th of May 1992.
27
This was the map that was put on public display 1st of July to August '93.
28
And you can see in that map we now have, if we could increase the size there,
29
please, of the map, in particular the specific Cherrywood lands.
11:11:44 30
There are a
number of proposed routes for the line of the Southeastern Motorway. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
The
11:11:49
11:12:15
17 1
Monarch lands are outlined in red.
You can see that the density that is
2
change No. 3, is now one house to the acre.
3
the town centre proposal and Mr Gilmore and O'Callaghan's now appear on the
4
map.
5
right through the Monarch property.
There's also 4A and 4B, that is
And there's the lands west of the Southeastern Motorway which is cutting You can see that?
6
A.
I can, yeah.
7
Q. 92
Now, do you remember anybody saying to you, Mr. Lynn at this time, do you
8
remember anybody such as Mr. Lynn expressing concern regarding this proposed
9
plan and map?
11:12:31 10
A.
No.
11
Q. 93
At all in relation to its impact on the Cherrywood lands?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 94
You say you were, have given evidence that you would have been prodevelopment,
14
pro increased zoning and this, as I've said to you, being the largest tract of
11:12:56 15
development land in south County Dublin at the time.
16 17
anybody commenting to you in relation to the low density zoning on this land? A.
18 19
You don't remember
Not specifically.
I remember there was an issue at the time but I don't
remember anybody particularly coming to me and discussing it. Q. 95
11:13:14 20
All right.
Now, I think there was a meeting in relation to this -- this map.
And representations received and that was on the 11th of November '93, that's
21
7258, please.
22 23
You can see there, Mr. O'Halloran, on the right-hand side half way down your
24
own -- you were in attendance at this meeting.
11:13:33 25
I have to ask you again do you
remember attending this meeting?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 96
Do you remember anybody discussing this meeting in advance in relation to
28 29 11:13:43 30
voting -A.
Again, I am he sorry.
Q. 97
Sure.
I have to say now.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I mean, it's 13 years ago.
11:13:43
11:13:57
18 1
A.
2 3
I don't remember specific meetings. meetings a week.
Q. 98
4
I accept that.
We were having meetings up to eight
I can't remember specific meetings.
Again as you say -- or advised it was a very very
controversial piece of zoning at the time?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 99
And that's why I was hoping it might stand out in your mind.
7
A.
It doesn't, sorry.
8
Q. 100
As you say, you also knew or had met with Mr. Lynn who was one of the persons
9
from Monarch who, Monarch were the developers of this land.
11:14:12 10
And it's in that
context that I ask you, do you remember this specific meeting?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 101
And I think in relation to this.
Again, there were a number of motions
13
received in relation to this proposed zoning and densities.
14
particular, there was a motion to confirm or two motions to confirm low
11:14:36 15
density.
And in
And 7261, please.
16 17
That was by Councillor Smyth and Buckley and at 7262 by Councillor Gilmore and
18
O'Callaghan.
19
maintain the low density zoning on those lands.
11:15:02 20
And these two motions were to maintain the status quo, to
the record would show.
You voted against those, as
And then there was the, what's known as the
21
Marren/Coffey motion and that's at 7263.
22
effectively delete change No. 3 on the map, which was the one house per acre,
23
and to increase the density to two per hectare.
24 11:15:41 25
A.
Again, I'm really sorry, I don't.
Q. 102
I'll show you a copy of the motion.
This motion was to delete,
Do you remember that?
It's 7226, please.
26
Map No. 27 change No. 3 "Dublin County Council hereby resolves to accept the
27
county manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendments in respect of
28
lands outlined in red on the attached map."
29 11:16:01 30
Now, I should have said, Mr. O'Halloran, that the -- and assisted your memory. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:16:06
11:16:26
19 1
The manager recommended the removal of change No. 3, that is to increase the
2
density.
3
And this motion was seeking to accept the manager's recommendation.
4
there's an amendment there regarding the balance of the lands to remain at two
5
per hectare. Could we have 7227, please.
To remove the low density and to increase the density on the lands. And
6 7
Again, this is a map, Mr. O'Halloran, showing the lands that this motion
8
relates to.
9
only.
11:16:56 10
And the balance of the lands are not effected by an increased in zoning
density.
11
And as you can see, these are the Monarch and Monarch owned lands
And Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey signed those.
Have you any
recollection of this vote?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 103
Of seeing this map?
14
A.
No.
Q. 104
And I can tell you that you voted in favour of the increase in density and this
11:17:06 15
16
motion was carried.
17
way in relation to any motion, this is the specific motion you say you can't
18
remember.
19
increase zoning density in regards to these lands?
11:17:34 20
A.
No.
Did anybody approach you, and can you remember, in any
Do you remember anybody approaching you in relation to a motion to
But I do what I do say to you is this; when councillors put forward
21
motions they would generally lobby fellow councillors with regard to the
22
motion.
23
I would have been available anyway because I wouldn't agree with low density
24
housing anyway.
11:17:58 25
26
So I would assume that the proposers would have sought my support.
So -- but I have no recollection of anybody particularly or
specifically. Q. 105
27
Do you know what objective criteria you would have used to vote yes or no other than your general belief in increased ...?
28
A.
Well I thought it was very useful land.
29
Q. 106
Right.
A.
No, better use of land.
11:18:13 30
Useful land.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:18:25
11:18:25
20 1
Q. 107
Better use of the land?
2
A.
To put more houses on it.
3
Q. 108
You remember that much.
4
A.
That's a philosophy I had but not specifically with regard to any of these
5 6
motions or maps. Q. 109
Again in, relation to your relationship with Mr. Lynn, who as I have said and
7
it has been put to you, would have met you some time in and around 1992.
8
is late 1993.
9
increased density?
11:18:44 10
Do you remember Mr. Lynn approaching you in relation to
A.
No.
11
Q. 110
Or in relation to these lands?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 111
Not at all?
14
A.
No.
Q. 112
A number of other motions were dealt with in relation to the changes to the
11:18:51 15
16
town centre zoning and maintaining those and I don't intend to go into detail
17
in any of those matters.
18 19
There's a -- 4761, please.
11:19:09 20
Dunlop.
At 10.10 am on the 30th of November 1993.
21
A.
I don't.
22
Q. 113
-- such contact.
23 24
This is a further contact between yourself and Mr.
Do you recall discussing any matter to do with lands,
density, zonings in relation to the Development Plan with Mr. Dunlop? A.
No.
Q. 114
Around this period in relation to the Cherrywood lands?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 115
Yes, I accept that.
28
A.
No, not at all.
29
Q. 116
Okay.
11:19:29 25
Do you recall --
As I said earlier --
If I might -- page 5165, please.
11:19:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
This
11:19:47
11:20:29
21 1
5065.
This is a, an expenses claim form.
It's signed by Richard Lynn and
2
it's a Monarch document.
3
second line down you can see "Development Plan review J O'Halloran".
4
would have -- this is an expenditure claim form for Mr. Lynn to Monarch
5
indicating some contact between yourself and himself at this time and the
6
expenditure of same.
7
relation to lunch or for a meal?
And it's dated week ending 22nd of April 1994.
And
So this
Do you remember meeting Mr. Lynn in April '94 in
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 117
Have you any comment to make in relation to this document?
A.
None at all, no.
Q. 118
Again, 5029, please. It's a similar document, 20th of May 1994 and again, five
11:20:51 10
11 12
lines down.
13
of meeting Mr. Lynn around this time?
14
"Development Plan J O'Halloran, 40.15 pounds."
Any recollection
A.
No.
Q. 119
20th of May.
A.
Could I just qualify that.
I'm not denying it either but I just don't -- I
17
don't recall it, you know.
So I'm not suggesting that it never took place.
18
I mean, if he has records of it I'd have to accept that.
11:21:13 15
16
19 11:21:31 20
21
Q. 120
All right.
A.
It's a better recollection than I would have.
Q. 121
All right.
There's a further document in July of 1995.
22
similar, it's an expenses claim form.
23
same in relation to that?
24 11:21:45 25
5274.
It's
And I take it that your evidence is the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 122
There's a, 5758 a diary entry for the 14th of March 1996.
"Mr. Dunlop".
And
26
subsequent to that 5776, there's a memo from Richard Lynn regarding Dublin west
27
by-election.
28
that 5776.
And requests for financial contribution.
Your name appears on
"John O'Halloran, independent 500 pounds."
29 11:22:19 30
Do you recall seeking funds from Mr. Lynn during this period? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:22:24
11:22:36
22 1
A.
I don't particularly.
I don't even remember receiving it but I accept that he
2
probably would have paid it, yeah.
3
time, yeah.
4
Q. 123
5
I would have welcomed any support at the
And have you any explanation as to why Mr. Lynn would have provided you with election funds around this time?
6
A.
No, I'm afraid Mr. Lynn would have to offer that explanation.
7
Q. 124
Sorry.
8
A.
No, I can't explain why he would have offered support other than he was
9 11:22:48 10
generous enough to do it. Q. 125
And there's a number of documents, you don't deny, there's a cheque at 5793 for
11
500 pounds made out to yourself, dated 29th of March 1996.
12
goes through Monarch Properties Services Limited on that same date 29th of
13
March '96.
14
As you say, you've no recollection of receiving the money and you don't know
11:23:20 15
And this payment
And it's attributed to yourself 500 pounds and that's at 5787.
why you might have received it?
16
A.
No, other than support for, towards expenses of the by-election, you know.
17
Q. 126
And I think you received further sums from Mr. Monahan and that's at 5822.
18
And that's in 1996, that's in April 1996.
19
Again, you can see there's -- would the contacts with Mr. Dunlop and these
11:23:54 20
"MS fundraiser, 250 pounds."
funds received by you, is there any connection between the two?
21
A.
Sorry, can you repeat that?
22
Q. 127
Your contact with Mr. Dunlop in March '96 and these payments by Monarch to you,
23
these election donations and the MS fundraiser, is there any connection between
24
the two?
11:24:09 25
A.
No.
26
Q. 128
Do you ever remember discussing with Mr. Dunlop seeking funds from Monarch?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 129
Thank you.
29 11:24:26 30
Did you ever discuss receiving these funds do you remember
receiving discussing receiving funds from Monarch in a general way with Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:24:27
11:24:51
23 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 130
And then finally in January 1997.
Again, there's a receipt at page 6151.
3
It's a letter you write to Mr. Richard Lynn seeking support for Multiple
4
Sclerosis fundraiser.
5
Lynn and a cheque as well.
6
A.
And there's a receipt of payment of 500 pounds from Mr. Do you recollect that in 1997?
Not specifically but Mr. Lynn has been a very generous supporter for my walking
7
for MS and indeed continues to be.
8
for me to seek his support and indeed get his support.
9
Q. 131
11:25:23 10
So, I mean, it wouldn't have been unusual
And notwithstanding that, did he ever seek from you any, anything in return for his friendship or his provision of electoral funds or funds for MS or
11
otherwise?
12
A.
No, no, there was no tie in between support for MS or anything else.
13
Q. 132
And/or your election funding?
14
A.
If he was associated with something I'm sure he would have tried to gain my
11:25:43 15
support but there is no connection between any financial support politically
16 17
and any support I would have given in terms of voting. Q. 133
18 19
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. O'Halloran.
You might answer any of my
colleagues questions. A.
Okay.
11:25:59 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
a moment please. Can I just ask you, Mr. O'Halloran, on the 11th of November
23
when the final vote was taken in relation to the Cherrywood lands, the very
24
first couple of motions were motions to confirm what had gone out on the
11:26:27 25
Just one short matter, Mr. O'Halloran.
display after Mr. Barrett's motion.
26
one house per acre.
27
out, you voted against that.
28
your ward was west Dublin, Lucan?
29 11:26:46 30
A.
Could I have 7217 for
That was motions to confirm the lands at
And the record shows I think, as Mr. Doyle has pointed And I think earlier you told us that you came --
That's right. JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I think everybody knows that in most of Lucan, certainly
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:26:50
11:26:57
24 1
the ones, the parts that's developed, there would be 12 to 14 houses to the
2
acre, by and large.
3
A.
And more.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
motions to confirm it at one house to the acre, you were looking at a broader
7
picture, that you wanted --
8
A.
And more perhaps indeed.
So obviously by voting against
Well I'd like to think --
9 11:27:11 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You saw no reason why these lands should just be one house to
11
the acre.
12
that was proposed by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey, had been signed by a number of
13
councillors.
14
back to what it had been on the first display effectively.
11:27:37 15
acre.
And we know that later on there was another motion then, the motion
And they were seeking to change it, to delete the change, to go Four houses to the
But they -- their proposal -- they were at idiom with the Manager on
16
that because the manager was also recommending that the one house per acre be
17
scrapped effectively and go back to four houses per acre.
18 19 11:27:58 20
And the manager was recommending that and had made his report I think on the 3rd of November and indeed on the 11th of November.
But Mr. Marren and
21
Ms. Coffey's motion that was proposed was qualified that they were only seeking
22
the four houses to the acre for the Monarch lands.
23
was produced and there was an amendment on the motion that the rest of the
24
lands and if you look at that map, the Monarch lands are outlined in a red
11:28:22 25
outline.
And in fact the map that
But there is still a substantial body of lands that were zoned
26
residential that they were happy enough to leave at one house to the acre.
27
at least for some reason they left it at one house to the acre.
28
have a particular view on land and on the use of lands.
Or
You seem to
29 11:28:48 30
Why would you have supported that particular motion when they were only, if you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:28:52
11:29:08
25 1
like, outlining a proposal for four houses to the acre in relation to certain
2
lands?
3
A.
4
Because at the time I probably felt it was the best thing he could get at that time.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But --
Well my own preference would have been for a much higher density.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:29:24 10
11
Yes.
But why not -- why confine it just to the lands
outlined in red Mr. O'Halloran? A.
I can't recall the specifics of the motion now or the whys or wherefores.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
boundary of a particular landowner's lands at the time?
11:29:36 15
A.
16
I suppose so.
Did you know that the map that was produced was a particular
When a motion is put you either vote for it or against or
abstain. The motions they put, I felt was a reasonable compromise.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
amendments to the --
11:29:53 20
A.
But there is provision presumably for anybody to seek
There is, yeah.
21 22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But you didn't seek any amendments.
No.
24 11:29:56 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27
If you were going to go the way you were going it would be for
all of the lands at the time? A.
That would have been my preference, yes.
28 29 11:30:06 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Do you know why you didn't do that or?
I don't. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:30:07
11:30:11
26 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
Thanks very much, Mr. O'Halloran.
Okay.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
7 8
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
9 11:30:16 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Reilly is due at half eleven.
Well perhaps rather than break
his evidence we will take a short break now.
12 13
MS. DILLON:
You are going to rise now?
14 11:30:27 15
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
Just for ten minutes.
16 17
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
18 19 11:30:55 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
21 22
MR. QUINN: Mr. Reilly, please.
23 24 11:49:43 25
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:49:43
11:49:54
27 1
MR. PATRICK REILLY, CONTINUED TO BE QUESTION
2
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
MR. CHAIRMAN: good morning, Mr. Reilly. Q. 134
6
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Reilly.
Yesterday you had been telling the Tribunal
about your involvement in relation to the Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
7
A.
That's correct, yes.
8
Q. 135
And I think you advised the Tribunal that you didn't really become involved in
9
the lobbying process or indeed the PR campaign in relation to Cherrywood until
11:50:12 10
late 1991 and that was in relation to Mr. O'Herlihy's involvement? Is that
11
right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 136
And that you attended a number of road shows but that you did not attend the
14
meeting in 1991 or indeed 1992, that is the council meeting in '92, is that
11:50:27 15
correct?
16
A.
Correct, yes.
17
Q. 137
Well after 1992 I think you indicated that you probably became more involved.
18 19 11:50:34 20
Is that right? A.
I did, that's right.
Q. 138
And I think you were also involved in relation to other Monarch lands and
21
attempts to have those rezoned, isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
23
Q. 139
I think you told the Tribunal that you began to attend the council chamber but
24
not -- but only in an observer capacity and for the purposes of keeping up
11:50:55 25
contacts with councillors, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct, yes.
27
Q. 140
And keeping up contacts with councillors in relation to other Monarch lands but
28 29 11:51:04 30
also the Cherrywood lands? A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 141
And you would have met Mr. Dunlop I take it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:51:06
11:51:12
28 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 142
And Mr. Dunlop has a recollection of meeting yourself and Mr. Lynn at those
3
meetings?
4
A.
Yes, that's right.
5
Q. 143
And then I think you advised the Tribunal that although you did not know he was
6
being appointed, you had a formal meeting with Mr. Dunlop and Monarch architect
7
in Mr. Dunlop's offices after his appointment for the purposes of briefing him
8
in relation to the lands.
9
Is that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 144
I take it that meeting would have taken place some time after March 1993?
11
A.
As I remember it, yeah.
12
Q. 145
You recall Mr. Dunlop's evidence that there was confusion and I think he said
11:51:31 10
13
that there was annoyance on your part in relation to the way Mr. Phil Monahan
14
was effectively going about having the lands rezoned, isn't that right?
11:51:51 15
16
A.
Yeah, that was his evidence, yeah.
Q. 146
I accept that.
17
That was Mr. Dunlop's evidence.
And you heard Mr. Dunlop in
relation to that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 147
Do you agree with Mr. Dunlop's evidence in that regard?
A.
Not really, no.
Q. 148
Well was there a divergence of view as to how matters might proceed in these
11:52:02 20
21 22
I didn't --
lands in early or mid 1993?
23
A.
Not that I was aware of, no.
24
Q. 149
So Mr. Dunlop is completely mistaken in his perception that you had, that you
11:52:19 25
were frustrated with Mr. Phil Monahan's approach to this matter?
26
A.
I would say so, yeah, I think he was wrong, yeah.
27
Q. 150
Was there any basis for Mr. Dunlop coming to the conclusion that there was
28
frustration or dissension or confusion putting it at its mildest, within the
29
Monarch camp in relation to these lands?
11:52:40 30
A.
Not to these lands but I suppose in relation to Phil, Phil operated out of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:52:46
11:53:01
29 1
Somerton in Castleknock and, I mean, he -- we didn't really -- I certainly
2
didn't know what other developments Phil would have been involved in.
3
Q. 151
You didn't know what other developments he was involved in?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 152
Did you know that he was involved in a meeting with politicians or councillors
6
in relation to these lands?
7
A.
No, I wouldn't know that.
8
Q. 153
Did you is suspect that he might have been involved?
9
A.
No, not really, no.
Q. 154
Did you hear his secretary yesterday, Ms. Gosling, say that Mr. Monahan was the
11:53:08 10
11
type of man that would do whatever was necessary to have --
12
A.
I heard that.
13
Q. 155
The position of his companies?
14
A.
I heard that, yes.
Q. 156
Would you agree with that evidence?
16
A.
I'd say he worked hard for his company, yes.
17
Q. 157
And would it surprise you therefore that he would have met politicians with a
11:53:20 15
18
view to convincing them that they might take an approach or take a rezoning
19
view to these lands?
11:53:36 20
A.
21
It would have surprised me that he would have gone out to meet councillors, yes.
22
Q. 158
You think he might have gone out to see more senior politicians?
23
A.
I don't know, I don't know.
24
Q. 159
You agreed with me yesterday and I think it is the case that there was nothing
11:53:49 25
going to happen in Cherrywood in the absence of a favourable vote from
26
councillors?
27
A.
Correct, yes.
28
Q. 160
And if Mr. Monahan was anxious to improve the development potential of his
29 11:54:01 30
lands he would need the support of councillors? A.
Correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:54:02
11:54:15
30 1
Q. 161
And if Mr. Monahan was the type of man who was prepared to do whatever was
2
necessary in order to improve the development potential of lands, presumably he
3
would also approach councillors?
4
A.
Well I don't believe he approached councillors.
5
Q. 162
You don't believe he --
6
A.
I never heard he approached councillors, no.
7
Q. 163
I see. Does that surprise you?
8
A.
Not really, no.
9
Q. 164
Yeah.
A.
Yeah, it's just, I mean, I suppose Mr. Monahan operated, Phil operated out of
11:54:24 10
Because --
11
Somerton.
12
the centres managing the centres, he didn't visit the centres that often.
13
he was working on his own out in Castleknock.
14
there were never any formal meetings that I was at with Phil or any other
11:54:50 15
16
people. Q. 165
17
He didn't come to the office that very often and when I was around So
Now, I don't know, as I said,
He would call occasionally to the office, sorry.
He would call but would you be surprised that he would take an interest in what was happening?
18
A.
Oh, I'd say he took an interest in it.
19
Q. 166
Cherrywood was the single biggest project after Tallaght and possibly now that
11:55:11 20
Tallaght was underway, the biggest project?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 167
And the rezoning of Cherrywood was itself this single biggest project?
23
A.
Yes, it would have been.
24
Q. 168
And it dominated Monarch's business throughout '92 and '93, isn't that right?
A.
Well it was part of it, yes.
Q. 169
That prospect of the development in Cherrywood had been set back because of the
11:55:22 25
26 27
vote in May '92, isn't that right?
28
A.
Well it was going through its process, yes.
29
Q. 170
But it had suffered a set back in May '92 with the vote in May '92?
A.
Well it was still on Barrett's motion of one house to the acre, yeah.
11:55:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:55:41
11:55:54
31 1
Q. 171
Yes. It was always on one house to the acre isn't that right even back in 1989
2
and 1990 when the lands were purchased, the lands were on one house to the acre
3
albeit on septic tank, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah. That's as I understand it, yeah.
5
Q. 172
So it was back to square one in 1992 vis-a-vis residential development?
6
A.
I suppose it was.
7
Q. 173
And there was substantial monies owed on these lands, isn't that right?
8
A.
I didn't know what was borrowed on it. I wasn't involved in the financial
9 11:56:07 10
side. Q. 174
At all?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 175
Just in relation to Tallaght. Just to go back to Tallaght for a moment.
13
have indicated that you were the manager of the centre in Tallaght.
14
have any involvement at all in the financial end of Tallaght?
11:56:19 15
16
No.
Q. 176
Were you not appraised of the incoming -- sorry the outgoings and the income in Tallaght ever?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 177
Were you ever circulated with any of the accounts analysis sheet?
A.
No.
21
Q. 178
Monthly figures or anything like that?
22
A.
No.
23 24 11:56:46 25
26
Did you
A.
17
11:56:37 20
You
I wasn't the Manager in Tallaght.
manager.
I was the group shopping centre
I appointed a Manager in in Tallaght, sorry.
Q. 179
Okay.
You appointed --
A.
Yeah, sorry, I just ....
Q. 180
But as group shopping centre manager, you say you never had any responsibility
27
and you were never furnished with any of the financial information of the group
28
or any of the companies within the group?
29 11:57:00 30
A.
No.
Q. 181
And did you know any of the financial information concerning the group Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:57:05
11:57:16
32 1
otherwise than --
2
A.
No, it wasn't my end of the business.
3
Q. 182
I appreciate that you say that you had no responsibility for it but presumably
4
I wasn't --
you knew the various companies within the group?
5
A.
I knew of them but I was never involved in the financial side of the business.
6
Q. 183
But did you know for example that there was Monarch Properties Services
7
Limited, a company which was responsible for carrying out the project
8
development in Cherrywood for example?
9
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
Q. 184
Did you know that there was an L&C Properties Limited?
11
A.
Yes, L&C was the Tallaght project.
12
Q. 185
Monarch Properties Limited.
13
A.
That was the mother company, yeah.
14
Q. 186
So you did know the individual companies?
A.
Absolutely, yeah.
Q. 187
And when you would give directions, as you indicated yesterday, for monies to
11:57:33 10
11:57:44 15
16 17
be paid, did you direct from which account to which company was to pay the
18
monies?
19 11:57:55 20
21
A.
No, I didn't, no.
Q. 188
You never gave such a direction?
A.
No. Just on that.
22
Just to be clear, I would have cleared an invoice for --
it would normally come in MPSL, Monarch Properties Services Limited.
23
Q. 189
But you would have never indicated the account from which it was to be paid?
24
A.
I don't believe so, no.
Q. 190
Could I have 6095, please.
11:58:15 25
26
This is an instruction to a Bill McMunn, which appears to be from you,
27
Mr. Reilly dated 17th of October 1996.
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 191
And the subject is Colm McGrath golf classic.
A.
Yes.
11:58:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:58:28
11:58:37
33 1
Q. 192
2
It says "I attach herewith the original signed receipt, 500 pounds by Richard Lynn which should be charged to Monarch Property Limited."
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 193
"Thank you for all your help."
5
A.
Yeah. Sorry, that can I --
6
Q. 194
You say that that receipt was already charged to Monarch Properties Services
7 8
when you received it? A.
9
He was going to a
golf classic that day and the cheque wasn't signed and could I get some money
11
to cover the cost of the golf classic itself. Q. 195
13 14
I got a call from our
accounts girl just to say that Richard Lynn was very upset.
11:58:57 10
12
No, I'll tell you exactly what happened in that case.
Why, since you had no responsibility with finance, did that request come through to you?
A.
11:59:18 15
Sorry.
What happened was, I'm explaining, from the accounts office, the girl
rang me, she was very upset.
Richard was after getting very annoyed with her
16
and said obviously the cheque hadn't been signed and was delayed or whatever
17
else.
18
get 500 pounds from petty cash from Bill McMunn, who was our head of security.
19
And I brought that cheque in, brought that cash in.
11:59:44 20
I said I believe I may have been in Tallaght at the time.
I said I
I got Richard to sign for
it.
21
Q. 196
Yes.
22
A.
And I sent an instruction back to ensure because that was from The Square
23
Management Limited, which was a separate company, which was the, owned The
24
Square at that stage, to charge this back to Monarch Properties Limited was it,
12:00:02 25
26
yeah. Q. 197
27 28 29 12:00:20 30
You see, I still don't understand how the cash query came to you Mr. Reilly, since you had no responsibility?
A.
Sorry it wasn't a cash query. company.
It was a row between two members of the
Monarch had a very difficult job and I arranged this and I said made
sure it's charged, it was not a Square receipt. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:00:23
12:00:37
34 1
Q. 198
You didn't want it as a Square receipt?
2
A.
No, it was nothing to do with The Square.
3
Q. 199
Why did Mr. Lynn not get on to, or the girl in accounts not get on to Mr, for
4
example, Mr. Glennane, since he was the accounts --
5
A.
I don't know.
6
Q. 200
Expert --
7
A.
I can't answer that, no.
8
Q. 201
So you say that's how you came to charge that payment --
9
A.
Exactly.
Q. 202
-- to Mr. McGrath to Monarch Properties Limited?
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 203
I asked you yesterday what the objective was in 1993 after Mr. Dunlop came on
12:00:45 10
I got I think a receipt signed by Richard for that.
13
board in relation to the lands.
14
isn't that right?
12:01:06 15
And you indicated it was to increase density,
A.
No, it was to get the lands approved.
16
Q. 204
Yes but approved for what I asked you?
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 205
Yes.
19 12:01:19 20
21
Increase from one acre to four acres. Was there a suggestion at this time also that the lands might be zoned
for industrial purposes? A.
I don't remember that, no.
Q. 206
That's the type of thing you, if it were the case, you should have known, isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
I would say I would have, somebody would have told me I guess, yes.
24
Q. 207
Because you were out lobbying some councillors particularly those in the
12:01:31 25
Tallaght area, isn't that right?
26
A.
We're back to canvassing.
27
Q. 208
Or canvassing.
28 29 12:01:42 30
My apologies.
I'll stick to the terminology you dictate and
we will call it canvassing. A.
Sorry.
Q. 209
You were out canvassing councillors that you knew in relation to the lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:01:45
12:01:53
35 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 210
And obviously you would know or should know or ought to know what you were
3
seeking on the lands, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 211
And you say that you did not know that you were looking for industrial zoning
6 7
on the lands in 1993, isn't that right? A.
What I was told and I can't remember the exact period was that the best that
8
could be got on the lands was the manager's proposal, which was four houses to
9
the acre on sewerage.
12:02:20 10
11
And a neighbourhood shopping centre.
And that was
what canvassing I did. Q. 212
If we could have 4312.
This is a memorandum of a meeting held in the County
12
Manager's office between Mr. Pat Field of GRE, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Lynn, and
13
Mr. O'Sullivan, who is the manager, and Mr. Murray.
14 12:02:38 15
Now, it would appear are from this memorandum that there were two possible
16
proposals from the Monarch side.
17
Mr. Sweeney, "tabled two draft submissions for the Development Plan review and
18
outlined two possible proposals.
19
spaces or C, zoning with E zoning, that is science and technology/industry.
12:03:03 20
And it commences ES, whom I presume is
C zoning A1 that's action area, plus F open A
1, which action area zoning and F, zoning."
21 22
Did you know that there was the question of industrial zoning being sited on
23
these lands in July 1993?
24 12:03:20 25
A.
I don't believe I did.
Maybe at a later stage, yes.
Q. 213
Did you know that there was a strategy being devised whereby the manager was
26
being offered lands for a science and technology park in exchange for an
27
increased density?
28
A.
No, I didn't know that.
29
Q. 214
You didn't know that that strategy was taking place?
A.
No.
12:03:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:03:38
12:03:57
36 1
Q. 215
Are you surprised now that you didn't know of that at the time?
2
A.
No.
Well if I can remember, as I say, I'm going back on my memory itself.
3
What I recall was that the plan went on display some time after that in July or
4
August.
5
discussion about a shopping centre, which I was originally interested in.
6
I gather I think as I recall Richard Lynn came back and said look Willie Murray
7
won't let anything go into it other than a neighbourhood shopping centre and
8
the manager was continuing to support four houses per acre on septic tanks.
I think it was August.
What happened then was that there was a And
9 12:04:21 10
Possibly at later stage there was some talk about a science park or whatever
11
else but that was never brought out to bring to councillors or anything else
12
like that.
13
Q. 216
14
No, I'm not suggesting that it was being brought to councillors at this stage. But what I'm saying is that the strategy was being devised at this stage.
12:04:37 15
And
that there had been meetings and discussions with the manager and his staff and
16
certain representatives of Monarch in relation to that strategy at this early
17
stage, that is to say July 1993.
18
A.
Right.
19
Q. 217
You say you did not know in July 1993?
A.
I do --
21
Q. 218
That that strategy was being devised or that those meetings were taking place?
22
A.
No, I do not know that I knew at that stage.
23
Q. 219
Yes.
12:04:51 20
24
To an observer, let's say take any of the councillors, you would have
been identified with Mr. Lynn as someone who would have been seeking the
12:05:07 25
rezoning of these lands at that time, isn't that right?
26
A.
Um, possibly, yeah, I suppose, yeah.
27
Q. 220
Yes.
28
A.
Or outside the council offices.
29
Q. 221
Other than yourself and Mr. Lynn, and indeed latterly be Dunlop on behalf of
12:05:23 30
I was in the council.
Monarch, was there any other representative of Monarch outside the council Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:05:27
12:05:37
37 1
offices?
2
A.
Maybe our architect came along in case there was a technical query.
3
Q. 222
Yes.
4
A.
Yeah, but --
5
Q. 223
And you had in the mind of councillors you would have been, the two of you
6 7
But otherwise it would have been yourself and Mr. Lynn?
would have been associated with the Monarch Group and the Monarch strategy? A.
Certainly I was associated with Monarch and with Tallaght.
I keep going back
8
to that but I have to keep going back because it was not my -- I have to keep
9
repeating it, I'm sorry.
12:05:54 10
Q. 224
Yes.
11
A.
It was a side show for me.
12
Q. 225
Yes. Was there anything going on in Tallaght that required rezoning at this
13 14 12:06:01 15
time? A.
No, I don't so.
Q. 226
So you were if you were attending these meetings it was for Monarch Properties
16
other than Tallaght?
17
A.
Either Ongar or Somerton or Cherrywood.
18
Q. 227
If I could have 4321.
19 12:06:18 20
21
Mr. McCabe, presumably you knew that Mr. Fergal McCabe
was the planner retained on behalf of Monarch, isn't that right? A.
Yeah, I knew Fergal was involved, yeah.
Q. 228
And Mr. McCabe drafted three different letters.
And unfortunately, the
22
Tribunal has been unable it to know, which, if any, were submitted to the
23
council in relation to the 1993 draft plan.
24
amendments to the 1991 draft plan.
12:06:43 25
26
I think in fact it's the 1993
A.
Right.
Q. 229
But for the moment we'll call it the 1993 draft plan which was on display in
27
July '93.
28
density on the residential to effectively four houses to the acre.
29
industrial seeking industrial increase on 28 hectares. Do you see that?
12:07:07 30
A.
And you see there a submission which speaks about increasing the
I do, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And on
12:07:07
12:07:30
38 1
Q. 230
That's one letter date the 30th of July 1993 there are two letters.
Could I
2
have 8556.
This is a letter which we know has a note on it which says "not
3
sent".
4
the plan in the context of residential and then industrial zoning.
5
finally there is a letter, if I could have 7221, a further letter. Again dated
6
30th of July 1993, which speaks to the plan in the context of residential
7
development?
So we presume that this one was not sent.
But again it speaks to And then
8
A.
Right.
9
Q. 231
Now, would you agree with me that that would tend to suggest that at that stage
12:07:48 10
that Monarch were undecided as to whether or not they would seek industrial
11 12
Okay.
zoning on the site at that time? A.
Well I haven't read them in detail but if I can explain, I've never seen these
13
letters.
14
any meeting that I can recall with the council on this.
12:08:11 15
12:08:23 20
And I was not
for it. Q. 232
18 19
I was never at
involved in the absolute detail of what Cherrywood or what that strategy was
16 17
I was never involved in the preparation of them.
So you're saying that you had no involvement in the strategy in relation to Cherrywood?
A.
Not in terms of science parks or whatever else other than --
Q. 233
You never attended any meetings in which there could have been discussions
21
concerning science parks?
22
A.
No. No.
23
Q. 234
Mr. Lynn never advised of you about meetings that he had attended with the
24 12:08:37 25
manager together with Mr. Sweeney as I have identified there at 4312? A.
Not in any great detail.
26
Q. 235
But in any detail at all?
27
A.
I don't believe so.
28
Q. 236
Do you think it unusual that you would have been lobbying the support of
29 12:08:53 30
I don't believe so.
councillors in the company of the one other representative of Monarch's present and he would have more knowledge in relation to the matter than you would have? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:08:57
12:09:17
39 1
A.
Richard, this was a full-time job for Richard.
2
the summer was quiet.
3
particularly in July and August.
4
Q. 237
I think as I said yesterday,
Everything went quiet.
And again in August 1993.
Everybody wanted holidays,
The push came on in September.
I had put up 8156 -- the proposal in relation to
5
the possible transfer or swap of golf course lands with lands in Cherrywood.
6
And again, you said yesterday that apart from some office rumour you had no
7
knowledge of that either?
8
A.
None whatsoever, no.
9
Q. 238
Now, if I could have 7258, please.
12:09:37 10
This is the attendance on the 11th of November, 1993.
And you are your
11
canvassing campaign would have culminated on the vote on the 11th of November
12
isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes, that's right.
14
Q. 239
And you would have been campaigning presumably or canvassing that the lands
12:10:00 15
16
would be zoned at four houses to the acre, is that right? A.
My recollection is that it was, we were going for the manager's report and
17
again just to be clear, I wasn't going around with armfuls of plans or motions
18
or whatever else, I was literally saying to anybody I knew, I hope you can
19
support us on the day.
12:10:23 20
Q. 240
Yes.
Now, just before I get to that.
At 5206, this is a plan drawn up by
21
Mr. Lynn for Monarch on the 15th of June 1994, and we see that at 5212.
22
a plan that's drawn up in 1994.
23
it in historical context.
24
So just to put it in context and just to put
We had the vote in November 1993?
A.
Right.
Q. 241
And then the plan is confirmed in December 1993?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 242
There's a meeting which we'll be dealing with in a moment in early January
12:10:48 25
28
1994.
29
This has been acceded to by the council.
12:11:08 30
It's
And there is a proposal to have a variation to the Development Plan. And then in May 1994 that variation
comes before the council as does a motion by Councillor Gilmore that there be a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:11:12
12:11:41
40 1
science and technology park.
2
motion which is before the planning and development committee of the council is
3
adjourned to the 26th of June of 1994.
4
1994 a strategy document is put together, possibly by Mr. Lynn but certainly
5
contributed to by Mr. Lynn.
6
heading "Progress report for 1994 Cherrywood" at 5206 and it starts with the
7
variation to the Development Plan.
8
referred you to a meeting between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney and the manager in
9
July of 1993?
12:11:56 10
11
And that variation and Councillor Gilmore's
And in the intervening period in June
And from that strategy document we see under the
And you will recall a moment ago I
A.
Right.
Q. 243
And we see now that under the heading "variation to the Development Plan" Mr.
12
Lynn is advising the Monarch representatives that "In September 1993
13
Monarch/Guardian agreed to give a letter to Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan committing the
14
landowners to reserving a significant portion of lands which could be
12:12:17 15
considered by the incoming council for possible industrial use to accommodate a
16
science and technology park.
Any residentially zoned lands thus taken up for
17
industrial purposes was to be compensated by bringing in the agriculturally
18
zoned lands for residential purposes."
19 12:12:33 20
Did you know that there had been such an agreement?
21
A.
I don't know.
22
Q. 244
Sorry you did not?
23
A.
I did not, no.
24 12:12:43 25
I did not, no.
Again, just to be clear.
I wasn't involved in any of these
discussions. Q. 245
I accept that you may not have been involved in the discussions and indeed, in
26
fairness to you, you don't appear to be -- to appear on any of the memos that I
27
referred to as having been in attendance.
28
ground, so to speak, seeking the support of councillors.
29
you didn't know that this strategy was being devised or if these agreements had
12:13:03 30
been reached? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
But as somebody who was on the Are you saying that
12:13:04
12:13:15
41 1
A.
No, I didn't know any agreement had been reached.
2
Q. 246
Or that these meetings had taken place with the manager?
3
A.
There were ongoing meetings with the council, I was never appraised of the
4 5
detail of them. Q. 247
6
Were are you surprised that you weren't appraised as some one who was expected to canvass the support of councillors?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 248
On the current up-to-date level of negotiations?
9
A.
Again.
Q. 249
Between Monarch and the council officials?
11
A.
No, this was not part of my job.
12
Q. 250
But just from a briefing point of view and just to put you in the picture, so o
12:13:22 10
13
to speak, are you surprised that you weren't au fait with the current
14
up-to-date position in relation to negotiations and discussions between the
12:13:36 15
between the Monarch Group and the planners at this time?
16
A.
No, I'm not surprised because I wasn't part of the Cherrywood project team.
17
Q. 251
If a councillor, whose support you were canvassing, had asked you to be
18
briefed -- had asked to be briefed by you in relation to the matter.
19
would not have been in a position to fully brief him, isn't that right?
12:13:55 20
A.
21 22
12:14:10 25
If he asked me I would have said if there's any issue talk to
Richard Lynn or Eddie Sweeney. Q. 252
23 24
Correct, yeah.
You
And they would -- Mr. Lynn if that discussion had taken place outside the council chamber Mr. Lynn would have been beside you?
A.
Not necessarily, no.
Q. 253
Do you think that a councillor would have great confidence in you if you were
26
not in a position to tell them the up-to-date current position within Monarch
27
in relation to their objectives for their lands particularly in circumstances
28
where you were seeking their support?
29 12:14:29 30
A.
Sorry.
Just again just to repeat.
I was, as I say, just attended a number
of meetings prior to the November '93 vote. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I didn't get into any detail with
12:14:35
12:14:52
42 1
any of the councillors on it.
2
other parks.
3
meetings.
Nobody asked me about science parks or any
I can't say and again, I repeat I didn't go to any of the
I wasn't being appraised of them.
And that's as I remember it.
4
Q. 254
Were you on a success bonus?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 255
In relation to the rezoning of the lands?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 256
Could I have 5180, you will have seen the document that I put on screen.
9
will have seen that report in June 1994.
12:15:07 10
In the CD sent to you and the papers
sent to you, Mr. Reilly, I have no doubt?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 257
And you will see this there that in dealing with the projective zoning costs
13
for 1994 there was 10,000 pounds being set aside per Mr. Sweeney for
14
entertainment and lobbying.
12:15:21 15
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
16
Q. 258
And then for staff.
17
A.
Yes, I see my name there.
18
Q. 259
Are you surprised --
19
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 260
-- that you were include in 30,000 pounds success bonus?
A.
Absolutely.
12:15:30 20
21
You
"Success bonuses".
You were in for 30,000 pounds?
It was never discussed with me.
Just it be clear, when the 1993
22
vote went through, as I said before, I was working on the shopping centres.
23
then went back to my shopping centres and I faded out of Cherrywood entirely.
24
Just, as I say, to bring it to the point.
12:15:53 25
The only time I would have been
involved in Cherrywood would be perhaps say there is a lunch on I've bought
26 27
I
tickets for something can you come out. Q. 261
So can you give or proffer any explanation to the Tribunal as to why Mr. Lynn
28
or Mr. Sweeney would have indicated that you would be due a 30,000 success
29
bonus in early 1994 for the industrial zoning of these lands?
12:16:15 30
A.
I have no idea.
Absolutely no idea.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:16:18
12:16:30
43 1
Q. 262
2 3
And do you see the -- did you ever see this document other than when you received it in the brief?
A.
4
No, the first time I saw it was when you sent it. And was it ever sent anywhere can I ask you.
5
Q. 263
You are Monarch's first official representative in the witness box.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 264
So we'll have to ask Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn presumably.
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 265
Where it went and who saw it and why it was prepared.
12:16:44 10
You say in any event
you knew nothing about it?
11
A.
Absolutely not.
12
Q. 266
Do you see the very first item there "lobbying - entertainment 10,000 pounds."
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 267
Pre um, Presumably lobbying there is in the context of councillors?
A.
I assume so, yeah.
16
Q. 268
Yes.
17
A.
Or whoever else would be involved in it.
18
Q. 269
Well a change in the plan would only be brought about by a vote of the
12:16:59 15
19 12:17:11 20
21
It was never discussed with me.
Maybe there was, I don't know.
councillors as I understand? A.
I presume so.
Q. 270
So therefore if that change were to take place it would be in relation to the
22
councillors, isn't that right?
23
A.
I assume so.
24
Q. 271
Now I'm talking -- now do you see underneath entertainment "other"
A.
I didn't.
Q. 272
So in other words the entertainment expense was to be 10,000.
12:17:24 25
26
But can you
27
give any indication to the Tribunal what the reference "other per E S" would
28
be?
29 12:17:37 30
A.
No, I haven't a clue.
Sorry.
Q. 273
Do you know if Mr. Lynn got 100,000 pounds success fee in relation to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:17:42
12:17:47
44 1
rezoning, industrial rezoning of the shopping centre?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 274
Or of the Carrickmines lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 275
Do you know if Mr. Lafferty or indeed any others got success bonus fees in
6
relation to the Cherrywood lands?
7
A.
No, no.
8
Q. 276
Do you see the reference to Mr. Lynn, 100,000 (similar to JW)?
9
A.
Yeah, I see that, yeah.
Q. 277
Apart from Mr. Whelan, were there others within the Monarch Group who had the
12:18:03 10
11 12
reference JW, to whom the initials JW might have applied? A.
I can't, no, I don't believe so.
There were a couple of Whelans in it but
13
they were, one was Donna Whelan and there was a, she was a secretary and her
14
mother worked there as well, Marie Whelan, that was all.
12:18:28 15
Q. 278
W, no, I can't say.
Yesterday I think you told the Tribunal whilst you knew Mr. Jack Whelan, you
16
could not think of any reason as to why he might have received almost or sought
17
or received almost a quarter of a million pounds in relation to the Cherrywood
18
lands?
19 12:18:43 20
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 279
Now, the -- under the heading "note".
What was required was being set out
21
there.
22
be available on a 7 day basis to meet with local politicians, community
23
representatives, sporting groups and others who will have a vested interest in
24
the outcome of the move to the variation of the Development Plan.
12:19:04 25
"Over the next six months it would be necessary for the above staff to
The staff
will have to be suitably briefed and be available to arrange and attend
26
functions, meetings and briefings and be sufficiently alert to counter adverse
27
representations which will be made to the local politicians.
28
addition to attending meetings with the local authority officials."
29 12:19:20 30
Did you carry out any of those functions -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
The above is in
12:19:22
12:19:31
45 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 280
-- in 1994 in relation to the variation of the Development Plan?
3
A.
No, I don't believe I did.
4
Q. 281
Did you have any involvement in relation to the siting of the science and
5
No.
technology park?
6
A.
No, no.
7
Q. 282
In --
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 283
Were you aware that those functions were being performed by others in relation
12:19:41 10
11
to the matter at that time? A.
Well I assumed Eddie Sweeney or Richard Lynn would have been dealing with that.
12
The only thing I can remember on the science park, Eddie asked me to do a
13
management proposal for managing the park when it was built.
14
thing I can remember.
12:19:57 15
Q. 284
Now, if I can 5178.
That's the only
This is another schedule and you will have seen it again
16
in the documentation, dated the 20th of June 1994.
17
"general promotions".
18
that might be incurred in relation to this matter.
19
of political parties and round sum figures being placed beside them?
12:20:19 20
And it's under the heading
Again, it's a projection I suggest to you of, of outlay And you see there a number
A.
Right.
21
Q. 285
Do you know anything about that type of transaction?
22
A.
I never saw that document before.
23
Q. 286
Do you see sponsorship?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 287
And again, you see round figure sums?
26
A.
I do, yes.
27
Q. 288
I think in Tallaght you were quite involved with community support groups?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 289
You see there a sum of 10,000 pounds being set aside for community support
12:20:30 25
12:20:43 30
I had no input it.
groups? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:20:43
12:20:52
46 1
A.
I do, yes.
2
Q. 290
Do you see gifts, vouchers, flowers, 5,000 pounds?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 291
Entertainment 5,000.
5
A.
Right, yeah.
6
Q. 292
Now, if I could go back to 1993.
General commerce 2,000?
I do, yes. If I could have 7258, please.
This is a
7
list of councillors present at the meeting on the 11th of November 1993.
8
just for completeness sake, perhaps if we go through the list you might
9
identify your councillors.
12:21:21 10
Mr. Dunlop in evidence said that yourself Mr. Lynn
and himself more or less decided the councillors into three between you.
11
And
And
I think you yesterday named a number of councillors?
12
A.
I named a few, yeah.
13
Q. 293
That you had particular close association with in particular Councillor Therese
14 12:21:35 15
16
Ridge, is that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 294
And I think you said some other local councillors including Councillor Charlie
17
O'Connor?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 295
John Hannon, was that correct?
A.
Yeah.
21
Q. 296
Breda Cass?
22
A.
Breda Cass, yeah.
23
Q. 297
Yes.
24
A.
Can I just clarify that.
Q. 298
Yes.
A.
Just on that meeting, there was no list taken out and a tick, this is Phil or
12:21:43 20
12:21:49 25
26 27
this is Frank's and this is Richard's.
28
continue to do.
29 12:22:07 30
Q. 299
I just said what I was going to
But presumably there was to be -- there was some organisation to what you were doing yourself and Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
You weren't all meeting the same
12:22:11
12:22:27
47 1 2
councillors presumably? A.
Well it wasn't a case of meeting the councillors.
I never met them other than
3
as I can recall outside the chamber or they were in either Toddy's or the Royal
4
Dublin.
5
Q. 300
I was just to continue to talk to them.
Would you agree with me that having regard to what you have said this morning
6
in relation to your knowledge of what was going on.
7
briefed to meet with councillors in relation to this project?
8
A.
9 12:22:46 10
Badly briefed.
You yourself were badly
I don't know what you mean by badly briefed.
were concerned -Q. 301
You weren't au fait with everything that was going on?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 302
In relation to the site, isn't that right?
13
A.
Science parks or anything like that, no.
14 12:22:56 15
As far as we
Or golf courses, if you are
referring that, yes. Q. 303
So you were badly briefed insofar as you were meeting councillors and putting
16
forward a strategy or proposal or seeking their, canvassing their support for
17
rezoning on the site?
18
A.
19
Yeah, but I wasn't meeting councillors in the site of arranging a meeting, sit down and have a long discussion about the pros and cons of it.
12:23:14 20
shopping centres.
I was running
And on days when there were, what do you call it meetings
21
and particularly coming up to the '93 meeting.
22
said without getting into any great detail I hope you can support, please.
23
Q. 304
24 12:23:40 25
I attended those meetings and
Well going through the list now and as best you can, can you identify the councillors that you would have approached at those meetings for support?
A.
Well if you can take them easy.
26
whatever.
27
certainly, I asked her.
You see, again, it was in the corridor or
Wait until we see now.
We can go through them.
Mary Elliott, I probably said the same to her.
28
Q. 305
Yes.
29
A.
Sorry, I'm just going down through as carefully as I can.
Q. 306
John Hannon.
12:24:05 30
Breda Cass,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
John Hannon, yes.
12:24:06
12:24:52
48 1
A.
Yeah.
Probably Cait Keane.
2
Barry Lohan, yes.
3
Mitchell, Charlie O'Connor.
4
Eamonn Walsh, certainly.
Michael Keating, yes.
Stanley Laing, yes.
Joan Maher, I asked her, yeah, certainly. Catherine Quinn, I'd say yes. There may have been others.
Olivia
Therese Ridge. I mean, I'm --
5
Q. 307
I make that about 11 of the 78 councillors?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 308
Now, did you know which councillors Mr. Lynn and/or Mr. Dunlop were likely to
8 9 12:25:08 10
11
be in contact with? A.
Not really.
Q. 309
Yes.
A.
I was only canvassing. Sorry, canvassing, yeah.
12
Richard was doing the lobbying, if you want to talk lobbying.
I was, as somebody said, the
friendly face of Monarch.
13
Q. 310
Yes.
14
A.
That's what somebody said to me in the, what do you call it ...
Q. 311
You weren't privy to any of the discussions concerning the tactics or the
12:25:24 15
You were the friendly face of Monarch, is that it?
16
strategy that might be adopted.
17
You didn't know which councillors were likely to table motions.
18
stage when you didn't even know that it was necessary to table a motion?
19
A.
12:25:45 20
You didn't know who was promoting the site. It was a
No but what happened closer to the event was that -- and again, it comes back to the strategy that I mentioned about the Loughlinstown and Ballybrack
21
committee, community council.
22
councillors to support the scheme and that was the local councillors.
23
Possibly a few days or a week or so beforehand I think Mr, Councillor Marren
24
had given a commitment that he was going to support it.
12:26:13 25
others, I don't remember exactly.
26 27
12:26:27 30
And one or two
But that was -- that was what the strategy
was. Q. 312
28 29
The strategy was that we had to get the local
If we could have 7263, please.
Was Councillor Marren's commitment seen as a
break through? A.
I think it was very positive.
Q. 313
And were you present when that commitment was given? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:26:31
12:26:37
49 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 314
Can you recall the circumstances under which you came to hear that Councillor
3
Marren was supporting?
4
A.
I'd say Richard told me.
5
Q. 315
Richard Lynn?
6
A.
Richard Lynn, yes.
7
Q. 316
And I think that as we see hear here, there was a motion proposed by Councillor
8
Marren and seconded by Councillor Coffey but in fact, it's a motion that was
9
signed by others.
12:26:52 10
11
A.
Okay, yeah.
Q. 317
And do you recall the circumstances under which that motion came to be
12 13
proposed? Well in the first instance signed? A.
14
Richard came back and said that
also. Q. 318
17 18
Well no other than what I've told you.
Councillor Marren was going to support it and obviously Councillor Betty Coffey
12:27:11 15
16
Isn't that right?
Did you canvass Councillor Marren's support for the proposal at any stage over the previous years?
A.
19
Not really.
I would have spoken to him on a number of occasions but to
actually sit down and say, no, please, I want you to sign this motion, no.
12:27:28 20
I
mean, again, my introduction to him was through the Loughlinstown community
21
council.
22
Q. 319
Yes.
23
A.
What happened, just to be clear, what happened to the Loughlinstown after their
24
tour to Tallaght.
12:27:43 25
26
They went all of the local councillors and they said we
want this development. Q. 320
27
Can I ask you, you mentioned the tour of Tallaght. politicians to come to Tallaght.
28
A.
They were in it all of the time.
29
Q. 321
Well apart from shopping?
A.
No, sorry, they were.
12:27:57 30
Was it usual for
They were shopping.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:27:59
12:28:20
50 1
Q. 322
2 3
Official visits. Tallaght.
A.
Yeah.
Were there ever helicopter visits or tour of politicians to
I'm going back to now to '88 or '89?
If my memory serves me correctly.
We had a top-out ceremony and we
4
had obviously the official opening.
And prior to that I believe in June of
5
'89 we had two nights on the site.
The first one was we brought all of the
6
solicitors and accountants and tenants, the fit out people etc, to just to tell
7
them we're opening on the 23rd of October.
8
shops to open on time.
9
minute to fit out.
12:28:48 10
It's always very difficult to get
Every tenant sits back and leave it until the last
And the second night then we had a party, again,
announcing the 23rd of October as our date of opening and we brought anybody
11
from the communities, and schools and the local Garda and politicians and
12
whatever else.
Sorry, the centre opened.
13
Q. 323
That was in June '89 you said?
14
A.
No, sorry, '90.
Q. 324
June 1990?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 325
And any -- was there any politicians at either of those?
18
A.
Oh, the second night there were, yeah. All of the community was brought.
19
Q. 326
Was it just local politicians or were there any national politicians, were
12:29:08 15
12:29:20 20
21
there any ministers at that? A.
22 23
26
No, I don't believe there was.
Unless there was a local politician a
Minister, I don't remember. Q. 327
24 12:29:34 25
The year it opened.
Going back to now to 1993 -- you have sought the support of a number of people you say in the lead up?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 328
And you were told by Mr. Lynn that Councillor Marren was going to propose a
27
motion?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 329
This was seen as a break through --
A.
Oh, it was, yeah.
12:29:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:29:43
12:29:59
51 1
Q. 330
2
And we know that Councillor Coffey and others supported that motion, isn't that right?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 331
And the motion was successful?
5
A.
Correct, yeah.
6
Q. 332
And you say that you had no further involvement with the site after that?
7
A.
Very little.
8
Q. 333
And you certainly had -- you knew nothing of the claim in paper, at least, that
9 12:30:09 10
you were likely to receive 30,000 in bonuses? A.
Absolutely no, not.
11
Q. 334
In early '94 in relation to the matter?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 335
And you don't know how that came into existence?
14
A.
No, it was never discussed with me.
Q. 336
Or --
16
A.
No, it was never discussed with me.
17
Q. 337
And yesterday I had dealt with a claim in relation to Tallaght.
12:30:18 15
If I could
18
have 8596.
19
And do you recall that? Again, you say you know nothing about?
12:30:34 20
This is a claim for a series of monies for Phil Reilly PR work.
A.
It I never got paid that money, I can assure you of that.
21
Q. 338
Did you ever seek it?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 339
Just to -- just in relation to that.
24
one of the payments.
12:30:54 25
Reilly/PR work 50,000 pounds under heading April 1989? A.
Yes.
27
Q. 340
And then if I could have 8597.
28
12:31:11 30
I -- I omitted
The document on screen, which is 8596, speaks about Phil
26
29
Just to, for clarity.
There is Phil Reilly PR work under a heading
April 1990, 150,000? A.
Yeah.
Q. 341
And I had omitted to refer to the second payment on that line under the heading Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:31:16
12:31:18
52 1
October 1990?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 342
100,000.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 343
Although I had referred to it, if we could have 8598.
6
total of those payments Phil Reilly?
7
A.
300.
8
Q. 344
PR work 300,000.
9
A.
I did not get paid that money.
Q. 345
My arithmetic was correct.
12:31:34 10
11
I had forgotten to highlight one of those
100,000s.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 346
Just looking at the document on screen.
14
payments there.
12:31:50 15
One of the payments there is to MPSL Tallaght account.
relation to Tallaght. A.
I
relations figure.
19
Tallaght. Q. 347
21
That monies would be paid to the MPSL account?
Yeah, again, I wasn't involved in the accounts but it was, I mean, the public
18
12:32:10 20
Just looking down through it and the
presume that that wouldn't be an unreasonable expenditure at that time in
16 17
A reference to the
And again, I'm using it, it cost about 35 million to build
Well do you see the Pembrook, PR.
Did the shopping centre have as agent
Pembroke?
22
A.
John Buttimer, yes.
23
Q. 348
Was Pembroke PR employed in relation to Tallaght?
24
A.
Yes, they were, yes.
Q. 349
And would a figure of 35, 000 be representative of what they might have sought
12:32:26 25
26
or been paid?
27
A.
It's 10,000 in my sheet here.
28
Q. 350
Well I'm looking.
29
A.
I'm looking at 1360.
Q. 351
I'm going to put 8598.
12:32:40 30
If we could have 8598?
It's just two above Phil Reilly.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
Do you see that?
12:32:48
12:32:58
53 1
Pembroke PR 35, 000?
2
A.
Oh, yeah.
3
Q. 352
Sorry.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 353
Petty cash is 35.
6
That's petty cash on mine still.
Apologies.
It's 10,000.
Well evening taking the petty cash.
have been reasonable for Tallaght at that time?
7
A.
I don't know.
8
Q. 354
Would 10,000 have been reasonable for Pembroke PR?
9
A.
I thought it would have been low.
Q. 355
Yeah.
12:33:15 10
Would 35 petty cash
11
I don't know, I suppose it would have been, I don't know.
Do you know Mr. Tierney stone mason who seems to have been in for 10,
600?
12
A.
There was a PJ Tierney on-site he was working for Sisk, I thought yeah.
13
Q. 356
Did McKeever solicitors do works.
14
A.
I don't know what they did.
Q. 357
Or Lombard and Ulster 28,000?
16
A.
I don't know.
17
Q. 358
Do you recognise any of the parties named on that sheet?
18
A.
Well, yeah, I do, yeah.
19
Q. 359
It's not a fabricated document is it, Mr. Reilly?
A.
I don't know where it came from.
21
Q. 360
It came to the Tribunal from discovery from Monarch?
22
A.
Oh, did it.
12:33:35 15
12:33:56 20
Would 62,000 have been reasonable for them?
I wasn't involved in any of that.
J Braid Security was security, yeah.
Sorry.
I mean --
23 24 12:34:06 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn can I ask you the document it says L&C payments
accounts
26 27
MR. QUINN: That's correct.
28 29 12:34:11 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And there is a date --
MR. QUINN: 29th of June 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:34:13
12:34:18
54 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
1992.
3 4
MR. QUINN: These are the accounts total as of November 1990.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, I just wanted to ....
7 8 9
Q. 361
MR. QUINN: Who would be able to explain this document to the Tribunal?
A.
Dominic Glennane.
11
Q. 362
Dominic Glennane?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 363
Well perhaps it's --
14
A.
He was the financial director of the company.
Q. 364
Certainly you say you never sought and were never paid these figures?
16
A.
Absolutely not. Just to be clear.
17
Q. 365
Did you seek it?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 366
And decide --
A.
Absolutely not.
12:34:24 10
12:34:31 15
12:34:47 20
Just to be clear.
Sorry.
Just.
When we launched The
21
Square in Tallaght we would have spent pre launch and post launch probably one
22
and a half million pounds at that stage.
23
huge task to bring Tallaght, as I say, we got a lot of negative publicity about
24
Tallaght over the previous ten years.
12:35:00 25
Q. 367
I think as I said to you, we had a
Can I just ask you about your involvement and meeting with any senior
26
politician.
27
Michael Smith at any stage in relation to any of the Tallaght projects?
28
A.
29 12:35:27 30
If I could have 8849.
Did you have a meeting with Ministers
I got this document about an hour ago.
It's the first time I've seen it.
And I have no recollection of this meeting. Q. 368
Now, at 8851.
This is a Kildare Street visitors book.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And it shows a seven
12:35:33
12:35:48
55 1
o'clock meeting in the Dail for a number of people.
2
people, I suggest to you.
Which could be Monarch
There is E Sweeney, P -- is that Lafferty?
3
A.
Lafferty, yeah.
4
Q. 369
And P Reilly?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 370
And a J Barry.
7
A.
No, Monarch, yeah.
8
Q. 371
Who?
9
A.
The only J Barry that looking at this document was Jim Barry was a councillor
12:36:02 10
Was there a J Barry employed by?
at some stage in Tallaght.
11
Q. 372
Well do you recall a councillor in Tallaght arranging a meeting for you?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 373
With Minister Flynn?
14
A.
No.
Q. 374
In 1992?
16
A.
I'd say it's -- it says Minister Smith here, sorry.
17
Q. 375
Minister Smith I should say sorry?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 376
I understand that there is a line through the entry that means that the people
12:36:11 15
12:36:24 20
attended?
21
A.
I don't know that.
22
Q. 377
Yeah.
23
A.
I don't.
I have no recollection of ever --
24 12:36:31 25
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, we did only receive this document this morning
26
Mr. Reilly has had no opportunity to consider it or to refer to any
27
contemporaneous resources.
28
the document.
29
which Mr. Quinn refers, is different to the handwriting that is below it.
12:36:54 30
I wonder could we be told a little bit more about
I notice for instance, that the handwriting on the page 8851 to
in fact, it seems to refer to appointments which were earlier than the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
12:36:58
12:37:13
56 1
appointments which appear to be for Messrs. Barry, Sweeney, Lafferty and
2
Reilly.
3
how the handwriting comes to be different? Or do we indeed know anything about
4
it at all.
Do we know anything about who was the author of this document? Or
5 6
MR. QUINN: I can tell my friend, that if necessary we can call evidence in
7
relation to this but previous similar type documents have been dealt with in
8
other modules.
9
the gate, visitors gate in Leinster House.
12:37:34 10
And they are, as best I understand it, from records held at And it seems to be the practice
that visitors to members of the house would have entered, would have been
11
booked to visit and would turn up for their appointments.
12
would have their names crossed out.
13
relation to it.
14
concerned about a possible meeting that Mr. Reilly might have had in Leinster
12:38:01 15
And once there
But if necessary we can call in evidence
I'm not particularly concerned about the document.
House in 1992.
I'm more
You accept you would either remember or you don't.
16
A.
I don't remember having a meeting with Michael Smyth.
17
Q. 378
Do you ever remember having a meeting in Leinster House with anyone?
18
A.
I was in Leinster House on a number of occasions over the years for Senate
19 12:38:19 20
Elections. Q. 379
But you don't remember any meeting with any Minister?
21
A.
No, I'm sorry.
22
Q. 380
If I could have 2136.
23
Mr. Reilly.
This is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's statement,
And just I want to refer you to the last paragraph.
24 12:38:43 25
You see it says "The site set up was very, was run very efficiently and had
26
full catering facilities capable of putting on silver service lunches and had
27
numerous visitors from politicians and businessmen from all over the country as
28
well as abroad.
29
development in Ireland at this particular time.
12:39:04 30
As Tallaght was at the forefront in terms of property
employment point of view.
From a public relations and
Many commercial and political people visited the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:39:07
12:39:20
57 1
site.
Some of them arriving in Phil Monahan's helicopter and were shown
2
around the development as part of a marketing exercise to raise the profile
3
which was seriously in need of such treatment."
4 5
That's in Mr. Sweeney's statement.
6
A.
All right.
7
Q. 381
Do you disagree with anything that is said there?
8
A.
Well many politicians.
9
Q. 382
Well do you recall any politician arriving in Mr. Monahan's helicopter in
12:39:34 10
11
I don't know how many he means.
Tallaght? A.
I genuinely don't.
A few politicians -- I've outlined the politicians pre
12
opening.
13
from Taoiseachs.
14
each party arrived for a tour or a walk around.
12:40:01 15
Q. 383
Post opening we had a lot of politicians certainly after it opened Any time there was an election on every senior politician in
Now, a number of politicians have given evidence here, a number of councillors,
16
Mr. Reilly, and you will have, if you have been present, have heard their
17
evidence.
18
relation to the Cherrywood site?
19 12:40:20 20
And they have spoken of being canvassed for their support in
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 384
And quite a number of them have given evidence to the Tribunal and it has been
21
discovered to the Tribunal by Monarch that they have received payments; isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
Correct, yes.
24
Q. 385
You would be aware of that.
12:40:33 25
You heard Ms. Gosling's evidence yesterday in
relation to that?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 386
And you heard that she felt or that it was Monarch's feeling that claims for
28
monies by politicians was effectively a necessary evil I think she described it
29
as?
12:40:45 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:40:45
12:40:55
58 1
Q. 387
2 3
I think that was the ethos or the philosophy within Monarch.
Would you agree
with that? A.
4
I wouldn't, no.
Necessary evil is not certainly the way I understood it in
Monarch.
5
Q. 388
Sorry.
6
A.
A necessary evil was not the way I understood it in Monarch.
7
Q. 389
Yes.
Well when you joined Monarch in 1987 was there a policy in place in
8
relation to requests for political subscriptions by councillors and political
9
parties?
12:41:12 10
A.
I wasn't aware of it at that stage.
11
Q. 390
You weren't aware of it at that stage?
12
A.
No, at what stage did you become aware of a policy in relation to such
13 14 12:41:34 15
16
requests. The first one that I can recall was the '91 Local Elections. Q. 391
Had you known of any payments by Monarch prior to May or June 1991?
A.
1991, no, not that I can recall.
Q. 392
Had you sanctioned or had anybody sought from you payments prior to May or June
17
1991?
18
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
19
Q. 393
Well can you tell the Tribunal the context in which you first came to learn of
12:41:53 20
21
the policy of Monarch towards such a request for money? A.
Well what happened exactly was that I was in the office in Harcourt Street one
22
evening, the elections were coming up, Richard said we're gonna send somebody
23
out to, some donations to politicians.
24
did you know any of these people from Tallaght.
12:42:25 25
He had a list on his desk and he said And I looked down through the
list and although I didn't recall, I obviously had met Mary Harney and she had
26
suggested a number of names and I think they were added to the list.
27
asked him was this normal and he said yes, he understood that there had been a
28
tradition of making donations to politicians at election times.
29 12:42:53 30
Q. 394
When I asked you about a culture of payments to politicians.
Was there any
policy in relation to requests by politicians for payments to others? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And I
12:42:58
12:43:06
59 1
A.
How do you mean?
2
Q. 395
On behalf of for example organisations?
3
A.
Oh, yes there was.
4
Q. 396
That always existed?
5
A.
It did, yeah.
There would have been, yes.
Certainly my experience in Tallaght was there was so many
6
needs.
The needs were so great out there you were being I suppose canvassed
7
or requested by politicians for donations to different groups.
8
Q. 397
And what was the policy within Monarch towards such requests?
9
A.
Support them.
Q. 398
And now, we move on to 1991 and you are speaking to Mr. Lynn in Harcourt Street
12:43:23 10
11
in the context of the upcoming Local Election?
12
A.
Correct, yes.
13
Q. 399
And Mr. Lynn is putting forward to you a list of people in the context of
14 12:43:42 15
16
payments to people on that list, is that correct? A.
In relation to contributions.
Q. 400
And it's being spoken about by you and Mr. Lynn in the context of unsolicited
17
contributions by Monarch, isn't that right, because you'd been asked who you
18
knew on the list, isn't that right?
19 12:44:01 20
A.
Well I was being asked did I know any of these people on the list, yeah.
Q. 401
Would you agree with me that this implies that those people you identified on
21 22
the list were going to receive or be offered support by Monarch? A.
23 24
Can I follow that up, exactly what he asked me to do was to ring some of the people on the list.
Q. 402
Yes.
A.
And ask them could we assist in the election expenses.
26
Q. 403
And this was being brought by Mr. Lynn, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's as I understood it.
28
Q. 404
And Mr. Lynn, as I understood it, had nothing to do with the with the financial
12:44:12 25
29 12:44:32 30
end of the Monarch Group? A.
No, he was a project manager as I understood him to be. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:44:34
12:44:45
60 1
Q. 405
Yes.
And did you understand from your conversation with Mr. Lynn that he had
2
cleared what he was proposing to do with others or that he had been directed by
3
others to do?
4
A.
Well I think he was going to get it cleared.
5
Q. 406
Yes.
6
A.
When the list was prepared.
7
Q. 407
Yes.
8 9
And did you ask him why he was taking upon himself to support the
democratic process? A.
12:45:01 10
Well I can't remember the exact words he said but I will be dealing with these people in the future.
Monarch will be dealing with these people in the future
11
and I need to be able to talk to them and get their time, something like that.
12
Somewhere along those lines.
13
Q. 408
14 12:45:20 15
Yes.
And it was in that context that you were asked to look at a list and see
were there people on the list that you could recommend for payment or sought? A.
Not recommend.
That I recognised the names.
16
Q. 409
Yes.
17
A.
Again, just despite the fact having been in the business for a long time before
18
that, for 20 odd years.
19
was an election coming up.
12:45:35 20
Q. 410
21 22
Yes.
This was the first company I was ever in when there
And did you identify people? Did you make contact with a number of
people? A.
Well, on the list I had I said well I recognise that name or whatever else.
23
Despite the fact that there were a hell of a lot of politicians in County
24
Dublin, as you know.
12:45:54 25
And in Tallaght there was quite a number.
know that many of them at the time.
26
couple.
27
No, she was all right.
28
some tickets for it.
29
was running as well.
12:46:18 30
I didn't
I did do what Richard asked me to a
I rang, as I said, Therese Ridge who I had become friendly with.
certainly rang him.
She had a raffle or something on, I said I would buy
I may have rang, I think there was Michael Hanrahan who I knew him from -- he was in one of the charities, I As I say, Mary Harney reminded me of the conversation
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:46:23
12:46:38
61 1
that I had forgotten and that there was a couple of new councillors that --
2
sorry, they weren't councillors, they were ordinary people.
3
to Richard.
4
Q. 411
Were they on the list?
5
A.
I don't know if they were on his list originally.
6
And I gave them
I can't remember now to be
honest with you.
7
Q. 412
How many names were on Mr. Lynn's list?
8
A.
Oh, I don't know.
9
Q. 413
And where was he taking the list from?
A.
I don't know where he got it from.
11
Q. 414
Or how it was compiled?
12
A.
I don't know.
13
Q. 415
Was there a discussion about how much you would contribute or how much Monarch
12:46:52 10
14 12:47:04 15
16
15 or 20 maybe.
would contribute to the people on the list? A.
I don't recall, no.
Q. 416
How long did the conversation take, the conversation last, the conversation
17
As I said, it was my first time in this, at this.
between yourself and Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
I'd say three four minutes, maybe five minutes.
19
Q. 417
Did you ask him how much his budget was in relation to it?
A.
No.
Q. 418
Did you have any discussion about what would be a reasonable contribution to
12:47:21 20
21 22 23
make? A.
24 12:47:38 25
I can't say exactly that I did but, I mean, what do you do.
If somebody said
something like that what do you normally pay, you know. Q. 419
Sorry?
26
A.
What would you normally pay.
27
Q. 420
Yes.
28
A.
But I didn't know, as I say, it was new to me.
29
Q. 421
You were going to ring some of the people on the list, isn't that right?
A.
Well I assume he set the figure whether it was 300 Euros or 300 Euros or 500 or
12:47:48 30
What donation is a typical donation.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:47:55
12:48:24
62 1 2
whatever it was, pounds sorry. Q. 422
If we could have 3248, please.
This is again a list supplied to the Tribunal
3
by Monarch.
In relation to possible payments in 1991, and going through that
4
list, there appear to be payments made between May and June 1991.
5
you, looking at the list can you tell the Tribunal the names on that list as we
6
see it, that you would have been responsible for?
7
A.
Well if I can tell you the names I would have recognised.
8
Q. 423
Yes.
9
A.
Which is John Hannon.
12:48:54 10
Sean Haughey.
Quinn, Catherine Quinn.
11
Therese Ridge.
Michael Hanrahan. S Terry.
Can I ask
Michael Keating.
C Tyndall.
And after
that I'm -- I don't be -- maybe Senator Larry McMahon.
12
Q. 424
And did you contact those various people that you have identified?
13
A.
I can't say exactly.
14
I would have certainly I rang Therese Ridge and I
believe I rang Michael Hanrahan.
12:49:28 15
And I would have obviously got the other
names from Terry, Tyndall and whatever the third one was -- whoever the third
16
PD was.
17
Q. 425
Cass was it?
18
A.
Quinn.
19
Q. 426
Catherine Quinn?
A.
Catherine Quinn I think it was.
21
Q. 427
What about Mr. Ryan, did you mention Mr. Ryan?
22
A.
No, no, I didn't know him.
23
Q. 428
You didn't know him?
24
A.
No.
Q. 429
And I think save for Councillor Ridge, all of the others got a subscription of
12:49:50 20
12:49:51 25
26
But I don't remember calling those.
300 pounds, is that right?
27
A.
So it would seem, yeah.
28
Q. 430
Did you ring any of the councillors to be told that they didn't require any
29 12:50:06 30
I'm not crossing checking now as I'm reading this.
assistance? A.
Well other than Theresa.
She said she didn't.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I bought tickets for a raffle
12:50:10
12:50:22
63 1
or something that she was running.
2
Q. 431
And that was the context in which those councillors received --
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 432
So when those councillors say that the monies that they received in 1991 were
5
unsolicited, certainly insofar as the councillors that you have identified are
6
concerned, your evidence to the Tribunal is they were unsolicited?
7
A.
Well other than the few I spoke to.
8
Q. 433
Yes.
9
A.
Could we help them.
Q. 434
Yes. But they didn't contact you seeking support, you contacted them in the
12:50:34 10
11 12
first instance, isn't that what your evidence is? A.
13 14
I asked them.
I can't say with certainty that I didn't get a letter or two in but I don't remember.
Q. 435
12:50:53 15
Now, having identified the councillors that you were going to support. did you next do to implement that?
16
A.
I didn't do anything.
17
Q. 436
Well presumably you must have given the names to somebody?
18
A.
No, I -- I identified them for Richard and he took it from there.
19
Q. 437
He took it from there.
12:51:11 20
21
He is the person within Monarch who decided who was
going to make the payments? A.
22
Well he asked.
I assume he went to somebody, either Eddie or whoever, and
just said I want to make these contributions.
23
Q. 438
Well why do you say Mr. Sweeney?
24
A.
Well, I don't know.
12:51:27 25
He was working for, he was working on the Cherrywood
project at the time.
26
Q. 439
So it was in the context of the Cherrywood project that --
27
A.
Well and Ongar and Somerton, I assume.
28
Q. 440
Yes.
29
A.
Well he was on the technical side so I suppose he was, yeah.
Q. 441
Well you either know or --
12:51:42 30
What
Was Mr. Sweeney involved in Ongar and Somerton as well?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:51:44
12:51:59
64 1
A.
2
Sorry, I assumed he was, yeah, I assumed he was. evasive.
Sorry, I don't mean to be
I'm just trying to be honest and give you a straight answer.
3
Q. 442
And it was in that context that these monies were paid, isn't that right?
4
A.
Correct, yeah.
5
Q. 443
Now, I'm not going to go into detail with you and trace the monies right
6
through.
7
about, other than the fact that they were paid by Monarch, isn't that right?
8
A.
9 12:52:18 10
That's perhaps some thing you would rightly tell me you know nothing
No, I didn't sign the cheques or do any of the accounts or bank reconciliation or anything like that.
Q. 444
You don't know which accounts or company made the payments?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 445
Or from whence the payments were made?
13
A.
No, no.
14
Q. 446
Or in fact that the payments were made?
A.
I assume they were made, yeah.
Q. 447
Now, I think in 1992 there were, there was a further series of disbursements,
12:52:25 15
16 17
isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 448
For candidates.
12:52:49 20
21
If we could have 1582.
Now, can you tell the Tribunal any
involvement you had in relation to these payments? A.
22
Well I raised a memo which you probably have on file here, which is probably the ones that the particular ones that I was certainly involved in.
23
Q. 449
If we could have 3190, please.
24
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 450
Well now can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you came to
12:53:13 25
26 27
Is this the memo that you were relating to?
raise this memo of the 18th of November? A.
Well this is for the General Election 1922.
28
there's an election in 1992.
29
councillors, Tallaght, Clondalkin councillors.
12:53:38 30
I went to Dominic and I said it
And I went on the basis that these were Tallaght These were people that were
running for office, sorry, Mary Harney wasn't a councillor, I think she was a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:53:43
12:54:08
65 1
TD at the time.
And the reason I raised this list was that Tallaght when it
2
started in 1990, I think as I explained was almost a wilderness.
3
had been built.
4
100 acres site of which 20 of it was The Square.
5
development that was taking place had taken place prior to the arrival of the
6
building was the Garda Station.
7
honestly will say to you, that I wanted good politicians representing The
8
Square in Tallaght.
The Square
There was still a lot of issues, we were sitting on probably And the only other
And I firmly believed at the time, and
Sorry, the Tallaght area.
9 12:54:24 10
And I chose these people because I believed that they were all, they were all
11 12
very committed to their area and they were all very good people. Q. 451
13 14 12:54:47 15
You have just earlier told us of the circumstances and of your contribution to the 1991 payments, isn't that right?
A.
Correct.
Q. 452
And there had been no policy as far as you were concerned in relation to
16
political support but that Mr. Lynn on an evening in Harcourt Street had come
17
to you and had given you a list and asked you to identify people that Monarch
18
might support, isn't that right?
19
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 453
And you have contributed to that list?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 454
And you have made calls to the various people involved?
23
A.
Right.
24
Q. 455
And I suggested to you that it was an unsolicited contribution and I think you
12:55:04 20
12:55:15 25
agreed with me?
26
A.
Well unsolicited if that's how you define it, yeah on that basis, yeah.
27
Q. 456
If I could have 1579, please.
In correspondence with the Tribunal the
28
solicitors to Monarch.
29
Tribunal that in relation to the 1991 list, all of the contributions are
12:55:33 30
If you look at the third paragraph.
Have advised the
believed to have risen on foot of requests for assistance to defray Local Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:55:38
12:55:46
66 1
Elections expenses save as set out, no records have been locate in the this
2
regard.
3 4
Now, in the first instance I would ask you to agree with me.
5
suggests that it is Monarch's position that the 1991 contributions all had been
6
solicited?
7
A.
Well.
8
Q. 457
Or had all been solicited I should say.
9
A.
Well I've given you my evidence.
Q. 458
Yes, that's fair enough.
12:55:58 10
11 12
A.
Yeah, there may have been some letters in but I don't remember them but certainly --
Q. 459
12:56:13 15
16
And you disagree with Monarch's solicitors
understanding of the 1991 contributions?
13 14
That that letter
-- certainly in relation to the people you've identified they were unsolicited contributions you say?
A.
Yeah, other than if I had a conversation with a politician, such as has been
17
given as evidence here, and I think was referred to from the PD people, that
18
they could do with some help.
19 12:56:34 20
21
Is that's solicited or unsolicited?
Q. 460
That was the request by Ms. Hard Harney I think on behalf of --
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 461
That letter has been opened.
But other than that request.
Any other
22
payments that you would have made or authorised would have been unsolicited
23
isn't that right?
24
A.
12:56:47 25
Not -- sorry.
Can I go back to my own list maybe if I can talk you through
it, my memo?
26
Q. 462
You want to go back to the 1991 list is it?
27
A.
No, the '92 memo, please.
28
Q. 463
Sorry, I'm dealing in 1991?
29
A.
Sorry.
Q. 464
I'll come to 1992 in a moment?
12:56:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:56:59
12:57:14
67 1
A.
Sorry.
Right.
2
Q. 465
The letter on screen is only dealing with 1991.
3
A.
Yeah.
Just to be absolutely clear, when I left Monarch in '97 I've had no
4
input other than with Monarch or discussions or whatever else in relation to --
5
they ran the around the business or in relation to this Tribunal until I
6
received correspondence.
So nobody asked me when preparing this letter.
7
Q. 466
So for your contribution in relation to that?
8
A.
I had no contribution in relation to this letter.
9 12:57:28 10
That's the point I'm
making. Q. 467
11
I understand. So wherever Messrs. Smyth & Partners got their information. They certainly didn't get it from you?
12
A.
Absolutely not.
13
Q. 468
Yes. Does that surprise you that they would, as solicitors to the Group, put
14
forward information to the Tribunal without contacting you, since you were
12:57:44 15
16
involved in 1991 and 1992 with the contributions? A.
17 18
Sorry, I don't know what way you want me to answer that.
But, I mean, I had
no dealings with Smyths. Q. 469
19 12:58:04 20
Nobody contacted me.
You had a contribution to make to the position concerning payments in '91 and in '92. Isn't that right?
A.
Well obviously, yes.
21
Q. 470
Now, if we return to your 1992 memo.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 471
And it's your direction to Mr. Glennane, who is the financial person within
24 12:58:21 25
That's at 3910.
Monarch? A.
Request. It's a request.
26
Q. 472
Yes?
27
A.
It's a request.
28
Q. 473
Yes?
29
A.
Just about.
Q. 474
This is your memo and this is your opportunity Mr. Reilly, to speak to it?
12:58:27 30
If I can talk to you.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:58:31
12:58:38
68 1
A.
I know.
2
Q. 475
And take your time.
3
A.
It's important to me as well.
4
Q. 476
That's the point I'm making?
5
A.
Sorry.
6
Q. 477
So you have as much time as you wish in relation to it.
7
A.
Certainly on the first one.
Please, take your time.
It's important?
Michael Keating or how the 1,000 Euros arose.
8
was talking to one of his people who happened to be a friend of my wife.
9
it was a casual conversation, how are things going for the Election, which
12:58:56 10
would be typical, were broke.
And I assume a bit of help wouldn't be any
11
harm, or words to that effect.
They are not the exact words.
12
some help.
13
Theresa, I didn't speak to.
14
But again, let me repeat.
12:59:19 15
Tallaght.
That was one of the -- certainly that was one of them. And I don't believe I spoke to the rest of them. I wanted good people.
And very committed to
Still even after all these years, they are a huge -- at that time
as I told you, there were a lot of problems out there.
17
tremendous work the voluntary groups were doing.
18
given evidence to this Tribunal, I wanted the best people in the Dail to try
19
and get the hospitals, the schools, etc..
21
And I saw the As far as I believe and have
And that is why I wrote that
specific memo and that's why I asked for that money from Dominic Q. 478
22
Now, there's no doubt but that you were able to sanction payments totalling I think about 4,000 pounds, per that list?
23
A.
Yes, request.
24
Q. 479
You had that authority to request that payments be made?
A.
Yes, please.
26
Q. 480
Well "sanction" or "request"?
27
A.
No, there's a big difference in my mind.
28
Q. 481
I see.
29
A.
Sanction would, that would have to go then to the accounts office.
13:00:03 25
13:00:11 30
And
Do you need
16
12:59:47 20
I
And
somebody in the accounts office would say well who has -- requested and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
13:00:16
13:00:27
69 1
sanctioned are different in my view.
2
Q. 482
I see.
3
A.
So Dominic Glennane had to say to whoever in the accounts office will you draw
4 5
up these requests. Q. 483
6
So you are saying even though you sent in that request to Mr. Glennane, that somebody else within Monarch could have refused to make those payments?
7
A.
Yes, correct, yes.
8
Q. 484
Have you ever submitted a request which has been refused?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 485
Yes?
11
A.
Not for this end of it, you know.
12
Q. 486
Refused, presumably, because there wasn't a proper backup invoice or?
13
A.
Not necessarily.
13:00:41 10
14
Not for politics.
It may have been too dear or what the hell are you doing
with that, why are you spending money on that, you know, that's crazy, sorry
13:00:57 15
about this.
16
Q. 487
Nobody within Monarch raised that query about this request?
17
A.
No, because as I firmly believed, as I said to you today, I said to Dominic at
18 19
the time. Q. 488
Did you have a chat with Mr. Glennane at the time about it?
A.
Oh, I did, yeah, I spoke to him about it.
21
Q. 489
And did he have any contribution to make towards the list?
22
A.
Not that I recall other than, I suppose, maybe he saw the bit of passion that
13:01:12 20
23
was in me about it, you know.
24 13:01:25 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right, Mr. Quinn, it's just gone one o'clock.
adjourn until two o'clock.
27 28 29
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13:01:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
So we'll
13:01:49
14:04:17
70 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
Q. 490
MR. QUINN: Just before lunch, I think before lunch we were dealing with 3910,
4
which was your memo to Mr. Glennane.
And I think you were advising the
5
Tribunal of a discussion you had with Mr. Glennane in relation to contributions
6
which you proposed to make during that election.
Isn't that right?
7
A.
That's correct, yeah.
8
Q. 491
And can I ask you, you have given evidence and you have -- that you selected
9
the councillors that you proposed or the politicians or candidates that you
14:04:39 10
proposed to support in that election.
Isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 492
That's your selection?
13
A.
That's my selection, correct.
14
Q. 493
Can I ask you, did you also decide the amounts you were going to contribute or
14:04:51 15
was that somebody else's input?
16
A.
No, that was my input.
17
Q. 494
How did you settle on the figures that we see there, can I ask you?
18
A.
Well, I suppose, I had an idea from the '91 elections what sort of
19
contributions were given.
14:05:12 20
And what I did then was certainly having spoken to
one of the Fine Gael people, it was obviously a national election is a lot more
21
expensive than a Local Election.
22
maybe I was trying to pick the winners.
23
Q. 495
24 14:05:36 25
26
Yes.
When you say you were trying to pick the winners, you were trying to
give more to the people who were likely to be successful? A.
Perhaps, yeah, to put it that way.
Q. 496
If we can have 8579, please.
27
'91 payments.
28
see this, these?
29 14:05:55 30
So I just picked those amounts, I suppose,
That's all I can remember.
This is an internal list in relation to the June
Did you prior to receiving this list in the brief did you ever
A.
No, I never saw that before.
Q. 497
We see there that in that Local Election that the standard contribution Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:06:02
14:06:14
71 1
appeared to be somewhere between 300 and 600 pounds, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
3
Q. 498
Did you have any input into the amounts being given in that election?
4
A.
That's the '91?
5
Q. 499
Yes.
6
A.
No, I believe I was guided by Richard on that.
7
Q. 500
Do you know that Mr. Tom Hand for example had received 5,000 pounds in 1991?
8
A.
No, I did not.
9
Q. 501
Did you know the late Mr. Hand?
A.
I met him a couple of times but I didn't know him at that stage.
Q. 502
Mr. Dunlop gave the impression that you, perhaps through your association with
14:06:33 10
11 12
Ms. Ridge, was more associated with the Fine Gael parties than perhaps with the
13
other parties would that be fair?
14
A.
14:07:25 15
Sorry, I knew some Fine Gael parties. party.
16
But I knew everybody in every other
Mr. Dunne with all due respects didn't know me.
I'm not associated
just for the record.
17
Q. 503
You're not associated.
18
A.
Not with any party.
19
Q. 504
Had you met Mr, the late Mr. Hand?
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
Q. 505
Did you know that Mr. Hand was supportive of the Monarch position in relation
14:07:26 20
21 22
to Cherrywood?
23
A.
I didn't really know what position he was in.
24
Q. 506
I see.
A.
I didn't discuss it where him so --
26
Q. 507
You don't know what position he held?
27
A.
No, not really, no.
28
Q. 508
Did you know Mr. Lydon?
29
A.
Yes, I knew Mr. Lydon, yes.
Q. 509
Did you discuss the Cherrywood position with Mr. Lydon?
14:07:26 25
14:07:27 30
But I think he may have supported some motions.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:07:27
14:07:36
72 1
A.
No, not discuss, no.
2
Q. 510
Did you mention the Cherrywood?
3
A.
Well I would have said I hope we'll be all right on the day or whatever,
4 5
something like that. Q. 511
6
Yes.
I hope you can support it.
I think your word for that is "canvass".
Did you canvass Mr. Lydon's
support?
7
A.
Other than what I've said to you if that's canvassing. Yeah.
8
Q. 512
Yes.
9
A.
The only time I can recall speaking to Senator Lydon was in the lobby.
14:07:55 10
could have been there, I don't know, it was in the middle of a crowd.
11 12
14:08:06 15
He It
wasn't a special meeting anyway. Q. 513
13 14
Was a Mr. Lynn with you when you spoke with Senator Lydon?
He didn't receive any special treatment for you, from you other than any other councillor who would support you?
A.
No, no.
Q. 514
Did you know that Mr.-- that Councillor Lydon was supportive of the Monarch
16
proposals?
17
A.
Yeah, well he had a proposal in, in '92 as I recall, yeah.
18
Q. 515
Yes.
19
A.
Oh, I did, yeah, yeah.
Q. 516
And was he seen within the Monarch Group as a supportive councillor?
A.
Well, I would say about supportive councillors, I think the majority of Fianna
14:08:22 20
21
Yes.
And you knew that, if not in '92 certainly subsequently?
22
Fail people I spoke to would have been pro-development and Senator Lydon
23
wouldn't have been any different I believe.
24
Q. 517
Yes. Did you know that Councillor Hand was supportive?
A.
Yes, I did, yes, I would say yes.
26
Q. 518
Councillor Coffey I think seconded the motion in 1993, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 519
Did you seek her support at any stage for this proposal?
29
A.
Again, no more than a casual, maybe a comment.
14:08:45 25
14:09:41 30
originally was Dun Laoghaire.
Her biggest issue was,
That if we build a big shopping centre in Dun
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:09:41
14:09:42
73 1 2
Laoghaire it would kill Dun Laoghaire. Q. 520
And I think that Monarch at some stage hit upon the idea of developing Dun
3
Laoghaire and developing both the Pavilion site and what is now the Bloomfield
4
site?
5
A.
The Bloomfield site, yes.
6
Q. 521
And was that brought to Councillor Coffey's attention?
7
A.
I'm sure she was aware of it at that stage, yes.
8
Q. 522
Now, I think you would have written and contributed after '92 to different
9 14:09:43 10
11
candidates and different politicians, isn't that right? A.
Monarch would have.
Q. 523
Monarch would have.
12
Within Monarch you would have been associated with
directing some of the payments, isn't that right?
13
A.
Requesting them, yeah.
14
Q. 524
If we could have -- this by the way.
A.
All right, yeah.
Q. 525
If we could have 4170, for example.
14:09:57 15
16 17
And it's dated the 27th of April 1993.
18
in 1993.
19
MS association.
14:10:17 20
21
I don't intend to go through them all.
This is a memo to you from Ms. Gosling. I don't believe there was an election
But in any event, Senator McGennis was looking for support for the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 526
And I think Ms. Gosling wrote to you and referred to a telephone conversation.
22
And said you were going to deal with it.
23
right hand corner "200 pounds to be given to me to deliver in person".
24
that a note written by you or somebody?
14:10:35 25
And we see a note at the bottom
A.
I think it's looks like Richard's writing, Mr. Lynn's.
26
Q. 527
And is it directed to you?
27
A.
Yes, it is, yeah.
28
Q. 528
So you must have spoken to Richard Lynn?
29
A.
I probably asked him, yeah.
Q. 529
As to what --
14:10:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
Is
14:10:49
14:10:58
74 1
A.
What we'd do, yeah.
2
Q. 530
Did he tell you why he wanted to deliver it in person?
3
A.
No, he didn't, no.
4
Q. 531
I think sometimes your view was sought in relation to payments, isn't that
5
right? If I could have 3807.
6
on the 5th of August 1992.
It's -- you're writing to Councillor Flaherty
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 532
And you are referring to a letter from Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn and I
9 14:11:21 10
think there's a note at the bottom.
Is that in your handwriting?
A.
It is, yeah.
11
Q. 533
It would be paid?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 534
You were anxious to confirm whether or not it was paid, is that right?
14
A.
Well I think as I recall, obviously she had written in requesting something for
14:12:54 15
a golf classic and both Eddie and Richard were away, obviously not available.
16
Both on holidays.
17
I don't know if we ever made a contribution to it or not.
18
Q. 535
19 14:12:55 20
21
And I don't know when I wrote Richard would be paid this.
If I could have 5972.
This is a letter to Mr. Monahan from Councillor
McGrath? A.
Right.
Q. 536
There's a note on the bottom right hand corner "Richard talk to me".
22
Is that
Phil?
23
A.
That's me, yeah.
24
Q. 537
That's 17th of May.
A.
It is, Richard Lynn, yeah, yeah.
26
Q. 538
On the bottom left hand corner "Richard Lynn recommended 500 Euros".
27
A.
That's my note, yeah.
28
Q. 539
Do you recall discussing whether or not that payment should be made?
29
A.
Yes, I did, yeah, with Richard, yeah.
Q. 540
And was it Mr. Lynn that sanctioned the payment?
14:12:56 25
14:12:56 30
Do you recall speaking to Mr. Lynn I presume?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:12:56
14:12:56
75 1
A.
Well he said pay 500 Euro.
2
Q. 541
Yes.
3
A.
And I would have assumed I sent it over to the accounts office.
4
Q. 542
Yes.
5
Was Mr. Lynn the contact person within the company that you would
generally talk to about whether or not these sort of --
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 543
Subscriptions should be paid?
8
A.
Yes, he was, yes.
9
Q. 544
You wrote I think to Senator Owen in June '97.
14:12:57 10
contribution.
At 8300 enclosing a
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 545
Would you have cleared it with Mr. Lynn or --
13
A.
We would have discussed it, yes.
14
Q. 546
There is 1996 please. This is a letter of the 3rd June 1997 to Mr. Don
14:13:07 15
Tipping.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 547
Again, you enclosed a contribution, would you have discussed that with Mr.
18 19 14:13:12 20
Lynn? A.
Probably, yes, I would have, yeah.
Q. 548
If we could have sorry 4654.
21
This is a request for the Labour Party national collection 1993 dated the 12th
22
of November 1993.
23
that in your writing
24
And you see up on the top "how much should we give".
A.
Sorry.
Q. 549
Mr. Sweeney.
26
A.
Directing it to me for some reason it seems.
27
Q. 550
That's Mr. Sweeney asking you whether or not a contribution should be given or
14:13:38 25
28 29 14:13:56 30
I'd say that's from.
Is
Yeah, it looks like Eddie's writing I think.
And who is he directing it to?
how much should be given? A.
Yeah I believe I sent back 200.
It says if anything -- on the side of it Phil
and he said yes and I ended up paying 100 for some reason. I don't know why Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:14:00
14:14:12
76 1
but anyway.
2
Q. 551
That was Mr. Sweeney seeking your advice on that occasion?
3
A.
Yeah, this is Mervyn Taylor, yeah.
4
Q. 552
If I could have 8559.
This one on the 5th of March 1997.
5
Noel Murray on behalf of a community enterprise society.
6
Noel approved?
It's a letter to Is that your writing
7
A.
Question mark, yeah.
8
Q. 553
Yes.
9
A.
PR to, I don't know what that says, the one on top.
Q. 554
I don't know.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 555
Would that be Phil Reilly to action?
13
A.
I assume so, yeah.
14
Q. 556
Somebody would have written that to you is that --
A.
Yeah, it was written in Owen Murray.
16
Q. 557
What position did Mr. Murray hold within the company?
17
A.
He was the marketing director for the company, he was the commercial marketing
14:14:31 10
14:14:38 15
18 19
And he must have obviously.
PR to action is it?
director. Q. 558
Did he operate out of Tallaght or out of Harcourt Street?
A.
No, Harcourt Street, 57 Harcourt Street.
21
Q. 559
Did you have to report to Mr. Murray or did you work closely --
22
A.
On some occasions Noel was marketing the units in the centre, so if a unit
14:14:53 20
23
became vacant in any of the eight or nine centres he would initially advice on
24
which agency we would use.
14:15:09 25
Q. 560
And would Mr. Murray come into play once the developments were up and running?
26
A.
Oh, prior to it.
27
Q. 561
Prior to it?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 562
Prior to them coming on stream?
A.
Yes.
14:15:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:15:19
14:15:33
77 1
Q. 563
He would be involved?
2
A.
Yes, he would be letting the shops.
3
Q. 564
I see.
4
But his input would be after the development had been undertaken but
before completion where he would advise on how to, tenants etc.
5
A.
Correct, yeah. Tenant mix and agree in terms and all of that, yeah.
6
Q. 565
Was Mr. Murray with the company when you joined it in 1987?
7
A.
He was, yes.
8
Q. 566
Did you have -- can I just ask you.
9
with council officials at any stage in relation to the Cherrywood site or
14:15:58 10
11
Did you have any contacts or interaction
indeed any of the Monarch lands? A.
On Cherrywood, no, I don't believe I had.
Although there is one memo I think
12
which you may have there of a discussion that took place at which I attended
13
with Willie Murray after the opening in April I think.
14 14:16:19 15
16
Q. 567 A. Q. 568
17
This is April of 1991? '94. April' 94. The one I was more particularly concerned about. 5603.
If I could have
Is an entry in Mr. Murray's diary for the 22nd of October 1993.
18
A.
Where is it? Sorry, I can't see it.
19
Q. 569
It's at 2.30 entry for Phil Reilly I think and Pat Lafferty is it Monarch?
A.
Yeah, it is, yeah.
21
Q. 570
Do you recall meeting Mr. Murray in October 1993 with Mr. Lafferty?
22
A.
I could have put I don't have any recollection at this stage.
23
Q. 571
Was that in connection with Cherrywood?
24
A.
I don't honestly know.
Q. 572
Was there -- we know that you met Mr. Dunlop with Mr. Lafferty after his
14:16:42 20
14:17:00 25
26
appointment in March '93, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
28
Q. 573
You gave evidence --
29
A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 574
-- in relation to that.
14:17:13 30
So could you have met Mr. Murray with Mr. Lafferty in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:17:18
14:17:35
78 1 2
relation to Cherrywood in October '93? A.
3 4
Possibly, yes, I could have, yeah but I don't recall it.
I'm sure if it's in
the diary I would have met him, yeah. Q. 575
Earlier this morning I was asking you about meetings between other Monarch
5
representatives and the council officials and the manager in July and in
6
September '93.
7
place at those meetings?
And you had no knowledge of those meetings or what was taking
8
A.
Correct, yeah.
9
Q. 576
Can I now ask you what that meeting was in connection with?
A.
I have no idea, sorry, I can't help you.
Q. 577
If it were in connection with Cherrywood, would you agree with me that you were
14:17:51 10
11 12
at a complete disadvantage meeting the planning officer in relation to
13
Cherrywood since you had no knowledge of other meetings taking place in or
14
around that time between other Monarch representatives and Mr. Murray and
14:18:11 15
Mr. O'Sullivan?
16
A.
Oh, yeah I would have been.
17
Q. 578
Do you know if there were any other meetings between you and other Monarch
18 19
I would have been au fait with what was going on.
representatives with council officials dating back to '87, '88, '89? A.
14:18:36 20
In 1987 certainly in Tallaght I was involved with the local authority at the time.
We set up a little subcommittee of one of the development people plus
21
one of the officials from the council.
22
between what was happening in the centre itself.
23
Q. 579
Yes.
24
A.
No.
Q. 580
If I could have 2816.
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 581
There appears a series of meetings.
14:18:56 25
And it was a communications group
Did you ever have meetings with Mr. Redmond, for example?
You will have seen them in the meeting
28
with Mr. Redmond and Monarch representatives.
29
diaries.
14:19:12 30
A.
That's for the 23rd of February 1998.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
These are Mr. Redmond's
14:19:13
14:19:31
79 1
Q. 582
2
And if I could have 2817.
That's the 26th of February.
I could have 2818, please, again. A.
I never met Mr. Redmond.
4
Q. 583
And finally on the 18th of April at 2819.
5
A.
No, I never met Mr. Redmond at any time.
6
Q. 584
There may also have been a meeting --
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 585
Sorry.
14:20:00 10
11
Did you have a meeting with Mr. Cremin in April '94? If I could have
5073, please. A.
I don't believe so, no.
Q. 586
You say that you had no meetings in connection or no involvement in connection
12
with the Cherrywood lands after the vote on the 11th of November '93.
13
right?
14
A.
14:20:17 15
put it up. Q. 587
Yes.
17
A.
I think it's in early '94 with Willie Murray.
18
Q. 588
Is that the 4th of January '94 I think.
19
A.
I'll see if I have a note of it.
14:20:34 20
What date is the meeting?
about Nutgrove. Sorry. Q. 589
22
I don't know what number it is.
Myself and Pat Lafferty went to meet him
If it can be found.
There's a meeting of the 6th of January, '94.
That's the only one that .... If I could have 4923, please.
Mr. Lafferty is noted as having attended a meeting with Willie Murray --
23
A.
No, it's not that one, no.
24
Q. 590
It's not that one?
A.
No, it's one later.
14:21:04 25
Is that
Yes, there is one, as I say, minute of a meeting if I can explain if you can
16
21
If
That's the 6th of April.
3
9
11.30 meeting.
If I can just ... that's the only one that I can recall
26
that I was with Willie Murray with.
27
was Nutgrove was making some changes there, we were adding extensions.
28
Lafferty was the project architect.
29
Cherrywood and Pat kept the memo, because I didn't know what he was talking
14:21:48 30
about.
Sorry.
It ran on but the primary purpose of that Pat
And Willie Murray went on to talk about
Just for the record.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:21:48
14:21:52
80 1
Q. 591
You had no understanding of what --
2
A.
They were talking roads and all of that.
3
Q. 592
Access, is that correct?
4
A.
It could have been, yeah.
5
Q. 593
We'll come back to that if that's okay.
6
Sorry, I just can't put my finger on it now myself. If we could have 2764.
There are a
series of expenses claims form, which you, if you have been present --
7
A.
Sorry.
8
Q. 594
-- will have been dealt with a number of councillors.
9
instance, without getting into the specifics.
14:22:11 10
Can I just in the first
Was it the practice within the
Monarch Group for executives to submit expenses claims forms?
11
A.
Yes, it was, yes.
12
Q. 595
And presumably that's for the purpose of being paid expenses incurred in
13 14 14:22:25 15
connection -A.
Yes, yes, with any development, which any ...
Q. 596
I agree, yes.
16
The form itself had set out the company that the claim was to
be made in respect of or the project, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, yes.
18
Q. 597
And there were so many different companies presumably there were so many
19 14:22:39 20
21
different projects coming on? A.
Charities.
Q. 598
So therefore whoever filled out the form gave the designation of the charge,
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Well that was my practice anyway.
24
Q. 599
And it appears to have been Mr. Lynn's practice also.
14:22:51 25
So, for example, if we
look at the claim form on screen which appears to be for January.
26
understand it may be in fact for January 1993.
27
by, is that your signature?
I
This is a claim form submitted
28
A.
Yes, correct.
29
Q. 600
Is that company described by you as Somerton, Cherrywood and Ongar?
A.
Ongar.
14:23:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:23:12
14:23:22
81 1
Q. 601
They were the three projects which were before the council at that time?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 602
I think it's a claim form headed or the nature of the expense is Senate canvass
4
- T Ridge?
5
A.
That's correct, yes.
6
Q. 603
Can I ask you to explain to the Tribunal what that was in connection with?
7
A.
Well she was running for the Senate.
She was, as I said, a good friend of
8
mine, still is.
9
I am originally from Cavan and I live in Meath.
14:23:44 10
By accident she said she was coming down to Meath and Cavan. And I said I know how tough
Senate campaigns are or I certainly knew after this day or two I spent with
11
her.
12
mine, S MacEntee there joined us and we drove around Cavan and Meath, it was
13
just to give her a hand but I didn't take part.
14
councillors or anybody that she was going to visit.
14:24:07 15
it.
And I said if you want a drive for a bit of company.
And a friend of
I didn't know any of the That's the background to
We did that again when ever the next election was.
16
Q. 604
Just before we leave that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 605
This is a -- your contribution to Ms. Ridge's election campaign?
19
A.
Senate.
Q. 606
Senate campaign?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 607
Ms. Ridge, is a friend of your's?
23
A.
Correct, yeah.
24
Q. 608
But it's being charged up to your employers Monarch, isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 609
It's being charged up in connection with Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar, is
14:24:18 20
14:24:27 25
26 27
that right?
28
A.
That's right, yeah.
29
Q. 610
So presumably you and your employers, you are submitting an expense form claim
14:24:39 30
form to your employers and your employers sanctioning the payment must have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:24:42
14:24:57
82 1
been of the view that this was a worth while expenditure in relation to
2
Ms. Ridge?
3
A.
4 5
Well I wouldn't quite put it like that.
It was an expense that I incurred in
the course of the day and they paid it. Q. 611
But it wasn't just a meeting with Ms. Ridge, it was incurred and identified
6
correctly as having being incurred in relation it her Senate canvass, isn't
7
that right?
8
A.
Canvass, correct, yes.
9
Q. 612
Presumably as I understand it, I may be wrong, that Senators, or potential
14:25:17 10
senators have to canvass existing TDs and Senators and others councillors,
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
Councillors.
13
Q. 613
Only councillors?
14
A.
Only councillors as I understand it.
Q. 614
So what we are looking at there is your contribution to transporting Ms. Ridge
14:25:24 15
16
to councillors somewhere in the State for support in connection with her 1993
17
campaign?
18
A.
Cavan, Meath and Louth to be exact, yeah.
19
Q. 615
Did she select the councillors or did you select the councillors?
A.
Oh, no she selected them.
21
Q. 616
Did you solicit support from any councillors on behalf of Ms. Ridge?
22
A.
No, I didn't know any of them.
23
Q. 617
Now, if we could have page 4057, please.
14:25:43 20
24
I didn't know any of them.
I just was the driver.
representation of an expense claim.
14:26:08 25
I think there's another
This time assigned to the Ongar Stud in
relation to modest expenditure in connection with refreshments and
26
entertainment.
Is that right?
27
A.
Correct. Yes, that's correct.
28
Q. 618
Can I just ask you going back to the last expense claim form at 2764.
29 14:26:28 30
How did
you, how did you decide to designate the expense to both -- to all three projects.
That is to say Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:26:33
14:26:52
83 1
A.
I don't know.
I suppose there wasn't any activity, I suppose, I don't know.
2
I suppose I put if in to them because maybe that was, when was it, January '93?
3
I don't really know, I suppose.
4
that's the expense heading I put it in to.
5
Q. 619
6
I just put those down as possibly, you know,
There are no companies, Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar.
There are three
projects but no company, isn't that right?
7
A.
No. That's right, yeah. I don't know where it was charged in the end.
8
Q. 620
Yes. Who would have decided where the charge would lay?
9
A.
I'd say somebody in the accounts office would just pick one of those and put it
14:27:08 10
through.
11
Q. 621
Yes.
Who had overall responsibility in the accounts office?
12
A.
Well, I mean, the top man is back Mr. Glennane again, Dominic Glennane.
13
don't know if he ever got involved in the nitty gritty of minor payments like
14
that of where they were charged.
14:27:26 15
Q. 622
Nut whoever received in this expense must have been satisfied that you,
16
Mr. Reilly, had incurred an expense in relation to those three projects, isn't
17
that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 623
For example if we could have 5729.
14:27:40 20
This again is a modest expenditure in
relation to Ms. Ridge on the 15th of December.
21
It's a Christmas time
expenditure but this time it's being written up under MPSL, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 624
Not any of the--
24
A.
No.
Q. 625
-- three projects?
26
A.
No, I wasn't involved in any other.
27
Q. 626
Projects. Whereas you were involved in the Cherrywood project in '93, isn't
14:27:57 25
28 29 14:28:07 30
that right? A.
That's correct, yeah.
Q. 627
And might that have been the reason why you felt it was know an expense Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
But I
14:28:11
14:28:18
84 1
incurred in connection with Cherrywood?
2
A.
Probably. Yeah, yeah.
3
Q. 628
I'm not going to go through the others.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 629
-- in the brief.
6
You have seen them in the --
Unless there is anything in particular you want to draw to
the attention's Tribunal in relation to it?
7
A.
No, I don't think so anyway.
8
Q. 630
Can I just go back to one document.
9
Could I have 4346, please.
cost projection to the 1st of January 1994.
14:28:37 10
created in 1993.
11
This a is a
It's so it's a cost projection
In fact the 1st of September 1993 as it appears from the
bottom left hand corner?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 631
I just want to get your assistance in relation to this.
14
three items? Item No. 12.
14:28:57 15
sewage scheme 1994.
Do you see the last
This is a cost projection.
"Carrickmines Valley
Third party costs to accelerate access to the sewer."
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 632
Can you give any indication to the Tribunal as to what sort of costs are
18 19 14:29:14 20
referred to there or are understood to be referred to there? A.
No, I'm sorry.
Q. 633
Do you see the next one.
21
I can't help. No. 13.
"Incentive bonus payments for Senior staff
1994 for achieving zoning and enhanced value of site."
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 634
Do you have any idea?
24
A.
No.
Q. 635
Did you know that if there were a bonus system in place for senior staff in
14:29:25 25
26
1994?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 636
For achieving zoning and enhanced value?
29
A.
No, no, it was never discussed.
14:29:38 30
I think that was in an earlier document you
showed me. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:29:39
14:29:55
85 1
Q. 637
2
Yes.
If such a system ask did exist having regard to your contribution
presumably you would have been entitled to benefit from such a scheme?
3
A.
Yeah well there was no scheme that I was aware of.
4
Q. 638
Yes. Was Mr. Lynn in receipt of bonus payments 1994 or 1993?
5
A.
Well I think I saw some correspondence on the GRE paper.
6
Q. 639
Yes.
7
A.
Or some correspondence.
8
Q. 640
You didn't know at the time?
9
A.
No.
Q. 641
And you never knew what Mr. Dunlop was being paid or what the arrangement was
14:30:05 10
11
That's all I knew.
I never discussed his payments.
for his payment.
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 642
You never discussed his payment?
14
A.
No.
Q. 643
And what system was in place between March 1993 and November 1993 between
14:30:11 15
16
yourself, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop and indeed Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray,
17
Mr. Monahan in relation to your progress with your canvassing of support from
18
councillors?
19
A.
14:30:31 20
Well there wasn't any formal system that I recall. meeting in March.
As I said, there was that
And then it went quiet for the summer.
21
Q. 644
Well how did you update each other on --
22
A.
Well I suppose we spoke on the telephone or just had a quick chat but I don't
23 24
believe -Q. 645
14:30:55 25
Were there ever any regular meetings where you would discuss the rate of progress?
26
A.
No, no, it was -- there were just informal discussions.
27
Q. 646
For example, when you first heard that Councillor Marren had come on board.
28
Was that at a meeting or a semi formal meeting in relation to the Cherrywood
29
site?
14:31:07 30
A.
I can't say exactly.
It was just, it could have been Richard standing outside
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:31:14
14:31:26
86 1
my door talking to somebody else saying it's good news Mr. Marren will support
2
the scheme.
3
Q. 647
And you'll have over heard what he said?
4
A.
Not over heard.
5
Q. 648
Just in relation to your offices, you had told us I think you had an office in
6
He might have said, listen this is the latest development.
Tallaght for a time and you had an office in Harcourt Street?
7
A.
Harcourt Street up to the time I left my employment.
8
Q. 649
Yes.
9
A.
He was on the first floor.
Q. 650
In Harcourt Street?
11
A.
Correct, yeah.
12
Q. 651
Mr. Murray?
13
A.
He was next to him.
14
Q. 652
Mr. Sweeney?
A.
He was at the back of the reception.
16
Q. 653
In Harcourt Street?
17
A.
In Harcourt Street, yeah.
18
Q. 654
Mr. Phil Monahan?
19
A.
He was in Somerton.
14:31:42 10
14:31:47 15
14:31:57 20
Had Mr. Glennane an office.
Where was Mr. Glennane's office?
He'd no office in Harcourt Street. When he'd come in
he'd use the board room the seldom time he'd come in.
21
Q. 655
And what about Mr. Lynn?
22
A.
Mr. Lynn had an office on the same floor as I had.
23
Q. 656
Was it close to your office?
24
A.
Next door to it.
Q. 657
So the two of you operated out of the same floor, next door offices?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 658
What about Mr. Paul Monahan?
28
A.
No, I don't think he was around much at the time.
14:32:08 25
29 14:32:19 30
If he was he was in
Somerton. Q. 659
I think Ms. Gosling has given evidence that she was in Somerton? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:32:22
14:32:27
87 1
A.
Somerton, that's right, yes.
2
Q. 660
Thank you very much, Mr. Reilly.
3
A.
Thank you.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Mr. Sanfey?
6 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. SANFEY AS FOLLOWS:
7 8 9
MR. SANFEY: Just one or two questions, Mr. Chairman.
14:32:33 10
11
Q. 661
12
Mr. Reilly, you weren't at -- well in attendance in May 1992 in relation to the vote on the Manager's proposals, isn't that right?
13
A.
No, I wasn't there, no.
14
Q. 662
So you certainly can't assist us as to Mr. Lynn's whereabouts on that day?
A.
No, no.
Q. 663
In relation to the Marren Coffey motion in November 1993.
14:32:49 15
16 17
that day I think?
18
A.
I was but not in the chamber.
19
Q. 664
Yes.
14:33:03 20
Is, what's your recollection of Mr. Lynn's movements on those, on that
date?
21
A.
I think he was in the chamber most of the day.
22
Q. 665
Is that what you would have expected?
23
A.
Oh, I would have yeah.
24 14:33:14 25
You were present on
I would have stayed in the chamber when there was a
vote on, yeah. Q. 666
In March 1993 when Mr. Dunlop was taken on board, did you have any idea at that
26
time that Mr. Dunlop's modus operandi, if I can put it that way, was to pay
27
money to councillors for votes?
28
A.
Absolutely not.
29
Q. 667
To your knowledge did anybody in Monarch have that understanding?
A.
No.
14:33:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:33:36
14:33:43
88 1
Q. 668
You are not aware of anybody in Monarch having that understanding?
2
A.
Absolutely not, no.
3
Q. 669
Thank you, Chairman.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
Could I just ask you, Mr. Reilly, in relation.
7
the extent of the briefing that you got before going off to lobby councillors
8
or talk to councillors.
9
A.
Thank you.
Do you want to ask any questions? In relation to the issue of
Uh-huh.
14:34:09 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
very little about the detail of what was being proposed or what plans Monarch
13
had in relation to the lands.
14
councillors you would want to be in a position where you could deal with
14:34:30 15
You say you knew
Presumably, when you went to talk to
queries that they would raise.
16 17
You got little or no briefing, as I understand.
I'm just wondering how you've -- how you
carried out that function without detailed briefing? A.
Yeah.
I mean, as I said earlier, for the November vote itself, what we were
18
looking for was seeking the manager's support.
19
would get Richard to deal with it.
14:35:05 20
If a councillor had a query, I
I would call Richard in and say look
there's a query on this or a query on , that you know, that ....
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
you would go to one of the councillors that you knew and say please vote for
24
whatever?
14:35:22 25
A.
Does that mean that you saw your job as merely a messenger where
That was the extent of what I did.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Without knowing much about what you were asking them to?
I was clear on what I was asking them to support the manager's position.
29 14:35:34 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, but if they turned to you and said well what is the manager's
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:35:38
14:35:56
89 1 2
position would you have been able to answer them? A.
I would have said it was four houses to the acre on septic tank.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
6
And would that be the extent of your --
That was the extent of all I needed.
I didn't have any plans or motions or
any documents with me.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
And who would tell you that, that such a motion was coming up next?
Richard Lynn.
14:36:01 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
of the council or the councillors?
13
A.
Richard Lynn.
So he would effectively point you in the direction
Correct.
14 14:36:08 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A.
Or the councillors from time to time.
That's correct, yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
and cons of a particular motion or --
14:36:19 20
A.
And did, in practice did councillors question you as to the pros
Well, I would believe that by the time I was in the lobby of the hall that
21
Richard would have met most of them and explained in detail what was -- what
22
was proposed etc.
23
I suppose describing me as the messenger, I wasn't the lead singer, if you want
24
to put it that way.
14:36:46 25
No, there was very few queries from me but, again, without
I was only assisting Richard to the extent I've already
explained.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
approach or lobby in this way to say yes, confirm yes, I'll support that or?
29 14:37:03 30
A.
But was there a tendency amongst the councillors that you would
Not necessarily. about it.
Some of them said no.
Some said that they would think
And some wouldn't give any commitment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:37:07
14:37:24
90 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
possibly in an effort to change their view?
3
A.
But you wouldn't then engage in any discussion with them about it,
Well, yeah, I wasn't -- no, I would say to them, as I recall, you know, it's
4
the manager's position.
We hope you can support it.
5
are supporting it and if you could please help.
6
canvass.
The local councillors
That was the extent of my
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
your close link to the councillors involved?
14:37:42 10
A.
And why were you brought in for that purpose? Was it because of
No.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
I mean, you weren't being brought in as an expert in any shape?
No, correct that's true. I was brought in because I was quite well known to a number of councillors in the Tallaght area.
14:37:57 15
The second thing was, I suppose,
it was a reminder to the great scheme that has made such a difference to
16
Tallaght even up to this very day. It was a catalyst for all of the
17
development.
18
said.
19
that, as I said, the show case, the Tallaght show case.
The -- Monarch were good developers, they delivered on what they
And I suppose I was almost there like as a reminder to those people of
14:38:21 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
were in effect paying money to councillors either for their support or to keep
23
them on side, so to speak?
24
A.
Did you have any sense yourself that Monarch were -- that Monarch
No, not in that sense.
14:38:42 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
You didn't think that was the?
No, absolutely not, no.
The payments were made, as we've talked about and as
28
you've seen, generally at election time or subsequent to that when they wrote
29
in for contributions to golf days or whatever other charities that they wanted
14:39:03 30
to support. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:39:03
14:39:22
91 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
level it was if Cherrywood didn't exist?
3
A.
But do you think the generosity of Monarch would have been at the
Well my experience, and all I can talk about is my experience of Monarch was.
4
I referred to it earlier, that certainly at Tallaght and it continued after
5
Tallaght, that they were very generous to the community at large.
6
that there was I believe almost 40,000 pounds donated to the Education Awards
7
in Tallaght.
8
education, it was to support them buying clothes, books or whatever else.
9
remember in Dun Laoghaire that they set up the golf show, which still -- not
14:39:46 10
I mentioned
And these were kids that although that they were getting free
the golf show, the horse show, it still runs today.
I
And by the nature of the
11
business that we're in in terms of shopping centres.
It is the focal point of
12
the community and even to today the shopping centres I manage, all they are
13
continual requests for payments from charity events etc..
14 14:40:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well charity is one thing --
Yes, yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
politicians is a slightly different category.
14:40:18 20
A.
Paying -- making contributions or paying councillors -- paying
Yes.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A.
24
No.
It's not a charity.
But today there are still requests coming in for golf classics etc. for
politicians, to this day.
14:40:29 25
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
And what about contributions at election time?
Well I haven't had an election in a couple of years. remember now just at this stage.
I'll have to think about that.
29 14:40:43 30
CHAIRMAN:
I don't -- I can't
Thank you.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:40:44
14:41:04
92 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
please.
3
you a couple of things about that document.
4
looking for.
5
about a document where there's references between April '89 and October '90.
6
That there's sums of money -- it isn't that one I'll have to look -- it should
7
be attributable to being paid.
8
--
9
A.
Yes.
Just one or two things.
I think that's the one.
Yes, it is.
It might be one prior to that.
Could I have document 8596,
Mr. Reilly, could I just ask Maybe that's not the one I'm But anyway, Mr. Quinn asked you
Do you understand? There was sums put to you
Yeah, that's right.
14:41:20 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- earlier by Mr. Quinn -A.
Yes.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:41:30 15
16
50,000 in April '89.
150,000 in April 1990 and October 1990
100,000. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
are all on the one document and they add up to 300,000.
14:41:38 20
A.
I think there's one document where there's a composite, they
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And it would appear that --
23 24
MR. QUINN: 3061.
14:41:51 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
Yes.
28
A.
Thanks Mr. Quinn. That's the one I'm looking for probably.
Do you see that document?
That's the total amount, yeah.
29 14:42:02 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, exactly.
And it's made up of the three composite amount
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:42:05
14:42:15
93 1
we've talked about.
That's headed L&C payments accounts.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 670
Do you see the very top line?
4
A.
Yes.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Do you know what that means?
I do not know and I didn't see this document until I got it from the Tribunal
8
itself.
Just for the record, I've asked my solicitor to query from that
9
figure came from.
To repeat I did not receive 300,000 Euro or 300,000 pounds.
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I just want to ask, a lot of the sums there would appear that
12
monies paid out by L&C to various suppliers, isn't that correct?
14:42:34 10
13
A.
Yes.
14 14:42:43 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And presumably most of those, there's Murrays Van Rental there
16
for example and Mondello Sports Limited and various other consultancies and
17
suppliers obviously.
18
A.
Correct, yeah.
19 14:42:59 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And I think this was in relation to Tallaght, is that correct?
Yes, L&C Properties was Tallaght, yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
most -- you will be able to give this general evidence.
14:43:13 25
26
Yes, I think Mr. Quinn mentioned that.
That most amounts
paid out by L&C Properties would be on foot of invoices. A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
All that, yeah, you needed paper to get anything.
27 28 29
And presumably
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
For actually, for sums to be paid out.
Yes.
14:43:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:43:24
14:43:33
94 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Are you surprised to see the sum of 300,000.
Absolutely.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
that you did as PR work.
6
A.
No.
Attributed to you.
That either you got that for you work
Or you got it to pay for PR work.
I can assure you --
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes, I know that.
Absolutely surprised.
14:43:42 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Are you surprised to see that attribution to you
Yes absolutely surprised.
I've asked my solicitor to get details of that.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:43:54 15
Yes.
Because this is -- we don't know and I can't say
obviously how the sums, how it comes to be described thus in this document.
16
But would you agree with me that if the books of L&C were audited by the
17
Revenue back in, back in 1993 or '94 or whatever time they might -- that they
18
would -- that you would be seen as having received 300,000 over and above.
19
And you were an employee of --
14:44:23 20
A.
Absolutely.
21 22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Who employed you exactly?
I think it was Monarch Properties Services Limited.
24 14:44:28 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Monarch Properties Services.
But wouldn't you agree with me
26
that that, if it had been audited, you are down as an employee and you were
27
paid and your tax was deducted.
28
A.
Correct.
29 14:44:41 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But it would appear that you received extra monies.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:44:44
14:44:54
95 1
A.
I have to keep repeating.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
either as a sole trader or as an independent contractor or whatever.
5
A.
They could.
Oh absolutely. Somebody could come to that conclusion that
They would be totally wrong.
The only thing I can put it down
6
to was, part of my public relations role for Tallaght, dealing with the
7
community groups etc.
8
2,00000 pounds on all of the various launches, promotions, activities within
9
that.
We would have spent approximately one and a half to
Whether that figure is put against it or not.
14:45:16 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Why would that be attributed you to you specifically?
I don't know.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:45:22 15
16
You were an employee but at that rate they could pick anybody
and just attribute that sum to. A.
Maybe I was identified in having the public relations role.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
that work, that was part of your job if you like.
14:45:46 20
21
But surely, Mr. Reilly, you are employed.
If you were doing
You were there, you were
the group manager. A.
Correct, yeah.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
were being paid for, isn't that correct?
14:45:47 25
A.
26
And you were on the ground in Tallaght and that's what you
That's correct, yeah.
And I have asked, as I said, for how that figure is
made up, through my solicitor.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Fair enough.
And please God we'll be able to get that detail.
14:45:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:45:55
14:46:05
96 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Astounded.
But you were surprised in any event?
Not surprised, astounded
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
responses there to Mr. Quinn in relation to the claim form for January 1993.
6
You said I think that you made a claim regarding three projects.
7
A.
And can I is ask you just to deal with something else in your
Yes.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:46:18 10
11
was Somerton. A.
Correct, yes.
Or referred to three projects Cherrywood, Ongar and I think it
And this was the day you were driving Ms. Ridge?
Days I think there were two days.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14:46:36 15
Did you discuss matters with her on that day, Mr. ?
Not about, no -- we were, what do you call it we were trying to find out where this guy lived or this councillor lived or what roads to take.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
And whatever.
19 14:46:41 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Presumably that sum was paid?
Oh, it was, yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
particular day, whatever day in January it was.
14:46:57 25
26
If you were able to put in an expenses claim form for that Obviously, you did so as an
employee of Monarch? A.
Monarch Properties Services, yeah.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And obviously you hadn't taken a day off to assist a friend.
No, I was working.
14:47:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:47:06
14:47:12
97 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
So you were working for Monarch
Yes, that's right, yes.
3 4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
6
Exactly.
Driving Ms. Ridge effectively.
Well I was doing it as a friend, I can assure you of that.
asked me to go out and drive her around.
Nobody
I volunteered.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
whatever it was or the petrol or whatever you were billing Monarch for,
14:47:27 10
11
Mr. Reilly. A.
Yes.
But then why bill Monarch for the costs of the lunch or
If you were doing it as a friend?
Well that was what I did.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
help a friend, isn't that correct?
14:47:38 15
A.
You didn't take a day's leave to say well I'm off today to
That's correct, yeah.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
I mean, you saw fit to bill the company.
And the company paid it.
19 14:47:44 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
Yes.
And that -- so you must have regarded it as being in
the nature of your duties for the company then. A.
Yes.
I suppose yes if you want to put it that way, yeah.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:48:02 25
26
And just one other matter.
You said the late Mr. Hand, you
didn't -- you were brought in late '92 I think you said or after the vote. A.
Well sorry, yeah, I became actively involved.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You knew about the whole, obviously the proposals.
Yeah.
14:48:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:48:14
14:48:22
98 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
liaised with Mr. Hand?
3
A.
Do you know who in Monarch dealt with Mr. Hand or talked to or
Sorry, I believe it was Richard Lynn, I believe.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Was it?
6
Fine Gael people.
The late Mr. Hand was Fine Gael.
7
A.
8
You had said earlier that you were liaising with
Sorry, Frank Dunlop said that.
I did have some Fine Gael people but I did
cover others --
9 14:48:35 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You mentioned more than Fine Gael people, in fairness to
11
yourself, including Mr. O'Connor.
12
relation to mr. Hand?
13
A.
You didn't have any interactions in
Not with Mr. Hand, no.
14 14:48:44 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thanks very much.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
me.
19
company, such as Monarch, who has, who is in the process of attempting to
14:49:04 20
Mr. Reilly, I wonder could you answer this question for
do you believe that it's a healthy practice where you have a development
rezone part of its lands, or all of its lands, to pay councillors monies during
21 22
Yes.
the process of that rezoning project? A.
Well if I can answer you personally just to clear this.
23 24 14:49:22 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
26
Yes.
I mean any of the payments that I recommended there was no ties to them whatsoever.
27 28 29
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Whether there are ties or not?
Yeah.
14:49:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:49:29
14:49:51
99 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
under going a process of, attempting to rezone its lands, pay considerable sums
3
of money to councillors even at election time when they have the power to vote
4
on whether that piece of land is rezoned or not?
5
A.
Do you think it is healthy that a development company who is
Well I suppose having gone through this I'd prefer if it wasn't done.
6 7 8
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Pardon?
I'd prefer if it wasn't done, yes.
9 14:49:58 10
JUDGE KEYS:
11 12
Well do you think it's unhealthy, do you think there's something
wrong with it or do you think it's all right? A.
13
If you have to go through a Tribunal like I have I'd prefer it wasn't done to be honest with you.
14 14:50:09 15
JUDGE KEYS:
Well, I mention that because as I understand it, when you were
16
talking to Mr. Lynn in relation to what politicians should receive donations.
17
He more or less, as I understand your evidence, said words to the effect well
18
we'll be meeting these people in the future.
19
A.
Correct, yes.
14:50:28 20
21
JUDGE KEYS:
22
have to meet these people again in the future because we're depending on their
23
votes to sway the council in voting in favour of rezoning their lands?
24
A.
Now, one can read into that enormous lengths such as that we'll
Yeah.
14:50:43 25
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
No.
But surely there's something wrong with that?
Well again, I think it's back to I don't believe.
obviously.
29 14:50:51 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Yes
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I'm saying this,
14:50:52
14:51:04
100 1
A.
That any of those payments were linked to them doing something.
All right?
2 3
JUDGE KEYS:
4
Why?
5
A.
But why would any company pay large sums of monies like that?
Well it was a tradition in the company.
Because again, going back to, I
6
suppose, shopping centres, with the nature of it being the focal point no more
7
than when my own father was in business, when it was a small pub down the
8
country, when there was a raffle on for something else --
9 14:51:23 10
11
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Well a raffle is different.
I know that.
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
I'm talking about money, cash, either by cash or cheque --
Cheque.
14:51:30 15
16
JUDGE KEYS:
17
considering whether a company who has given them that money is going to have
18
their lands rezoned which in turn will make that particular company very well
19
off.
14:51:43 20
A.
Into somebody's hand.
And they are in the process of
Well, I think it's incumbent on any company, and I'm not defending Monarch or
21
whatever, my own company, to try and get them maximum for what they are doing,
22
okay?
23 24
JUDGE KEYS:
14:51:57 25
26
Yes but it depends on how you do it. There are ways of doing it,
there is the correct way and the incorrect way. A.
My understanding, which I queried at the time was this okay from Richard Lynn.
27 28 29
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
And he said yes, these were elections expenses.
14:52:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:52:07
14:52:16
101 1 2
JUDGE KEYS: A.
And these were people we're going to be meeting again.
Correct.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
5
their vote in our favour so that we can rezone our lands and develop them
6
A.
And meeting again whether in the context of whether we can secure
I don't think he extended it to that.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
they want to meet them again if that's the case? For what purpose?
14:52:29 10
A.
11
No I know but can you give me another meaning then? Why would
Because by the nature of when you're dealing with councillors etc. you want to be able to get access to them all right?
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
14:52:46 15
Yes.
And you were supporting, I suppose, to some extent the democracy and that you -- what do you call it, made these donations.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
Monarch could have said to the Fianna Fail party we will give a lump sum to
19
headquarters for them to equally distribute the monies to the councillors
14:53:02 20
rather than the company individually paying councillors who had the actual vote
21 22
Couldn't democracy be supported in other ways for example,
in deciding that the lands were going to be rezoned or not. A.
23
Well payments were made from the records I have seen to headquarters, whatever, and what happened it I don't know after that.
24 14:53:22 25
JUDGE KEYS:
Well put it like this.
Do you think that Monarch would have
26
paid those sums of monies if they had no property in Cherrywood or in that area
27
and there was no motions going to come before the council? Do you think these
28
councillors would have been paid any monies by Monarch?
29
A.
I think some of the councillors would have been paid by Monarch.
14:53:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:53:45
14:54:04
102 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
area, the company has no development plans?
3
A.
Even though they have no business interests whatsoever in the
Well I can take it and bring it back to my '92 memo that I asked for.
There
4
was no Development Plans I'm aware of that the council were involved in at that
5
time or since.
6
that I believed that it was good to have a strong representation in the Dail to
7
try and approve Tallaght.
And those monies were paid on, at my request, on the basis
8 9
JUDGE KEYS:
14:54:20 10
11
That was in relation to yourself.
I'm talking about the company
Monarch as a whole. A.
Sorry.
12 13
JUDGE KEYS:
14
along with all of the other members of the company would have paid these sort
14:54:32 15
of monies if they had no development plans in the area and no motions were
16 17
I asked you did you believe that Monarch as a whole, Mr. Lynn,
going to come before the council? A.
Monarch paid the memo that I put through.
18 19 14:54:41 20
JUDGE KEYS: A.
21
Right.
I know that.
But Monarch paid it.
Yes, if that's the answer that you want.
At
that stage that they did that they had no activity in Tallaght at that stage.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
opening of this module there was a figure of something like half a million
14:55:00 25
Well can I put it like this.
I do take it then -- I think the
mentioned in relation to monies which were paid in contributions, call them
26
contributions.
27
irrespective of whether Monarch had any interest in building or looking for
28
rezoning in the Cherrywood area?
29 14:55:19 30
A.
Are you saying that that sum of money would have been paid
Well again I think I was an employee of the company.
I think that's something
that should be perhaps addressed to the directors of the company. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:55:22
14:55:36
103 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
of people who went out to canvass councillors.
3
views.
4
anything which may damage Monarch but it's a question which I think is very
5
pertinent.
6
A.
Yes but you are part of the company.
You were part of a group
I'm just asking you for your
You may think it's an unfair question because you don't want to say
I have come here to be very honest.
7 8 9
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
With what I believe.
14:55:40 10
11 12
JUDGE KEYS: A.
13
Yes.
If there was half a million pounds, I didn't think it was that high that was paid over.
14 14:55:46 15
16
JUDGE KEYS: A.
It's over a period of time now.
Over 12 or 14 years.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
Where Monarch had, as I understand it, had business interests, they had lands
14:55:59 20
to be rezoned.
At a time when all developments were going on in these areas.
They were involved in Tallaght and so forth.
I'm just asking
21
you, do you believe that the same sort of monies or the level of monies being
22
paid if this development wasn't being carried on by this company at all?
23
A.
24
I, I suppose I -- if you want.
Let me just think about that for a moment.
Would they have paid out the money.
14:56:22 25
26 27
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
I don't know I suppose is my answer.
If you want a personal opinion on the
28
future, which I suppose this whole Tribunal, it's better if no monies were paid
29
by any organisation, whether a developer or whatever, to a political party.
14:56:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:56:39
14:56:59
104 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
it's a matter of -- we'll have to think about in more detail.
3
that's why I asked you.
4
you have a business interest like a motion pending before a council, that that
5
particular company should depart money to politicians who have the power to say
6
you will succeed or you will not succeed? That's the point I'm making. It
7
goes back to --
8
A.
9
Well perhaps at a time when you may be correct, I don't know, But perhaps
Is it fair or sorry -- is it proper really that when
Well I suppose having looked back on the last ten years it's preferable if they didn't do that.
14:57:17 10
11
JUDGE KEYS:
12
of view of democracy and the public perception that people would have a
13
perception of politicians.
14 14:57:30 15
A.
Do you agree then it's an unhealthy point of view from the point
Well people's perception is certainly it's not healthy. with the Monarch people.
From my experience
I always found them to be honest, straight forward
16
people.
Any of the payments that were made, were made, what do you call it
17
the cheques were made payable to the councillors or to the parties themselves.
18
And they were straight forward.
19 14:57:46 20
JUDGE KEYS:
Yes.
Thank you very much.
21 22
MR. SANFEY: Judge, just before we finish.
23
when you were speaking to Mr. O'Reilly.
24
pounds paid as political contributions referred to in the opening. I wonder if
14:58:01 25
There was just one point you made
I think you referred to a sum of 500
I could just clarify that by reading from Ms. Dillon's opening statement.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
million pounds for political contributions.
29
statement was looking at all of the figures that were the subject matter of
14:58:17 30
I think it was under inquiry.
It wasn't suggested that half a
What I said in the opening
inquiry in this module, they amounted to 510,000 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:58:21
14:58:27
105 1
JUDGE KEYS:
I just called them contributions.
2 3
MR. SANFEY: If we could just clarify --
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
6 7
MR. SANFEY: -- that they were political contributions.
8
point out that Ms. Dillon just before breaking down that 500,000 pounds also
9
said it's not being suggesting that the full sum of 508,000 pounds amount to
14:58:40 10
11
And if I may also
corrupt payments but rather by reason of the matters that are set out in this opening they have become the subject of inquiry.
12 13
So subject to that clarification.
14 14:58:48 15
JUDGE KEYS:
I'm not stating whether the 500,000 pounds.
I don't want it to
16
be interpreted by anybody that they were corrupt payments.
17
that a sum of money was paid out in certain circumstances.
18
witness whether in fact it was healthy bearing in mind that the people
19
receiving the monies had in fact had the power to decide whether the company
14:59:10 20
I'm just saying I just asked the
benefits or not from their vote.
21 22
MR. SANFEY: Yes, I suppose Judge, the point I wanted to clarify is that I
23
don't think it ever has been suggested that the 500,000 pounds all went to
24
politicians.
14:59:19 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
Fair enough.
That clarifies the matter.
28
MS. DILLON:
Just to be absolutely clear about it.
29
There are a number of those payments that, withdrawals and payments cheques
27
14:59:29 30
drawn on the books of Monarch where it is not known who the payee was. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
14:59:36
14:59:53
106 1
it's not to say that they're not political payments.
The situation is that
2
the payee or the recipient of the monies is not yet known but may become known.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
Well that clarifies the matter.
5 6
MR. QUINN: Sir, there was just one matter arising out of Mr. Reilly's answer
7
to Judge keys.
8 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:59:54 10
11
Q. 671
12
I think, Mr. Reilly, you referred if I could have 3910 to your payments in November '92, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 672
And I think you said that they had nothing to do with the Cherrywood project.
15:00:06 15
16
Isn't that right? A.
17 18
Tallaght. Q. 673
19 15:00:17 20
Sorry, I said that they were for, as far as I was concerned they were for
You may not know this but the evidence I think will show that they were assigned to the Cherrywood project?
A.
Were they, yeah, sorry.
I didn't know that, sorry.
Okay.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
24 15:00:23 25
CHAIRMAN:
Is that the?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
That's the conclusion of the witnesses for today.
28 29 15:00:30 30
There are two witnesses for tomorrow morning, commencing at half ten. it's anticipated that they will both conclude before lunchtime tomorrow. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
15:00:34
15:08:53
107 1 2
CHAIRMAN: All right.
Thank you.
Half ten.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Thank you.
5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:11:54
10:33:44
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
23RD JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Colm McGrath, please.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning.
7 8
MR. COLM McGRATH HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
9
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
10:34:16 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. McGrath.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. McGrath.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 2
Mr. McGrath, you were a member of Dublin County Council I think from 1985 until
13 14 10:34:21 15
16 17
December 1993 and thereafter I think you became a member of South Dublin County
18
Council, isn't that right?
19 10:34:31 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 3
You had been first elected I think in June 1985 is that correct? You had been
21
reelected in the June 1991?
22
A.
Yes, I think we've established all of that already.
23
Q. 4
Yes.
24
And you were written to I think in November 2000 by the Tribunal and you
were advised -- if we could have 1482, please -- that the Tribunal were
10:34:53 25
investigating certain allegations being made.
Isn't that correct?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 5
And in particular, that since 1990 you had directly or indirectly received on a
28
number of occasions monies from Mr. Dunlop in connection with certain rezoning
29
projects, isn't that correct?
10:35:10 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:35:11
10:35:33
2 1
Q. 6
And you responded to that letter.
If we could have 1485, please.
On the
2
14th of December 2000.
And in that letter you advised the Tribunal that you'd
3
received unconditional political donations from Monarch Properties amongst
4
others, donations typically 500 pounds by way of cheque and lodged to your bank
5
account, isn't that correct?
6
A.
Um, yeah.
7
Q. 7
And you say that "Monarch Properties and/or Richard Lynn supported my
8
fundraising and unconditional cheque donations were lodged to my bank account."
9 10:35:43 10
11
Isn't that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 8
I think earlier this year you were written to in the context of lands at
12
Cherrywood.
13
pages 1493 and 1494 of the brief.
14
April 2006.
10:36:01 15
That's a letter of the 14th of March, 2006.
And you responded I think on the 18th of
And I think you advised the Tribunal that you'd been lobbied by
Mr. Lynn on several occasions and you recall contact with Mr. Philip Reilly and
16
Mr. Richard Lynn.
Is that correct?
17
A.
That's not up but I remember that, yes, yeah.
18
Q. 9
Yes.
19 10:36:21 20
21
Which is at both
And you said that you could not recall any contact from Mr. Philip
Monahan, Eddie Sweeney or Dominic Glennane, is that correct? A.
Yes, that's correct.
Q. 10
And I think you said that you never received any payment from anybody in
22
relation to the Cherrywood lands?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 11
You said Monarch Properties, Richard Lynn, Glenroy Properties Limited, Frank
10:36:29 25
Dunlop & Associates supported your fundraising on various occasions, is that
26
correct?
27
A.
Yes, yeah.
28
Q. 12
And then you referred cheques you said from fundraising events would have been
29 10:36:42 30
lodged to your bank account and you gave your bank account details. A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:36:42
10:36:51
3 1
Q. 13
2
Now, just in relation to these lands.
You were elected I think for the Lucan
ward, is that right? For south --
3
A.
Clondalkin.
4
Q. 14
Clondalkin.
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 15
The lands in Cherrywood would not, you wouldn't have been the local councillor
7
for the lands in Cherrywood, isn't that right?
8
A.
No, no.
9
Q. 16
But you recall, I take it, being in attendance in late 1990 at a series of
10:37:04 10
special meetings of the council to review the Development Plan.
And you may
11
or may not recall the manager proposing certain proposals for development of
12
lands including the Cherrywood lands.
13
which is referred to as DP90/123 which would have included the Cherrywood area.
14
Do you recall that?
10:37:28 15
16
A.
Vaguely, yes.
Q. 17
Yes.
17
If we could have 6397.
This is a map
I think the records of the meetings, the special meetings show you in
attendance?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 18
I think the Cherrywood lands or the Monarch lands are to be seen on the bottom
10:37:39 20
right hand corner of that map.
21
that right?
22
A.
Yes, I was there I'm sure, yeah.
23
Q. 19
Yes.
24 10:37:55 25
26
You would have attended those meeting, isn't
If we have 6930 I think it shows you being in attendance on the 18th of
October 1990. A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 20
And again on the 16th of November 1990, at 6945, you are again recorded as
27
having been in attendance.
And then I think the matter came on by way of a
28
motion on the 6th of December 1990.
29
recorded as having been in attendance.
If I could have 6952.
10:38:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Again, you are
10:38:14
10:38:32
4 1
Just before I get to that meeting on the 6th of December 1990.
2
been given to the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath, by Mr. Fergal McCabe, who is a well
3
known planner, who had been retained by the Monarch interest.
4
Mr. McCabe?
5
A.
Not personally no.
6
Q. 21
Did you ever meet Mr. McCabe?
7
A.
I think I met him in the recent past but not around that time.
8
Q. 22
Yes.
9
Evidence has
Did you know
And it was Mr. McCabe's recollection that he had a meeting with three
councillors on the eve of this meeting on the 5th, 6th of September 1990.
10:38:50 10
If
I could have day 650, please, page 111.
11 12
Mr. McCabe had an involvement at that time with the council of Irish Planning
13
Institute and had been requested to attend a meeting with a number of
14
councillors.
10:39:18 15
And he identified two of those councillors as being Deputy Liam
Lawlor, who would in 1990 have been a member of Dublin County Council, yourself
16
and possibly Councillor GV Wright.
17
Buswells Hotel.
A meeting which may have taken place in
Do you have any recollection of any such meeting?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 23
Could such a meeting have taken place?
A.
Well ...
21
Q. 24
And you would have forgotten about?
22
A.
I think you know the answer to that yourself now.
23
Q. 25
Yeah.
24
A.
Let's not be silly now.
Q. 26
Sorry, Mr.--
10:39:39 20
10:39:47 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
be certain what your evidence is.
29
A.
Mr. McGrath, that is not silly.
You are being asked.
You're being asked --
I'm being asked a hypothetical question, Chairman.
10:39:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
We have to
10:39:58
10:40:13
5 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
not a silly question and a response like that is not called for.
3
A.
No. You are being asked -- then you can give an answer.
But it's
Well, I mean, a lot of what's being put to me before we even get into the
4
questioning is already established fact.
I have no recollection.
I have
5
already said I have no recollection of having a meeting with Mr. Fergal McCabe.
6
So why is not just then left like that?
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
may not have met him.
10:40:31 10
A.
Because the answer then could have been I'm absolutely certain I Or I could have met him but I cannot recall.
Chairman, with respect there's only one answer to the last question put to me.
11
I think the question was is it possible that such a meeting could have taken
12
place?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah.
10:40:38 15
16 17
MR. QUINN: And you could have forgotten about it. A.
You couldn't say no to that.
Of course it's possible.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
10:40:46 20
21
You could have said I wasn't there at the time.
I wasn't in
Dublin. A.
I can't be sure of that.
I can't remember whether I was there or not.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
10:40:58 25
If that's your attitude --
That's not an attitude.
If you are trying to establish facts on the basis of
hypothetical questions that's not a very good way of going forward.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
It's not a hypothetical question.
28
A.
Well I think it is anyway. Maybe we should move on.
29
Q. 27
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, just on that before we do move on, maybe if I put the
10:41:09 30
meeting in context for you.
Do you recall any level of irritation amongst
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:41:14
10:41:29
6 1
councillors in late 1990 in relation to the contacts between the officials and
2
the councillors concerning the Cherrywood lands?
3
A.
No, I don't recall any irritation.
4
Q. 28
Sorry.
5
A.
I don't recall any irritation.
6
Q. 29
Yes.
7 8
Do you recall any discussion amongst councillors in relation to the
views of the Irish Planning Institute in relation to rezonings at that time? A.
9
Not specifically, no.
I recall that there was a wide ranging debate about the
Cherrywood lands with various different opinions being expressed from all
10:41:54 10
quarters.
I -- if there were differences of opinions as between the elected
11
members and the council management, well that would not be uncommon.
12
that was very common.
13
respect for each other's opinions I'd say.
14
Q. 30
10:42:18 15
Yes.
It didn't cause irritation.
In fact,
It was just a mutual
Do you ever recall, for example, discussing with Deputy Lawlor or your
colleague, Mr. Wright, the prospect of meeting with members of the Irish
16
Planning Institute to discuss if there were any common grounds between you as
17
councillors and them in relation to the review of the Development Plan?
18
A.
19 10:42:39 20
No, not specifically, no.
Although I do recall attending several of the Irish
Planning Institute's conference over the years. Q. 31
Yes.
21
A.
And I might have expressed opinions at that.
22
Q. 32
Yes.
If we could just have perhaps 3068, please.
23
McCabe to Mr. Sweeney.
24
Mr. McCabe had been retained by Monarch.
10:43:06 25
And Mr. McCabe is reporting back to You
will have seen that letter in the brief, Mr. McGrath.
27
A.
I may have all right.
28
Q. 33
Yes.
10:43:30 30
Mr. Sweeney was involved on behalf of Monarch and
Mr. Sweeney in relation to the meeting he had had the previous night.
26
29
This is a letter from Mr.
When asked about that letter Mr. McCabe said that he was a member of the
council of the Irish Planning Institute, which was a body which represented professional planners.
And during the period, they were quite disturbed that
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:43:45
10:43:58
7 1
planning developments in the Dublin area.
And in relation in particular to
2
the rezoning of land use in north County Dublin.
3
by Deputy Lawlor to a meeting to see if there was any common ground between the
4
parties.
5
Councillor Lawlor, who attended that meeting.
6
in your recollection of whether or not such a meeting took place?
And that he had been invited
And he identified you as one of three councillors, including Does that in any way assist you
7
A.
No, it doesn't.
8
Q. 34
And you have no recollection of discussing the views of the Irish Planning
9 10:44:18 10
11
Institute with Deputy Lawlor or Deputy Wright? A.
No, no recollection whatsoever.
Q. 35
And it was Mr. McCabe's view was expressed in that letter.
And arising from
12
that meeting that there was a degree of irritation by those present at the
13
meeting because of the lack of consultation in relation to the Cherrywood site
14
between the planners and the councillors.
10:44:39 15
16
Again, does that in any way assist you in relation to your recollection? A.
No, it doesn't but it doesn't surprise me either though because I'm surprised
17
that Mr. McCabe didn't know the way the system worked.
18
draft plan without the elected members input and that was then presented to the
19
members for their input and comments and observations.
10:45:02 20
The manager produced a
So maybe it was at the
stage of the manager's draft preparation that Mr. McCabe observed what goes on.
21
And he probably didn't take into account that the members did have quite a
22
substantial input into the preparation of the plan following on from the
23
manager's draft preparations.
24
Q. 36
10:45:25 25
No.
Mr. McCabe was quite specific.
And as appears from that contemporaneous
letter of the 6th of December, Mr. McGrath --
26
A.
Yeah, I'm reading it here.
27
Q. 37
-- that in fact his view was that there was a degree of irritation because
28
there hadn't been adequate consultation between the planners and the
29
councillors in advance of the publication of that draft, which I had on the
10:45:42 30
screen a moment ago, that is DP90/123. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:45:46
10:45:58
8 1
A.
All right.
2
Q. 38
Yeah.
3
A.
I would put that a little bit lower than a view.
4 5
His actual words were that was the impression he got.
I don't think that he'd
actually formed a view on it he just got an impression. Q. 39
6
You are interpreting what he said from that letter.
I'm putting to you what
he said in evidence, Mr. McGrath.
7
A.
Okay, well I'm not aware of what he said in evidence.
8
Q. 40
Yeah. It's to that extent I'm putting it to you.
9
A.
All right.
Q. 41
So you say no such meeting took place and if such a meeting took place it's
10:46:10 10
11
unlikely you would have been at it?
12
A.
I cannot recall being at any meeting with Fergal McCabe.
13
Q. 42
You have no recollection of any discussion between yourself, Mr. Lawlor and
14
Mr. Wright either in relation to the publication of the draft plan or the
10:46:25 15
prospect of having a meeting with the representatives of the Irish Planning
16
Institute?
17
A.
No. Not in relation to Cherrywood, I have no specific --
18
Q. 43
Well no, I'm not saying that the meeting was called in the context of
19
Cherrywood, although Cherrywood was raised in the course of the meeting, do you
10:46:41 20
understand? It was a general meeting in relation to the views of the Irish
21 22
Planning Institute at that time? A.
Well I would have probably discussed the general Development Plan on several
23
occasions with Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Wright in the course of the general adoption
24
of the Development Plan.
10:47:05 25
26 27
But I can't recall that specific meeting or whatever
it's being referred to there. Q. 44
Well can you recall the special meeting of the council on the 6th of December 1990? If I could have 6952 again, please.
28 29 10:47:20 30
This is a meeting which dealt with the Carrickmines area and in particular dealt with the motion tabled by Councillors McDonald and Coffey. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
If I could
10:47:25
10:47:46
9 1
have 6953, please.
Councillors McDonald and Coffey had tabled a motion that
2
the draft development for the 1990 for the Carrickmines Valley area be prepared
3
on the basis of limiting zoning development to the eastern side of the
4
Southeastern Motorway proposed line and taking cognisance of developments
5
approved for the area -- if we look at 6954 -- adoption of the 1983 plan and in
6
doing this, significantly reduced the number of areas proposed for industrial
7
zoning and indicate where public open space/parks could be provided and
8
indicate the nature of residential zoning for proposed industrial lands.
9 10:48:01 10
That was a proposal or motion put forwards by Councillors McDonald and Coffey.
11 12
I think -- do you recall that motion coming on? A.
13 14
Not specifically but I mean it's there and I was there. it?
Q. 45
10:48:23 15
Well you voted -- first of all, you voted against a proposed amendment as we see there.
And then in relation to the vote -- that proposed amendment was
16
unsuccessful.
17
actual motion itself?
And if we look at 6955 we see that you voted in favour of the
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 46
Do you recall that vote?
A.
I don't but obviously I did.
Q. 47
Yeah.
10:48:30 20
21 22
Okay.
That would have effectively limited development to the line on the
proposed Southeastern motorway, isn't that right? Do you recall?
23
A.
Presumably so, yes.
24
Q. 48
And that was your proposal at the time.
10:48:53 25
And did I vote for
could have 7003.
If that's what the motion said. Then on the 25th of May 1991.
If I
There was a further meeting or special meeting of the
26
council in relation to the Development Plan.
27
put forward three proposals.
28
that there would be one of three options put forward for the Draft Development
29
Plan 1991.
10:49:22 30
And at that meeting the manager
If I could have 7006.
And he was proposing
And the first option was a drawing DP90A/129A.
against that proposal.
Do you recall that vote?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
And you voted
10:49:24
10:49:35
10 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 49
You don't recall that vote? You don't recall that meeting or you that vote?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 50
I see.
5
A.
-- but I'll accept what's in the minutes, you know what I mean.
6
Q. 51
I see. Do you recall anything about the can lands in Cherrywood, Mr. McGrath?
7
A.
Oh, I do I recall that I would have supported their development.
8
Q. 52
Yes.
9
A.
The development of the Cherrywood lands.
Q. 53
Yes.
10:49:51 10
I don't recall any of these meetings --
You would have supported the Monarch development?
When I'm referring to the Cherrywood lands now I'm referring in the
11
context of Monarch Properties.
When you're referring to the Cherrywood lands
12
are you referring to the lands at Cherrywood including the Monarch lands?
13
A.
I would be, yes.
14
Q. 54
Yeah.
A.
I wouldn't be attaching any significance to the ownership.
Q. 55
I see.
10:50:05 15
16 17
Well the matter came back before the council I think in May 1992.
you recall the matter coming back before the council in May '92.
18
A.
No but if you remind me I'm sure I will.
19
Q. 56
Yes.
10:50:28 20
On the 13th of May '92, the manager If I could have 7203, please.
Do you recall this map being debated and being voted upon? A.
23 24
If I could have 7193, please.
presented his report, which was map DP90/44.
21 22
Do
Not specifically but I mean, I have no no doubt that that was the map presented.
Q. 57
10:50:57 25
If I could have 7144, please.
This is a motion in the name of Councillors
Lydon and Hand which had been signed, received by the council on the 4th of May
26
'92.
And would have come on in the normal way for review on the 25th of May
27
'92.
Do you recall that motion or receiving that motion?
28
A.
29 10:51:21 30
Not specifically.
I don't specifically recall any motion.
the agenda I would have -Q. 58
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But if it was on
10:51:22
10:51:35
11 1
A.
-- deliberated over it I'm sure.
2
Q. 59
Yes. Do you recall any meetings in Conways where the Fianna Fail grouping
3
would discuss upcoming matters in the council agenda?
4
A.
Yes, we had regular meeting in Conways.
5
Q. 60
Do you recall any meeting in which this proposed motion was discussed?
6
A.
Not specifically but it would have been discussed I'm sure. Yes.
7
Q. 61
I think Councillor Lydon would have been a member of your party at this time,
8 9 10:51:47 10
11
is that right? A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 62
And do you recall discussing the motion with Councillor Lydon?
A.
I don't recall discussing it with him but I'm sure I would have discussed it
12 13
with him because it was in his area. Q. 63
14
Yes, yeah. 1992.
10:52:12 15
At that meeting on the 25th, I said in fact it's the 27th of May
If I could have 7207, please.
The manager's proposal at DP92/44 was
proposed by Councillor Lydon and yourself, Mr. McGrath.
And I'm just
16
wondering if you can assist the Tribunal on how you came to second that
17
proposal on that date.
18
A.
It could have been for a variety of reasons.
19
Q. 64
Well can you give the actual reason in the first instance Mr. McGrath?
A.
Well I can't specifically give you the actual reason.
21
Q. 65
Why not?
22
A.
I would have -- I'll try and explain to you now.
23
Q. 66
That's what I'm asking you.
24
A.
One reason could have been which was very often --
Q. 67
I don't want a hypothetical reasons, Mr. McGrath. I'm anxious that you can,
10:52:29 20
10:52:41 25
26
give the precise reason and how you supported and seconded that motion?
27
A.
Well I'll try and recall why I did that.
28
Q. 68
Please.
29
A.
Let me see now.
10:53:02 30
Perhaps I was sitting beside Councillor Lydon at the time.
And to put the motion on the floor I may have seconded it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But more than
10:53:07
10:53:25
12 1
likely, the more than likely answer is that I supported the thrust of the
2
motion and I was happy to second it.
3
Q. 69
Yes.
So the Tribunal has the option of accepting either the fact that you
4
happened to be located beside Councillor Lydon on the day or alternatively you
5
supported the proposal?
6
A.
No, I think what I'm trying to say to you and it's not hypothetical.
Is that
7
very often in the cauldron that was Dublin County Council at the time.
8
colleague had a motion before the floor and was proposing a motion, courtesy
9
alone was enough reason -- enough to second somebody's motion.
10:53:44 10
without a seconder a motion doesn't fly and it falls.
If a
Because
So common courtesy some
11
times just was the reason why some people seconded motions.
12
the floor for debate and then to be dealt with by the council.
13
necessarily have been no motive or no reason behind some times seconding a
14
motion.
10:54:08 15
16
To get them on
So there may
But I would be fairly confident in that case I was happy to second
that motion because I supported it. Q. 70
If we could have 7144, please.
This is the actual motion that Councillor
17
Lydon was proposing for the meeting, Mr. McGrath.
18
that motion, that was Councillor Hand.
19
Hand was present on the occasion.
10:54:29 20
And he had a seconder for
And we can see at 7205 that Councillor
We can see also that Councillor Hand voted
in favour of the motion I had on the screen a moment ago.
So Councillor Lydon
21
already had a seconder for his own motion and we know that the seconder voted
22
in favour of the proposal that you seconded?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 71
So would you agree with me that it's unlikely that Councillor Lydon would have
10:54:46 25
been deprived of a seconder? Could we have 7207, please.
26
A.
Mr. Hand may not have been in the room.
27
Q. 72
Well he voted on the motion?
28
A.
But he may not have been in the room when it was proposed.
29
Q. 73
He spoke in favour of it, Mr. McGrath.
10:55:11 30
Do you see 7207? It says "Following
discussions to which Councillors Lydon, Hand and others contributed the manager Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:55:16
10:55:25
13 1
replied to queries raised."
2
A.
I see that, yeah.
3
Q. 74
And do you also see the motion -- and underneath the motion those councillors
4
that voted in favour of it?
5
A.
I do see that.
6
Q. 75
And do you see Councillor Hand's name there as having spoken in favour of it?
7
A.
I see that, yeah but that doesn't change the fact that he may not have been in
8 9
the room when the motion was proposed. Q. 76
10:55:42 10
11
So you think that you came to second this motion because Councillor Hand may not have been present in the room even though he spoke in favour of the motion?
A.
12
I came to second the motion because -- well I mean it's a question that you have to ask Mr. Hand but --
13
Q. 77
Now, Mr. McGrath.
14
A.
I beg your pardon, sorry.
10:55:59 15
have been in the room.
16
That's slipped my memory.
If, Mr. Hand may not
So if there's a pregnant pause between the proposing
of a motion and a seconding, well then somebody has to second it.
17
Q. 78
Yes.
18
A.
And if I support the motion, second it.
19
Q. 79
You were there, Mr. McGrath, isn't that right? And you are now here and you're
10:56:14 20
assisting the Tribunal.
And I'm asking you what transpired and how you came
21
to second the motion, isn't that correct? And what you're telling the Tribunal
22
is that they should ask the deceased Mr. Hand.
23
A.
24
No, I withdrew that now and I apologised for it so I don't know why you're pursuing that line of questioning.
10:56:33 25
are you trying to get at here.
Also -- you see, maybe if you explain what
I don't understand your thinking on this.
26
Q. 80
I have no thinking.
27
A.
I seconded a motion which I support and voted for and consistently voted for.
28
Q. 81
I'm just asking you, Mr. McGrath, to explain how you came to second the motion.
29 10:56:50 30
There was already a motion by Councillor Lydon and Councillor Hand. A.
But Mr. Hand didn't second it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:56:52
10:56:57
14 1
Q. 82
2
He didn't second this proposal, even though he has voted in favour of it, isn't that right?
3
A.
Is it Mr. Quinn is it?
4
Q. 83
Yes, Mr. McGrath.
5
A.
Mr. Quinn, a motion, irrespective of whether it's written down and signed it
6
still has to be proposed on the floor of the meeting to get it, to give
7
ownership to the meeting of the motion.
8
seconded. Now --
9 10:57:14 10
And it has to be proposed and
Q. 84
This --
A.
I'm suggesting to you and I think it's unreasonable of you not to accept my
11
proposal, that Mr. Hand may have been out of the room when Mr. Lydon proposed
12
the motion.
13
council meeting.
14
Q. 85
10:57:34 15
So I seconded the motion to give it flight on the floor of the
In any event, the motion was unsuccessful, isn't that right? And Mr. Lydon withdrew his motion as did Councillor Hand.
16
Do you recall that meeting,
Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Not specifically, no.
18
Q. 86
Can I just ask you, by May 1992 had any body from Monarch asked for your
19 10:57:53 20
support for their proposals? A.
21 22
I would have discussed it with, I'm sure, yes, various representatives from Monarch.
Q. 87
23 24
Not in detail, no.
Well could you identify for the Tribunal the representatives that you might have discussed it with?
A.
I definitely recall discussing it with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
Q. 88
How did you know Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
I came to know him through his, his regular attendance at council meetings.
27
Q. 89
I take it that Mr. Lynn would have been in attendance seeking support for
10:58:08 25
28 29 10:58:23 30
various of the Monarch proposals? A.
He was, yes.
Q. 90
I think one of those was the Cherrywood site and another may have been Somerton Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:58:27
10:58:36
15 1
or Ongar Stud, is that right?
2
A.
Ongar.
3
Q. 91
Yes.
4
A.
However, he was there.
5
Q. 92
Yes.
6
A.
As were others, as you know.
7
Q. 93
What about Mr. Reilly?
8
A.
Um, well Mr. Reilly, I'm not sure how I came to meet Mr. Reilly, in similar
9 10:58:47 10
I don't recall that, no, no.
He was omnipresent, as they say.
circumstances I would say. Q. 94
Had you met Mr. Reilly by May '92?
11
A.
I may have met him in the context of The Square in Tallaght.
12
Q. 95
Yes.
13
A.
Yes, at various ceremonies, opening ceremonies or whatever.
14
Q. 96
I'm just wondering would you have seen Mr. Reilly at council meetings up to May
10:59:06 15
That would have been back in 1990 I think?
1992 or did his attendance become more prominent after 1992?
16
A.
Oh, it's very difficult to say.
17
Q. 97
Yes.
18
A.
But, I mean, he was in attendance at some council meetings and I would have met
19 10:59:19 20
him at an odd one, as they say. Q. 98
Now, we do know that you met Mr. Lynn in early '93, isn't that right? If we
21
could have 4038.
22
week ending the 26th of February '93.
23
of expenses and one of them, second last one you will see Draft Development
24
Plan McGrath et al.
10:59:53 25
Limited.
This is an expense claim form submitted by Mr. Lynn for the And he has there identified as a series
You see that? In connection with the Cherrywood Property
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in February of 1993?
26
A.
No, I don't recall it, no.
27
Q. 99
If you did meet Mr. Lynn in February 1993 in connection with the Cherrywood
28 29 11:00:10 30
Properties Limited what would it have been in connection with? A.
If I did meet him?
Q. 100
Yeah.
What would you have been discussing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:00:13
11:00:22
16 1
A.
In relation to the Cherrywood Properties?
2
Q. 101
Yes.
3
A.
I presume we would have been discussing the proposed -- the proposals for those
4 5
lands. Q. 102
6
Yes.
Were you very much in support of the development in those lands
Mr. McGrath?
7
A.
I was, yes.
8
Q. 103
Now, Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that in early March 1993 he became -- he
9
was retained by the Monarch interest in relation to the lands and that
11:00:41 10
subsequently he had a discussion with you after he was retained.
11
You'll have
seen that in the brief?
12
A.
Yeah, I saw some of it.
13
Q. 104
And heard some the parties evidence in relation to it?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 105
You I think had some telephone attendance with Mr. Dunlop on the 9th of March
11:00:53 15
16
1993, if we could have 4046.
17
in March 1993?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 106
Yes.
A.
Most likely Quarryvale.
Q. 107
Yes.
11:01:11 20
21
I've no idea.
Do you recall why you were contacting Mr. Dunlop
It could have been for several reasons.
Now, in relation to Cherrywood.
Do you recall first hearing that Mr.
22
Dunlop had been taken on board by the Quarryvale team -- sorry the Cherrywood
23
team?
24
A.
No, I didn't hear he'd been taken on board, no.
Q. 108
Did you know that at some stage he was on board?
26
A.
No, it wasn't clear to me for quite some time that he was on board no.
27
Q. 109
When did it become clear to you that he was on board?
28
A.
It didn't become clear to me at any stage that he was on board.
29
Q. 110
I see.
A.
But he seemed to be --
11:01:30 25
11:01:45 30
So --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:01:47
11:01:57
17 1
Q. 111
Did you know that he was ever on board?
2
A.
He seemed to be hovering on the wings of it, he seemed to be hovering on the
3 4
background. Q. 112
5
So is it your evidence to the Tribunal that you never knew Mr. Dunlop was involved in the Cherrywood proposals?
6
A.
No, it wasn't clear to me that he was involved.
7
Q. 113
But in your statement I think you have said that he discussed it with it with
8 9
you, isn't that right? A.
11:02:15 10
11
Well sure we would have discussed what was going on on the day, any day, with anybody.
Q. 114
12
Just to put, to be fair to you.
You say "I discussed a proposal with Frank
Dunlop at least once."
13
A.
Yeah, I probably did, yeah.
14
Q. 115
So are you saying that your discussion with Mr. Dunlop in relation to
11:02:27 15
Cherrywood was in the context of a general discussion?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 116
And not in the context of a discussion between you, a councillor, and Mr.
18 19 11:02:43 20
21
Dunlop, a lobbiest, who had been retained by the Monarch interest? A.
No, that's a good way of putting it, yeah.
Q. 117
Yeah.
A.
My recollection is discussing it with him but I don't remember it being on a
22
specific mano mano basis vis-a-vis Cherrywood.
23
remember just discussing it with him all right.
24
Q. 118
11:03:01 25
Him coming lobbying me.
Yes. Now, Mr. Dunlop has said in evidence, Mr. McGrath, that shortly after he was appointed that he had a conversation with you and that he -- he felt that
26
you already knew that he had been taken on board.
What do you say to that?
27
A.
What do you want me to say? I've just said I didn't know he was on board.
28
Q. 119
He said you seemed to be quite happy with that.
29 11:03:30 30
I
That is to say that you were
quite happy with the fact that he was now on board? A.
Uh-huh.
Are you asking me a question? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:03:32
11:03:41
18 1
Q. 120
Yes.
2
A.
Go ahead.
3
Q. 121
I'm asking you to comment on Mr. Dunlop's evidence because I'm putting to you
4
what Mr. Dunlop has said, Mr. McGrath.
5
comment on it, do you understand?
Just to give you an opportunity to
6
A.
I really have nothing to say to that, I mean it's --
7
Q. 122
Okay.
8
A.
Honest to God.
9
Q. 123
He goes on to say that "He had a suspicion that you already knew that he was on
11:03:51 10
board."
11
A.
A suspicion.
Why would he use the word suspicion?
12
Q. 124
Yeah. Now, you had had a meeting with Mr. Lynn on I think the 26th of March as
13
we saw a moment ago.
14
26th of February I should have said.
11:04:08 15
And Mr. Dunlop dates his appointment to early -- sorry And Mr. Dunlop dates his appointment to
early March which would be about a week later.
Did you discuss the possible
16
involvement of Mr. Dunlop with the site with Mr. Lynn when you met him on the
17
26th of February '93, can you recall?
18
A.
No, I wouldn't have, no.
19
Q. 125
Mr. Dunlop said that he knew from his discussions with Mr. Richard Lynn that
11:04:28 20
you had already been lobbied in relation to the proposal?
21
A.
No comment.
22
Q. 126
He said that there was a relationship there in the sense of lobbying.
23
to say a relationship there between you and Mr. Lynn.
24
evidence that you had been lobbied by Mr. Lynn, isn't that right?
11:04:49 25
That is
I think you've given
A.
I was lobbied by Mr. Lynn, yes.
26
Q. 127
So he could be correct in that assertion?
27
A.
Well I would be very, very slow to attach correctness to anything Mr. Dunlop
28
says to be honest with you.
29
really, you know, Mr. Dunlop -- ah go on anyway, I don't where this is going!
11:05:08 30
Q. 128
But the point is, I don't see where this is going
I don't want to interrupt anything you want to say that might be of assistance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:05:12
11:05:25
19 1 2
to the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath. A.
3
But is there something you do want to say?
No, I've nothing to say about those. frivolous.
I find them very trivial and very
Can we get down to the --
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. McGrath, what do you find trivial and frivolous?
Well going back to some of the previous questions, Chairman.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
What previous question as soon as --
What difference does it make whether I'm happy or not about --
11:05:39 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13
We're not asking you to say whether you are happy or not.
Chairman, can I suggest to you, the questions are sort of being put in such a way that it almost makes one seem to be uncooperative because they are --
14 11:05:51 15
CHAIRMAN:
No, no. This is a similar line of questioning that is adopted with
16
everyone or with most witnesses.
17
Tribunal, one of our tasks is to determine the extent to which Mr. Dunlop may
18
or may not be telling the truth to the Tribunal and other witnesses.
19
of evidence or statements of evidence made by Mr. Dunlop that relate to you or
11:06:16 20
21
Things that Mr. Dunlop have said to the
So items
that might be relevant to you, to your position, are quite properly put to you. A.
Yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
that particular statement is a truthful statement.
11:06:32 25
But it's quite correct
that you be given the opportunity to comment on what Mr. Dunlop has said.
26 27
So that you can -- it doesn't mean that Mr. Quinn believes that
you can disagree or agree with it or .... A.
Okay.
28 29 11:06:53 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Or say --
In response to that, Chairman, can I just say this. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
If Mr. Quinn asks me a
And
11:06:53
11:07:07
20 1
question which involves details of something that happened whatever it is, 15
2
years ago at a meeting and I honestly tell him that I cannot specifically
3
recall and you know and thankfully with prompting from the screen and all of
4
the paperwork you have, some times it jogs your memory.
5
details in relation to questions, around something that I do recall attending
6
and being involved to the extent that I was there and involved in debate and
7
that.
8
sentence involving seven words that's supposed to have been said to me 15 years
9
ago by a individual and I say no or I say -- and he wants me to comment.
11:07:30 10
If I can't give him
And then he comes along and asks me a question about do I recall a
All
I'm saying is how does he expect me to remember whether or not Frank Dunlop
11
said something to me 15 years ago, when I can't remember something that I was
12
involved in and had lots of paperwork to back it up and loads prompting and
13
loads of reminders of what was going on.
14
I'm just saying do you really expect me to be able to remember that? That's
11:07:50 15
So I'm not saying I don't remember.
what I'm saying.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
that witnesses who initially might say they don't recollect something.
19
who then are prompted by evidence that may have come into the possession of the
11:08:04 20
Well we don't know.
Because people's memories vary.
And we know And
Tribunal or evidence of other witnesses, when prompted, they then start to
21
recollect or recollect something more than they -- than was the position
22
earlier.
23
doesn't mean or suggest that Mr. Quinn or anyone else disbelieves you when you
24
say that you can't recollect.
11:08:30 25
26
So that's the reason why these bits of evidence are put to you.
It
The purpose of prompting you with other
evidence is to see if we can -- if that aids your recollection. A.
All right.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
additional material having been so prompted.
11:08:46 30
And some witnesses have been able to provide very significant Not because they were
withholding it but because their memories have been aided by whatever the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:08:50
11:09:00
21 1 2
prompt was.
And that's the reason for it.
A.
Okay.
I accept that Chairman, right.
Q. 129
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, Mr. Dunlop went on to say that when he discussed the
3 4 5
matter with you, that you were quite aggressive about what could be done or
6
what should be done on the site.
7
developing the site, very much pro having the site developed for residential,
8
increased density residential development.
9
A.
11:09:23 10
I was pro-development on the site.
I would never describe my attitude to any
of those matters as being aggressive.
11 12
In other words, in a you were very much pro
enthusiastic. Q. 130
The strongest I would put it would be
But I do not recall discussing that with Mr. Dunlop.
Do you recall being disappointed that the manager's 92/44 that we had on the
13
screen a moment ago, that you seconded, that that proposal had been
14
unsuccessful and Councillor Barrett's motion was successful which effectively
11:09:46 15
16
proposed a zoning of one house to the acre on the land at the time? A.
17 18
No, I wouldn't describe my feelings about losing on a vote like that as disappointment. That's just the cut and thrust of the democratic system.
Q. 131
19
Yes. Mr. Dunlop went on to say that you made some remarks about why you were in the situation you were in.
11:10:07 20
That is to say why the lands were now proposed
for a zoning at only one house to the acre.
When you -- you've told the
21
Tribunal that you recall discussing the site with Mr. Dunlop on at least one
22
occasion, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah, I think I did, yeah.
24
Q. 132
Can I ask you to tell the Tribunal your recollection of that discussion? What
11:10:23 25
26
would you have said to Mr. Dunlop in relation to the site, can you recall? A.
I'd be -- I can only speculate on what I might have said to him.
I more than
27
likely told him that I was supporting the development of those lands at a
28
reasonably -- at a sustainable density.
29
speculate on what I might have told him, you know.
11:10:47 30
Something like that.
I probably gave him enough
to leave him with the impression that I was supporting -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I can only
11:10:50
11:11:02
22 1
Q. 133
Yes.
2
A.
-- the motions to rezone, so.
3
Q. 134
He'd have known that I presume had he attended any of the council meetings
4
because you would have et vote in the favour of the proposals on the site,
5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah, I think my position in the Development Plan was fairly consistent so.
7
Q. 135
Did it occur to you to ask Mr. Dunlop why he was asking you how you were likely
8 9
to vote or what your attitude was in relation to the site? A.
No, I wouldn't have had any reason to ask him that either.
Q. 136
Were you not curious?
11
A.
No because it was part of his job.
12
Q. 137
Yes.
13
A.
Um.
14
Q. 138
So therefore, that implies that you you knew that he was employed in relation
11:11:29 10
11:11:31 15
16
It was what he did.
to the matter? A.
No, it doesn't.
As I said to you earlier, we may have just discussed it in
17
general discussion.
18
he wasn't involved in in the course of general discussion.
19
Q. 139
11:11:49 20
And we very often may have discussed other projects that
Mr. Dunlop's recollection of those meetings and in particular this meeting which took place in and around 1993 and shortly after he was retained by the
21
Monarch interest, was that he advised you or told you that he needed your
22
support.
And your response to that was fine but it'll cost you?
23
A.
(laughter) No, I reject that out of hand.
24
Q. 140
He says you began a negotiation and that he agreed to give you 2,000 pounds.
A.
No, I totally refute that.
Q. 141
You refute that you entered into a negotiation request Mr. Dunlop for your
11:12:14 25
26 27
support for the site.
Is that right?
28
A.
Totally! Totally refute that.
29
Q. 142
Yes.
11:12:34 30
He says that you were a key figure -- were you a key figure,
Mr. McGrath, in relation to the group, the Fianna Fail grouping in the council Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:12:38
11:12:47
23 1
in 1993?
2
A.
I wouldn't have regarded myself as a key figure. No.
3
Q. 143
Yes.
4
A.
Um, yes.
5
Q. 144
And you had survived the election in 1991, isn't that right?
6
A.
I like the way you put it.
7
Q. 145
Well when I say that, Mr. McGrath, I think that a lot of councillors did not
You had been in the council I think since 1985, isn't that right?
8
survive the 1991 election, isn't that right? There was quite a big turn around
9
in 1991.
11:13:02 10
A.
Well the electorate are very fickle, Mr. Quinn.
11
Q. 146
Yes.
12
A.
And you know, you can attribute a variety of reasons as to why somebody might
13 14 11:13:11 15
not be reelected. Q. 147
Yes.
A.
Or why somebody is reelected.
16 17
over the years. Q. 148
18 19
It's something I've never managed to fathom
There had been a big turn around in 1991, isn't that right? A lot of your colleagues had lost their seats in 1991.
A.
There was a swing against Fianna Fail in 1991 as far as I can recall. Yeah.
Q. 149
And you had been reelected?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 150
So you would have been seen by the incoming fresh councillors as somebody with
11:13:28 20
23
experience and somebody who had been in the council for some time, isn't that
24
right?
11:13:40 25
26
A.
Perhaps so.
Q. 151
Yes. And you had quite a detailed knowledge of the council and its working at
27
that stage, isn't that right?
28
A.
I'll accept that, yes.
29
Q. 152
Do you recall being lobbied by any of the Monarch interest between May 1992 and
11:13:54 30
November 1993 in relation to the project? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:13:58
11:14:15
24 1
A.
2 3
I'm sure Mr. Lynn would have been in regular -- he was in regular contact with us.
Q. 153
4
When you say in regular contact.
Do you mean to imply that he was regularly
on the phone to you and regularly meeting with you?
5
A.
No, was regularly in attendance.
6
Q. 154
At council meetings?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 155
And was it your practice to meet with him there and maybe have a coffee with
9 11:14:24 10
him or -A.
The meeting was unavoidable.
11
Q. 156
Yes.
12
A.
I don't recall specifically.
13 14
Yeah, we may have had coffee or perhaps a drink
together on occasions but -Q. 157
Yeah.
A.
-- that was just the logistics of Dublin County Council at the time.
16
Q. 158
Did you come to see Mr. Reilly at the council meetings at that time also?
17
A.
Yes, I recall him being there at least once or twice anyway, yeah.
18
Q. 159
Did Mr. Reilly ever ask for your support for the project?
19
A.
I can't recall him specifically asking for my support, no.
Q. 160
Did you ever discuss with --
21
A.
But he would have discussed it with me I'm sure.
22
Q. 161
Yes.
11:14:35 15
11:14:59 20
23 24
Did you ever discuss with Mr. Lynn the possible support for others for
the project? A.
11:15:13 25
Not the possible support of others, no but we may have discussed in general terms who might be likely to support it.
26
Q. 162
Yes.
27
A.
Yeah, we probably did, yes.
28
Q. 163
And would you have an idea of the councillors within Fianna Fail in particular
29 11:15:26 30
That's what I mean.
who might or might not support the project? A.
Not specifically but I would only be able to go on patterns of -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:15:31
11:15:38
25 1
Q. 164
Yes.
2
A.
-- similar to my own.
3
Q. 165
Yes.
4
A.
Pro-development.
5
Q. 166
In favour of rezoning?
6
A.
Well pro-development.
7
Q. 167
Yes.
People who were generally --
Well pro-development councillors would have been well known, I take it,
8
to somebody like Mr. Lynn who was regularly in attendance at these meetings,
9
isn't that right?
11:15:48 10
11
A.
Well it's not hard to identify pro-development councillors.
Q. 168
What I'm asking you, Mr. McGrath, is did a rapport develop between yourself and
12
Mr. Lynn in relation to the site or Monarch interest at this time?
13
A.
I wouldn't call it a rapport, no, but obviously familiarity creeps in.
14
Q. 169
Yes. You were on first name terms for example?
A.
Yes, we would have been after several meetings.
16
Q. 170
And were you on first named terms with Mr. Reilly?
17
A.
Eventually, yes.
18
Q. 171
Eventually?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 172
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn was more prominent than Mr. Reilly in
11:16:13 15
11:16:21 20
21
relation to the project?
22
A.
Yes, in attendance, yes, yeah.
23
Q. 173
Yeah.
24
A.
Yes, I would say so, yeah.
Q. 174
Did you ever discuss the project with Mr. Lynn in the company of colleagues, in
11:16:36 25
26
Mr. Reilly played a lesser role?
other words, other councillors?
27
A.
Oh, um, I may have but I don't specifically recall that, no.
28
Q. 175
How long would those --
29
A.
Sorry, there may have been -- often there might be a grouping of people
11:16:53 30
together. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:16:53
11:17:03
26 1
Q. 176
That's what I'm asking you Mr. McGrath, yeah.
2
A.
We were in confined spaces.
3
Q. 177
Yeah.
4
A.
If you stopped to talk to somebody, there may be already somebody there or in
5
ear short or shoulder to shoulder. Yeah, the answer is I suppose is yes we
6
would have.
7
Q. 178
8 9
Did you often retire to the local hostelries with Mr. Lynn and others after or during those council meetings?
A.
I would say probably yes but not by specific arrangement.
Q. 179
I appreciate that.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 180
But you could find yourself perhaps in Mr. Lynn's company?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 181
In Conways is that fair?
A.
I think it's fair to say we all gravitated to Conways after meetings or during
11:17:15 10
11:17:22 15
16 17
lunch breaks. Q. 182
So for example if somebody were to go into o Conways in mid or late 1993 it
18
wouldn't be unusual to find you there with Mr. Lynn or other councillors or
19
find Mr. Lynn there with other councillors?
11:17:39 20
A.
No, that wouldn't be unusual, no.
21
Q. 183
Maybe even Mr. Dunlop there also?
22
A.
I think he made the odd appearance, yes.
23
Q. 184
Yeah.
24
your view of how the motions in relation to the project were likely to go at
11:18:00 25
26
And would you have discussed with Mr. Lynn at any of those meetings
future meetings? A.
No. I'd be fairly confident in saying that when one got to Conways we regarded
27
that as our break from what were sometimes seven and eight hour long meetings.
28
And we really relished the chance to get out of that chamber and go for a cup
29
of coffee and a sandwich.
11:18:24 30
So very often, you know, it was a little taboo to
be getting into the actual discussion of the items that were up, you know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
We
11:18:28
11:18:40
27 1
usually took a break and talked about more domestic things, you know.
2
Q. 185
You were off duty.
3
A.
Off duty, that's a good way of putting it, yeah.
4
Q. 186
Did you ever discuss this project with Councillor Fox, for example?
5
A.
No, not that I can recall, no.
6
Q. 187
Do you ever recall a Fianna Fail meeting in Conways at which the Carrickmines
7
or the Cherrywood lands were, the Monarch lands were discussed?
8
A.
They would have been discussed at our group meeting, yes.
9
Q. 188
Yes.
11:18:58 10
11
and who spoke against the project at those meetings? A.
12 13
Um, well, Councillor Lydon would have spoke in favour of them. Councillor Fox.
Q. 189
14 11:19:21 15
And do you recall who spoke in favour of the project at those meetings
Yes.
Perhaps
Now, I can't recall anybody speaking against them, no.
But you will have identified Councillor Lydon with the project, would
you? A.
Not specifically, no.
16
Q. 190
That's what I mean?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 191
He was the local councillor, isn't that right or certainly --
19
A.
Usually when an item came up for discussion at a group meeting, the Chairman of
11:19:33 20
It was his area.
That's the only reason.
the meeting would advert to the local councillor in the first instance to get
21
his synopsis on the situation, you know.
22
Q. 192
Did you ever discuss the matter with Councillor Lydon?
23
A.
I'm sure I would have, yes.
24
Q. 193
Did you ever discuss strategy in relation to the site with Councillor Lydon?
A.
Strategy in relation to the site?
26
Q. 194
Yes.
27
A.
Um, no, not strategy in relation to the site, I wouldn't think so, no.
28
Q. 195
Yes.
29
A.
There were so many various proposals for that site.
Q. 196
Between March and October 1993, and I'm not going to put these up on screen
11:19:54 25
11:20:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:20:16
11:20:34
28 1
unless you want me to, Mr. McGrath, there were a number of telephone
2
attendances on you, that is to say you ringing Mr. Dunlop's office.
3
Dunlop not being there and his secretary taking memos of the fact that you had
4
rang.
5
March '93 and October '93.
6
reasonably regular contact with Mr. Dunlop at this time?
Mr.
I think in all there were 16 calls recorded as having been made between Would it be fair to say that you were in
7
A.
Yeah, that's fair to say, yeah.
8
Q. 197
You would have been ringing him and presumably you would have been meeting him
9 11:20:55 10
in the way that you described with Mr. Lynn earlier at the special meetings? A.
I'd probably be returning his calls.
11
Q. 198
I appreciate that.
12
A.
Do we have those records?
13
Q. 199
Yes.
14
A.
No, his calls to me.
Q. 200
No.
16
A.
Well, I don't have the resources to discover those calls.
17
Q. 201
Do such notes exist, Mr. McGrath?
18
A.
No, they don't but --
19
Q. 202
And therefore --
A.
Could you not have established these facts from Eircom?
Q. 203
No.
11:21:07 15
11:21:19 20
21 22 23
They are in the brief and we can put them up if you wish?
You haven't discovered any such calls, Mr. McGrath?
Mr. McGrath, the issue of resources don't arise.
If you don't have the
notes they don't exist, isn't that right? A.
24
Resources.
I'm putting time as being the most important resource not money.
I would put it to you that I think you should have got the records to show if
11:21:43 25
Mr. Dunlop had made a call to me around the same time -- or on the same days
26
and prior to my call coming to him.
27
Q. 204
So you --
28
A.
I think that's very relevant.
29
Q. 205
You think it's relevant that the contacts which are recorded as having been
11:21:59 30
made by you with Mr. Dunlop in that period ought to be put in the context of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:22:04
11:22:20
29 1 2
you returning calls that is Mr. Dunlop made to you is that correct? A.
Well if you're attaching any relevance to -- you are making a point that I
3
contacted him 16 times over a seven or eight month period. So I'm saying to
4
you that perhaps I was returning phone calls.
5
prove that.
6
Q. 206
We can't seem to be able to
The point I'm making to you, Mr. McGrath, is that and you've agreed with it,
7
is that there was regular contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in this
8
period whether it was 16 times or 20 times you've accepted it I think?
9 11:22:33 10
A.
I have accepted it, yes.
Q. 207
And it is your evidence I understand to the Tribunal, that there was regular
11 12
contact between you in this time? A.
13 14
Yes but I'm curious to know if those entries in Mr. Dunlop's diaries are supported by Eircom evidence?
Q. 208
You think these are a forgery?
A.
I'm suggesting to you that they can be.
16
Q. 209
Are you suggesting that you didn't make those contacts?
17
A.
No, I'm not suggesting that at all.
18
Q. 210
If you look at the document on screen, Mr. McGrath?
19
A.
I'm suggesting that --
Q. 211
Just look at the document 4046 on screen.
11:22:46 15
11:22:55 20
It's a telephone message of the 9th
21
of March 1993. 9:25 Colm McGrath.
22
two telephone numbers including a mobile did you recognise either of those
23
numbers, Mr. McGrath?
24 11:23:15 25
Not urgent please call him." And there are
A.
I think you're missing the point, Mr. Quinn.
Q. 212
No, no just answer my question, Mr. McGrath.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The point that Mr. Quinn is making in relation to the specific
28
telephone call and I only put it -- one can only speculate.
29
which it is recorded if it is a contemporaneous note suggests and I'll only put
11:23:28 30
the word suggests, because we can't do anything in fairness to everybody -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
The manner in
11:23:33
11:23:42
30 1
A.
Okay.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
office and left to numbers.
5
A.
Colm McGrath at 9:25 on the 9th of March called Mr. Dunlop's
Okay.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
that in itself couldn't be further grounded by any search in the Eircom
9
telephone records because that's, save your own telephone records, Mr. McGrath,
11:23:59 10
11
I think what Mr. Quinn is, in relation to that specific one,
because that suggests -A.
Okay.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- a call coming in to Mr. Dunlop's.
14
other calls by you may well be a response to a telephone call from Mr. Dunlop.
11:24:11 15
A.
That's not to say that
All right.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
specific one.
19 11:24:20 20
A.
All right.
I think that's as much as Mr. Quinn is putting to you that
I accept that and thank you for that.
But the point I still
maintain is No. one, I can neither say whether these calls were in response to
21
a call made to me.
I can't confirm nor I won't confirm any of those calls
22
made by me to Mr. Dunlop for the moment anyway.
23
this road of attaching importance to whether I made them or not.
If we're going to go down
24 11:24:41 25
I'm also surprised to see that in March of 1993 that I would see it necessary
26
to leave my two phone numbers with Mr. Dunlop.
27
well knew at the time and probably had them in his mobile phone.
28
surprised to see that I would have to leave numbers for him.
29
trying to be awkward Chairman, I'm just trying to say that if a secretary -- I
11:25:03 30
Two numbers which he quite I'm
Now, I'm not
accept that I was in regular contact with Mr. Dunlop on the phone but I'm not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:25:08
11:25:19
31 1
going to confirm any specific time or date that I phoned him.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
would be very difficult for you to do.
5
A.
No.
We're not asking you to condition firm that because that
It, yeah.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
establish the level of contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop.
9
itself doesn't mean that there's anything amiss about that --
11:25:30 10
A.
The importance of the evidence, insofar as it is important, is to Which in
No, I accept that.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
it's 15 times or 20 times or whether you called him or he called you or
14
whatever.
11:25:44 15
It's just to establish.
Now, it doesn't really matter whether
We're not interested in that detail.
A.
Okay.
Q. 213
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, just in relation to the numbers on screen.
16 17 18 19
say that they were your phone numbers at that time? A.
Yes, and still are.
Q. 214
You recognise them?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 215
Now, if we could have 4264.
11:25:51 20
This is a message, for example, that you appear
23
to have left on the 25th of June '93.
24
weekend" and you give another number.
11:26:06 25
"At 4:25.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 216
Yeah.
27
A.
I see that.
28
Q. 217
Yeah.
29
A.
No -- I have to repeat myself.
Q. 218
You're not confirming any of those calls.
11:26:20 30
Do you
Please call him over the
You were anxious that Mr. Dunlop would call you over that weekend? I'm not confirming any of those phone calls.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:26:22
11:26:42
32 1
A.
2 3
No. All I'll confirm is that I was in regular contact with Mr. Dunlop during that period.
Q. 219
If we could have 8051.
This was a message left on the 1st September 1993, two
4
messages one at 10:10 in the morning and the other at 4:30.
5
numbers given "need to speak to you before he sends this out.
6
Again, do you recognise those numbers?
7
A.
Yeah, the same numbers.
8
Q. 220
They are the same numbers?
9
A.
Yeah, I recognise those numbers.
11:26:56 10
11
Again, two Fax from him."
I repeat though I'm not confirming any of
these notes as being 100 percent accurate. Q. 221
12
8504.
On the 24th of September 1993.
11:15 Colm McGrath Fianna Fail rooms
in DCC -- which presumably is Dublin County Council and the number given.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 222
Is that the number for the Fianna Fail room?
A.
Yes, I recognise the number, yes.
16
Q. 223
On the 16th of September '93 at 8503.
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 224
And you say that despite this level of contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop,
11:27:13 15
10:36 a.m. a mobile number given.
19
you had no specific conversation with him in relation to the Cherrywood lands
11:27:38 20
although you would have discussed it in a general way with him and you, as I
21
understand it, did not understand him to have been retained by Monarch in
22
relation to the lands?
23
A.
24
No, that wasn't made clear to me.
My contact with Mr. Dunlop was
predominantly in relation to the Quarryvale Module.
11:27:59 25
And after that I cannot
confirm to you any of those calls or their contents, which is probably more
26
interesting, the content would be more interesting I'm sure.
27
Q. 225
Well there are only two people that can give that evidence, Mr. McGrath?
28
A.
Exactly.
29
Q. 226
You are one of them, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
11:28:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:28:15
11:28:30
33 1
Q. 227
But you are not in a position, you say to tell the Tribunal what that is?
2
A.
Well I can't recall seeing anything in the folders that suggested that Mr.
3 4
Dunlop was able to say what the content of those calls were. Q. 228
Well whatever about the contents of the telephone calls, Mr. Dunlop has given
5
very specific evidence which you objected to my putting to you in detail a
6
moment ago concerning a meeting some time in March 1993 where he sought your
7
support in relation to Cherrywood where you asked him, told him it would cost
8
him.
9
agreement that you would be paid 2,000 pounds.
11:28:51 10
You asked him for money.
There was a negotiation and there was an And that was his evidence,
Mr. McGrath.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 229
Now, can you recall the vote on the 11th of November 1993?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 230
If we could have 7258, please.
11:29:07 15
Okay.
Did you know, for example, that Councillors
Marren and Coffey and others had tabled a motion for the 11th of, which was
16
heard on the 11th of May '93?
17
A.
I would have been aware of it, I'm sure if it was on the agenda.
18
Q. 231
7266, please.
19
A.
Have we established that it was an agenda motion?
Q. 232
Well it would appear to be tabled on the day I think has been the evidence to
11:29:26 20
21
date?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 233
There is the motion on the screen.
24 11:29:41 25
Well if it was tabled -- sorry.
Okay.
26
Q. 234
Taking the motion on the screen.
27
A.
Yes.
28
11:29:53 30
There's
another motion in relation to the neighbourhood centre. A.
29
In fact there were two motions.
The answer then is if it was tabled on the day I would have had no
notice of it. Q. 235
In advance.
A.
No. That wasn't unusual. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:29:55
11:30:08
34 1
Q. 236
The motion was, what appears to have been on the agenda for the day Ms. Dillon
2
advices me.
Which I think would suggest that it had been tabled in advance,
3
isn't that right?
4
A.
In which case I would have had notice then.
5
Q. 237
Yes.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 238
Do you recall discussing the motion with any of the people who either proposed
8 9
or seconded the motion in advance? A.
11:30:22 10
No, not specifically.
I would have -- I may have involved myself in the
discussion when it was put to the floor, other than that I have no recollection
11
of discussing it with anyone.
12
Q. 239
Do you have a recollection of discussing the motion in Conways?
13
A.
No, I don't.
14
Q. 240
I think in fact the motion was tabled on the day.
11:30:41 15
Councillor Coffey will be
giving evidence in a moment and she can clarify the matter?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 241
The evidence to date has been that it was tabled on the day?
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 242
Yes.
11:30:55 20
21
Well I would have had no notice of it so. And would you have notice of it even if it were tabled on the day at the
Conway meeting, do you think? A.
22
No.
I -- just looking at that particularly with the handwritten addendum to
it.
23
Q. 243
Yes.
24
A.
It looks like a motion that was formulated on the day arising out of the
11:31:10 25
debate, arising out of discussions in the chamber.
26
Q. 244
Yes.
Do you recall anything of the debate or on the day?
27
A.
Well I can -- I generally recall that there was quite a robust debate on it
28
because there was a lot of opinions being expressed vis-a-vie the development
29
of these lands and how they should be developed and there was reference to a
11:31:35 30
science and technology park.
There were -- the core issues seemed to revolve
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:31:41
11:31:57
35 1
around what densities that these lands should be developed at.
2
Q. 245
Either one or four houses to the acre, isn't that right?
3
A.
Well whatever, yes, yeah, there was, yeah.
4 5
That's where the real crux of
difference of opinion occurred as far as I recall. Q. 246
Yes.
In any event, you voted in favour of that proposal, isn't that right?
6
And you would say that it was consistent with your position to date, is that
7
right?
8
A.
9 11:32:14 10
Yeah, consistent with my opinion that land in County Dublin shouldn't be wasted at such low densities.
Q. 247
11
Mr. McGrath, did you continue to meet with Mr. Lynn after that motion and that is to say after November 1993?
12
A.
As in what context, Mr. Quinn?
13
Q. 248
Well if we look at, if I could have 5433, please.
14
There have been a series of
expense claim forms discovered to the Tribunal by the Monarch interest.
11:32:41 15
appear to have been submitted by Mr. Lynn.
And the one on screen is for the
16
3rd of November 1994.
17
have been a councillor for south Dublin, is that correct?
Now, in November 1994, as I understand it, you would
18
A.
Yes, I was, yeah, yeah.
19
Q. 249
And do you see the second last entry in that form?
A.
I do, yes. I see it.
Q. 250
"Development Plan review C McGrath."
11:32:58 20
21 22
Which
And then there's an expense claim, which
is irrelevant.
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 251
But did you meet Mr. Lynn in November 1994 in relation to the Development Plan
11:33:11 25
review?
26
A.
I may have, I may have.
27
Q. 252
The Development Plan would have been confirmed I think in December 1993?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 253
Although there was a variation to the plan in relation to lands including these
11:33:25 30
I've no recollection of it.
lands, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:33:26
11:33:37
36 1
A.
2
Yeah, yeah, there would have been, yeah.
Is there any more supporting
documentation to the expense claim form?
3
Q. 254
Well what type of documentation would you like, Mr. McGrath?
4
A.
Venue.
5
Q. 255
Where might you have met Mr. Lynn?
6
A.
Well that's what I'm seeking your assistance on.
7
Q. 256
Yeah.
8 9 11:33:51 10
Can you recall where you met Mr. Lynn other than in the council
meetings, Mr. McGrath? A.
No.
Q. 257
So your meetings with Mr. Lynn would have been either in the foyer of the
11
Except perhaps in one of the nearby hotels.
council chamber or in one of the nearby hotels?
12
A.
Or in Conways perhaps.
13
Q. 258
Or in Conways.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 259
And do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in 1994 in any of those three locations,
11:34:04 15
16
Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Um, yes, I'm sure I do but I couldn't be specific as to when.
18
Q. 260
That expense claim form is in relation to the Cherrywood Properties.
19 11:34:27 20
21
Do you
see that in the top left hand corner under the heading "company"? A.
Yes, I see that.
Q. 261
But you would have been a councillor in South Dublin County Council at that
22
time, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, I would.
24
Q. 262
Can you tell the Tribunal why Mr. Lynn might be meeting with you in the context
11:34:46 25
of Cherrywood Properties which was situated in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
26
Council when you were a member of South Dublin County Council?
27
A.
No, I can't tell you why.
28
Q. 263
Yes.
29
A.
Perhaps Mr. Lynn was representing somebody else as well.
Q. 264
Well did Mr. Lynn ever approach you in relation to other properties in
11:34:53 30
It may have been for some other reason then.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:34:58
11:35:03
37 1 2
Cherrywood? A.
Um, in Cherrywood?
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Other than Cherrywood.
5 6
Q. 265
MR. QUINN: Other than Cherrywood.
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 266
Did he ever receive your support for other Monarch Properties? Yesterday,
9
I can't specifically.
Sorry.
No, I don't think he did, no.
Mr. Reilly gave evidence that there were two other projects current at this
11:35:17 10
time.
11
One in relation to Ongar Stud and the other in relation to Somerton,
where Mr. Monahan was based.
12
A.
No, I don't recall him approaching me about those, no.
13
Q. 267
Did you know Mr. Phil Monahan?
14
A.
Not personally, no.
Q. 268
Did you ever meet Mr. Phil Monahan?
16
A.
Yes, I've met him once I think, yeah.
17
Q. 269
Did anybody other than Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever seek your support for the
11:35:32 15
18 19
Cherrywood project? A.
As in relation to the Monarch group?
Q. 270
Yes.
21
A.
No, I think they are the only two I can recall dealing with.
22
Q. 271
Now Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath, that following on his
11:35:45 20
23
negotiation and following on the debate and the vote that in accordance with
24
his prior agreement with you.
11:36:03 25
That he paid you 2,000 pounds in cash.
You
have seen that evidence, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yeah, I've seen that evidence, yeah.
27
Q. 272
Now, you presumably denied that you received that?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 273
You have given evidence in the past of having received unsolicited cash from
11:36:16 30
Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:36:17
11:36:28
38 1
A.
I have, yes.
2
Q. 274
But you say that you did not receive this money, isn't that right?
3
A.
No, absolutely not.
4
Q. 275
You did receive some support from the Monarch interest, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I did.
6
Q. 276
In 1991 I think, on the 5th of June 1991, if we could have 1584, please.
They supported my fundraisers, yes.
7
Sorry.
8
appear to suggest that you had been paid on the 5th of June 1991 a sum of 600
9
pounds, isn't that right?
11:37:02 10
A.
11
1581.
Monarch have discovered to the Tribunal a document which would
Well I don't -- I'm on record already.
I don't accept the word "pay".
received a donation.
12
Q. 277
Did you seek that donation?
13
A.
Quite possibly.
14
Q. 278
Who would you have sought it from?
A.
Um, I would have written to their headquarters I'm sure.
11:37:16 15
16 17
I
I can't remember who
specifically. Q. 279
At 3809.
This is for 1992, Mr. McGrath, on the 17th of November 1992, Monarch
18
have discovered to the Tribunal records which suggest that you received a sum
19
of 500 pounds for what was described as General Elections expenses of that
11:37:46 20
year.
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 280
If I could have 3880.
This is an extract from the Monarch Properties Services
23
Limited cash book.
24
Colm McGrath Fianna Fail 500 pounds.
11:38:04 25
And you will see at No. 18 on that screen, a payment to Did you -- first of all, I take it that
you accept you received that money?
26
A.
I'm sure I did.
27
Q. 281
And again, could I ask you, did you seek that money or -- and if you did from
28 29 11:38:18 30
I'm sure I did.
whom? A.
I would have probably -- it's the same answer.
Yeah, it was a fundraiser I
would say which they were sent a brochure and that was their response. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:38:22
11:38:41
39 1
Q. 282
2
And I think you sent a letter to Mr. Monahan in May 1996. 5972, please.
If we could have
Where you again sought, I think funds of --
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 283
Isn't that correct?
5
A.
That's typical of what I would do at around election time.
6
Q. 284
You were seeking a contribution to your election war chest?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 285
Which you said was crucial to the success of your campaign, isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 286
And I think on foot of that request, you received 500 pounds, isn't that right?
11:38:54 10
11
Can I just ask you in relation to that, Mr. McGrath, you would have known Mr.
12
Lynn quite well at this stage, isn't that right, this is 1996?
13
A.
Yes, we would have developed a relationship, yeah.
14
Q. 287
And you knew Mr. Lynn was working for Monarch?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 288
You had ever only met Mr. Philip Monahan once, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, I think so, yeah.
18
Q. 289
Why didn't you write to Mr. Lynn within Monarch for that subscription? Why did
11:39:12 15
19 11:39:26 20
you write to Mr. Monahan as opposed to Mr. Lynn? A.
Maybe Mr. Lynn suggested that I write to Mr. Monahan.
21
Q. 290
Uh-huh.
22
A.
Sorry.
23
Q. 291
Yes.
24
A.
Was Mr. Lynn not out on his own at that stage?
Q. 292
I understood he was still with Monarch but I may be wrong in that.
A.
'96? Maybe he was, yeah.
11:39:47 25
26 27 28 29 11:40:12 30
I think you got a further subscription in July 1996 of 500 pounds? There's another part to that answer perhaps.
He did go out on his own I think at one point.
Okay. Q. 293
At 6038, there appears to be a further payment on the 3rd of July '96, to Mr. Colm McGrath.
"MCC Fianna Fail 500 pounds."
acknowledge receiving that payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Again, I take it that you
11:40:13
11:40:29
40 1
A.
I'm sure I did, yes, yeah.
2
Q. 294
On the 3rd of October 1996, at 6096, there's a further 500 pounds towards a
3
golf classic.
Isn't that right? And again at -- I take it that you accept
4
receiving that money?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 295
Cheque 8540?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 296
And I think you received a further sum of 500 pounds in May 1999 for a golf
9
classic fundraiser towards your Local Election funds, at 6753. Again I take it
11:40:48 10
that you accept that?
11
A.
Yeah, I accept that, yeah.
12
Q. 297
Thank you, Mr. McGrath.
13 14 11:41:00 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Are there any questions for Mr. McGrath?
Okay.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
previously said that you were generally pro-development?
19
A.
Just to ask you, Mr. McGrath.
You've said I think and
Uh-huh.
11:41:11 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
on the houses.
23
A.
And you said that I think earlier that in terms of the density
You didn't think that land should be wasted with low density?
No, that's right, yes.
24 11:41:22 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And we know, as far as I understand it, that when the
26
manager's map was put up, as his recommendations to go out on the second
27
display, this is back in May 1992.
28
four houses to the acre.
29
A.
He was recommending at that stage I think
Uh-huh.
11:41:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:41:39
11:41:47
41 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
With an action area plan I think?
Yes, yeah.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
extension of lands to be zoned further south or further west, whichever way you
6
look at it.
7
A.
And indeed, he was also recommending, if I recall, a further
And you vote in the favour of that?
Yes, I would have.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:42:02 10
Now we know, and the record shows that in fairness.
Now, we
know that that motion didn't get anywhere because it was fairly narrowly
11
defeated.
12
Mr. McGrath.
13
months later or whatever, I take it your view was still the same in terms of
14
you, you think there should be --
11:42:28 15
A.
I just want to ask you, and I've asked this to other people, When it came to debating these lands again, which was some 18
Higher density?
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes, that there should have been higher density.
It would have been, yeah.
19 11:42:34 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Because we know what happened after May when Mr. Barrett's
21
motion was passed.
22
including the lands of all Cherrywood, were zoned one house to the acre.
23
A.
All the lands the subject matter of that motion and
Uh-huh.
24 11:42:47 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You obviously were fairly pro active in the council because it
26
looks as if back in May when, this is '92, when the manager was putting forward
27
his proposals, you've seconded that.
28
that could be courtesy
29
A.
And you've said fair you have enough
Uh-huh.
11:43:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:43:05
11:43:13
42 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
It would appear that your voice was heard in any event.
Fair enough.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
motion was produced and obviously it appears, probably Ms. Coffey will be able
6
to give us more details, the motion in 1993 is produced.
7
A.
In some shape or form on the day.
Can I just ask you.
A
Uh-huh.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:43:27 10
Which seeks to uphold or support the manager's recommendation
to take away change three I think it is, which was to take away the one house
11
and to put four houses to the acre on the lands.
12
that's only in relation to the Monarch lands.
13
A.
But that there's a -- but
Uh-huh.
14 11:43:42 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I'm just wondering if -- can you recall if at all, why you
16
wouldn't have queried why it should be just as it was apparently the lands of
17
Monarch? Because the manager was recommending the change be deleted for the
18
entire of the lands.
19
A.
Yeah.
11:44:06 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
in May '92.
23 24 11:44:21 25
A.
Uh-huh.
And that's something in fairness that you had supported back
Well I can only speculate as to why.
Densities -- my recollection
of when densities were being sited upon, if you were proposing the development of lands in close proximity to an existing development.
And if that existing
26
development had a density of X per acre, it was normal practice that the
27
immediate development which was proposed to take place in the newly zoned lands
28
would be in sympathy for a certain distance with the existing development.
29
And then -- in fact, that still prevails today.
11:44:49 30
And then perhaps as you move
further away from those lands at the lower density, you can then raise the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:44:53
11:45:00
43 1
density.
2 3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
If you put up 7217.
It's more sympathetic.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
the map that was, that went out, as I understand it, after the -- Mr. Barrett's
8
vote effectively.
9
ultimately then zoned or not zoned but voted on for four houses to the acre.
11:45:23 10
11
I just want to get the map.
Do you see that map? That was
And if you look at the lands outlined in red, they were
But outside of that red line we're left at one house to the acre. A.
Uh-huh.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
back in May, the year previously, were supportive of the fact that all of the
11:45:41 15
16
Whereas, yourself and indeed others who have given evidence,
lands marked, zoned, in yellow, which are the residential lands -A.
Uh-huh.
17 18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- should be four houses to the acre on the action area plan. A.
Yeah, that would have been --
11:45:51 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
modified your views.
23 24 11:46:08 25
26
A.
I'm just wondering then why you would have restricted or
I don't think I modified my view. resistance.
I would assume that there was -- there was
In fact, I recall there was resistance from local residents
associations to the four per acre density.
And obviously that was reflected
eventually in the modified proposal.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
why if there was debate on the day or indeed, why the actual land that was
11:46:34 30
But do I take it from what you're saying, that you don't know
zoned four to the acre would have run along the boundary of Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:46:40
11:46:45
44 1 2
effectively? A.
I can't recall why that.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Obviously not all because there was some land left
5
agricultural in fairness. No, I can't say why that actually happened on the
6
day.
7
lands.
8
got four to the acre on a substantial portion of the lands.
I mean, I would have supported four to the acre on the entirety of the So perhaps I saw it as just a good fall-back position that at least we
9 11:47:01 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
12
All right.
I wasn't that tuned into the fact that it was specifically Monarch lands. That wasn't very clear to me at the time.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:47:13 15
We know -- just on that point as I understand it, especially
in May '92 there were a number of motions put to the floor.
And a lot of
16
them -- these were zoned, to keep it, after the first display, where it was
17
four to the acre, to keep it at one to the acre.
18
think, refer specifically to Monarch.
19
have seemed from the minutes appeared on a fairly regular basis.
11:47:34 20
A.
And a lot of the motions I
I mean, Monarch, the word Monarch would
Yeah.
21 22 23 24 11:47:47 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Would you agree with that, Mr. McGrath?
Well I have no doubt yes they did because I've read some of the minutes, yeah. Chairman, you'd have to be in constant attendance or Judge, at some of these meetings to really have 100 percent feel for exactly what's going on at any
26
given time.
That sort of detail is quite often lost on the members if they're
27
actually there for the full debate.
28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thanks very much, that's all I have.
11:48:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:48:02
11:48:07
45 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
All right.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
We'll rise for, say, ten minutes.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
7 8
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
9 11:48:14 10
11
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Sir.
Ms. Elizabeth Coffey, please.
MR. FARREN:
Chairman, before Mrs. Coffey gives evidence.
14 12:02:23 15
This is Brian
16
Farren, counsel for Mrs. Coffey instructed by Langwell solicitors. Mrs. Coffey
17
was granted limited representation in relation to two previous modules.
18
would simply apply for a continuation of that.
19 12:02:39 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Granted.
21 22
MR. FARREN:
Thank you, Chairman.
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I
12:02:43
12:02:57
46 1
MRS. BETTY COFFEY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Ms. Coffey.
5 6
Q. 298
MS. DILLON: Good afternoon, Mrs. Coffey.
7
You have previously given evidence to the Tribunal in the Carrickmines 1
8
Module, isn't that right? And also in a subsequent module dealing with lands
9
in north County Dublin?
12:03:13 10
11
A.
That's correct, Ms. Dillon.
Q. 299
And you were during the period that we're looking at in the Carrickmines lands
12
a member of Dublin County Council and subsequently a member and indeed
13
Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
14 12:03:32 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 300
Now, in relation to the evidence that you gave to the Tribunal in the
16
Carrickmines 1 Module, is there any part of that evidence that you wish to
17
change?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 301
If I could deal, first of all, with the sequence of your disclosure to the
12:03:41 20
Tribunal in relation to payments in connection with Mr. Frank Dunlop.
And if
21
I could start by showing you what you told the internal Fianna Fail Inquiry, at
22
page 148, please.
23
you that was carried out by the Fianna Fail Inquiry.
Now, this is a record of the report on the interview with
24 12:04:05 25
And at the second paragraph it records that "Councillor Coffey indicated her
26
dismay at the recent revelations and the manner in which they reflected on
27
councillors, who like herself, had dedicated themselves to public service and
28
who had never been motivated by personal gain."
29 12:04:20 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 302
"Constituency records show that Frank Dunlop made a donation of 250 pounds to a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:04:22
12:04:33
47 1
constituency fundraising committee.
This donation was for constituency
2
funding.
3
no personal donations from any developer or builder."
Councillor Coffey received no personal donation from Mr. Dunlop and
4 5
Now, is that accurate insofar as it relates, in the first instance, to Mr.
6
Dunlop and in the second instance to developers or builders, Ms. Coffey?
7
A.
Well the interview with Fianna Fail I wasn't clear and I had no records, by the
8
way, of any donations for election campaigns.
9
phoned Frank Dunlop to ask him and I think that's recorded, had he given me any
12:04:59 10
donations and he informed me he had.
11
As a matter of fact, I had
So I had no records and I stand over
that statement.
12
Q. 303
Uh-huh.
13
A.
In the sense that my family and their friends, who are business friends, would
14
fund my General Election campaigns.
12:05:20 15
16
And indeed, would fund Fianna Fail
fundraising events. Q. 304
So your position is that you did not receive any personal donations from Mr.
17
Dunlop and you did not receive any personal donations from any developer or
18
builder, is that your position?
19
A.
12:05:35 20
discovered a donation from Monarch for the 1992 General Election of 1,000
21 22
pounds. Q. 305
23 24
Since that statement I wrote a letter in to Fianna Fail to tell them that I had
I actually wrote to letter to Fianna Fail.
And insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned, has your position in relation to what monies Mr. Dunlop might have given you changed?
A.
12:05:59 25
Well, I accept that Mr. Dunlop gave me 1,000 pounds for the 1992 General Election which I sent him a letter thanking him for.
26
He had said he gave me
1,000 in 1991, which I do not remember and I have no records.
27
Q. 306
Yes.
28
A.
And I don't think he has either.
29
Q. 307
Do you recollect receiving 1,000 pounds from Mr. Sean Dunne for the 1991
12:06:20 30
elections? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:06:21
12:06:39
48 1
A.
No, I don't remember that.
2
Q. 308
Yes.
That's it.
So insofar as your initial position with the Fianna Fail Inquiry was,
3
Mrs. Coffey, as I understand what's recorded in the document at page 148.
4
that you hadn't received any personal donations from Mr. Dunlop or any personal
5
donations from any developer or builder.
6
accept you did receive at least 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop in 1992 for which
7
you wrote a letter thanking him which I'll come to in a moment.
8
did at least receive 1,000 pounds from Monarch Properties, isn't that right?
9
A.
12:07:05 10
Your position now is, is that you
I was a member of the fundraising committee in Dun Laoghaire, I was one of the prominent members of it.
12
that contributed to those fundraising events.
13
committee, who was sitting then, of that.
12:07:27 15
And there was a lot of people, including builders, And I informed Fianna Fail
Q. 309
So --
A.
So, some of them could have been, like, some -- I find the fundraising events
16 17
And that you
Since that I discovered that I received 1,000 pounds from Monarch Properties.
11
14
were confused with personal contributions to General Elections. Q. 310
Yes.
But the position is as of now, Ms. Coffey, that 1,000 pounds that you
18
received on the 17th of November 1992 was a personal donation to you from
19
Monarch Properties, isn't that right?
12:07:48 20
21
A.
It was.
Q. 311
It wasn't anything to do with constituency fundraising or anything else, isn't
22 23
that the position? A.
24 12:07:58 25
26
No, it was a contribution for a General Election.
And like when you say
"personal." Q. 312
Yes.
A.
You know, I want to make it clear.
And I think we have been down this before.
27
A contribution for a General Election is not what I consider a personal, as
28
it's worded there.
29
law of the land, it's not personal to me.
12:08:29 30
Was
Q. 313
Yes.
It's a contribution to fund election times and that is the
Insofar as you first provided information to the Tribunal, Mrs. Coffey, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:08:29
12:08:40
49 1
in connection with your dealings with Mr. Dunlop at page 160 please.
2
statement you provided to the Tribunal in connection with the Carrickmines 1
3
Module.
4
Ms. Coffey.
5
or payment whether for elections expenses or otherwise" and in the view of what
6
you just said a moment ago I emphasise the word "otherwise" was ever made by
7
Mr. Frank Dunlop to me."
If I just draw your attention to the last sentence in that statement, And I quote "Insofar as I can assert and no contribution donation
8
A.
Yes, I accept that's there.
9
Q. 314
And you --
A.
I accept that I made a mistake.
12:08:53 10
The
Actually I rang Frank Dunlop and you have it
11
in one of the documentations, to ask him had he contributed to any campaigns.
12
And in reading through the statements, he told me he had.
13
letter at that time and I don't know -- oh, no he had the letter that's right.
14
I didn't have that letter in file with where I thanked him.
12:09:18 15
letter.
16 17
12:09:34 20
Q. 315
So I was wrong and I admit I was wrong but I actually phoned him to
Yes.
So that it was your belief in October of 2002 that you had not received
any money for any purpose whatsoever from Mr. Dunlop, isn't that the position? A.
It was.
Q. 316
And you subsequently came into the Tribunal on day 412 and you swore to the
21
truth of that statement, isn't that correct?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 317
At question 138.
24 12:09:49 25
26
He had the
find out had he.
18 19
I hadn't got the
And you confirmed on sworn testimony to the Tribunal that
you had not received any money from Mr. Dunlop isn't that also the position? A.
That was what I believed at that time, yes.
Q. 318
And when I asked you this morning was there any part of your evidence in
27
relation to Carrickmines 1 that you wished to change, you indicated that there
28
was no part of your evidence that you had given in the Carrickmines 1 Module
29
that you wished to change.
12:10:06 30
And I ask you again now.
Is there any part of
your evidence that you had previously given to the Tribunal in the Carrickmines Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:10:09
12:10:44
50 1 2
1 Module that you now wish to change? A.
Are you asking me and I want to be very careful about this because I had a very
3
gruesome time in the Carrickmines 1 Module with the questioning, or I was very
4
upset at it, I must say.
5
to assist the Tribunal in every way.
6
lie.
7
discovered that Frank Dunlop gave me 1,000.
8
yes, change that, please.
9
CHAIRMAN:
12:11:10 10
11
And I understand what the Tribunal is at and I want If you're asking me did I lie, I didn't
If you're asking me for the record, am I to change it now that I've Well I will change it and say
But if you're asking me did I lie to the Tribunal.
No you are simply being asked do you want to change your evidence.
It doesn't mean -A.
It doesn't mean that I'm lying.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
It doesn't necessarily mean that you lied to the Tribunal.
No.
12:11:17 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
the record, if it's to be changed, for whatever reason.
18
A.
But it's important that we know that the evidence which is there on
Right.
19 12:11:24 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
That it is changed.
Well that's fine.
That's why you're being asked.
Well then you can change it to say that I got, to
22
the best of my knowledge. No, not to the best of my knowledge, because we have
23
proof of it now because Mr. Dunlop gave the letter that I sent him.
24
form of a letter to people who thanked, who do things for you during election.
12:11:47 25
1,000 pounds in 1992.
That's a
Is that all right?
26 27
Q. 319
MS. DILLON:
Is it your position then, Ms. Coffey, just so the Tribunal
28
understands it, that it was not until production of the letter by Mr. Dunlop
29
that you recollected that you had in fact received money from Mr. Dunlop?
12:12:09 30
A.
Well that was the proof I got that I had received it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I think -- I don't know
12:12:14
12:12:33
51 1
when the phone call took place.
I can't recollect what date that was.
2
did say he gave it to me but I had no records and I had no proof.
He
3
Q. 320
Can you recollect now whether that donation by Mr. Dunlop was in cash?
4
A.
No, I can't.
5
Q. 321
According to Mr. Dunlop, you see, Mr. Dunlop says that when he -- that when he
6
paid you this May donation in 1992, that it was probably in cash and it may
7
have been either 1,000 or 2,000 pounds.
8
amount that Mr. Dunlop gave you?
9
A.
12:13:01 10
And can you assist at all as to the
Well Mr. Dunlop did a summary of payments to Betty Coffey, page 332. he stated Betty Coffey 1,000; 1991.
1, 000; 1992.
In which
1,500 for fundraising
11
events.
12
women's lunch which the Taoiseach was at and he would have paid 500 pounds for
13
that.
14
my previous evidence.
12:13:32 15
And I'm quite positive about the 1,500 because he attended the
That's where he said he met me for lunch.
that's that.
16
You may recollect that from
And 1,000 pounds for a St. Patrick's Day event.
So
But when he tots it up he won't get ten out of ten for maths.
He tots it up as the 4,500 in in fact it amounts to 3,500.
17
Q. 322
Did you you accept that's the amount of money Mr. Dunlop paid you; 3,500?
18
A.
He didn't send me 3,500.
19
He says he sent me 1,000 in 1991.
if it was from him or from Berland.
12:14:05 20
I have no records.
He doesn't know
He has no records
but I have no problem whatsoever in saying to you I accept that he may have
21
sent me an election campaign donation.
22
Nobody ever paid me anything only at election time to contribute to help me get
23
elected.
24 12:14:31 25
Q. 323
And I'm -- I must emphasise that.
All we're trying to do at the moment, if we can at all, Ms. Coffey.
And if
you'd answer the questions I ask you we might make a bit more progress.
Is to
26
try and now establish in light of your previous evidence and the correspondence
27
you have had with the Tribunal, what in fact you now accept that you got from
28
Mr. Dunlop.
29
that you now accept you got 1,000 pounds in 1991 and a similar amount in 1992
12:14:52 30
And do I understand your evidence to the Tribunal today to be,
from Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:14:54
12:15:15
52 1
A.
I accept I got 1,000 pounds in 1992.
I've no record and I don't remember
2
getting 1,000 pounds in 1991. And the other sum of money he's mentioned, which
3
I brought to the attention of the Tribunal by the way and asked them to correct
4
it, which they haven't, was for fundraising, fianna Fail fundraising events so
5
we're talking about two payments.
6
records of it and doesn't appear he has either.
7
Q. 324
8 9 12:15:31 10
11
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 325
And did you get that money in cash, as Mr. Dunlop says he paid it?
A.
I don't remember.
I would have thought it would have been a cheque but I
don't remember. Q. 326
14
It wouldn't appear that there are any cheques in a, for that sum in Mr. Dunlop's records or the records of Mr. Dunlop's business to you in 1991,
12:15:51 15
16
So is it your evidence then that you accept that you received in 1992 a sum of 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop?
12 13
One of which I don't remember and I have no
Ms. Coffey. A.
Mr. Dunlop has never handed me personally cash.
He may have come to what we
17
always had an election campaign office and a team would be there and he could
18
have left it for me.
19
memory.
12:16:14 20
Q. 327
But he never personally handed me cash to the best of my
And I think I would remember if he handed me cash.
And certainly you accept that Mr. Dunlop was a supporter of your -- of the
21
fundraising of the Fianna Fail organisation in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, is that
22
right?
23
A.
Absolutely.
24
Q. 328
And can I ask you about Mr. Sean Dunne and Berland Homes and whether or not you
12:16:32 25
ever recollect receiving 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop and being told it was
26
being paid on behalf of Mr. Sean Dunne?
27
A.
No. I've no memory of that whatsoever.
28
Q. 329
You will have seen the statement that has been provided to the Tribunal by
29 12:16:48 30
Mr. Sean Dunne, 8852. A.
Yes, I just got that today. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:16:49
12:17:00
53 1
Q. 330
Yes. And you will see there that Mr. Dunne confirms and will apparently next
2
week tell the Tribunal, that he made a payment of 1,000 pounds in 1991 as a
3
contribution to it your Local Election campaign.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 331
It was made on behalf of Berland Homes Limited which I understand to be a
6
development company, and I cannot recollect whether it was made directly to
7
Ms. Coffey or through Mr. Dunlop.
8
Berland Homes Limited.
9
It was fully approved by the board of
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 332
Right.
11
A.
I do.
12
Q. 333
Is Mr. Dunne a developer?
13
A.
He is.
14
Q. 334
And is Berland Homes a developer?
A.
They are.
16
Q. 335
And is Monarch Properties a developer?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 336
And when you told the Fianna Fail Inquiry, I think we looked at a it earlier.
19
A.
Can you go back to that statement.
Q. 337
Which one do you want, the Fianna Fail one?
21
A.
Yes, the Fianna Fail statement.
22
Q. 338
Yes 148, please.
12:17:15 10
12:17:23 15
12:17:37 20
23 24
I have no problem with that but I have no record of it.
Do you know Mr. Sean Dunne?
Now, "Councillor Coffey received no personal donations from
Mr. Dunlop and no personal donations from any developer or builder." A.
12:18:06 25
Yes.
I never received anything on a, on a personal nature from any developer
or any builder, anything I ever received which I didn't look after at all, I
26
received as a contribution to my um, election campaigns.
27
Q. 339
Yes.
28
A.
I think the question put to me.
29 12:18:22 30
Can you put that one back up again?
personally get any money. Q. 340
And I cannot be sure, was did you ever
No, I never personally got any money from anyone.
And certainly when you were asked by the Tribunal to identify the source of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:18:26
12:18:44
54 1
political donations received by you.
You provided information which is
2
recorded on pages 149 and 150.
3
political donation from Mr. Sean Mulryan and indeed Monarch Properties.
4
don't identify having received any money from Mr. Sean Dunne or Berland Homes,
5
isn't that right?
And while you identify having received a
6
A.
Well actually you have more than that.
7
Q. 341
Sorry.
You have --
The question, Ms. Coffey, is did you identify having received a sum of
8
money from either Mr. Sean Dunne or Berland Homes.
9
question and then expand on whatever point you want to make.
12:19:02 10
A.
You
No, I didn't put it in.
So if you just answer that
And I'm sure there's other people I've left out too
11
because I can't remember who paid me.
12
They are all in business and some of their business friends would have sent me
13
political contributions.
14 12:19:21 15
I have a -- my family is in business.
Q. 342
And --
A.
And it's actually unfair to put the few names down you can remember though you
16
don't have records and leave out all of the others.
17
Dunne by the way that would have sent me a political contribution but I know
18
Sean Dunne well.
19
Q. 343
12:19:40 20
right? A.
23 24
But you weren't in a position, is that the case, your memory was jogged by the recent correspondence from Mr. Dunne in relation to that payment, is that
21 22
Yes.
Q. 344
Yes.
If Sean
And you accept now having seen the letter that you wrote to Mr. Dunlop
that you got a payment from Mr. Dunlop in 1992?
26
A.
I do.
27
Q. 345
Yes.
28
12:20:13 30
Well, Sean Dunne said, I'm confused by the '91 contribution.
Dunne said he sent me 1,000 pounds for the 1991, I would accept that.
12:20:02 25
29
So there's more than Sean
And if we just look then very quickly at the situation in relation to
Monarch Properties? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 346
There were a number of payments, Ms. Coffey, and some of them were payments in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:20:20
12:20:35
55 1
connection with the St. Patrick's Day lunch in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 347
And that's, as I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, a
4
fundraising activity that's carried out in the constituency as it were?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 348
And is it the position that the funds generated by that are constituency funds?
7
A.
Yes, definitely.
8
Q. 349
Yes.
9 12:20:48 10
But insofar as the November 1992 contribution of 1,000 pounds is
concerned, that was a contribution to yourself, isn't that right? A.
It was a contribution, an unsolicited contribution to my election campaign of
11
1992.
12
parties reading through the, some of the statements you sent out to me.
13
Q. 350
14
Yes.
Which I believe Monarch sent to very many politicians of different
It would appear that in June of 1991 at 3185.
That a cheque was drawn,
apparently, in favour of you but never sent because it was cancelled by Monarch
12:21:18 15
Properties.
If you look some half way down approximately of that list between
16
Paddy Madigan and Therese Ridge you will see "Betty Coffey FF 300 pounds" and
17
the word "cancelled" beside it. Can you confirm in fact that you did not
18
receive that donation?
19
A.
12:21:38 20
Well I don't know anything about that donation to be honest with you. missed it when going through these.
And I
And may I apologise to the Tribunal for
21
one thing.
22
very, grave family commitments at the moment.
23
through all of them but I tried to choose the pieces that I thought would be
24
relevant.
12:22:04 25
26
I have something like 19 volumes of documents and I have some
So my apologies for that.
I haven't been able to read
I haven't really been able to have the
time to do it. Q. 351
27
And insofar as November 1992 is concerned, Ms. Coffey.
I think you accept
that you received a sum of 1,000 pounds by way of a cheque?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 352
You say that that was unsolicited and you didn't seek it, is that correct?
A.
Correct.
12:22:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:22:18
12:22:25
56 1
Q. 353
At that time would you have known Mr. Richard Lynn?
2
A.
Yes.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
That 1,000 pounds is that from Monarch?
5 6
Q. 354
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
That's from Monarch Properties.
7
from Monarch Properties is recorded at page 3880.
8
1,000 pounds to Mr. GV Wright.
9 12:22:48 10
Sorry, the 1,000 pounds
Just above a payment of
A.
Yes.
Q. 355
You will see that, an extract from the cheque payments book that records
11
receipt, payment of a cheque in the sum of 1,000 pounds to you, isn't that
12
right, Mrs. Coffey?
13
A.
Yes, that's right.
14
Q. 356
And I think that in March of 1994, Monarch Properties disclose at page 5005,
12:22:59 15
payment of a sum of 1,000 pounds as a fundraiser to the St. Patrick's Day
16
lunch.
17
A.
That's.
18
Q. 357
And in brackets Betty Coffey "B Coffey", isn't that right?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 358
And would it have been the normal way, would you have written out to Monarch
12:23:12 20
21 22
Properties seeking their support for that? A.
It would have been, we would have sent out Comhairle Dail cheantair headed
23
paper to various people, in the area, all the business people in the Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown area seeking support for the lunch.
12:23:32 25
Q. 359
And I think Monarch Properties also contributed a sum of 700 pounds towards an
26
activity that was being run by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Chamber of Commerce.
27
8567.
This was the Endeavour Awards, isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 360
And I just want to draw to your attention a note at the bottom where it's
12:23:54 30
recorded that "Betty Coffey's husband is running this". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Do you see that note
12:23:59
12:24:05
57 1 2
at the bottom? A.
3
I see T 1994.
I think my husband was president of the Chamber of Commerce
then.
4
Q. 361
And that?
5
A.
I could be wrong though but he was at certain stages.
6
Q. 362
And that request is directed to Mr. Noel Murray.
7 8
Mr. Noel Murray? A.
9
Yes, you would meet Noel Murray at various functions particularly the Chamber of Commerce.
12:24:23 10
11
Would you have known
I think they were members of the Chamber of Commerce, Monarch
and you'd see Noel Murray and people like that there. Q. 363
12
Yes.
And I think again in February of 1996 you wrote to Mr. Richard Lynn
seeking support for the St. Patrick's day lunch.
5763.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 364
You confirm that you wrote that letter, isn't that right?
A.
Well you see again I signed it "Betty" but the top of it, it's from the Fianna
12:24:41 15
16
Fail Comhairle Dail cheantair Dun Laoghaire.
17
sign that because that's ...
And they would have asked me to
18
Q. 365
Yes.
19
A.
They would have known that I knew Richard Lynn.
Q. 366
Because there's a note there at the bottom there "Richard phone me re this
12:24:57 20
21
lunch" and that's a note from you, is it?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 367
So you were asking Mr. Lynn to contact you directly about the lunch, isn't that
24 12:25:06 25
right? A.
26 27
sold. Q. 368
28 29 12:25:17 30
To see did he want it take a table at lunch so we'd know how many tables we
Right, so he did in fact -- I think the sum of 1,300 pounds was paid on that occasion, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 369
And I think again Dublin -- Dun Laoghaire Community Enterprise Society, of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:25:23
12:25:45
58 1
which you were a member of the board, received funding from Monarch Properties
2
as well isn't that right, in the sum of 1,000 pounds?
3
A.
Well the Dun Laoghaire Enterprise Board was made up of and indeed the founder
4
members, John Docklan and myself.
5
in the centre of Dun Laoghaire which we're very proud of, to try and create
6
some jobs.
7
asking them to help us and sponsor it.
8
the old fire station, very successful.
9
Q. 370
12:26:03 10
And it was to set up an enterprise centre
And yes, we wrote to every business person in the community and And the building is there today, it is
And did you yourself make a personal approach in advance of any correspondence from the board to Monarch in order to get funding?
11
A.
No, I wouldn't do that.
The letter would go out.
12
Q. 371
Could I have page 8559, please.
That's it.
This is the letter that was sent on the 5th
13
of March 1997 which appears to be the first or introductory letter.
14
just want to draw to your attention the second paragraph "I understand from
12:26:20 15
And I
Councillor Betty Coffey, who is a member of our board, that Monarch kindly
16
agreed to donate 1,000 pounds towards the cost of this work.
We are indeed
17
grateful for the contribution and I am now writing to request that you might
18
forward same as your convenience as we are now nearing completion of the
19
project."
12:26:36 20
21
That would suggest, Ms. Coffey, if it's an accurate note of the letter, that
22
you had been in touch with Monarch directly and sought the sponsorship.
23
that right?
24 12:26:50 25
Isn't
A.
Well, I think I can put it a different way to you.
Q. 372
Now I'm just dealing with the answer you gave a few minutes ago when I asked
26
you would you have made a direct approach to somebody in Monarch and you said
27
no?
28 29 12:27:08 30
A.
I would on a regular have basis have met business people at Chamber of Commerce lunches, I would have met Noel Murray, I would have met all of the Monarch people.
And not only to them but to other people I would have said look the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:27:13
12:27:35
59 1
enterprise centre now is definitely going to happen will you support it.
2
me personally an enterprise centre.
3
Q. 373
Not
Yes but insofar as I had asked you a few moments ago whether you had approached
4
Monarch Properties directly in advance of correspondence issuing the DUn
5
Laoghaire Community Enterprise Society Limited, do you accept now that the
6
position is that it is likely that you would have made a direct approach to
7
somebody in Monarch for this support in advance of the correspondence?
8
A.
Well I don't remember.
9
Q. 374
Yes.
12:27:46 10
And certainly it would appear that you must have known some of the
people in Monarch well enough to be able to approach them to seek their support
11 12
But if it's in writing, then I did it.
for a project such as this, isn't that right? A.
Well the people in Monarch were involved in everything in Dun Laoghaire.
It
13
would be very hard if you were Cathaoirleach for instance and a member of the
14
council not to know all of the people in Monarch.
12:28:04 15
Commerce.
16 17 18 19 12:28:32 20
21
They were sponsors of the Horse Show.
things they were in. Q. 375
They were in the Chamber of I couldn't name the list of
They were very well known to everyone.
Was it your position in relation to Monarch's proposed development in Cherrywood, Ms. Coffey, that you were against it from the beginning?
A.
I wasn't against development in Cherrywood.
And it's a story in itself and I
don't know how to answer your question like yes or no.
I know the Tribunal
wants to know how things happen.
22 23
I was against massive rezoning all throughout the Carrickmines Valley and over
24
it.
12:28:55 25
I -- the different -- as the meetings evolved it was Monarch's land that
was the land that was in the prime position for, say, the first development and
26
they had a very, very aggressive lobby to support what they wanted.
27
had -- you had three lobbies.
28
Ballybrack and then you had the Carrickmines Valley Protection Society.
29
my main aim was that the town of Dun Laoghaire in 1991 there was no
12:29:23 30
development.
You also
You had the lobby from Loughlinstown,
There was no development anywhere.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But
And I can assure you that
12:29:27
12:29:39
60 1
there was nobody looking to buy a house at that stage because nobody had a job
2
at that stage.
3 4
And I was adamantly opposed to Monarch getting a town centre or even a district
5
centre zoning on that land.
6
it would destroy Dun Laoghaire.
7
Laoghaire town.
8
building a huge district centre/town centre opposition to it a couple of miles
9
up the road.
12:30:07 10
11
Completely opposed to it because it would be -We had to try and get investment into the Dun
That was the main town first before we started thinking of
That was my position then and it was my position to the day I
left the council two years ago. Q. 376
So I just want to understand this before we go to look at the documents and the
12
sequence in relation to the meetings, Ms. Coffey.
13
were opposed to development because of the development of a possible town
14
centre on the lands which would have adversely effected the viability of Dun
12:30:28 15
It's your position that you
Laoghaire town centre?
16
A.
Yes, that's correct.
17
Q. 377
Now, at 176 you have provided a statement to the Tribunal and in it you say two
18
things.
And I just want to clarify that this is your position so that the
19
Tribunal can understand it.
12:30:44 20
21
In the second paragraph you say the following "During late 1989/1990
22
discussions at Dublin County Council began regarding the lands at Cherrywood as
23
part of the discussion on the proposed County Development Plan.
24
Properties, the owners of the lands at Cherrywood started to lobby councillors
12:31:00 25
Monarch
for a major rezoning which included a town centre zoning on the part of the
26
land.
27
have drastic repercussions on the future development of Dun Laoghaire town
28
centre.
29
rezoning.
12:31:18 30
I was deeply concerned that a town centre zoning on this land would
In this regard, I was totally opposed to Monarch's proposals for such I considered that this was a major rezoning which would have
important implications for the whole of the Dun Laoghaire area and I expressed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:31:22
12:31:32
61 1
my views at Fianna Fail group meetings."
2 3
You then say at subparagraphs one and two that "You were contacted by Mr. Lynn
4
and during the coming years you had several meetings with Mr. Lynn but never
5
changed your mind."
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 378
That's your position?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 379
So it was always your position that you were an opponent to the Monarch
12:31:40 10
proposals for the rezoning of the lands, for the change in density on the lands
11
at Carrickmines.
Is that right?
12
A.
For the development of the retail element of the land in particular.
13
Q. 380
Well where in your statement do you make that distinction for the Tribunal,
14 12:31:57 15
Mrs. Coffey? A.
Well I make the distinction in stating that my main concern was the town
16
centre/ what's it district centre zoning was definitely going to destroy Dun
17
Laoghaire.
18
the residential element of it.
19
you had the Carrickmines Valley, which started off wanting nothing and then
12:32:26 20
The other aspects of it, which I think you're talking about, is Well you had then, on the on the other hand
stepped down to one house to the acre.
21
And then you had the Loughlinstown
group which wanted the whole land developed I suppose for jobs.
22 23
But my -- all my arguments to my colleagues was for the protection of the Dun
24
Laoghaire town centre.
12:32:55 25
The difference in the residential zoning came as a
result of the lobbying from both sides.
I mean, Monarch wanted 16 to the
26
acre, we've got to remember that.
27
got -- I wouldn't say a quarter of what they wanted.
28 29 12:33:23 30
Q. 381
They got nothing in the final motion they
You will have seen in the documentation, Mrs. Coffey, that in November of 1993 you were a signatory to two motions; isn't that right? Having previously been a signatory to a number of other motions which if necessary I will go back to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:33:28
12:33:40
62 1
deal with, but you were a signatory to two motions that dealt in particular
2
with the Carrickmines lands, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
In '93 you're talking about.
4
Q. 382
The review of the '83 Plan?
5
A.
Oh, yes, yes.
6
Q. 383
And in summary.
So that I can outline the position in summary.
Initially
7
what had happened was that the manager had brought certain proposals before the
8
council for the development of a large portion of land in a map called DP90/123
9
which was the subject of discussion in Carrickmines 1?
12:33:59 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 384
And that was voted down as a result of a motion by yourself in December of
12
1990, isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct, yes.
14
Q. 385
And following that, the manager was directed to prepare new maps which he
12:34:09 15
presented to you and your colleagues in January of 1991?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 386
Following that, in May of 1991 prior to the first public display, the manager
18
brought a second map known as option one DP90/129A to the council and that was
19
adopted by the council and went on public display.
12:34:34 20
A.
21 22
Isn't that right?
Uh-huh. Well I don't have the map up and yes if it's there it's right, I don't want to delay the Tribunal.
Q. 387
When the matter came back into the council after the first public display, a
23
number of motions were brought before the council and a meeting took place on
24
the 27th of May 1992.
12:34:50 25
A.
Uh-huh.
26
Q. 388
There were 11 motions at that meeting.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 389
And two of those motions were successful.
29 12:35:04 30
Yes.
One was a motion by Councillor
Gilmore and others for a district centre on a portion of the lands.
And the
other was a motion by Councillor Barrett to reduce the density on the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:35:09
12:35:26
63 1
residential portion of all of the lands from four to the acre to one to the
2
acre?
3
A.
4 5
Yes. Now, I don't think I was in attendance at those votes.
Not -- was it
Eamonn Gilmore's motion for the district centre. Q. 390
6
What happened and the record shows is you were in attendance on the 27th of May 1992.
You voted against the manager's proposals on DP92/44.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 391
At page 7207.
9
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 392
You will see there on the record you are recorded as voting against the
12:35:40 10
11
manager's proposals for the rezoning effectively of the plans?
12
A.
Oh, yes.
13
Q. 393
And you are not recorded as voting on the balance of the motions that took
14 12:35:59 15
16
place. A.
Yes, I voted against that motion.
Q. 394
You did and indeed, you are recorded in a, in the newspapers the following day.
17
If I could have 8161, please.
18
please.
19
A number of -- Fianna Fail Councillors told the meeting that she would be
12:36:31 20
And if we look at the fourth column across,
And if we could increase the fourth column across.
And it's there.
voting against Councillor Lydon's motion which would have allowed the company
21
to build 6.6 houses on each acre of this site.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 395
Now, the -- can the Tribunal take it, Mrs. Coffey, that everybody at this
24
meeting knew that what was being discussed were the Carrickmines lands were the
12:36:47 25
26
Monarch lands? A.
I wouldn't -- I wouldn't say that they -- that the whole council, 78 members
27
knew that the land was called Monarch.
28
say they were voting on the Cherrywood proposal.
29
lands as the developer, you know.
12:37:09 30
Q. 396
They called it Cherrywood.
So they'd
We didn't always refer to
Well Councillor Lydon seems to have been aware that the lands were Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:37:13
12:37:32
64 1
lands because he's recorded in the newspapers as saying and I quote "basically
2
the outcome means the company can build 167 huge mansions on the site but I
3
understand they will not proceed with this said Councillor Lydon after the
4
meeting."
5 6
And it also records that Councillor Lydon had made a passionate plea on behalf
7
of Monarch saying that the project would bring 1,000 permanent jobs to the
8
area.
9
day, Ms. Coffey, the only developer or landowner who is mentioned or discussed
12:37:41 10
11
And if one reads the article that was in the newspaper the following
is Monarch. A.
Well in the press by Councillor Lydon but you asked me would all of the
12
councillors be aware that it was the Monarch land.
13
--
14 12:37:54 15
16
I couldn't answer that but
Q. 397
Were you aware it was the Monarch lands?
A.
Yes.
Q. 398
And had you been approached by anybody seeking you -- seeking your support for
17
an increase in density or a change on the Monarch lands?
18
A.
What year was that?
19
Q. 399
1992.
A.
Oh, yes.
21
Q. 400
And 1992 or 1993.
22
A.
Well the man I dealt with, and I think the only person I dealt with was Richard
12:38:09 20
Who approached you?
23
Lynn.
24
And I had passionately spoken in the council chamber that I was not and never
12:38:32 25
would support what Monarch initially wanted.
26 27
And many, many meetings with Richard Lynn but he knew my position.
meetings, he met me. Q. 401
So in May of 1992, and as appears to be the position that's set out in the
28
record.
29
proposing, which is recorded on 7203, please.
12:38:59 30
But, you know, people ask for
Your position was that you were against what the manager was
Mrs. Coffey. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Which is the manager's map,
12:38:59
12:39:15
65 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 402
The manager had brought a report in favour of this map and he had sought
3
changes on the map.
And I think the council officials who have given evidence
4
to the Tribunal have agreed that the substantial portion of the changes,
5
suggested on this map, concerned only the Monarch lands.
So --
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 403
So it would appear that certainly from the official point of view what was
8 9
being proposed by the manager related primarily to the Monarch lands? A.
I'm sorry.
Q. 404
Yeah.
11
A.
Yes, I see it.
12
Q. 405
And the manager was proposing a change from AP to A1P and a slight increase in
12:39:30 10
13 14
They are the lands outlined in red on that map.
the area that would be zoned residential. A.
Yes.
Q. 406
And you voted against that.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 407
Now, the manager had in his report to the meeting indicated that what he meant
12:39:41 15
18 19
by A1P was low density residential four houses to the acre? A.
Correct.
Q. 408
So you voted against that?
21
A.
I did.
22
Q. 409
So you were not in favour of four houses to the acre on the Monarch lands in
12:39:53 20
23 24 12:40:01 25
May of 1992? A.
No.
Q. 410
But in November of 1993 you were a co-signatory to a motion which had as its
26
direct effect the increase in density on the Monarch lands from one house to
27
the acre to four houses to the acre, isn't that right?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 411
Now, why did you do that?
A.
Well we are on the motion I signed with Councillor Marren aren't we?
12:40:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:40:23
12:40:38
66 1
Q. 412
Yes.
2
A.
Well I'll tell you why I signed that: After the manager's motion I voted
3
against it.
4
was one to the acre, which I voted in favour of -- no wrong.
5
motion was by Councillor Breathnach and I don't know who seconded it, which was
6
one to the acre, which I voted in favour and that was lost.
7
the final motion, which is the one had -- you have to forgive me if I don't
8
remember number in all of the motions.
9
the manager's motion was only lost by two votes.
12:41:06 10
The following motion was a motion by Councillor Dockrell, which The following
We now come to
So we come to the final motion. Of which I was one.
Now,
The
final motion, which was Donal Marren's motion or including Larry Lohan, myself,
11
Liam Cosgrave and I think it's Anne Ormonde, because it's not right to say one
12
person owns a motion or not, that's incorrect.
13
to the manager's motion except that there was a certain amount of the land
14
zoned one to the acre.
12:41:37 15
That motion was very similar
And forgive me if I preempt your question, why did I
only support Monarch and leave out one to the acre.
16
the other land was not owned by Monarch.
17
Monarch.
18
honest truth.
I was never aware that
I thought the whole lot was owned by
You might find that silly or not but that's the way I -- that's the
19 12:41:50 20
And you're in a council chamber and you know what support you're getting, cross
21
party or otherwise.
22
proposal was only lost by two votes, then councillor -- the substantive motion
23
signed by the five of us was definitely going to be voted through.
24
And you know the numbers.
If you see that the manager's
Q. 413
With respect --
A.
It was the best we could get at the time.
26
Q. 414
You are mixing up two sets of minutes, Ms. Coffey.
27
A.
Well I --
28
Q. 415
And I'll take responsibility for that because I've been trying to hurry the
12:42:18 25
29 12:42:33 30
process along.
You are cobbling together the events of May 1992 and November
1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:42:34
12:42:43
67 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 416
Because the manager's motion takes place on the 27th of May 1992 and is lost.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 417
Councillor Barrett's motion is successful on the same day.
And your motion
5
and your colleague's motion to rezone the Monarch lands does not come before
6
the council until November 1993?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 418
So --
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon.
Just to put it into context in fairness.
12:42:54 10
11
MS. DILLON:
I think I'll go back --
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
successful motion, the second public display goes out.
12:43:06 15
And all of the lands
the subject matter of Mr. Barrett's motion are zoned one house to the acre.
16 17
What happens after May 1992, Ms. Coffey, when Mr. Barrett's
So that's the second public display. A.
Thank you very much.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that happens over the course of I think it's 1993.
12:43:20 20
21
MS. DILLON:
July 1993.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
effectively, the last of the meetings regarding the whole of the Carrickmines
12:43:29 25
July 1993 and it comes back then to the council for
Valley for the confirmation meeting.
26 27
Q. 419
MS. DILLON:
If I show you a map it might make things simpler.
28
This is the effect of the May 1992 meeting.
29
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
12:43:46 30
The yellow lands are all the
red are the lands owned by Monarch Properties. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
7217, please.
The lands outlined in
And the box part of those
12:43:51
12:44:09
68 1
lands were the lands zoned for a town centre by Councillor Gilmore at the
2
meeting on the 27th of May.
3
the yellow lands has a residential density of one to the acre.
4
first public display they'd had a residential density of four to the acre.
As a result of Councillor Barrett's motion all of
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 420
In May of 1992 you voted for two motions.
7
Whereas in the
Councillors Gordon and Reeves and
Breathnach and Smyth to keep the lands at one house per acre and that was lost.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 421
And Councillor Barrett's motion on which you did not vote, was won.
12:44:29 10
And the
effect of that was that all of those lands on the map on screen that are
11
coloured yellow were zoned one house to the acre.
12
public display.
13
November 1993.
14
with the town centre and one in connection with the residential density.
12:44:53 15
That went out on the second
It came back into the council for further consideration in At which stage you signed two motions.
One in connection The
residential density motion that you signed is at 7226.
16
A.
7226?
17
Q. 422
It's going to come on up on screen now.
This is the motion in relation to the
18
residential density and the motion seeks to accept the County Manager agencies'
19
recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined
12:45:16 20
in red on the attached map and the balance of the lands remained at two per
21
acre.
22
entire of Councillor Breathnach's change and reverting for the entire of the
23
residential lands back to four per acre.
24
The manager in his report to the meeting had recommended deleting the
A.
That's correct.
Q. 423
The motion, the map that's signed by you and attached to the motion is 7227.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 424
And the lands that are outlined in red are those portion of the Monarch lands
12:45:30 25
28
that go as far as the old 1983 Southeastern Motorway line.
29
zoned portion of the Monarch lands.
12:45:51 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
The residentially
12:45:51
12:46:07
69 1
Q. 425
Right.
So what your motion, Ms. Coffey, and Mr. Marren's motion, seeks to do
2
is to change the density on the Monarch lands from one per acre to four per
3
acre and leave the balance of the residentially zoned lands at one per acre?
4
A.
That's correct.
5
Q. 426
Right.
6
A.
And the district centre remains at neighbourhood centre.
7
Q. 427
I will come to the district centre in a moment.
8
A.
All right.
9
Q. 428
What I would like you to outline to the Tribunal, do you accept first of all,
12:46:18 10
that this is a change in position for yourself?
11
A.
Yes, I do.
12
Q. 429
All right.
And would you just explain to the Tribunal, the factual basis on
13
which you came to change your opinion and then the circumstances in which you
14
came to sign this motion?
12:46:33 15
A.
I will.
First of all, we better -- I'll explain to you how I signed the
16
motion to the best of my memory.
17
motion.
18
asked me would I support, would I support the motion.
19
then he said will you sign it.
12:47:02 20
Councillor Marren came to me with the
And as you see, Larry Lohan's name is underneath his name.
And
I said I would.
I remember saying well why do you need to sign
it because he said you've spoken so often on the development, if your signature
21
is on it, it will carry weight.
22
I'd had achieved what I wanted to achieve.
23
centre on it and that took the risk away from Dun Laoghaire town centre.
24
the land --
12:47:31 25
Q. 430
26 27
12:47:43 30
So I agreed to do that.
Mainly because one,
I'd had achieved a neighbourhood Two,
Can I just stop you there on that. Are you reading from some sort of prepared script?
A.
28 29
And
No, I'm not. You can have this if you like.
This is the motion in front of
me. Q. 431
Before you go on to talk about the neighbourhood centre, can I ask you this, which motion was dealt with first? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:47:46
12:47:57
70 1
A.
2 3
I'm dealing with which is referred to as the Marren Coffey motion. ARe you happy with that?
Q. 432
Yes. You're talking about the neighbourhood centre being kept at neighbourhood
4
size.
I am suggesting to you, Ms. Coffey, that that motion was voted on after
5
this motion was voted on, isn't that right?
6
A.
Well I'm -- I've lost you a bit but I accept what you're saying.
7
Q. 433
We'll just get it clear in fairness to yourself, Ms. Coffey?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 434
You appear to be making a point to the Tribunal because you had satisfied
12:48:11 10
yourself about the size of the neighbourhood centre, you were then in a
11
position to change your position and sign this motion, is that the position?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 435
However, any amendment to the neighbourhood centre change took place after this
14 12:48:25 15
16
motion was voted upon so the record shows, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 436
But if your concern had been to ensure that the changes that you were proposing
17
to the neighbourhood centre, one would have expected that you would have
18
ensured that that motion would have been voted on first?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 437
Did that happen?
21
A.
Well the manager's report on his initial --
22
Q. 438
Sorry.
23
A.
-- motion.
24
Q. 439
Sorry can you just answer the question, Mrs. Coffey?
A.
I can't answer the question.
26
Q. 440
Was the neighbourhood motion voted on first?
27
A.
Sorry, I can't answer the question the way you are putting it.
12:48:37 20
12:48:45 25
28
explain to the Tribunal.
29 12:48:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I want to
12:48:53
12:49:01
71 1
A.
I want to explain to the Tribunal.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
When I spoke to the other signatories of this motion which I only spoke to
5
Donal Marren and Larry Lohan.
6
neighbourhood centre would stand, which was in the manager's initial motion
7
which I had vetted voted against.
8
motion.
9
talking plan, we're talking politics. And in politics you have to have
12:49:28 10
They said that there was agreement to, that the
And that this was a completely compromised
And I'm sorry, the Tribunal must just remember, we are not just
positions.
You have a position that you might start and another position that
11
you might end.
12
certainly would not sustain a district centre or town centre.
13
sustain it.
14
the amendment in his own writing there was to appease the Carrickmines Valley
12:49:55 15
Four houses to the acre is a fairly low density.
It
It would not
And my understanding was that the reason that Donal Marren put
Protection Society and Michael Smyth's group, wherever they were, by keeping
16
some of the land one to the acre.
It's as simple as that.
17 18
Q. 441
19 12:50:13 20
21
MS. DILLON:
The first motion that was to be dealt with that day.
Could I
have page please 7224 for Ms. Coffey. A.
7224?
Q. 442
Yes.
It will come up on screen beside you.
The first motion that was to be
22
dealt with was a motion by Councillor Smyth, Buckley and Misteil resolving that
23
the lands on change three be confirmed at low density housing of one or two
24
houses to the acre.
12:50:29 25
And that was the first motion that was dealt with, isn't
that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 443
Now, you had voted in favour of such a motion in May of 1992, isn't that right?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 444
You didn't do so on this occasion, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
12:50:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:50:40
12:51:00
72 1
Q. 445
Now, what I have asked you to do on a number of occasions, I think this is my
2
third time now to ask you, Ms. Coffey, is to explain to the Tribunal the
3
factual basis on which you came to change your mind?
4
A.
Well I don't think that I can explain it any more factually than I explained
5
it.
6
different political parties.
7
the people that you represent.
8
different political parties.
9
everybody watches the West Wing but it would be really, it would educate you
12:51:29 10
But I will try again.
about politics.
You are in a council chamber made up of all You've tried to achieve an end result that suits There's interlinking going on between the
It's a political arena.
I don't know if
At the end of the day it's numbers.
And remember,
11
Ms. Dillon, you told me one time, the last time we're not only bums on seats
12
and I was really insulted but at the end of the day it is numbers.
13
you can achieve.
14
the acre was a formula by which Monarch could never ever build a major shopping
12:51:59 15
I couldn't achieve one to the acre.
centre because they wouldn't sustain it.
16
It's what
And actually one to
Neither could they build a district
centre or a town centre at four to the acre.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
What did you understand this motion would achieve?
The motion would achieve.
12:52:10 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Which would in some way satisfy your own view?
The motion achieved that in the council chamber, talking to the heads of the
23
different groups that they were happy with a neighbourhood centre.
24
nobody was going to try and push through a district centre.
12:52:34 25
That
And this motion
sustained a neighbourhood centre and gave, it gave everybody something.
It
26
gave Loughlinstown Ballybrack some job creation, something that would keep them
27
going.
28
at four to the acre, which they must have been desperately disappointed in.
29
And they gave the Carrickmines Valley, their one to the acre, and land to the
12:53:05 30
It gave Monarch enough to develop the land to a neighbourhood centre
north of it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:53:05
12:53:20
73 1 2
And I tell you I am an honourable person.
3
it to you now.
4
the numbers game at what you can achieve.
5
in the centre of Dun Laoghaire.
6
people and I look at it now, if anyone here lives in Dun Laoghaire, I mean Dun
7
Laoghaire now has an opportunity to boom.
8
drive through Cherrywood and if you see the science and technology park and
9
what has established and the houses.
12:53:47 10
I'm an honest person.
I'm saying
In all honesty, that was all behind the toing and froing and
can't go out and meet Wicklow.
I was working for my town.
I love Dun Laoghaire.
I live
I was protecting the
It's fantastic.
And if you now
Where were we to go? We were warned you
You only had to go that way.
11
gone up to Stepaside.
Now, I may be going on in yards.
12
impress on you, I'm not here to cod anyone.
13
what I did then.
14
way it was.
And now we've
But I want to
I'm here passionately telling you
And I don't want to get upset, you know, I'm -- that's the
12:54:08 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
17 18
Q. 446
19 12:54:15 20
MS. DILLON:
In January of 1994 the councils were going to separate into three
separate councils, Mrs. Coffey, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 447
Fingal, south Dublin and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 448
This event is happening in November 1993, some two months before Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council takes up its own statutory functions, isn't
12:54:29 25
that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 449
And when Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was established on the 1st of
28
January 1994, the number of councillors dealing with the matter or the area
29
would have been much reduced, isn't that right from the 78?
12:54:40 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:54:40
12:55:03
74 1
Q. 450
Isn't that the position? Now on the 11th of November 1993, Councillor Barrett
2
brought an amendment to councillor Misteil's motion at which he suggested at
3
7225.
4
to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council not later than June '94, a draft
5
variation of the new County Development Plan for these lands.
6
the residentially zoned lands.
That the amendment that the manager be requested to prepare and submit
And they are
Do you see that, Mrs. Coffey?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 451
This was an opportunity I suggest to you to have taken the entire difficult
9
situation that you have described and take it out of the hands of Dublin County
12:55:20 10
Council for a two or three month period and put it in the hands of effectively
11
the local councillors in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, isn't that right?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 452
You voted against that amendment, isn't that right? That's what the record
14 12:55:34 15
shows. A.
Well if the record shows it.
16
Q. 453
7261, please?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 454
What I would like you to explain to the Tribunal, Mrs. Coffey, is this.
19
What
was the urgency or the great necessity in November 1993 to get four houses to
12:55:51 20
21
You're not putting it up.
the acre for Monarch? A.
The urgency was and I think Councillor Marren put it to you.
The urgency was
22
this; 1992, that's 16 years ago isn't it now? 16.
And you're asking me, by
23
the way, and I have to remind you, to think back to what way I was thinking 16
24
years ago.
16 years ago I didn't qualify for my bus pass.
I do now.
12:56:23 25
26
However, what was trying to be achieved is, and there were huge debates.
27
a pity, the minutes don't reflect debates in the council chamber.
28
was going to achieve was it was going to get land developed that was going to
29
produce jobs for Loughlinstown Ballybrack.
12:56:51 30
low density housing to sustain it.
What this
It was going to produce a fairly
And then it was going to, it was a piece.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
It's
12:56:56
12:57:07
75 1
That's all I can say to you.
And the debate had gone.
Can you give me the
2
vote on that motion? What was the vote on that motion?
3
Q. 455
On which motion the amendment motion?
4
A.
Councillor Barrett's.
5
Q. 456
7267. 43 to 27.
6
A.
43 to 27?
7
Q. 457
Uh-huh.
8
A.
So 43 people voted it down, did they?
9
Q. 458
Voted against it.
A.
They voted against it.
11
Q. 459
Yes.
12
A.
So if I only could have the debate that was in the chamber.
12:57:17 10
13 14 12:57:28 15
16
you what I was thinking. Q. 460
What I am asking you, Mrs. Coffey, is to explain how?
A.
I don't --
Q. 461
When the manager had made a substantially similar proposal which he had brought
17
to the chamber in May of 1992 you voted against it.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 462
Yes.
12:57:44 20
21
Then I can tell
You are now voting for Monarch only and signing a motion that benefits
Monarch only in November 1993. A.
Isn't that the position?
It happens to be the way you can interpret the position.
But I'm telling you
22
that even though it was a Monarch only piece of land, the other piece of land,
23
one to the acre, I wasn't even aware that Monarch did not own it.
24
going to go down that road.
12:58:08 25
And surely by now I've convinced you.
Dublin County Council. Q. 463
What I'm concerned about, Mrs. Coffey, at 7229 leaving aside any abiding
28
passion you might have.
29
had as its only and direct effect the benefiting of a specific landowner,
12:58:31 30
Surely by
now I've really convinced you of my abiding passion about what I was doing in
26 27
So I'm not
Is why you elected to put your name to a motion that
namely, Monarch Properties.
And I really wish, and we might make progress.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:58:36
12:58:51
76 1
If you would for the fifth time would address your mind to answering that
2
simple question; why did you bring a motion before the council that is
3
completely contrary to the way you had voted in May of '92 and benefit a single
4
landowner, Monarch Properties.
5
A.
6
Well I believe I have answered it.
Would you just answer that question, please. I believe I've answered it twice.
It
had -- it might be a long-winded answer but I've answered that question twice.
7 8
MR. FARREN:
Chairman, If I may -- I hasten to interrupt my friend in full
9
flight, as it were but I think the witness has answered that question.
12:59:09 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Well she has.
She insists that that is the --
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Is the answer.
14 12:59:13 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
16 17
Q. 464
MS. DILLON:
All right.
18
fair to you.
19
house to the acre.
12:59:26 20
21
Well then the position is this then Ms. Coffey to be
The following is the position. In 1992 your position was one No town centre.
Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 465
In 1993 your position is four house to the acre for Monarch Properties and a
22
neighbourhood centre.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 466
Right.
12:59:40 25
And that is as a result of tick tacking or political negotiation on
the floor of the chamber is that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 467
And were you approached or persuade in any way by anybody on behalf of Monarch?
28 29 12:59:51 30
Did Mr. Dunlop approach you for example? A.
No.
Q. 468
How do you know? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:59:51
13:00:06
77 1
A.
I know he didn't because I was never aware that he was working for Monarch.
2
Q. 469
Did Mr. Lynn approach you?
3
A.
Oh, several times.
4
Q. 470
And when did you ever indicate to Mr. Lynn that you had changed your position
5 6
I'd several meetings with Richard Lynn.
in relation to Monarch? A.
No.
Because I think that motion was held on the day. Richard Lynn could not
7
have been happy even with that motion.
8
it.
9
wanted a town centre.
13:00:25 10
They wanted 16 to the acre.
Monarch could not have been happy with
They said it was a district centre.
That was a step down motion and -- and Monarch must
have been very disappointed with that motion.
11
Q. 471
Well did he send you flowers after the vote?
12
A.
(laughter) I don't remember.
13
Q. 472
Mr. Lynn?
14
A.
I don't remember.
Q. 473
8566.
13:00:35 15
They
You see there flowers ordered by Richard Lynn for Betty Coffey and Phil
16
Reilly for Michael Keating.
17
he certainly thought enough of you, didn't he, Mrs. Coffey, or what you had
18
done that he was minded enough to send you flowers the day of the vote, isn't
19
that right?
13:00:54 20
A.
21 22
Q. 474
If he did. We got flowers at
Well I'm drawing to your attention first of all the date which is the 11th of November --
A.
13:01:10 25
I see it's the 11th.
Richard Lynn is a gentleman.
He probably knew he had
sort of annoyed me enough seeking enough meetings to get what they wanted which
26 27
Well that was, I mean, I don't remember it.
Do you see that? Well
Christmas always from Monarch.
23 24
11th of November 1993.
they didn't get. Q. 475
Well he certainly seems to have been happy enough with whatever you had done to
28
consider that you were worthy of receiving flowers on the same date as the
29
motion is passed, isn't that right?
13:01:27 30
A.
Oh, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:01:28
13:01:38
78 1
Q. 476
And do you accept now looking back on it, Mrs. Coffey, that there is a radical
2
change in your position between May of 1992 and November 1993 in relation to
3
the Monarch lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 477
So you do not see being against a town centre, a neighbourhood centre and being
6
against four houses to the acre and only in favour of one to the acre in May of
7
'92 and being in favour of four to the acre and a neighbourhood centre in
8
November '93 as being a change in position?
9
A.
13:01:59 10
No, I don't.
Four to the acre is low density housing.
16 to the acre was
the norm then.
11
Q. 478
And do you accept --
12
A.
One to the acre would stop any -- any question of any district centre going on
13
the land.
14
thinking.
13:02:11 15
Q. 479
Yes.
Now, I think I've made myself very clear on where, what way I was
And that's my other question to you.
If you had as your stated
16
objective or desire the protection of the business interests in Dun Laoghaire
17
--
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 480
-- town.
13:02:26 20
to the acre which would have ensured no neighbourhood development on the
21 22
Cherrywood lands? A.
23 24 13:02:37 25
26
Why then did you not support Mr. Misteil's motion to keep it at one
Because then there would be no development and the people in Loughlinstown Ballybrack would have no hope.
Q. 481
So you had changed your position?
A.
No.
Q. 482
In May of '92 where you were in favour of no neighbourhood centre to a position
27
where in November '93 you were in favour of a reduced size neighbourhood
28
centre?
29 13:02:54 30
A.
No, '92 I was -- I voted against the manager's proposal because I wanted to slow down the whole process. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:02:58
13:03:16
79 1
Q. 483
Sorry, you wanted to slow down what process?
2
A.
The process of reaching, of ensuring that we'd got -- that we slowed down a
3
major development which would be provide -- providing a town centre or district
4
centre on the site.
5
Q. 484
That was it.
But you could have slowed the process down even further by supporting Mr.
6
Barrett to leave it all over to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council couldn't
7
you?
8
A.
9
One to the acre. If you supported one to the acre, which I did on one occasion.
13:03:33 10
I mean, it's just not real and you have to be in the council
chamber to see what's happening.
Anyway there were 11 motions all together.
11
Some of them I wasn't there for.
I must have had to go to some either a
12
family thing or another meeting.
I know I'm clear on it, Ms. Dillon.
13
can't explain to you any more what I did I know was right.
14
Q. 485
13:03:56 15
Monarch lands? When you signed the motion in November '93? A.
Yes well I didn't, you know.
I -- maybe it was discussions on what we were
18
going to achieve.
19
didn't question the one to the acre.
13:04:19 20
Q. 486
That was, you know, a compromise motion
Are you saying that you believed that all of the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley were all owned by Monarch?
A.
13:04:40 25
26
I
represented his thinking on a lot of things.
23 24
I thought all of the lands were the Monarch lands.
and, you know, Donal Marren is a very able councillor and I would have
21 22
Would it be fair to say that you
would have known at least when you signed that motion that they were the
16 17
And when the question of the Monarch lands.
I
I don't -- I didn't question it.
I just -- I didn't think about it one way
or the other. Q. 487
Did you subsequently in 1997 support various motions by or on behalf of Monarch
27
in the review of the plan before Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown to increase the science
28
and technology zoning into the golf course lands?
29 13:04:59 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 488
And -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:05:02
13:05:15
80 1
A.
But I think that the golf course was a very important issue because Larry
2
Butler and myself I know put a motion down to ensure that a golf course could
3
be developed, even though some of us was brought in to accommodate the science
4
and technology park.
5
Q. 489
Yes.
A motion --
6
A.
But we were assured that a golf course could be built.
7
Q. 490
Yes.
You had brought a motion, an amendment to the main motion, in which you
8
sought that the -- moving the science and technology zoning into the golf
9
course lands would be without prejudice to the Council's wish to develop public
13:05:35 10
golf course on the lands, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 491
And because of that amendment that was put forward by you.
13 14 13:05:44 15
It would appear
that the motion itself was passed, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 492
And those -- the lands that were on the map, at 7287.
16
These lands with the
letter three?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 493
They subsequently became zoned for science and technology E1 at that point in
19 13:06:03 20
21
time, isn't that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 494
And did you also support an extension of the development of the town centre
22
into the adjoining lands?
23
A.
The neighbourhood centre?
24
Q. 495
Yes.
A.
Was it a town centre by then?
26
Q. 496
Neighbourhood centre?
27
A.
Yes, I'm sure I did.
28
Q. 497
I think you were present but it's recorded only as a show of hands.
13:06:13 25
29 13:06:29 30
If it's in the minutes I did, yes. But it
would seem likely that you would have supported it? A.
Yes.
If we were going to be successful in developing a science and technology Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:06:34
13:06:53
81 1
park and we were able to maintain the development of a golf course, I would
2
have supported anything that helped the science and technology park.
3
Q. 498
4
And I think the cap on retail development, which had been imposed in 1993, was removed also in 1998, isn't that right?
5
A.
Well ...
6
Q. 499
The cap on the retail element at Cherrywood?
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 500
Isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 501
Because the Manager proposed an alternative amendment, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 502
And that would have allowed for much greater development on the town centre
13:06:58 10
13 14
lands than had been allowed previously? A.
No.
Q. 503
Much greater retail element, isn't that right?
16
A.
District centre then it went up to.
17
Q. 504
Yes?
18
A.
District centre, yes not town centre.
19
Q. 505
And is it your position that by the time that motion came on for hearing you
13:07:10 15
13:07:20 20
21
were in support of a district centre on the Cherrywood lands? A.
By the time '98 came along Dun Laoghaire had developed the Pavilion site.
We
22
were also I think now, I could be wrong but I'm just giving you a history of
23
what happened in Dun Laoghaire.
24
Monarch had invested in the Bloomfield site and built another shopping centre
13:07:43 25
The Pavilion site was being developed.
and Dun Laoghaire was beginning to grow.
The Manager put investment into the
26
redevelopment of the main street itself.
27
district centre would not have effected Dun Laoghaire.
28
stand on its own and is doing quite well.
29 13:08:08 30
Q. 506
And therefore there was no, the Dun Laoghaire can
In view -- in November 1993, Mrs. Coffey, in view of the imminence of the separate local authority of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Why did
13:08:13
13:08:34
82 1
you not consider yourself bringing a motion that would have left over the
2
entire question to the new council?
3
A.
Well, I did try in debates in the County Council to say that I felt we were
4
doing an impossible task in trying to put together a Development Plan for the
5
whole of Dublin County.
And there were also staffing problems at that time.
6
Q. 507
Will I repeat the question for you, Mrs. Coffey.
7
A.
I'm trying to tell you, Ms. Dillon.
8
Q. 508
We're talking about the zoning of the Carrickmines Valley and the Tribunal is
9
Which is this question --
not interested in the zoning of the rest of Dublin because this Module is
13:08:53 10
concerned, at this moment in time, with the Carrickmines Valley.
And what I'm
11
asking you, and what I'd like you to answer, first before you elaborate.
12
why you didn't elect to transfer the vexed question of the zoning of the
13
Carrickmines Valley into the hands of the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council
14
which was taking up office two months later?
13:09:13 15
A.
Is
Well the zoning that we achieved at the end was going to be carried forward to
16
the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
17
were quite happy with, the signatories on that motion and the people who voted
18
for it were very happy with what we'd achieved.
19
over.
13:09:39 20
And that was going to carry
And we did I think pass a motion to carry out an area Action Plan for
the Cherrywood area, which was done, took a long time to do it, and it was just
21 22
And what we had achieved in, we
a starting point. Q. 509
And that's it.
Nothing wrong with that.
The area Action Plan was commenced in January of 1994 on the instructions of
23
Mr. Willie Murray and was brought before the Council in April 1994. And I
24
suggest to you, Mrs. Coffey, that is not a very long time.
13:10:05 25
at a Draft Action Area Plan by April 1994 and were considering it?
26
A.
Mrs. Dillon.
27
Q. 510
So why are you suggesting -- ?
28
A.
You have the documentation there.
29 13:10:14 30
You were looking
'94.
ago. Q. 511
Why -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
This is 2006.
This is 12 years
13:10:15
13:10:32
83 1
A.
Now, I want to tell you.
This is -- it's very unfair of you, if you don't
2
mind my saying so, and with all respect to you, to say to me to remember
3
exactly how everything happened.
4
here.
I hadn't studied all of that until I came
It's --
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
way.
8
better to leave over questions relating to the rezoning of this area until the
9
new Councils were created and a more focused approach by local Councillors
13:10:59 10
Well do you remember, Mrs. Coffey.
If the question was put this
Do you remember considering at the time, in '93, whether it might be
would then take on the task? I mean, did you consider whether that might be a
11
better way forward, or what were your views at that time as to whether the
12
decisions should be taken there or should be delayed for what, presumably,
13
couldn't have been more than a few months?
14
A.
13:11:25 15
Absolutely.
I agree with you.
And I regret now I didn't put down a motion
to that effect and try and push it through.
16
route.
But no everyone wanted to go that
People wanted to participate in the Development Plan then.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
But there was a motion --
And '92.
13:11:38 20
21 22
MS. DILLON: A.
There were two --
Sorry.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
13:11:44 25
council.
There were two motions seeking to achieve that before the
One was Mr. Barrett's and then --
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
plate, so to speak.
29
A.
Yes.
So that opportunity, if you like, was presented to you on a
Yes.
13:11:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:11:52
13:12:10
84 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
And we're just wondering where why ...
I didn't vote for it.
I should have probably.
Well 46 voted against it.
3
So in the debate there was probably not support for it.
4
were saying, were we're not going to go along with this.
And probably my group
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
or discussing it amongst yourselves at the time, should we wait or should we
8
deal with it now?
9
A.
Well do you have any recollection, in any event, of considering it
No, I've no memory of that.
Not.
I really don't.
13:12:26 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13
All right.
You know, hindsight is a great thing but the motion didn't get support, generally across the board it didn't get support.
14 13:12:37 15
CHAIRMAN:
16
Ms. Dillon, it's now one o'clock.
Now, if your nearly finished
...
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
an opportunity to put her position in relation to the record really I have to
13:12:50 20
I'm almost finished.
ask you this, Ms. Coffey.
In fairness to Ms. Coffey just to give her
Did the payment of 1,000 pounds in November 1992,
21
was that a factor you took into account in November 1993 when you came to
22
consider the Monarch position again?
23
A.
Absolutely not.
24
Q. 512
Thank you very much, Ms. Coffey.
13:13:07 25
If you would answer any questions anybody
else might have for you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask a question?
28 29
MR. SANFEY: No, Chairman.
13:13:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:13:12
13:13:22
85 1
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Farren, do you want to ask a couple of questions?
2 3
MR. FARREN:
4
matters.
Just a couple of brief questions, Chairman, just for clarifying
5 6
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. FARREN AS FOLLOWS:
7 8
Q. 513
9
At the very beginning of Ms. Dillon's questioning.
Sorry Chairman, Would You
prefer to ask questions first?
13:13:27 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: Q. 514
No, no, no you're okay.
MR. FARREN:
Ms. Dillon asked you whether you wanted to change any of your
13
evidence already given to the Tribunal and you indicated no.
14
did explain in your answers to her subsequent questions that you saw a
13:13:42 15
And I think you
difference between what was being termed "personal" donations and political
16
donations in the sense of donations to a political General Election campaign?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 515
Isn't that right?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 516
And it was on that basis that you were making that distinction.
21
A.
Yes, yes.
22
Q. 517
And as far as you're concerned, when you use the term "personal" as you have to
13:13:55 20
23
the Tribunal know a number of occasions, you are quite clear that you have
24
received no "personal" donations of any sort?
13:14:13 25
A.
I have never received a personal donation for anything in my life.
And
26
anything that came -- any money that ever were paid, the process under the
27
Constitution as to the way political fundraising was carried out and elections
28
are funded.
29 13:14:43 30
Q. 518
And in the context of the contributions that have subsequently become clear from Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Dunlop's evidence as to his contributions.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I think
13:14:57
13:15:01
86 1
when that issue arose you did try to obtain clarification yourself from Mr.
2
Dunlop as to what he was referring to?
3
A.
Yes, I did.
4
Q. 519
And you've I think fairly described to Ms. Dillon now how since Mr. Dunlop's
5
evidence to the Tribunal and the somewhat unclear aspects of that itself, you
6
are clear that in 1992, a contribution to your General Election campaign in
7
that year was made only on the basis of Mr. Dunlop's production of that letter
8
from you, isn't that correct?
9 13:15:23 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 520
And whereas Mr. Dunlop makes reference to an earlier payment in relation to the
11
1991 Local Elections.
You don't have any personal recollection of that?
12
A.
I don't.
13
Q. 521
And equally, you don't have any recollection if there's a different payment in
14 13:15:43 15
16
I genuinely don't.
relation to the payment from Mr. Dunne or Berland Homes? A.
I don't remember that.
Q. 522
But obviously again today we've been given a letter from Sean Dunne which
17
indicates that he did, he says he did, either through Berland Homes either
18
through Mr. Dunlop or direct to you, give you that payment.
19
willing to accept that but you don't have any recollection of it?
13:16:00 20
21
And you are
A.
Yes, I accept that.
Q. 523
Now, coming on to the very briefly on to the questions which Ms. Dillon was
22
posing about how you supported the motion, Mr. Marren's motion.
23
understand it, that motion was passed by, I think by a substantial majority I
24
think at the time.
13:16:34 25
26
As I
It's 43 to 27, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 524
And does that reflect the recognition, as it were, in the cauldron of the
27
council, how the compromise had been reached to the majority's satisfaction?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 525
And equally, when there was the opportunity that the Chairman has referred to,
13:16:53 30
to as it were, to pass the ball back to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown when it had been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:16:59
13:17:21
87 1 2
established. A.
Yes.
The motion was rejected by 43 to 27?
I think everyone had felt that they'd done so much work that at that
3
stage and they had attended I'd say 1,000 meetings all together from all of the
4
different groups.
5
could go forward to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown.
6
Q. 526
That they felt that they had reached a point that they
And that majority is similar to the majority in relation to the earlier motion
7
which, is it fair to say, again reflects the political reality of the
8
recognition of the compromise?
9 13:17:38 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 527
And finally, Mrs. Coffey, Ms. Dillon made reference to a bunch of flowers being
11
delivered from Mr. Lynn I think.
12
have you received flowers on other occasions?
13
A.
14
Well you receive flowers and mass cards and a bottle of wine now and then and a box of chocolates.
13:18:13 15
In your capacity as member of the council,
into envelopes.
An old lady often came around and helped me put things
That's people.
It's a wonderful profession to be in and I
16
enjoyed my 20 years.
17
believe that the people there understand my commitment and my honesty.
18
have who say that in the Tribunal today because it is a very difficult
19
situation to be in.
13:18:35 20
21
Q. 528
Thank you, Mrs. Coffey.
A.
Thank you.
I'm retired now and I'm very glad of that.
I really And I
No further questions.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
from what I gather from what you've told us.
13:18:52 25
26
Can I just ask you, Mrs. Coffey.
On the 11th of November,
The -- your approach was
obviously dictated by your concern for Dun Laoghaire. A.
Uh-huh.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
time when, as you said, things were needed in Dun Laoghaire.
13:19:08 30
And that it wouldn't loose out, we're now back in 1993, at a We know from the
record, that the records show on the 11th of November that actually the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:19:12
13:19:21
88 1
limiting of the district centre to neighbourhood centre motion was in fact, as
2
I understand it, the last motion put.
3
A.
Yes.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Regarding the Carrickmines lands
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
didn't you put that motion first? Because to some extent it would have been,
13:19:39 10
Isn't that -- I think that's the way it was.
Did you -- why
if you like, for what you say you wanted to achieve, a safety valve if you
11
like, because the other motions, as I understand it, that are voted on,
12
including the motion that you co-signed and proposed, extending up, if you
13
like, the residential housing to four houses to the acre.
14
A.
Um.
13:20:00 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Was first
Well I'm even confused myself about it.
I actually -- when I was discussing
18
with Donal Marren, Larry Lohan and others, whether it was a mistake the motion
19
was put second or not.
13:20:20 20
My understanding was that by putting in that motion we
were going to have a neighbourhood centre.
So I'm confused as to why that
21
happened and I cannot answer that question.
22
trust among the leaders of the group you know, if you say you're going to do a
23
thing you do it.
24
that, that motion.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
All right.
Thanks.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
But there is great
And they informed me that it was a neighbourhood centre plus
13:20:36 25
26
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
Thank you.
13:20:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:20:41
13:20:44
89 1
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Ms. Coffey.
2 3
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW:
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Mrs. Coffey.
6
propose sitting on Tuesday.
Tuesday.
I don't know what time you
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten.
9 13:20:48 10
Ms. Dillon: May it please you, Sir.
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY,
13
27TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.
14 13:24:32 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:17:40
10:34:13
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY, 27TH JUNE 2006
2
AT 10.30 A.M:
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Good morning. Mr. Paul Monahan please.
5 6
MR. PAUL MONAHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
7
BY MS. FOLEY:
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:34:48 10
A
11
Q
Good morning. 1
12
MS. FOLEY:
Good morning, Mr. Monahan. I think you are the current managing
director of Monarch Properties Limited, is that correct?
13
A
14
Q
10:34:59 15
A
16
Q
That's correct. 2
And when did you take on that role? I started in May 2002, 2001.
3
17
And prior to that, did you have a role as, you were a director of -- other than managing director?
18
A
19
Q
10:35:13 20
A
21
Q
22 23
Good morning, Mr. Monahan.
I wasn't managing director. 4
Had you a role within the company? No.
5
Could you give just a general background of your training and when you started to work with the Monarch Group?
A
24
Basically I started to work in the Monarch Group in May 2001, that's when I started my employment with the Monarch Group.
10:35:31 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
closer to you, yeah.
28
A
Sorry, Mr. Monahan, I wonder could you pull the, a little bit
Okay.
29 10:35:38 30
MS. FOLEY:
Prior to that, what were you doing? www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:35:41
10:35:58
2 1
A
Basically I was at school, I studied accountancy, I trained to become a
2
helicopter pilot, I did my own businesses in both property and in leisure. I
3
was self-employed.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
6
They were separate businesses to those of the Monahan group? Yes, separate businesses, yes.
7
You furnished a statement to the Tribunal, your second statement in May 2006,
7
and you say that you had no direct knowledge of the events surrounding
8
Cherrywood?
9 10:36:12 10
A Q
That's correct. 8
And that you tried to get this information based on information from other
11
people and who were the people that assisted you in providing your statement to
12
the Tribunal?
13
A
Basically a letter came from the Tribunal, basically I did my best endeavours
14
to reply to it in as much detail as possible, so that would involve me having
10:36:31 15
to do some research and would have to involve basically previous officers who
16
were in the company and ask what actually happened so I could make as full a
17
reply as possible to the Tribunal.
18
Q
9
19
I wish to draw your attention to Mr. Sweeney's statement, page 2135, on the second paragraph there, Mr. Sweeney says that from 1990, Mr. Phillip Monahan
10:36:54 20
operated most of the time from an annex to his new home in Somerton,
21
Castleknock where he set up a separate team of people, including his personal
22
assistant, Ms. Gosling, Mr. Sherwood and also two of Mr. Monahan's sons, Colm
23
and Paul?
24
A
Basically on the offices there, it was in Wilton House in Dundalk, it is
10:37:13 25
correct, they did have a site office in The Square, they also had offices in
26
Earlsfort Terrace and they also had offices in Somerton and Harcout Street, my
27
brother Colm Monahan is employed by Monarch Properties but not me.
28
Q
29 10:37:33 30
10
You say that Mr. Sweeney is incorrect when he says that from 1990 you moved into the offices in Somerton?
A
He was talking about Monarch Properties moving into the offices and Phil www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:37:36
10:37:48
3 1 2
Monahan and that. Q
11
3 4
fact? A
As you can see if you check my employment details, my employment started in May
5
2001.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:38:04 10
And when he says Colm Monahan and Paul Monahan, meaning yourself, you didn't in
Q
12
Did you live in Somerton in the residential part of the building? Basically, I lived between Dundalk and Dublin.
13
Right. And Dublin being Somerton? Yes.
14
In your statement of April 2002, page 1562 please, you outline some of the
11
other officers of the company and at the second part of paragraph B you name
12
some of the previous senior officers of the company. Could you just briefly
13
outline your understanding of the role of Mr. Glennane within the organisation?
14
A
I understand Mr. Glennane is a qualified accountant and would have been the
10:38:31 15
accountant for the Monarch Group.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15
I understand Mr. Glennane was also a shareholder in the Monarch Group. 16
closely with Mr. Monahan.
21
Q
22
A
17
What's your understanding of the role of Mr. Sweeney? Mr. Sweeney, as far as I know, was a technical director, that was his
23
experience, I don't know exactly what his qualifications were.
24
Q
10:39:01 25
A
18
And Mr. Noel Murray? Noel Murray was in marketing, he originally started as a manager in Nutgrove
26
Shopping Centre and then progressed onwards from there.
27
Q
28
A
10:39:24 30
He would have worked closely with Mr. Phillip Monahan? I am sure as a fellow director and as an accountant he would have worked
10:38:47 20
29
And would he also have been a shareholder?
19
Mr. Phillip Reilly? Mr. Phillip Reilly, my understanding is that he came in from America and basically his skill is in management and his role is in managing shopping centres. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:39:24
10:39:35
4 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
20
My understanding is he would have been involved in Tallaght. 21
10:39:46 10
Mr. Richard Lynn? He originally worked in Dundalk and then he worked for Monarch.
22
And do you know what function he performed within the Monarch Group? Not a hundred percent, no.
23
8 9
Would he have been particularly involved in Tallaght, do you understand?
Would these be the people that you looked for assistance to when you were preparing your statements for the Tribunal?
A Q
Yes, I would have asked, yes. 24
11
These would have been all the people or would you have also consulted with others?
12
A
13
Q
14
I would also have consulted with others, yes. 25
Briefly about the role of your father, your late father within the group, at your statement you say that he carried a function of director and chairman and
10:40:08 15
was the founder of the group and would have the prime mover in all the
16
developments. Mr. Monahan himself says that he had no direct involvement with
17
day to day running of many issues or indeed the details of the company
18
finances. Whereas at 8038 please in Monaghan's affidavit in 1996, for the
19
litigation against Mr. Sweeney at paragraph B there, Mr. Monahan says that
10:40:35 20
while Mr. Sweeney carried out important work on behalf of the group, he did it
21
at all times under the direct supervision of himself or the second named
22
defendant, Mr. Glennane. The driving force behind the company was at all times
23
Mr. Phillip Monahan and the second named defendant, Mr. Glennane, would that be
24
your understanding of Mr. Monahan's role?
10:40:55 25
A
Primarily my understanding was Mr. Monahan was the founder of the company, he
26
started in the late 70s, he would have taken on board Mr. Glennane and
27
Mr. Sweeney. He was certainly the major shareholder in it. He did have
28
periods where he was sick during his time, he had two triple by-passes, he was
29
sick then after that. But my understanding was he was the chairman of the
10:41:23 30
group. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:41:24
10:41:40
5 1
Q
26
And essentially the other people that we have just outlined would have been
2
acting on his instructions whether with an intermediary level in the hierarchy
3
or directly?
4
A
I don't know exactly, I can't assume exactly how he controlled his business but
5
he was the chairman and he would have employed them originally and Mr. Glennane
6
had a shareholding and Mr. Sweeney had some sort of a shareholding.
7
Q
27
And also in your statement to the Tribunal, you say that if a project was a
8
major, out of courtesy the group would consult with all the major political
9
parties and elected representatives, what's your understanding of who within
10:42:01 10
11
the group would make this contact with the politicians? A
My statement of that was because if you look at all the payments that were
12
made, it's clear that all the payments that were made to all, were to all
13
different types of party and all different --
14
Q
28
10:42:24 15
political representatives and political parties, whose role was it within the
16 17
When you say that out of courtesy the group would consult with the politicians,
organisation to contact the political representatives? A
I don't know whose role it was but my understanding is that they would have --
18
in relation to a project that they would have asked everybody in relation to a
19
project.
10:42:51 20
Q
29
Could I have page 1596 please. This is a letter from your solicitors on behalf
21
of the Monarch Group and the last paragraph of that page you can see that the
22
client, Monarch Properties, has pointed out it doesn't have any records with
23
respect to Monarch Properties Limited and its various subsidiaries before 1991.
24
And subsequently, an order was made on the 18th of April 2002 and you furnished
10:43:25 25
an affidavit to the Tribunal dated -- sorry, 10th of May 2002 and in this
26
affidavit, if I could have page 1574 please, one of the items on the second
27
schedule, which is items that are, that you had but no longer do have is a
28
receipt from 'Shredd it' and then subsequently in May 2002, your solicitors
29
wrote to the Tribunal furnishing them with marketing brochures and also with
10:44:00 30
document at 8897 please, indicating that on the 26th September 2000, 819 kilos www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:44:12
10:44:30
6 1
of confidential waste was destroyed. The Tribunal subsequently wrote and asked
2
what was the nature of the material destroyed but didn't receive a reply.
3
Would you be able to assist the Tribunal?
4
A
Sorry, I wouldn't be able to assist the Tribunal. I wasn't there at the time
5
when --
6
Q
7
A
30
But the document was furnished, it was referred to in your affidavit? Yes. Basically, my understanding on records is that you have to keep records
8
for six years and if you notice from the Tribunal, you have records going back
9
from the company which I personally sent in to you going back 15 years.
10:44:55 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
31
No idea. 32
13
And -- but you found, you knew about this, which is why you were able to refer to it in your affidavit even though you didn't have the certificate?
14
A
10:45:09 15
Q
16
A
Yes. 33
And how did you know about it? We did have the certificate, we didn't have it at the time. I couldn't locate
17
it at the time and that's why --
18
Q
19
A
10:45:16 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
34
But somebody was able to inform you of this? Exactly.
35
Who was the person who provided you with that information? It would have been Mr. Sherwood.
36
23 24
And do you know what was the nature of the documentation that was destroyed?
And the other documents that were furnished on foot of the affidavit, who assisted you in compiling the documents?
A
It would have been Mr. Sherwood and anybody else that I would have asked for
10:45:33 25
information for would have assisted me.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:45:41 30
Q
37
That would be Mr. Glennane -Yes, anybody I would have asked.
38
Mr. Murray, Mr. Lynn maybe? Yes.
39
Yes? In May 2006, the Tribunal also wrote to you and asked you about the www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:45:57
10:46:08
7 1
Aynsley Trust and Aynsley Holdings?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 40
4
Could I have 8477 please. This is -- the reply is included in your statement of 2006.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 41
And you say that your understanding is that Aynsley Holding represented the
7
owners of Ansbacher Bank or held shares in Ansbacher and that Monarch
8
Properties borrowed monies from Ansbacher. I am not quite clear on that
9
paragraph, Mr. Monahan, if could clarify it please?
10:46:26 10
A
Well, my understanding is that Ansbacher was a bank and that Monarch Properties
11
borrowed money from the bank.
12
Q
13
A
42
My understanding is that the Aynsley Trust was to do with the owners of the
14 10:46:43 15
Where does Aynsley Trust then fit in to that?
Ansbacher Bank. Q
43
16
Your understanding is Monarch would deal with Aynsley Trust or Aynsley Holdings or Ansbacher or just directly with Ansbacher?
17
A
18
Q
Just with the bank, yes. 44
19
Could I have document 8905 please. This is a note from the discovery of KPMG in respect of Monarch, the Monarch Group and it's the minutes of a meeting of
10:47:12 20
the directors of L&C Properties Limited held on the 31st January 1989. Are you
21
at present a director of L&C Properties or have you ever been a director or L&C
22
properties?
23
A
24
Q
At present I am a director of L&C Properties. 45
10:47:33 25
You see the first paragraph there, Allery limited, the board agreed that steps be taken to acquire a stock company, Allery limited. It was resolved that Paul
26
Monahan, John Sherwood and Patrick O'Shaughnessy should be board members of
27
Allery Limited". Do you recall being nominated to the board?
28
A
29
Q
10:47:49 30
A
I do, yes. 46
Was that around that time? 1989, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:47:49
10:48:03
8 1
Q
47
2 3
Is that the only company that you were a director of that's connected with the Monarch group?
A
As far as I am aware, that's the only company I was a director of. I know
4
there was a company called Pre-kay which was to do with a house which I was
5
made a director of and that's about it.
6
Q
48
7 8
your role within it have in the Monarch Group? A
It was a company that was, as far as I was concerned, was outside the Monarch
9 10:48:30 10
And your role as a director of Allery limited, what role did that company and
Group, it was to do with a gas business in Dundalk which I was involved with. Q
49
Could I have page 1567 please. This is a further extract from your statement
11
Mr. Monahan and in paragraph F you indicated that all payments to any identity
12
would have been supported by invoice or any other documentation such as an
13
invitation to subscribe to a race night, golf outing or such like. From where
14
did you get that information?
10:48:53 15
A
Again, from asking various people who would have been involved in Monarch at
16 17
the time. Q
50
Further documentation furnished to the Tribunal in the context of statements
18
from the Monarch Group indicate that similarly that all of the contributions
19
are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for assistance in relation to
10:49:18 20
the lists of donations that were furnished to the Tribunal. But Mr. Reilly,
21
when he was in giving evidence to the Tribunal last week, indicated that that
22
wasn't entirely his recollection, that he believes that himself and Mr. Lynn
23
worked from a list compiled by Mr. Lynn and contacted people offering political
24
donations in 1991. Were you aware of this?
10:49:42 25
A
Again, basically when a letter came in from the Tribunal I used my best
26
endeavours to reply to it as promptly as possible and with as full information
27
as possible.
28
Q
29
A
10:50:03 30
51
Did you speak to Mr. Reilly? Probably did speak with Mr. Reilly. I am sure I spoke with Mr. Lynn, Mr. Glennane, Mr... www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:50:03
10:50:20
9 1
Q
2
A
52
You spoke with Mr. Lynn on the question of political donations? I would have asked. I would have said I have a letter from the Tribunal and I
3
need to get a reply back to it, I want to make it as full as possible. That
4
was my duty when the letter came in to reply back to it.
5
Q
53
Mr. Lynn has not yet given evidence so we don't know what he will say about
6
this list but he know that Mr. Reilly is of the view that this list was
7
compiled internally.
8
A
Well, again, I just got a letter that came in from the Tribunal of something
9
that I had no hand or involvement in.
10:50:38 10
Q
11
A
54
And I just basely had to reply back to a letter in as full and complete way as
12 13
And you haven't heard anything about this list?
possible. Q
55
14
Is it your understanding that all of the lists of payments furnished to the Tribunal were similarly solicited by various politicians. There's one list
10:50:58 15
referring to a 1997 list and it's not covered in the letter, it doesn't
16
specifically say that these were also on foot of requests from politicians but
17
is it your understanding that all of the donations were on foot for every year?
18
A
Basically I just would have, as I said, I would have got a letter in and I
19 10:51:22 20
would have replied back to it in as full a way as possible. Q
56
Also in your statement you tell the Tribunal that to the best of your late
21
father's recollection, and to the best of your understanding, the company's
22
patterns of donations would have been similar in the period 1973 to 1990 and
23
that the group had a simple rule of treating all political parties alike and
24
you believe this is evident from the submitted records. But I think that
10:51:46 25
including some of the donations that you furnished on foot of your affidavit,
26
that prior to 1991, the documentation that we have received from your companies
27
indicate that there were perhaps not quite a similar pattern. That in 1989
28
there were five donations, all to members of Fianna Fail, including one to
29
Fianna Fail of 16,000 pounds, which significantly larger than donations post
10:52:13 30
1991 and also we have a donation that was made personally by your father in www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:52:21
10:52:41
10 1
February 1991 of 25,000 and I was wondering if it is your understanding that
2
there is missing documentation pre-1991 that indicates further donations?
3
A
Basically all documentation, basically every single piece of information that
4 5
we have has been sent into the Tribunal. Q
57
6
the documentation?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:53:01 10
Q
11
A
I have no knowledge, no personal knowledge, no. 58
59
Q
14
A
I don't, he didn't have a role in the Monarch Group, he was not an employee of
60
Did he have some connection with the Monarch Group, did he act in some way? My understanding of Mr. Whelan, he seemed to be a land dealer, he seemed to
10:53:17 15
deal in land. Q
61
17
And is it your understanding that any payments that would have accrued to him would have been in that regard?
A
I have no idea what any payments to him would have been in regard to it but my
19 10:53:32 20
And do you know his role within the Monarch Group?
Monarch Properties.
13
18
Did you know a Mr. Jack Whelan? I did meet a Mr. Jack Whelan, yes.
12
16
And you have no personal knowledge of other donations that are not covered in
understanding was that he was a land dealer. Q
62
Could I have page 8576 please. And beside that 8574 please. The Tribunal
21
wrote to you in May 2006 asking you about this particular, this invoice that
22
will appear on screen there beside you which is dated April 1991 but seems to
23
have been stamped received April 1992 so the date, the actual origin is not
24
certain.
10:54:06 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 63
And it's for Whelan Land Use Specialists and it relates to fee to services in
27
relation to residential consultancy at Cherrywood of 150,000 plus VAT of
28
30,000. You have responded to this query?
29
A
10:54:24 30
Q
That's correct, yes. 64
Advising that Mr. Whelan was used to seek out land opportunities and was a www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:54:28
10:54:47
11 1
self-employed property consultant, that he dealt with your late father,
2
Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray, Mr. Glennane and would you tell us from where you got
3
the information contained in this?
4
A
Again, I asked the various different people in Monarch who Mr. Jack Whelan was
5
and what exactly did he do.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
65
Exactly. 66
Can you tell the Tribunal exactly who you asked about the role of Mr. Whelan? I would have asked Dominic Glennane, I would have asked Phil Reilly, I would
10:55:05 10
11
And this was only now about six weeks ago?
have asked Richard Lynn, I would have asked John Sherwood. Q
67
In the course of your inquiries, did you come across any reason why Mr. Whelan
12
would be sending a fee of 150,000 and then subsequently at 5040 please, there's
13
an indication of balances with GRE, this is around April of 1994 and third from
14
the end there, you will see Jack Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan, 121,000. And
10:55:35 15
then could I have page 5180 please. This document is dated 29th June 1994 and
16
indicates, you see there staff success bonus, R Lynn 100,000 and in brackets,
17
similar to J W. You believe that J W, that perhaps would be Jack Whelan?
18
A
19
Q
Well, I wouldn't know if it was Jack Whelan or not. 68
10:56:05 20
So you wouldn't know what services Mr. Whelan would provide that could generate these type of fees and bonuses?
21
A
22
Q
Again I started with Monarch in May 2001. 69
You had met Mr. Whelan prior to that?
23 24 10:56:20 25
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Mr. Monarch, I don't think that's good enough. You are
saying you started in May 2001 with Monarch which may well be the first
26
occasion when you became officially involved with the company but surely you
27
must know a lot more information than you indicate that you know given that you
28
would have had discussions with your late father who, you have an accountancy
29
and business background. I mean listening to your evidence would suggest that
10:56:49 30
you knew absolutely nothing until May 2001 and then your only source of www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:56:54
10:57:09
12 1
information is whatever employees and former employees of the company have
2
decided to tell you. But surely you must know an awful lot more. Surely this
3
is a topic of conversation around the dinner table at home?
4
A
No, sorry, it wasn't a topic of conversation.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
your late father throughout the 1990's?
8
A
9
Are you saying you never discussed the business of Monarch with
It wasn't a topic of conversation around the dinner table. Mr. Monahan did his business, he didn't do business with me, he did it with other people, not me.
10:57:23 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
But you were his son.
Yes, a family of six, I am not an only son.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
10:57:34 15
16
But were there not discussions at home about how the business was
doing and what sort of activities it was involved in? A
17
Well, certainly I would have known what, I would have an idea of what my father was doing, but certainly not talking to him about his business.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
10:57:50 20
the region of a quarter of a million pounds paid to Mr. Whelan, what they were
21 22
And you are saying you have no idea as to what sums, possibly in
connected to? A
That's correct, yes.
23 24 10:58:03 25
CHAIRMAN: A
And is that your evidence that you don't know?
All I have done is done the research to see what Mr. Whelan did, where he came
26
from, what did he do, my understanding is that those invoices weren't paid, I
27
don't know whether they were or not paid, my understanding is they were not
28
paid.
29 10:58:22 30
CHAIRMAN:
Where did you get that information? www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:58:24
10:58:34
13 1
A
2
My understanding from Mr. Glennane that the first invoice that you mentioned was not paid.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A
And do you know why it wasn't paid?
I think it says it in my letter to yourselves.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A
No, you tell us why you understand it wasn't paid
From Mr. Glennane.
9 10:58:43 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A
But why?
I have no idea why.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A
10:58:54 15
And you never asked why it wasn't paid?
Basically I have a letter from the Tribunal and basically I replied back to it with as much information as I could gather and reply back to it.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
different councillors and political parties other than what appears on the --
19
A
And do you know anything about the payments being made to the
No, I don't know what's appeared.
10:59:08 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A
You say it was never discussed between yourself and your father
Yes.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
10:59:16 25
were progressing or about the problems that he had or was experiencing in
26 27
He never gave you any information about Cherrywood or how things
relation to their rezoning? A
I wasn't involved in any dealings in relation to Cherrywood.
28 29 10:59:31 30
CHAIRMAN:
I know you weren't involved but do you have any information, surely
it was something that would have been discussed between yourself and your www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:59:35
10:59:44
14 1 2
father at home? A
3
Certainly, I didn't talk to my father about Cherrywood or what deals he was doing or what deals he wasn't doing.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A
So he never gave you any information?
No.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
And -- but you were involved in L&C Properties as a director
I am a director of L&C Properties now, yes.
10:59:55 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
13
And did you now I anything about their business?
As far as I am aware, I would have to double check, I became a director of L&C in July of 2002.
14 11:00:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A
But were you not a director before that?
As far as I am aware, no. I will have to check but as far as I am aware, no.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
2001?
11:00:20 20
A
21
Have you any involvement with any of the family businesses before
Well, the family business was the property business. That's what the family business was.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
But had you an involvement in that before 2001?
I had my own businesses, I did my own property, I had my own businesses.
11:00:30 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
Was that part of the family business?
No.
28 29 11:00:36 30
CHAIRMAN: A
That your father was involved in?
No. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:00:36
11:00:45
15 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
dealings in relation to Monarch or any of your father's dealings at all before
4
2001?
5
A
6
You say you had no involvement or no knowledge of any of the
Monarch Properties was Monarch Properties, my father ran Monarch Properties, not me.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
I know that but did he ever discuss it with you?
No.
11:00:51 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
Never?
No.
13 14 11:00:56 15
CHAIRMAN: A
And did he discuss it with other members of your family?
Not that I'm aware of.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A
You knew nothing about your father's businesses until 2001?
I had a general idea of what he was doing.
19 11:01:06 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
Did you qualify as accountant?
No.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
Did you do accountancy?
I did.
11:01:11 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
When do you do accountancy?
I started in 1988.
28 29 11:01:17 30
CHAIRMAN: A
When did you finish studies?
In 1990, 89, 90. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:01:20
11:01:31
16 1 2
CHAIRMAN: So from 1990, even though you were in effect an accountant and
3
businessman, you had no discussion, no detailed discussion with your father
4
about any aspect of his businesses until 2001.
5
A
I lived between Dundalk and Dublin and I was doing my, living my own life.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
informally, at home, or wherever, with your late father between 1990 and 2001?
9
A
Is that your evidence that you had no detailed discussion,
It is, yes.
11:01:54 10
11
Q
70
MS. FOLEY:
Is it not the case that Allery, the company that we referred to
12
earlier on, if I could have 8905 please, the second paragraph there indicates
13
that it was resolved that of the two subscriber shares, one should be
14
registered in the name of this company, ie L&C Properties and one in the name
11:02:11 15
of Mr. Phillip Monahan as the company nominee, so is it not the case that this
16
company is connected with the Monarch Group, if its shareholders are L&C
17
Properties and Mr. Phillip Monahan, it is not an independent company. So in
18
fact this company is connected with the Monarch Group?
19
A
That was to do with a gas business in Dundalk, that's where it operated, It
11:02:33 20
operated a gas business in Dundalk.
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
71
It certainly wasn't owned by me anyway. 72
24
When the Tribunal first contacted Monarch Properties in the year 2000, is it your evidence that between 2000 and 2003, that you did not discuss the
11:02:53 25
26
Yes, connected with and it is a company owned by the Monarch Group?
Cherrywood or the matters before this Tribunal with your father? A
Mr. Monahan was a director and shareholder until he died in August 2003 so any
27
of the --
28
Q
29
A
11:03:12 30
Q
73
And you were also a director from 2001? No, I replaced Ann Gosling as a director when she resigned.
74
You have just told the Tribunal you were a director from 2001? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:03:16
11:03:49
17 1
A
2
Q
I became involved, employed by Monarch in May 2001. 75
3
Could I have 8477 please. This is the first line of your statement there. Please Mr. Monahan, if you could read it out?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
I was appointed managing director of Monarch Properties Limited in 2001. 76
Thank you? I was appointed, I had a management agreement with Monarch Properties signed in
7
May 2001. I did not become a director of the companies until Ann Gosling
8
resigned which was as far as I am aware was in 2002.
9
Q
77
11:04:08 10
Limited in 2001'?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
A management agreement is what I obtained in May 2001. 78
was signed in May 2001 which appointed me as managing director. Q
79
16 17
A
Basically Mr. Monahan was still a director and the principal shareholder of Monarch Properties, so I was I suppose in a way working along with him.
19
Q
11:04:51 20
A
21
Q
80
Would you be sort of managing director in waiting? Kind of, yes.
81
22
During the course of that period, did you discuss Cherrywood and the matters that are before this Tribunal with Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
Basically, Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sherwood and I suppose myself would have been --
24
certainly I was helpful in getting all the information, any information that
11:05:09 25
26
During your tenure in this position as, how would you describe your role at that point?
18
23
You were not appointed managing director then, you are changing your evidence? My directorships began when Ann Gosling resigned but I have an agreement which
14 11:04:31 15
Your statement says 'I was appointed managing director of Monarch Properties
was required and done. Q
82
But you were receiving correspondence from the Tribunal, documents were being
27
furnished on foot of orders from the Tribunal, there must have been some
28
discussion?
29 11:05:23 30
A
Well Mr. Monahan would have dealt with it along with our solicitors, Noel Smyth. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:05:24
11:05:32
18 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
83
Well ... 84
85
A
I would have got whatever information I could glean from people. I would have got whatever information and replied back to the Tribunal.
Q
11:05:47 10
A
11
Q
86
87
Would you please answer the question, would that include discussions with Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I am sure he would have been part of whatever was being sent back, he would
14 11:06:03 15
Wouldn't that include discussions with Mr. Phillip Monahan? I would have asked whoever I would have had to have asked.
12 13
You must have discussed this with fellow directors, in particular Mr. Phillip Monahan?
8 9
Clearly you furnished an affidavit in April 2002? Mmm.
6 7
And yourself?
have been part of whatever was being sent back. Q
88
When you furnished documents and replies and statements to the Tribunal, would
16
you have discussed the documentation that you were furnishing with Mr. Phillip
17
Monahan?
18
A
19
Q
What dates were the replies sent in? 89
11:06:21 20
you also furnished a statement in April 2002.
21
A
22
Q
Yes, at that time, Mr. Monahan was under 24 hour nurse supervision. 90
23 24
Your affidavit is, the order was in April 2002 and your affidavit is May 2002,
And Mr. Monahan subsequently furnished a statement to the Tribunal in 2003, in the intervening period, between 2001 and 2003?
A
Basically in December of 2001, Mr. Monahan had a heart attack in Spain. He was
11:06:50 25
in intensive care, had to be flown home. He was intensive care in St Vincent's
26
and he was under nurse supervision until August of 2002, at that stage I would
27
have --
28 29 11:07:09 30
Q
91
And prior to his illness, when you were managing director in waiting and there was contact with the Tribunal, would you not have discussed Cherrywood and the matters before the Tribunal with Mr. Phillip Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:07:13
11:07:25
19 1
A
Well, the principal of Monarch Properties at that stage and still the major
2
shareholders of Monarch Properties and the man who knew all the information was
3
Mr. Monahan.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:07:48 10
Q
92
You would have discussed it with him? He would have discussed it with our solicitors.
93
And you would have discussed it with him? I would have got whatever information was necessary to make a reply.
94
Could I have page 1599 please. This is the Monarch Group structure, sorry it's not very clear there.
95
There's a company called Pallarang which is held 25 percent Aspentree, 10
11
percent Circimus and 15 percent Isotope. I just want to ask you a little bit
12
about Pallarang. Mr. Sweeney's affidavit of March 1996, he indicates as a
13
result of the success of The Square in Tallaght, the group agreed to pay an
14
aggregate dividend of 1.8 million in a tax efficient manner to himself,
11:08:26 15
Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane. Subsequently in a replying affidavit by the late
16
Mr. Phillip Monahan, he says in 1991 an opportunity arose to purchase a company
17
with substantial exported sales relief and to involve a number of individuals
18
who significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch Group and this is
19
referring to the company and the payment discussed by Mr. Sweeney in his
11:08:50 20
affidavit and then page 8077, paragraph 15 there. Mr. Sweeney identifies that
21
the exported sales relief company from which he received the dividend was
22
called Pallarang Limited. We believe this company, from your father's
23
affidavit, to have been purchased in 1991, are you a director of Pallarang
24
Limited?
11:09:12 25
A
If it's still in existence, I would be a director, if it's not in existence, I
26
would not be a director.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:09:27 30
A
96
When would you have become a director of Pallarang Limited? I am not a hundred percent sure.
97
Do you believe you would have been a director at the time of its purchase? I don't know. That's to be perfectly honest. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:09:32
11:09:38
20 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
98
No. 99
100
The information that you see there from the affidavits and brief indicating it was to makes payments in a tax efficient manner?
7
A
8
Q
9
A Q
I have read that and I have seen what they are, I understand now. 101
Were you aware of that before receiving the brief? No.
102
11 12
Do you know what the purpose of its acquisition by the Monarch Group was? No.
6
11:09:51 10
Do you know what the purpose of the company was?
So you became a director of the company but you had no idea what the company did?
A
Yes, if the company basically, I would have got directorships of all the
13
companies that were in the Monarch Group. I wouldn't necessarily know exactly
14
what they did, I would certainly know now if they were in existence what they
11:10:11 15
16
did or didn't do. Q
103
17
informed of this? Are you requested to become a director?
18
A
19
Q
11:10:28 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:10:38 25
Q
26 27
When you are a made a director of a company within the Monarch Group, are you
I am sure I would have been requested. 104
You would be aware at the time of becoming a director? I am sure I would be, I am not -- I am sure I would be.
105
You believe that people would have asked you? I am sure.
106
But you weren't certain? I am not sure but I believe I would have been asked.
107
So you think that people may have appointed you as directors of companies and not informed you?
A
I don't honestly know, I don't know.
28 29 11:10:54 30
CHAIRMAN: A
Don't you have to sign documentation to become a director?
My understanding is yes, you would have to sign documentation. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:10:57
11:11:17
21 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
extraordinary and ridiculous that you know so little about your business
4
affairs and about the background to Monarch and what it's engaged in, are you
5
serious that you, that your level of knowledge is as minimal as you suggest it
6
is?
7
A
But surely you know, the level of your knowledge strikes us as both
Well in relation to Pallarang, is the company still in existence?
8 9
Q
108
11:11:45 10
11
MS. FOLEY:
The company, I think was dissolved in August 2003 and incorporated
in 1990. A
Mmm. And it was dissolved in 2003, I would have been made a director then
12
before it was dissolved, that would be my understanding, because I would have
13
taken over all Ann Gosling's directorships.
14
Q
11:12:10 15
A
16
Q
109
So you believe you only became a director in 2002. I don't know, I would have to check back on my own records to see exactly.
110
Could I ask you now about Mr. Liam Lawlor. It seems from both, from
17
Mr. Lawlor's statement that he first became acquainted with your father in the
18
late 60s or early 70s and your father has told the Tribunal in a statement of
19
2003, he met Mr. Lawlor in respect of the lands which are now the lands owned
11:12:35 20
by Jackson Way Properties. He doesn't refer further to Mr. Lawlor. He said he
21
had known him for a number of years and met him on a number of occasions and
22
what is your understanding of the nature of the relationship between Mr. Lawlor
23
and Mr. Phillip Monahan?
24
A
11:12:57 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29 11:13:17 30
Certainly my father knew Mr. Lawlor. Certainly knew him all right. 111
And would you have also met him? Certainly I met Mr. Lawlor, yes.
112
And under what circumstances would you have met Mr. Lawlor? I met him in the house a couple of times, he was there, and certainly I used to see him at Luttrelstown, he was playing golf. I used to go there for my lunch and I used to see him there playing golf. I would say if you asked him my www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:13:22
11:13:32
22 1
name, he wouldn't know my name.
2
Q
3
A
113
Certainly, he was a guy, with all the coverage he has got, he is a guy you
4
would certainly know.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
114
11:13:48 10
Would he have been a frequent visitor to your home? No.
115
8 9
But you met him with your father?
Could I have 7594 please. This is a document dated 29th June 1988 and it's signed, I think, by Mr. Phillip Monahan.
A Q
Mmm. 116
11
And it's basically extending a guarantee for a loan to Advance Protein Limited, of 14,400 for 36 months. And this is in respect of a car lease.
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:14:05 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 117
At 7798? Mmm.
118
Would you have been aware of this at the time? No.
119
Would you have been aware that the friendship between your father and
18
Mr. Lawlor in 1988 was that close, that your father was prepared to guarantee a
19
loan for Mr. Lawlor?
11:14:21 20
A
21
Q
No. 120
I see. Could I have 1596 please. This is a letter dated 16th April 2002 from
22
your solicitors and at paragraph 3, it says that with regard to Mr. Lawlor,
23
neither Mr. Phillip Monahan who is now retired or Mr. Paul Monahan have any
24
recollection that Mr. Lawlor received a sum or sums as high as 40,000, as
11:14:49 25
Mr. Lawlor has told the Tribunal over the 70s, 80s and 90s, this is the amount
26
of money he would have received from the Monarch Group. And then the letter
27
goes on to say, "however our client has instructed us that it will again trawl
28
through whatever records it has or make further queries to try and ascertain if
29
any further payments were made."
11:15:16 30
Did you subsequently try to ascertain what
level of payments were made to Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:15:16
11:15:25
23 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 121
3
And other than the documentation furnished in 2000, did you find or anybody who was able to tell you anything more about it?
4
A
5
Q
Well every single piece of document that we have, we sent into the Tribunal. 122
6
And when you consulted with the people that assisted you in providing your statements to the Tribunal, were they able to help you?
7
A
8
Q
Whatever research was done was put into a letter and sent back to the Tribunal. 123
9
Could I have 1255 please. About seven or eight lines from the end, you see there are two cheques there, number 689 and 690, both dated 16th October 1990.
11:16:01 10
The first for 28,000 and the second for 28,300, both made out to Comex Trading
11
Corporation. 1267 please. The top three lines there. These payments and
12
cheque numbers are allocated in the general ledger at strategy planning. Now
13
the Tribunal understands that from Mr. Lawlor that Comex Limited is a company
14
that Mr. Lawlor used to use for creating invoices. And further that the second
11:16:30 15
cheque there of 28,300 was lodged to the account of Economic Reports Limited, a
16
company controlled by Mr. Lawlor. Can you help the Tribunal with any
17
explanation for these payments?
18
A
19
Q
11:16:49 20
A
21
Q
No, I wouldn't have, I wouldn't have known what they were. 124
Did you know that they were made? (shakes head).
125
22
Did you know Mr. Lawlor may have been receiving payments of that level, 56,000 in 1990?
23
A
24
Q
No. 126
11:17:00 25
Have you any idea what services Mr. Lawlor might have provided for these payments.
26
A
27
Q
No. 127
28
Do you have any recollection of Mr. Lawlor at that time in the late 1990s, it would have been around the opening of Tallaght, for example?
29
A
11:17:17 30
Q
Certainly, I was at the opening of Tallaght but no. 128
Sorry I mean the early 1990s. Do you recall the opening of Tallaght? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:17:22
11:17:54
24 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 129
Was that a big event in the company's history? It was a big event, yes.
130
Number 7589 please. This is a letter dated September 2001 from Mr. Phil
5
Monahan to Mr. Liam Lawlor on foot of a request from Mr. Lawlor asking about
6
details of payments made to him and at paragraph 3 the letter indicates that
7
records exist since 1991 and the details I have available pertaining to your
8
good self relate to a payment made 28th July 1994 by cheque to A & L Lawlor in
9
the amount of 3,000 pounds, do you know anything about this payment?
11:18:14 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 131
No. 132
14
Documentation furnished to the Tribunal by your solicitors indicate that it is the company's belief that this cheque to A & L Lawlor was in fact for Mr. Liam
11:18:28 15
Lawlor. Can you assist the Tribunal with how this belief was acquired?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:18:49 20
A
21
Q
No. 133
Did you speak to anybody about this payment? Well Mr. Monahan sent in the reply back to it.
134
But you yourself knew nothing about the payment? No.
135
22
Nor how it came within the Monarch Group to be believed that this payment was to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
11:19:09 25
July 1994?
No. 136
In June 2000, the Tribunal wrote to Mr. Phillip Monahan asking him about, to inform the Tribunal whether he directly or indirectly on his own behalf or on
26
behalf of any other person or company made any payments with regard to any
27
benefits of any kind to any elected representatives. Could I have 1578 please.
28
This is a reply from the solicitors for the Monarch Group dated 14th June 2000,
29
the third paragraph, it says "we would advise that Mr. Monahan did not on his
11:19:35 30
own behalf make any contributions or provide any benefits of any kind to any www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:19:39
11:19:57
25 1
elected representatives or any public officials. However, Monarch Properties
2
Limited and companies within the Monarch Group made certain contributions to
3
certain elected representatives."
4
correspondence at the time Mr. Monahan?
5
A
6
Q
Would you have been aware of this
No. 137
Could I have page 8902, this is the affidavit of Mr. Phillip Monahan made on
7
foot of an order of the Tribunal made 18th April 2002. And if I could have
8
3100, this is a document furnished on foot of the affidavit which is a cheque
9
drawn on the account of Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mary Monahan made payable to
11:20:22 10
Charlie Haughey Party Leaders Fund and signed, I believe, by Mr Philip Monahan,
11
is that your father agency signature?
12
A
13
Q
It looks like it. 138
14
And the payee, does that look like your father's writing to you, Charles Haughey, Party Leaders Fund?
11:20:35 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:20:51 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
It looks like two different types of writing. 139
Were you aware of this payment at the time in February 1991? No.
140
It's a payment made on your parents account for 25,000? I am not aware.
141
Were you aware of the meetings that led to the payment? No.
142
Could I have page 8717 please. This is an entry in your father's diary for
23
February 1991. You will see maybe about halfway down the page, there's S
24
Murphy, 100,000 cash, it looks like it reads. Can you see that entry?
11:21:16 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:21:33 30
Q
I can. 143
Do you see it Mr. Monahan? Yes, I can see exactly, yes.
144
Do you know who S Murphy is? No.
145
And you have no idea why there would be a meeting involving 100,000 pounds in www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:21:38
11:21:54
26 1
cash with an S Murphy and your father?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
No idea. 146
Do you know where Mr. Monahan would have sourced cash at the time in 1991? No idea.
147
Could I have 8156 please?
6 7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Sorry, do you know a D Murphy, Mr. Monahan?
No.
9 11:22:07 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11
Just it looks like an S but there's a line going through it.
It could be a D. Just go back to it for a second. 8717.
12 13
Q
148
14 11:22:41 15
MS. FOLEY:
Is the entry made in your late father's handwriting, Mr. Monahan,
as far as you can identify? A
Could you put the whole diary back there. His handwriting looks similar to the
16
rest of the stuff that's there.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:23:04 20
A
21
Q
149
Sorry, Mr. Monahan, I didn't catch what you said? It looks similar to the rest of the writing that's there on it.
150
But you can't assist with the writing? Whether it's an S or a D or even Murphy looks a bit funny.
151
And I believe your father appeared before the Moriarty Tribunal in October 2000
22
with respect to this payment of 25,000 pounds to the Fianna Fail party, would
23
that, would you have discussed that with your father?
24
A
11:23:37 25
Q
26
A
No, but I know he did appear in front of the Moriarty Tribunal. 152
Was it at that point that you became aware of the payment? I wasn't even at, when he was there, I wasn't even at the Tribunal when he was
27
in front of the Tribunal, I wasn't even there.
28
Q
29
A
11:23:51 30
Q
153
But you had no idea until the evidence came out in public? Yes.
154
On that day that your father had made that payment? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:23:54
11:24:08
27 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 155
Prior to his appearance to the Tribunal, it was never discussed? I didn't know what he was --
156
Could I have 8156 please. This is a letter from Noel Smyth & Partners dated
5
12th August 1993 and you will see there on on the second half of the page it
6
refers to a proposed deal with Dun Laoghaire Golf Club. Dun Laoghaire have
7
approximately 70 acres which would be considered prime residential land and the
8
deal with Dun Laoghaire is described as that they are to receive 150 acres of
9
land approximately at Cherrywood which is to be redeveloped into a first class
11:24:31 10
golf course at the cost of the developer. Were you aware of this proposed deal
11
in August 1993?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:24:42 15
Q
No. 157
Only aware that Cosgroves did a deal on the land, that's all. 158
16 A
18
Q
No. 159
19
The second, the last paragraph on the page there indicates that the sum of 500,000 cash would have to be paid to the club on actual hand over. Do you
11:24:59 20
know anything about this proposed payment?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
No. 160
Do you know where 500,000 pounds cash would come from within the group? I don't know how you would define the term cash, whether it's money that you
24
have or money you have in your bank account or I think you referred to cash, it
11:25:14 25
means something else.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
11:25:40 30
But you are not aware of any involvement with the proposed golf club at Cherrywood Lands?
17
29
Were you ever aware of it since?
161
I have -- I don't know what the author intended by that term? Nor do I.
162
Now Ms. Gosling has told the Tribunal that your late father met with politicians on a regular basis and I would just like to ask you your understanding of the nature of his relationship or friendship with various www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:25:44
11:26:08
28 1
politicians based on documentation furnished to the Tribunal which indicates
2
some level of contact. First of all, Mr. Padraig Flynn, your father appears in
3
Mr. Flynn's diaries in 1989 and 1990 and 1991. There seems to have been a
4
record of meetings having taking place, were you aware of any of these
5
meetings?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:26:14 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 163
Had you ever meet Mr. Flynn? No.
164
Were you at the opening of Tallaght? Yes.
165
Did you not see Mr. Flynn there? I saw Mr. Haughey.
166
14
But you never had any direct meeting with him. Do you know of the nature of the relationship your father may have had with Mr. Flynn, was it business,
11:26:26 15
personal?
16
A
17
Q
I have no idea. 167
Could I have 2864 please. This is a letter signed by your father to Mr. Frank
18
Wall of Fianna Fail referring to donations made including a donation to
19
Mr. Dermot Ahern for 3,000 and Mr. Kieran Haughey for Mr. Sean Haughey for a
11:26:56 20
thousand, do you know anything about Mr. Monahan's relationship with Mr. Ahern
21
or Mr. Sean Haughey?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:27:14 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:27:33 30
No. 168
But you knew he had a relationship with Mr. Charles Haughey, is that correct? I remember Mr. Haughey opening The Square in Tallaght.
169
And was that on foot of a request from your father, would you imagine? I have no idea.
170
Do you remember were they friends? I have no idea, just remember that he was there and he opened it.
171
Ms. Mary Harney has also contacted Mr. Monahan for donations, do you know the nature of any relationship between Mr. Monahan and Ms. Harney? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:27:38
11:27:55
29 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:28:07 10
Q
None at all with Ms. Harney. 172
Do you know Mr. Brian Lenihan? Brian lives in Castleknock.
173
And would your father have had any relationship or contact with Mr. Lenihan? I know Brian myself.
174
Mr. Lenihan, Junior? Yes, junior.
175
And Mr. Lenihan senior, do you know if your father had any contact? No idea, I never met Mr. Lenihan, Senior.
176
3687, this is a letter from a company called Travac Limited signed by Sean
11
Clafferty returning a cheque for 5,000 pounds in May 1992 and this appears to
12
have been copied to deputy Brian Lenihan, do you know anything about this
13
payment, this returned payment?
14
A
11:28:24 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
No. 177
Or any reason why it would have been returned? No.
178
18
Mr. Albert Reynolds, do you know is he an acquaintance or contact of your father's?
19
A
11:28:41 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:28:52 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:29:02 30
Q
No. 179
You never recall him? No, never.
180
Mr. Colm Hilliard? Never heard of him.
181
Mr. Noel Dempsey? I know of Noel but no.
182
Senator Liam Cosgrave? (shakes head).
183
Councillor Colm McGrath? No.
184
Do you know, did you ever meet with Mr. Bill O'Herlihy who worked for Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:29:17
11:29:23
30 1
Properties and the Cherrywood Lands?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
No. 185
Were you aware that he was working for Monarch? No, until he was here.
186
Mr. Frank Dunlop? No, never met him.
187
And Ms. Gosling has given evidence to the Tribunal that when requests for
8
monetary support came from politicians, most of them would have come in
9
addressed to somebody and that person would make a recommendation and in the
11:29:40 10
final stages, Mr. Monahan was the one who said yes or no, would that be your
11
understanding of your father's role in the organisation?
12
A
13
Q
I don't know. 188
14
She also said Mr. Monahan wouldn't personally have to clear every single donation but some of the senior staff would have authority to clear political
11:29:56 15
donations?
16
A
17
Q
Again I wouldn't know what way. 189
18
Do you know who the senior staff would be who would have the authority to authorise political donations?
19
A
11:30:05 20
Q
No. 190
Ms. Gosling has also told the Tribunal it is her understanding of the culture
21
that existed within the Monarch Group that a politician would never have been
22
refuse a political donation because it would have been seen as necessary to
23
support financially those politicians who were in turn supporting or dealing
24
with their lands, that would be your understanding also?
11:30:23 25
A
26
Q
I wouldn't understand what the culture was. 191
27
She described it as a necessary evil, political donations were a necessary evil?
28
A
29
Q
That's her description, it's not mine. 192
I have no further questions, thank you Mr. Monahan.
11:30:37 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:30:37
11:30:43
31 1
WITNESS CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR SANFEY
2 3 4
Q
193
5
us in a bit more detail what you were doing in the ten years prior to 2001?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:31:01 10
MR. SANFEY: I have a couple of questions, chairman. Mr. Monahan, can you tell
Basically I was at school and then -194
When did you leave school? 1988.
195
A
Could you tell us what you did for a living after that? Basically, I worked in an accountancy office in Dundalk. I worked there for a
11
number of years and then I trained to become a helicopter pilot, which I did
12
and then I had my own businesses, various different types of businesses.
13
Q
14
A
196
I did a cinema magazine, the Big Ticket. I was in leisure business, a thing
11:31:23 15
called Glenhurst, property business, PR Properties, developed my own property.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:31:37 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
197
Did your father ever have involvement in any of those businesses? They were things I did myself.
198
Were you work working full-time in those businesses? Yes.
199
Did you live at home during that time? I lived between Dundalk and Dublin, Dundalk is home.
200
Who lived in Dundalk may I ask? The family are in Dundalk, it's home.
201
11:31:53 25
26
Can you tell us in rough outline what those businesses were?
What proportions of your father's time would have been spent between Dundalk and Castleknock?
A
It varied, as work depended on it. I know initially when he moved in, he was
27
just after having his second triple bypass and basically it was Somerton when
28
he was in Dublin, that's when he first stayed in Dublin for a while.
29
Q
11:32:12 30
A
202
Yes. You are a married man, I think? I am, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:32:13
11:32:19
32 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
203
In 2000. 204
11:32:33 10
205
So from 2000, you have been living in your own house? Yes.
206
Right. Can I take it that those businesses that you describe, you worked full-time at those, is that right?
A Q
That's right, yes. 207
11 12
Is that the point at which you moved out of home? Yes.
8 9
When did you get married?
And just to be entirely clear, did you at any time work for Monarch Properties during the 1990s or up to 2001?
A
I had a slight involvement, my father was into cars and he did a thing called
13
Irish National Transport, a BES scheme and he wanted me to be involved in. So
14
I became involved in it.
11:32:52 15
Q
16
A
208
Would you tell us what that project was about and your involvement in it? It was to do with vintage cars, my father was into vintage cars, he was a motor
17
mechanic. That's what he trained at and that's what his passion was, cars.
18
Q
19
A
11:33:10 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:33:18 25
A
209
Was it a business with a view to selling cars or acquiring cars? He wanted to do a museum for Dublin, that was his idea.
210
A car museum? A car museum.
211
Where was this to be? In Dublin.
212
In Dublin. And was that carried through? The BES scheme was formed, it went through and the people that invested in it
26
got their return on it. The museum didn't materialise, they did have a
27
temporary museum but his vision was having one beside the toll bridge and it
28
didn't materialise.
29
Q
11:33:35 30
A
213
It didn't work out? He had problems with National Roads Authority trying to get access and he www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:33:39
11:33:51
33 1
wanted to --
2
Q
3
A
214
It was almost, it was a hobby, I have an interest in cars myself so it was kind
4
of a in a way a hobby.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
215
11:34:08 10
It was a shared interest between you and your father? Yes.
216
8 9
How much of your time did you spend working on this?
In general terms, were you aware of what Monarch Properties was doing during that time?
A Q
In general terms, yes, you would be aware of it. 217
11
You would have been aware that the company had a major project going on in Cherrywood?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:34:16 15
Q
16
A
Yes. 218
And you would have been aware of Tallaght? Yes.
219
In general outline? For example, the opening of Nutgrove Shopping Centre, I would have been there
17
and the opening of Navan Shopping Centre. I would have been there but that
18
would be my involvement, of being invited to the openings.
19
Q
220
11:34:37 20
that be a fair description of him?
21
A
22
Q
He just worked 24 hours a day, just non-stop. 221
23 24
Was your father somebody who was totally dedicated to Monarch business, would
Do you recall having much contact with him during the 1990s in personal terms, like ships that pass in the night?
A
He was a man that worked very very hard, he just really enjoyed his work and he
11:34:56 25
worked very, very hard to the detriment of his health.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:35:13 30
Q
222
Right. In 1990, what age were you? 1990, I was 23. There, thereabouts.
223
So you are now -40.
224
40. During the 1990s, did your father ever ask you your advice in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:35:18
11:35:27
34 1
operational decisions to do with Monarch Properties?
2
A
3
Q
No. 225
4
Did he ever confide in you about problems he might have been having with Monarch Properties?
5
A
6
Q
No. 226
7
Did he ever talk generally about the sort of problems that were facing Monarch Properties over the tea table?
8
A
9
Q
11:35:39 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 227
Was that not his way? That wasn't his way at all, he was his own man, he did his own thing.
228
Of the six children of whom you were one, where do you come in that order? In the middle.
229
14
Would there have been anybody else in the family he would have confided in or anything like that?
11:35:55 15
A
16
Q
No, that wasn't his way. 230
17
That wasn't his way. Did he ever discuss politics or political donations in particular with you?
18
A
19
Q
11:36:11 20
A
No, not at all. 231
What made you decide to join the Monarch Group in the end? I know he wanted somebody to develop out when he wasn't there, he wanted
21
somebody to develop out what was there and keep it in control of whatever was
22
left when he wasn't there.
23
Q
232
24 11:36:35 25
And what did you see as the advantage to you of getting involved in the Monarch Group?
A
Obviously I was going to be getting paid for it and getting incentive for
26
whatever I do well.
27
Q
28
A
233
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Monarch. Thank you.
29 11:36:55 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Monahan, did your late father ever discuss the Tribunal and the www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:36:56
11:37:18
35 1 2
sort of inquiries the Tribunal was making of him an the company before he died A
He would have dealt with the, with his replies, whatever replies.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
was investigating?
6
A
Did he ever discuss with you the sort of issues that the Tribunal
No.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
business in 1991, sorry, 2001.
11:37:33 10
A
Even at the time you effectively took over the running of the
No.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
the Tribunal must have been hanging as a bit of cloud over him and the company.
14
A
And at that time and subsequently when your father was still alive,
Certainly it was something that he had to deal with.
11:37:51 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
the time, he died that there was never any discussion between himself and
18
yourself given that you were effectively taking over the company from him, he
19
never discussed in detail with you the sort of issues which the Tribunal was
11:38:17 20
21
And are you saying that during those years from 2000 or 2001, up to
looking into? A
He dealt with the issues whenever the information and requests were --
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
No, no --
No, he didn't discuss with me.
11:38:27 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
I mean we know what information Monarch provided the Tribunal so --
They provided massive amounts of information to the Tribunal.
28 29 11:38:42 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, but were there discussions between yourself and your father as
to the issues with which the Tribunal was concerned? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:38:46
11:39:01
36 1
A
2
No. basically when a letter came in from the Tribunal, my father dealt with his letter as quick as possible.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
running of the company was involved, and given that he had a great interest in
6
development of the company and its future presumably, he never sat down and
7
discussed in detail with you any concerns he might have or any information he
8
might have in relation to issues with which the Tribunal was concerned.
9
A
11:39:31 10
So, even though you were his heir, so to speak, insofar as the
Well it's clear from what I can see that he co-operated fully with all the Tribunals.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
I am talking about the discussion, any discussions that you had
13
with him in your capacity, I mean you were sort of a dual capacity, you were a
14
son and a member of his family and you were also the person taking over his
11:39:50 15
business. So in that, in those capacities, in either capacity, did he ever
16
discuss in detail with you the sort of issues with which the Tribunal was
17
concerned?
18
A
No.
19 11:40:06 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
document, Mr. Monahan, you have said that it's your belief that this bill
24
wasn't paid, is that correct?
11:40:45 25
A
Could I have 8574 and 8576 up on screen. No, 8574. Just this
Yes, that's correct, yes.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
dealer or land agent, is that correct?
29
A
And Mr. Whelan, you have said, you believed him to be a land
Yes.
11:40:55 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:40:55
11:41:11
37 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
3
From whom did you get the information that this wasn't paid?
My recollection is it came from Dominic Glennane, that it wasn't paid and certainly Mr. Glennane is next so he can check, you can check it with him.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Did you make any inquiries independent of Mr. Glennane?
No.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
residential consultancy at Cherrywood, isn't that correct
11:41:27 10
A
11
Because this was, seems to be a fee to services in relation to
I am just giving you my understanding, I am quite prepared to say that I'm wrong, I am just giving you -- that's my understanding.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
obviously he billed Monarch Properties Limited in 1991?
11:41:41 15
A
You would agree with what it says that whatever Mr. Whelan and
Certainly that's what it says on it, yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
Development.
19
A
And it would appear to be somehow connected to the Cherrywood
Certainly it appears that way, yes.
11:41:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
was ever discussed at board meetings or within the group, I know you say you
23
weren't there at the time but did you ask for any information from
24
Mr. Glennane?
11:42:15 25
A
And did you peruse any papers to ascertain whether or not this
In relation to information, basely all the information that was held by Monarch
26
was submitted to the Tribunal. We sent in over 66 boxes of information. We
27
did request to have the information sent back to us and we were told that it
28
would be copied and sent back to us in due course, but we never received it
29
back.
11:42:36 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:42:36
11:42:50
38 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
Could I have 8897. This is a document that you discovered to the Tribunal.
3
A
And what do you say was shredded on the 26th September 2000?
Correct, yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: And what do you say was shredded on the 26th September 2000,
6
Mr. Monahan?
7
A
Just as I said earlier, the documents were normally held for six years, the
8
documents that were sent to the Tribunal go back from 1991, they were very
9
comprehensive documents, all the Tribunal you can see most of the information
11:43:37 10
that you have is from them, I have no idea what --
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: But what timeframe was shredded, this is a document that's
13
dated but what I'm asking you is what timeframe of documents were shredded on
14
the 26th September 2000?
11:43:53 15
A
I have no idea what timeframe, what was shredded on it, the only thing I can
16
presume, we would presume is that a lot of drawings are produced when you are
17
dealing with properties and they are the sort of things which are bulky and
18
possibly would have been shredded.
19 11:44:09 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: Well who made the decision to shred the documents? A
22
I have no idea but I presume it would have been Ann Gosling that made the decision on it. She would have been in charge.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:44:24 25
26
And whose signature is there on the right hand side and it
says signed for client, do you know whose signature that is? A
It looks like John Sherwood's signature.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY: And this is the 26th September 2000. Now there's a letter, we
29
have a letter and you say that documents were sent to the Tribunal that you
11:44:38 30
have since 1991 because we have the late Mr. Monahan's letter to Mr. Lawlor www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:44:45
11:44:56
39 1
which he said, I think, he was looking for information about a 3,000 cheque
2
that the Monarch Group documents exist from 1991.
3
A
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
2000 if documents exist in 1991, why in 2000 are documents being shredded?
7
A
And I am just wondering that that was a letter in 2001, why in
I can only surmise that it would have been drawings or something like that.
8 9 11:45:19 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
But you don't know.
I don't know.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
would have made the decision prior to the 26th September, somebody would have
14
to physically decide what documents within the, if it is the Monarch Group, it
11:45:39 15
is Monarch Properties, it was on the premises in Monarch Properties in Somerton
16 17
I am asking you now, as managing director of the company, who
Road in Castleknock. What properties would or who would have made the decision A
18
My feeling would have been that Ann Gosling possibly in conjunction with John Sherwood, I would say that Ann Gosling would have made the decision.
19 11:46:03 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
You refer to drawings, as I understand it, the main company
office was in Harcourt Street, was it not? A
Basically in Dundalk, in Wilton House and then it moved to Earlsfort Terrace
23
and then Harcourt Street and some of it went along with Dunloe into its
24
headquarters and other stuff went into Castleknock. There was a number of
11:46:25 25
26
different moves for paperwork, as you understand, it's a lot of paper to be moving.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
documents that were destroyed on the 26th September related to documents held
11:46:39 30
Yes, but this would appear to, are you saying that the
in Somerton only? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:46:41
11:46:55
40 1
A
2
Yes. No, I would, my guess would be it just refers to documents held in Somerton only.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
understand he would have been the technical director of Monarch Group?
6
A
As I understand it, we haven't heard from Mr. Sweeney yet, I
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
we have indeed from Mr. Reilly and others, that Mr. Sweeney was the person, if
11:47:05 10
you like, probably within Monarch on the technical aspect of the development of
11 12
And he would be the person, as I understand from the evidence
the Cherrywood site, is that correct? A
13
Well I am not exactly sure what Mr. Sweeney's role on it was but certainly he was, I don't know exactly what his qualification was.
14 11:47:24 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's my understanding of it. You are only surmising it
16
would appear that Mr. Sweeney, his office was in Harcourt Street as I
17
understand it?
18
A
Yes.
19 11:47:33 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Would it not be more likely that all the technical documents
21
would be -- to be found or most of them, save for whatever the late Mr. Monahan
22
might have had himself, would be found in Harcourt Street?
23 24 11:48:02 25
A
Any of the stuff that would have been there would have been, if there was drawings in Harcourt Street which -- the offices were sold, if drawings that were there on it, Mr. Sweeney I am sure wouldn't have wanted them. I think in
26
2000, whenever information, whenever Harcourt Street would have closed, it was
27
in 1996 as far as I am aware of, Monarch went into Dunloe so at that stage
28
documents would have gone to Dunloe.
29
not there at the time or he was exited at that time, and I am sure that any
11:48:26 30
Mr. Sweeney, as far as I am aware, was
surplus information or drawings or whatever else on it would have been www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:48:30
11:48:44
41 1
transported and stored in Somerton.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
told us that the late Mr. Monahan back in 1986 appeared to be making some
5
provision for, that he wanted a million pounds in cash, do you know anything
6
about that?
7
A
I see. And just one other thing, do you know Ms. Gosling has
Basically Mr. Monahan had two triple by-passes, his latter one was in 1989 and
8
he had another one then in 2001 and he was a man of ill health, he was a
9
diabetic, he was a man coming up at that stage to retirement age, so I'm sure
11:49:11 10
when someone is in their 60s, they are thinking about retirement and not
11
working any more.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
this money back in 1986?
11:49:21 15
A
Was it ever discussed, do you know if Mr. Monahan received
I have no idea if he received it or not.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see. Thank you.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:49:34 20
21
Mr. Monahan, could I just ask you, are you the only member of the
family who is now involved in the companies run by your father? A
I have another brother who is paid by Monarch Properties.
22 23 24
JUDGE KEYS: Has he a greater involvement in the company than you? A
No.
11:49:48 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
27
heir elect in 2000 when your father became ill?
28
A
Do I take it for all intents and purposes, you were really the
Well --
29 11:49:58 30
JUDGE KEYS:
He was setting you up to be the person to take over? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:50:01
11:50:11
42 1
A
He wanted somebody to -- yes.
2 3
JUDGE KEYS:
4
and explained even what the company structure was, what companies he had a
5
shareholding in and what assets those companies had?
6
A
Is it your evidence to the Tribunal they never sat down with you
I would have an idea of what was involved.
7 8 9
JUDGE KEYS: A
Did he ever sit down with you and go through his portfolio?
No.
11:50:27 10
11
JUDGE KEYS:
12
of companies, to a very successful businessman who had made quite a lot of
13
money and he never explained to you what the company did, secondly what the
14
structure was, thirdly, who the directors were, what jobs they had in hand, or
11:50:46 15
16
So therefore you were being set up as the heir elect to a group
what lands it even owned or what assets? A
17
That's not the way the he operated, he didn't sit down and tell people what they should be doing or what it was about.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:51:03 20
I understand immediately that, but let us face it, as his health
deteriorated, surely he became concerned at this stage, while you are the heir
21
elect, you are now going to have to step into his shoes and take over and run
22
it and despite that you are telling me he never explained to you the structure
23
of the company, the assets it had, who were the directors and so forth?
24
A
No, he never sat down and explained to me the whole structure of the company.
11:51:26 25
26 27
JUDGE KEYS: A
And do you know what the structures of the company are now?
I do.
28 29 11:51:32 30
JUDGE KEYS: A
And when did you find that out?
Since I became employed. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:51:35
11:51:45
43 1 2 3
JUDGE KEYS: A
And who did you consult with to obtain that information?
Advisers or accountants.
4 5 6
JUDGE KEYS: A
Well, what accountants?
KPMG, Sean Mooney, Pascal & Company.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
affairs, you are saying that he never discussed that with you either?
11:52:02 10
A
And tell me, as the Tribunals became interested in your father's
That's correct.
11 12 13
JUDGE KEYS: A
Never marked your card at all?
That's correct, yes.
14 11:52:09 15
JUDGE KEYS:
Did he ever discuss how, what problems the company may have and
16
what problems may arise when the Tribunals were inquiring into the business
17
arrangements he had?
18
A
No.
19 11:52:31 20
21
JUDGE KEYS: A
Do you know did he tell anybody else?
Pardon?
22 23 24
JUDGE KEYS: A
Do you know did he tell anybody else or inform anybody else?
I don't know if he informed anybody else.
11:52:40 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
27
what the structures were, he had to have told somebody to pass on the
28
information so the companies could keep going, is that correct?
29
A
Because somebody had to know because you eventually found out
Well accountants knew exactly.
11:52:53 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:52:53
11:53:04
44 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
his assets?
3
A
4
Well do you know where his assets were when he died, did you know
Well I wasn't, I am not an executor but certainly I know exactly what all the assets are now.
5 6
JUDGE KEYS:
7
next of kin you would have some interest in it, in the assets he would have
8
had, no? You see you paint a picture as if you know absolutely nothing or
9
close to nothing about his affairs during a time when he was very ill and it
11:53:25 10
I don't want to enquire into personal matters but I take it as
look liked like he may not survive and yet despite that, you come in here as if
11
you know nothing about him, any of the business. From 2000 onwards now, I am
12
not talking about 1991, I am talking about from 2000, from the time the
13
Tribunals started to send correspondence to your father making inquiries and
14
this is a time when you are, as I understand it, were going to take over the
11:53:52 15
reins of the company. And you didn't express any interest and ask your father
16
'well listen, if I am going to take over these companies, you will have to tell
17
me more about them?'
18
A
19
That wasn't the way that he operated. He wasn't the type of person who sat down with somebody and told him --
11:54:05 20
21 22
JUDGE KEYS: A
Did you ever ask him to sit down?
No, I am an owner driver, I do my own thing.
23 24
JUDGE KEYS:
I see, thank you very much.
11:54:15 25
26
MR. RYAN: Excuse me, chairman, may I just make one clarification there.
27
think Judge Faherty said to Mr. Monahan that Ms. Gosling gave evidence that
28
Mr. Monahan senior wished to raise over a million pounds in 1986, just by way
29
of clarification, Ms. Gosling did not say that directly in evidence, I believe
11:54:32 30
it was put to her. www.pcr.ie Day 659
I
11:54:33
11:54:42
45 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I said it arose in the course of Ms. Gosling's evidence and
3
she said I must have been aware of it.
4 5
MR. RYAN: Very good.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I was only trying to ascertain this witness's --
8 9
MR. RYAN: Just by way of clarification, she didn't give evidence.
11:54:53 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I accept she didn't put it.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
We are going to rise for about 15 minutes, we would like
14
Mr. Monahan to be here in the hearing room when we return.
11:55:11 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
17
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
18 19 12:13:38 20
CHAIRMAN:
The Tribunal is not at this time satisfied that Mr. Monahan has
provided it with full and frank information as he is legally supposed to do.
21
It appears to the Tribunal that Mr. Monahan has been evasive in many of his
22
replies to counsel and to the Tribunal. And as a matter of probability has
23
far more detailed relevant information than that which he has given so far. If
24
Mr. Monahan would like a further opportunity in the course of this week to give
12:14:06 25
26
additional evidence to the Tribunal, he will be afforded an opportunity to so do.
27 28
If he does not do so, the Tribunal will in due course critically appraise his
29
evidence and may decide to refer Mr. Monahan to the High Court as provided for
12:14:21 30
in the Tribunals of Inquiry legislation. All right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:14:25
12:14:39
46 1 2
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder if I could reply briefly to that. I obviously
3
want to consider the position with Mr. Monahan and advise him appropriately but
4
I do know from having spoken to him during the break, he stands over the
5
evidence he gave and says that it is truthful evidence. It may be there is
6
some way on reflection he can be of more assistance to the Tribunal, I will
7
investigate that with him.
8 9 12:14:53 10
CHAIRMAN:
If he does and if he wants another opportunity to give evidence or
to give additional information, then that's something you can raise with the
11
Tribunal's legal team and he will be facilitated in order to give that
12
evidence.
13 14
MR. SANFEY: Very good, chairman.
12:15:09 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Dominic Glennane please.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:15:14
12:15:55
47 1
MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
A
6
Q
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane.
Good afternoon, chairman. 234
7
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane. You were here for the evidence of
Mr. Paul Monahan this morning?
8
A
9
Q
I was, yes. 235
12:16:04 10
And I think that while it's not the case perhaps that you have been here for the entire of the evidence in the Module to date, you have been here for
11
certainly a substantial portion of it?
12
A
13
Q
That's right, yes. 236
14
I think that throughout the critical period that the Tribunal is investigating, you were the senior financial officer in the Monarch Group?
12:16:18 15
A
16
Q
That's right, yes. 237
17
You were in addition a 20 percent shareholder in the Monarch Group effectively, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes, that's right, yes. 238
12:16:31 20
And we will come to look at some of those documents, but if we start with some generalities first, Mr. Glennane, if I can do it that way. You would have been
21
the person, who leaving aside the late Mr. Phillip Monahan, would have had
22
ultimate fiscal or financial responsibility within the Monarch group?
23
A
24
Q
12:16:49 25
A
26
Q
In the main, yes. 239
You would have been responsible for signing cheques, is that right? Well, I didn't sign all the cheques but I was one of the cheque signatories.
240
Is that right and in terms of preparing the books of records and making the
27
entries, while some of this work might have been done by other people, you were
28
the person who ultimately had to stand over it all?
29
A
12:17:08 30
Q
I would have been the person that signed off the accounts. 241
Is that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:17:08
12:17:15
48 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 242
3
Now you would also have been a person who worked closely with the late Mr. Phillip Monahan, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
By and large, yes. 243
You heard the evidence this morning of Mr. Paul Monahan, I don't want you to
6
comment on that evidence but would you have described the late Mr. Monahan,
7
that's the late Mr. Phillip Monahan as a secretive man?
8
A
9
Q
12:17:33 10
A
11
Q
12
A
I would think so, yes. 244
And can I ask you -Fairly secretive.
245
Very secretive? Fairly secretive. I think he told you what he wanted you to know was the long
13
and short of it.
14
Q
12:17:44 15
A
16
Q
246
That was the way he operated? Exactly.
247
Would it also be fair to that the late Mr. Phillip Monahan would have had
17
dealings with individuals that may not have been known to the balance of the
18
people with whom he worked?
19
A
12:17:57 20
Q
Yes, that's true, yes. 248
I am going to take you through the documentation in relation to a number of
21
people, Mr. Glennane, but from your experience in dealing with the late
22
Mr. Monahan, was it your, from your knowledge and understanding and having
23
worked so closely with him over the years that he compartmentalised things, if
24
I can put it like that?
12:18:18 25
A
So a certain extent I suppose, certainly since the 1990, he was based in a
26
different location than the rest of the Monarch people effectively other than
27
the small team he had working with him, so we might have no contact with him
28
for several days or you might talk to him a few times a day, he was always out
29
looking for new development opportunities and that was his job.
12:18:40 30
Q
249
And did Mr. Monahan do his own thing in relation to the company as it were? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:18:46
12:19:06
49 1
A
Well to a certain extent I'd say yes but within the legal limits of the sort of
2 3
compliance and that but he didn't answer to anybody on a daily basis. Q
250
4 5
And indeed it would be fair to, Mr. Glennane, that everybody else answered to Mr. Monahan but Mr. Monahan didn't answer to anybody else within the company?
A
Well we would have, if we had disagreements, we would sort them out and that so
6
I don't think, nobody else or certainly none of the senior people would have
7
necessarily just done what he said to do. You would have no problems arguing
8
with him or debating with him.
9
Q
251
12:19:29 10
Mr. Phillip Monahan, so far as he is operated bank accounts, his personal bank
11
accounts for example Mr. Glennane, how was that funded?
12
A
13
Q
Well from the company resources presumably, yes. 252
14 12:19:45 15
A
Well, he was paid a monthly salary the same as everybody else, he was paid expenses. And I mean that was the main source of income so far as I was aware.
Q
253
18 19
Well, you are the financial officer now, you must know if there were drawings from the company to the late Mr. Monahan, isn't that right?
16 17
And insofar as Mr. Monahan, when I say Mr. Monahan, I am talking about the late
Insofar as Mr. Monahan claimed expenses, did he simply indicate a figure or did he have to provide vouching documentation for any expenses?
A
I think he filled in a sheet, in some case there would have been receipts
12:20:13 20
attached to it, other cases not.
21
Q
22
A
254
Did Mr. Monahan get director's loans from the companies? Well actually he had, I suppose as a result of one of the transactions which
23
you have been referring, there was a large director's loan due to him by the
24
company and it was reduced over the years so there was never a situation where
12:20:39 25
there was a director's loan from the company to him.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 12:20:56 30
255
Are you talking about the 1.8 million? Well yes, yes.
256
I will come to deal with that in time, are you saying as a general principle in relation to that transaction, Mr. Glennane, that the company owed that money to Mr. Monahan and as and when Mr. Monahan needed that money, he simply took it www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:21:00
12:21:09
50 1
because he was entitled to it?
2
A
3
Q
Yes, pretty much so. 257
4
of a million pounds, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 258
7 8
Mr. Monahan had access to that million pounds and he didn't have to account to anybody else for what he did, is that the position?
A
He would have had to had to, if he was drawing money from the company, if it
9
was any sort of a substantial sum, obviously it would have been discussed
12:21:24 10
because the company mightn't have the spare cash at the time to pay it for the
11 12
That's insofar as his share of that 1.8 million which was a significant share
spare funds available to pay it. Q
259
But the only discussion that would take place Mr. Glennane, and correct me if I
13
am wrong, whether the company had the money to pay Mr. Monahan, not whether
14
Mr. Monahan was entitled to the money and what he was going to do with the
12:21:46 15
16
money? A
I think it was a courtesy, he would probably would have said I need the money
17 18
to buy something, a deposit, I am buying more cars or whatever. Q
260
19
But the reasons that Mr. Monahan wanted the money would have been irrelevant to the company that was paying the money, isn't that right?
12:22:05 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Well from an accounting point of view. 261
Isn't that right? Yes.
262
24
The only matter that would concern the company whether it was in funds to pay Mr. Monahan the money he wanted?
12:22:09 25
A
26
Q
To an extent, yes, I suppose. 263
And can I ask you about the certificate of wast that we have seen this morning
27
at 8897. And this is the shredded document, now do you know anything about
28
this?
29
A
12:22:26 30
Q
No, I don't, no. 264
Well let's see if we can work out a few things, a few facts in relation to it. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:22:32
12:22:44
51 1
There's 819 kilograms of confidential waste which I work out at being
2
approximately 700 weight, is that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
If you say so, I don't know. 265
That's right, yes. 266
7 8
So and this is all being destroyed in Somerton?
Now, what kind of documentation would there have been in Somerton, Mr. Glennane?
A
Well Somerton over the years would have accumulated its own files obviously and
9
then when Monarch was sold in 1997, all the documentation was split up, some of
12:23:04 10
it -- as indeed the staff were, so and any historical documentation was sent to
11
Somerton, anything to do with accounts or anything like that, any documentation
12
which related to the technical end insofar as the jobs were ongoing or insofar
13
as the companies were acquired by Dunloe wanted them in Dunloe's offices and we
14
were very conscious that you had to keep obviously documents for six years
12:23:36 15
under the Companies Act. So we would, on the other hand, at that stage we were
16 17
trying to dispose of as much as we can obviously. Q
267
So the technical documentation that, the plans, the engineers, the architects,
18
of current or jobs or jobs that had been sold to Dunloe Ewart, would have gone
19
to Dunloe Ewart?
12:23:58 20
A
Or gone to Lafferty Design, who was the chief architect who started his own
21
business at the time.
22
Q
23
A
268
I don't think anything relating to Cherrywood, that's probably the only one
24
that wouldn't have gone or say Drogheda, not only, Dun Laoghaire Town Centre,
12:24:15 25
26
But they haven't have gone out to Somerton?
any recent job but there were a lot of other old drawings, if you like. Q
269
And the historical financial documentation, including the old audit working
27
papers and any of your say working papers, they would have gone out to
28
Somerton, is that right?
29
A
12:24:34 30
Q
For the previous six years, yes. 270
And then in addition to that, Somerton would have had its own files anyway, is www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:24:39
12:24:44
52 1
that right?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
That's right, yes. 271
That's right, yes. 272
6 A
8
Q
Not that I'm aware of, no. 273
9
Were you aware, for example, you will see from the document on screen that it's, that -- I think the destruction occurs on the 26th September 2000.
12:25:04 10
A
11
Q
That's right, yes. 274
12
Were you aware that the Tribunal on the 6th June 2000 had written to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I am not sure when I became aware of that, I became aware certainly at some
14 12:25:19 15
So and in, did any event occur in 2000 that precipitated or caused this destruction?
7
13
And they would have been the files that were operated by Mr. Monahan?
stage, yes. Q
275
1576. And this is the first letter that's sent to Mr. Phillip Monahan at
16
Somerton in Castleknock and I want to draw to your attention that what the
17
Tribunal is asking Mr. Monahan about is whether or not he has made any payments
18
directly or indirectly to any elected representative or public official. Do
19
you see that?
12:25:40 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 276
It goes on to say "this request extends to any payments which may have been
22
made or benefits provided to or through Mr. Frank Dunlop or any other
23
intermediary", do you see that?
24
A
12:25:51 25
Q
Yes, I do. 277
So Mr. Monahan when he got this letter, as indeed yourself when you first saw
26
it, would have been aware that the Tribunal was inquiring into political
27
payments made by Mr. Monahan directly, including payments made by Mr. Dunlop,
28
is that right?
29
A
12:26:07 30
Q
To Mr. Dunlop. 278
Through Mr. Dunlop? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:26:08
12:26:18
53 1
A
2
Q
To Mr. Dunlop. 279
If you look at the letter Mr Glennane, it says "this request extends to any
3
payments that may have been made or benefits provided to or through
4
Mr. Dunlop?"
5
A
6
Q
That's right. 280
So Mr. Monahan when he saw this letter would have been aware that the Tribunal
7
were inquiring into political payments, including payments that may have been
8
made by Mr. Frank Dunlop, isn't that right?
9 12:26:31 10
A Q
I assume so, yes. 281
11 12
Mr. Glennane, is that right? A
Well I am not quite sure if I agree with your terminology of an ounce of sense,
13 14
Well anybody with an ounce of sense reading that letter would have known that,
but yes. Q
282
12:26:45 15
When you read it, Mr. Glennane, did you understand what the Tribunal was inquiring into is this?
16
A
17
Q
Yes, I did, yes. 283
And you knew and Mr. Monahan would have known that Mr. Frank Dunlop had been
18
retained by Monarch Group in 1993 in connection with the rezoning of the
19
Cherrywood Lands, isn't that right?
12:26:59 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 284
And that is not a fact that was a secret or unknown within the Monarch Group? Not at all, no.
285
24
So when you received this letter and Mr. Monahan received this letter, you were aware of two things, one, you had had dealings with Mr. Frank Dunlop, and two,
12:27:15 25
the Tribunal was inquiring into those dealings, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
That's right. 286
Now, prior to you receiving this letter in April of 2000, Mr. Frank Dunlop had
28
given evidence in public in this Tribunal that was widely reported in the
29
newspapers, do you remember that?
12:27:30 30
A
I do, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:27:31
12:27:51
54 1
Q
287
And it would have been clear from anybody reading the newspapers at that time
2
that what Mr. Dunlop had told the Tribunal and which he had written on lists
3
were the names of companies for whom he had conducted business, ie seeking the
4
rezoning of their lands in 1992 and 1993 and lists of politicians who
5
Mr. Dunlop said he had paid in order to secure that rezoning, would you have
6
known that in April of 2000?
7
A
I would have been aware of it, I don't remember the exact dates now but I
8
certainly was aware when he came before the Tribunal and his interviews with
9
the Tribunal.
12:28:08 10
Q
288
Would it be fair to say that similarly Mr. Phillip Monahan must also at the
11
time have been aware of that background prior to him receiving the letter of
12
6th June 2000?
13
A
I couldn't say that, I don't know what Mr. Monahan was aware of then, I am not
14 12:28:24 15
sure what his state of health was throughout that period. Q
289
16
Well, when Mr. Monahan received this letter, did he discuss with you, Mr. Glennane?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:28:30 20
Q
I don't think so, no. 290
At that time? No.
291
But certainly, in April 2000, it was well known in this country that Mr. Frank
21
Dunlop had provided two important pieces of information to the Tribunal, though
22
nobody knew the detail of them, one was a list of people for whom he had acted,
23
and who had given him money in the course of the Development Plan, and two, he
24
had provided lists of people whom he said he had paid in order to secure that
12:28:53 25
rezoning, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
I was aware of it certainly, yes. 292
Right, now you also knew at the time that Mr. Dunlop was giving his evidence as
28
did everybody else in Monarch that you, in Monarch, had retained Mr. Dunlop in
29
connection with the Cherrywood Lands, isn't that also right?
12:29:09 30
A
That's right, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:29:09
12:29:28
55 1
Q
293
2 3
So you knew and you must have suspected that your name or Monarch's name was on some list somewhere prepared by Mr. Dunlop?
A
Well, I don't know because I mean as far as we are concerned, it was the
4
services of Frank Dunlop & Associates who are a PR company so -- but if he was
5
giving details of all the clients he had over the years, obviously I would have
6
expected our name to appear on it, yes.
7
Q
294
8 9 12:29:40 10
It couldn't have come as a surprise to you that Mr. Dunlop might have put the Monarch's name on a list, is that right?
A Q
That's right, no. 295
So that when the letter comes of the 6th June 2000, it can't be wholly
11
unexpected within the Monarch Group that such a letter is coming following the
12
public evidence of Mr. Dunlop in April 2000, isn't that right?
13
A
Well I don't know, I don't know what you mean the Monarch Group because that
14 12:29:58 15
is, I had left the Monarch Group. Q
296
16
But certainly you knew that the Monarch Group had retained Mr. Dunlop in connection with the Cherrywood Lands in 1993, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
That's right, yes. 297
19
You knew that you had paid substantial sums to Mr. Dunlop in 1993 for his services, isn't that right?
12:30:11 20
A
21
Q
That's right, for fees, yes. 298
We will come to look at Mr. Dunlop, Frank Dunlop, shortly Mr. Glennane but you
22
would certainly have been aware as would other people in the Monarch Group of
23
the fact that by April 2000 or the end of Mr. Dunlop's first evidence, there
24
was a real risk or likelihood that Monarch's name appeared on a list of
12:30:31 25
Mr. Dunlop's as an employer of Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Well obviously, yes, there was a -299
Indeed, anybody in the Monarch who had been in the Monarch Group at the time
28
such as Mr. Lynn, or Mr. Reilly or Mr. Sweeney would equally have been aware of
29
the fact that A, Mr. Dunlop was giving very highly quoted public evidence and
12:30:49 30
B, that Mr. Dunlop had previously been retained by Monarch, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:30:54
12:31:10
56 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Well I can't speak for other people. 300
Right. But you certainly were aware of it? I was certainly aware, yes, that he had given evidence to the Tribunal, yes.
301
And you were also aware, without discussing it with Mr. Phillip Monahan, you
5
yourself had made the connection that it was likely that Monarch's name
6
appeared on some of Mr. Dunlop's lists, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
As clients of his, yes. 302
As a client of his and we will come to look at that? I certainly would not have thought it would appear as somebody who had given
12:31:22 10
him money to give to politicians, we would never have done that.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
303
Leaving aside that? I am not sure of the context of what you are talking about.
304
14
Yes, so that what happens then from Mr. Phillip Monahan's point of view at Somerton is that approximately 700 weight of paper in Somerton is destroyed in
12:31:41 15
September of 2000. Isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
So it appears, yes. 305
Now, looking at it now, Mr. Glennane, in that context and in that sequence, can
18
you think of any reason why someone who has been informed that they are going
19
to be the subject matter of an inquiry by a Tribunal of Inquiry why would such
12:32:04 20
a person elect at that point in time to destroy 819.88 kilograms or 700 weight
21
of newspapers which might, of not newspaper, of paper, which might contain
22
material or relevant information, can you help the Tribunal why that took place
23
in September of 2000?
24
A
It's normal practice in a company to have documents shredded every six to 12
12:32:28 25
months if you can, otherwise it just all builds up. I wouldn't have thought
26
it, I mean as far as I can see, all the documentation relating to Mr. Dunlop is
27
included in the brief. It doesn't appear that any documentation, I assume it
28
was waste piper that was destroyed.
29 12:32:52 30
Q
306
Who was the person who would have carried out that analysis, Mr. Glennane, who would have gone through that documentation before it was shredded to decide www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:32:57
12:33:10
57 1
whether or not, before it was torn up, whether there was anything in it that
2
might assist the Tribunal in its enquiries?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
I don't know. Somebody in Somerton probably. 307
Did I think that? 308
309
Do you think it's in any way significant or indeed sinister that such a shredding operation took place within two months of Mr. Monahan being told he
12:33:25 10
was the subject matter of inquiry by this Tribunal?
11
A
12
Q
I wouldn't think so, no. 310
13
Do you think this is a normal reaction of somebody who is being told they are the subject matter of inquiry by the Tribunal to shred 700 weight of documents?
A
I have no idea what 700 weight of documents is in context but I would have
12:33:48 15
16
Yes? No, I didn't know anything about this shredding documents until I saw it here.
9
14
Do you think such an exercise was in fact carried out?
thought it's a normal process to shred documentation on a regular basis. Q
311
10 hundred weight would be half a ton of documents, 700 weight is almost half a
17
ton of documents and I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that's a very, very, very
18
great deal of documents, isn't that right?
19
A
12:34:09 20
Q
I said I can't visualise it but yes. 312
21 22
And can you think of any other precipitating factor that might have led to this shredded exercise being carried out?
A
No, they might have wanted to clear out space because I know all the
23
documentation was stored in the place where the cars were stored so I think it
24
was very tight for space so I assume that somebody made a decision to dump --
12:34:38 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:34:54 30
313
Who was the person who would have made the decision to dump the documentation? Mr. Monahan or John Sherwood or Ann Gosling or some combination.
314
But it wasn't you anyway because you had left the company? No.
315
Can I ask you Mr. Glennane when you left the company, did you set up another company with Mr. Phillip Reilly? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:34:56
12:35:12
58 1
A
2
Q
Not for about two years after that, yes. 316
And is that the occupation that you are presently engaged in, with Mr. Reilly
3
and if I understood Mr. Reilly correctly, you are providing a similar type of
4
service that had previously been supplied by Monarch Property Services Limited?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
That's right. 317
Yes. 318
9 12:35:21 10
Is that right?
Would you like to tell the Tribunal about it, in a general way, the services that were provided by Monarch Property Services Limited?
A
Well the services that were provided which we are continuing to provide were
11
the management, the overall management of shopping centres on behalf of clients
12
and in Monarch days on behalf of ourselves and really it's to do with the
13
running and administration of shopping centres, the collection of rents,
14
collection of service charges and employing security, cleaning staff and the
12:35:50 15
16
general overall running of the centre. Q
319
And insofar as Monarch Property Services Limited becomes involved in joint
17
venture activities, it became involved in a joint venture activity in Tallaght
18
with GRE?
19
A
12:36:02 20
Q
That's right. 320
21
And then it became involved subsequently in Cabinteely with or Cherrywood with GRE also, is that right?
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 321
24
I will come to deal with that but there's a number of what I call separate issues I want to deal with before we look at the accounting treatment of the
12:36:15 25
payments, Mr. Glennane, an the first matter I want to ask you about is the late
26
Mr. Liam Lawlor and whether you knew him?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:36:32 30
Q
I met him on a few occasions. 322
Where did you meet him? I think I met him certainly in our office on two or three occasions.
323
Which office would that be? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:36:33
12:36:42
59 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
In Harcourt Street. 324
I would say maybe three or four. 325
12:36:57 10
And who would have set up the meetings? I think he just called in, if I remember rightly.
326
Was Mr. Lawlor in the habit of dropping into the offices of Monarch? I don't know if he was in the habit, certainly he dropped in a few times that I
8 9
How many occasions would you have met Mr. Lawlor?
was aware of it. Q
327
A
Did you ever have scheduled or arranged meetings with Mr. Lawlor? I think I might have had one or two in connection with Prague, he was very
11
involved if I recall on the Prague venture which we were involved with for
12
sometime.
13
Q
14
A
12:37:15 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
328
I think it was 1993 I think. 329
Yes. And certainly prior to 1993, would you have occasion to meet Mr. Lawlor? I think I met him in Tallaght on maybe one or two occasions.
330
Who introduced you to him? I think it was either probably -- I think Mr. Monahan probably.
331
12:37:36 20
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Monahan, as a director of Monarch Properties Limited, provided a guarantee to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing in
21
June of 1988 for the benefit of Mr. Lawlor?
22
A
23
Q
I don't think so, no. 332
24
7594, you will have seen this document in the brief. Were you aware of that guarantee, Mr. Glennane?
12:37:55 25
A
26
Q
I don't think so, but. 333
27
Were you aware of the fact that Advance Proteins Limited was a company that was beneficially owned by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
28
A
29
Q
12:38:14 30
Approximately when did the Prague business start, can you remember?
I don't think so. 334
7798. You will see that this is the leasing arrangements with Mr. Liam Lawlor that is the subject matter of the guarantee by Mr. Phillip Monahan on behalf of www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:38:19
12:38:32
60 1 2
Monarch Properties Limited? A
That's right, yes, in fact the company who supplied that vehicle is Dublin Road
3
Motors which was a Monarch company.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:38:43 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
335
That Monarch was guaranteeing it? 336
Yes? Or Phillip Monaghan, no, I don't think so.
337
Does it -- in 1988 what was your position in the company? I was a director, yes.
338
Were you the financial director? I was, yes.
339
13
And if you weren't aware of this transaction, does that mean that Mr. Monahan didn't bring it to your attention?
14
A
12:38:55 15
Q
Presumably, yes. 340
16
As the financial, were you the financial director of Monarch Properties Limited?
17
A
18
Q
I was, yes. 341
19
So you were the person who ultimately, if there was a default by Mr. Liam Lawlor or Advance Proteins Limited, Monarch property were going to have to step
12:39:11 20
into the breach, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
12:39:24 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:39:44 30
Yes, the Monarch -- yes, now were you aware of this arrangement?
I assume I would have taken back the car. 342
So it was a contingent liability? It would have been a contingent liability.
343
You were unaware of the existence of the contingent liability? So far as you can recall, yes.
344
Does that mean Mr. Phillip Monahan kept it a secret from you? If he didn't inform me about it, I don't know if he kept it a secret.
345
Shouldn't he have informed you about it Mr. Glennane? No disrespect but it wasn't any sort of big transaction in our business so, yes, he should have from an accounting point of view I suppose. I don't know www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:39:49
12:40:10
61 1
if it was as a contingent liability in the accounts or not.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:40:29 10
Q
346
Were you the financial director in 1990 of L&C Properties? Well, I was the financial director of Monarch which owned L&C Properties, yes.
347
Were you aware of two payments in October of 1990 to Comex Trading Corporation? I don't recall if I was aware of them or not.
348
1255 please. I see them there.
349
You see the two payments there in October? Yes.
350
Now before we talk about those, I want to show you another document at 1269
11
which is a document that was provided to the Tribunal by Mr. Lawlor and I
12
should explain to you, Mr. Glennane, if fairness to yourself, Mr. Lawlor gave
13
evidence to this Tribunal arising out of a number of invoices that he had
14
produced as a result of which he told the Tribunal that he was in the habit of
12:40:51 15
creating invoices and in creating invoices, he had used a number of names for
16
the purpose of creating invoices and they are listed on that letter of the 1st
17
May 2000 at A to H, do you see that?
18
A
19
Q
Yes, I do. 351
12:41:10 20
Commencing 'Industrial Consultants International' and concluding 'Demographic & Strategic Consultants' and the second name on that is Comex Limited?
21
A
22
Q
I see that. 352
23
In that letter, Mr. Lawlor also told the Tribunal that the entities who may have received such invoices from him included at number C, Monarch Properties?
24
A
12:41:25 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
That's right, yes. 353
Were you aware of that proclivity on the part of Mr. Lawlor? Sorry?
354
28
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Lawlor used other company's names in order to generate invoices to receive payment?
29
A
12:41:42 30
Q
No, I don't think so, no. 355
Do you understand what Mr. Lawlor was telling the Tribunal he had been in the www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:41:46
12:41:57
62 1 2
habit of doing? A
Well I assume he was saying that he owned a number of companies and they
3 4
invoiced -Q
356
No, what Mr. Lawlor was telling the Tribunal was that he used those names for
5
the purposes of creating false invoices for the purposes of generating revenue
6
for himself.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:42:06 10
Q
Okay, well -357
I understand that. 358
11 12
A
Well if it was called Comex Limited, I assume it was a limited company it was owned by somebody.
Q
359
12:42:28 15
At 1255, you will see that in October 1990, two cheques were written to an entity called Comex Trading Corporation in the sum of 28,000 and 28,300?
16
A
17
Q
That's right. 360
18 19
He is not saying and did not say to the Tribunal that he owned a company called Comex?
13 14
Do you understand?
What can you tell the Tribunal about that transaction or those transactions, Mr. Glennane?
A
I don't have any memory going back to that particular time, that was the week
12:42:49 20
before the opening of Tallaght Town Centre, everybody was extremely busy
21
including myself, we were concluding three major investment sales, so I don't,
22
I mean there was an awful lot going on at that time. But I have discovered
23
since there were apparently invoices raised for that during the year, the year
24
1990 and as you can see there, it's been posted to a creditor's ledger of L&C
12:43:18 25
Properties Limited.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:43:30 30
Q
361
And do you have the invoices? I don't have them, no, but I have a reference to them in the brief.
362
Yes, if you just give us the brief page? I am trying to find it.
363
Okay. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:43:34
12:44:06
63 1
A
Page 3021. You will see about halfway up there's a thing called Strategy Plan
2
and there's two invoices, one dated the 21st March 1990 and one dated the 19th
3
September 1990 and one is for 28,300 and one is for 28,000. It appears there
4
were invoices raised in March and September.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
364
Yes, so I would believe. 365
8 9 12:44:17 10
And those invoices would have been in the name of Comex Trading Corporation?
And that would mean that was a creditor with whom the company was doing business?
A Q
So it would appear, yes. 366
11
What can you tell the Tribunal about the corporate structure behind Comex trading corporation?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
I have no information on it, no. 367
What services did Comex Trading Corporation provide to the company? Well it's described here as strategy plans so I presume that was the reference
12:44:35 15
on the invoice.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:44:51 20
Q
368
What strategy plan? I presume strategy planning.
369
Strategy planning or strategic planning? Yes, either.
370
Could you explain then in those circumstances how one of those cheques was
21
lodged to the bank account of Economic Reports Limited which is beneficially
22
owned by Mr. Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
I have no idea, no. 371
12:45:08 25
If that is the case and it appears to be the case, it means that certainly the cheque for 28,300 pounds made out to Comex Trading Corporation which was paid
26
by L&C Properties Limited was in fact paid to Mr. Lawlor?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:45:25 30
Q
Yes, so it would appear certainly. 372
And you would accept that that that is the case? Yes, I would, yes.
373
If Mr. Lawlor was in the habit of producing false or fictitious invoices in www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:45:30
12:45:46
64 1
order to create an apparent indebtedness to provide a cover for the receiving
2
of funds, that is something that could only have been done, Mr. Glennane, I
3
suggest to you with the agreement of somebody in L&C Properties or Monarch
4
Properties, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
I think the invoice would certainly have been passed by somebody, yes. 374
I would suggest it was Mr. Sweeney but I wouldn't, either Mr. Sweeney or
8 9
Mr. Monahan, certainly I didn't pass it. Q
12:46:00 10
A
11
Q
375
376
And you believe you didn't pass the invoice because you have no memory of or you would have remembered it?
13
A
14
Q
I think I would have remembered it, yes. 377
12:46:17 15
So you say it was either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan and of those --
16
A
17
Q
I would believe so. 378
18
Of those two, Mr. Glennane, who is the more likely candidate to have passed those invoices?
A
I really couldn't say. I would say quite possibly Mr. Sweeney but I
12:46:32 20
21
You didn't pass the invoice? No, I don't think so, no.
12
19
Now, who passed the invoice?
wouldn't -Q
379
If Mr. Sweeney were to tell the Tribunal when he comes here on Thursday that he
22
didn't pass those invoices for payment, would that leave the Tribunal in a
23
position that the only person who could have passed them for payment, seeing as
24
you didn't, was the late Mr. Phillip Monahan must have passed them for payment?
12:46:47 25
A
26
Q
I would suggest so, yes. 380
27
passed by a senior member of the organisation?
28
A
29
Q
12:47:05 30
Would it be fair to say that an invoice or debt of that size would have to be
Yes. 381
And does it not also follow from what is now being revealed, Mr. Glennane, in order for those invoices to be paid, the person who was passing the invoice www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:47:09
12:47:23
65 1
must have known that Mr. Lawlor had generated the invoice for the purpose of
2
securing payment, doesn't that follow?
3
A
4
Q
I would assume so, yes. 382
If there's no such entity as Comex Trading Corporation and no such entity ever
5
provided services to Monarch Properties Limited, isn't what's happening here a
6
vehicle for the provision of money to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
7
A
Well if Mr. Lawlor was the beneficial owner of Comex Trading Corporation, then
8 9
I presume the money was going to him eventually yes. Q
383
12:47:48 10
What Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal was that another individual with whom he was an owner of Comex and in fact the Tribunal has not been able to identify any
11
company called Comex Trading Corporation, right, and at 1256, can I show you
12
where the money ended up. Mr. Glennane, this is the bank account of Economic
13
Reports Limited's current account and on the 26th October of 1990, there is a
14
lodgment of 28,300, do you see that?
12:48:15 15
A
16
Q
I do, yes. 384
17
That appears to equate from the lodgment of the cheque in favour of Comex Trading Corporation.
18
A
19
Q
12:48:24 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 385
That was drawn by L&C Properties? Yes.
386
Does that follow? There seems to be a gap between the two of about ten days, yes.
387
24
It would follow when one takes into account what Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal about generating false invoices, about the fact that one of the cheques appears
12:48:39 25
to have been lodged to economic reports, that when these cheques were drawn on
26
the 16th of October 1990 by L&C Properties, they were a mechanism for the
27
provision of a payments to Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
28
A
29
Q
12:49:00 30
A
Well there were payments there but I can't say if he provided services or not. 388
If Comex -For the payments. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:49:00
12:49:13
66 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
389
If Comex trading corporation is a false name -Yes, certainly if it's a false name.
390
As Mr. Lawlor has told the Tribunal it was used falsely by him? Yes.
391
Then this is a mechanism operated by two people, one within Monarch, one within
6
L&C Properties Limited and the other being Mr. Lawlor as a mechanism for
7
funnelling money to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:49:35 10
No, I don't think that's the correct interpretation. 392
A
Well you just tell the Tribunal the correct interpretation? If Mr. Lawlor had provided services through whatever vehicle, whatever name,
11
and he came in and said I want to get paid and will you make the cheque out to
12
Comex Trading Corporation, it's quite normal for people to tell you to make a
13
cheque out to the name of a company or whatever. And they would have paid
14
that. I don't think there's any, I think if you are drawing the inference
12:49:59 15
there was some sort of collusion between somebody in Monarch and Mr. Lawlor, I
16 17
think that's a step too far, if you don't mind me saying so. Q
393
What the tribunal has been told, Mr. Glennane, by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor, is
18
that Comex was a name used by him for the purpose of generating false or
19
untrue invoices?
12:50:21 20
A
If he said false or untrue, I don't think that was regarded as a false or
21 22
untrue invoice. Q
394
23
late Mr. Liam Lawlor was a creditor to the tune of 56,300 pounds?
24
A
12:50:36 25
Q
Certainly by October it was, yes. 395
26
Is that right, what services did Mr. Lawlor provide L&C Properties to the tune of 56,300?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:50:53 30
Are you saying in 1990, L&C Properties felt that -- was of the opinion that the
I don't know, it wasn't done through me so I can't comment on it. 396
But if you are telling the Tribunal, Mr. Glennane, that it wasn't a false invoice and it wasn't a mechanism?
A
I am not saying whether it's a false invoice or not, I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:50:56
12:51:07
67 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Glennane, was the company in 1990 in the habit of
3
retaining politicians of which Mr. Lawlor was one and a sitting councillor I
4
think in --
5 6
MS. DILLON:
County.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
councillor to provide services to the company?
12:51:12 10
A
County councillor, I beg your pardon, a sitting county
No, I wouldn't have thought so, no, but I do believe Mr. Lawlor, I think, he
11
did a lot of work in the early days in Tallaght -- with explaining how to, if
12
you like, deal with the council. We had a very long saga with Dublin
13
Corporation and Dublin County Council. Negotiating agreement with Tallaght and
14
I do believe he advised on that to Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney.
12:51:43 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A
While he was a councillor?
While he was a councillor, if he was a councillor, yes.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:51:51 20
And certainly the designation that's given to payment in the
books of L&C Properties at 1267 is strategy planning, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, yes. 397
23
So whoever makes that entry, Mr. Glennane, is of the view that the services that are being provided, they are not glazing or construction fees?
24
A
12:52:11 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:52:28 30
A
Obviously that was written on the invoice. 398
So the invoice that's being provided for is for strategic or strategy planning? So it would appear.
399
And the invoice is provided to L&C Properties? That's right.
400
And L&C developed the Tallaght Town Centre? That's right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:52:29
12:52:41
68 1
Q
401
2
is that right?
3
A
4
Q
That's right. 402
5 6
In conjunction with GRE and that was its only function in or around this time,
Would you tell the Tribunal what strategy Mr. Lawlor provided for this shopping centre?
A
I don't know, other than providing general advice on -- I think dealing with
7
the council and dealing with the various local authorities. But it wasn't
8
provided to me. I am just offering an opinion really.
9
Q
12:52:57 10
A
11
Q
403
I don't remember. 404
12 A
14
Q
12:53:11 15
A
16
Q
I am sure I probably was, yes. 405
Were you being paid 100,000 pounds? I wouldn't have thought so.
406
17
In 1990, a sum of 56 thousand pounds, how would that rank generally, was that a very great deal of money?
A
Well not in the context of Tallaght, which probably cost about 50 or 60
19
million.
12:53:29 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
407
Was it a very great deal of money in 1990, 56,000? It was in isolation a good amount but not compared with --
408
Not compared to what? Compared with some of the other charges that were made by architects,
24
solicitors, not compared with the context of the total cost of Tallaght which
12:53:52 25
was about 50 to 60 million.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 12:54:07 30
Well do your best now if you can at all, were you being paid 50,000 pounds, do you think?
13
18
What was your income in 1990, Mr. Glennane, how much were you being paid?
409
In total? Yes.
410
Out of which a sum of 56,300 in 1990 is paid to Mr. Liam Lawlor apparently through a company called Comex, is that right?
A
So it seems, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:54:08
12:54:17
69 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
411
Yes. 412
4
And you can't tell the Tribunal A who made the arrangement with Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
In my opinion, it was probably Mr. Sweeney. 413
7
Or Mr. Monahan I think you said. You can only speculate as to what Mr. Lawlor would have done for the money, is that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:54:35 10
A
11
Q
Well I think, yes. Yes. 414
You didn't record it in the books and accounts of L&C Properties? Certainly it was recorded in the books of account.
415
12
You didn't record it in the books and account of L&C Properties because you have told the Tribunal you didn't pass the invoices, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
But it was recorded in the books of accounts, yes. 416
12:54:55 15
And there's nothing on the face of the documentation that records the payment to indicate that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor had anything good bad or indifferent,
16
political or otherwise, to do with the payments, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:55:10 20
Q
What do you mean? 417
There is nothing on the face of the documentation we have just gone through? Yes. Only Comex Trading Corporation.
418
21
There's nothing to indicate that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor had anything to do with this payment, good bad or indifferent?
22
A
23
Q
That's right. 419
24
Can I ask you this, if the Tribunal had not already known that Comex Trading was a name used by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor to generate invoices, would you be
12:55:25 25
sitting in this witness-box answering these questions?
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:55:38 30
On foot of an invoice or on foot of two invoices?
Well not about Comex presumably. 420
No, isn't that right? That's right.
421
Because there's nothing in the documentation to connect Mr. Lawlor to the Comex payment if the Tribunal had not already made that connection, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:55:41
12:55:51
70 1
A
2
Q
So it appears, yes. 422
And there was no assistance you could have given the Tribunal to connect
3
Mr. Lawlor to Comex until you were provided with the documentation from the
4
Tribunal, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
That's right, yes. 423
7
financial officer within the Monarch Group, is that right?
8
A
9
Q
I was at that time, yes. 424
12:56:08 10
11
And yet you are the senior financial officer and were at that time the senior
So somebody kept from you the fact that Mr. Lawlor was being paid 56,300 pounds in October of 1990, isn't that right?
A
Well I don't know that they kept it from me, that, they may well have told me
12
it was Mr. Lawlor.
13
Q
14
A
12:56:21 15
Q
425
Well did they? I don't recall.
426
And if somebody had said to you do you think Mr. Glennane, if somebody had said
16
to you by the way that 56,300, we are paying to Comex, that's really a payment
17
to Mr. Liam Lawlor, do you think that might just have lodged somewhere and you
18
might have remembered it?
19
A
12:56:36 20
Q
I don't know. 427
21
But you didn't connect Comex to Mr. Lawlor until such time as the Tribunal did it, is that right?
22
A
23
Q
Yes, that's right, certainly. 428
24
And but you would accept now having reviewed the documentation that such a payment was in fact a payment to Mr. Lawlor?
12:56:51 25
A
26
Q
Yes, so it would appear. 429
And you would tell the Tribunal that the people or the only people that made
27
that arrangement seeing as it wasn't yourself was either Mr. Sweeney or the
28
late Mr. Monahan, is that right?
29
A
12:57:03 30
Q
I would assume that, yes. 430
And do you remember ever having a meeting with Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney at www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:57:08
12:57:20
71 1
which this payment or the mechanism of it was discussed?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
No. 431
I don't remember ever seeing them. 432
Do you believe that you passed them? No, I don't, no.
433
8 9
Do you remember ever seeing the invoices that were passed for payment?
Does it follow from that they must have been passed by Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Monahan?
A
12:57:29 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
I would think so, yes. 434
Why was it done so secretly, Mr. Glennane, can you help? Sorry, what do you mean secretly.
435
Why it was done in such a way the involvement of Mr. Lawlor as the recipient of
13
56,300 in October 1990 is not recorded on the face of any of the documents of
14
L&C Properties?
12:57:51 15
A
It might have been recorded on invoices, I don't know if we had the invoices,
16 17
it might have been on the invoices for all I know. Q
436
18
2000, Mr. Glennane. Do you think that's where they might be?
19
A
12:58:10 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
I don't, no. 437
438
If we don't have them, Mr. Glennane, can you speculate as to where they might be?
A
I think they might well have been shredded in 1997 because a lot of the, as
12:58:25 25
much documentation as could be shredded was shredded.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:58:40 30
Because the Tribunal certainly doesn't have them? Yeah well.
23 24
Maybe the invoices are in the shredded box that were destroyed in September of
439
If not shredded in 1997, then perhaps shredded in 2000? Well I don't know.
440
Yes. More likely I would have thought in 1997 because we would have shredded all the old invoices. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:58:41
12:59:08
72 1
Q
441
2
Can you think what kind of strategic planning Mr. Lawlor might have been involved in that would have been of benefit to L&C Properties?
3
A
4
Q
Other than I have already said, no, I can't, no. 442
I think if I could turn to page 4715 please. In 1993, it would appear
5
Mr. Glennane according to your diary on the 17th November, you have recorded a
6
meeting with Mr. Liam Lawlor at Monarch?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
I recorded that there was to be a meeting, yes. 443
I think it was in connection with Prague, I think there's actually one the next
12:59:29 10
day or two.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
444
And indeed at 4717 on the 18th? It's my believe now that meeting didn't take place on that day.
445
Why is that your belief? Because I have written below it there was a football match that night, Northern
12:59:42 15
Ireland were playing Republic of Ireland which is a football much I recall very
16 17
Do you know anything about that meeting or why it's recorded in your diary?
well watching in Dundalk. Q
446
18
The meeting was 4 o'clock, I think. In any event on the 18th November 1993, at 4717, you have an entry on the 19th, Liam Lawlor at Cherrywood?
19
A
13:00:03 20
Q
At Monarch, yes. 447
I want to draw to your attention, the other page, at the bottom you have three
21
entries, I think it is Eamon somebody, somebody Gillespie and Liam Lawlor and
22
you see you have three Xs beside them?
23
A
24
Q
13:00:18 25
A
Yes. 448
What do they signify? They signify I would have had to make contact or do something with them and the
26
X would indicate that I had.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
13:00:39 30
A
449
Would it signify for example that you paid a cheque? No. It's just a memory jogger.
450
And it wouldn't mean that you were paying a cheque to Mr. Lawlor? No, that entry wouldn't certainly, no. www.pcr.ie Day 659
13:00:42
13:00:53
73 1
Q
451
2
And the three figures opposite the three names of 31, 30 and 31 totalling 92, do they have anything to do with those entries?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
No. 452
What have they to do with? It looks to me like it was to do with a quarter, I was counting the number of
6
days in some particular quarter.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
453
That's what that's to do with? That's what I suggest, I don't know.
454
13:01:11 10
It wouldn't for example suggest you were going to pay 31,000 or 3,1000 pounds to Mr. Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
13:01:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
I don't think so, no. 455
Do you ever pay Mr. Lawlor money? I think we did sometime after that.
456
Did you? I don't recall ever doing so but --
457
Did you ever pay Mrs. Hazel Lawlor money? I don't recall, I have seen her name appearing all right there in the diaries.
458
Did you meet her, Mrs. Lawlor? I don't think so, no.
13:01:39 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Right, it's gone one o'clock. Two o'clock. Thank you.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
24 13:01:54 25
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
13:59:20
14:04:00
74 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, sir. Mr. Glennane please.
4 5
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE
6
BY MS. DILLON:
7 8
Q
459
9
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane. Just before lunch, I was asking you about the contacts with Mr. Liam Lawlor and we had looked at two entries in your diary
14:04:30 10
and I think we were about to look at a third at 4730 and you will see there
11
it's an entry for the 22nd of November 1993 and at the bottom, you have to ring
12
Kevin Nelson and then beneath that, Liam Lawlor?
13
A
14
Q
14:04:50 15
A
Yes. 460
Was that an entry to meet with or to ring Mr. Lawlor? It was either, certainly his name is on my mind, it wasn't a meeting, it would
16
have been above the line, if it was -- it was either to remember something
17
about, to either ring him or whatever.
18
Q
461
19
Yes and I think in so much four days later on the 26th November 1993 at 4752, you have an entry in your diary for Hazel Lawlor, isn't that right?
14:05:15 20
A
21
Q
That's right, yes. 462
22
Now I think I had asked you earlier on whether you had made any such entries, isn't that right, in relation to Hazel Lawlor, did you meet Ms. Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
14:05:28 25
A
No, I didn't, no. 463
Did you make a payment to Ms. Lawlor? I am not sure, there seems to be a record of 3,000 pounds with her name after
26
it but I couldn't find it actually in the cheque payments books that were
27
supplied. There is several accountancy references to it.
28
Q
29 14:05:56 30
464
Certainly at 4880, which is an internal Monarch document which deals in the first instance with payments to Mr. Frank Dunlop, isn't that correct?
A
That's right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:05:57
14:06:12
75 1
Q
465
And then there's the handwritten notation, Prague strategic which becomes
2
patrol us strategic and then beneath that, there's Hazel Lawlor, 26th November,
3
isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
The 23rd actually. 466
3,000 pounds. Yes. And I think that in the general ledger report at 1201 and
6
can I ask you first of all about this document, about the account reference at
7
the top, general promotion, see that at the very top, if we could increase the
8
top?
9
A
14:06:36 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
Yes, sorry, yes. 467
Yes. 468
Can you explain that account numbering system to the Tribunal for us please. Not really I am afraid, there are obviously different account numbers for
14
different accounts but I mean I don't know the source of the numbers or why
14:06:59 15
they, obviously it was to do with the computer system, but obviously it
16 17
And you see there there's account 73510201. General promotion.
recorded on that was a heading general promotions, yes. Q
469
Well, first of all if we establish, if we can go back to see the full of the
18
document please and if we just look at the company that's making the payment is
19
Monarch Property Services, isn't that right?
14:07:16 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 470
That's right. 471
24 A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
14:07:48 30
And I would suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that the 735 designation is a designation in connection with Cherrywood?
14:07:30 25
29
And it's Monarch Property Services that are recording these payments?
Well yes, okay, yeah, it appears so, yes. 472
Isn't that the position? I think so, yes.
473
So that in fact what is happening here is that all of the payments that are recorded under the account designation 73510201 are payments made by Monarch Property Services Limited but they are being attributed in the books of Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:07:51
14:08:02
76 1 2
to Cherrywood, isn't that right? A
That's right, yes, they are not all payments, there's some invoices there and
3 4
journal entries as well. Q
474
Yes but in so far as this account, the general promotions account is concerned
5
and we will come back to look at that in more detail later but at the moment I
6
am focusing on the designation of the account?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:08:16 10
Q
It's called general promotions, yes. 475
So it seems, yes. 476
11
Because the general promotion attributable to Monarch Property had a designation beginning with 6, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes, so I believe, yes. 477
14
So that the position in fact is that the designation of 73510, where that appears in the accounts of Monarch property, those accounts record payments or
14:08:37 15
transactions made in connection with the Cherrywood Lands.
16
A
17
Q
Well that -- that were coded in connection with Cherrywood, yes. 478
18
They were attributed by the person who made the entry as being transactions or payments in connection with the Cherrywood Lands?
19
A
14:08:53 20
Q
They were attributed by the person who made the entry, yes. 479
21
And payments that were attributed to the coding 66801 were payments or transactions in connection with Monarch Property Services Limited?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 480
24
So that the system that was operated within Monarch Property Services Limited was that when a payment was made by Monarch Properties on behalf of a
14:09:11 25
development, it was attributed by Monarch Property Services Limited to that
26
development in its own books, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:09:27 30
But it's general promotions attributable to Cherrywood, is that right?
So far as they could, yes. 481
I beg your pardon? So far as it could be attributed to a particular development, yes, it would be, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:09:27
14:09:43
77 1
Q
482
2
pounds, at page 1201, some four entries from the bottom?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
Yes. 483
There is a reference re H Lawlor, 3,000 pounds? Yes.
484
Isn't that right? Well there is, it's described here as being a journal entry.
485
Yes. And then there's a reference but below that saying re Prague and there was a
14:09:55 10
11
So that in relation to the particular payment to Ms. Lawlor of the sum of 3,000
credit of 3,000 pounds. Q
486
Yes. So what that appears to suggest on the face of it, Mr. Glennane, subject
12
to any clarification that you may give is that there was an entry in your diary
13
for Hazel Lawlor for the 26th of November 1993?
14
A
14:10:10 15
Q
Yes. 487
There is an accounting entry indicating a sum of 3,000 pounds that was paid to
16
Hazel Lawlor and there is a reversal of that entry attributing a credit in
17
connection with Prague, is that correct?
18
A
19
Q
14:10:30 20
A
Well that's not recording a payment, that's recording a journal entry. 488
A journal entry? I haven't been able to locate a payment going through the sheets which were
21
provided by the Tribunal.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
489
Yes but have you -Obviously, there was some suggestion of the name Hazel Lawlor and 3,000.
490
14:10:51 25
Yes. You will also have seen a lodgment of the 23rd November 1993, the same date as the record of the alleged payment to Hazel Lawlor, to an account of
26
Mrs. Lawlor as in the sum of 3,000 pounds at 1202, you will see there recorded
27
3,000 pounds credit on the 23rd November 1993?
28
A
29
Q
14:11:17 30
Yeah right. 491
And you will also see as you pointed out yourself that the record at 4880, the notation that's made there is of a payment to Hazel Lawlor on the 23rd November www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:11:21
14:11:32
78 1
1993?
2
A
3
Q
Yes, that's right. 492
I would suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, taking all of those documents into
4
account the fact that the actual bank documentation can't be located, doesn't
5
matter very much, that the coincidence of the figures is sufficient in what it
6
probably means and I put it no higher than that, is that there was a payment to
7
Mrs. Lawlor in November of 1993 of 3,000 pounds?
8
A
9
Q
14:11:51 10
It would appear that way, yes. 493
A
Sorry it just seems to have been recorded as Prague just as a matter of
11
interest.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
494
495
Was it possible that at that time I think you have told the Tribunal before lunch that you were involved with Mr. Lawlor in connection with a development
16
or an enquiry into a development at Prague?
17
A
18
Q
That's right. 496
19
Is it possible that what might have been going on, you were making certain payments, by you I mean Monarch, on behalf of either Mr. Liam Lawlor or
14:12:23 20
Mr. Frank Dunlop to Ambrose Kelly in connection with the development? A
Yes, we were paying Ambrose Kelly a monthly amount in connection with Prague,
22 23
Yes. But it would -I don't know if anything hangs on that but it seems to be recorded as Prague.
14:12:07 15
21
Yes. Now you would have met, according to your diary --
yes. Q
497
24
Yes, Monarch were, but what I'm asking you is there any possibility that the payment of 3,000 pounds to Hazel Lawlor or indeed the other two payments that
14:12:44 25
are recorded above that under the heading 'Prague strategic' might have been
26
payments made in connection with Prague for and on on behalf of Mr. Frank
27
Dunlop or Mr. Liam Lawlor?
28
A
Yes, possible, yes, I presume it's on behalf of Mr. Lawlor, if the cheque was
29 14:13:03 30
made out to his wife. Q
498
Which is then lodged as we have seen to her account? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:13:06
14:13:12
79 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:13:22 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
To her account, yes. 499
Did you meet Mrs. Lawlor on this occasion? No, I didn't, no.
500
Did you ever give her a cheque? No, I didn't.
501
Who would have given her the cheque? I would assume the cheque was given to Mr. Lawlor.
502
By whom? Either by me or by somebody else.
503
And you remember giving the cheque to Mr. Lawlor? No, I don't, no.
504
But you accept from the paperwork that what appears to have happened is that a
13
cheque for 3,000 pounds was paid in November 1993 to Mr. Lawlor through the --
14
through his wife, Ms. Hazel Lawlor?
14:13:42 15
A
16
Q
It would seem so, yes. 505
And do you think it's also likely that the other two entries on page 4880 in
17
relation to 'Prague Strategic' in the sum of 4,000 and 3,000 might be in
18
relation to payments made to Prague or into Ambrose Kelly in connection with
19
Prague on behalf of Mr. Lawlor or Mr. Dunlop?
14:14:02 20
A
If they were made to Ambrose Kelly, it could have been on behalf of the Prague
21
project.
22
Q
23
A
24 14:14:22 25
506
And what exactly were the payments on behalf of the Prague project? Well, the idea in Prague was that Ambrose Kelly had an office in Prague and he had a full-time representative there. At some stage he approached, I think, Mr. Monahan on a sort of consortium if I can call it that, a loose consortium
26
of people was set up to try to, on behalf of -- Ambrose Kelly was trying to get
27
architectural work for his firm, on our behalf I suppose it was to try to get
28
development opportunities in Prague. There was another engineering company
29
involved called, I think, Rotary Engineering who were trying to get mechanical
14:14:52 30
electrical work and I know at some stage Frank Dunlop was involved on the basis www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:14:57
14:15:18
80 1
that he might be able to get some PR work and the idea was that supposedly all
2
the payments, all the expenses, would be borne by Ambrose Kelly and we would
3
pay a certain amount per month which I think was 6,000.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
507
Yes, I think at 4754, you see on the 26th November 1993, Mr.-Yes, 6,000, that's right.
508
Mr. Noel Murray is making the November contribution? That's right.
509
9
And at 4755, the actual cheques is available which is a cheque drawn on Monarch Properties Limited, signed by yourself, is that right?
14:15:31 10
A
11
Q
That's right, yes. 510
12
And that's then duly debited and dealt with in the bank accounts, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
I presume so, yes. 511
14:15:41 15
So if that payment is a payment by Monarch Properties on behalf of its own obligation in connection with the Prague project, it would follow that the
16
entries referred to at 4880 of 4,000 and 3,000 in connection with Prague
17
strategic don't relate to Monarch's monthly payments, is that right?
18
A
Well I think they may have been subsequently deducted from the 6,000 payment
19
paid to Ambrose Kelly. I suspect they were, certainly I think our view or my
14:16:11 20
view certainly was that the maximum liability if you like we had was 6,000 per
21
month to Ambrose Kelly, and that he would make, he would make all the payments
22
on behalf of --
23
Q
24
A
14:16:40 25
Q
512
I think it's the same thing and our idea was to try to find development. 513
26
Sorry, can we just stop there. When you say it's the same thing, do you mean it's the same place and location you were paying the 6,000 to?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:17:01 30
What exactly was Prague Strategic, do you know?
Well, it's just a heading, I think is Prague, I think if you look at 4763. 514
Yes, 4763? I am looking at it, you will see there's an account there from Prague Strategic Studies. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:17:02
14:17:14
81 1
Q
515
2
Yes and I want to draw to your attention, that Prague Strategic Studies does not record the 6,000 payment in November?
3
A
4
Q
It doesn't. 516
That Prague strategic studies is nothing to do with, on the face of your
5
documentation, with the 6,000 that you pay as your November contribution, isn't
6
that right?
7
A
8
Q
So it would appear, yes. 517
9
So if we put up on screen please 4754 together with the existing document at 4763, and if you look at the second, the third document entry down, Prague
14:17:46 10
Strategic Studies?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 518
And you will see there recorded there are a number of payments and one invoice
13
I think recorded and some reversal but none of them equate to a sum of 6,000
14
pounds, is that right?
14:18:01 15
A
16
Q
That's right. 519
17
So that, they do refer to a payment of 4,000 and a payment of 3,000, is that right?
18
A
19
Q
That's right, yes. 520
14:18:14 20
Right. Now, we can deduce from that, I think, Mr. Glennane, that the 6,000 payment in November 1993 is not recorded in the Prague Strategic Studies entry
21
at 4762?
22
A
23
Q
I don't think so. 521
24
So it's recorded elsewhere and it probably is recorded under Ambrose Kelly, is that right?
14:18:29 25
A
26
Q
Or professional fees. 522
So now having eliminated the fact that Prague Strategic Studies would have
27
anything to do with Monarch making its' own payments, can you assist the
28
Tribunal as to what exactly Prague Strategic Studies was and who were these
29
payments made for.
14:18:45 30
A
Well, there was only one Prague project if I can call it that. And I suspect www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:18:52
14:19:22
82 1
for instance that if this 3,000 was paid to Mr. Lawlor via Hazel Lawlor, it
2
might well be that one of the 3,000s here was 6,000 minus 3,000 on the basis
3
that we had made a direct payment of 3,000. Certainly my knowledge and
4
recollection of Prague was that it was, the eventual agreement was we will pay
5
6,000 per month to Ambrose Kelly and we did that for a few months and then we
6
decided against the project.
7
Q
523
8 9 14:19:41 10
Ambrose Kelly Partnership, second entry down? A Q
Yes. 524
11 A
13
Q
14
A
14:19:50 15
Q
That's right. 525
Now, so that is one supplier, isn't that right? Yes, that's right.
526
16
And that is Monarch Properties on foot of its agreement with Ambrose Kelly making it's monthly contribution in relation to the Prague project?
A
I think only one amount of 6,000 there that, the amount of 7,965.06, there's
18 19
That I suggest to you records the payments that were made by Monarch Properties in connection with Prague?
12
17
You did that and at 4178 please you will see there the supplier recorded as the
two and one of 5,000. Q
527
14:20:14 20
Yes. But they are the payments made by Monarch to Ambrose Kelly in connection with the Prague project, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:20:26 25
A
26
Q
That's right, yes. 528
Now the second supplier entry is the one at 4763? That's right.
529
Which is Prague Strategic Studies. That's right, yes.
530
Now, in the first instance, Prague Strategic Studies does not record or relate
27
to the payments made by Monarch itself in connection with its own liability
28
under the Prague project, is that right?
29 14:20:45 30
A
I am not sure about that. I would believe that the two accounts would need to be taken at one effectively, there's only one Prague project in all of that, www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:20:53
14:21:06
83 1
there wasn't two. There wasn't separate payments being made to anybody and
2
payments to Ambrose Kelly. As far as we were concerned, Ambrose Kelly was
3
supposed to make all the payments, any payments had to be made and we were
4
sharing the cost with him.
5
Q
531
Let's just look at Prague Strategic Studies for the moment, the line Prague
6
Strategic Studies on the screen, you might explain a few things that are going
7
on here if you would, Mr. Glennane. First of all, when one talks about a
8
supplier in the context of this report, are you, were you talking about
9
somebody who provides services?
14:21:33 10
A
11
Q
Yes, presumably so, yes. 532
12
Services Limited?
13
A
14
Q
Well it's a heading, yes, used obviously, yes. 533
14:21:48 15
will by Monarch to describe? A
I am saying obviously there was some document that had Prague Strategic Studies
18 19
written on the top of it and it was posted or a new account was opened for it. Q
534
14:22:08 20
that right? A
Obviously there was a payment made and a new account was opened as a result of
23
that, yes.
24
Q
14:22:23 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 14:22:43 30
A new account was opened for it because Monarch Property Services Limited were going to make payments to or in connection with Prague Strategic Studies, is
21 22
When you say it's a heading, let's be precise here now, Mr. Glennane, when you say it's a heading, are you saying that it is something that can be used at
16 17
So Prague Strategic Studies is a supplier of services to Monarch Property
535
So you see the very first entry is 4,000 and there's a little dash beside it? Yes.
536
What does that dash represent? The dash represents, I think, that it's the payment.
537
Okay. Because if you go back to the second column, it says PMT 5301, does that mean payment and remittance slip 5301?
A
One is a debit and one is a credit. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:22:46
14:23:02
84 1
Q
538
2
you see it starts off by saying --
3
A
4
Q
One is an invoice and one is a payment. 539
5
Does the word, where something is an invoice, do you usually get the word I N V beside that?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
14:23:10 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
You would normally expect that. 540
There's one invoice referred to there and it's five down? That's right.
541
So the first four entries are payments? No, they are not.
542
Okay, what are they? Sorry, two of them are payments and two of them are some sort of credits.
543
14
Well now Mr. Glennane, you are a fully qualified accountant and have been for many years, what kind of a description is some sort of a credit?
14:23:26 15
A
16
Q
Well one can sells out the other. 544
17 18
We will move on to the debits and credits, we are still on the first line. And
Fine. So what happens then, are you telling the Tribunal that the first thing that happens is that a payment of 4,000 pounds is made?
A
I am not sure which came first but one of them, yes. The payment for 4,000
19
appears to be the, a payment that was made and then there was some sort of
14:23:47 20
adjustment made that was reducing that to nil. I think one was being offset,
21
there was an invoice. What happened was that the payment on the invoice
22
cancelled out.
23
Q
24
A
14:24:05 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:24:18 30
545
Yes, but you see with respect -They are not both payments. That's the point I'm making.
546
The only invoice that's referred to there -- is an invoice -The balance is then shown as nil.
547
Don't worry about the balance? You have to worry about the balance.
548
When we get to the balance, we will deal with the balance. The only invoice that's recorded there is an invoice dated 30th November 1993 in the sum of www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:24:22
14:24:31
85 1
10,000 pounds. Isn't that right.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
That's the only thing that's described as invoices. 549
On the face of it, it records an invoice? Yes.
550
Immediately following that is a payment, isn't that right? 10,000, yes.
551
Of 10,000. So I would suggest to you, not being in possession of your
8
particular knowledge, that in fact the only invoice that's recorded in the
9
document is then paid by the payment in the equal amount, would that seem
14:24:48 10
logical?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
Well certainly it looks like it, that invoice and that payment, yes. 552
Yes. 553
14:25:00 15
So that means that the 10,000 invoice is paid by the 10,000 pound payment, is that right?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
It would appear so, yes. 554
Now having -There is actually over a year between them.
555
14:25:16 20
I noticed that. Now, there have been two payments, according to your evidence, before that in order, one of 4,000 and one of 3,000, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:25:25 25
A
So it would seem. 556
Now what happens to those? What do you mean what happens to them.
557
They are offset you say? I am saying in the books here, they are off offset. They were payments made
26
obviously to somebody.
27
Q
28
A
558
Yes. That's the point, isn't it? I think so, yes. I am assuming it was through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership, I
29 14:25:39 30
Is that right?
couldn't be sure about that. Q
559
We have already seen your payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership are www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:25:43
14:25:51
86 1
recorded as payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership in the books, is that
2
right?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 560
So, I think we can take from that as a matter of logic, Mr. Glennane, that
5
Prague Strategic Studies are not payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership,
6
wouldn't that follow?
7
A
8
Q
Not necessarily with all due respects. 561
9 14:26:07 10
Are you telling the Tribunal that that you would have had two methods of paying the Ambrose Kelly Partnership?
A
I am saying there could have been a mistake made on foot of the invoice. I am
11
certainly saying that as far as I recall, any payments to do with Prague were
12
made through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership and if we had paid something as
13
direct, then we would have deducted it from the payment to him.
14
Q
562
14:26:27 15
payment in connection with Prague, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
So it seems. 563
18 A
14:26:42 20
Q
I don't think it was, yes, it was around the same time, yes. 564
21
Well in fact the payment to Mrs. Lawlor is the 23rd of November 1993 and the payment of the cheque is the 26th November 1993?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
14:26:54 25
Q
Yes. 565
So it's the same time? Yes.
566
26
Can I ask you this, Mr. Glennane, do you have any idea who was behind Prague Strategic Studies?
27
A
28
Q
14:27:15 30
You make that payment at the same time as you pay your 6,000 monthly payment to the Ambrose Kelly partnership, isn't that right, because we saw the cheque?
19
29
Well, you made a payment to Mrs. Hazel Lawlor in which you speculate was a
I don't, no. 567
Do you think that it is likely, in view of the fact that Mr. Lawlor was involved in the Prague activities, that these might have been a mechanism of funnelling payments to Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:27:18
14:27:42
87 1
A
I think the payments may have been made to Mr. Lawlor. Certainly he was very
2
involved in the Prague project and I know went to Prague on several occasions.
3
So, I mean he would have been quite entitled to charge presumably for it but I
4
would have thought he would have charged through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
5
Q
568
6
enterprise in which Monarch were jointly involved?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 569
9
You believe that payments were made to some entity called Prague Strategic Studies in connection with the Prague project?
14:28:02 10
A
11
Q
Yes, it would appear so, yes. 570
12 13
You believe that Prague Strategic Studies is something to do with the Prague
It is unlikely to have been a payment to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership because that is separately recorded as payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership?
A
I am not sure, there could easily have been a mistake made at the time in the
14
accounts or if there were payments made on behalf of Prague, they would have
14:28:24 15
been deducted from payments made to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
16
Q
17
A
571
You have no idea who or what was Prague Strategic Studies? No, it looks actually like a wording on an invoice rather than a name, like
18
most of those accounts are actually names of suppliers.
19
Q
14:28:49 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
572
And certainly there's at least one invoice, isn't that right? Yes.
573
But there doesn't seem to be a copy of that invoice available? I don't know.
574
24
The other two people who were involved in the development in Prague or a number of people who were involved directly and indirectly with Monarch in connection
14:29:05 25
with this Prague inquiry, one was the Ambrose Kelly Group, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
That's right. 575
28
And they were being paid directly 6,000 a month or were meant to have been paid 6,000 a month?
29
A
14:29:17 30
Q
Yes. 576
Mr. Frank Dunlop had some peripheral involvement or involvement also, is that www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:29:21
14:29:28
88 1
right?
2
A
3
Q
That's right. 577
4 5
Do you know whether any arrangement was made to pay Mr. Dunlop's share of the project for him?
A
Well, again, if there was any payment made to him, I believe it would have come
6
from the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
578
A payment made by Monarch on behalf of Mr. Dunlop? No, it would have been included in the 6,000 per month.
579
14:29:45 10
And do you know whether any payment was made by the Monarch Group on behalf of Mr. Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
On behalf of Mr. Lawlor? 580
Yes. You mean to him?
581
14:29:57 15
No, I mean is it possible that you were paying Mr. Lawlor's share of the activity if Mr. Lawlor had a share?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Paying it to Mr. Lawlor or do you mean paying it to some other third party? 582
Paying it to some third party on behalf of Mr. Lawlor? I am not aware of that.
583
14:30:15 20
Do you think that it's likely this payment to Prague Strategic Studies might have been a payment to Mr. Lawlor?
21
A
22
Q
It's quite possible, yes. 584
Just think about that then for a moment, Mr. Glennane. What would have been
23
the necessity of directing payments to Mr. Lawlor through a medium of Prague
24
Strategic Studies?
14:30:29 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:30:49 30
Q
Well I presume Mr. Lawlor would have requested it. 585
And if he requested it, Mr. Glennane, did he request it from you? Not that I can recall.
586
Who is the person that he is likely to have requested that from? Again, either myself or Mr. Sweeney. Or I think probably either of us, yes.
587
Or anybody? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:30:50
14:31:04
89 1
A
No, or possibly Mr. Monahan I suppose. They are the only people I can think
2 3
of. Q
588
4
yourself or Mr. Monahan?
5
A
6
Q
Yes, I would think so, yes. 589
7 A
9
Q
Yes. 590
14:31:18 10
Can you tell the Tribunal what you discussed with Mr. Lawlor when you met him on these occasions?
A
I don't believe I met him more than once on these occasions. I presume we
12
discussed this payment, whatever.
13
Q
14
A
591
You presume you would have -I presume well -- after we discussed it, I presume he came in to collect a
14:31:33 15
16
Notwithstanding that these transactions appear to be occurring at the same time as Mr. Lawlor is recorded in your diary as meeting you?
8
11
So, it would have been either Mr. Sweeney, yourself and you don't think it was
cheque if there was a cheques being issued. Q
592
Certainly if there was a payment of to Hazel Lawlor of 3,000 pounds, that was
17
something that would have to be organised with somebody in Monarch by
18
Mr. Lawlor?
19
A
14:31:44 20
Q
That's right. 593
And because Hazel Lawlor is recorded in your diary, it's likely you are the
21
person who in fact made the payment or arranged the payment for Hazel Lawlor,
22
is that right?
23
A
Well it's certainly likely that I knew something about it when I wrote down the
24 14:31:57 25
name, yes. Q
594
26
you the person who made that entry? At 4752?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:32:26 30
And is that your writing in your own diary for Hazel Lawlor, is that you, are
It is, yes. 595
And at 4767 on the 4th of November 1992 or after the 4th of December, Mr. Lawlor is again recorded in your diary and your diary appears to record NN, re, 12 and 3 and number 3 is Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:32:31
14:32:41
90 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
Well, then that's right, yes. 596
It would appear so. 597
Mr. Lawlor and Ambrose Kelly.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
598
599
A
Was Mr. Murray the person in Monarch most heavily involved with Prague? I think Mr. Sweeney was in the sense of directing it but I know Mr. Murray certainly went to Prague on two or three occasions.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
14:33:11 15
A
16
Q
600
And was Mr. Monahan involved in Prague? Well he was, yes, in a general way, yes.
601
In a general way? Sorry, he was, yes. He was the one that would have introduced it and --
602
17
And if and when Monarch decided it wasn't going to proceed with Prague, who is the person that would have made that decision?
A
Well, I certainly had a strong view that we shouldn't so I don't know whether
19
to take the credit for it or not but certainly -- I certainly would have argued
14:33:33 20
very strongly against it.
21
Q
22
A
603
Good. Well who made the decision? Well, I mean the decision was made between myself and Mr. Monahan presumably
23
and Mr. Sweeney.
24
Q
14:33:46 25
A
26
Q
604
And you agreed not to proceed with Prague? That's right, yes.
605
27
And I think on the 8th of December 1993 at 4793, your diary again records an entry Liam Lawlor at Monarch, do you see that?
28
A
29
Q
14:34:22 30
Was Mr.-- I beg your pardon, sorry? And a few other people, sorry, go on.
11
18
What would you have been talking to Mr. Murray about Mr. Lawlor for? At that time Mr. Murray went to Prague on a few occasions I think with
6
14:32:57 10
Was that a note to yourself to talk to Noel Murray about Liam Lawlor?
I do, yes. 606
And again, on the 14th of December 1993, at 4383, sorry, 4838, your diary again records an entry E.S./Liam Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:34:25
14:34:36
91 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
That's right. 607
Yes. 608
609
A
11
Q
I presume about Prague. 610
Between the 17th November 1993 and the 15th December 1993, Mr. Glennane, there
Yes. 611
12
It appears in that period, at least one payment was made being a sum of 3,000 to Hazel Lawlor, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's right. 612
14:35:03 15
The furthest you can put the situation to the Tribunal is that the meetings were about Prague and the 3,000 pound payment might have been in connection
16
with Prague, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:35:19 20
Q
Well I would say it was in connection with Prague, yes. 613
And do you remember it and do you remember it being in connection with Prague? No, I don't, no.
614
21
Can I ask you whether any other payments might have been routed to Mr. Lawlor indirectly as it were?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
14:35:43 25
Q
Not as far as I am aware or I was aware, no. 615
You weren't aware of the Comex payment, isn't that right? Well, I don't know that I was aware of it or not at the time.
616
26
And now you think that the Prague Strategic Studies might have been a mechanism whereby payments were routed to Mr. Lawlor?
A
I think payments were made to Mr. Lawlor rather than routed, it's not a
28
14:36:06 30
What would that have been about?
are seven entries in your diaries relating to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
14:34:50 10
29
Does that mean you had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lawlor? It would appear so.
9
27
The E.S. I presume is Eddie Sweeney?
terminology we use for paying somebody, routing payments. Q
617
If you weren't routing the payments in a particular way, why wasn't the Comex payment made out to Liam Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:36:08
14:36:29
92 1
A
2
Q
3
A
I presume because Mr. Lawlor wanted it paid through Comex. 618
And I suggest to you because Monarch were prepared to facilitate Mr. Lawlor? It's normal with any professional if somebody does work for you and they come
4
in with an invoice, will you pay the company or will you pay whoever, you
5
wouldn't necessarily query it as long as you knew it was due.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
619
I wouldn't describe it as routing. 620
All right. They were payments made to a company, you would normally assume that it goes to
14:36:40 10
11
What did you --
the company. All our cheques were crossed as a matter of course. Q
621
But certainly insofar as Comex is concerned, you know the following: The
12
payments made out to Comex Trading Corporation ended up in the bank account of
13
Economic Reports Limited, a different company, isn't that right?
14
A
14:36:59 15
Q
So it appears, yes. 622
Mr. Liam Lawlor was the beneficial owner of Economic Reports Limited and I
16
think that is the position. The Tribunal has been unable to trace any company
17
called Comex Trading Corporation?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 623
14:37:19 20
And if no such company existed, Mr. Glennane, then it was a company that was fabricated or made up by somebody?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:37:28 25
A
I presume yes. 624
For the purpose of preparing an invoice? That's right.
625
And for the purposes of getting money from Monarch? I don't know whether that was the only purpose of the company but presumably,
26
yes.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:37:46 30
A
626
It would be the purpose of presenting the invoice to Monarch, wouldn't it? Presumably, yes, yes.
627
What did you know about Mr. Lawlor in 1990 and 1993? I knew he was a TD and he was, I don't know -- I don't know if he was a www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:37:52
14:37:56
93 1
councillor or not.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
628
Yeah. 629
You knew that? I probably did, yes.
630
Do you know whether or not Mr. Lawlor held consultancies? Well, certainly he did in the Prague context, he was with us but other than
8 9
He was a councillor up to June of 1991?
that, no, I wouldn't have known. Q
631
14:38:21 10
Would there have been any difficulty in writing a cheque for 56,300 to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
Not if there was a proper invoice produced, no, and he had provided services. 632
13
And does it follow from that that Mr. Liam Lawlor couldn't provide a proper invoice for services rendered?
14
A
14:38:42 15
Q
Well, I can't speculate what Mr. Lawlor could or couldn't do. 633
16
Because what you do know happened or didn't happen is more to the point. Is it that Mr. Lawlor didn't provide an invoice for 56,300?
17
A
18
Q
So it would seem, yes. 634
19
Can I show you a check at 4221 please which is a cheque dated 26th May 1993 and can you confirm for us first of all that's your signature at the bottom of the
14:39:03 20
cheque?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
That's right. 635
This is a cheque made out for 10,000 pounds to Mr. Frank Dunlop? That's right, yes.
636
14:39:14 25
And on the reverse of the cheque, there is a apparently Mr. Dunlop's, there is a signature Frank Dunlop.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:39:24 30
A
That's right. 637
Now Mr. Dunlop has denied that that is his signature? So I gathered, yes.
638
And -I was here for that evidence, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:39:26
14:39:36
94 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
639
Were you here for that evidence? I was, yes.
640
4
And Mr. Dunlop made a number of suggestions as to speculations on his part as to how this cheque might have ended up with Mr. Lawlor.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 641
7
You will have seen the recent statement from Mr. Patrick Murphy that was furnished to the Tribunal, have you seen that?
8
A
9
Q
No, I haven't. 642
14:39:50 10
Can I show you first of all that on the back of the cheque, the word Cleary's appears?
11
A
12
Q
That's right, I saw it. 643
And can I then show you 8913 and this is a second cheque which is made out by
13
Monarch Properties Limited in the sum of 2,500 pounds dated 5th January 1995 to
14
L Lawlor, do you see that?
14:40:08 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 644
That's right. 645
19
And there's an entry on the reverse of the cheque, P Murphy, lounge bar, Inchicore?
14:40:17 20
A
21
Q
22
That cheque is signed by you, is that right?
Yes, I can see that. 646
The Tribunal made certain inquiries of Mr. Patrick Murphy and Mr. Patrick Murphy has provided a statement to the Tribunal, page 8915.
23 24 14:40:32 25
MR. SANFEY: Chairman we haven't seen this statement, we weren't aware it existed.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
I think the statement was received on the 26th June and it was
28
circulated this morning.
29 14:40:37 30
CHAIRMAN:
They don't have it, Ms. Dillon. Could they be given a copy? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:40:50
14:41:08
95 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Absolutely.
4
MS. DILLON:
8915, I will just print a copy of 8915. We are printing a copy
5
of that, in the meantime I want to draw to your attention, those two cheques
6
were provided to Mr. Murphy who previously traded in Inchicore as Cleary's Bar
7
and Mr. Murphy has provided previous evidence, I think, to the Tribunal of
8
cashing cheques for Mr. Lawlor. Now he says that he cannot specifically recall
9
cashing the two cheques in question but he has no doubt that he did cash them
3
14:41:34 10
and he says the cheque for 10,000 pounds made payable to Frank Dunlop was
11
signed Clearys on the back of the cheque by my wife Catherine. I am certain of
12
the signature of Frank Dunlop is in similar handwriting to that of Mr. Liam
13
Lawlor. Mr. Murphy will be coming to the Tribunal to give evidence about this,
14
Mr. Glennane and what he will tell the Tribunal apparently is the signature
14:41:56 15
'Frank Dunlop' on the back of the cheque for 10,000 pounds is the signature
16
made by Mr. Liam Lawlor. He then goes on to explain Mr. Lawlor often presented
17
cheques in the living quarters over Cleary's and sometimes I would give him
18
cash. On other occasions I would have cheques written against this amount at
19
Mr. Lawlor's direction. Normally he would ring to see if I was at home and
14:42:20 20
sometimes he would ask me to hold back a certain amount of cash from my daily
21
lodgment. In or around 1993, my weekly turnover was in the region of 17,000
22
pounds and I was not troubled about cashing cheques. I felt obligated to
23
assist Mr. Lawlor as I was grazing cattle on his land. I also recall cashing a
24
monthly cheque in the sum of IR 1,000 pounds drawn on an account in Prague
14:42:42 25
which I believe was called Flymo. Now if Mr. Murphy and Mrs. Murphy are
26
correct in what they are going to tell the Tribunal, it would appear to
27
confirm, if we could have page 4221 please, that the signature on the back of
28
the cheque for 10,000 pounds is not that of Mr. Dunlop but rather is that of
29
the late Mr. Liam Lawlor and which was cashed by him in Cleary's pub by
14:43:08 30
Mr. Patrick Murphy, after he received the cheque. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:43:13
14:43:24
96 1 2
Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal he did not give that cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 647
5 6
Can you assist the Tribunal as to how Mr. Lawlor might have come into possession of that cheque?
A
Not really, no. No. Certainly we wouldn't have given it to him. As I said
7
already, you can see all our cheques were crossed '& Co'. So that would be a
8
surprise that he was able to cash it but however that's the name on the bank.
9
Normally when a cheque is crossed it can only be used to lodge.
14:43:59 10
Q
648
11
out to Frank Dunlop & Associates and given it to Mr. Lawlor?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:44:15 15
Q
16
A
I don't believe so, no. 649
Who asked you for the cheque? I have no idea, it was probably just drawn in the normal way.
650
There's no -I wouldn't have instructed that a cheque be drawn, I would have signed it. I
17 18
And could somebody in Monarch Properties have asked you for that cheque made
mean there were cheques drawn all the time for signature. Q
651
19
Well, we will come to look at payments to Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Glennane and I think you will be familiar with the fact that certainly for the first two payments to
14:44:34 20
Mr. Dunlop of 15 and 10, there were no invoices, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
Until later on. 652
We will come to look at whether they were in fact retrospective invoices or not
23
but you would agree, I think, notwithstanding what is stated to be the Monarch
24
policy but certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop was concerned, a cheque for 15,000
14:44:53 25
and a cheque for 10 now, were drawn without the benefit of any invoices, is
26
that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:45:05 30
Q
That's right, yes. 653
Now was there an invoice for this cheque? I don't think so, I don't recall.
654
Okay. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:45:06
14:45:22
97 1
A
There was an invoice of over 12,100 which would have been normally 10,000 plus
2 3
VAT, I don't know whether that relates in the same -Q
655
4
1993.
5
A
6
Q
Whatever it was, yes. 656
7 8
A
Not specifically, no, but there were invoices from Mr. Dunlop mainly drawn towards the end of 1993 which actually exceeded the amount paid to him.
14:45:45 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
657
And there was an invoice in April -Actually that was a journal entry put through reversing that.
658
13
There is an invoice from Mr. Dunlop which purports to be dated 10th April 1993 in the sum of 12,100 pounds?
14
A
14:46:02 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
That's right. 659
But there's no payment for 12,100 pounds? Not specifically not, no.
660
18
So, it would appear insofar as this cheque is concerned, Mr. Glennane, the furthest you can assist is that you signed it?
19
A
14:46:17 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That's right. 661
There doesn't appear to have been an invoice attached to it, is that right? No, but I assume there would have been a remittance advise attached to it.
662
23
Well if there is, I don't think the Tribunal has it. Right, though it has other remittance advices in relation to other cheques?
A
It was certainly the normal practice on any creditor's cheque to send a
14:46:42 25
remittance advice with the cheque so that person receiving it would know what
26 27
But insofar as this payment is concerned, Mr. Glennane, have you found any invoice from Mr. Dunlop in connection with this payment?
9
24
That invoice wasn't paid and I think you are referring to an invoice in April
they were getting paid for. Q
663
And you will have seen where in the statements provided to the Tribunal the
28
Monarch position in relation to the making of payments has been clearly and
29
unambiguously stated to have been that payments were normally only made on foot
14:47:02 30
of invoices, is that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:47:03
14:47:16
98 1
A
2
Q
That's right, normally, yes. 664
3
But certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned, the first two payments and now this cheque did not have attached to them any invoice, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
... 665
That would mean, would it not, Mr. Glennane, the payments to Mr. Dunlop were
6
treated otherwise than those normally treated by Monarch Properties, is that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
14:47:28 10
In a general way, yes. 666
A
Why was that? Well I -- I assume because they were, they were drawn before the proper
11
documentation was furnished. The first receipts had been drawn a day or two
12
after he was appointed so I assume that was some form of retainer or payment in
13
advance.
14
Q
667
14:47:57 15
right?
16
A
17
Q
That's right, yes. 668
18
And I think Mr. Dunlop says he was appointed around March of 1993 and certainly the first payments are in March, isn't that right?
19
A
14:48:05 20
Q
That's right, yes. 669
21
So by May of 1993, can you think of any reason why Monarch would be paying out 10,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop without an invoice?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Only if they were waiting or expecting the invoice to come in after afterwards. 670
Or if they weren't paying Mr. Dunlop at all and they were paying somebody else? No, that's certainly paid to Frank Dunlop & Associates, it was crossed and we
14:48:32 25
would always rely on the protection of the bank, as I said all our cheques were
26 27
And this cheque that you are looking at is dated 26th May 1993, isn't that is
crossed. Q
671
You may not have been aware of Mr. Lawlor's arrangement with Mr. Murphy whereby
28
Mr. Murphy would cash cheques of quite significant amounts of money for
29
Mr. Lawlor?
14:48:47 30
A
I certainly wasn't, no. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:48:48
14:49:01
99 1
Q
672
But you wouldn't, while you wouldn't necessarily have been aware of that
2
arrangement that Mr. Lawlor had with Mr. Murphy, somebody else in Monarch might
3
have been aware of it?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
I wouldn't think so, no. 673
If Mr. Dunlop -I am absolutely sure.
674
You know that in the documentation that's been provided to the Tribunal,
8
there's no surrounding documentation in connection with this cheque, there's no
9
letter for example sending it to Mr. Dunlop?
14:49:15 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 675
Well I presume there was one drawn at the time, yes. 676
14 14:49:28 15
There's to remittance advice.
There's nothing surrounding this document except the copy cheque, isn't that right?
A
So it seems, yes, but I am absolutely sure that that cheque was not made out
16
to Frank Dunlop & Associates and deliberately given to Mr. Lawlor. As I said,
17
we would always rely on the fact that the cheques are crossed and I don't know
18
how Mr. Murphy was able to cash it and lodge it presumably into his own
19
account, that's between him and the bank.
14:49:59 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
677
I don't know. 678
679
If he asked you for a cheque for 10,000 pounds to Frank Dunlop & Associates, would you have given it to him?
26
A
27
Q
28
14:50:28 30
Could you have given it to Mr. Phillip Monahan? Unlikely, I would have thought.
14:50:12 25
29
Who did you have give the cheque to?
We possibly would have, yes. 680
Was there anybody else in Monarch you would have given a cheque to in similar circumstances other than Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I mean we would have normally posted out cheques or if people offered to come and collect them, they would be left in reception. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:50:32
14:50:49
100 1
Q
681
2 3
request in such circumstances other than Mr. Phillip Monahan? A
Well I think if Mr. Sweeney was dealing with Mr. Dunlop, I understood he was,
4 5
Was there anybody else in Monarch that you would have written a cheque for on
he might have done it for him. Q
682
6
If Mr. Sweeney had asked you to make out a cheque for 10,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop without any invoice, you would have done so?
7
A
8
Q
I think so, yes. 683
9
And do you say then that this is between, if this cheques was given by somebody in Monarch to Mr. Liam Lawlor, then it rests between Mr. Eddie Sweeney and the
14:51:06 10
late Mr. Phillip Monahan as to who would have done that?
11
A
12
Q
I would think so, yes. 684
Can I show you a payment in July 1994 I think to A & L Lawlor at 5279 you will
13
see there. A & L Lawlor, 3,000 and this has been identified in correspondence
14
to the Tribunal as a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor.
14:51:42 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
If you say so, yes. 685
Do you know anything about that payment? I don't think so, no, I don't recall it.
686
19
And can I show you the 5th of January 1995 at 5522, which is an extract from the cheque payments book and again you will see halfway down the page, L
14:52:04 20
Lawlor, 2,500 pounds?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, I see that, yes. 687
23
And you will have seen the cheque at 5523 which is also a cheque that's cashed by Mr. Murphy at the lounge bar in Inchicore for Mr. Lawlor.
24
A
14:52:19 25
Q
That's right. 688
And I draw to your attention again notwithstanding the fact that as you say
26
it's crossed, the cheque is apparently cashed by Mr. Lawlor with Mr. Murphy in
27
Inchicore?
28
A
29
Q
14:52:34 30
A
So it would appear. 689
So it would appear Mr. Lawlor had that facility? Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:52:34
14:52:50
101 1
Q
690
2
And the question is whether anybody else in Monarch knew whether Mr. Lawlor had that facility?
3
A
4
Q
I wouldn't any so, I don't think so. Certainly I didn't know. 691
5
And at 6050 on the 15th of August 1996, there is a cheque for 1,000 pounds for a golf classic paid to Mr. Lawlor.
6
A
7
Q
I see that, yes. 692
Can I suggest to you now, Mr. Glennane, that the documentation in relation to
8
the late Mr. Liam Lawlor appears to disclose the following: That through a
9
medium called Comex Trading Corporation, a sum of 56,300 pounds was paid to
14:53:11 10
Mr. Lawlor in 1990.
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
14:53:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 693
Yes, it was. 694
695
Do you think -1990.
696
Do you think those two events are connected? That the payment to Mr. Lawlor of 56,300 was in some way connected to the opening of Tallaght?
A
I would think if he had carried out work in the previous few years, the obvious
21
time to get paid was when the job was just about finished.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:53:57 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 14:54:09 30
When did The Square in Tallaght open? It opened the 23rd October.
19 14:53:38 20
And can I ask you this: That payment was in October of 1990, isn't that right?
697
There is then a payment of 3,000 pounds apparently to Hazel Lawlor? That's right, yes.
698
There's a payment of 2,500 pounds to Mr. Liam Lawlor? That's right.
699
A payment of 1,000 pounds to Mr. Liam Lawlor, is that right? Yes.
700
A payment of 3,000 pounds to A & L Lawlor which is accepted to be a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor, isn't that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:54:09
14:54:21
102 1
Q
701
And there's also a payment of 10,000 pounds which is addressed to Mr. Frank
2
Dunlop but the proceeds of which are apparently received by Mr. Lawlor, is that
3
right?
4
A
5
Q
Well, so it appears, yes. 702
6 7
indirectly was 75,800 pounds by Monarch Properties? A
If your figures are right but I am absolutely sure the 10,000 cheque addressed
8 9
That would mean that the total amount paid to Mr. Lawlor directly and
to Frank Dunlop & Associates was not meant for Mr. Lawlor. Q
703
14:54:49 10
And if the 20,000 pounds that was attributed to Prague Strategic Studies was also paid to Mr. Lawlor, that would mean 95,800 pounds was directed to
11
Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:55:09 15
Q
If your figures add up, I haven't added them up. 704
It isn't very difficult to add them. I am quite happy that they are accurate? I am sure they are, yes.
705
And insofar as the 10,000 pounds cheque is concerned, what you say is that the
16
cheque was not made out to Mr. Lawlor but you accept that he received the
17
benefit of the cheque?
18
A
19
Q
So it appears, yes. 706
14:55:28 20
relationship with Mr. Lawlor, whatever it was, that I suppose culminated in
21
these payments but that that was the late Mr. Phillip Monahan?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Certainly he knew him from old, yes. 707
And he was the one with whom Mr. Lawlor had his dealings? Well, he may have had dealings with Mr. Sweeney but certainly with Mr. Monahan,
14:55:51 25
26
And would it be fair to say that the person in Monarch Properties who had the
he lived beside him as well as, as far as I know. Q
708
And if payments of the order of 95,000 pounds were made to the late Mr. Liam
27
Lawlor, either through Comex or through any other vehicle, they were payments,
28
I suggest to you, that could only have been authorised at the highest level in
29
Monarch.
14:56:09 30
A
Well, they are each individuals one but yeah, it was authorised by the same www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:56:16
14:56:26
103 1 2
person or different people at different times, yes. Q
709
3
It's your position they weren't authorised by you, they made the payments insofar as you wrote the cheques but you didn't authorise the payments?
4
A
5
Q
That's right, yes. 710
And according to you, you are one of the two top people in Monarch, if it
6
wasn't you it could only have been either Mr. Eddie Sweeney or the late
7
Mr. Phillip Monahan?
8
A
9
Q
That's right, I think that's actually three people. 711
14:56:43 10
with the late Mr. Liam Lawlor was Mr. Monahan?
11
A
12
Q
That's right, yes. 712
13
Was Mr. Monahan in the habit of routing funds indirectly to people, can you tell us?
14
A
14:56:56 15
Q
No, not as far as I know. 713
16
But if Mr. Monahan authorised the Comex payment to Mr. Lawlor, he would have known that Comex was a front for Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
Well, presumably. Presumably he would have, yes. 714
Because no such company Comex exists or existed in 1990? Well, I mean we didn't -- we don't we don't ask to see the certificate of
14:57:22 20
21
Of those three people, the person who had the longest standing relationship
incorporation of every company that you are dealing with. Q
715
22
Because you know who you are actually dealing with, who is the person behind it?
23
A
24
Q
14:57:30 25
A
26
Q
Exactly. 716
And the face behind Comex was Mr. Liam Lawlor? Yes, so it appears, yes.
717
So, that whoever authorised the Comex payment in Monarch and it wasn't you
27
though you effected the payment, that person had to know that Comex was a front
28
for Mr. Liam Lawlor?
29 14:57:47 30
A
Yes, sorry I am not sure that I effected the payment but however, I don't know if I signed the cheques for not but I prefer to admit I may well have signed www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:57:54
14:58:06
104 1
them, I don't know. They must have known it was Mr. Lawlor, yes, that was
2
behind Comex.
3
Q
718
4
And that would mean that whoever that person was, they had no problem with making payments indirectly, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Well, I think your term indirectly is a bit of a misnomer. 719
Oh really. Well let's just analyse that for a minute, Mr Glennane, and let's
7
talk realities here. Mr. Liam Lawlor was a serving politician in 1990, he was
8
a member of the Dail, he was a member of Dublin County Council, he was well
9
known. Do you agree with all of that?
14:58:25 10
A
11
Q
Yes, absolutely. 720
12
Mr. Phillip Monahan was a very wealthy individual who had headed up a big development company, do you agree with that?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 721
14:58:40 15
Comex Trading Corporation did not exist as a legal entity or otherwise. And you may take that from me?
16
A
17
Q
Okay I take it now, yeah. 722
Now, if Mr. Lawlor was providing services to Monarch Properties and those
18
services were above board and there was nothing hidden or untoward or improper,
19
then I suggest to you that Mr. Lawlor would have furnished an invoice to
14:59:01 20
21
Mr. Monahan in Mr. Lawlor's own name? A
Not necessarily, it might have suited him. It very often suits people to
22
trade through a company rather than as an individual.
23
Q
24
A
14:59:13 25
Q
723
To trade through a company that doesn't exist? Not one that doesn't exist.
724
26
Because Mr. Lawlor had available to him companies with which he was involved that did exist such as Economic Reports.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:59:25 30
Q
Right, well. 725
And he elected not to use those, isn't that right? So it would appear.
726
So what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. Glennane, when one takes those circumstances www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:59:30
14:59:48
105 1
into account and those series of facts into account, it follows logically that
2
what was going on in the Comex payment was a secret hidden payment to
3
Mr. Lawlor that would withstand scrutiny?
4
A
5
Q
I don't -727
6
Corporation?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 728
9
And there are two invoices from Comex Trading Corporation with an address in Clerkinwell in England, let's say for example?
15:00:00 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
I don't know where the address is. 729
Let's just say? Sorry.
730
14
On the face of it it likes like a bona fide invoice, and there's nothing on it to indicate it's a payment of 56,300 to Mr. Lawlor, the auditor is not going to
15:00:22 15
look behind the invoice?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
In general, no. 731
Is that right? No.
732
15:00:27 20
21
Let's say the auditor decided pick up on the payment to Comex Trading
So what is being kept secret here is the fact that the 56,300 is going to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
A
Well, yes, well yes, it depends whether it referred on the invoice to Mr.
22
Lawlor or not. I don't know that.
23
Q
24
A
15:00:43 25
Q
733
Let's assume for the moment it didn't? Assuming that it didn't.
734
What is being kept secret from the auditors and everybody else is that the
26
payment of 56,300 is in fact a payment to a then sitting politician, isn't that
27
right?
28
A
Yeah, I am not sure of being a politician precluded people from providing
29 15:01:03 30
consultancy services. Q
735
I am not suggesting that it didn't? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:01:05
15:01:17
106 1
A
2
Q
You are suggesting. 736
3
I am not, I am saying what's being kept secret by using this mechanism is that the payment in in fact a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
4
A
5
Q
Well, a payment for his benefit. 737
If the face of the invoice does not disclose that it's a payment to Mr. Liam
6
Lawlor or that Mr. Liam Lawlor is involved in it, the auditor will not pick up
7
that in fact it's a payment to Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
8
A
That's right, yes, but as a corollary of that, I don't think the auditor would
9
have had any difficulty if it was a payment to Mr. Lawlor, if there's an
15:01:48 10
invoice made by Lawlor Consultancy Services ... it wouldn't have concerned the
11 12
auditors. Q
738
Of course that would mean for that to have happened, Mr. Glennane, there would
13
have to be an invoice from Mr. Lawlor but that didn't happen because the
14
invoice was from Comex?
15:02:05 15
A
I know that but I don't think it was any, I don't -- it's a bit academic, if
16
you don't mind me saying so, the argument we are having, but I don't think it
17
was of any concern of the auditors whether a payment was to made to Mr. Lawlor
18
or anybody else.
19
Q
739
15:02:21 20
I am obviously not making myself clear. What I'm trying to establish from you, Mr. Glennane, is if the auditor had picked up on the payment of 56,300 in
21
October 1990 and checked the invoice in the name of Comex Trading Corporation,
22
there was nothing on that invoice to indicate to the auditor the payment was a
23
payment to Mr. Lawlor, do you understand that question?
24
A
15:02:41 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
I do, yes. 740
If you would answer it now please? Sorry.
741
The question is if there is nothing on the face of the invoice from Comex to
28
show that the recipient of the money is in fact Mr. Lawlor, even if the auditor
29
were to pick up the invoice, that doesn't help him in establishing who the
15:02:56 30
recipient is, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:02:58
15:03:17
107 1
A
2
Q
Well it doesn't tell it was Mr. Lawlor, if that's the point you are making. 742
3
Yes, the point is that the mechanism that is utilised in the Comex payment is a mechanism that hides Mr. Lawlor's involvement, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
It hides it, it doesn't disclose it. 743
What's the difference in doesn't disclose and hide? Well if you get an invoice in the morning from a McCarrick Woods for instance,
7
you are not assuming that it's disclosing who the partners are on that firm or
8
whatever.
9
Q
744
15:03:37 10
And in the normal course, would L&C Properties have had a list of approved suppliers?
11
A
12
Q
No. 745
13
Didn't have it and did Monarch Property Services have a list of approved suppliers?
14
A
15:03:46 15
Q
No. 746
16
So that each supplier's invoice came in and was treated accordingly, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
Yes, I presume it was passed by somebody, yes. 747
Did, if I can ask you to deal with the bonus payments that were made first of all briefly in relation to Mr. Sweeney's statement in his affidavit, that at
15:04:09 20
paragraph 8056, that in 1986 it was agreed to pay a sum of 100,000 pounds
21
notionally. It's in paragraph 10, and on the following page at 8057 for which
22
he would receive a cash sum of 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner with a
23
balance of 50,000 pounds being paid to Mr. Monahan as consideration a tranche
24
of his existing shareholding equivalent to 15 percent of the issued share
15:04:42 25
capital. Now, you can correct me if I am wrong, but it would appear from a
26
review of the subsequent Affidavits and documents in the proceedings between
27
Monarch and Mr. Sweeney, that it was not disputed that a sum of 100,000 pounds
28
was to be paid to Mr. Sweeney and that 50,000 pounds of it was to be paid as a
29
cash sum, is that right?
15:05:03 30
A
I think again when you are referring to cash, it doesn't necessarily mean in www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:05:13
15:05:28
108 1
cash as in pounds notes, it means by cheque or by consideration.
2
Q
3
A
748
No, I don't know if it was paid or not and it's described as being a notional
4 5
Do you know how that 50,000 pounds was paid in fact?
payment which I am not quite sure what a notional payment is. Q
749
It was agreed an ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds would be notionally paid
6
to him for which he would receive 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner. Do
7
you know whether that sum of money was in fact paid to a sister of
8
Mr. Sweeney's?
9
A
15:05:44 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
I don't know. 750
No. 751
Were you involved in making that payment? I don't think so, no, I have certainly no recollection of it.
752
15:06:01 15
And insofar as the second payment is concerned at 8053, this is the disbursement of the 8058, sorry, the disbursement of the sum of 1.8 million,
16
you were involved in this transaction, isn't that right, Mr. Glennane?
17
A
18
Q
Yes, I was, yes. 753
19
And because I think you were to receive a share of that in the amount of 450,000 pounds, is that right?
15:06:23 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 754
And did you take that yourself through some corporate structure? Through a company call Aspentree Company.
755
24 15:06:42 25
You don't know?
And insofar as Mr. Monahan was to receive a share from this transaction, what was Mr. Monahan's share to be?
A
It says 65 percent there, I think that's wrong, it should have been probably
26
like 55 percent. I gather, I think 10 percent was paid to a Circinus Limited
27
which is owned by the late Tom Monahan and Ann Gosling.
28
Q
29
A
15:07:13 30
Q
756
Out of the 1.8 million, approximately what would have been Mr. Monahan's share? I suppose about a million, a bit over half of it.
757
Yes. And how was that money paid to Mr. Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:07:17
15:07:38
109 1
A
Well, what happened at the time was that all that money was, if you like, went
2
round in a circle and was all loaned back to the company by the various people
3
and the various companies involved. And it was then paid out in instalments
4
later on.
5
Q
758
So effectively what was happening was it was admitted that money, people were
6
to receive money, money was being taken through various corporate structures,
7
the corporate structures then lent the money back and as and when the
8
individuals involved needed money, namely Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney,
9
Mr. Glennane, Ms. Gosling and Mr. Tom Monahan, they made demands of the company
15:08:05 10
11
and repayments were made, is that right? A
I would say more as of when the company could afford it rather than less that
12 13
they made demands. Q
759
14
individuals in the amount of the monies they had lent?
15:08:20 15
A
16
Q
That's right, yes. 760
17
And therefore the company was indebted to Mr. Monahan in the sum of one million pounds approximately?
18
A
19
Q
That's right, yes. 761
15:08:34 20
And that money was made available to Mr. Monahan on request from Mr. Monahan provided the company was in a position to pay it?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
I would think so. 762
Is that a fair way of putting it? I think it was probably more adjusted every year through inter-company accounts
24
for directors loan accounts we spoke about earlier.
15:08:49 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
763
Is it fair to that this money became available initially in 1991? No, I think probably a small amount.
764
Sorry? I think just a small amount became available in 1991, do you mean about the
29 15:09:05 30
The effect of it Mr. Glennane was that the company was indebted to each of the
money of Mr. Monahan? Q
765
Let's talk about the 1.8 million that's available for disbursements. When does www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:09:10
15:09:22
110 1
that come into Pallarang?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
It came in at that time. 766
Whenever this thing was -- I think January 1992, if that was the -767
15:09:41 10
768
A Q
Taken back over the years, not necessarily as and when they needed it. 769
And where are the reconciliation or the accounting of those payments, where is that kept, Mr. Glennane?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
15:10:01 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
It would have been kept with the rest of the Monarch accounts. 770
Would that documentation have been kept in Somerton? Well not before 1997.
771
And before 1997, where would it have been kept? It would have been kept in Monarch House in Harcourt Street.
772
And thereafter it would have gone to Somerton? Any documentation that was left then would have been, yes. Each of those
19
companies would have done accounts on an annual basis. Q
773
21 22
So that the money comes in, the 1.8 million, and is disbursed and is lent back and then taken back by the various individuals as and when they need it?
11
15:10:25 20
In 1991, late 1991, early 1992? Yes.
8 9
What's that time?
But all of these companies would have had as their assets was the money that was owed to them by the Monarch Group?
A
That's right, but they would all have done audited accounts on an annual basis
23
so each party, if you like, would have known how much was still due back to
24
them or whatever.
15:10:45 25
Q
774
Yes. And in July of 1992, Mr. Phillip Monahan wrote to Mr. Martin Baker of GRE
26
Properties a letter seeking extra additional costs in relation to Tallaght
27
including 3781. Are you familiar with this letter, Mr. Glennane?
28
A
29
Q
15:11:18 30
A
Well, I have seen it in the brief. 775
And prior to seeing it in the brief, were you aware of its existence? I am sure I saw it at the time, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:11:21
15:11:29
111 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
776
I might have, yes. 777
15:11:41 10
Because that letter -Probably did, yes.
778
Because that letter is all about financial matters, isn't it? Well a lot of it is, yes.
779
8 9
And would you have assisted in putting together that letter?
Because the main purpose of the letter is seeking extra payments from GRE, isn't that right?
A Q
That's right, yes. 780
And I want to draw to your attention what's said under paragraph 5 of
11
additional marketing costs and Mr. Monahan says "To ensure the success of the
12
joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred. These costs which
13
were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring the tax
14
status and appropriate tenant profile for the Tallaght town centre."
15:12:03 15
Do you
see that?
16
A
17
Q
I do, yes. 781
Now I suggest to you that what Mr. Monahan is saying there is that marketing
18
costs were incurred for two things, one was ensuring the tax status of Tallaght
19
and the second is ensuring an appropriate tenant profile, do you agree with
15:12:24 20
that?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 782
23 24
costs. A
I don't know what that means but I presume that means he negotiated, certainly
15:12:39 25
26
with the tenants, yes. Q
783
27
Well we are talking about two things. I think we will agree, tax status and tenant profile?
28
A
29
Q
15:12:50 30
The other thing that Mr. Monahan is saying is that he directly supervised those
Yes. 784
And he is saying, what the letter says is key additional marketing costs were incurred, what does that mean? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:12:52
15:13:07
112 1
A
It means that there were, there were key, there were additional marketing costs
2
that were key, particularly the tenant profile business, there were key to
3
getting in the tenants.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
785
What does the word incurred mean, Mr. Glennane? It means incur, means expenses, I suppose, expenses.
786
7
Doesn't that mean that to ensure the success of the joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred, the company incurred extra expenses?
8
A
9
Q
15:13:27 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
That's right. 787
Money was spent. That's right, yes.
788
Isn't that what it means? Yes.
789
14
And those costs were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan, isn't that what it means?
15:13:35 15
A
16
Q
That's what that said, yes. 790
And those costs, as spent by Mr. Monahan, were critical to ensuring A the tax
17
status of Tallaght and B the tenant profile of Tallaght, isn't that what that
18
means?
19
A
15:13:49 20
Q
Yes. 791
So what Mr. Monahan is saying there is 'I incurred extra costs in order to
21
ensure the tax status and tenant profile of Tallaght Town Centre and I
22
supervised those costs myself'?
23
A
24
Q
I think he means the company incurred them and not him. 792
15:14:12 25
Where does it say there that the key additional market costs were incurred by the company?
26
A
27
Q
It doesn't say they were incurred -793
28
What it does say is that Mr. Monahan personally supervised the costs, isn't that right?
29
A
15:14:21 30
Q
That's what it says. 794
Well are you suggesting that Mr. Monahan when he wrote this letter was www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:14:25
15:14:45
113 1 2
incorrect? A
No, I am saying there were additional marketing costs incurred and that him
3
saying they were supervised directly by him is just really puffing up the
4
situation to be honest with you, saying he had some, he had huge personal input
5
into it.
6
Q
795
7
Because he goes on to say "The Square was included in a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act.?"
8
A
9
Q
15:15:00 10
A
11
Q
That's right. 796
That has nothing whatever to do with tenant profile, is that right? No, except it's an incentive obviously to get the tenants in.
797
In the first paragraph Mr. Monahan says he "over saw costs in relation to two
12
matters, tax status and tenant profile", he goes on to talk about The Square
13
being included as a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act and I suggest to
14
you that can only relate to tax status.
15:15:27 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Sorry, I didn't ... 798
Is that right? Sorry, yes.
799
19
He then says "Significant professional fees were incurred in this area, particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght.?"
15:15:40 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 800
That sentence, I suggest to you, means Mr. Monahan was saying that fees were
22
incurred in order to ensure the tax designation of Tallaght and that is
23
separate from the appropriate tenant profile?
24
A
15:15:53 25
Q
26
A
That's right. 801
What fees were spent in obtaining the tax designation in Tallaght? Well there were, I know we certainly organised local pressure groups to bring
27
pressure to have it designated. We also --
28
Q
29
A
15:16:19 30
Q
802
How much did that cost you? I don't know. Not a lot but --
803
Would it have cost you 2,000? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:16:21
15:16:37
114 1
A
I know it is somewhere in the documents I saw a reference to, it was organised
2
by a man called Liam McParland who used to work for us.
3
Q
4
A
804
5,000? 5,000, that's described as expenses I think and there was also, I think, we
5
prepared accountants' reports to demonstrate I think the, that the benefits of
6
tax designation and --
7
Q
8
A
805
I have no idea. I think the main cost of these figures is really the tenant
9
profile, if I can put it that way. That's described there.
15:17:03 10
Q
11
A
806
When you talk about the cost of the tenant profile, what are you talking about? You are talking about payments being paid to anchor tenants to induce them to
12
come into the scheme. It's quite common in the business, unfortunately.
13
Q
14
A
807
So how do you differentiate ... What you actually do is pay a capital contribution and really what you are
15:17:33 15
16
How much did that cost?
doing is paying for their fitting out costs. Q
808
17
You are saying the majority of the payments to which Mr. Monahan refers in this letter relate to that as opposed to tax designation?
18
A
19
Q
15:17:49 20
A
Certainly in my opinion. 809
Where's the break down between the two? I don't have any break down for the first one but I certainly know we paid
21
Dunnes Stores something like a million pounds to go into Tallaght and we also
22
paid another company called Pricewise 250,000 to go into Tallaght.
23
Q
24
A
15:18:04 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28 29 15:18:29 30
810
That's 1.25 million? Yes.
811
Mr. Monahan says that all that is spent under this heading is 850,000 pounds? That seems like an understatement then.
812
Yes. There's no reconciliation, if I understand you correctly Mr. Glennane, and no break down of this sum of 850,000 pounds?
A
Not that I'm aware of, I am aware of the two figures I am after giving you, which came to 1.25 million. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:18:31
15:18:46
115 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
813
But they are certainly greater than the sum of 850,000 pounds? Yes.
814
And insofar as these payments are directly supervised by Mr. Monahan, do you
4
agree that what that means, Mr. Monahan appears to be the one who is in charge
5
of these payments?
6
A
He certainly would have carried out the negotiations with --
7 8 9 15:18:50 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could I just clarify something, Ms. Dillon, sorry to interrupt
11
you, the reference to 850, this is Mr. Monahan writing to GRE, the joint
12
venture?
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Correct.
15:19:01 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
contribution?
Is this letter purporting to look to GRE for their
18 19 15:19:11 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes, for additional money. This letter seeks the additional
money and becomes the subject of correspondence.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Do I take it then that Mr. Monahan, there's a letter on file
23
that Mr. Monahan is seeking from GRE 850, that would have been 50 percent of
24
the contribution to these significant costs?
15:19:26 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I don't, I can't answer that at the moment, it's not clear to me
27
that that in fact is what's being paid.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
Was it a 50/50 venture?
15:19:34 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:19:34
15:19:43
116 1
MS. DILLON:
It was 50/50 venture on some but not all of the -- some costs had
2
to be borne completely by GRE.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
costs here being sought by Mr. Monahan would have been in the realm of the
6
50/50 costs. Do you see what I'm saying, Mr. Glennane?
7
A
Yes, but how does Mr. Glennane know whether or not the sort of
I don't actually know the answer to that.
8 9 15:20:01 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
11
Because there could be two things here
I know what you are saying, the 1.7 million or the 850, that's what you are asking, I really don't know.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Yes, very well, we don't know yet
I don't know, yeah, no.
15:20:10 15
16
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder could I just voice general concern, this is a
17
letter written to GRE by Mr. Monahan in relation to the square in Tallaght, it
18
seems to me to have peripheral if any relevance at all to Cherrywood and I am
19
wondering could we have some indication where this is going. Obviously
15:20:30 20
21
Mr. Glennane will have prepared his evidence on the basis he was going to answer questions about Cherrywood rather than The Square.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
basis on which accounts were maintained in relation to Cherrywood. The
15:20:55 25
Well, it's to presumably assist the Tribunal in understanding the
Tallaght Town Centre project pre-dated it by, it was in or around the same
26
time, although it was a couple of years ahead of it but to that extent, it
27
might assist the Tribunal in understanding the basis on which items were
28
charged in relation to the Cherrywood operation. That's my understanding
29
unless Ms. Dillon has a ...
15:21:26 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:21:26
15:21:52
117 1
MS. DILLON:
2
Development and also the Cherrywood Development and also seeking to establish
3
the funds that were available to Mr. Monahan for whatever, any activity that
4
Mr. Monahan wished to involve himself in. Because it is important for the
5
Tribunal to understand the culture that existed in Monarch in order to fully
6
understand the nature of the payments that we will be coming on to quite
7
shortly I hope, to deal with, Mr. Glennane, including political payments. In
8
other words one must look at the entire of the transactions that were involved
9
in Monarch and how they dealt with them because one of the key elements in
15:22:17 10
It will also assist the Tribunal in looking at the Tallaght
looking at the payments that were made in 1991 and 1992, the political payments
11
were the attempts that were made by Monarch Properties to seek recovery of
12
those payments from their joint venture partner notwithstanding that they were
13
political payments. So all of the relationship between GRE and Monarch is
14
important and I am focusing in on this because this appears to be, and I am
15:22:37 15
subject to correction, Mr. Monahan saying I have spent 850,000 pounds under my
16
direct supervision in order to achieve two things, tax designation in Tallaght
17
and appropriate tenant profile and the response to this from GRE is saying they
18
paid a million pounds outside of the joint venture agreement and again that
19
would be a fund and where it was would be of interest to the Tribunal.
15:23:03 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Also this is July 1992, which is smack in the middle of the
22
Cherrywood. Also the documentation to which the witness is being referred is
23
in the brief so presumably he would have seen it. If he has a particular
24
difficulties about aspects of it, obviously you can say that.
15:23:26 25
26
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, it is in the brief certainly and as you are aware, the
27
brief is extremely large and I am slightly concerned that Mr. Glennane should
28
be, I can see how this is relevant to background, I am just a little bit
29
concerned that the focus be on Cherrywood rather than Tallaght though I accept
15:23:42 30
the totality of the relationship with GRE may be relevant. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:23:46
15:24:04
118 1 2
But also Chairman, we are looking at page 7 of a lengthy letter. I wonder if
3
Mr. Glennane would like to see the letter to refresh his memory. It's written
4
on Monarch Properties notepaper. There seems to be some issue about whether
5
Mr. Monarch was talking about funding the expenses himself or Monarch. It
6
seems clear to us that the context of the letter...
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
will be back in the morning, I am prepared to leave this now and let
15:24:17 10
Could I suggest if the witness has a difficulty, Mr. Glennane
Mr. Glennane overnight look at the correspondence and also the reply from GRE
11
in relation to this and I can pick it up tomorrow morning and move on now
12
without having concluded that matter to allow him, if that's agreeable.
13 14
MR. SANFEY: Very good, chairman.
15:24:30 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
the morning, if that's all right?
15:24:42 20
A
21
Q
If you wish. 815
22 23
Now can I ask you just very briefly, were you aware of any proposal to swap a portion of the Cherrywood lands with any golf club?
A
I was aware there was some discussions with both, I think, Dun Laoghaire and
24
Killiney.
15:24:59 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:25:17 30
Thank you, Mr. Glennane, I will come back to deal with that in
816
Who conducted those discussions on behalf of Monarch Properties? I think Mr. Monahan.
817
Did Mr. Monahan deal with all of those himself? So far as I know, yes.
818
You will have seen in the brief and again if you haven't, we can leave it over until tomorrow a letter at 8516 dated 12th August 1993 in which it is referred www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:25:25
15:25:45
119 1
to and I'm looking at the second last paragraph, all costs of Dun Laoghaire
2
corporation will be the responsibility of the developer and in addition the sum
3
of 500,000 pounds cash would have to be paid to the club on the actual hand
4
over. Were you aware of this correspondence?
5
A
I think it says on the top, I think draft letter actually, if I read it
6
correctly.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
819
Yes? I don't recall, it seems to be a letter from Noel Smyth to somebody.
820
15:25:58 10
It's only a draft letter but what is being set out is a proposed agreement which never in fact happened?
11
A
12
Q
No, I don't think it was -821
But what I'm drawing to your attention, were you aware of the fact that the
13
proposed agreement provided for a sum of half a million cash to be paid in the
14
event the agreement proceeded?
15:26:10 15
A
No, I mean -- no, again I think that reference to 500,000 pounds cash doesn't
16 17
mean cash, it means a payment. Q
822
And if I could show you 8717, sorry before I leave that, if I could have 8155
18
please. This is a copy letter to Mr. Monahan of the 12th August 1993 relating
19
to the document we have just looked at and in the first sentence he says "I am
15:26:48 20
enclosing a copy letter that I have now sent with your package to an unnamed
21
person who is not part of this" so it would seem certainly the draft letter was
22
sent to Mr. Monahan?
23
A
24
Q
15:27:05 25
A
Yes, I think so. 823
And were you aware of any of this, Mr. Glennane? I don't think I was aware of this letter but I was certainly aware, I thought
26
it was a few years later on about discussions with Dun Laoghaire Golf Club. I
27
think it was after we acquired the Galvin land, I don't see how we could have
28
given 150 acres of the existing -- the first lot of land for a golf course. It
29
wouldn't make any sense to me to be honest with you.
15:27:35 30
Q
824
At 8717, which is an extract from Mr. Phillip Monahan's diary which relates to www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:27:41
15:28:01
120 1
the payment to Mr. Charles Haughey. But what I want to draw to your attention
2
halfway down is a reference P N and it appears either S or D or G Murphy,
3
100,000 pounds cash. And that's on the 6th February 1991.
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 825
I read that as being it was each I must say rather than cash. 826
8 9
A
Well if it was each it would be some sort of joint venture he was talking to somebody about, each would put up 100,000.
Q
827
12
If we could just increase PM, S Murphy 100,000, that line. I suggest to you that it's cash?
13
A
14
Q
15:28:47 15
It may be cash. 828
Can you assist the Tribunal as to why Mr. Monahan would have been looking for 100,000 cash or giving 100,000 cash or dealing in 100,000 pounds cash in any
16 17
You read that and what significance do you attach to the 100,000 before that word?
15:28:20 10
11
Now first of all --
way in February of 1991? A
No.
18 19 15:29:02 20
CHAIRMAN: A
Do you know who Mr. Murphy is?
I don't think so.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
S Murphy?
S or D Murphy.
24 15:29:08 25
26
CHAIRMAN: A
Do you know any?
I know a number of Murphys, quite a common name.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A
Somebody with whom Mr. Monahan might have been dealing at the time?
No. It could have been to do with a car, I could only hazard a guess to that.
15:29:30 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:29:30
15:29:41
121 1
MS. DILLON:
2
A
3
Q
Did you know Mr. Jack Whelan?
Did I, yes. 829
4
And did you know that Mr. Whelan carried out certain work apparently for and on behalf of Monarch Properties?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
That's right, yes. 830
Can you tell the Tribunal first of all what work Mr. Whelan carried out? He was an ex-managing partner of Murphy Buckley & Keogh, the agents that we had
8
used on the dock shopping centre, when I joined the company first. I think he
9
provided advice to Mr. Monahan and indeed to Monarch, he was involved I suppose
15:30:08 10
for three or four years and he was also involved in Prague and he was, I
11
suppose, a land dealer or one of these people that was seeking out deals.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
15:30:31 15
A
831
I think it was a man called Tom Murphy, I think. 832
Tom Murphy? I think that certainly went out of business a long time ago. It's nothing to
16 17
Who is the Murphy in Murphy Buckley Keogh?
do with the last Mr.-Q
833
18
And Mr. Whelan's function or the services he provided was the finding of land, is that right?
19
A
15:30:48 20
Q
21
A
Well finding of land and general advice I suppose. 834
Who did he give those advices to? Well to Mr. Monahan, I certainly met him on a number of occasions. He was a
22
good property person, put it that way. He seemed to have known everybody in
23
the property business.
24
Q
15:31:11 25
A
835
And did Mr. Monahan not know everybody in the property business? Well he might or mightn't but sometimes people, Jack Whelan was the sort of man
26
probably would have socialised a lot more with people in the property business
27
than Mr. Monahan did.
28
Q
29 15:31:34 30
836
And you will have seen in the brief at 8574, Mr. Glennane, a fee note that was put in by Whelan Land Use Specialists?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:31:34
15:31:53
122 1
Q
837
Which is dated April 1991 and recorded received April 1992 although it may all
2
have occurred in April 1992 but what I want to draw to your attention is the
3
subject matter of the invoice, which is services in relation to residential
4
consultancy at Cherrywood.
5
A
6
Q
7
A
Yes. 838
I presume it means he was trying to charge a fee for giving consultancy advise
8 9
on the residential land at Cherrywood. Q
15:32:06 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
839
840
Did you ever see any such written advices from Mr. Whelan? They don't have to be written advice to get advice but no.
841
Well in 1991 or 1992, there would have to be fairly substantial advices to generate a fee of 150,000 pounds, would you agree with that?
15:32:27 15
A
16
Q
I would, yes. 842
17
And they would want to relate to a very significant portion of land, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Well, it does tend to relate to value, yes. 843
15:32:44 20
And that invoice when it comes in is recorded as being circulated to Mr. Monahan and yourself?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I do. 844
It's not being circulated to Mr. Sweeney or to anybody else? Yes.
845
15:32:54 25
So the two people within the company who are deemed to have an interest in this invoice are Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mr. Dominic Glennane, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
28
15:33:14 30
And where are those advices recorded? I don't know. I don't have any record of them.
14
29
What does that mean?
So it would appear. 846
What do you know about the advices that were given or the services provided by Mr. Whelan in connection with Cherrywood?
A
Certainly, I know he spent a lot of time out at Somerton with Phil and I am sure he was probably advising him on potential buyers of the land and things www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:33:18
15:33:28
123 1
like that.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
847
Did Mr. Whelan deal directly with Mr. Monahan? Yes.
848
5
And would this have been circulated to you, Mr. Glennane, because you are the financial controller and because it's an invoice?
6
A
7
Q
Presumably, yes. 849
And presumably when you received this and you saw the amount of it and you had
8
recovered your breath from the size of it, you went and you spoke to
9
Mr. Monahan about it?
15:33:44 10
A
11
Q
I am sure I did. 850
12 13
this invoice and what it was in connection with? A
No, I don't remember having a specific conversation about that invoice. But I
14 15:34:02 15
Can you outline to the Tribunal that discussion you had with Mr. Monahan about
know that the invoice was never paid. Q
851
That may be, Mr. Glennane, but certainly Mr. Whelan was of the opinion he had
16
done 150,000 pounds worth of work in connection with the residential
17
consultancy at Cherrywood and was moved to put in an invoice for that amount?
18
A
19
Q
So it seems. 852
15:34:29 20
1992 and January of 1993 --
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 853
23
-- included in that approximately a third of the way down is Whelan land, 150,000, is that right?
24
A
15:34:39 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
That's right. 854
So this is a record of invoices that have been received, is that right? Yes.
855
Whose handwriting is that in, that document, do you know? I think it was a man called Ken Lawless I think he was an accountant at the
29 15:34:52 30
And in the schedule of Cherrywood costs at 3916 which are costs between May
time. Q
856
Was he an in-house accountant? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:34:58
15:35:06
124 1
A
2
Q
Yes he was. 857
3
Cherrywood, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 858
6
So I suggest to you in the overall figure there is 244,539, do you see that, on the total, do you see that?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 859
9
And therefore the biggest single item on that is Whelan Land Specialists at 150,000?
15:35:22 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 860
12 13
And this is single biggest expense recorded on this document in connection with
I suggest to you arising from that it must have been at some discussion, this invoice and what had been done to it?
A
My honest opinion was that the invoice was probably a try on at the time and
14
certainly it wasn't paid, it accrued in the accounts and then written back.
15:35:42 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:35:56 20
A
21
Q
861
It was never paid? No.
862
But it was certainly sent by Mr. Whelan, isn't that right? Absolutely.
863
And the person with whom Mr. Whelan dealt was Mr. Monahan? That's right.
864
22
Were you able to get any information from Mr. Monahan what Mr. Whelan had been doing in connection with Cherrywood?
23
A
24
Q
15:36:09 25
A
26
Q
No, other than giving general advice. 865
To the tune of 150,000 pounds? I said it wasn't paid so it was a grossly overcharged.
866
And at 5040, Mr. Glennane, can I show you a separate amount and this is an
27
internal --5040 -- this is an internal Monarch document which is dealing with a
28
1994 document dealing with balances with GRE and amounts due. Do you see that?
29
A
15:36:36 30
Q
Yes. 867
And you will see third from the end Jack Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan, www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:36:42
15:36:49
125 1
121,000.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 868
Yes. 869
6 A
8
Q
9
A Q
That's right. 870
Whereas the earlier claim had been for residential consultancy at Cherrywood? That's right.
871
11 12
That would suggest a separate invoice because the subject matter of this claim is introducing Dwyer Nolan, isn't that right?
7
15:37:03 10
That would suggest a figure of 100,000 plus 21,000 pounds VAT?
This would appear to be a separate matter and what this document is suggesting, is that that is is being bought from GRE, is that right?
A
I am not sure if that was ever said to GRE, having read through the brief and
13
documents in the brief, I can't find any record what was sent to GRE. I know
14
the sheet behind it was a smaller figure on it. So I don't think that they
15:37:26 15
were ever sent to GRE but certainly Mr. Whelan had had negotiations with Dwyer
16 17
Nolan the land and had got an offer from them to buy it. Q
872
18
What I would suggest was an invoice from Mr. Whelan in the sum of 100,000 plus 21,000 for VAT?
19
A
15:37:52 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:38:06 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:38:21 30
Q
Well I don't remember ever seeing an invoice for it. 873
Where did the figure of 121,000 come from? I presume he put in some sort of estimate.
874
Who would have put it in at some sort of estimate? I don't know, whoever prepared this document would know the source.
875
Well did it come from you? No, I don't think so.
876
Could it have come from Mr. Sweeney? Well it could have, yes, or a combination of the accounts department and him.
877
Could it have come from Mr. Monahan? I don't think so.
878
And in June of 1994, when information was being provided to GRE in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:38:34
15:38:47
126 1
future or upcoming costs at 5180, in June of 1994?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 879
You will have seen this in the brief where there's a reference to Mr. Lynn,
4
staff bonus 100,000 similar to J Whelan, which I would suggest is Jack Whelan
5
and what's being predicted here are future costs that will be incurred under
6
the heading zoning costs at Cherrywood, is that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 880
9
So what is being set out here is lobbying and entertaining at 10,000 and then success bonus to certain people and Mr. Lynn's is being equated to Mr. Whelan?
15:39:04 10
A
11
Q
12
A
Yes. 881
Now what had Mr. Whelan to do with lobbying or zoning in Cherrywood? I don't know that he had anything to do with it. All them we are dealing with,
13
Dwyer Nolan and all the rest. This is a letter written to GRE and the fact of
14
the matter is we were always trying to claim extra money off GRE and often
15:39:27 15
there was a constant exchange of correspondence between ourselves and GRE on
16
figures.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:39:45 20
A
21
Q
882
And Mr. Whelan was involved in Prague, is that right? That's right, yes.
883
And he was involved with Mr. Lawlor in connection with Prague, is that right? He was involved with Ambrose Kelly and whoever else was in Prague, yes.
884
22
And he ultimately instituted proceedings apparently against Monarch Properties for fees due to him?
23
A
24
Q
15:39:58 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:40:08 30
Q
That's right, yes. 885
And were those proceedings settled? As far as I know.
886
Do you know how much money Mr. Whelan was paid? I was a feeling it was the order of 10 or 20,000.
887
Do you know, Mr. Glennane? I don't.
888
Were you involved in the settlement? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:40:09
15:40:25
127 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
I was, yes. 889
And can you tell the Tribunal how much Mr. Whelan got? To the best of my recollection, it was between 10 and 20,000.
890
5
Would it be fair to describe Mr. Whelan's function as being one that reported directly to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
15:40:38 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
He certain had a lot of contact with him, yes. 891
Who else did he have contact with? Myself and Mr. Sweeney.
892
Just in relation to yourself, what did he have contact with you about? About various properties.
893
What properties would they have been? I think probably on Cherrywood, all the properties that we had.
894
Did he advise on all of -I remember him negotiating a letting of a shop in Dundalk for us. There was a
15:41:01 15
period of two or three years where he was fairly involved with the company.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
895
And was it -And would have known most of the property that we were dealing with.
896
And was Mr. Whelan paid other monies? Yes, for a period he was paid, I think, 300 pounds per week and he was also
15:41:22 20
paid 3,000 in, if you -- if you actually like to look up 3764, you see it
21
there.
22
Q
23
A
897
This is Whelan Land Specialists. You will see ... it is reversed there, having paid him 3,000 we end up with a
24
credit for 147,000.
15:41:50 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:41:57 30
A
898
That's arising from the invoice for 150,000 plus VAT? Yes.
899
So you paid him 3,000 off that effectively. No not off that, we paid him 3,000.
900
On the documents you credit it off that, is that right? Off his account, yes. If you look at 4896 it's a Monarch Services Trial www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:42:12
15:42:26
128 1
Balance, you see half way down there is a credit note -- a credit balance for
2
147,000. 150 minus the three. So the point I am making the 150 was charged
3
in, I think it was 1991 but actually credited back in 1993.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
15:42:39 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
901
It was never paid? Exactly.
902
But the point about it is, is that it was charged? It was attempting to be charged, yes.
903
But you refused to pay Mr. Whelan, is that right? We refused to pay 150.
904
You didn't refuse to pay Mr. Lawlor? It was an awful lot less than 150,000.
905
Oh I see, is it the amount? No, Mr. Whelan provided services, we ended up probably paying him 20 or 30,000.
906
15:42:58 15
Mr. Whelan provided services for which he charged 150,000 pounds out of which you paid 3,000 pounds?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:43:14 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
15:43:34 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:43:51 30
A
I don't think the 3,000 relates to the 150,000. 907
If you look at 3764? It's on the same account because that was his account.
908
There's only one invoice, is that right? There seems to be two, 1,000 and 2,000.
909
Are they invoices? I am not sure actually.
910
I suggest to you they are payments, is that right? They are not invoices? Yes, sorry.
911
So there's only one invoice? The 150.
912
That's right. Off which a sum of 3,000 is paid in two portions, two in one? Well, I don't think the two in one related to the 150.
913
What did they relate to then, Mr. Glennane, if they didn't relate to the 150? He was certainly providing services and working with us for a period of two or www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:43:55
15:44:26
129 1
three years. As I said to you, we also paid him a number of payments of, I
2
think, 300 pounds per week at one stage and I mean eventually when I think he
3
stopped doing any work for the company, he then came back and claimed, he
4
claimed a fee relative to the Dwyer Nolan and we refuted it and then we settled
5
it for some small amount.
6
Q
7
A
914
It was normal to pay a bonus at Christmas to the staff if we could afford it,
8 9
Was it the normal practice in Monarch to pay a success fee or a bonus?
yes. Q
915
15:44:44 10
If we look at the bonus at 5180 that's being discussed or being indicated in 1994, this is what GRE are being told by Monarch, these are the staff or
11
success bonuses that might have to be paid or these are the zoning costs that
12
will be incurred, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's right, yes. 916
15:45:02 15
And the figure for Mr. Lynn is 100,000 pounds, Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lafferty and then others and we have already seen in relation to the 1.8 million, there's a
16
disbursement among let's say the top echelon in Monarch, isn't that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
Well, I wouldn't say the top echelon. 917
Who is higher than yourself, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Monahan? No there wasn't, no I think there people higher than Tom, God rest him, and Ann
15:45:22 20
Gosling.
21
Q
22
A
918
Were there also a purchase of a house for Mr. Lynn? There was a purchase of I think a house by Cherrywood Properties Limited but it
23
was actually purchased originally by Richard Lynn and for some reason
24
Mr. Monahan didn't want him to own the house or whatever so I think the company
15:45:42 25
purchased it and I think either rented it to him or certainly he lived in it.
26
Q
27
A
919
Mmm. At 2753 please. Sorry, just to go back to the GRE, I think I think it's quite clear from GRE's
28
letter they refuted those items.
29
Q
15:46:06 30
A
920
And that, I suggest to you, that's not the point at all? It is the point. 8764, you will see there that it's refuted by them, they say www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:46:14
15:46:37
130 1 2
it's an internal matter for Monarch. Q
921
And we will be coming to deal with all of those in detail, Mr. Glennane, but
3
the important point about it is Monarch were prepared to say that's what zoning
4
would cost?
5
A
6
Q
We were prepared to make a claim for GRE for that sort of money. 922
7
Yes because I think you said a little while ago to the Tribunal members that GRE often made claims -- that Monarch often made claims to GRE?
8
A
9
Q
15:46:46 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That's right, yes. 923
That were in excess of what they really wanted to get? That's right.
924
And was that the habitual practice in Monarch? It's the position with GRE, they were an institution, they always wanted to
13
know, preferably a year in advance what their commitments were going to be and
14
naturally when you are trying to provide commitments to somebody, you tend to
15:47:09 15
overstate it rather than understate it. That document 5180 is dated the 20th
16
June 1994 which is I think after the, after all of the zoning votes as I recall
17
it.
18 19 15:47:33 20
Q
925
I don't think that's precisely accurate but we will be looking at that tomorrow. If we look at Mr. Lynn's house and what, in fact, was said in your disclosure letter to Century Holdings Limited, this is the Cherrywood
21
Properties Limited disclosure letter at 2753 and in looking at the specific
22
disclosures, it's recorded that the assets of the company include a property
23
provided for in the balance sheet, 13 Millstead, Blanchardstown, "It was bought
24
personally by Richard Lynn and acquired from him by the company. The subject
15:47:56 25
is subject to loan and charge payable to the ICC involving monthly repayments
26
of capital and interest by standing order from the company's bank account.
27
Richard Lynn resides in the property and claims equitable ownership on the
28
property on the basis of an alleged agreement with P Monaghan. His property is
29
taken subject to such residence and claim of entitlement by Mr. Lynn if any in
15:48:16 30
respect of and all the furniture is of the property of Mr. Lynn." www.pcr.ie Day 659
Do you see
15:48:20
15:48:27
131 1
that?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 926
4
That suggests there was an arrangement made between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lynn in the first instance, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
I think the arrangement was made about moving into that house, yes. 927
If this is an accurate disclosure, what appears to have occurred is the
7
property was bought by Mr. Lynn and subsequently purchased by Cherrywood
8
Properties?
9 15:48:42 10
A Q
That's right, yes. 928
11
were made to the ICC by Cherrywood Properties, is that right?
12
A
13
Q
That's right. 929
14 A
16
Q
17
A
That's what it records. 930
That would suggest Mr. Lynn had made a separate arrangement with Mr. Monahan? I don't think it was any arrangement, what it means that there was a dispute
18
between him and Mr. Monahan about the property. Q
931
15:49:17 20
21
And Mr. Lynn apparently claimed equitable ownership on the company on the basis of an agreement with Mr. Monahan?
15:48:59 15
19
And then Mr. Lynn was allowed to reside the property report, the repayments
Are you saying Mr. Monahan's position was he had never agreed that Mr. Lynn would continue to have an interest in the property?
A
Yes, that's what it reads to me, would be my understanding of it, yes. It was
22
a matter of some friction, I think, between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Monahan.
23
Q
24
A
932
And what ultimately happened? Well, I understand Mr. Lynn bought the property after some time, some time
15:49:41 25
after this.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:49:58 30
Q
933
Was Mr. Lynn paid a success fee in connection with the zoning of Cherrywood? No. Not that I am aware of, no.
934
He was not paid a success fee? Not that I can recall, no.
935
At 7813 please. This is a letter of February 1994 and you will remember, www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:50:09
15:50:26
132 1
Mr. Glennane, that the critical zoning was the 11th November 1993?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 936
And Mr. Martin Baker is talking about the bonus arrangement for Mr. Lynn and he
4
says "As you know, we agreed we should pay a bonus of 15,000 to Richard as and
5
when he achieved a successful rezoning on the above land. I understand from
6
Anthony Caplin that while we paid the relevant invoice for our 50 percent of
7
this figure, to date Richard Lynn has only received 3,000 pounds. As we paid
8
our 7,500 pounds on the 23rd December last, I should be grateful for your
9
comments on why this bonus has not been paid."
15:50:46 10
Would that suggest that there
was an agreement about a bonus payment to Mr. Lynn?
11
A
12
Q
It would appear to suggest that, yes. 937
And it would appear from a document that is dated the 1st September 1993 at
13
4347 that GRE agreed, it's noted in handwriting at the bottom of that document,
14
"R Lynn, 15,000" and the total of that amount comes to 70,500 pounds and by
15:51:16 15
letter of the 28th September 1993 at 4392, GRE confirm at paragraph 4 under the
16
heading Monarch Project Management Fee "As per your appendix A attached to your
17
letter of the 22nd September but with the addition of a success fee for R Lynn
18
of 15,000 pounds, this will now give a total of 70,500" and it's noted as
19
billed and paid."
15:51:47 20
And that 70,500 was apparently paid so that would suggest
it was agreed that Mr. Lynn would receive a 15,000 pounds success fee, half of
21
which was to be funded by GRE and which, in fact, their half was paid in
22
December 1993, is that right?
23
A
24
Q
15:52:02 25
A
That's right. 938
So were you aware of that arrangement, Mr. Glennane? I am sure I was. I am sure I would have seen copies of all this correspondence
26
but I don't think there's any commitment on our part to pay half of it, to pay
27
7,500 but obviously we convinced GRE to pay 7,500.
28
Q
29 15:52:32 30
939
Would that not have been on the basis that GRE might have been under the misapprehension you were going to pay the other 7,500?
A
Yes, that's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:52:33
15:52:42
133 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
940
But you weren't going to pay the other 7,500. I certainly don't think we did anyway.
941
And would that have been standard practice in Monarch? What would be standard practice?
942
That kind of carry on, where you tell GRE that the fee is 15,000, and Mr Lynn
6
is going to get 15,000, they pay 7,500 and you keep the other 7,500 for
7
Monarch?
8
A
9
Q
15:52:58 10
We would have sorted it out with Mr. Lynn amicably. 943
A
How did you sort this out with Mr. Lynn? My recollection is at the time Mr. Lynn was spending a lot of time studying law
11
and was missing from the office for long periods. I felt we had covered our
12
share, if you like, by paying his fees in Blackhall Place and continuing to pay
13
his salary while he was out of the office.
14
Q
15:53:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
944
I think so, yes. 945
And did you make that agreement with Mr. Lynn? I think so, yes, probably, when you say make that agreement, he accepted it, I
18 19
Did you agree that with Mr. Lynn?
think. I'm not necessarily saying he was happy about it but he accepted it. Q
946
15:53:42 20
When you came to make a claim against GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop's fees, did the same apply?
21
A
22
Q
In what sense? 947
23
That you had paid out money to Mr. Dunlop in advance of putting in any invoices to GRE and then when you got paid by GRE, you kept the money?
24
A
15:53:56 25
Q
If we paid it out, yes, we kept the money, of course, yes. 948
Would you have seen, for example, any difficulty with creating an invoice with
26
Mr. Dunlop, let's say for a success fee, for the sole purpose of recovering
27
money from GRE even though you weren't going to pay a success fee to
28
Mr. Dunlop?
29
A
15:54:19 30
Q
My understanding was Mr. Dunlop was paid a success fee. 949
Leaving that aside for a moment. That wasn't what I asked you. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:54:20
15:54:31
134 1
A
I don't think we would have artificially generated an invoice from somebody if
2
that's what you are suggesting.
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
950
You would never have artificially generated an invoice? I don't think so, no.
951
When you say you wouldn't have artificially have generated an invoice, are you
6
saying you wouldn't have prepared an invoice purporting to come from a third
7
party?
8
A
9
Q
Certainly not. 952
15:54:44 10
But you would have had no difficulty in creating a Monarch invoice which would have included, for example, 15,000 pounds success fee to Richard Lynn, being
11
paid half of that and either keeping it or not paying the other half to
12
Mr. Lynn?
13
A
14
Q
15:54:57 15
A
16
Q
Well -953
Is that right? Well I think we'd certainly have paid the half to him that we got from GRE.
954
17
According to the letter from GRE you hadn't, if I am understanding the letter correctly?
18
A
19
Q
In February 1994. 955
15:55:16 20
Yes, in 7813, the letter in February. They said they had paid 7,500 on the 23rd December 1993 and their information was that by February 1994, he had only
21
got 3,000?
22
A
23
Q
That's what they are saying, yes. 956
24
So would that not suggest to you even though Monarch had been paid the 50 percent due to Mr. Lynn in December of 1993, they had only paid Mr. Lynn 3,000
15:55:32 25
pounds?
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:55:44 30
A
That's what it's saying, yes. 957
Would that mean that Monarch would have kept the other 4,500 pounds? Certainly until February, yes.
958
And after that February, did you pay Mr. Lynn? I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:55:45
15:56:02
135 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
959
Who was the person in Monarch who was responsible for policing the invoices? What do you mean policing the invoices?
960
4
Well, making sure that all the invoices were in order and everything was ready and could be forwarded on to GRE?
5
A
6
Q
It was a combination of the accounts department and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney. 961
7
And would it be fair to that insofar as third party costs were concerned, GRE would not pay unless they got an invoice with back-up documentation?
8
A
9
Q
That's right. 962
15:56:29 10
And when it came say, for example, to political donations or matters such as that sort, GRE, if there wasn't an invoice or back-up documentation, were
11
likely to balk or refuse to pay?
12
A
13
Q
I would think yes. 963
14
And would it have been well known within Monarch that in order to receive payments from GRE, it was necessary that back-up documentation, including
15:56:39 15
invoices, be available?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
If possible, yes. 964
When was the first time that you met Mr. Dunlop? I think I remember meeting him with Mr. Monahan in Noel Smyth's office some
19
years ago in connection with Blanchardstown actually.
15:57:00 20
Q
21
A
965
And what were you meeting Mr. Dunlop about Blanchardstown for? Well Mr. Monahan was very keen to get involved in Blanchardstown with Green
22
Property Company and Mr. Dunlop I think knew or was friends with John Corcoran
23
who was the MD of Green Properties and I think we had a meeting with him and he
24
said that he would speak to John Corcoran and see could we get together with
15:57:31 25
him.
26
Q
27
A
966
No, I don't think so, no. I think there was bad feeling, certainly on John
28 29 15:57:53 30
And did that happen?
Corcoran's part, I think, towards Mr. Monahan so ... Q
967
And was Mr. Dunlop brought in to try and ease the passage between Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:57:54
15:58:10
136 1
A
If I remember rightly the meeting was arranged by Noel Smyth on the basis that
2
Mr. Dunlop knew, I think he lived beside Mr. Corcoran.
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
968
Which equation, sorry? 969
970
971
A
I remember myself and Mr. Monahan meeting him, just the three of us, the meeting was, I think, arranged by Noel Smyth.
Q
972
And when Mr. Dunlop was retained by Monarch Properties and when the Tribunal first wrote to Monarch Properties asking the Monarch Properties to provide all
15:58:43 15
the information in connection with Mr. Dunlop's retention and how much money
16
had been paid, what figure did Monarch come up with, can you remember?
17
A
18
Q
I think 52 and a half thousand. 973
19
Can you indicate from what source Monarch Property obtained their information that the amount that it paid to Mr. Dunlop was 52,500 pounds?
A
I think they went through all the cheques payments sheets and tried to make a
21
list of them. And apparently missed three payments, as I understand it.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:59:24 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
16:00:21 30
According to your diary it look place at his office but I'm asking who brought Mr. Dunlop to the meeting?
14
15:59:04 20
It was Noel Smyth? I think so, the meeting took place at his office.
12 13
Into that meeting? No, I think it was Noel Smyth.
15:58:22 10
11
Was it Mr. Monahan who brought Mr. Dunlop into the equation?
974
Who actually carried out the exercise, can you remember? I certainly did part of it with one of my assistants.
975
And what payments did you miss? We missed I think the first two, the 15 and 10. And some other one after that.
976
Did you also miss the 10,000 pounds that ultimately Mr. Lawlor received? I am not sure which one I missed now, I will have it here in a second for you.
977
Take your time. I don't seem to have it, sorry. But I, we were 52, I think maybe seven and a half we missed, if I remember correctly. There were two payments of 7 and a www.pcr.ie Day 659
16:00:28
16:00:35
137 1
half.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
978
And you missed one of those? I think so, yes.
979
I propose to start to take you through the payments to Mr. Dunlop, I don't know whether --
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Well it might be a good time to break now this evening.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
I don't mind.
16:00:40 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
We will break until half ten tomorrow.
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
14 16:00:59 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, WEDNESDAY, 28TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.30 A.M.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
09:49:36
10:36:11
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
28TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
Mr. Glennane, please.
9 10:36:18 10
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE AS FOLLOWS:
11 12 13 14 10:36:38 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Glennane.
Good morning, Chairman.
16 17
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Glennane
18
A.
Good morning.
19
Q. 1
I propose to start by taking you through the invoices and the payments to Mr.
10:36:47 20
Dunlop?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 2
If I could have 4051, please and what I propose to do, just so that you're
23
clear about it, I propose first of all to deal separately with the payments by
24
Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
10:37:01 25
26
A.
Right.
Q. 3
And then I propose to deal with Monarch's attempts to seek recovery of those
27
payments from GRE?
28
A.
Okay, yeah.
29
Q. 4
Fine.
A.
Yes.
10:37:12 30
That's fine.
So if we look first of all at 4051.?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:37:13
10:37:28
2 1
Q. 5
2
And this is a remittance advice dated the 11th of March 1993.
Seeking or
enclosing a cheque in the sum of 15,000 pounds for Mr. Frank Dunlop?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 6
Now, do you accept that there's no invoice in relation to that?
5
A.
Yes, I do, yeah, at that stage, yes.
6
Q. 7
Yes.
7
A.
Well not specifically that amount but there are later invoices.
8
Q. 8
And you are aware that the Tribunal has been told that any payments would have
9 10:37:47 10
And do you say then that there is a later invoice that covers this?
been supported by invoice or other documentation? A.
I think I said actually most payments.
11
Q. 9
Okay.
12
A.
Not all payments, no.
13
Q. 10
Right.?
14
A.
Sorry, they were supported afterwards but at the time if you didn't have an
10:38:00 15
invoice and you wanted to pay somebody you'd pay them but the accounts
16 17
But not all payments?
department would then look for the invoice afterwards. Q. 11
And can you identify please for the Tribunal the invoice that was sought
18
afterwards in connection with this payment of 15,000 pounds on the 11th of
19
March 1993?
10:38:14 20
A.
I don't think there was one sought for that particular amount.
There is a
21
reference later on to Pat Caslin who was our financial controller not looking
22
for invoices.
23
Q. 12
24
Yes.
But there is there is no correspondence passing between Monarch
Properties and Mr. Dunlop seeking invoices in connection with this payment,
10:38:32 25
isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 13
I think that the reference to which you make, and we'll come on to it, refers
28 29 10:38:45 30
to Mr. Caslin seeking back up invoices to support a claim to GRE? A.
No, I think at some stage there is a reference to, they are saying that there was a balance on his account of 42,000 or something. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:38:48
10:38:59
3 1
Q. 14
Yes?
2
A.
And we needed invoices.
3
Q. 15
Yes.
4
And I think that that was in connection with an invoice that had been
furnished to GRE?
5
A.
I'm not sure actually.
6
Q. 16
Yes.
At 4390. We'll just be clear about it, Mr. Glennane.
I think the
7
matter to which you refer is contained there beside the reference No. 2068
8
Frank Dunlop on page 4390.
9
Do you see that?
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 17
And you will note what's being discussed there is invoice 2068?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 18
And invoice 2068 was a claim by Monarch Properties against GRE in respect of a
10:39:16 10
13 14 10:39:28 15
payment against Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 19
In fact what's being discussed there is looking for backup for an invoice that
16
had been provided to GRE?
17
A.
That's right.
18
Q. 20
In connection with Mr. Dunlop's payments, isn't that right?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 21
And what this document notes is that as of the 27th of September 1993 that
10:39:38 20
21
there was only one invoice for 12,100 pounds although payments of 42,500 had
22
been made?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 22
Isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 23
So that when you suggested earlier on that that documentation which is
10:39:53 25
26 27
presently on screen at page 4390 might have had something to do with 4091 I
28
suggest that you are probably mistaken?
29 10:40:09 30
A.
I presume that payment is included in the 42,500.
Q. 24
Yes.
But what steps were taken to seek the invoices? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:40:12
10:40:24
4 1
A.
Well that's, that appears to be the first step other than the one for 12,100.
2
Q. 25
Are you aware of any other step that was taken to seek an invoice in connection
3
with the --
4
A.
Not up to then, no.
5
Q. 26
At 4051, please, which is the first payment to Mr. Dunlop, you accept that was
6
a payment that was made without invoice?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 27
And without any supporting documentation?
9
A.
I don't know but there may be some sort of memo with it, I don't know.
Q. 28
Are you aware of the existence of any such document?
11
A.
I'm not, no, but obviously somebody requested that a cheque be drawn.
12
Q. 29
Yes.
13
A.
Not at that stage, no.
14
Q. 30
Who entered into the agreement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I think Mr. Sweeney probably.
16
Q. 31
Right.
17
A.
I had some communication.
18
Q. 32
Right.
19
A.
In '95 I think yes, yeah.
Q. 33
Were you aware of the fact that prior to the introduction of Mr. Dunlop that
10:40:37 10
10:40:58 15
10:41:11 20
Were you privy to the agreement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop?
Did you subsequently have communication with Mr. Dunlop yourself?
And I think that took place later?
21
another PR firm, in fact two other PR firms, had been retained by Monarch
22
Properties.
23
A.
Yes, yes.
24
Q. 34
And that Mr. Bill O'Herlihy had been retained up to May of 1992?
A.
That's right, yes.
26
Q. 35
And he traded as, I think, Public Relations of Ireland, isn't that right?
27
A.
PRI.
28
Q. 36
And I think independently of that you also retained Pembroke PR Limited?
29
A.
Yes, they were our general PR company.
Q. 37
Yes.
10:41:28 25
10:41:42 30
I wanted to ask you about that.
Throughout Mr. Dunlop's tenure with
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:41:47
10:41:59
5 1
Monarch you continued to retain Pembroke PR Limited, isn't that right?
2
A.
Monarch did, yes.
3
Q. 38
Yes, Monarch did.
4 5
Can you explain to the Tribunal the necessity for two
public relations firms? A.
6
Well I think Pembroke PR were, had been our PR company for a few years before that but it wasn't unusual to bring in a second firm or an advertising agency.
7
Q. 39
Uh-huh?
8
A.
We have done that in openings like The Square and Nutgrove and other things
9 10:42:17 10
like that. Q. 40
And you would bring in somebody with specialist experience?
11
A.
Specialist knowledge.
12
Q. 41
What specialist experience or specialist knowledge did Mr. Dunlop have?
13
A.
Well I assumed that he had in -- in relation to Cherrywood.
14
bring him in so I can't say what was his thought at the time.
10:42:37 15
I assume it was
thought he had some, he had some contribution to make to this general, to the
16 17
I mean, I didn't
Cherrywood. Q. 42
The problem that existed since May of 1992 in connection with Cherrywood was
18
the zoning, isn't that right? And the density on the residential density isn't
19
that right?
10:42:54 20
21
A.
Yes, well I don't know, yeah, yes.
Q. 43
Mr. Dunlop was brought in to assist in rectifying what Monarch perceived to be
22
a problem?
23
A.
Well I'm not sure.
24
Q. 44
You're not saying it was?
A.
An unsatisfactory conclusion.
26
Q. 45
You approved payments of 85,000 to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
27
A.
I approved?
28
Q. 46
Yeah?
29
A.
I don't know.
Q. 47
Well you signed the cheques?
10:43:07 25
10:43:15 30
You're saying it was a problem.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:43:16
10:43:24
6 1
A.
Well I did, I authorised them, yes.
2
Q. 48
Okay.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 49
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I am.
6
Q. 50
And you have a responsibility to the shareholders including yourself and to the
7 8
auditors, isn't that right? A.
9 10:43:36 10
Q. 51
10:43:55 15
16
And I presume in that position, you would know why somebody was being retained and somebody was being paid such significant amounts of money?
A.
13 14
Well I don't have responsibility to the auditors but yes I have responsibility for the company.
11 12
You are the chief financial controller of the company?
Well I would know that they were doing some work in a general sort of a way. There was a lot of consultants employed in various projects over the years.
Q. 52
Uh-huh?
A.
You wouldn't necessarily know exactly what they were all doing.
Q. 53
You would have known that you had a public relations firm and as you have
17
already told the Tribunal Mr. Dunlop would have been brought in because of some
18
added value or added expertise that he was bringing to the situation?
19 10:44:13 20
A.
The same with Mr. O'Herlihy, yes.
Q. 54
Would you like to outline to the Tribunal what was the belief in Monarch that
21 22
Mr. Dunlop could bring? What special expertise did Mr. Dunlop have? A.
Well I presume he had -- he knew his way around the political system, if that's
23
the right way to put it.
24
taken by any group of people to employ him.
10:44:34 25
10:44:52 30
And I
presume it was felt he could make some contribution. Q. 55
28 29
My recollection is that I was
actually -- I think Mr. Monahan arranged for him to meet Eddie Sweeney.
26 27
That's the only -- I don't remember a decision being
And do you know who recommended to Mr. Monahan that Mr. Dunlop should be retained?
A.
I don't, no.
Q. 56
Do you know whether the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor had any input into recommending Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:44:56
10:45:07
7 1
that Mr. Dunlop's services be retained?
2
A.
I don't know that, no.
3
Q. 57
What special expertise could Mr. Dunlop have brought to increasing the density
4 5
or assisting in the rezoning of the Monarch Lands at Cherrywood? A.
Well I assume he would have -- he would have known other councillors and had
6
some, would have known the best way to put forward the case.
7
PR firm is doing.
8
Q. 58
And what was the other PR firm doing that you had retained?
9
A.
Well they were just general.
10:45:32 10
Cherrywood.
That's what any
They weren't doing anything probably in
They were a general PR retainer, which you have all of the time.
11
Q. 59
Yes?
12
A.
If you wanted something put into the papers you rang them.
Or if there was
13
adverse stories about you you rang them or they were actually a buffer between
14
journalists and ourselves.
10:45:46 15
16
If journalists -- instead of ringing you they'd
ring the PR firm. Q. 60
So may the Tribunal take it then Monarch in deciding to retain Mr. Dunlop were
17
satisfied in the first instance that their then existing public relations
18
company didn't have the special expertise needed to assist them in the rezoning
19
and density changes in the Cherrywood Lands?
10:46:03 20
21
A.
Yeah, I think would with think so, yes.
Q. 61
And equally, Monarch were satisfied either through Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney
22
that Mr. Frank Dunlop did have that expertise?
23
A.
Yeah, obviously, yes.
Yes, he had some expertise relevant.
24
Q. 62
If we could have page 4133.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Could I have 4062, please.
10:46:32 25
26
This is the second payment Mr. Glennane, that was made to Mr. Dunlop.
27
sum of 10,000 pounds on the 12th of March 1993.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 63
And you agree that there's no invoice in connection with that payment?
A.
That's right, yes.
10:46:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
In the
10:46:46
10:46:59
8 1
Q. 64
2
Right so there are two payments totalling 25,000 pounds that are paid to Mr. Dunlop without any invoice?
3
A.
Well I'm not sure of that invoice that flashed up there a minute ago.
4
Q. 65
I'm coming to that next.
5
these payments?
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 66
It's not if I say so.
8 9 10:47:11 10
It's not an invoice in connection with either of
Well if you say so, yeah. Are you aware from the documentation that Monarch has
supplied to the Tribunal whether there in fact exists an invoice -A.
No, I'm not, no.
Q. 67
That would mean that that's the second payment that was made to Mr. Dunlop
11
without the benefit of an invoice?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 68
There is -- so that by the 12th of March '93 Mr. Dunlop has been paid 25,000
14 10:47:25 15
16
pounds? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 69
And know the 10th of April 1993 there is an invoice from Mr. Dunlop.
17
At 4133.
Now, this invoice is not in fact paid, isn't that the position?
18
A.
Well it seems to say on it that it's paid the 1st of June but ...
19
Q. 70
The 1st of June 1993.
A.
Yes, yeah.
21
Q. 71
Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 72
To Mr. Dunlop dated the 1st of June 1993 that's been provided to the Tribunal,
10:47:51 20
24 10:48:00 25
26
There's no payment, isn't that right?
isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 73
And this is a document you will see, and I'll come to deal with it again
27
later, but it is a document that is certified by Mr. Pat Caslin?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 74
To GRE as being a true copy of the original?
A.
That's right, yeah.
10:48:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:48:15
10:48:30
9 1
Q. 75
2
And it's stamped paid 1st of June 1993.
And it's sent to GRE in support of a
claim for payment of Mr. Dunlop's invoices isn't that right?
3
A.
So I believe, yeah.
4
Q. 76
But there is in fact no evidence that the invoice was in fact paid by Monarch
5
Properties, isn't that right?
6
A.
Well not in that specific sum.
7
Q. 77
There is no evidence that a payment of 12,100 pounds was paid by Monarch
8 9 10:48:46 10
Properties Limited to Mr. Dunlop. A.
Yeah, in that specific sum, yes.
Q. 78
Yes.
Isn't that the position?
And I'll come back to deal with that when I come to deal with the GRE
11
matter.
12
invoice dated 19th of May 1993 apparently. 4204.
13
the sum of 15,000 pounds.
14 10:49:11 15
The third payment that was made to Mr. Dunlop was on foot of an Now, this is an invoice in
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
And I draw to your attention that the invoice is marked paid with thanks for
16
VAT purposes only.
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yeah, I do, yes.
18
Q. 80
Is that the invoice that would issue after receipt of payment?
19
A.
Well it looks like it says paid with thanks, presumably it had been paid.
Q. 81
So this is a retrospective invoice, if I can put it like that, Mr. Glennane?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 82
Yes?
23
A.
And 17th of September.
24
Q. 83
And we'll come to those payments in a moment.
10:49:32 20
10:49:50 25
It says somebody's written on it paid 19th of May.
Dunlop on the document.
26
That's a note made by Mr.
What I'm drawing your attention to are the words
"paid with thanks for VAT purposes only?"
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 84
And I'm suggesting to you that this was an invoice that was raised after the
29 10:50:02 30
payments had been made? A.
That's right, yeah.
Well that was normal procedure.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Normally people would
10:50:14
10:50:24
10 1
say this is not a VAT invoice it's a request for payment.
2
issuing that VAT invoice until after they are paid.
3
Q. 85
4
They tried to avoid
And would you agree that Monarch that Monarch had not discovered any other invoice in connection this payment other than the invoice at page 4204?
5
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
6
Q. 86
If that is correct, it follows does it not, Mr. Glennane , that this is a third
7
payment that's made to Mr. Dunlop without the benefit of any invoice?
8
A.
Sorry, which payment are you talking about?
9
Q. 87
The one that's on screen.
A.
I don't know if that relates to the first payment of the 15,000 in March.
Q. 88
Are you suggesting that this invoice dated the 19th of May 1993 relates to a
10:50:42 10
11 12
At 4204.
The one for 15,000 pounds?
payment made by Monarch Properties in March of 1993?
13
A.
It could have presumably, yes.
14
Q. 89
Well I suggest to you that you are completely incorrect because you will see at
10:51:06 15
page 4277 a cheque in the sum of 7,500 pounds on the 1st of the 7th '93.
16
Do
you see that?
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 90
And do you see also a second remittance slip at 4366? Dated the 17th of the
19 10:51:32 20
21
9th '93 in the sum of 7,500 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 91
And do you see behind that at 4367.
22
A cheque for 7,500 pounds to Mr. Dunlop
signed by yourself?
23
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
24
Q. 92
And bearing in mind both of those dates.
10:51:49 25
4204.
26
If you go back to the invoice at
And I draw to your attention Mr. Dunlop's note at the top paid "19th of
the 5th, 17th of the 9th" do you see that?
27
A.
I do, yes.
28
Q. 93
And what apparently is the position and what I understand you through your
29 10:52:13 30
solicitors have agreed.
Is that this invoice -- or sorry, this sum of 15,000
pounds was paid in two payments, each of 7,500 pounds? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:52:19
10:52:27
11 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 94
Isn't that the position?
3
A.
Well I don't understand then why it would say on the 19th of May 'paid with
4 5
thanks' if it hadn't been paid. Q. 95
The logical explanation for it is that the invoice did not issue on the 19th of
6
May, '93, Mr. Glennane, as you well know.
It's an invoice issued only after
7
Mr. Dunlop had been paid the 15,000 pounds?
8
A.
Oh, I see.
9
Q. 96
Isn't that the logical answer?
A.
It's an answer, yes.
11
Q. 97
Well what is --
12
A.
A logical answer, yes.
13
Q. 98
Would you like to suggest any other answer Mr. Glennane?
14
A.
No, no.
Q. 99
That then would be the third payment to Mr. Dunlop without the benefit of any
10:52:44 10
10:52:55 15
16
But I'd -- go on anyway, yeah.
invoice, isn't that the position?
17
A.
Sorry, which payment are you talking about?
18
Q. 100
The one of 15,000 pounds that's paid by way of two cheques of 7,500 pounds
19 10:53:09 20
each? A.
There was one paid on the 26th of May for 10,000 pounds as well.
21
Q. 101
We're going to come to that?
22
A.
That's before July.
23
Q. 102
This invoice, Mr. Glennane, as you well know, is dated the 19th of May 1993.?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 103
And the payments that are made in connection with that invoice are the payment
10:53:23 25
26
of the 1st of the 7th '93.
At 4277.
27 28
And the payment of the 17th of the 9th '93 at 4366.
29 10:53:48 30
Do you see that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:53:49
10:54:04
12 1
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
2
Q. 104
And they are the two payments that are made that deal with the invoice that is
3 4
dated the 19th of May 1993. A.
5 6
Yes.
Isn't that right?
Well I -- it's only right because you're telling me so.
I don't know if it's
right or not or according to Mr. Dunlop's annotation that's what we paid. Q. 105
7
Can I -- on the 14th of September 1993. entry in your diary for Mr. Dunlop.
At 4364, Mr. Glennane.
You have an
Do you see that?
8
A.
Sorry, ...
9
Q. 106
Do you see the 14th of September 1993 E S re Cherrywood Dunlop?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
11
Q. 107
Now, did you have a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 14th of September 1993?
12
A.
I don't recall if I had or not.
10:54:44 10
13 14
It doesn't sound like I had.
It sounds more
like I had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney about Mr. Dunlop. Q. 108
10:55:04 15
And isn't it likely and I suggest to you that that meeting might have been about Mr. Dunlop's fees?
16
A.
It might have been, yes.
17
Q. 109
Because on the 17th of September 1993, at 4366., a cheque is requisitioned in
18 19
the sum of 17, 500 pounds, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 110
That cheque at 4367 is signed by you?
21
A.
That's right, yeah.
22
Q. 111
And that cheque is attributed by Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Dunlop's auditors as being
10:55:22 20
23
half the payment in connection with the 15,000 pounds on the invoice of the
24
19th of May 1993?
10:55:41 25
26
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 112
Yes.
Well that's, yeah, that's up to him to do that, yes.
Now, according to your solicitors, if I could have page 8581.
27 28
Just so that there is no ambiguity about this, Mr. Glennane.
29
you will remember that yesterday we looked initially at the payments that
10:56:03 30
Monarch admitted to making to Mr. Dunlop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
At 8581.
And
And the amount that Monarch
10:56:07
10:56:19
13 1
admitted to making was 52,500 pounds, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's correct, yes.
3
Q. 113
You will recollect that when this Module opened it was indicated from the
4
Tribunal's enquiries that the Tribunal believed the documentation showed that
5
Mr. Dunlop had been paid at least 85,000 pounds, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 114
And this letter of the, at 8581, of the 30th of May 2006 states as follows.
8
We refer to previous correspondence and in particular our client's previous
9
indications with respect to payments made to Mr. Frank Dunlop.
10:56:39 10
It appears
from a further perusal of the information it has now received from the Tribunal
11
that it should correct the total amount it believes was paid to Mr. Dunlop as
12
it would appear that same amounts to 85,000 pounds broken down as per the
13
attached sheet and our client would be grateful if you would bring this matter
14
to the attention of the Tribunal and hope that this clarifies this particular
10:56:57 15
matter?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 115
And at 8582.
18 19 10:57:05 20
21
A schedule is provided to the Tribunal. A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 116
Including two payments of the 1st of the 7th '93, 7,500 and the 17th of the 9th
22
'93, 7,500 pounds?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 117
Right.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 118
Is it the position then that when the first inquiry was made or when you were
10:57:20 25
26
Now, and that amount comes to 85,000 pounds?
27
preparing the information for the Tribunal that the documentation you looked at
28
showed only 52,500 pounds?
29 10:57:37 30
A.
Yeah, yes, yeah, obviously, yes, yeah.
Q. 119
Yes.
But you would now accept that the full amount of the payments is 85,000 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:57:41
10:57:52
14 1
pounds?
2
A.
Yes, that's right.
I prepared this document that's on the screen.
3
Q. 120
Yes.
4
A.
Well, I certainly assisted in it, yes, but, yeah.
5
Q. 121
So how did you get it so terribly wrong, Mr. Glennane?
6
A.
Well obviously the cheques payments sheet that had the 15 and the 10 on it
And you prepared the earlier document of 52,500 pounds?
7
wasn't looked at or wasn't seen or wasn't available.
8
on the one sheet.
9
Q. 122
10:58:17 10
Two of the payments were
And it appears that one of the 7,500's got missed.
So the first payment that you missed were the two payments for which there's no invoices?
11
A.
That's right, yeah, yeah.
12
Q. 123
Totalling 25,000 pounds?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 124
And then you missed one of the payments of 7,500 pounds, isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 125
And what is your explanation to the Tribunal for that?
17
A.
Well, the list at the time was prepared from the cheques payments sheets but
10:58:27 15
18
myself and another colleague, we went through all of the cheque payments sheets
19
that we could find listing all of the payments.
10:58:44 20
all of the -- any other sort of relevant payments that we were being asked
21
about.
22
Q. 126
Uh-huh?
23
A.
And obviously that sheet was missed.
24 10:59:03 25
Not just to Mr. Dunlop but
Certainly, there was no intention to
under state what Mr. Dunlop was paid or anything like that. Q. 127
And there was no intention, is that what you are saying?
26
A.
Absolutely not.
27
Q. 128
Not to disclose the fact that there were no invoices or records --
28
A.
There were invoices eventually. If you look through his account you will see
29 10:59:15 30
invoices. Q. 129
You didn't listen to the question Mr. Glennane? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:59:17
10:59:27
15 1
A.
I did, yes.
2
Q. 130
Was it an attempt to hide the fact that the first two payments to Mr. Dunlop
3
were not supported by invoices?
4
A.
No, it certainly was not no.
5
Q. 131
So far the payments to Mr. Dunlop by September 1993 amount to 40,000 pounds,
6
isn't that right?
7
A.
I think actually 50.
8
Q. 132
I think of the three payments we've looked at so far.
9 10:59:45 10
15,000.
The first payment was
The second payment was ten?
A.
Yeah, well you're excluding the one on the 26th of May for some reason.
11
Q. 133
No, I'm coming to deal with that payment next?
12
A.
All right.
13
Q. 134
I'm just saying insofar as we've dealt with these payments now?
14
A.
Okay, 40,000.
Q. 135
It's 40,000.
10:59:58 15
16
1993.
The next apparent payment to Mr. Dunlop is on the 26th of May
At 4219.
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 136
And at 4221.
19 11:00:22 20
Isn't that right?
This cheque is again signed by you, Mr. Glennane, isn't that
right? A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 137
In the sum of 10,000 pounds?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 138
And this is the payment to Mr. Dunlop, apparently, that ends up in the hands of
24 11:00:31 25
26
Mr. Liam Lawlor? A.
Yes, so it appears, yes.
Q. 139
And we looked at the documentation surrounding that yesterday.
And I think
27
subject to any correction that you appeared to accept that by virtue of what is
28
set out in the statement of Mr. and Mrs. Murphy.
29
cheque went to the benefit of Mr. Lawlor?
11:00:50 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
That the proceeds of this
11:00:51
11:01:04
16 1
Q. 140
2 3
that might have occurred? A.
4 5
But you're not in a position to understand or give any explanation as to how
It certainly wasn't given to Mr. Lawlor by Monarch.
I'm absolutely 100
percent sure of that. Q. 141
6
Well do you know whether the late Mr. Monahan might have given it to Mr. Lawlor?
7
A.
I don't believe he did.
8
Q. 142
Did you ever discuss this with Mr. Monahan?
9
A.
Sorry, discuss what?
Q. 143
This cheque?
11
A.
No, I didn't, no.
12
Q. 144
This payment?
13
A.
No, I didn't.
14
Q. 145
So how do you know whether Mr. Monahan might or might not have given it to
11:01:13 10
11:01:22 15
16
Mr. Lawlor? A.
There is absolutely no reason in the world why he would have.
If you wanted
17
to give a cheque for 10,000 to Mr. Lawlor he'd have just given it out and given
18
it to him.
19 11:01:36 20
21
Q. 146
He didn't do that in the context of the Comex cheque.
A.
That's presumably because Mr. Lawlor would have asked for it.
Q. 147
What do you presume that Mr. Lawlor would have asked for the Comex cheque.
22 23
What evidence have you that Mr. Lawlor would have asked for the Comex cheque? A.
24 11:01:52 25
Well I don't think anybody else other than him knew about Comex, from what you're talking about so.
Q. 148
26
Certainly somebody in Monarch knew about Comex, I thought we agreed that yesterday?
27
A.
Sorry, they knew about it from Mr. Lawlor presumably.
28
Q. 149
Yes.
29
A.
No, no.
Q. 150
So that person was somebody else.
11:02:03 30
But that person wasn't you?
And I think you told the Tribunal it was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:02:06
11:02:17
17 1
either Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney?
2
A.
Yeah, I would think so, yes.
3
Q. 151
And if Mr. Sweeney were to deny it was him that leaves Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
It would seem so, yes.
5
Q. 152
And here again can I ask, other than your personal opinion of what the late
6
Mr. Monahan might or might not have done, can you offer the Tribunal any reason
7
as to why this cheque might have been made out to Mr. Dunlop but might have
8
been given to Mr. Lawlor?
9
A.
Can I offer any?
Q. 153
Yeah?
11
A.
Why or why not sorry?
12
Q. 154
Other than why it is your view that Mr. Monahan wouldn't have given this
11:02:33 10
13 14
cheque? A.
11:02:44 15
crossed cheque to somebody that it has to end up in that person's account.
16 17
Certainly that was my view then and now. Q. 155
18 19 11:03:03 20
21
I believe if he would have asked anybody or he would know that if you gave a
Do you see the signature at the bottom of the --.
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 156
Do you know whose initial that is?
A.
I think it might be somebody, somebody in the account's department, I'm not sure now.
23
advice.
11:03:19 25
26
4219, please.
The signature at the bottom of the remittance advice?
22
24
Sorry.
The initial, yes.
It's not mine anyway but it's whoever made out the remittance
Q. 157
So by this stage, according to the --
A.
Normal.
Q. 158
So at this stage by the 26th of May 1993.
27
It would have been the same signature as on the ones before that. The total amount paid to Mr. Dunlop
is 50,000 pounds, is that right?
28
A.
Sorry, by what stage?
29
Q. 159
By with when this payment was made?
A.
This is the third payment that was paid before the two seven and a halves.
11:03:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:03:40
11:03:54
18 1
Q. 160
2
The two seven and a halves are paid apparently on foot of an invoice that purports to be dated 19th of May 1993?
3
A.
But they were paid in July and September.
4
Q. 161
Very good. By September 1993 Mr. Dunlop had been paid 50,000 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 162
And there is one invoice?
7
A.
Um, yes.
8
Q. 163
That is paid, isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 164
The invoice dated the 19th of May 1993, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 165
Would -- from your knowledge of the way that Monarch conducted its business,
11:04:00 10
13
would you regard it as unusual that so much money would have been paid out in
14
the name of Mr. Dunlop without supporting invoices?
11:04:23 15
A.
Well if the payment was requested by somebody, it would always be the aim to
16
have invoices.
17
reconciliation, what would have ended up then would have been apparently an
18
overpayment.
19
being done it would show that there was -- that there were invoices missing or
11:04:54 20
Because when -- whatever you were doing a creditor's
So it wasn't unusual.
When a creditor's reconciliation was
short or short and that they would always be looked for.
21
Q. 166
Yes?
22
A.
It's all shown on his account in the creditor's ledger if you want to look at
23 24
that. Q. 167
11:05:07 25
Yes, we'll come to the creditor's ledger in a moment.
Whether it was unusual
to pay out to make payments of this order and this size without the benefit of
26
a supporting invoice?
27
A.
It was -- it was slightly unusual but not completely unusual.
28
Q. 168
And I think there's an invoice dated the 2nd --
29
A.
We had a habit of making round sum payments to, say, professional people which
11:05:30 30
meant that it made it more difficult really to reconcile then afterwards. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We
11:05:35
11:05:48
19 1
did the same with our solicitors, we did the same with architects and people
2
like that.
3
Q. 169
4
And in making these round sum payments, was it intended that there would ultimately be a balancing or a reconciliation?
5
A.
That's exactly it, yes.
6
Q. 170
And the endeavour for which Mr. Dunlop was hired was the Cherrywood Lands,
7
isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
9
Q. 171
And you would have known, as would have everybody in the accounting department
11:06:00 10
of Monarch, that in order to claim back 50% of the fees paid to Mr. Dunlop
11
you'd have to have invoices for GRE?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 172
Because I think you agreed yesterday that GRE would not pay third party
14 11:06:16 15
invoices unless they were supported? A.
Third party costs unless they were supported by invoices.
16
Q. 173
Isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 174
And the next invoice is dated the 2nd of November 1993.
19
invoice, Mr. Glennane, is 15,000 pounds.
11:06:38 20
At 4633.
Now, this
And there's no element of VAT, isn't
that right?
21
A.
Yes, that's right, yes.
22
Q. 175
Why would that be?
23
A.
I don't know you'd have to -- it seems to say it refers to the provision of
24
media communications training.
11:06:51 25
I presume that that training is VAT exempt, I
don't know.
26
Q. 176
What media and communications training did Mr. Dunlop provide to Mr. Monarch?
27
A.
I don't know, I'm not aware of any that he did.
28
Q. 177
And isn't that the point?
29
A.
Yeah well, well, the point is that the onus is on the person raising an invoice
11:07:08 30
to charge VAT or not. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:07:09
11:07:30
20 1
Q. 178
2 3
received VAT inclusive invoices to conduct any query where its VAT exempt? A.
4 5
And there's no onus on the person receiving the invoice who has previously
Well not if the person making it has listed there something which is apparently regarded as VAT exempt.
Q. 179
6
Because in the recent correspondence from your solicitors they have described this sum as VAT inclusive?
7
A.
That's wrong obviously, yes.
8
Q. 180
That's wrong?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 181
That's the invoice now that you prepared at 8582.
11:07:39 10
11
You told the Tribunal a few
moments ago that you prepared this schedule?
12
A.
The schedule, yes.
13
Q. 182
And you note at the top "all amounts are VAT inclusive?"
14
A.
Well they are VAT inclusive, yes.
Q. 183
And include in that is a sum of 15,000 pounds on the 2nd of November 1993.
11:07:54 15
16
And if I could have on screen 4633 beside 8582.?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 184
Now, Mr. Glennane, which is it? VAT inclusive or VAT exempt?
19
A.
Sorry.
Q. 185
Oh, I see.
21
A.
I don't see any contradiction.
22
Q. 186
So where do you indicate on your schedule to the Tribunal that the payment of
11:08:24 20
23 24
It includes -- it included VAT but the VAT was nil. I see?
the 2nd of November 1993 is zero rated for VAT? A.
11:08:45 25
Well, we haven't indicated anything about the VAT other than that they were VAT inclusive.
26
Q. 187
I see?
27
A.
That that was the total payments made.
28
Q. 188
Included VAT?
29
A.
Yeah, yeah, included VAT, yeah, where appropriate, yeah.
Q. 189
Sorry where appropriate?
11:08:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:08:57
11:09:17
21 1
A.
Well obviously if his invoice is nil then it includes nil VAT.
2
Q. 190
It's not nil.
3
A.
Yes, well it's the same thing as far as I'm concerned.
4
Q. 191
Was this invoice ever accrued in the books as a creditor?
5
A.
Yes, it was posted to the books, yes.
6
Q. 192
No, no, I didn't ask you that.
7
It's exempt.
I asked you was it accrued in the books as a
creditor. I don't know.
8
A.
I don't think so.
9
Q. 193
Right.
A.
Well because you would only accrue a creditor at the end of the year.
11:09:30 10
Why not? And if
11
this is November '93 whatever, the year would have been May '93 to 30th of
12
April '94.
13
Q. 194
14 11:09:55 15
So it's, it falls within the year.
Are you saying that this was accrued in the books of -- was accrued as a creditor?
A.
No, I'm saying it wasn't accrued as a creditor as far as I know.
16
Q. 195
Were the others accrued as creditors, the other payments?
17
A.
Of the 30th of April? I don't know.
18
Q. 196
Was this treated as a Cherrywood cost?
19
A.
This 15,000?
Q. 197
Yes?
21
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
22
Q. 198
Yeah.
23
A.
No, well no other than whatever else he was doing for all of the money.
24
Q. 199
Right?
A.
But nothing specifically different.
Q. 200
You signed the cheque at 4634.
11:10:13 20
11:10:28 25
26 27
And you don't know what Mr. Dunlop did for this particular money?
So by this stage the cheque, I just want to
point out to you is dated the same date as the invoice?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 201
And the -- by this stage Mr. Dunlop has been paid 65,000 pounds?
A.
That's right, yes.
11:10:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:10:55
11:11:27
22 1
Q. 202
2
And I'd suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that what's happening here is this is a payment effectively of 15,000 pounds cashed to Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
The cheque, at that stage.
4
Q. 203
It's a cheque that's going to be written up in the books of Monarch.
What in
5
fact is happening by virtue of the invoice that is produced is you know when
6
you receive this invoice it's a straight payment of 15,000 pounds that there's
7
no VAT element, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, so it seems, yes.
9
Q. 204
Let's just look at the two invoices to see if we can distinguish any difference
11:11:44 10
between the earlier payment, at 4204, please.
11
Together, please.
12
Monarch; isn't that right?
13
A.
14 11:12:19 15
4633 and 4204.
And can we have 4633.
This is the same service provider to
Um, the one on the left actually has no name on it.
Assuming it's Frank
Dunlop's. Q. 205
16
Well do you want to actually go through with page 4204 whether that relates to Mr. Dunlop or not Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
Well it actually was never posted to our accounts.
18
Q. 206
The?
19
A.
The one on the left.
Q. 207
Which page No, 4204?
21
A.
Yes, 4204, yes.
22
Q. 208
Was never posted to your accounts?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 209
But looking at that invoice and looking at the second invoice, which is dated
11:12:33 20
11:12:45 25
the 2nd of November 1993.
26 27
that right? A.
28 29 11:13:01 30
They are both invoices from Mr. Frank Dunlop; is
Well so it seems.
Looking at it now, I'd have to question if we ever got that
invoice on the left, the document. Q. 210
The one page 4204?
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:13:02
11:13:14
23 1
Q. 211
You don't know whether you ever got that?
2
A.
I don't know, no.
It certainly doesn't appear in any records.
3
been signed by anybody.
4
Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 212
6
Yes.
It hasn't
You see the one on the right is signed yes,
That's a copy from build Dunlop.
The page at 4204 is provided to the
Tribunal by Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Yes, that's what I said.
8
Q. 213
Right.
9
A.
I have no record of it.
Q. 214
But you did get a document, I think, just look at the earlier invoice.
11:13:29 10
11
4133.
I have my doubts if we ever got that document.
Well so --
So if we have 4133 and we have 4633 together.?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 215
Now, this is an invoice that you accept was -- the invoice at 4133.
14 11:14:04 15
Of
You
accept was not in fact paid? A.
Sorry? 4133.
16
Q. 216
Isn't that right?
17
A.
Well it was posted to our account.
18
Q. 217
No, no, do you understand the word "paid" Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
I do. I understand when you pay things and then you get invoices you are
11:14:17 20
automatically paying, you are getting invoiced for payments you've already made
21
if that's the case.
22
& Associates.
23
Q. 218
24 11:14:35 25
26
There was no cheque ever drawn for 12,100 to Frank Dunlop
Now, what I want to draw to your attention here are Monarch retained Frank Dunlop isn't that right to carry out a job in connection with Cherrywood?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 219
Okay.
You have two invoices that are received by Monarch from Mr. Dunlop.
27
The first is an agreed fee re public affairs strategy and its implementations,
28
10,000 plus VAT 12,100?
29 11:14:52 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 220
You have a second invoice for the provision of media and communications Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:14:56
11:15:08
24 1
training of 15,000 pounds that's VAT exempt?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 221
Now, is it normal practice that the one supplier would be invoicing you on some
4
occasions inclusive of VAT and on other occasions VAT exempt?
5
A.
I presume it could be, yes, if they were carrying out different activities.
6
Q. 222
Well would you give me an example of another supplier of services to Monarch
7
who on some occasions claimed VAT and on other occasions did not claim VAT for
8
the same services.
9
A.
I can't think of any offhand but.
11:15:25 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
earlier that it could be training that Mr. Dunlop was affording Monarch.
13
invoice is dated the 2nd of November 1993.
14
A.
Mr. Glennane can I just ask you.
On that point you said That
Yes.
11:15:36 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Which is nine days short of the confirmation vote?
Yes.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:15:45 20
If that were the case would it not be more likely that the
April invoice had, had Mr. Dunlop been retained for training, surely the
21
training was coming, if that were the case, very late in the day.
22
confirmation vote --
23
A.
Yes.
Well if it had been for training.
The
Presuming it is.
24 11:16:03 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Assuming.
With Retrospect there would have been work training carried out or whatever but I don't think there was that.
28 29 11:16:13 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Dunlop I don't think has ever suggested that he ever
carried out any training Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:16:13
11:16:19
25 1
A.
I'm not aware of any training that he did.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
knowledge?
5
A.
So that really doesn't seem to have been the case.
To your
No.
6 7 8
A.
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You don't recall
No, I don't recall.
But the point I'm trying to make is that the onus is on
the person issuing an invoice to charge VAT or not to charge VAT.
11:16:31 10
11
MS. DILLON:
12
hands of Mr. Dunlop was to give him 15,000 pounds for which there was no VAT
13
liability.
14
isn't that right
11:16:48 15
A.
16
The effect of the payment on the 2nd of November 1993 in the
And therefore, in his hands could effectively be treated as cash,
I don't know why you say it could be treated as cash.
It is the same as any
other receipt.
17
Q. 223
Uh-huh?
18
A.
I mean, I don't know how you'd treat a cheque for 15,000 as cash.
19 11:17:00 20
But I
didn't. Q. 224
You cash it, Mr. Glennane, and you don't put it through your books?
21
A.
Well ...
22
Q. 225
That's how you do it?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 226
Right?
A.
But I'm in the aware of that.
Q. 227
We'll come to look at the Monarch cash payments in a few moments and that might
11:17:08 25
26
Thanks for telling me.
That's ...
27
assist you.
28
are dealt with by Monarch in relation to Mr. Dunlop.
29
1993 for whatever reason Monarch are complicit in issuing a cheque to Mr.
11:17:28 30
For the moment just looking at the two mechanisms of payment that On the 2nd of November
Dunlop for 15,000 pounds which has zero VAT element in it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that the
11:17:34
11:17:41
26 1
position?
2
A.
They issued a cheque. I wouldn't use the word complicit.
3
Q. 228
You I issued the cheque, Mr. Glennane?
4
A.
Yeah, well I signed it anyway, yes.
5
Q. 229
Well you're happy that you signed it?
6
A.
Yeah, I think I did -- I don't know if I saw the cheque or not.
7
Q. 230
There's the cheque.
8
A.
Yeah well ... yes, that's certainly my signature, yes.
9
Q. 231
And you give a cheque to Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 15,000 pounds where you have
11:18:02 10
4634.?
previously paid him VAT.
11
And on this cheque you're not paying him any VAT,
isn't that the position?
12
A.
So it seems, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 232
Notwithstanding that Mr. Dunlop is doing the same job for Monarch.
14 11:18:16 15
16
Isn't that
right? He's only hired do one thing? A.
Well he's hired to do general PR work, which covers a multitude.
Q. 233
Yes.
17
And what Mr. Dunlop is facing into is a vote in Dublin County Council on
the 11th of November 1993.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Well if you say so.
19
Q. 234
No, no, now, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Well I believe that now, yes.
Q. 235
Isn't the 11th of November 1993 the critical date for the zoning in density
11:18:32 20
21 22
changes on Monarch?
23
A.
It was one of the dates apparently, yes.
24
Q. 236
And the previous May 1992, the density on the Monarch lands had been reduced to
11:18:50 25
one house per acre?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 237
Isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 238
And in November 1993 the job facing Monarch and its PR man, Mr. Dunlop, was to
11:19:01 30
change that position in Dublin County Council, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:19:05
11:19:13
27 1
A.
Um, that's right, yes.
2
Q. 239
And that was Mr. Dunlop's job?
3
A.
Well it was part of his job, yes, yeah.
4
Q. 240
What was the rest of his job?
5
A.
Well it was to create the circumstances I suppose where people would look
6
favourably on it and in general highlight the good points and that.
7
Q. 241
To who?
8
A.
I presume to councillors and that.
9
Q. 242
Right?
A.
And I don't know who else, yes.
11
Q. 243
Who else was going to make a decision?
12
A.
Advisors to councillors or whoever else.
13
Q. 244
Who else? Who were the people, Mr. Glennane, who were going to make a decision
11:19:25 10
14 11:19:40 15
16
about the Cherrywood lands on the 11th of November 1993? A.
I assume the councillors.
Q. 245
Right.
17 18
element to Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 15,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
19 11:20:01 20
And on the 2nd of November 1993 Monarch wrote a cheque with no VAT
Yeah, well on the basis that it was VAT exempt apparently, yes.
I don't know
which came first on the day, the cheque or the invoice. Q. 246
But what is clear is that the invoice --
21
A.
What's clear is that Monarch paid 15,000 to Mr. Dunlop on the 2nd of November.
22
Q. 247
On the 2nd of November 1993?
23
A.
Put it through its books in the normal way.
24
drawing is that Monarch gave 15,000 in some under hand method to Mr. Dunlop to
11:20:21 25
26
So if the inference that you're
distribute to councillors, it's totally untrue. Q. 248
27
You say that was not a payment of 15,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop for the purpose of making payments to councillors or to anybody else?
28
A.
Absolutely, yes.
29
Q. 249
And can you afford any explanation to the Tribunal as to why Monarch would have
11:20:38 30
had no difficulty with Mr. Dunlop providing invoices, some of which are VAT Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:20:43
11:21:02
28 1 2
inclusive. A.
3 4
And this one, at page 4633, which is VAT rated at zero?
Yeah, yes, yeah.
As I said to you, the onus is on the party raising the
invoice to charge VAT or not. Q. 250
Do you accept that the effect of making the cheque out on foot of such an
5
invoice could have been to give Mr. Dunlop 15,000 pounds in cash, if he had
6
cashed the cheque?
7
A.
Well it could have been.
8
Q. 251
Uh-huh?
9
A.
But the same thing could have happened to any other cheque.
11:21:15 10
11
cash or somebody cashed the one for 10,000 so. Q. 252
12 13
If the cheques were inclusive of VAT that would create an obligation on the recipient to account for the VAT, isn't that right?
A.
14 11:21:30 15
Apparently he did
Well I assume.
There's an obligation to account for all of your invoices,
that include VAT are or not. Q. 253
16
And there is an obligation to account for all payments out that are being attributed as an expense, isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yeah.
18
Q. 254
So that for each payment or deduction or debit that's attributed to cash, one
19 11:21:48 20
21
would expect to find back up, is that right? A.
In the normal course, yeah.
Q. 255
In the normal course.
Insofar as this payment is concerned, the reality of
22
the matter is on the 2nd of November 1993 a cheque with no VAT element was made
23
out by Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
24 11:22:02 25
A.
Yes, so it seems, yes.
Q. 256
And you say that had no connection as far as you believe in the upcoming
26
meeting of Dublin County Council on the 11th of November 1993?
27
A.
Certainly it had no connection in terms of giving him money to give anybody.
28
Q. 257
Was there any other --
29
A.
He may well have used it as a good time to look for a cheque.
Q. 258
A cheque with no VAT?
11:22:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:22:22
11:22:32
29 1
A.
No, with or without VAT.
2
Q. 259
Was there any other invoice that Mr. Dunlop provided to Monarch that was VAT
3
exempt?
4
A.
Not as far as I know, no.
5
Q. 260
Do you think any, attach any significance to the fact that the only zero rated
6 7
invoice of Mr. Dunlop's is the one dated the 2nd of November 1993? A.
8 9
Q. 261
When you say there was no significance in Monarch's.
Lynn and the late Mr. Monahan? A.
Well, I don't think Mr. Lynn or Mr. Monahan might have known anything about it.
13
Mr. Sweeney okayed the invoice.
14
whether it included VAT or not.
11:23:10 15
I don't think he'd have been concerned In the normal course you'd expect if there
was VAT it would be 18,000 or something, it would be 15 plus VAT. Q. 262
17
Now, in December of 1993 a number of invoices were raised by Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 263
And we'll go through them briefly.
11:23:28 20
21
Because they relate, I suggest to you,
primarily to seeking to recoup money from GRE? A.
22
Well obviously we at that stage were A, keen to recoup the money from GRE and B, keen to sort out his account.
23
Q. 264
Sort out Mr. Dunlop's account?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 265
If we just look at the invoices in any event.
11:23:42 25
Do you mean there was no
significance in your mind or are you speaking on behalf of Mr. Sweeney, Mr.
11
16
But certainly
there was no significance from Monarch's.
11:22:52 10
12
Well unless there was some significance in Mr. Dunlop's mind.
If we could have 4768 and 4722
26
together, please.
Now, these invoices are both dated the 6th of September --
27
December 1993.
That's after the successful vote on the 11th of November.
28
just want to draw to your attention.
29
right, they include VAT?
11:24:21 30
A.
They are all VAT inclusive isn't that
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
I
11:24:21
11:24:26
30 1
Q. 266
And yet they are both for different amounts?
2
A.
That's right, they both have the same number for some reason or other.
3
Q. 267
They have both the same invoice number?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 268
But they are for different amounts?
6
A.
That's right, yeah.
7
Q. 269
We'll come back to look at those in more detail when they come to look at the
8 9
... A.
11:24:39 10
11
It suggests to me the one on the right was superseded by the one on the left or ...
Q. 270
And there was also a success fee invoice of the 14th of December 1993.
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 271
And I'll come back to deal with that in a minute.
4839.
12
11:24:55 15
16
On the 21st of December 1993.
17
Mr. Dunlop.
You have an entry in your diary.
At 4875, for
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 272
What was that about?
A.
Well I know from the records we gave him a cheque for 15,000 that day.
11:25:05 20
21 22
So it
may have been to give him the cheque. Q. 273
Do you remember I asked you yesterday whether that tick beside somebody's name
23
at the bottom of your diary meant that you had issued or paid a cheque to
24
somebody and you said no?
11:25:23 25
A.
No, it meant that it was on my mind.
I might not have met him, sorry.
I was
26
looking at the wrong part of the diary.
27
mind so it may have been that I was, I had been requested to get a cheque for
28
him.
29 11:25:39 30
What it meant was that he was in my
Q. 274
And it would appear that on the 21st of December --
A.
That's not a meeting, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:25:41
11:25:50
31 1
Q. 275
2
Of December.
At 4865 a payment of 15,000 pounds on account was made to Mr.
Dunlop?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 276
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 277
Bringing the total at this stage to 80, 000 pounds that has been paid to Mr.
7
Dunlop?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 278
Now, there isn't an invoice for that 15,000 pounds, isn't that right?
A.
Not a specific invoice, no.
11
Q. 279
There had been the earlier December invoices?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 280
Which hadn't been paid and this is described on the remittance advice as a
11:26:01 10
14 11:26:11 15
payment on account? A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 281
And at 4868.
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 282
Isn't that right?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 283
So that would suggest that when you made the entry in your diary of the 21st of
11:26:18 20
It appears that you signed the cheque?
21
December 1993 it was probably in connection with making a cheque out or getting
22
a payment to Mr. Dunlop of 15,000 pounds?
23
A.
I would think so, yes.
24
Q. 284
Right.
11:26:37 25
Do you know whether that 15,000 pounds was zero rated for VAT or VAT
inclusive or what the situation with it was?
26
A.
Well it was just a payment on account.
27
Q. 285
It was just a payment on account?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 286
And the balancing exercise that was carried out in connection with that payment
11:26:48 30
happened in May of '94, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:26:51
11:27:07
32 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 287
And at 8729.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 288
Mr. Glennane, from a Mr. Philip Connolly from Frank Dunlop's office looking
There is a fax to you?
5
forward to an early payment and enclosing, at 8730.
6
of December 1993 invoices?
A copy of one of the 6th
7
A.
That's right, yeah.
8
Q. 289
And that invoice totals 22,296?
9
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 290
And it acknowledges at the side that 15,000 pounds has been paid.
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 291
And that 15,000 pounds I suggest was your payment in December of 1993?
13
A.
Yes, that's right, I would think so, yeah.
14
Q. 292
And that left a balance, according to Mr. Dunlop's records of 7,296.94
11:27:22 10
11:27:38 15
outstanding?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 293
And I think on -- that wasn't paid at that time, is that right?
18
A.
That's right, no.
19
Q. 294
I think that was subsequently paid --
A.
I think it was only actually 5,000 of it was paid sometime in '95.
21
Q. 295
In August of '95?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 296
It would appear in January of 1995 that you again have entries in your diary
11:27:52 20
24 11:28:06 25
for Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right? A.
I don't know.
26
Q. 297
5539?
27
A.
Yes, his name is in it, yeah.
28
Q. 298
And you see immediately beneath that the name O'Shea, Walsh, Rory O' Connor and
29 11:28:23 30
If you show it to me I ...
then FD, I think? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:28:24
11:28:33
33 1
Q. 299
Is that Mr. Dunlop?
2
A.
No, it's not, no.
3
Q. 300
And why would Mr.--
4
A.
Builders.
5
Q. 301
Right.
6
A.
I presume he might have rung looking for his cheque or something.
O'Shea Walsh, I'm not sure what they were actually.
They were builders.
And why would Mr. Dunlop be in your diary in January 1999?
7
obviously something in my mind.
8
know.
9
There was
I suspect to do with the cheque but I don't
Q. 302
In Mr. Noel Murray's diary for 27th of January 1995 at 5540.?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 303
There is an entry Frank Dunlop (DG) I presume the DG is yourself?
12
A.
Yeah, I assume that, yes.
13
Q. 304
And did you meet Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I don't recall.
Q. 305
Because Mr. Dunlop has in his diary for the same date, 27th of January 1995 at
11:28:57 10
11:29:09 15
16
7929, has an entry, Dominic, Monarch?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 306
Now, that would suggest, Mr. Glennane, that you are the Dominic?
19
A.
I would think so, yes.
Q. 307
According to Mr. Murray's diary.
11:29:26 20
21
He's meeting Mr. Frank Dunlop and he
includes you in the meeting?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 308
And according to Mr. Dunlop's diary he's having a meeting at Monarch with
24 11:29:38 25
26
Dominic? A.
So it would suggest, yes.
Q. 309
So it would suggest very strongly on 27th of January 1995 you met with Mr.
27
Dunlop?
28
A.
Yes, it appears so, yes.
29
Q. 310
What was that about?
A.
I would assume he was still looking for his cheque for the balance of his
11:29:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:29:53
11:29:57
34 1
account.
2
Q. 311
Do you know?
3
A.
No, I don't know, no.
4
Q. 312
Right?
5
A.
I don't remember having any other meeting with him.
6
meeting.
7
him.
8
Q. 313
9 11:30:15 10
But I don't remember, any other reason why I would have been meeting
And on the 30th of January.
At 5542.
Mr. Noel Murray has an entry in his
diary DG phone Frank Dunlop? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 314
Do you know what that was about?
12
A.
No.
I think analysing it now looking at it all, I would, I would believe that
13
I probably passed the meeting on to Noel Murray.
14
it were.
11:30:38 15
11:30:58 20
But that's pure, that's not supposition but
it's, it's the most likely explanation of it, of those entries. Q. 315
18 19
Sort of passing the book, as
And he may have met him and he probably arranged with him that I
would ring him about his cheque.
16 17
I don't remember that
And on the 23rd of March 1995 at 5563. meeting with Mr. Dunlop at Monarch.
A.
Yes.
Q. 316
Ten o'clock, Frank Dunlop at Monarch.
Your diary apparently records a
Do you see that?
And Mr. Murray's diary at 5564, has an
21
entry for ten o'clock, Frank Dunlop see Norma DG which I assume is yourself
22
Dominic Glennane; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 317
And Mr. Dunlop's diary.
A.
Yes.
Q. 318
So now that's another meeting in 1995 between yourself and Mr. Dunlop that's
11:31:20 25
26 27
At 5562.
Records Dominic Glennane, Monarch?
recorded in three separate diaries; isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 319
What was that about?
A.
I'd imagine again it was about his accounts but I ....
11:31:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:31:34
11:31:47
35 1
Q. 320
Do you know?
2
A.
I don't, no.
3
Q. 321
Yes?
4
A.
And again reading it, it would appear to me as if Noel Murray met him and that
5 6
I can't think of any other reason for it.
I didn't meet him but ... Q. 322
7
Oh, sorry.
How are you deducing from those documents, Mr. Glennane, that you
didn't meet Mr. Dunlop?
8
A.
Obviously Mr. Dunlop expected to meet me.
9
Q. 323
And you expected to meet him because you've recorded him in your diary; isn't
11:32:00 10
that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 324
At 5563?
13
A.
If you turn back to the entry in Noel Murray's ...
14
Q. 325
Let's deal with the diary entry in your diary?
A.
There was a meeting arranged by somebody.
16
Q. 326
That was for Frank Dunlop in Monarch?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 327
And you have Mr. Dunlop in your diary and Mr Dunlop has Dominic Glennane in his
11:32:08 15
19 11:32:18 20
21
If you turn back to ...
diary? A.
Yes.
Q. 328
So, certainly in so far as there is an independent record at that point in time
22
both of you expect to meet each other at that stage, on the 23rd of March?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 329
Mr. Murray's diary at 5564 records Frank Dunlop and then in brackets DG?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 330
Which would suggest, Mr. Glennane, that Mr. Murray was expecting to have a
11:32:34 25
26 27 28
meeting with both yourself and Mr. Dunlop? A.
29 11:32:50 30
Well I'm not sure.
You'd better ask Mr. Murray.
It looks to me like he was
meeting him on my behalf, if I can put it that way. Q. 331
Why would he, why would you have been delegating Mr. Murray to meet Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:32:56
11:33:15
36 1
A.
I presume -- I presume as a stalling device really over his cheque at that
2
stage.
3
him or if I did meet him.
4
Q. 332
5
I can only guess now.
I don't remember any other reason for meeting
And you have an entry in your diary at April.
At 5579 for a Frank Dunlop
cheque?
6
A.
Yeah. That's right, yes.
7
Q. 333
In April of '95?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 334
But the Tribunal hasn't been furnished with any cheque made out to Mr. Dunlop
11:33:25 10
in April of 1995?
11
A.
There wasn't one, no.
12
Q. 335
Right.
13
A.
It was probably just to remind me that I was due to send him a cheque.
14
Q. 336
Because you also have an entry in your diary for the following week in April
11:33:42 15
So can you explain the significance of that entry?
for 5583, for Frank Dunlop again?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 337
Do you see that at the bottom?
18
A.
Yes, yeah.
19
Q. 338
Right.
11:33:52 20
So in January, February, March, and April you have a number of entries
in your diary and in Mr. Murray's diary and indeed Mr. Dunlop's diary for
21
meetings or contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
That's right, yeah.
23
Q. 339
And you don't really know what it's about, Mr. Glennane, is that right?
24
A.
Well I think it was about the balance of his accounts but ...
Q. 340
Do you know what it's about?
26
A.
I'm pretty sure it was about the balance of his accounts, yes.
27
Q. 341
And --
28
A.
Which was eventually made on the 13th of August.
29
Q. 342
It's actually paid on the 1st of August?
A.
All right, the 13th I have down here.
11:34:08 25
11:34:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:34:23
11:34:35
37 1
Q. 343
The records that you provided may be incorrect.
2
A.
Yeah, may have been drawn.
3
Q. 344
On the 1st of August?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 345
And that's a cheque in the sum of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 346
But according to the documentation that Mr. Dunlop had furnished to you in May
8 9
of 1994.
5689?
The balance outstanding according to him was 7,296.94?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 347
So he is now being paid 5,000 pounds leaving a shortfall, is that right?
11
A.
So it appears, yes, yeah.
12
Q. 348
And that shortfall was eventually written out in the books of Monarch?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 349
It was written off.
11:34:51 10
11:35:15 15
Isn't that right? I think at 5825.
That 2,296.64,
that's one-third of a way down the page?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 350
WO, does that mean written off?
18
A.
Written off, yes, sorry.
19
Q. 351
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 352
So that you -- out of the balance that was owed to Mr. Dunlop, according to
11:35:24 20
21 22
what Mr. Dunlop was looking for, you paid him 5,000 pounds in 19 -- in August
23
1995 and you wrote off the balance of 2,296.00?
24 11:35:39 25
26
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 353
Now, if we just look at the creditor's listing for Mr. Dunlop. At 7433, please.
27 28
Let me just try and work-out this document, if we can at all.
29
because the Tribunal would be anxious that you could assist it as best you can
11:35:58 30
in relation to this. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Mr. Glennane,
11:35:59
11:36:13
38 1 2
If we could highlight supplier Frank Dunlop & Company, please.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 354
And this is a 31st of May 1995 document; isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 355
And this is the creditor's account between Frank Dunlop and Monarch?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 356
And the first matters that are listed, the first six matters that are listed
9 11:36:28 10
are payments, isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
11
Q. 357
So the first is the payment of 15,000 pounds?
12
A.
That's right, yeah.
13
Q. 358
And the 10,000 pounds that were paid in March of 1993?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 359
And then there is the 10,000 pounds that disappears to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that
11:36:36 15
16
right? The third payment?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 360
Then there are the two payments of 7,500 pounds which take out the invoice of
19 11:36:52 20
the 19th of May 1993, isn't that right? A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
21
Q. 361
And then there is the December on account payment of 15,000 pounds?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 362
So then we come to look at the invoices?
24
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 363
Now, just to be clear about this, if we can.
11:37:03 25
26
PMT means payment and invoice
INV in the second column means?
27
A.
Invoice.
28
Q. 364
All right?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 365
Now, the invoices that are set against those payments?
11:37:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:37:19
11:37:32
39 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 366
Invoice 9320 is an invoice for 12,100 pounds?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 367
That's not in fact ever actually paid, isn't that right? A sum of 12,100?
5
A.
Sorry it's included in the account, yeah.
6 7
11:37:49 10
And
that's why that account is the way it is. Q. 368
8 9
It's not specifically paid.
Okay.
Well let's do the following then if we can, Mr. Glennane.
Why don't
we add up all of the invoices, the four invoices that are listed there? A.
I don't need to.
Q. 369
Fine.
11
I mean, it is self-explanatory there.
If we add up the four invoice that are recorded there.
There is an
invoice of the 10th of April '93 in the sum of 12,100?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 370
There is an invoice of the 14th of December '93 in the sum of 60,500?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 371
There is an invoice of the 14th December '93 in the sum of 31,371.94?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 372
And invoice on the 6th of December '93 in the sum of 22, 296.94?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 373
And they aggregate £126,268.88, isn't that right?
A.
I haven't added them if you say so, yeah.
Q. 374
That means the invoices that Mr. Dunlop raised that are recorded in the this
11:38:04 15
11:38:26 20
21 22
document?
23
A.
That's right, in this document, yes.
24
Q. 375
In this document?
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 376
Amount to 126,000?
27
A.
Right, yes, yeah.
28
Q. 377
And the payments that are made according to Monarch against those invoices are
11:38:36 25
29 11:38:49 30
payments totalling 80,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yeah, if -- yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:38:51
11:39:03
40 1
Q. 378
It's equal to. 65.
2
A.
Sorry?
3
Q. 379
65,000?
4
A.
60,000.
5
Q. 380
65,000 payments recorded, isn't that right?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 381
15, 10, 10, 15 and 15?
8
A.
65, yes.
9
Q. 382
65,000?
A.
Yeah.
11
Q. 383
Now, where on that do you record the invoice in November of '93?
12
A.
Well if you turn to page 4055 you'll see it.
13
Q. 384
Yeah.
14
A.
I see it says account there Frank Dunlop & Company, yeah.
Q. 385
Uh-huh?
A.
Because if you look at the last two entries they're both the 2nd of November.
11:39:20 10
11:39:42 15
16
Sorry, I beg your pardon?
65 or 75.
Sorry, I haven't added them.
4055, please.?
17
One is the invoice and one is the payment.
18
they cancel out.
19 11:39:55 20
Because they are the exact same
That's the point I was trying to make to you earlier on.
Q. 386
Uh-huh?
A.
This balance is only carried because there's unallocated payments against
21
unallocated invoices.
22
Q. 387
If we go back to the document at 7374, Mr. Glennane?
23
A.
It's the extended there, you'll see it is naught.
24
Q. 388
The total amount of the invoices that are recorded from Mr. Dunlop amount to
11:40:16 25
126,268 --
26
A.
No, this 15,000 is recorded as well.
27
Q. 389
Yes.
28
A.
No it's an invoice 15,000.
29
Q. 390
No at 57392 -- 972?
A.
If you look at the sheet I suggested, 4055.
11:40:31 30
No, that's an adjustment?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:40:38
11:40:44
41 1
Q. 391
7343, please.
2
A.
If you look at 4055 first, I suggest.
3
Q. 392
7343 please, thank you.
4 5
We'll just deal with the first document first,
Mr. Glennane? A.
Well because on the document which I have referred to, the 15,000 invoice and
6
the 15,000 payment were for the same amount on the same date, they haven't been
7
carried forward to this sheet.
8
Q. 393
They cancelled each other?
9
A.
Exactly, yeah.
Q. 394
So they are not carried forward on to this document?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 395
So on this document what you have got are payments of 65,000 against invoices
11:41:00 10
13 14 11:41:15 15
of 126, 268; isn't that right? A.
Well if your figures are right, yes.
Q. 396
And that leaves a net deficit or an under payment to Mr. Dunlop, according to
16
this record; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, of 60,000, yes.
18
Q. 397
Of 60,000?
19
A.
Odd, yeah.
Q. 398
Yeah.
21
A.
Well as you can see there there's an adjustment.
22
Q. 399
Uh-huh?
23
A.
Of 53, 972.24.
24
Q. 400
And how was that figure selected?
A.
Because at that stage the balance had been agreed with him at 7296.
Q. 401
Did you tell Mr. Dunlop that according to your records you owed him -- you owed
11:41:27 20
11:41:37 25
26 27
Now, what happened to that?
him 61,268?
28
A.
I'm sure we did, uh-huh.
29
Q. 402
So what you did was your records showed that you were indebted to Mr. Dunlop in
11:41:57 30
the sum -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:41:58
11:42:09
42 1
A.
2
No, no, there were invoices -- our records.
I mean, our records didn't show.
That was the balance on the account.
3
Q. 403
Yes?
4
A.
But we obviously then established the balance on the account with him.
5
Q. 404
No, you, Mr. Dunlop was asked, is that right, how much Monarch owed him?
6
A.
I'm not sure if he was or not but however.
7
Q. 405
And he came back in May of '94 saying a sum of 7,296.64, isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yeah.
9
Q. 406
And that is the figure that is at the bottom of that column as the figure that
11:42:29 10
is being owed to Mr. Dunlop?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 407
So you have written off or adjusted 53,972 pounds?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 408
But your own records with Mr. Dunlop show that you owed him 61,000?
A.
Well, if you want to take that interpretation.
11:42:41 15
16
That was the balance on the
account, yes.
17
Q. 409
The balance of?
18
A.
The invoices had been over posted.
19
Q. 410
They had been over posted.
A.
Well I mean it's too many -- as I said to you already it looks to me that that
11:42:54 20
How do you mean they had been over posted?
21
31 was actually a substitution for the 22 but they both seem to have been
22
posted.
23
Q. 411
So we're --
24
A.
I'm saying earlier at a time you get a statement from your creditor, you
11:43:13 25
reconcile the statement and you reconcile your own books with that statement.
26
Q. 412
And did you get a statement from Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
Other than the one showing the 15,000, I would regard that as a statement, the
28 29 11:43:30 30
document 8730. Q. 413
That's the fax from Mr. Dunlop in May of '94?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:43:30
11:43:44
43 1
Q. 414
2
According to Mr. Dunlop's records he says you owe him 7,296.64 and you make an adjustment so your books reflect that matter?
3
A.
Exactly, yes.
4
Q. 415
So up to the time Mr. Dunlop came back to you in May 1994.
Your books showed
5
that Mr. Dunlop -- that the full figure that should have been paid to Mr.
6
Dunlop was 126,268 and that he had been paid 65,000 pounds of that; is that
7
correct?
8
A.
No, no, that's not right.
9
Q. 416
That's not right?
A.
Once again, if I can ask to have that sheet put up.
11
Q. 417
It may be simply that I'm just not understanding the point that you are making?
12
A.
The point I am making is that there was a payment -- again if I could have that
11:43:55 10
13
sheet shown up.
4055.
Is that too much to ask?
14 11:44:10 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
4055.
4055?
If you highlight Frank Dunlop account, that one there.
You see on the
17
last two items the 2nd of November invoice 15,000. The 2nd of November payment
18
50,000 and that's extended out then as nil.
19
forward on the statement that you had a few minutes ago.
11:44:35 20
The rest of the figures carry
Q. 418
Yes, but what year end is that can I ask you?
21
A.
It's not any year end.
22
Q. 419
What's the date at the top of the document?
23
A.
It says as of 30th of November '93.
24
Q. 420
And as of the 30th of November '93?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 421
As of the 30th November '93, does that document accurately record all of the
11:44:48 25
26 27
invoices that Mr. Dunlop had furnished up to that point in time?
28
A.
It would certainly record all of the one that were posted, yeah.
29
Q. 422
That were posted?
A.
The 12,100 and the 15.
11:45:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:45:03
11:45:16
44 1
Q. 423
2 3
And then one moves onto the next document dated 31st of May '95; isn't that right?
A.
4
Yes. All of the same figures are carried forward except those two 15's because they have been netted off.
5
Q. 424
That's the one for which there was a zero VAT?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 425
That one has been eliminated?
8
A.
Not eliminated.
9 11:45:28 10
It's been paid and the computer has offset one against the
other. Q. 426
And when one comes to look at the document at 7343.
Then what one is looking
11
at here are invoices that have now been received by Monarch for Mr. Dunlop and
12
the record of payments that have been made by Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
13
A.
Yes.
And they don't match.
14
Q. 427
Yes.
That's why you make the inquiry of Mr. Dunlop as to what he says he's
11:45:47 15
That's why they're carried forward.
owed?
16
A.
Well I'm not sure if we made the inquiry or if the inquiry came from him, yes.
17
Q. 428
And that shows a substantial difference in your books as to what you believe
18 19
Mr. Dunlop was owed and what Mr. Dunlop believe he was owed. A.
11:46:06 20
Is that right?
Well I don't think we believed he was owed anything at that stage other than what was left on that invoice.
21
the accounts department.
22
at it.
Certainly it was -- mistakes had been made in
There's a reconciliation on 7340 if you want to look
23
Q. 429
What mistakes were made in the accounts department?
24
A.
Well too many invoices were posted.
Q. 430
Was there an --
A.
Because Of the system of making payments on account, round sum payments on
11:46:24 25
26 27
account, which would then -- normally you would end up with a balancing figure.
28
Q. 431
Uh-huh?
29
A.
Due to the supplier or the creditor.
Q. 432
Is it possible that what happened here was you looked for invoices from Mr.
11:46:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:46:44
11:47:05
45 1
Dunlop in December 1993 to back a claim you were making against GRE in respect
2
of money you had already paid to Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
And you posted those to this?
Well there would be no connection between backing them and looking for them
4
from GRE and posting them.
They would have just gone into the accounts
5
department system and they would have been posted.
6
Q. 433
The success fee invoice, Mr. Glennane?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 434
For 60,500 pounds?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 435
That's generated for the first time in December 1993?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 436
What's done with that?
13
A.
Well it's posted to our account and it's also -- sorry our books.
11:47:12 10
14 11:47:27 15
16
certified as an invoice and sent to GRE. Q. 437
And what else was certified as an invoice and sent to GRE?
A.
There's a list of them here somewhere.
17
I can't quite lay my hand on it but
there is a reference there of a cheque from GRE of 52,000.
18
Q. 438
And it deals with four invoices?
19
A.
52,030, that's 4815.
Q. 439
But that's the end result, isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 440
Let's step it back from that, Mr. Glennane, to December of '93?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 441
And let's go back and look at the invoices.
11:48:06 20
11:48:18 25
And let's look at 4772 for
example?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 442
That's an invoice from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 32,371.
28 29 11:48:33 30
And it was
And it is certified
to be a true copy, isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 443
And at 4773.
There's a further certificate from Mr. Sweeney?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:48:39
11:48:56
46 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 444
And that is certifying to Monarch -- by Monarch Properties to GRE that this
3
money is due to Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's the same document, yes.
5
Q. 445
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
6
A.
Well, sorry, could you put the last back up again.
7
Q. 446
Certainly.
8
A.
Yeah, that's Mr. Sweeney certifying that invoice.
9
Q. 447
Uh-huh.
11:49:24 10
Yes, because the invoice, yes ...
How --
4772, please and 4773 together.?
And what's happening there, I suggest to you, is that that invoice is
being sent to GRE to back up a claim for third party costs in connection with
11
Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 448
And if we look at 4839.
14
A.
Yes, that's it, yeah, same thing.
Q. 449
That's the invoice for 60,500?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 450
We saw on the creditor's listing dated 14th of December.
11:49:57 15
And 4846 together, please.
That again --
It's being
18
forwarded, certified by Mr. Sweeney and it's being forwarded to GRE seeking to
19
recover the 50,000 pounds?
11:50:12 20
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 451
Because apparently, according to the documentation --
22
A.
Half the 50,000.
23
Q. 452
Half the 50,000.
24
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 453
Did you ever pay it?
26
A.
Well it's included in all of those payments we made to him.
27
Q. 454
Okay.
11:50:24 25
GRE and Monarch had agreed a success fee for Mr. Dunlop?
The 85,000.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
Ms. Dillon, we might just stop there for ten minutes.
11:50:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:50:35
11:50:45
47 1
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
2 3 4 5 6
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
7 8 9 12:11:56 10
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Glennane, please.
11 12 13
Q. 455
14
Mr. Glennane, if I can take you to deal with the dealings between Monarch and GRE in connection with the payments to Mr. Frank Dunlop and the first invoice
12:12:21 15
in time is 4819.
16 17
And this is an invoice dated the 29th of June 1993 and the person involved is
18
Frank Dunlop & Company and the amount that's being sought is half of 25,000
19
pounds; isn't that right?
12:12:42 20
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 456
Now, the -- this is in June of 1993?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 457
And there's no back up invoice from Mr. Dunlop with this invoice; isn't that
24 12:12:54 25
26
right? A.
So it would seem, yes.
Q. 458
And it would have been the agreement, as I understand it, between GRE and
27
Monarch in connection with third party costs, that back up invoices would be
28
required?
29 12:13:08 30
A.
Well in most cases yes, certainly, yes.
Q. 459
And third party invoices would be payments made by Monarch on behalf of GRE and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:13:15
12:13:36
48 1
Monarch in connection with Cherrywood insofar as the matters we're looking at
2
are concerned.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 460
Now, I think that GRE wrote in connection with that invoice.
At 4822.
And
5
they said insofar as invoice 2064 is concerned that at their meeting in May he
6
agreed the appointment of Frank Dunlop and this was on the basis of 4,000
7
pounds per month with no success fee.
8
invoice for 25,000 pounds which would imply over six months work when Mr.
9
Dunlop was only appointed in May.
12:13:58 10
11
I find it difficult to understand an
A.
Right
Q. 461
Now, if I could just pause there for a second.
GRE appeared to be under the
12
misapprehension or the belief that Mr. Dunlop was to be paid 4,000 pounds per
13
month?
14 12:14:10 15
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 462
There was no agreement, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong,
16
between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop that he be paid 4,000 pounds per month.
17
that correct?
18 19
A.
Is
Well insofar as I know now, I can't remember from the time it appears to me that there was agreement, yeah, that he be paid 4,000 per month.
12:14:32 20
21
MR SANFEY:
Chairman, I think the evidence to date has been that Mr. Sweeney
22
is the one who negotiated with Mr. Dunlop.
23
evidence.
Mr. Sweeney hasn't yet given
24 12:14:40 25
26
I don't understand it to be Monarch's evidence that there was no agreement with Mr. Dunlop in relation to what he was to be paid.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I think Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal and denied that there
29
was any agreement with Monarch that he would be paid 4,000 pounds per month.
12:14:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:14:56
12:15:07
49 1
And I understand Mr. Dunlop's evidence to the Tribunal in relation to his
2
payment to have been that he agreed lump sums or sought lump sums but he that
3
he had no agreement for a monetary retainer.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I think these issues are going to have be to be probed with all of
6
the Monarch witnesses.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Indeed.
9 12:15:14 10
MR SANFEY: Indeed but I just don't want it to be put to this witness that
11
Monarch accept that there was no arrangement for 4,000 pounds per month when I
12
understand the evidence to be that it was Mr. Sweeney who did any negotiations
13
with Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Sweeney hasn't yet given evidence.
14 12:15:30 15
CHAIRMAN:
That's fine.
16 17
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:15:36 20
In any event, the document records insofar as invoice 2064 was
concerned that certainly according to GRE Mr. Dunlop was to be paid 4,000
21
pounds per month with no success fee
22
A.
That's right.
23
Q. 463
They are querying how 25,000 pounds could have been accrued by June; isn't that
24 12:15:48 25
26
right? A.
That's right.
Q. 464
I think that following receipt of that letter at 4553.
In reference to
27
invoice 2064 Frank Dunlop, the Monarch note notes that it's not agreed and I
28
presume that means not agreed with GRE?
29 12:16:07 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 465
And MB, that's Martin Baker, says he agreed 4,000 pounds from May. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Eddie
12:16:14
12:16:24
50 1
Sweeney replied that he would be willing to cancel the invoice and invoice
2
monthly?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 466
And then if we go to the bottom of the page where it says 2064, Frank Dunlop 50
5
percent by May to August at 4,000 pounds per month 9,680. Do you see that?
6
A.
Yes, I do, yes.
7
Q. 467
So what appears to be suggested there is that they were going to re invoice
8 9 12:16:44 10
Monarch -- they were going to reinvoice GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 468
And at 4825.
On the 13th of July 1993.
And the last paragraph.
Your item
11
No. 4 invoice 2064.
12
4,000 pounds per month for April, May, June and July if you feel you should pay
13
only on a monthly basis?
14 12:17:10 15
I am prepared to cancel 2064 and re issue invoice 2068 at
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 469
And it goes on to say please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were engaged
16
from April and requested part of their payment to be up front before they would
17
take on the assignment.
18
pounds to date?
19 12:17:23 20
That is the reason for the payment by us of 25,000
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 470
And then invoice 2068 is issued to Guardian at 4827.
And effectively, what
21
has happened here is invoice 2064 is cancelled and invoice 2068 is issued and
22
it's claiming 4,000 pounds per month April, May, June and July and seeking half
23
of that amount from GRE?
24
A.
12:17:54 25
That's right, yes.
Obviously in the first case we tried to claim 50% of the
25,000 that we had paid up front.
26
Q. 471
And GRE weren't having any of that, isn't that fair to say?
27
A.
That's right, absolutely, yes.
28
Q. 472
They say they agreed 4,000 pounds per month and Mr. Dunlop had only been
29 12:18:07 30
employed from a certain date? A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:18:08
12:18:19
51 1
Q. 473
And they weren't going to pay.
2
A.
Accepted that position.
3
Q. 474
Accepted that position and re issued an invoice in the sum of 9,680 -- that's
4
And Mr. Sweeney?
invoice 2068?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 475
And Mr. Sweeney's letter is July 1993 and in September of 1993, at 4390, this
7
document notes that the following invoices had been passed to Mr. Beng for
8
payment by Mr. Baker; isn't that correct?
9 12:18:41 10
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 476
And there is a list of invoices that had been passed for payment.
11
In the
centre is 2068 Frank Dunlop 9,680?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 477
At the top is headed 'issues outstanding before payment will be made'. Do you
14 12:18:55 15
16
see that? A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 478
And under that heading there is "copy of Dunlop's invoice.
We only have one
17
invoice for 12,100 pounds even though we have made payments of 42,500.
18
must get invoices?"
19 12:19:09 20
A.
That's right.
Q. 479
And you have been referring to this document earlier on this morning, isn't
21
that right, Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 480
Now what, this document appears to suggest, if it's correct, that by the 27th
24
of September 1993 the only invoice Monarch had in its possession was the April
12:19:29 25
invoice for 12,100 pounds?
26
A.
So it would seem, yes.
27
Q. 481
Which invoice was never in fact paid in the sum of 12,100 pounds; isn't that
28 29 12:19:35 30
Eddie
right? A.
In that sum, yes.
Q. 482
Right.
Now, and they had paid out or Monarch had paid out 42,500 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
So
12:19:42
12:19:57
52 1
they need to get invoices in order to shore up their claim against GRE; isn't
2
that right? They have to back up the claim?
3
A.
4
They have to back up on invoices, yes, even though GRE were only going to pay on the basis of 4,000 pounds.
5
Q. 483
They still wanted invoices?
6
A.
Exactly.
7
Q. 484
The issues outstanding before payment will be made was what was required was a
8 9 12:20:05 10
copy of Mr. Dunlop's invoice? A.
Yeah.
Q. 485
And there's also an invoice 2094 which dealt with the later payment to Mr.
11
Dunlop and the position was the same for that; isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 486
So that would mean, would it not, that if you had had an agreement with Mr.
14 12:20:23 15
16
Dunlop for an agreed payment of 4,000 pounds per month; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 487
If you had had -- you would be seeking an invoice from Mr. Dunlop showing an
17
invoice for 4,000 pounds per month?
18
A.
Yes, yes.
19
Q. 488
Is there any such invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
A.
For 4,000 per month?
21
Q. 489
Uh-huh?
22
A.
No, not as far as I can recall.
23
Q. 490
How can that be, Mr. Glennane?
24
A.
I mean, obviously the payments were made, if you like, the fact that the 25,000
12:20:38 20
12:20:56 25
was paid in advance or as a retainer, effectively it would cover the first six
26
months of -- obviously then I don't know what date this document is obviously.
27
Obviously we started looking for invoices off him after that, after this.
28
Q. 491
29 12:21:25 30
Is it your position, Mr. Glennane, that what was agreed with Mr. Dunlop was a retainer of 4,000 pounds per month.
A.
Yeah, as far as I know, yes.
All of the correspondence points to that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:21:29
12:21:45
53 1
Q. 492
The correspondence with GRE?
2
A.
Yes, exactly, yes, yeah.
3
Q. 493
But insofar as your agreement with Mr. Dunlop is concerned, do any of the
Discussions with them, yeah.
4
invoices from Mr. Dunlop to Monarch record or refer to a payment of 4,000
5
pounds per month?
6
A.
I don't recall any of them, I don't recall any of them.
7
Q. 494
And how could that be, Mr. Glennane, if you are correct in telling the Tribunal
8 9 12:22:08 10
that the agreement with Mr. Dunlop was for 4,000 pounds per month? A.
Well maybe Mr. Dunlop misinterpreted the agreement or something about ...
Q. 495
And assuming that Mr. Dunlop misinterpreted the agreement on receipt of the
11
invoices from Mr. Dunlop did Monarch take any step to alert Mr. Dunlop to the
12
mistake that he had made?
13
A.
I think apparently not.
14
Q. 496
And did Monarch ever seek an invoice from Mr. Dunlop in the amount of 4,000 per
12:22:28 15
Just looking for more invoices, yes.
month?
16
A.
Not so far as I can see.
17
Q. 497
Now, I think in September of 1993, at page 4817.
18 19
This is a letter from GRE to Mr. Sweeney.
12:22:50 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
That last document is a document from GRE.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
The document at --.
24 12:22:58 25
CHAIRMAN:
To Monarch.
MS. DILLON:
At 439 --
26 27 28
A.
Yes.
29 12:23:02 30
MS. DILLON:
Sorry.
43 --.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:23:06
12:23:10
54 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
It was dealing with queries raised by ...
GRE, yes.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
4390.
Is this the document, Sir? .
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
12:23:20 10
That document is an internal memorandum from Eddie Sweeney to
Mr. Glennane
11
A.
It's actually from Pat Caslin to Eddie Sweeney.
12
Q. 498
And it's cc'd to Mr. Glennane.
It schedules the invoices.
If one reads
13
across the top it gives you the invoice number.
14
document is claimed, the amount and the issues outstanding before payment will
12:23:35 15
be made.
The heading under which the
And what that document suggests and I think Mr. Glennane agrees,
16
that by the 27th of September 1993 Ms -- they only had in Monarch one invoice
17
from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 12,100 pounds.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
12:23:57 20
But they weren't purporting -- at least they didn't appear to be
seeking invoices of 4,000 from Mr. Dunlop.
21 22
MS DILLON: That is what Mr. Glennane has just told you, Sir.
23
nothing to indicate that they sought invoices in the sum of 4,000 pounds per
24
month from Mr. Dunlop but that it is also his understanding that the
12:24:11 25
arrangement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop was for 4,000 pounds per month, if I
26 27
There is
understand Mr. Glennane correctly. A.
Is that?
That's correct, yes.
28 29 12:24:27 30
CHAIRMAN:
But would it have mattered to, I'm just wondering from an
accounting point of view.
Would it have mattered to Monarch whether they were
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:24:28
12:24:47
55 1
getting invoices for 4,000 a month or for larger sums so long as the total
2
didn't exceed?
3
A.
No, the only reason would have been really to submit them to GRE, that would
4
have been the only reason why we'd have required invoices showing that short of
5
figure.
Because ...
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
invoices for 4,000 a month, but invoices to equal the total of the claim?
9
A.
But what you'd have been submitting to GRE, not necessarily
Exactly, yes, yes.
12:25:04 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
But we issued our own invoices showing 4,000 per month.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
12:25:13 15
16
MS. DILLON:
But what was required from Mr. Dunlop was an invoice or invoices
17
to back up the amount that Monarch were claiming from GRE?
18
A.
Um, yes, sorry, yes, yeah.
19
Q. 499
And if -- sorry?
A.
Original invoice from him, yes.
Q. 500
And according to what Monarch had agreed with GRE, that was for 4,000 pounds
12:25:38 20
21 22
per month?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 501
Yes?
A.
But we did submit Mr. Dunlop's invoices to GRE in December.
12:25:49 25
26 27
4,000 per month but they were accepted by GRE and paid. Q. 502
28 29 12:26:32 30
They didn't show
The invoices that were paid by GRE were invoices, there were four invoices that were paid; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 503
So if we -- the first invoice was invoice No. 2068. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And that is at 4827.
12:26:45
12:27:01
56 1
Isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, sorry, yes.
3
Q. 504
The second invoice that was paid was 2111.
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 505
The third invoice that was paid was 2186.?
6
A.
2179 actually I think.
7
Q. 506
2186.
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 507
2186.
A.
That's right, yes.
11
Q. 508
And the last one is 2179?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 509
And 2179 is the invoice at 4829.?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 510
Now, they were the invoices from Monarch to GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop;
12:27:25 10
12:27:38 15
16
At 4828.
Isn't that right?
Isn't that right?
I'll just find 2186 for you.
Yes, is 4832.
Is that right?
isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 511
Now, they are paid, and the only payment from GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop
19 12:27:58 20
21
is made in January of '94, at 4815.? A.
That's actually December actually, yes.
Q. 512
Yes.
22
It's received on the 5th of January.
It's stamped "received" on the
5th of January; isn't that right?
23
A.
I --
24
Q. 513
By 57?
A.
The letter is.
26
Q. 514
Yes.
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 515
And the letter says "we have pleasure in enclosing cheque in the sum of 52,030
12:28:09 25
29 12:28:31 30
The funds had been received before that.
The cheque is a cheque in the sum of 52,030 pounds; isn't that right?
pounds in payment of invoice number 2011, 2068, 2186 and 2179, in respect of attached copy invoices". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:28:33
12:28:44
57 1 2
And they are the invoices we have just seen; isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 516
Now, each of those invoices with the exception of the one for 50,000 pounds are
5
in respect of a claim for 4,000 pounds per month; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 517
Okay.
8 9 12:28:56 10
Now, GRE were not happy to pay; isn't that right? Until it was backed
by documentation from Mr. Dunlop? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 518
Okay.
So, now, if we look at the documentation that was supplied by Monarch
11
in support of this claim.
And at 4848.
Mr. Pat Caslin sends to GRE
12
certified copies of the invoices of Frank Dunlop as requested in your fax?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 519
Okay.
A.
Right.
16
Q. 520
Now, firstly, does this document say anything about 4,000 pounds per month?
17
A.
No, it doesn't, no.
18
Q. 521
And that document contains a certificate on the face of it, certified to be a
12:29:32 15
19 12:29:49 20
The first invoice is dated the 10th of April 1993.
At 4133.
true copy of the original; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 522
And Mr. Pat Caslin's signature comes above it?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 523
And with that document goes a certificate from Mr. Eddie Sweeney at 4142,
24
please.
And if we leave the two on screen together.
12:30:03 25
26
Now, Mr. Sweeney in his payment certificate certifies that the amount of the
27
quotation is 4,000 a month?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 524
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
12:30:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:30:28
12:30:39
58 1
Q. 525
Right.
And he includes -- he refers to the invoice in the sum of 10,000
2
pounds plus VAT.
And that it's dated the 10th of April, '93.
3
is certifying the first invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
So Mr. Sweeney
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 526
But it is Mr. Sweeney who it telling GRE that the amount of the quotation is
6
4,000 pounds per month?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 527
Because there is nothing on the face of Mr. Dunlop's document to indicate any
9 12:30:51 10
11
such agreement; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 528
The second invoice from Mr. Dunlop that's forwarded to GRE is at 4772.
12
dated the 6th of December.
13
expenses?
14
And is
And is in the sum of 25,000 pounds plus VAT plus
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 529
And that is certified by Mr. Sweeney.
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 530
And that is forwarded to GRE?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 531
And Mr. Sweeney's certificate refers to 4K per month; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 532
And Mr. Dunlop's document does not refer to any monthly retainer; isn't that
12:31:07 15
12:31:25 20
21 22
At 4773.
Isn't that right?
right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 533
And the third invoice for Mr. Dunlop that's forwarded is at 4839.
12:31:40 25
success fee of 50,000 vis-a-vis public affairs strategy and its implementation
26
totalling 60,500 pounds?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 534
And that is certified by Mr. Eddie Sweeney at 4846.
29 12:32:01 30
And is a
50,000 pounds? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
At being a claim for
12:32:04
12:32:30
59 1
Q. 535
So the three certificates and the three invoices that are sent by Monarch to
2
GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop are an invoice for 12,100, an invoice for
3
32,371.94 and an invoice for 60,500; is that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 536
What is being sought from GRE is 50% of that sum; is that right?
6
A.
No, what we sought was the invoice at 50% of the invoices.
7
Q. 537
Yes.
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 538
Yes.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 539
So you have sent invoices, four invoices, that refer to, with the exception of
12:32:48 10
11 12
No, no.
We had sent them.
Sorry? This is back up to that documentation.
To support the claim that you had made?
one for 50,000 pounds, 4,000 per month to GRE; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 540
And you don't have invoices to that effect from Mr. Dunlop?
A.
That's right.
Q. 541
But you have other invoices for round sum payments and you have copied those
12:33:03 15
16 17
certified them and forwarded those to GRE?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 542
And GRE, on foot of those make the payment of 52,030; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 543
Now, who was the person that dealt with GRE in relation to Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
Well it was Mr. Sweeney I'd say, supported by the cash department.
23
Q. 544
Yes.
12:33:17 20
24
Would you accept that certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop provided invoices
to GRE, there seems to be no reference to any agreement to 4,000 pounds per
12:33:46 25
month?
26
A.
I don't think he supplied any invoices to GRE.
27
Q. 545
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
28 29 12:33:57 30
Insofar as he supplied invoices to Monarch
Properties there's no references to 4,000 pounds per month? A.
That's right.
Q. 546
And in the documentation up to December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
There is no claim for a success
12:34:02
12:34:18
60 1
fee from Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 547
There's no documentation and no payment from Monarch to Mr. Dunlop prior to the
4
end of December 1993 that reflects payment by Monarch of a success fee; isn't
5
that right?
6
A.
Not specifically, yes.
7
Q. 548
Well, sorry.
8 9
If you say it's contained in some document generally would you
just indicate the document? A.
It was 80, 000 paid to him at that stage.
Q. 549
I beg your pardon?
11
A.
Sorry, there was 80,000 pounds had been paid to him at that stage.
12
Q. 550
Be that as it may, Mr. Glennane.
12:34:32 10
What we're talking about now is the
13
existence or otherwise of a document within Monarch prior to December 1993 that
14
passed between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop indicating an agreement about a success
12:34:53 15
fee?
16
A.
No, other than the invoice from myself, yes.
17
Q. 551
That is the invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 552
And are you saying that that invoice for the success fee was paid by Monarch?
A.
Well I'm saying it was paid or it was paid in part of, I presume, of the
12:35:04 20
21
80,000.
22
Q. 553
Which part?
23
A.
Well any -- in different dribs and drags.
24
Q. 554
Would you identify the payment that you say that Mr. Monarch paid to Mr. Dunlop
12:35:20 25
26
in connection with the success fee? A.
27 28
I think we paid him 50,000 pounds in December on the 21st
of December. Q. 555
29 12:35:37 30
Not specifically.
Which was a payment on account in respect of an invoice for a greater amount dated, I think, the 14th of December; isn't that right?
A.
That was a payment on account, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:35:38
12:35:51
61 1
Q. 556
But it wasn't a payment on account of the success fee, Mr. Glennane?
2
A.
Well I don't know that.
3
Q. 557
Well let's go back and look at that then.
Because you made your position
4
clear in relation to that prior to lunch.
But if there is any ambiguity we
5
can go back over it again.
6
is Mr. Dunlop's invoice about the success fee?
Can I show you while we're doing that 4832, which
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 558
I just want to draw to your attention there the notation, "this is not an
9
invoice for VAT purposes.
12:36:10 10
A VAT invoice will issue on receipt of payment" do
you see that?
11
A.
I do, yes.
12
Q. 559
Would that indicate to you as an accountant that by 10th December 1993 Mr.
13 14
Dunlop had not been paid his success fee? A.
No, it wouldn't.
Q. 560
It wouldn't indicate that?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 561
Would it indicate to you as an accountant that he had in fact been paid his
12:36:21 15
18 19
No, no.
success fee? A.
12:36:31 20
No, it wouldn't have anything to do with Mr. Dunlop.
What it indicated was
that we didn't want to have to account for the VAT until we got paid.
21
Q. 562
Until you got paid?
22
A.
Yeah, it's the sort of notation that you would get on solicitors invoices and
23
all sort of professional invoices saying this is not an invoice for VAT
24
purposes.
12:36:47 25
Q. 563
26
4839, which is Mr. Dunlop's claim for the success fee.
Where do you say Mr.
Dunlop was paid this?
27
A.
Sorry.
28
Q. 564
Do you know whether or not to your own knowledge, any part of the payment of
29 12:37:07 30
I know he was paid a total of 85,000.
80,000 pounds was in connection with the success fee? A.
Well I assume in the heel of the hunt .... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:37:11
12:37:41
62 1
Q. 565
2
Do you know of your own knowledge, whether any part of the payments made to Monarch related to the success fee?
3
A.
No, I can't specifically identify a cheque for 30,250 or for 60,500.
4
Q. 566
So if there wasn't any such payment, what exactly was going on, Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
I don't know what you mean what was going on.
6
Q. 567
Well if there was no, if there was no pavement to Mr. Dunlop in connection with
7
the success fee but you were sending the invoice on to GRE and seeking payment
8
on foot of it, what exactly is going on?
9
A.
12:38:00 10
Well the arrangement with GRE obviously that they were happy that he be paid 4,000 per month and that he be paid -- and that he be paid a success fee, which
11
came in sometime after the start, if you like.
12
that to GRE and we were assuming, we were trying to pay Mr. Dunlop on much the
13
same, on much the same basis. I think you'd have to ask Mr. Sweeney what fee
14
he negotiated with Mr. Dunlop.
12:38:29 15
16
And that we were reflecting
To the best of my knowledge, it was 4,000 per
month. Q. 568
17
Yes.
And the 15,000 pounds payment that you referred to, I think, in
December; isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 569
Yes.
12:38:43 20
That in fact was a payment in respect of a separate invoice.
7030, please.
We went through this this morning, Mr. Glennane.?
21
A.
If it was a payment on account.
22
Q. 570
Yes.
23
A.
No, no, the payment on account of the general account.
The payment on account was that --
24
posted.
12:39:05 25
invoice.
26
Q. 571
27
That invoice was
At the end of it Mr. Dunlop is advocating 15,000 against that
The payment in December.
What date in December was the payment made? The
payment on account is 4865.?
28
A.
The 21st of December I think.
29
Q. 572
Is the requisition; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
12:39:25 30
9558.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:39:26
12:39:39
63 1
Q. 573
Which is after I think you have an entry in your diary of the same date?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 574
Isn't that the position? And are you saying that that was a payment on account
4
in connection with the invoices of the 6th of December and the invoice for the
5
success fee?
6
A.
No, well I'm saying it was -- a payment on account of his general account.
7
Q. 575
Of his general account?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 576
Including a success fee?
A.
Exactly, yes, yeah.
Q. 577
And where is the documentation to indicate that when you were paying that
12:39:50 10
11 12
15,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop that it included or was part of a success fee?
13
A.
There's no specific documentation.
14
Q. 578
So I'll ask you again Mr. Glennane, to explain to the Tribunal.
12:40:08 15
and dealing on the one hand with GRE and on the other hand with Mr. Dunlop? A.
18 19 12:40:28 20
What
precisely was going on with all of these invoices and all of this negotiation
16 17
It's just ...
Well, I mean, there was -- the position with GRE is quite clear.
That they
approved and were happy to pay for 4,000 per month. Q. 579
Yes?
A.
Plus the success fee.
21
And what Monarch was paying Mr. Dunlop was the agreed
rate we seem to have under paid him, if anything.
22
Q. 580
You seem to have under paid Mr. Dunlop?
23
A.
If we use the GRE figures we have there, yes.
24
Q. 581
You were looking for more from GRE than you'd paid Mr. Dunlop; isn't that
12:40:56 25
26
right? A.
Well we were looking for more, I don't know if we knew at that stage what the
27
final account would be with Mr. Dunlop.
28
with -- GRE were the sort of people that wanted to close off their books on the
29
31st of December and they wanted to make sure that all of the payments were
12:41:18 30
I was saying, what happened there
made in that year. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:41:20
12:41:34
64 1
Q. 582
If we just --
2
A.
They actually made out a request, very unusual, in my experience, to please
3
lodge the cheque as soon as possible.
Nobody's ever written to me nor I've
4
never written to anybody asking them to lodge the cheque as soon as possible.
5
Q. 583
Did you pay Mr. Dunlop any money out of that cheque?
6
A.
Yeah, well the 15,000, yes.
7
Q. 584
That was paid in December?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 585
That you -- and you got the cheque from GRE in January.
A.
I'm not sure when we got the cheque.
12:41:46 10
11 12
I have a feeling it went into our
account, before, before Christmas. Q. 586
13
Can I just summarise a few matters for you, Mr. Glennane, to give you an opportunity to comment on them.
14 12:41:58 15
When the Tribunal first contacted Monarch Properties about the payments to Mr.
16
Dunlop.
The figure you came up with was 52,500 pounds?
17
A.
That's right.
18
Q. 587
That figure's wrong?
19
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 588
You had available to you the documentation that enabled you to check to see
12:42:10 20
It is wrong, yes.
21
what payments had in fact been made to Mr. Dunlop but you omitted the first two
22
payments that had been made to Mr. Dunlop that had been not supported by
23
invoices?
24
A.
12:42:31 25
12:42:45 30
We mustn't
recorded those two payments. Q. 589
28 29
I'm not sure we had.
have had available to us the documentation of March '93 or we would have
26 27
No, no, it's nothing to do with invoices.
But you weren't able to advise the Tribunal of the correct position; isn't that right?
A.
At that time, yes, at that time, no.
Q. 590
The Tribunal then conducts its inquiries and establishes what appears to be the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:42:50
12:43:06
65 1
correct amount that's paid to Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
2
A.
Based on the information supplied by Monarch.
3
Q. 591
Yes.
And the position appears to be, and correct me if I am wrong, that
4
contrary to what is stated to be the Monarch position about payments in
5
general, Mr. Dunlop's payments are unusual in that payments are made to Mr.
6
Dunlop unsupported by invoices from Mr. Dunlop; is that right?
7
A.
At the time of payment, yes.
8
Q. 592
And you contend now to the Tribunal that you had a monthly retainer agreement
9 12:43:26 10
with Mr. Dunlop, which is denied by Mr. Dunlop? A.
Sorry, that's my understanding of the position.
11
Q. 593
From whom did you get that understanding from?
12
A.
Mr. Sweeney.
13
Q. 594
And did he tell you that he had agreed 4,000 pounds per month with Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I can't recall the exact wording, but, I mean, from the time but that's my --
12:43:42 15
looking back now at it years later all the evidence I see supports that, that
16 17
that was the arrangement. Q. 595
Yes.
But he'll have to speak for himself.
Insofar as the 15,000 pounds paid without any VAT to Mr. Dunlop is
18
concerned.
19
immediately; isn't that right?
12:44:02 20
That figure is netted off in the books of Monarch almost
A.
It's not netted off.
21
Q. 596
Yes?
22
A.
I don't understand how it works but because the invoice and the payment
23 24
I mean, it's automatically done by the computer.
coincide. Q. 597
Yes?
A.
For the same amount they are netted off.
26
Q. 598
And they don't carry?
27
A.
In the other cases all the payments because there is no exact invoices are
12:44:13 25
28 29 12:44:25 30
carried forward. Q. 599
So what happens is --
A.
That is quite a normal procedure and the accounts were reconciled then Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:44:29
12:44:51
66 1
certainly every year or more often than every year before the end of the year.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
that's paid.
5
A.
Mr. Glennane, sorry, Ms. Dillon. Just on that.
That invoice
And you say it was paid on the day it was received?
Yes.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
while shortly, to Mr. Caslin having sent certified copies of invoices to GRE?
9
A.
And that's fair enough.
Ms. Dillon referred us shortly,
Yes.
12:44:56 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
Dunlop's invoices
13
A.
And these are certified copies, as I understand it, of Mr.
That's right, yes.
14 12:45:03 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16 17
One dated 10th of April and one dated 6th of December and then
the success fee one A.
That's right, yes.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:45:17 20
of Mr. Caslin's letter is but was the certified copy of the 2nd of November
21 22
And she did mention, I'm not sure the reference number of what
'93 invoice sent to GRE? A.
I don't think so, no.
23 24 12:45:27 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And why not?
Well I think the invoices sent to GRE I think actually came to more than the
26
amount that we were claiming so there was no need, if you like, to put in more
27
invoices.
28 29 12:45:43 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But Mr. Glennane it seems from the correspondence and indeed
the internal documentation of Monarch that GRE were particularly sticky. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
That
12:45:49
12:46:07
67 1
every piece of paper that Monarch had that could support a claim should be
2
sent.
3
like.
4
December but an invoice for 15,000 pounds was sought and indeed paid by Monarch
5
on the 2nd of November.
6
books is not certified by Mr. Sweeney nor sent to the personnel in GRE and I'm
7
asking why that could be since you actually have that, as I understand the
8
evidence, actual document in your possession by December.
9
why ...
12:46:32 10
A.
Why not? Because that one came -- that was the second in time if you If you take the 10th of April.
Sorry, I don't know.
The next one sent is the 6th of
Yet that payment that you have presumably on your
I'm just asking him
Maybe if we could show the invoice.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14
4633, I think.
Certified by Mr. Sweeney, yes.
I mean, I can't explain why that particular
one wasn't sent and the one for say the 25 or the 32 was sent.
12:46:52 15
I think we
were trying to substantiate that the amount we were claiming from GRE, which
16
was the 4,000 per month, was the success fee, that we had invoices for more,
17
for more than that from Mr. Dunlop.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:47:10 20
questions to you, Mr. Glennane, that GRE might query why there was no VAT on
21 22
I mean, looking at it there. and I know Ms. Dillon has put
it? A.
23
I don't think they would have, no, because the invoices we sent them were for fees and we added on the VAT to it.
24 12:47:23 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
So it wouldn't have been, our VAT inputs wouldn't have been any concern of theirs.
28 29 12:47:33 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
For some reason the decision was made when Monarch were
looking for back up and obviously had to because of the letters that they were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:47:36
12:47:54
68 1
getting from GRE.
2
include this particular document as back up for the monies you had paid Mr.
3
Dunlop by December 1993?
4
A.
For some reason a decision must have been taken not to
Well it wasn't just monies we had paid.
We also had back up for monies we
5
intended to pay in the future.
There was a claim for payment.
6
said, we ended up with too many invoices from Mr. Dunlop.
7
crediting them later on.
Yes, as I
So we ended up
8 9
MS. DILLON:
12:48:10 10
And insofar as that invoice is concerned and the payment was made
on the same day, you say that what happened was the computer netted them off
11
and therefore they weren't carried forward because they cancelled each other
12
out ?
13
A.
Exactly, yes.
14
Q. 600
So when one came to look at the creditor's listing for Mr. Dunlop in '95 that
12:48:26 15
invoice and payment does not appear; isn't that right?
16
A.
Well it doesn't appear in the creditor's listing, yes.
17
Q. 601
Isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 602
Because they have already cancelled each other out?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 603
And they haven't been carried forward?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 604
It just disappears off the books?
24
A.
No, it's doesn't disappear. It's recorded in the books as an invoice.
12:48:36 20
12:48:45 25
invoices are recorded in the books.
All
The reason for doing a creditors
26
reconciliation is to ensure that you have documents to reconcile the balance
27
you are showing you owe any particular creditor with an independent
28
verification which would also be verified by the auditors.
29
peculiar in any situation if you appear to have overpaid somebody.
12:49:10 30
It would look So the
auditors and ourselves would be concerned about any account that was actually Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:49:14
12:49:29
69 1 2
in debit. Q. 605
It would obviously suggest that there were invoices missing.
So the significant features then about this payment of 15,000 pounds in
3
November of 1993 is the invoice and the cheque are dated the same day; is that
4
right?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 606
The payment is made on the date it's demanded; isn't that right?
7
A.
Well I'm not sure which came first, as I said to you already.
8
Q. 607
All right.
9 12:49:44 10
11
It is never sent to GRE.
And it's never claimed back in that
format from GRE? A.
Not in that format, no.
Q. 608
It doesn't appear to be subsumed into any later invoice from Mr. Dunlop; isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
Sorry?
14
Q. 609
It doesn't seem to be included in any later invoices, in the December invoices
12:49:56 15
from Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
16
A.
Of this 15,000?
17
Q. 610
Yeah?
18
A.
It wouldn't be if it had been paid.
19
Q. 611
And reimbursement of this payment does not appear to have been sought by
12:50:09 20
Monarch from GRE on foot of this invoice; isn't that right?
21
A.
On foot of this specific invoice, yes, yes.
22
Q. 612
Isn't that the position?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 613
Right.
12:50:22 25
26
it from GRE? A.
27 28
Because as I said, there were more than enough invoices had come in from him, if you like, to use up the total figure that we had agreed with them.
Q. 614
29 12:50:43 30
Now, why wouldn't you have relied upon that invoice and sought 50% of
Why didn't you send a letter to GRE on the 3rd of November and look for your 7,500 back?
A.
Because we were in communication with them, say, on a monthly basis. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We
12:50:47
12:50:55
70 1
didn't submit a letter every day saying we paid this invoice yesterday or
2
tomorrow.
3
Q. 615
You waited until December?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 616
And you waited until Mr. Dunlop had furnished a number of other invoices which
6
you did send on to GRE, isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 617
But you never sent on this one?
9
A.
Apparently not.
Q. 618
There could be a very good reason why it wasn't sent on in that that could be a
12:51:11 10
But I don't -- there's no reason why this wasn't sent.
11
provision of cash to Mr. Dunlop to deal with the difficulty on the 11th of
12
November 1993 that Monarch had in Dublin County Council?
13
A.
No, it certainly was not.
14
Q. 619
Couldn't have been?
A.
No.
16
Q. 620
Why do you say that?
17
A.
Because it was paid by cheque.
18
Q. 621
No VAT?
19
A.
No -- whether there's VAT or not doesn't matter.
Q. 622
How can you say that when Mr. Dunlop is a vatable individual?
A.
Well that activity, if that activity doesn't attract VAT. I don't know what
12:51:26 15
12:51:36 20
21
It couldn't have been.
22
motivation Mr. Dunlop had in raising that invoice on that day but I do know it
23
was just treated as a normal invoice in Monarch's books and when it went
24
through it was paid by cheque.
12:51:57 25
It certainly wasn't paid in cash or anything
like that. It was quite clear that it was paid by cheque.
It went through
26
the books and was available for scrutiny by the auditors and by everybody else
27
and it was included in the creditors reconciliation.
28
Q. 623
But it was never claimed back from GRE; isn't that right?
29
A.
Well the amount we claimed back from GRE was the agreed amount.
12:52:29 30
than enough invoices, invoices in that letter. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We had more
I think obviously that letter
12:52:33
12:52:49
71 1
was written in a bit of a hurry in December to try to get the cheque from them
2
before Christmas.
3
need to sort this out before Christmas or before the 31st of December, which
4
were their end of year.
Because, again, they would have been certainly saying we
5
Q. 624
Uh-huh.
6
A.
So I think it was probably a matter of make sure we have enough invoices to
7 8
cover the amount we're claiming. Q. 625
9
Would you explain to the Tribunal the circumstances of the allocation of payments against certain accounts in the books of Monarch, and Monarch
12:53:09 10
Properties Services Limited?
11
A.
Sorry in, what sense?
12
Q. 626
If, for example, Monarch Properties Services Limited pays 1,000 pounds on
13
behalf of Cherrywood Limited or on behalf of the Cherrywood Development what
14
happens?
12:53:22 15
A.
It's coded then as a Cherrywood payment.
16
Q. 627
What's the code for a Cherrywood payment?
17
A.
I don't know offhand.
18
Q. 628
Were they the 735 codes?
19
A.
So it appears, yes.
Q. 629
Can I show you an analysis that has been carried out by the Tribunal.
12:53:37 20
Or they were allocated against Cherrywood, yes.
21 22
At 8199.
And see if you can assist in making sense of what happened.
23 24 12:53:53 25
If we can turn this document around. consider that document.
Let me show you before we come to
3241.
26 27
This is a schedule of political payments, according to Monarch Properties,
28
totalling 23,450 pounds, which is made in May and June of 1991.
29
documentation has been furnished to the Tribunal.
12:54:12 30
preparing these schedules? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And this
And I think you assisted in
12:54:13
12:54:33
72 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 630
Now, the Tribunal analysed how these payments were treated in the books of
3
Monarch Properties Services Limited, Mr. Glennane, and prepared a document that
4
you've been furnished with., at 8199, and we might get you a hard copy of
5
8199.
6
A.
I got this last night.
7
Q. 631
You got this last night.
And if we just look first of all at the, under the
8
heading "original and change".
9
just increase that first of all.
12:54:56 10
To the left-hand side of the document.
So that we can possibly read that.
we look under the heading "original".
We see 66802201.
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 632
Now, you can explain this, if I'm incorrect.
If we
And if
Do you see that?
But in its simplest form.
What
13
that is, is a posting in the books of MPSL indicating the account to which the
14
payment is charged.
12:55:17 15
Is that right?
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 633
Isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 634
And that posting of 66802201 is a Monarch Properties Services Limited posting?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 635
Okay.
21
A.
Right, yes.
22
Q. 636
Isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, so it would seem, yes.
12:55:30 20
24 12:55:44 25
So it appears so, yes.
That is then changed to an account with the number 7351021?
If this document is correct.
I'm not disputing
it. Q. 637
Yes.
26
A.
It's not my document.
27
Q. 638
The underlying documents are probably your documents?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 639
The 7351021 accounts are Cherrywood accounts; isn't that right?
A.
In Monarch services, yes.
12:55:58 30
I mean, we'll come to look at the actual document?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:56:00
12:56:13
73 1
Q. 640
In Monarch Properties Services Limited?
2
A.
I think so, yeah, sorry.
3
Q. 641
So what happens, leaving aside accountancy terms for the moment.
4
all understand what's going on.
5
pounds is written to the late Mr. Tom Hand?
A cheque for in this case let's say 5,000
6
A.
Right, yes.
7
Q. 642
That cheque is written on the 30th of May 1991.
8 9 12:56:39 10
Just so we
And it's initially attributed
in the books of Monarch to Monarch Properties Services Limited; is that right? A.
I'm not sure about that but however I won't dispute it however.
Q. 643
If we look at 3988.
11 12
Now, this you will be familiar with, Mr. Glennane, because this is one of your
13
own documents.
14
you will see it's headed account 66802201 promotions.
12:57:01 15
And I want you to look at the second half of that page.
And
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
16
Q. 644
And do you see coming down that the third entry is 5,000 pounds T Hand's FG?
17
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
18
Q. 645
Are you you satisfied now that initially the payment of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Tom
19 12:57:20 20
21
Hand in May of 1991 is posted to account number 66802201? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 646
The total amount of the payments.
If we just look at the payments immediately
22
beneath that of 1,000, 500, 300, 300 and 1,000.
23
political payments?
24
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 647
And they total 8,1000; isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 648
And if we go to 3989.
12:57:33 25
Do you see all of those
28 29 12:57:51 30
And we look at the bottom of the first documents. part - the top part of the document, please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And it -- no, the first
And I want to draw to your
12:57:57
12:58:09
74 1
attention "transferred to -- the last entry" transferred to Cherrywood
2
promotion 8,100 pounds"
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 649
And then I want to draw to your attention, 3990.
5 6
Which is headed at the bottom of the page "account 73510201 General Promotion
7
Cherrywood".
Do you see that? General promotion
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 650
And you see at the very bottom 'transfer 15,350 promotion and 8,100
12:58:29 10
sponsorship', do you see that?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 651
And the total is 23,450?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 652
Now, what is happening there, Mr. Glennane, as I understand it, subject to any
12:58:40 15
correction that you're making, is that when the cheque for 5,000 pounds
16
political donation is written to Mr. Tom Hand, it is initially put into an
17
account called promotions?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 653
In MPSL; is that right?
A.
Yes, so, yes.
Q. 654
It is then transferred in April of 1992 into an account called 'General
12:58:59 20
21 22
Promotions Cherrywood; isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 655
And that means, as I understand it, that it was considered in MPSL that the
12:59:11 25
payment of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Hand was an expense in connection with
26
Cherrywood.
Is that right?
27
A.
I don't think -- not an expense, no.
28
Q. 656
Okay.
29
A.
Well the fact is it's the opposite of an expense.
12:59:27 30
Well what is it?
forward as a work in progress.
Because it was then carried
If that stayed in the first account it would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:59:31
12:59:41
75 1 2
have been written off as an expense. Q. 657
3
Well leaving aside the Cherrywood stock and what ultimately happened with that. And we'll come to deal with that, Mr. Glennane?
4
A.
Yes well --
5
Q. 658
We're dealing first of all in what's happening in the books at the time?
6
A.
Yeah, if it had been left in promotions it would have been written off as a
7
Monarch expense, a reference there to Christmas party and things.
8
Q. 659
Yes?
9
A.
Which were regarded as normal expenses.
Q. 660
Can you write off political contributions?
A.
Not as far as I know, no.
12:59:58 10
11 12
Sorry, not for tax purposes. I don't think you can
write them off for ...
13
Q. 661
Can you write them off as an expense?
14
A.
Well not for tax purposes.
Q. 662
How should political contributions be treated?
16
A.
You mean? You mean for tax purposes?.
17
Q. 663
No.
18
A.
Well if, if they were being written off they should be written off as an
13:00:11 15
19
expense that's not allowable for tax.
13:00:34 20
21
I'm talking about in the books and accounts of a company.?
They either call them donations or
promotions or ... Q. 664
22
Well let's start with the word "donations".
What's listed in the schedule
you've provided to the Tribunal in May of 1991.
At 3241.
23 24
There is a schedule of political donations totalling 23,450 pounds; isn't that
13:00:53 25
right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 665
Now, can you indicate to the Tribunal the account within Monarch Properties
28 29 13:01:04 30
Services Limited headed political donations? A.
Into --
Q. 666
Into which these donations were posted? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
13:01:07
13:01:21
76 1
A.
There wasn't one obviously.
2
Q. 667
Well, why wasn't there one?
3
A.
Because it wouldn't be a normal heading in your books.
And this was probably
4
I think probably the first time we had ever made political donations other than
5
very occasional ones.
6
Q. 668
Well certainly --
7
A.
But it wouldn't be regarded as just a normal heading so ...
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon it's after one o'clock.
13:01:31 10
11
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
So we'll stop until two o'clock.
14 13:01:35 15
16 17 18
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
19 13:01:57 20
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
21 22 23 24 14:06:41 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Glennane, please.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Now Mr. Glennane.
29 14:07:01 30
MS. DILLON:
I think before lunch, if I could have page 8191, Mr. Glennane
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:07:13
14:07:26
77 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 669
And I think you had some concern as to the accuracy of the document?
3
A.
No, I'm just pointing out it was your document, yes.
4
Q. 670
Yes.
5
And the document as we saw was based upon the documents supplied by
Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes, certainly, yeah.
7
Q. 671
And are you prepared to accept now that based on Monarch Properties documents
8
that each of those payments was initially recorded in an account of MPSL and
9
then subsequently transferred in April 1992 to an account of Cherrywood
14:07:46 10
Properties?
11
A.
In Monarch Services, yes.
12
Q. 672
Monarch services?
13
A.
Accounts, yeah.
14
Q. 673
So that everybody understands what was happening.
14:07:56 15
16
In Monarch Properties
Services Limited was a company that had funds; isn't that right? A.
17
Sorry, it wasn't funds.
It was generally a holding company where everything
was channelled through.
18
Q. 674
Yes?
19
A.
From various companies in the group, if you like, an umbrella company, to put
14:08:12 20
it that way.
21
Q. 675
And it would make payments on behalf of certain companies?
22
A.
Exactly, yes.
23
Q. 676
And it made payments on behalf of Cherrywood Properties Limited?
24
A.
In some cases, yes.
Q. 677
And it made payments on behalf of other companies?
26
A.
Exactly, yes.
27
Q. 678
And when it wrote a cheque it would allocate that cheque against an account
14:08:21 25
28 29 14:08:32 30
within Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 679
Would that be a fair way of describing it in its simplest? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:08:36
14:08:52
78 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 680
What initially happened with the schedule of payments that were made to
3
politicians in May and June of 1991 is those payments were initially allocated
4
against Monarch Properties Services Limited?
5
A.
Well they were allocated against promotions yeah, apparently, yeah.
6
Q. 681
Within Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 682
And in April of 1992 they were transferred?
9
A.
Yeah, an internal transfer.
Q. 683
An internal transfer from general promotions and sponsorship in Monarch
14:09:00 10
11
Properties Services limited and they were transferred to Cherrywood promotions;
12
isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 684
So that effectively, whilst initially they had been regarded as being a cost of
14:09:17 15
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
16
In April 1992 they were being regarded
as a cost of Cherrywood?
17
A.
Well they were being regarded as some concerns to do with Cherrywood, yes.
18
Q. 685
Well let's just see --
19
A.
I think in fairness, I think the original coding would have been done by
14:09:35 20
somebody fairly Junior.
And I don't think they placed great emphasis on the
21
coding of them.
22
they should be carried forward and they should be carried forward under the
23
heading of general promotions and allocated as Cherrywood, yes.
24
Q. 686
14:09:58 25
It was certainly felt presumably at the end of the year that
So that the expenses which are regarded as political expenses which total 23,450 pounds were initially coded or charged or allocated to Monarch
26
Properties Services Limited Sponsorship and Promotion, but in April 1992 were
27
transferred into Cherrywood general promotions?
28
A.
29 14:10:22 30
Well, yes, but it's wrong terminology to say that they were regarded as political expenses.
Q. 687
They weren't political expenses? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:10:24
14:10:37
79 1
A.
No, they were political donations.
2
Q. 688
Okay.
3
A.
But they were transferred from the Monarch -- in other words if they hadn't
We'll start again?
4
been transferred they would have been written off that year in Monarch services
5
Limited under the heading promotion.
6
Q. 689
Yeah, but they would have been written off; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yeah.
8
Q. 690
Through the P&L?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 691
They would have been deducted as an expense and the tax added back?
11
A.
Well, presumably, that was up to the auditors.
12
Q. 692
If that happened?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 693
But that didn't happen; isn't that right?
A.
No.
16
Q. 694
Because they were charged in April 1992 to Cherrywood?
17
A.
Well, they were allocated to Cherrywood.
18
Q. 695
Okay.
19
A.
As stock in Cherrywood, yes.
14:10:45 10
14:10:57 15
14:11:13 20
Were they allocated to Cherrywood as a cost of Cherrywood? So something, as I said, to do with Cherrywood,
yes.
21
Q. 696
Okay.
What had they to do with Cherrywood?
22
A.
Well, I mean, I suppose the short answer to it is that they had to be allocated
23
somewhere.
24
Cherrywood and that was probably a convenient home for them, it was the most
14:11:31 25
At the time there was a lot of payments going through relating to
likely thing, the most likely place that they would have been allocated to.
26
Plus we would have analysed anything showing Cherrywood and tried to recover
27
50% of it from GRE.
28
Q. 697
29 14:11:54 30
They were already allocated when they were made to promotions and sponsorship in Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
A.
Well they were, yeah, they were allocated as something that was a Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:12:00
14:12:09
80 1 2
expense to be written off. Q. 698
3
They could have stayed in Monarch Properties Services Limited and been dealt with through the profit and loss; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
5
Q. 699
And they could have been written down as an expense and then added back, isn't
6
that right, because it wasn't a deductible expense?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 700
That didn't happen?
9
A.
No, that's right, yes.
Q. 701
So now it's not an expense of Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that
14:12:19 10
11
right?
12
A.
It's carried forward.
13
Q. 702
But it's carried forward as Cherrywood stock?
14
A.
They were actually written off in Monarch Services at the end of the day.
Q. 703
In 1996?
16
A.
Exactly, yeah.
17
Q. 704
Yes.
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 705
But in 1992?
A.
So they were sort of, if you like, in a holding situation throughout the years
14:12:36 15
14:12:48 20
21 22
To be decided on at some future date.
I think it's fair to say that.
That's what the documentation shows?
'92, '93, '94 and '95. Q. 706
We'll come to look at the auditors treatment and what the audit working papers
23
look at but for the moment let's just look at what happened when the cheques
24
were written.
14:13:06 25
26
a cost to MPSL, Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
27 28
Well when you say they weren't necessarily allocated at the same day the cheque was written.
Q. 707
29 14:13:33 30
When the cheques were written they were initially allocated as
They would have been allocated maybe six or eight weeks later.
Six or eight weeks after the payment was made they were allocated to Monarch Properties Services Limited either sponsorship or promotion?
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:13:33
14:13:38
81 1
Q. 708
In April of 1992 they were transferred out of Monarch Properties Services
2
Limited Promotion and Sponsorship and transferred into Cherrywood General
3
Promotions?
4
A.
That's right, yeah.
5
Q. 709
Isn't that right?
6
A.
I would assume in consultation with the auditors or --
7
Q. 710
In consultation with the?
8
A.
With the auditors.
9
Q. 711
Is there any documentation to indicate it was in consultation with the
14:13:50 10
11
auditors? A.
12
There's certainly documentation indicating that the auditors, there is a document explaining the treatment of them prepared by the auditors.
13
Q. 712
That's the 1995 and 1996 documents?
14
A.
7378.
Q. 713
Uh-huh.
14:14:08 15
16 17
And when this was transferred on the 30th of April 1992 to Cherrywood
Promotion. A.
18 19
It explains it all actually very well, if I may say so.
Who made that decision?
I would assume it was made by the financial controller in consultation with the auditors.
Q. 714
Who was the financial controller?
A.
At that stage it was a man called Pat Caslin.
21
Q. 715
Who was the person with ultimate responsibility for this?
22
A.
Oh, me, yes.
23
Q. 716
So would you've proved this transfer?
24
A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 717
So that in April 1992 was it the position that it was considered within the
14:14:21 20
14:14:31 25
26
Monarch Group that these expenses or costs or cheques that had been written
27
were attributable to Cherrywood as opposed to being attributable to Monarch
28
Properties Services Limited?
29 14:14:47 30
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 718
Okay.
How did the political payments of 23,450 pounds become considered to be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:14:58
14:15:15
82 1
attributable to Cherrywood?
2
A.
Well, I assume at the time Cherrywood was the only development that we had on.
3
Q. 719
Is that the position?
4
A.
Well, I think so.
Active.
I mean, we were still involved in Tallaght.
We
5
were still involved in Ongar and Somerton were a bit later on I think, we had
6
several small developments.
7
you like, on Cherrywood.
But sure the main sort of light was shining, if
8
Q. 720
They could have been left in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
9
A.
They could have been and written off, yes.
Q. 721
But they weren't?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 722
So somebody made a decision to treat these expenses or costs or cheques that
14:15:33 10
13
had been written as an expense or a cost or, as you say yourself, something to
14
do with Cherrywood isn't that right?
14:15:45 15
A.
That's correct, yes.
16
Q. 723
Who was that person?
17
A.
I have already said, in my opinion, it was either Pat Caslin in consultation
18 19 14:15:58 20
21
with the auditors or myself. Q. 724
And you would have approved of this, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 725
So what had the payments that were made in May and June of 1991 to politicians
22 23
I'm not disowning it in any way.
to do with the Cherrywood development? A.
24
They were obviously the contributions which had been sought for the elections in that year and they were, the decision was made, the most likely, the correct
14:16:19 25
place, job to put them against really was Cherrywood.
26
It was the most active
job that was on at the time.
27
Q. 726
Are you saying it was a convenient place to put them?
28
A.
Exactly, yes.
29
Q. 727
How was it more convenient to put them against Cherrywood than against Monarch
14:16:35 30
Properties Services Limited? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:16:36
14:16:53
83 1
A.
2
Because we didn't presumably want to write them off and be -- if they were put in Cherrywood there would be a prospect of recovering 50% of them from GRE.
3
Q. 728
Why would you have wanted to leave them in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
4
A.
Sorry?
5
Q. 729
If you had left them there what would have happened to them?
6
A.
They would have just got written off.
7
Q. 730
Because they weren't tax deductible.
8
A.
It will show a higher revenue deficiency.
9
Q. 731
But you would have added back the tax; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yeah.
11
Q. 732
And that would have been the end of them; isn't that right?
12
A.
Exactly, yeah.
13
Q. 733
They would have been finished then forever and more?
14
A.
Well unless the Tribunal would be looking at them again presumably.
Q. 734
Yes?
16
A.
But in the normal course, yes.
17
Q. 735
Yes.
14:17:08 10
14:17:21 15
And if you claim them as an expense --
That's what would have happened if they had been treated as a political
18
donation and deducted as an expense, the tax would have been calculated on them
19
and the tax would have been added back and that would have been the end of them
14:17:34 20
in the following year when the following year's accounts were done in Monarch
21
Property Services Limited, isn't that right?
22
A.
In the normal course, yes.
23
Q. 736
In April 1992 the normal course didn't prevail; isn't that right?
24
A.
In what sense do you mean?
Q. 737
Because you didn't write them out of Monarch Properties Services Limited, you
14:17:47 25
26
transferred them to Cherrywood?
27
A.
Well, yeah, we transferred them, yeah, to, yeah.
28
Q. 738
And in transferring them to Cherrywood you are saying and I think what --
29 14:18:05 30
correct me if I'm not quoting you correctly, because they had something to do with Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:18:06
14:18:21
84 1
A.
I would think so, yeah.
2
Q. 739
Now, what was the something that they had to do with Cherrywood?
3
A.
Well I presume we believed that the reason that they were sought was because
4
the council would have known that we were involved in Cherrywood and would have
5
presumably believed that we'd be looking for some support off them at some
6
stage.
7
Q. 740
So are you --
8
A.
That's the basis that they were sought on.
9 14:18:31 10
That would be my interpretation of
it. Q. 741
That's your?
11
A.
Interpretation of it.
12
Q. 742
Sorry, just to be clear on it.
Your interpretation is that the councillors
13
would have sought these payments because they knew you were involved in
14
Cherrywood?
14:18:41 15
A.
Yeah, presumably or involved in development, yes.
16
Q. 743
And you would be looking for their support?
17
A.
Asking for their support.
18
Q. 744
In connection with Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes, yes, yes.
Q. 745
On that basis and based on that understanding or belief within Monarch, these
14:18:51 20
21
political donations were attributed to Cherrywood?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 746
And they were attributed to Cherrywood as a cost; is that right?
24
A.
Well, when I say a cost.
14:19:08 25
as stock.
26 27
14:19:28 30
If you carried forward something as stock you don't regard it as a
cost until it is eventually charged in. Q. 747
28 29
They were -- they were -- they were carried forward
Yes.
And if you could just explain that whole concept of the stock, the build
up of the stock, Mr. Glennane? A.
Well, there's the heading 'stock and work in progress', which is really the same thing.
In a normal company stock is still something that you still have
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:19:34
14:19:48
85 1
at the end of the year.
2
Q. 748
Uh-huh?
3
A.
And which you are going to deal with next year.
4 5
So it's not written off in a
property company it's, if you still had -- say your land was shown as stock. Q. 749
6
MPSL wouldn't have been showing the Cherrywood Land as its stock; isn't that right?
7
A.
Not the Cherrywood, no.
8
Q. 750
Because it didn't own the Cherrywood Land; isn't that right?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 751
So when it's talking about Cherrywood stock it's talking about when Monarch
14:19:57 10
11
Properties Services Limited is talking about a build up of Cherrywood stock
12
it's talking about a build up of money it has paid out on behalf of Cherrywood?
13
A.
Which is allocated against Cherrywood.
14
Q. 752
Against Cherrywood stock.
14:20:18 15
Services Limited is an asset called Cherrywood stock which ultimately will be
16 17
bought by Cherrywood when it comes into funds? A.
18 19 14:20:35 20
21
So what is being created in Monarch Properties
Not necessarily, no.
It's just being carried forward as a, the last part
doesn't necessarily follow. Q. 753
Yes?
A.
Rather than written off.
Q. 754
Yes.
22
It's being carried forward as an asset.
So what happens is that Monarch Properties Services Limited makes
payments on behalf of Cherrywood and it accumulates --
23
A.
Makes payments, yes.
24
Q. 755
Which it attributes in its books to being payments on behalf of Cherrywood; is
14:20:50 25
that right?
26
A.
Well, which are the best allocation of them is against Cherrywood.
27
Q. 756
The factual position on Monarch's records is all of these expenses are
28 29 14:21:05 30
attributed to the 73 reference; isn't that right? A.
All of these costs, yes.
Q. 757
All of these costs are attributed to the 73 reference? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:21:08
14:21:15
86 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 758
The 73 reference is the reference for Cherrywood in Monarch Properties Services
3
Limited?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 759
So the build up of the Cherrywood stock happens when Monarch Properties
6
Services Limited, in the first instance, makes a payment which it attributes to
7
Cherrywood?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 760
That's the first thing that happens; isn't that right?
A.
Well attributes at the end of the year.
Q. 761
At the end of the year.
14:21:28 10
11 12
Cherrywood can't pay that or doesn't pay that; isn't
that right?
13
A.
Well it could have paid it if it had been asked.
14
Q. 762
But it's not paid no. The situation is that it's not paid?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 763
Over the years that debt builds up and it's called stock in its simplest terms;
14:21:42 15
16 17
isn't that right?
18
A.
It's not a debt.
19
Q. 764
It's money that is paid out by Monarch Properties Services Limited for and on
14:21:58 20
It's built up as stock, yes.
behalf of Cherrywood Properties Limited; is that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 765
And what is, in its simplest terms and it may not be a proper accountancy term
23
Mr. Glennane, what's happening is that Cherrywood Properties Limited owes a
24
large amount of money to Monarch Properties Services Limited and Monarch
14:22:15 25
Properties Services Limited carries a large debt which is due to it by
26
Cherrywood Properties Limited which ultimately it will sell to Cherrywood
27
Properties Limited?
28
A.
No, I don't think that's right.
29
Q. 766
You don't think that's right.
14:22:30 30
Do you want to explain then the concept of
Cherrywood stock? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:22:30
14:22:45
87 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 767
Uh-huh?
3
A.
It's not reflected in the Cherrywood accounts at all.
4
Q. 768
Yes, I didn't suggest it was.
5
A.
You did. You said it was reflected as a debt in Cherrywood.
6
Q. 769
I beg your pardon.
7
A.
No, it was carried forward as stock/work in progress in Monarch Services.
8
Q. 770
And what is contained within that figure are costs that have been paid by
9 14:23:01 10
11
The only accounts where it's reflected is Monarch services Limited.
Other than that?
Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 771
And included within the figure of costs that have been paid on behalf of
12
Cherrywood Properties Limited are the political expenses?
13
A.
They are political donations. Yes.
14
Q. 772
And included also were other matters such as Mr. Frank Dunlop's fees?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 773
And architects' fees?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 774
And matters such as that sort?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 775
But one element?
A.
I'm not sure if they were charged or whether they were charged indirectly to
14:23:18 15
14:23:23 20
21 22
Cherrywood.
Yes, they could be carried forward as work in progress.
23
Q. 776
An accumulation of costs going on?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 777
Included in the accumulation of costs are political contributions?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 778
And the political contributions that are made in later years, in 1992 and some
14:23:36 25
28
of the political contributions that are made in 1993, are also attributed to
29
Cherrywood; isn't that right?
14:23:50 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:23:51
14:24:12
88 1
Q. 779
So that there is a process ongoing effectively in Monarch whereby when certain
2
political expenses are paid, they are being attributed as payments, if I use
3
your phraseology, in connection with Cherrywood?
4
A.
Well, that's the most likely place to put them at the time.
I mean, it
5
changed later on, a lot of them were put through Dun Laoghaire or Dun Laoghaire
6
Town Centre or something like that.
7
through as, I say, Tallaght.
8
I can put it that way.
9
Q. 780
14:24:33 10
Previously they would have been put
So Cherrywood was the main kid on the block, if
And the decision is made to attribute these expenses to Cherrywood because of the knowledge or belief or understanding in Monarch that these monies are being
11
sought from Monarch by the councillors or the politicians because they know
12
that you are going to be developing in Cherrywood and because you will be
13
seeking their assistance in connection with Cherrywood, if I understand you
14
correctly?
14:24:50 15
A.
Well it's a huge -- because the decision would have been made in the accounts
16
department in Monarch rather than made by, I don't think Mr. Monahan would have
17
known anything about it, accounting treatment or indeed Mr. Sweeney.
18
Q. 781
But the accounts --
19
A.
The people from the accounts department, they were looking for a home for
14:25:06 20
these.
21
You had two alternatives; either write them off as an expense that
year.
22
Q. 782
Uh-huh?
23
A.
Or carry them forward.
24
Q. 783
That decision that was made to carry them forward was made in April 1992?
A.
It would appear so, yes, that was the end of the year, yes.
26
Q. 784
When they were transferred into Cherrywood?
27
A.
Yes, well, whenever they were transferred in, yes.
28
Q. 785
I think that was April.
14:25:23 25
29 14:25:40 30
And so a decision was made to carry them forward.
And I think then attempts were made to recover those
funds from GRE; is that right? A.
I think so, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:25:43
14:26:11
89 1
Q. 786
And I think that in March of 1992 I think Mr. Richard Lynn wrote at 8767 to GRE
2
Properties and he enclosed in the second sentence a complete statement in
3
cashflow in relation to the draft Development Plans submission as requested by
4
Brian Gillies.
Do you see that?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 787
And the cashflow projection is at page 8769.
7
Now, I want to draw to your
attention, you'll be familiar with this document, Mr. Glennane?
8
A.
I've seen it before, yes.
9
Q. 788
I want to draw to your attention two headings.
14:26:30 10
One is the second last
heading which is called Strategy Consultancy Fees?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 789
And then the one ahead of it, Community Contributions and Courtesy Personnel,
13 14 14:26:40 15
that's three in fact? A.
Right.
Q. 790
Now, the document is divided into paid and there is -- divided into -- there
16
are payments that have been made up to the 31st of January '92 which is
17
underneath the column entitled total in the centre of the page; isn't that
18
right?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 791
And then there are projections?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 792
For March, April, May and June?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 793
With a projected total.
14:26:55 20
14:27:13 25
And there is a projected total for strategy
consultancy fees of 75,000 being three payments of 25,000; isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 794
But there's no actual cost in incurred under the heading of Strategy
28 29 14:27:19 30
Consultancy Fees at this stage; isn't that right? A.
On that sheet, yes.
Q. 795
Isn't that the position? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:27:20
14:27:40
90 1
A.
Yes, on that, yes.
2
Q. 796
Now, that letter is sent on the 16th of March 1992.
And on the 27th of April
3
1992, at 2736.
There is a second version of that document.
And it contains
4
a notation at the bottom.
5
And it says "Richard, I can't find the 25,000 in respect of Strategy
6
Consultancy Fees.
7
Personnel' as follows.
Now, the document is dated the 27th of April 1992.
Can you be specific and then increase 'Consultants Courtesy March '92, 5,000 and April '92, 5,000".
8 9
So it would appear that somebody was looking for a Strategy Consultancy Fee of
14:28:01 10
11
25,000; isn't that right? A.
Well I don't know what -- it says I can't find it.
This is a projection I
12
think.
13
find -- it wouldn't be an invoice or anything it was just a projection.
14
I mean, you wouldn't -- I don't know how you wouldn't be able to
Q. 797
If it was in costs paid to date you'd expect to find it wouldn't you?
A.
Sorry?
16
Q. 798
If it had been in costs paid to date, the first half of the document?
17
A.
If it had been paid, yes.
18
Q. 799
In fact there's nothing under the heading of Strategy Consultancy Fees paid to
14:28:24 15
19 14:28:37 20
date; isn't that right. A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 800
Who is the Richard to whom this query is being addressed?
22
A.
I presume it's Richard Lynn.
23
Q. 801
And do you know who is the person making the query?
24
A.
It's obviously somebody in our accounts department, I think, maybe a man called
14:28:51 25
Ken Lawless, I wouldn't be a hundred percent sure of that.
26
Q. 802
On the 28th of April 1992, on the following day, at 3992?
27
A.
Yeah?
28
Q. 803
Under the heading "Strategy Consultancy Fees" a sum of 22,150 pounds has been
29 14:29:08 30
allocated? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:29:09
14:29:13
91 1
Q. 804
Under April 1992?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 805
Isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 806
So this is under the heading of money that is paid; isn't that right?
6
A.
Has been paid, yes.
7
Q. 807
Has been paid.
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 808
So now the document is saying by April 1992, 22,150 pounds was paid under the
14:29:28 10
heading 'Strategy Consultancy Fees'?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 809
Okay.
13 14 14:29:37 15
As opposed to the projection?
And this is the first time the sum of 22,150 pounds arises; isn't that
right? A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 810
And the total amount that is deemed to have been paid to date is the sum of
16
382,424 pounds; isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 811
And included in that sum is the sum of 22,150 pounds for strategy consultancy?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 812
Now, if I could have 3991, please.
14:29:52 20
Now, this is a document between Monarch ,
21
an account with GRE Properties Limited entitled Third Parties Costs.
22
to your attention first that the total expenditure is 382,424 pounds?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 813
And included therefore in that figure is 22,150 pounds for strategy
14:30:18 25
consultancy?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 814
Isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 815
And what is being sought here is 50% of that figure from GRE?
A.
That's right, yes.
14:30:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
I draw
14:30:25
14:30:40
92 1
Q. 816
Less a payment of 71,463 pounds?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 817
Which is lodged to the bank account of Monarch at 7364 on 26th of February '92?
4
A.
Sorry which figure?
5
Q. 818
Sorry, 7346.?
6
A.
Sorry, I'm lost.
7
Q. 819
Sorry.
8
A.
71453, yes.
9
Q. 820
Yes, and that's lodged to the bank account?
A.
Yes, yes.
11
Q. 821
It says 26th of February GRE?
12
A.
Woodchester Bank heading was confusing me. It's GRE, yes.
13
Q. 822
So if we go back to -- 3991.
14:30:55 10
14
You see that there was an amount paid by GRE on account?
It says -- sorry, yes.
What this document is saying effectively is that
there is due to Monarch between Monarch and GRE a sum of 382,424. Included
14:31:19 15
within that is a figure of 22,150 for strategy consultancy; is that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 823
And that half of that is due by GRE and they have already paid 71,463?
18
A.
Well not half of it, yeah, well of the total, yes.
19
Q. 824
Of the total of 382,424 , half of that is being sought from GRE?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 825
Less a sum of 71,463 already paid?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 826
The calculation of the sum of 22,150 is at 8579.
14:31:41 20
24 14:31:53 25
This is the strategy consultancy fee back up; isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes, yes.
27
Q. 827
So that in calculating the sum of 22,150 pounds under the heading of strategy
28
consultancy, what's being added together are various political donations made
29
by Monarch Properties in May and June of 1991?
14:32:17 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:32:17
14:32:31
93 1
Q. 828
The total amount that in fact had been paid by Monarch Properties in May or
2
June of 1991 was a figure of 23,450 pounds.
3
document?
We saw that on the original
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 829
Isn't that right? And now what's being claimed under the heading of strategy
6
consultancy is 22,150; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 830
Now, on the 28th of April 1992, at 3668.
9 14:32:45 10
Again, under the heading Cherrywood Village, because this document I should
11
have pointed out to you, is a document that is headed Cherrywood Village.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 831
And I draw your attention again to the Strategy Consultancy Fees of 22,150 ?
14
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 832
And there is a note at the bottom of the document "next Thursday cheque for
14:33:05 15
16
everything except rings" do you see that?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 833
It's handwritten at the bottom?
19
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 834
Everything except rings refers to the items on the list that have an asterisk
14:33:19 20
21
or a circle beside them?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 835
One of the items that is circled is the strategy consultancy fees of 22,150 ?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 836
And I suggest that means that GRE had agreed to pay everything except the fees
14:33:33 25
26
that are marked with a black asterisk including the strategy consultancy?
27
A.
About eight or ten different items.
28
Q. 837
There's a number of items?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 838
And the total amount of the items in dispute is 103,271 but the total amount
14:33:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:33:53
14:34:10
94 1 2
being sought by Monarch was 382,424? A.
3 4
Yeah well, I don't think it's a correct thing to say that they were in dispute but they may have needed more information or something.
Q. 839
Right.
Well included in that figure, included in that list as one looks at
5
it, Mr. Glennane, is a list of matters that are, that have asterisks or little
6
black ticks beside them?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 840
It starts with MPSL Ledger accounts; Sundry ; administration; stationary,
9
valuations; materials; Pembroke PR; Audio Services; RSI, weekend promotions;
14:34:33 10
payments; then petty cash; wages; courtesy personnel and strategy consultancy
11
fees.
Isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 841
And in May of '92, at 3666.
14 14:34:54 15
16
Mr. Noel Murray sends a memo to Mr. Philip
Monahan which is cc'd to yourself and Mr. Eddie Sweeney; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 842
And he records that he met Brian Gillies in Monarch House on Tuesday 7th of May
17
and went through the schedule of costs incurred to the 30th of April '92.
18
That's the schedule we've just been looking at?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 843
He says he attaches a list of the queries raised by Brian?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 844
And I go down to the next paragraph, "I can also advise that Brian is quite
14:35:07 20
23
adamant that GRE will not contribute towards the strategic consultancy fee
24
element of the cash flow projections?
14:35:22 25
A.
Right.
26
Q. 845
So they're not going to pay it, according to this document?
27
A.
According to Brian Gillies, yes.
28
Q. 846
They are baulking at paying the 22,150 ?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 847
The 22,150 is comprised we know of political contributions paid by Monarch in
14:35:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:35:39
14:35:51
95 1
May and June of 1991?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 848
The list of queries raised by Brian Gillies are at 3667.
And this list
4
reflects those marks that had been made by way of an asterisk or a circle in
5
the projected cost list; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 849
And the last two on that list are courtesy personnel and strategy consultancy
8 9
fees? A.
Yes.
Q. 850
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes, that's right, yes.
12
Q. 851
Now, on the 8th of May 1992.
14:36:00 10
At 8445.
Mr. Ken Lawless sends to GRE
13
Properties copies of the March and April invoices and sets out that the sum due
14
to Monarch amounts to 146,473 pounds?
14:36:35 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 852
And he encloses with that a schedule of third party cost.
17
At 8846.
And he
sets out the total expenditure to February as 311, 642?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 853
There's additional expenditure in March '92.
14:36:49 20
expenditure in April '92.
Schedule two.
Schedule one.
There's
And there's expenditure in
21
March/April '92, schedule three.
And the figure for schedule 1, is £8,801
22
schedule 2, £61,981 and schedule 3 £53,448.
Is that right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 854
The total comes to £435,872?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 855
He's looking for 50% of that from GRE less credit for the 71,000 pounds; isn't
14:37:09 25
26 27
that right?
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 856
And the total he's looking for is £146,473?
A.
That's right.
14:37:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:37:23
14:37:41
96 1
Q. 857
Attached to that document at page 3998, is another copy of the schedule of
2
costs entitled Cherrywood Village and at the top of it it has one, two and
3
three.
Do you see that?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 858
At the bottom, I want to draw to your attention, at the bottom of the column
6
headed one the figure is 8,801, do you see that?
7
A.
Sorry, where is that.
8
Q. 859
Under the words "Cherrywood Village?"
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 860
Do you see handwritten at the top one and a circle?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 861
If you follow that to the very bottom and the total?
13
A.
Oh, yes, 8101, yes.
14
Q. 862
That was total referred to in schedule one in Mr. Lawless' document at page
14:37:54 10
14:38:09 15
8846; isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 863
If you look at column two, 61,981; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 864
And that was attributed to schedule two in Mr. Lawless' document at 8846?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 865
Under column three, 53,447 and that was the amount attributed to schedule three
14:38:20 20
21 22
under Mr. Lawless' document at 8846?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 866
Right.
14:38:38 25
Included in column two is a sum of 22,150 pounds for strategy
consultancy fees?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 867
So, notwithstanding GRE saying that they weren't going to pay them; isn't that
28 29 14:38:44 30
right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 868
Monarch come again in May of 1992 with this document including the strategy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:38:51
14:39:02
97 1
consultancy fees; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 869
So it would appear that by the 14th of the 6th 1992 Monarch are still
4
maintaining that they are entitled to be paid half these costs?
5
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
6
Q. 870
And can you explain to the Tribunal how it was that political donations
7 8
totalling 22,150 pounds came to be described as strategy consultancy fees? A.
9 14:39:24 10
11
It's quite clear from one of the earlier documents that GRE
knew what they were. Q. 871
That's not my question.?
A.
No, well, I mean.
12 13
I don't know, no.
Maybe GRE asked us to call them that or something, I don't
know. Q. 872
14
Well insofar as GRE are concerned, they are adamant, according to Mr. Noel Murray, that they will not contribute towards the strategic consultancy
14:39:44 15
element?
16
A.
Mr. Gillies, was.
17
Q. 873
Yes?
18
A.
He wouldn't have carried much authority as far as we were concerned in GRE.
19
Q. 874
Right.
14:39:53 20
But leaving that aside for the moment.
Someone has designated
£22,150 of political donations that are made in May and June of 1991 by
21
Monarch Properties Services Limited as strategy consultancy fees?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 875
First of all, is that right?
24
A.
Sorry, yeah, it is right, yes.
Q. 876
And then can I ask you.
26
A.
Well, it's as good a way as any I suppose, if I'm being honest about it.
27
Q. 877
How can a political donation be described as a fee?
28
A.
Well, it doesn't be described as a fee obviously, yes.
29
Q. 878
And what strategic consultancy was involved in the sum of 22,150 pounds paid
14:40:11 25
14:40:35 30
Is that a correct way to describe them?
to local councillors and politicians in May and June of 1991? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:40:40
14:40:52
98 1
A.
2
I don't know -- there was no consultancy fee, no. It was obviously a convenient heading more than anything else.
3
Q. 879
And who came up with the convenient heading?
4
A.
I don't know.
5
Q. 880
How could this --
6
A.
Maybe GRE.
7
Q. 881
This document, I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, as you well know, is a document
8 9 14:41:06 10
I'm not saying that it was.
generated by Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right? A.
Absolutely.
Q. 882
And the creation of this document is created for the purpose of advising GRE of
11
the expenses that have been incurred by Monarch Properties Services Limited in
12
connection with Cherrywood Village; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 883
And so is the document headed that.
14:41:21 15
That is for the purpose of retaining
repayment; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 884
And I would suggest to you that if you accept that, it follows that somebody
18
within Monarch decided to describe strategy consultancy fees as an appropriate
19
way to describe 22,150 pounds worth of political donations; isn't that right?
14:41:36 20
21
A.
Well, it's a convenient way or whatever, yes.
Q. 885
All right.
22
Well, who was the person who was able to conveniently describe
political donations in that way?
23
A.
I don't know.
24
Q. 886
Well can you think of any reason as to why somebody would do that?
A.
Well, I mean, I don't know.
14:41:49 25
Again, as I said, unless it was bounced off GRE
26
first and they wanted it described as that.
27
documents that you had earlier.
28
from GRE.
29 14:42:08 30
If you go back to one of those
There was certainly no attempt to conceal it
Q. 887
I beg your pardon?
A.
If you go back to one of the documents that you had earlier. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
There was no
14:42:12
14:42:24
99 1
attempt to conceal it from GRE.
2
political parties after them.
You had a document earlier with a list of
3
Q. 888
I'm not worried about GRE?
4
A.
This document is solely prepared for GRE.
5
Q. 889
What I'm asking you about?
6
A.
You have to be worried about GRE.
7 8
seeking reimbursement from GRE. Q. 890
9 14:42:43 10
11
Somebody decided to describe 22,150 pounds worth of political donations as strategy consultancy fees, doesn't that follow?
A.
Yes.
Q. 891
Now, I want you to explain to the Tribunal A you who believe that person to be
12
and what the reason for doing that was?
13
A.
Well A, I don't know.
14
Q. 892
Well was it you?
A.
I don't think so.
14:42:55 15
It was solely prepared for the purposes of
But I don't recall doing it.
I -- I could speculate if
16
you want me to on who might have done it, I don't know if you want me to.
17
certainly appears that it was a document prepared in consultation with GRE.
18
There was certainly no attempt to conceal what they were.
19
somebody in GRE said this will look better coming to our people if it's
14:43:22 20
21
And perhaps
described as that, but that's mere speculation. Q. 893
Can that really be so, Mr. Glennane, if one looks at the very first version of
22
this document entitled Cherrywood Projections at 8769 before it ever goes to
23
GRE.
24
that?
14:43:43 25
26
You will see there a designation 'strategy consultancy fees', do you see
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 894
And this is before it's ever sent off on the first instance to GRE; isn't that
27
right? Because you see there is nothing included as having been spent under
28
the heading; isn't that right?
29 14:43:55 30
It
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 895
So it's unlikely in those circumstances to have been a designation requested by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:44:01
14:44:17
100 1 2
GRE; isn't that right? A.
Well, I don't think that necessarily follows.
I'm sure there was
3
communication on the phone and we were saying we wanted to try to recover half
4
of these costs and the GRE personnel may well have said put them in there.
5
Q. 896
Are you sure --
6
A.
Political contribution.
7
Q. 897
Is that speculation on your part?
8
A.
It is, yes.
9
Q. 898
Are you aware of any such conversation, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Not specifically, no but there was certainly constant communication with GRE.
Q. 899
Certainly insofar as the documents in the first version is created within
14:44:29 10
11
It might not be acceptable to somebody in GRE.
12
Monarch, the document at 8769 has already a Designation Strategy Consultancy
13
Fees and records nothing having been paid under that heading to the 31st of
14
January '92; isn't that right?
14:44:50 15
16
A.
That's right.
Q. 900
And then when one comes to look at a later version which is the 14th of June
17
'92 at 3998.
You see that, and we've seen it already?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 901
The sum of 22,150 which you agree is the list of political donations made by
14:45:07 20
Monarch in May and June of '91?
21
A.
Can I see the list again, please?
22
Q. 902
Certainly.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 903
Now, it's not the full list of the payments that were actually ...
A.
I think it's worth emphasising that there is no attempt to conceal what that
14:45:31 25
3122?
26
is.
27
somebody.
28
names or initials.
29 14:46:02 30
Q. 904
It says if FG, FF, FF.
So it's obvious that it was discussed with
It wasn't just sent out of the blue saying this is a whole list of So it wouldn't have been sent just out of the blue.
Two things have happened by June of 1992.
At 3998.
Somebody has decided
that strategy consultancy means political payments of the order of 21,500 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:46:07
14:46:14
101 1
pounds?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 905
And somebody has located them as having been paid by April '92; isn't that
4
right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 906
In fact those payments had been made in May and June of '91; isn't that right?
7
A.
So I believe, yes.
8
Q. 907
In the very first version of this document there is no record of them having
9
been allocated as having been paid before May and June of '91; isn't that
14:46:31 10
right? Sorry, before April of '92; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 908
So somebody made a second decision to include them; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 909
No, who did that?
A.
Um, whoever prepared that document, which may have been either Ken Lawless or
14:46:41 15
16
Mr. Lynn or certainly it wouldn't have been done in isolation.
17
probably a combination of people.
18
Q. 910
19
And did anything happen around this time in May or June of 1992, that would have caused somebody to include the sum of 22,150 pounds as being part of
14:47:08 20
21
So it was
strategy consultancy fees? A.
No, well my belief is that it would probably have been discussed.
They said
22
we'd like to recoup half of these costs.
23
this way by GRE because certainly if you look back to that list just on
24
initials there's no way that would have been sent sort of cold to somebody. It
14:47:34 25
26
And we were asked to designate it
wouldn't mean anything. Q. 911
On the 27th of April 1992.
At 3736.
And I just want to draw to your
27
attention, Mr. Glennane, it might help, the date at the bottom of this
28
document, which is the 22nd of April?
29 14:47:49 30
A.
'92.
Q. 912
' 92.
You see under the heading 'strategy consultancy fees' nothing has been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:47:55
14:48:00
102 1
entered?
2
A.
That's right, yeah.
3
Q. 913
There is a query to Richard Lynn about where is the 25,000?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 914
On the following day 28th of April 1992.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 915
The 22,150 is allocated to 'strategy consultancy fees' for the first time;
8 9 14:48:13 10
At 3992?
isn't that right? A.
I see that yeah.
Q. 916
Did that allocation have anything to do with the transfer of the fees out of
11
Monarch Properties Services Limited into the Cherrywood General Promotion
12
Account which occurred at the same time?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 917
So you say that these matters are not related?
A.
No, I wouldn't think so, no.
Q. 918
When the calculation of the list of 22,150 was done, would somebody have had
14:48:28 15
16 17
to go back to the books and records of Monarch to find out where those payments
18
were?
19 14:48:42 20
A.
I assume so, yes, yeah.
Q. 919
And when they went back.
21
the first half of that page.
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 920
And in April of '92.
24
If we could have 3987.
Political donations; Isn't that right?
If somebody went looking for the back up of that list
they would have realised that where those payments had been posted was not to
14:49:07 25
Cherrywood but to Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
26
A.
Possibly, yes.
27
Q. 921
Well that's where they're posted; isn't it?
28
A.
Can't see the heading on it.
29 14:49:24 30
And if you look at really
it is. Q. 922
I don't know if that's a trial balance or what
Sorry, General Ledger Report.
If you look at 3928? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:49:27
14:49:46
103 1
A.
That would normally be done well after the end of the year.
2
Q. 923
If you look at -- I'm just looking at the allocation now, Mr. Glennane.
3
look at 3986.
At the bottom of that page.
4
matter is sponsorship 66801201?
5
A.
That's right, yeah.
6
Q. 924
If we look at the following page, 3987.
If we
You will see that the very last
You will see that all of those
7
political payments are attributed to that account within MPSL; isn't that
8
right?
9
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 925
And that account is not a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
11
A.
Yeah, that's right, yes.
12
Q. 926
It's a 6682101; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's what we have on this, yes.
14
Q. 927
And the political donations on that page amount to 15,350 pounds.
14:50:00 10
14:50:17 15
go to 3988.
16
At the very bottom of the first half of the document.
And if we I draw to
your attention 30 April '92 transfer to Cherrywood promotion 15,350 pounds.?
17
A.
I see that, yeah.
18
Q. 928
Now, two things are happening simultaneously in Monarch.
19
One is, a claim is
being made for 21,250 pounds 'strategy consultancy fees', which are comprised
14:50:52 20
of political donations; isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 929
And those political donations are up to April 1992 recorded as being posted not
23 24 14:50:57 25
26
to Cherrywood but to Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 930
And in April of 1992 they are taken out of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
A.
Sorry, not necessarily in April.
27
which could be most likely after April.
28
Q. 931
Do you see transaction date?
29
A.
Well.
Q. 932
At the top of the document.
14:51:14 30
They are taken out of the end of the year,
TRX date?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:51:17
14:51:25
104 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 933
And go down to the very bottom what's?
3
A.
12, '92.
4
Q. 934
What does it say.
5
A.
That was the end of the year, yes.
6
Q. 935
So the transfer is taking place at the 30th of April '92; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes, but that's the end of the year, yeah.
8
Q. 936
Yes.
9
It says the 30th of April '92?
But what is happening is that these political expenses are being cut out
of the promotions account in Monarch Properties Services Limited and are being
14:51:42 10
transferred over to the Cherrywood Promotion Account; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 937
And this is happening at the same time as somebody has decided to allocate
13 14
these costs as being Strategy Consultancy Fees; isn't that right? A.
14:52:02 15
No, I'm saying that I would believe that that entry there was probably made sometime well after April '92.
16
Q. 938
Notwithstanding that it's dated April' 29?
17
A.
No, because the end of the year was April.
18
off until the following January.
19
entry would have been made.
14:52:20 20
Q. 939
21
So the accounts were never signed
So sometime between April and January that
And if you look at the second half of that list.
Sorry, if we could have the
full page back?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 940
And you see account 66802201 promotions.
24
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
Q. 941
And that is the promotions account in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 942
And do you see four payments T Hand, FG, J. Fahy FF, JD, JH, SH, OH.
14:52:32 25
28 29 14:52:46 30
see that? A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 943
They are all political payments aren't they? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that account?
Do you
14:52:49
14:53:07
105 1
A.
2
I don't know about the JD and JH, they don't have any political party named after them.
So I don't know. But certainly the T Hand's and the J Fahy are.
3
Q. 944
And OH.
4
A.
I don't know, I have no idea.
5
Q. 945
You've no idea no, but they total 8,100 pounds those payments; isn't that
6
Would that be Owen Hammond?
right?
7
A.
I think so, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 946
And if you move to the next page.
9 14:53:29 10
11
3989.
And at the bottom of the first
entry you see transfer to Cherrywood Promotions 8,100 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 947
So two things have happened.
The political payments that have been made by
12
Monarch Properties Services Limited are being carved or taken out of the
13
general promotions and sponsorship account of Monarch Properties Services
14
Limited and being placed into a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
14:53:46 15
A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 948
And they total 23,450; isn't that right?
17
A.
Well I don't know.
18
Q. 949
Well if we look at 3990.
19
I believe, yes. And this account at the bottom of the page is
account 73510201. And the 73 accounts were Cherrywood accounts; isn't that
14:54:08 20
right?
21
A.
Um, yes, well, yes.
22
Q. 950
And that's the general promotion account?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 951
And at the very bottom of that transfer 15,350 promotion and 8,100, 23,450
14:54:23 25
pounds do you see that?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 952
So that is the other side of the transaction.
We saw it coming out of the
28
Monarch Properties Services Limited two accounts and it's now coming into the
29
Cherrywood account, isn't that right?
14:54:34 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:54:34
14:54:53
106 1
Q. 953
2
And that figure of 23,450 is the same list of political donations provided to the Tribunal by you at 3241.
Do you see that?
3
A.
Provided by Monarch, yes.
4
Q. 954
Yes.
5
A.
I helped prepare, it, yes.
6
Q. 955
That list totals 23,450 pounds?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 956
The amount that had been attributed to Strategy Consultancy Fees was a sum of
9 14:55:10 10
And I think you helped prepare that list?
21,500 pounds; isn't that right? A.
I thought it was 22,150 or something but maybe I'm wrong.
11
Q. 957
Maybe you're correct.?
12
A.
There was --
13
Q. 958
22,150?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 959
And I think at 3996.?
16
A.
There appears to be a difference of about 1,300, Ms. Dillon.
17
Q. 960
Well there's slightly more than that but certainly at the first instance.
14:55:19 15
18
the document dated the 8th of June 1992.
19
consultancy fees across, the 22,150, you will see beside it just slightly
14:55:42 20
above it in handwritten plus 2,700.
If you follow the strategy
Do you see that?
21
A.
Sorry, where is that again?
22
Q. 961
If you could increase the portion dealing with the bottom third of the
23
document, please.
24
the side.
14:55:59 25
Yes.
On
And if you just look at the handwritten notation at
Do you see that?
A.
Sorry, plus 2,700. I see that.
26
Q. 962
Do you see that?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 963
And that is the difference, Mr. Glennane, between the 22,150 and the 23,450?
29
A.
No, I wouldn't think that's the difference.
Q. 964
You don't think that.
14:56:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:56:15
14:56:36
107 1
A.
2
Q. 965
3
If you subtract 22 from 23 you don't get 2,700. Sorry, I beg your pardon.
It's the difference, sorry, I think between the.
It should be 24,850; is that right?
4
A.
I am not counting but it is certainly not 23,000.
5
Q. 966
24, 850 it should be, Mr.-- and on the following version of the document on the
6
14th of June, at 3998.
Do you see there is added in a figure of 3,000 pounds
7
under the heading strategy consultancy fees?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 967
Do you know what that relates to?
A.
Interim lay or something.
11
Q. 968
1700 not 2,700.
12
A.
I do, yes.
13
Q. 969
Do you know what that relates to?
14
A.
No, it's interim at the top, I'm not quite sure what that means.
Q. 970
Okay.
14:57:04 10
14:57:22 15
16
I'll come back to that.
Can I show you 7380, please.
Do you see the figure of 3,000?
And do you see the first entry across is
a cheque made out to cash?
17
A.
Cherrywood, yes.
18
Q. 971
And it's attributable to Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 972
And you see at 7381.
21
A.
I do, yeah.
22
Q. 973
From the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 974
And the cheque at 8544 I think is signed by yourself.
A.
That's right, yes.
26
Q. 975
And it's made out to cash?
27
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
28
Q. 976
And that appears to be at 3707.
14:57:40 20
14:58:03 25
29 14:58:19 30
It's deducted.
Do you see that? From the account of?
The second item on this list headed cash
3,000 pounds and strategy beside it? A.
Is that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:58:19
14:58:48
108 1
Q. 977
And I suggest that explains how it's now being included in the list at 3998.
2
So the first figure is 22,150 is made up of the list of political payments.
3
And the second sum of 3,000 pounds is a cash payment that's made on foot of a
4
cheque signed by you in May of 1992.
5
what that cash payment was about?
Now, can you assist the Tribunal as to
6
A.
No, I can't, no.
7
Q. 978
Well what we do know is that the 22,150 is comprised of political payments;
8 9
Not at this stage, no.
isn't that right? A.
Political contributions, yes.
Q. 979
Political contributions?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 980
So it would follow, would it not, that the payment of 3,000 pounds is equally
14:59:02 10
13 14 14:59:13 15
paid to a politician? A.
Not necessarily.
I don't know that I would reach that conclusion.
Q. 981
Let's just analyse that for a little bit so.
We know for a fact that the
16
22,150 is comprised solely and absolutely of political contribution; isn't
17
that right?
18
A.
There's a figure put in April '92 apparently, yes.
19
Q. 982
But we know that it's political contributions; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 983
That it has no other matter or payment included in it other than political
14:59:32 20
21 22
contributions?
23
A.
From that list, yes.
24
Q. 984
And therefore, we know that somebody in Monarch decided that political
14:59:45 25
contributions should be described as strategy consultancy fees although we do
26
not know who that person is; isn't that right?
27
A.
Or somebody within GRE.
28
Q. 985
Or somebody in GRE?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 986
Although you agree that the document was created by Monarch?
14:59:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:00:00
15:00:11
109 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 987
It would follow from that, I suggest, that a payment of 3,000 pounds must
3
similarly be a political contribution which is now being described as strategy
4
consultancy fees.
5
A.
Not necessarily, no.
6
multitude.
7
the two.
8
Q. 988
9 15:00:34 10
Would you agree with that?
Uh-huh.
I mean, strategy consultancy fees could cover a
I mean, it's, I don't see any necessary connection really between
Do you know what was happening with the planning in May of 1992? The
planning and the zoning of Cherrywood in May of 1992? A.
Yes, yes.
11
Q. 989
What was happening?
12
A.
Well there was a meeting at some stage in May or towards the end of May to --
13
Q. 990
You know that on the 4th of May 1992.
14 15:00:53 15
7144, please.
A motion seeking the
rezoning of these lands was received by Dublin County Council? A.
Well, I didn't know that, but, yes.
16
Q. 991
Do you think these matters, these two matters might in some way be connected?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 992
But you have no idea what the 3,000 pounds was paid for?
19
A.
No, no.
Q. 993
Who decided to allocate the word "strategy" to the 3,000 pounds?
21
A.
I don't know.
22
Q. 994
Was it you?
23
A.
No, it certainly wasn't, I don't think, no.
24
Q. 995
Do you know where the sum of 3,000 pounds was attributed in the books of
15:01:11 20
15:01:28 25
26
Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
27
Well I would have assumed if Cherrywood is written after it, it went into this promotions account we were talking about earlier.
28
Q. 996
It went into 7382?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 997
7382, please.
15:01:41 30
It seems ...
You will see there account 73571 promotion open days.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Now,
15:01:50
15:02:03
110 1
the 73 means that's a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 998
But this is another Cherrywood account.
4
postage and telephone.
And some four items down between
You have cash cheque, isn't that right, 3,000 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 999
So this is being attributed as being a payment in connection with or associated
7
with Cherrywood; isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 1000
And it is further being attributed as being a strategic payment; isn't that
15:02:18 10
right?
11
A.
Well not necessarily by the same person, yes.
12
Q. 1001
But it is being so attributed?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 1002
Right.
And it finally finds its association in strategy consultancy fees at
3998.
Because --
15:02:30 15
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 1003
They are described in association with the 22,150 as strategy consultancy?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1004
And can you assist the Tribunal at all as to how that 3,000 pounds could either
15:02:48 20
have been a strategic payment or a consultancy payment or a political payment?
21
A.
No, could you go back to the cheque payments sheets, please.
22
Q. 1005
I can. The actual cheque?
23
A.
No, the actual cheque payments sheet where somebody has written Cherrywood.
24
Q. 1006
73 --
A.
In the margin.
26
Q. 1007
Sorry the cheque payments book?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1008
Sorry.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 1009
And if you could increase the second or third line of that please.?
15:03:11 25
15:03:19 30
7380.?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:03:25
15:03:44
111 1
A.
I'm just trying to figure who that handwriting is.
2
transactions would have followed from that.
3
is or who wrote "Cherrywood" there.
4
Q. 1010
Well certainly somebody --
5
A.
Somebody wrote Cherrywood.
6
have.
7
Cherrywood account.
Because the rest of the
I don't know whose writing that
As I said, the rest of the transactions would
When somebody came to post it they would have posted it to the
8
Q. 1011
And if somebody?
9
A.
If somebody included in that other list, not necessarily the same person,
15:03:59 10
11
that's the point I'm making. Q. 1012
12
At 3707.
Someone has written the word "strategy" beside the cash of 3,000;
isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1013
And then it appears -- it appears in the --
A.
The sheets.
16
Q. 1014
In the sheets, yeah.
17
A.
That's what I'm saying.
15:04:14 15
18 19 15:04:27 20
21
At 3998 isn't that right? I think the rest of it flowed from that entry on the
cheques payments sheet. Q. 1015
That because it's being attributed to Cherrywood?
A.
Exactly, yes.
Q. 1016
So why would that be so? Why couldn't it have gone into Cherrywood supplies,
22
for example? Why would simply attributing it to Cherrywood mean that it would
23
end up as a strategy consultancy payment?
24 15:04:46 25
26
A.
I don't know.
I'm just saying if it went into promotions I don't know why.
Obviously if it was described as cash it would be difficult for somebody to ascertain afterwards what it was for.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
29 15:04:53 30
MS. DILLON: Sorry, Sir. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:04:54
15:04:59
112 1 2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Glennane, you signed the cheque for 3,000?
That's right.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
feature, I take it?
8
A.
And a cheque made payable to cash would have been an unusual
Well not that unusual, no, no.
9 15:05:06 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
12
No, no.
No.
For that size of? I mean, there was -- I mean, you'd often -- certainly there are
several reasons why you draw cheques for cash.
13 14 15:05:24 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
But presumably if you were signing it you'd have asked?
I'd have known at the time I think, yes.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
cash?
19
A.
No, no, no.
Yes.
So would that have been an unusually large sum to write for
I wouldn't think so, no.
15:05:48 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
23
Well, I mean, do you -- was it something that you did every day?
Certainly not every day, no.
Once a month or once every three or four months
or whatever.
24 15:05:48 25
CHAIRMAN:
26 27
So you must know -- you must have some idea as to what it was used
for? A.
I'm saying generally they were cheques drawn for cash by Mr. Monahan to buy
28
cars.
29
in the habit of buying old cars.
15:06:13 30
I'm not a hundred percent sure if it was to buy his own cars.
He was
I can't remember that particular one at that
time, it was 13 years ago. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:06:15
15:06:29
113 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
"Cherrywood" would have provided you with similar information if it wasn't your
4
decision to record it under those headings?
5
A.
6
Well, no.
But presumably the person who allocated it to "strategy" and to
As I said, somebody, and I don't know whose writing it is, has
written in "Cherrywood" after it.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Having asked you to sign the cheque?
No, sorry, that was written after the cheque was signed it was written on it.
15:06:42 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
So --
I don't know if it's the same handwriting even as the actual entry.
13 14 15:06:53 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
16
And it goes into -- it goes into a --
It could be a month, two months, three months later somebody is going into, analysing these things, looking for a home for it.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
me, 100 percent of political payments.
15:07:13 20
21
It's allocated to a capital which includes, as I can, it appears to It doesn't include any other type of
payment? A.
Well, just one, this.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
appears only to refer to payments to politicians.
15:07:27 25
A.
Yes.
But the strategy payments only include -- it's a term which
Well, on that particular list, yes, that's right, yes.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
because you say you can't be certain, as a matter of probability that the
29
3,000, given that it was given this similar designation, was also intended for
15:07:51 30
Yes.
So can we take it then that as a matter of probability,
politicians? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:07:52
15:08:05
114 1
A.
I wouldn't, no.
I wouldn't reach that conclusion, myself, no.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
you really haven't a clue what was written
5
A.
But I don't understand why you can -- why on the one hand you say
No.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
You don't know who designated it.
8
when it's proposed that it be treated by the Tribunal on the balance of
9
probability as being the same as all of the other payments under that
15:08:19 10
designation.
11
proposition.
12
A.
You seem quite firm to reject that as being the reasonable
Well I think it's -- I think that in my memory there was never any attempt to
13
draw money for cash to give to politicians.
14
occurring.
15:08:44 15
for cash.
16
But yet you seem quite firm
I don't recall any -- that ever
And to me what's happened here is somebody has written a cheque Somebody else at some stage, possibly later, has written
"Cherrywood" against it.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well you you wrote the cheque for cash?
I didn't, no.
15:08:55 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well you signed the cheque?
I signed the cheque, yes.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
15:09:03 25
Well, is it your proposal then to the Tribunal.
Is it your
proposal then that we should assume that when all of the other payments
26
designated under this particular designation are payments to politicians.
27
This should be definitely decided by the Tribunal as not being such a payment?
28
A.
Well --.
29 15:09:21 30
CHAIRMAN:
You seem quite firm.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:09:22
15:09:34
115 1
A.
2
Well in my opinion it's not.
I think there's a huge quantum leap to make to
assume that.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
for?
6
A.
7
But you can't give us any idea as to what it might have been used
Well it could have been.
It was quite common for Mr. Monahan to come in and
draw cash if he was going off to buy an old car or draw cash.
8 9 15:09:47 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
But it would hardly go into this particular designation
I'm just saying somebody wrote Cherrywood after it.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Uh-huh.
And it followed from that trail somebody else coming in would have, it would have got posted to the general promotions account.
15:10:03 15
And somebody, not
necessarily the same person, they would have gone through the cheques payments
16
sheets and said there is something for Cherrywood so add it on to this.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Presumably when you signed the cheque, the payee is cash is there
Yeah.
15:10:16 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
And do you recognise the writing of?
Show it again there.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Put it back up again, please.
15:10:23 25
26
MS. DILLON:
4544.
.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
you're ...
15:10:39 30
A.
There's a fair bit of handwriting there to, that should I think if
If it was up to me, probably a man called Pat Cooney. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:10:45
15:10:57
116 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry?
It was probably a chap called Pat Cooney.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
And what was his?
He worked in the cash department.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Monahan presumably ...
Can I see the cheque payments again?
15:10:58 10
11
MS. DILLON:
7380.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
15:11:19 15
Sorry?
I wanted to check -- these cheques were written on sort of carbon and the actual payment was made at the same time.
16
I just wanted to make sure it was
the same handwriting, you know.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
buy a car, is it likely that he would have been have gone to somebody, a
15:11:34 20
21
If it was a case of Mr. Monahan looking for this amount of money to
relatively junior person to get a cheque made out to cash? A.
Oh, yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
position?
15:11:42 25
A.
Or is it more likely that he would go to somebody in a more Senior
He'd have gone to the person who had the cheque book.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
department in effect?
29
A.
And do you know from your -- because you were head of this
Yeah.
15:11:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:11:50
15:12:13
117 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
normally be a fairly accurate designation of the reason for the cheque made out
3
by whatever staff member?
4
A.
Was it the practice if Mr. Monahan made such a request, would there
No, if he came in and said I want a cheque for cash, we'd make it out for cash.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
designation for the payment?
8
A.
9
But would -- would he not designate or give the person a
Not necessarily, maybe he might, maybe he mightn't.
He might just well say to
them or whatever.
15:12:31 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
cheques made payment to cash.
13
wouldn't have provided the staff member?
14
A.
So does that mean within the accounts in Monarch you would have Without any designation because Mr. Monahan
Certainly, that could happen, did happen, yes.
15:12:49 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
And did they remain blank then?
No, they were made out to cash.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
15:12:59 20
21
Yes but do they remain blank or are they assigned to some activity.
As in this case it was assigned to Cherrywood? A.
Yes, I think it was, yes.
22 23 24 15:13:09 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
So --
I mean, they would have been assigned to some, something like Cherrywood or sundries or something.
I think it's a different handwriting there than
26
Cherrywood.
So somebody else assigned it to Cherrywood at a different time
27
than when the cheque was drawn.
In my opinion anyway.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
15:13:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:13:28
15:13:43
118 1
MR SANFEY: Before Ms. Dillon resumes, there was a document put up on the
2
screen a moment ago. We didn't catch the number but it had the cheque for
3
3,000 allocated among a number of different, what appeared to be entertainment
4
expenses under the heading promotion.
5
that.
I wonder if Ms. Dillon could locate
I want to have a look at it again.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
7382.
Is that the document?
MR SANFEY:
Perhaps the bottom portion could be increased.
8 9 15:14:01 10
It's just it
struck us that there were a number of matters referred to there which seemed to
11
relate to a typical sort of promotion type of activities.
12
chocolates, privilege.
Classic hits, wine,
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
15:14:25 15
Yes.
They are all, much smaller sums.
But this doesn't -- this
is just dealt with as a cash cheque.
16 17
MR SANFEY: I was just wondering whether it might assist Mr. Glennane in any
18
way.
19
A.
No, I don't think so, no.
15:14:40 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
22
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
15:14:59 25
Mr. Glennane, on the 6th of July 1992.
At 3997.
increase the bottom third of that and this again is headed Cherrywood Village.
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 1017
Isn't that right? Again, if we look at strategy consultancy fees?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 1018
There's a figure of 22,150 .
15:15:16 30
If we could
Then the 3,000, which is the cheque made out to
cash? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:15:17
15:15:29
119 1
A.
Right.
2
Q. 1019
And then it has increased to 27,850; isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 1020
So that there is an additional 2,700 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 1021
So that the total amount now claimed for strategy consultancy fees is 27,850?
7
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 1022
I think that the documentation shows that GRE were unhappy to pay this strategy
9 15:15:52 10
consultancy fees; isn't that right? A.
They were.
11
Q. 1023
And certainly as of June 16th '92.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1024
There was a meeting between Mr. Beng, Mr. Murray and Mr. Lynn?
14
A.
All right.
Q. 1025
And on the following page at 8842.
15:16:09 15
They were certainly unhappy originally about the 22,150.
16
1992.
17
invoices had not been forwarded.
18
that right.
19 15:16:40 20
At 8841?
Dealing with the second schedule of April
The strategy consultancy fees of 22,150 and courtesy personnel
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1026
Now, that refers back to 3998.
And the total was reduced to 34,381; isn't
We'd looked at this schedule earlier.
21
under the column headed April 1992.
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, I think so, yeah.
24
Q. 1027
61,981.
15:16:59 25
And
You will see that the total is 61,981;
And it appears that deducted from that figure by GRE was the sum of
22,150 and 5,000 because no invoices had been forwarded; isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 1028
And it was also agreed at that meeting at 8843, in the centre, it was agreed
28
that RML, that's Mr. Lynn, would re cast the schedules and show only the
29
amounts which had been agreed and the outstanding invoices would feature in an
15:17:22 30
additional schedule? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:17:23
15:17:30
120 1
A.
Right.
2
Q. 1029
Isn't that right?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 1030
So what appears to have been agreed between GRE was in relation to the items
5
that they were in dispute with Monarch is that Mr. Lynn was going to prepare a
6
schedule showing what had been agreed and what was in dispute?
7
A.
Yes, that would be probably be right, yes.
8
Q. 1031
And it appears he did so because in July of '92 at 3770, at the third
9
paragraph.
15:17:54 10
He encloses a schedule No. 8 in the sum of 99,858 and he says
subject to variations which will emerge from your computer sheet the sum
11
outstanding by GRE properties to Monarch Properties amounts to 206,681 and he
12
asks him to agree the figures in schedule eight; isn't that right? In the next
13
paragraph?
14 15:18:11 15
A.
Sorry, yes, yeah.
Q. 1032
And the schedule that's enclosed with that is at 8777.
16
schedules one through to eight; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 1033
And schedule eight comes to 99,858.
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1034
According to this.
15:18:29 20
And that refers to
21
Isn't that right?
And the total due from GRE, as per Mr. Lynn's letter is
recorded as 206,681 pounds?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 1035
And the schedules that are attached are at 8778 and the continuation of that,
24
at 8779.
15:19:02 25
And if we could increase the bottom half of schedule eight, please.
The bottom half of the page.
Now, the second last column.
26
to the full so that we can see.
27
schedule eight; isn't that right?
To go just back
The top of the page the second last column is
28
A.
Sorry, yes.
29
Q. 1036
And schedule eight according to Mr. Lynn's letter, was the schedule he was
15:19:20 30
asking them to agree and it totalled 99,858. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And they were the matters in
15:19:26
15:19:37
121 1
dispute.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, yes.
3
Q. 1037
And if we go down to the bottom half of schedule eight please at 8779.
4
And
you see first of all the total is 99,858?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 1038
And included under the heading of strategy consultancy fees is a sum of 27,850?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 1039
So what is happening here is Mr. Lynn has included under this heading the same
9 15:19:56 10
fees that have already been disputed by GRE; isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes, yeah.
11
Q. 1040
And that figure of 27,850 is the 22,150 of political donations?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1041
Plus the cheque for 3,000?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1042
Plus the difference of 2,700; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
17
Q. 1043
And GRE are seeking to recover these; isn't that right?
18
A.
Sorry?
19
Q. 1044
Sorry.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1045
On the 27th of July '92.
15:20:07 15
15:20:23 20
21
Monarch are seeking to recover these from GRE, 50% of them?
At 3789.
Mr. Eddie Sweeney wrote to Mr. Martin
22
Baker, under the heading 'costs'. He notes that Mr. Baker has approved
23
payments of 149,898 and are presently checking further invoices per schedule
24
eight which amounts to 99,858 and not 56,784 as mentioned in yours?
15:20:52 25
A.
Right, yes.
26
Q. 1046
That figure of 99,858 is the total of schedule eight; isn't that right?
27
A.
I think so, yes.
28
Q. 1047
Include in the that is the figure of 27,850 for strategy consultancy fees?
29
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1048
Include in the that figure of 27,850, is a figure of 22,150 political
15:21:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:21:10
15:21:35
122 1
donations and a 3,000 pounds cheque to cash; isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, yeah.
3
Q. 1049
Now, the --
4
A.
Sorry.
5
Just on that.
I mean, obviously, we provided details to GRE at the
time of that 3,000.
6
Q. 1050
Yes.
7
A.
Sorry, they approved the figure 149, yes.
8
Q. 1051
But that doesn't include the figure of 99,858.?
9
A.
Well.
Q. 1052
They include the other figure; isn't that right.
11
A.
Sorry, I can't see where you're going.
12
Q. 1053
I'm sorry.
13
A.
It's quite hard to follow all of this.
14
Q. 1054
If you see the heading Cabinteely at 3827 and you see paragraph 12,
15:21:50 10
15:22:03 15
And GRE subsequently agree the figure of 149,898.
At 3827.?
It's?
sub-paragraph 1?
16
A.
Yes, 50% is due to GRE, yes.
17
Q. 1055
Yes?
18
A.
Checking further invoices submitted and confirm that in principle they accept
19
they will be responsible for 50% of these costs but are not willing to make any
15:22:21 20
payments until such time as the majority of the matters in respect of Tallaght
21 22
have been settled. Q. 1056
23 24
Yes, I think the situation was with GRE was that they agreed that they would pay figures but that it was subject to production of invoices?
A.
15:22:41 25
Well, it makes reference there to Tallaght, checking the further invoices submitted so ....
26
Q. 1057
Yes but the 149,898 is agreed; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 1058
But the other figure that had been included in the letter has not yet been
29 15:22:56 30
agreed, the figure of 99,858; isn't that right? A.
Well I'm not sure if paragraph two is referring to that or not, I don't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:23:01
15:23:22
123 1
It says that in principle they accept they would be responsible.
2
if that refers to the 99,000 or not.
3
Q. 1059
But that could include the 99,858.
4
A.
Presumably, yes.
5
Q. 1060
But I think --
6
A.
The point I was making though.
It could include it?
That's the point I'm making, yes.
Obviously that 3,000 has something to do with
7
Cherrywood.
8
do with Cherrywood.
9
elicit payments or anything like that.
15:23:44 10
Q. 1061
11
But that was, that was demonstrated to GRE, it was something to And I don't think GRE would have been involved in any
And certainly by October of 1992 at 3837. recoupment.
I don't know
Mr. Eddie Sweeney is seeking
3837, please.
12 13
At item No. 2.
14
sum of 556,288; isn't that right?
15:24:14 15
16
Of third party outlay from September '89 to June of 1992.
A.
Yes, that is correct, yes.
Q. 1062
And that figure, at 8785, is the total on the first schedule.
17
A
Do you see the
bottom of that page? If we could increase the bottom of that, please?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1063
Do you see the figure of 556,287?
A.
I do, yes.
21
Q. 1064
And if you move back up to strategy consultancy fees you see the figure?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 1065
It's still included?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 1066
So when Mr. Sweeney writes in October of 1992 he's looking for 556,288 and in a
15:24:37 20
15:24:44 25
26
letter of the 6th of October from Richard Lynn at 8783.
27
paragraph he is also seeking acceptance of the end figure on the attached
28
document?
29 15:25:11 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 1067
And the attached document is 8784.
In the second last
And this again includes the schedule of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:25:20
15:25:31
124 1
99,858?
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 1068
So there are two strands of correspondence going on with GRE.
One with Mr.
4
Lynn and one with Mr. Sweeney and both of them are seeking to recover the same
5
figure of strategy consultancy fees but I'm not suggesting they were seeking to
6
recover it on the double?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1069
Do you know what I mean?
9
A.
Mr. Beng was the accountant in GRE.
Q. 1070
Yes.
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 1071
And Mr. Lynn appears to be dealing with Mr. Beng?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1072
They are both seeking to recover the figure including the strategy consultancy
15:25:42 10
15:25:54 15
So that Mr. Sweeney appears to be dealing with Mr. Baker?
fees of 27,850; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 1073
So by this date, which is October 1992, Monarch are still maintaining that they
18 19 15:26:09 20
are entitled to be repaid half of those fees; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1074
I think that Monarch confirmed -- sorry, GRE confirmed, at 8345.
That they
21
had agreed 556,288 which was the figure put forward, isn't that right, by
22
Mr. Sweeney in his letter?
23
A.
Right, yes.
24
Q. 1075
Right.
A.
It included the 90, did it.
26
Q. 1076
It includes the 90, yes.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 1077
Do you see the second item, No. 2, is third party outlay 556,288? Do you see
15:26:45 25
29 15:27:05 30
If we just look at --
At 3837?
that figure? A.
No, sorry, where is it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:27:05
15:27:16
125 1
Q. 1078
Item No. 2?
2
A.
Oh, yes, yeah.
3
Q. 1079
And if you see then what GRE say in appendix one, at 3845.
4
Under the heading
'agreed fee', 556,288?
5
A.
Right, yes, yeah.
6
Q. 1080
And they are going to pay that 50/50?
7
A.
Right.
8
Q. 1081
And they further say at 3850.?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1082
Do you see the heading 'third party costs'?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 1083
GRE confirmed that they would be responsible for 50% of 556,288?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 1084
This is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable
15:27:28 10
15:27:41 15
and in this respect I would refer to the recent correspondence between Monarch
16
and G Beng?
17
A.
Right.
18
Q. 1085
And secondly, they confirm that they would pay 50% of future third parties
19 15:27:55 20
21
costs amounting to 18,500 on the receipt of proper invoices? A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1086
They are saying two things.
22 23
are proper invoices; isn't that right? A.
24 15:28:13 25
One is, we will pay half of the 556,288 if there
No, they're saying that the invoices are properly payable.
So it would
suggest that they got invoices at this stage. Q. 1087
26
It says this is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable; isn't that right?
27
A.
They're not looking for invoices.
28
Q. 1088
And they are also saying in item No. 2 that they'll only pay future third party
29 15:28:30 30
They have invoices presumably.
costs up to a limit of 18,500? A.
Unless they got proper invoices, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:28:32
15:28:44
126 1
Q. 1089
That would be 50%.
2
A.
That was putting a maximum figure on it, yes.
3
Q. 1090
So they're putting a ceiling on third party costs?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1091
And invoices then raised.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 1092
Which includes all those costs.
8 9
So in other words the most they will pay is 18,500 pounds?
At 3955.
In the sum of 550,978; isn't that right?
But that invoice is not paid.
right? There's never a payment of 550,978? A.
Oh, well they might have requested those at 261 I think.
Q. 1093
That figure.
11
A.
Included in which figure now?
12
Q. 1094
In the 550,978?
13
A.
Yes, yes.
14
Q. 1095
That includes?
A.
The 29 or whatever it is.
16
Q. 1096
Yes.
17
A.
Well I think so, yes.
18
Q. 1097
Well if we look at?
19
A.
I'm finding it very hard to keep up with you, however.
Q. 1098
Sorry.
15:29:12 10
15:29:26 15
15:29:38 20
21
But included in that figure is the 27,000; isn't that right?
That includes the figure of 27,850; isn't that right?
At 8785 if we just finish this point.
I don't want to mislead you in
any way?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 1099
If we could increase the bottom half of 8785.
24 15:29:58 25
26
totals.
You see that there are two totals.
What we want to look at are the
And 550977.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1100
The first total is the total of schedule five and eight.
27
is a sum of 5,310 giving a final total; isn't that right?
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 1101
Included in both figures is 27,850?
A.
Yes.
15:30:14 30
Isn't that
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that?
And what's deducted
15:30:14
15:30:30
127 1
Q. 1102
For strategy consultancy fees?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 1103
In the invoice that is put in, following these negotiations, at 3955.?
4
A.
Yes, that's the 550, yes.
5
Q. 1104
Therefore, included in the figure of 55,978 is the figure of 27,850?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 1105
And that figure includes political donations of at least 21,500?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 1106
Isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1107
And what is being sought from Guardian by Monarch is 50% of that; isn't that
15:30:43 10
11 12
right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1108
Do you know whether that was in fact paid?
A.
No, I was hoping that you were going to tell me, to be honest, because I don't.
15:30:55 15
16
I presume it was but I don't know.
17
Q. 1109
In a schedule of outstanding costs which I think is dated approximately um...?
18
A.
There's two figures on that.
19
They add up to the 261,678. I don't know if they were two different payments
15:31:20 20
21
216 and 45 and I don't know what they refer to.
made at different times. Q. 1110
I don't know really.
But what is clear from this documentation, is it not, Mr. Glennane , that
22
throughout 1992 that Monarch were seeking to recover from GRE a number of third
23
party costs?
24 15:31:34 25
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1111
Included in that third party costs were costs described as strategic
26
consultancy fees or strategy consultancy fees; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1112
The substantial portion of that strategy consultancy fees are comprised of
29 15:31:54 30
political donations which were made in May and June of 1991? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:31:54
15:32:12
128 1
Q. 1113
You don't know who described them as strategy consultancy fees?
2
A.
No, I don't, no.
3
Q. 1114
But you would agree that that's not a correct description?
4
A.
Well it's -- yeah, it's certainly not.
5 6
It's certainly -- they weren't fees,
yes. Q. 1115
Yes.
And we saw yesterday, Mr. Glennane, when we looked at the description
7
that was applied to the payments that were made to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor
8
through Comex that they were described as strategy plan or strategy planning?
9
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1116
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1117
And they were described in the books of L&C Properties as strategy planning?
13
A.
Based on his invoice, yes.
14
Q. 1118
Which the Tribunal has never seen?
A.
No, no.
16
Q. 1119
But leave that aside?
17
A.
Obviously.
18
Q. 1120
The description that is given?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1121
Is strategy plan?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 1122
And the description that is given in this case is strategy consultancy fees?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 1123
In 1992; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1124
Can you conceive of any reason as to why somebody would be minded to describe a
15:32:29 10
15:32:39 15
15:32:43 20
15:32:53 25
26 27 28
genuine political donation as a strategy consultancy fee? A.
29 15:33:18 30
Not particularly, no, no.
Unless you wanted to make the leap to say that it
was a strategy, to make political contributions when asked. Q. 1125
Pardon? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:33:20
15:33:46
129 1
A.
Unless, as I say. They wanted -- you wanted to make the leap to say that it
2
could be believed to make strategy, political contributions.
3
is that a good strategy you'd probably have said yes.
4
that was thrown around an awful lot in those days.
5
quite happy with that description.
If somebody said
Strategies was a word
And obviously, GRE were
6
Q. 1126
We'll leave GRE out of it for the moment.?
7
A.
This is all based on GRE.
8
Q. 1127
Well did you seek to --
9
A.
This is all between ourselves and GRE.
Q. 1128
Did you seek to recover the 56,000 paid to Mr. Lawlor from GRE?
11
A.
I don't think so, no.
12
Q. 1129
Yet that is described as strategy plan; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
14
Q. 1130
And we don't know who decided to describe it in that fashion also; isn't that
15:33:58 10
15:34:17 15
16
I don't think so.
right? A.
Well I know from reading the ledger that all the persons posting that would
17
have just taken the description off the invoice.
18
invoice.
19 15:34:33 20
21
Q. 1131
That the invoice from Comex was in connection with strategy plan?
A.
Yes, that wording was on the invoice obviously, yes.
Q. 1132
And when it comes time to describe the 21,500 political payments that are made
22
in May and June of 1991.
23
strategy consultancy fees?
24
So it was obviously on the
Yes, obviously.
It's described -- it is decided to describe them as
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 1133
Now, whatever else they are, Mr. Glennane, they're not fees; isn't that right?
26
A.
Absolutely, yes.
27
Q. 1134
They might be a strategic payment but they certainly can't be fees; isn't that
15:34:56 25
28 29 15:35:09 30
right? A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 1135
As you've said yourself it might be strategic to think? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:35:14
15:35:21
130 1
A.
In their term, yes.
2
Q. 1136
It might have been in Cherrywood's best interest to pay the money; isn't that
3
right?
4
A.
If they were asked for it, yes.
5
Q. 1137
And is it your belief that only when Monarch were asked that Monarch paid?
6
A.
Yes, that's my belief, yes.
7
Q. 1138
Can you think of any other reason as to why one would describe political
8 9 15:35:41 10
payments as strategy consultancy? A.
No, no.
Q. 1139
So it would appear from the books and records of Monarch that in 1992 a number
11
of things happened to the political payments made in '91, they were transferred
12
from Monarch Properties services limited and attributed to Cherrywood isn't
13
that right?
14
A.
Sorry, they were transferred internally in Monarch Properties services, yes.
Q. 1140
Because you --
16
A.
They weren't transferred from Monarch Properties.
17
Q. 1141
As you said yourself because they had an association with Cherrywood?
18
A.
So it seems, yes.
19
Q. 1142
Following on that, they are then described as strategy consultancy fees in
15:36:00 15
15:36:13 20
internal working documents within Monarch; isn't that right?
21
A.
With GRE.
22
Q. 1143
Which are then sent to GRE?
23
A.
That's right, yeah.
24 15:36:26 25
Are purely -- are purely produced for the sake of dealing
with GRE. Q. 1144
26
But seeing as you didn't produce them, did you, you didn't decide to call them strategy consultancy fees; isn't that right?
27
A.
No, I don't think so, no.
28
Q. 1145
And what would have been the difficulty with calling them political donations
29 15:36:43 30
and asking GRE to pay half of them? A.
Well as I said a while ago, it would be my opinion that somebody discussed it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:36:49
15:37:00
131 1
with GRE and they didn't want them described as that.
2
that they knew what they were.
But it's quite clear
And it's also quite clear that --
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But isn't it unlikely that GRE ...
Sorry.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
them?
15:37:06 10
A.
Gave them that designation, because they then objected to paying
Well they objected to paying the amounts.
But they knew what they were and
11
that, yes.
I mean, it's -- I'm not -- I'm not clear on and I was hoping that
12
if -- if they did pay this 27 or not, I'm not clear on that.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
15:37:29 15
16
Well possibly they may have at the end of the day.
They certainly
had a payment about paying them. A.
Mr. Gillies.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
suggested this designation and then having so suggested it then turned around
15:37:41 20
21
Yeah, for a long time.
So it's unlikely that they would have
and said we're still objecting to paying for it. A.
22
Well, we are dealing with different people at different times, you know.
So
one of them may have suggested it and somebody mightn't.
23 24 15:37:53 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
But isn't it --
It ended up that Mr. Baker, the MD ...
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
asked that they should have been called such and such would then turn around
29
and say no, we still have a problem about paying them.
15:38:12 30
A.
But isn't it improbable that whoever in GRE having decided, were
Well ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that unlikely?
15:38:12
15:38:16
132 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
If you had chosen ...
If you knew the personnel involved, no.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
If they had chosen it?
It might have been discussed with them and said they'd agreed.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
difficulty about paying it?
15:38:30 10
A.
11
Wouldn't you then expect them to pay it or not to raise any
Well, I don't know.
Again, you're dealing with different individuals at
different times:
12 13 14
MS. DILLON: A.
15:38:43 15
Can I ask you about --
Sorry, a point I think should be made. included in these so they were.
That at all times this 3,000 was
It was certainly scrutinised closely by GRE,
16
as you can see, there's five or six different references to these figures so
17
....
18 19
MS. DILLON:
15:39:01 20
Can we have a look maybe and it might help if we look at what
happened to the payments to Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Bruton and how they were dealt
21
with?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 1146
I think the position is that in -- there was a General Election in November
24 15:39:11 25
26
1992; isn't that right? A.
If you say so, yes.
Q. 1147
And a payment was made to Mr. John Bruton.
27
3905.
Now this is payment by
Monarch Properties Limited of 2,500 pounds?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 1148
And there's a payment to Mr. Albert Reynolds by Mr. Monarch Properties Limited.
15:39:33 30
At 3894.
Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:39:34
15:39:46
133 1
A.
Well I haven't seen it yet.
2
Q. 1149
And at 3895.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 1150
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 1151
Now, when these payments are made initially where are they attributed?
7
A.
I don't know.
8 9
Yes.
I think we can see that your signature is on the cheque?
Well, yes.
They're actually written by Monarch Properties Limited, which
is a different company. Q. 1152
15:40:09 10
Yes.
And they are attributed.
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
11
They are Monarch Properties.
A.
That's right, so it seems, yes.
13
Q. 1153
And they are then transferred.
14
And they are attributed to sponsorship;
3900.
Do you see the heading Cherrywood
Properties Limited? Do you see AR, FF 5,000 J B, F G, 2,500? A.
Yes, yeah.
16
Q. 1154
And you see that's an account called Cherrywood Properties Limited?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 1155
And then at 4904.
19 15:40:59 20
21
Not
isn't that right?
12
15:40:35 15
3902:
Do you see where it says the last transaction there is
transfer sponsorship FF, FG 7,500 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1156
And I suggest to you that is the transfer of the money to Mr. Reynolds and
22
Mr. Bruton?
23
A.
Yeah, yeah, so it appears, yes.
24
Q. 1157
And that is being transferred into account number 7359201 into a Cherrywood
15:41:13 25
account isn't that right? It's a 73 account?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 1158
So a decision is made in effect to do very much the same as happened with the
28 29 15:41:31 30
Yes, sorry, yeah.
1991 payments with these payments in November 1992? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1159
And these payments then find themselves now on a list called third party costs Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:41:47
15:41:53
134 1
in June of '93.
2
third party cost.
3
pounds?
At 4317.
And you will see there a list of expenses called
And included is Fine Gael 2,500.
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1160
And that then is included at an invoice at 4302.
Fianna Fail 5,000
And sorry.
6
drawn to your attention that third party costs at 4317.
7
and 4302 together, please.
8
party costs by June of '93 come to 20,370 pounds?
9
I should have
If I could have 4317
Now, you will see that the total of the third
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1161
And that includes 2,500 to Fine Gael and 5,000 to Fianna Fail?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1162
That appears to be included in an invoice at 4302.
15:42:34 10
13
miscellaneous fee third party costs 20,370.
14
is 50% of that figure; isn't that right?
15:42:54 15
16
That's invoice 2066 as
And what's being sought from GRE
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1163
So what is being sought here are third party costs including half of the
17
payment to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 1164
And that's the payment made in November' 29 to Mr. Albert Reynolds and Mr. John
15:43:08 20
Bruton?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 1165
Isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right, yeah.
24
Q. 1166
Now, we saw earlier on that the agreed balance or the maximum that GRE would
15:43:15 25
agree to pay for third party costs going forward was 18,500 pounds; isn't that
26
right?
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 1167
That's referred to at the invoice at 2066?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1168
There is there is also at 2062.
15:43:24 30
A management claim.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Sorry.
At 4299.
I
15:43:32
15:43:54
135 1
beg your pardon.
At 4299.
2
management fee.?
An invoice No. 2062.
For 30,000 pounds for a
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1169
Isn't that right? Now, I think that what happened was that GRE refused to pay
5
the invoice 2062.
And invoice 2062 was the invoice in -- invoice 2066 they
6
refused to pay.
7
say to Mr. Sweeney?
If we have 4303.
And under the heading invoice 2062, GRE
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 1170
"This matter relates to the additional management fee.
15:44:19 10
And should therefore
include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds included in invoice 2066.
11
If you would confirm this I will arrange for invoice 2062 to be passed for
12
payment".?
13
A.
All right.
14
Q. 1171
Now, invoice 2062 was a management fee of 30,000 pounds; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1172
And what GRE are saying.
15:44:40 15
16 17 18
should have been included in the management fee; isn't that right? A.
19 15:45:06 20
Is that the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds
Um, um, yes, I'm not sure whether it means added on to the management fee or included in the management fee.
Q. 1173
21
Yes, one or the other.
Should include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds included in invoice 2066?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 1174
Now, if we just pause there for a second.
24 15:45:23 25
The contributions of 2,500 and the
5,000 pounds are the payments in November 1992 to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael? A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 1175
They have been included on invoice 2066 under the heading third party costs?
27
A.
All right.
28
Q. 1176
GRE say on receipt of that they should not have been included under invoice
29 15:45:41 30
2066 as third party costs but they should have been included under 2062. Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:45:43
15:45:53
136 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1177
And therefore, it follows from that, that there must have been some agreement
3
between Monarch and GRE, that political payments would have been included in
4
the management fee?
5
A.
So it would seem, yes, yeah.
6
Q. 1178
And that would be borne out by the response from Mr. Sweeney, because
7 8
Mr. Sweeney says at 4314 ... A.
9 15:46:09 10
I think they are -- they are asking us there to include it in the management fee.
Q. 1179
Yes.
But Mr. Sweeney replies to Mr. Baker.
And he says.
"As regards
11
invoice 2062 and your reference to the two payments of 2,500 and 5,000, you
12
will note that these sums were paid bona fide to the parties concerned".
13
you see that?
14 15:46:26 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 1180
And he goes on to say.
Do
"They therefore would not rank within the payments
16
envisaged which had been disbursed through the additional management fee.
17
I therefore feel they could not be written out in the way that you suggest".?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 1181
Now, that exchange of correspondence, Mr. Glennane, appears to suggest that
15:46:50 20
there was an agreement of some sort between Monarch and GRE to include
21
political payments in a management fee.
22
A.
It would appear so, yes.
23
Q. 1182
Right.
24
A.
Well I don't recall that arrangement.
15:47:06 25
Would you agree with that?
Now, what can you tell the Tribunal about that arrangement? It seems clear to me that as I heard
that, that agreeing that GRE were quite prepared to pay these, they wanted them
26 27
described as management fees. Q. 1183
Mr. Sweeney in his letter is making the point to GRE that the 2,500 and the
28
5,000 were paid bona fides and therefore should be included as third party
29
costs.
15:47:27 30
And
A.
Do you see that?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:47:27
15:47:43
137 1
Q. 1184
And he then goes on to say "they would not rank within the payments envisaged
2
which had been disbursed through the additional management fee".
3
suggest to you, would be payments which were not bona fide.
And that I
Is that right?
4
A.
No, I wouldn't think so, no.
5
Q. 1185
Well just look at it there now?
6
A.
I think he's saying that the additional management would fee was to be 30,000
7
and he didn't think that the 7,500 should be included in the 30,000.
8
should be 30,000 plus 7,500.
9
Q. 1186
15:48:06 10
It
What Mr. Sweeney is saying is that the 2,500 and the 5,000 were bona fides payments and therefore should be include in the third party costs; isn't that
11
right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1187
He then goes on to say "that because they are paid bone fide they would not
14
rank within the payments envisaged which had been dispursed through the
15:48:16 15
additional management fee".
16
So what are the payments that were disbursed
through the additional management fee, Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
I don't know.
18
Q. 1188
What costs?
19
A.
Well ordinary management costs.
15:48:37 20
running up huge costs.
21 22
I presume he just means costs.
costs. Q. 1189
I don't know.
I mean, we were running -- Monarch was
That's why they were getting management fees.
Staff
Various other costs.
What Mr.-- what GRE are saying is that they'll pay it provided it's included in
23
the management fee.
24
therefore it's third party costs and therefore doesn't go into the management
15:49:05 25
26
fee; isn't that right? A.
27 28
Well I think it's more to me an argument whether the management fee included that 7,500 or not.
Q. 1190
29 15:49:23 30
What Mr. Sweeney is saying is it was paid bona fide and
And what arrangement was there between GRE and Monarch about including political donations in the management fee?
A.
I don't know.
I wasn't aware of any arrangement.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
But it appears to me that
15:49:28
15:49:48
138 1
as I said before, the suggestion came from them.
2
were an insurance company.
3
political contributions, I don't know.
4
that the initiative to do all of this came from them.
It may have been that they
They may well have not been allowed to make But it appears to me from all of that,
5
Q. 1191
And the use of the --
6
A.
But that they were fully accepted as being bona fide.
7
Q. 1192
And the use of the word "bona fide" appears to have come from Mr. Monahan in
8 9 15:50:05 10
Monarch Properties; isn't that right? A.
I think he means that they are third party costs.
Q. 1193
He says that they were paid bona fide to the parties concerned; isn't that
11
right?
12
A.
Well, yes, okay.
13
Q. 1194
He then goes on to say "they wouldn't rank within the payments envisaged which
14
had been disbursed through the additional management fee" now what payments
15:50:19 15
could Mr. Sweeney --
16
A.
I think he means costs but I don't know.
17
Q. 1195
Well what could he have been talking about, Mr. Glennane?
18
A.
Well obviously we made a claim for additional management fees.
19
the basis we'd taken on more staff and it was costing us more than we
15:50:36 20
21
It could be on
envisaged. Q. 1196
22
Well did you make an arrangement with Monarch or between Monarch and GRE that political payments would be included in a management fee for example?
23
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
24
Q. 1197
Well what other interpretation could you take from the correspondence other
15:50:54 25
than there was such an arrangement. If you look at what Mr. Baker says at
26 27
4303. Because what Mr. Baker is saying -A.
28 29 15:51:16 30
"This matter relates to an additional management fee and should therefore include the contribution included in the invoice (reading to himself).
Q. 1198
Yes.
And invoice 2062 is an invoice in relation to a management fee, isn't
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:51:17
15:51:35
139 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1199
At 4400.
So for whatever reason, Mr. Baker appears to be under the
3
misapprehension that the political payment of 2,500 and 5,000 made in November
4
1992 should have been included in the claim for the management fee and not
5
included as third party costs, isn't that right?
6
A.
7
Yes.
Well there was ongoing negotiations going on with GRE.
And there was
different deals struck at different times and --
8
Q. 1200
Sorry.?
9
A.
It he might well have said to me -- and looked at me and said we were obviously
15:51:53 10
claiming for more management fees and we were also claiming for these third
11
party costs and he may -- it appears to me that he was saying -- he had agreed
12
a fee of, an extra fee of 30,000 on the basis that these third party costs
13
would not arise.
14
wouldn't have agreed the extra 30,000 if I realised that I was going to have to
15:52:20 15
pay these.
And now he's being billed for both and is really saying I
That's my interpretation of what it says.
16
Q. 1201
It doesn't say that, you see Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
It doesn't.
18
Q. 1202
If you look at what Mr. Baker actually says "this matter relates to the
19
additional management fee and should include the contributions of 2,500 and
15:52:35 20
5,000 included in the invoice 2066". In simple terms what Mr. Baker is telling
21
Monarch is the invoice that includes the 2,500 and 5,000 figures should be
22
included in the management fee and not under the heading of third party costs;
23
isn't this right?
24 15:52:54 25
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 1203
That would suggest that there was some arrangement between Monarch and GRE,
26
that political payments or contributions or Mr. Baker certainly believed that
27
they had some arrangement, that they would be included under the heading of
28
management fee as opposed to third party costs; isn't that right?
29 15:53:17 30
A.
No, as I said, I can certainly read a different interpretation into it. That he had agreed to pay the additional management fees, but he didn't want to pay Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:53:24
15:53:33
140 1
additional management fees and pay these contributions.
He was of the opinion
2
that the additional management fees would cover these, would cover their share
3
of these contributions.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I assume Mr. Sweeney will be able to throw a lot of light on that
6
particular issue.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
I --
9 15:53:43 10
CHAIRMAN:
At least his evidence?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
I assume so.
13 14 15:53:46 15
Q. 1204
Because certainly in the documentation that passed between Monarch and GRE, in
16
the correspondence between Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Baker, Mr. Sweeney makes the
17
argument that because these payments were paid bona fide they should be
18
included as third party cost and not included as management fee?
19
A.
15:54:11 20
I think the word bona fides is a little bit of a mute point.
You can take it
out of context.
21
Q. 1205
Okay?
22
A.
I mean, if the inference is that there's some other payments that weren't bona
23
fide.
24
he said is they are bona fide third party costs.
15:54:29 25
26
Again, I think that -- I don't think that that follows.
weren't to our benefit.
I think what
In other words, that they
So it was a matter of either paying 22,500, which
would come to Monarch.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
29
GRE by Monarch.
15:54:56 30
And I think ultimately the figure, second invoice, was sent in to That's invoice at 4311.
And you will see that that invoice
is in the sum of 16,270 pounds; isn't that right Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:55:01
15:55:12
141 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1206
And there's within a reduction of 4,100 pounds on the earlier invoice; isn't
3
that right? Because the earlier invoice is for third party costs?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 1207
Sorry?
6
A.
I would again sorry.
7 8
Obviously, we were trying to circumvent this limit that
he had put of 18,500 on third party costs. Q. 1208
9
And I think that invoice, at 2069 makes a deduction for fees due to Noel Smyth & Partners in the sum of 4,100 pounds.
15:55:48 10
That was the original invoice.
pounds is a sum of 4,100 pounds.
12
understand the point I'm making? A.
I don't see it anywhere.
14
Q. 1209
They are third party costs.
15:56:12 15
Which were fees due to Noel Smyth. Do you
The document on screen is third party costs. One
of the very first documents that I showed you.
16
please.
Yes.
And the difference between that and the 16,270
11
13
If we look at 4302, please.
If we could look at 4317
This is the combination of the invoice?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 1210
For 20,370 pounds Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 1211
You see there a figure for 4,100 pounds to Noel Smyth & Partners?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 1212
That made up the first invoice put in for third party costs at 4302 in the sum
15:56:36 20
23 24 15:56:40 25
of 20,370 pounds.
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 1213
Following the exchange of correspondence a second invoice is sent in by -- for
26
third party costs at 4311.
27
16,270 pounds.?
Invoice No. 2069.
And the figure now sought is
28
A.
Right, yes.
29
Q. 1214
And the difference between the two are the costs due to Noel Smyth?
A.
Right.
15:57:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:57:02
15:57:21
142 1
Q. 1215
2
So what is still included on invoice 2069, are the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds made to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.
Do you understand?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1216
And those were the subject of correspondence and ultimately were confirmed that
5
that invoice, 2069 at 4211.
This is a letter dated the 28th of September '93.
6
And in it Mr. Baker confirms he has authorised invoices for payment and the
7
second invoices, 2069.
Do you see that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 1217
And above it is the no. 2; do you see that?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 1218
And No. 2 means back up required?
12
A.
Right.
13
Q. 1219
Do you see that written at the very bottom?
14
A.
Yes, I do, yes.
Q. 1220
That would have meant that Mr. Baker was agreeing to pay invoice 2069 including
15:57:45 10
15:57:52 15
16
the 5,000 pounds to Fianna Fail and the 2,500 to Fine Gael provided back up was
17
provided; isn't that right?
18
A.
So it seems, yeah.
19
Q. 1221
Now, was such back up provided?
A.
I don't know.
15:58:07 20
21
But I presume all the back up it means was receipts from Fianna
Fail and from Fine Gael.
22
Q. 1222
And were such back up obtained?
23
A.
Well I don't know but I'm sure there would have been.
24
difference between getting half of 7,500 back and not getting it I'm sure it
15:58:29 25
26
would have been easy enough to get them presumably. Q. 1223
27 28 29 15:58:49 30
If it was the
Can I ask you how the decision was arrived at to attribute those political payments as costs in connection with Cherrywood?
A.
Well on the same basis as we said earlier.
Because we were again -- we seem
to have worn down GRE at this stage, that they agreed to pay them, to pay 50% of them.
So if we were able to get 50% back that was great as far as I was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:58:54
15:59:08
143 1 2
concerned for everybody else in the company. Q. 1224
Certainly in deciding to attribute the costs to Cherrywood, did you take into
3
account in the company what Mr. Monahan had said to Mr. Reynolds when he made
4
the payment?
5
A.
I have no idea what Mr. Monahan said to Mr. Reynolds.
6
Q. 1225
3891, please. In the letter that was sent with the payment to 5,000 pounds to
7
Mr. Reynolds, you will see in the second paragraph that Mr. Monahan says "as
8
you are aware, we in Monarch together with our partners Guardian Royal
9
Exchange, are in a position to begin a major development in Loughlinstown,
15:59:31 10
County Dublin, but are caught in the throes of the review of the County Dublin
11
Development Plan which is holding up developments. We have been greatly
12
assisted by your party members on Dublin County Council without whom it is fair
13
to say we would not have achieved the part zoning which now obtains on the
14
lands".
15:59:47 15
16 17
Do you know what he meant by that? A.
18 19
I assume he meant that, sorry, um, well I presume he meant that if party members hadn't voted in favour of it, it wouldn't have gone through.
Q. 1226
16:00:08 20
Your members have been to the fore in encouraging good development based on proper planning criteria endorsed by the council's own professional staff. In
21
so doing your party shows an admirable stance for a common sense approach to
22
development and for being positive towards job creation.
23
parties who have been against all proposed developments during the review of
24
the Draft Development Plan now appear to take the High Road on job creation
16:00:28 25
Unfortunately other
possibilities during the course of the General Election".
26 27
That is the letter that Mr. Monahan sent to Mr. Reynolds for the cheque for
28
5,000 pounds.
29 16:00:40 30
A.
Yes.
Nice waffle, if I may say so, yes.
Q. 1227
But it's waffle in connection with the zoning of the Cherrywood lands isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:00:44
16:01:01
144 1 2
that correct? A.
No, it's waffle in connection with job opportunities and the Fianna Fail party.
3
It's just saying that -- I don't know.
4
letter to Mr. Bruton, for all I know.
He might have well written the same For all I know.
5
Q. 1228
How many developments had Monarch going into 1992?
6
A.
I couldn't say.
7
Q. 1229
Well Somerton was before the council; isn't that right?
8
A.
I don't know.
9
Q. 1230
Ongar Stud?
A.
They were all certainly somewhere.
Q. 1231
And some of them were pending before the council in the Development Plan,
16:01:26 10
11 12
I don't know what was before the council.
weren't they?
13
A.
If the Development Plan was covering the whole county I would assume so, yes.
14
Q. 1232
But the only matter that's discussed by Mr. Monahan or mentioned by Mr. Monahan
16:01:34 15
to Mr. Reynolds when he writes this letter are the lands at Loughlinstown,
16
which are the Cherrywood lands; isn't that right?
17
A.
He mentioned his partners, GRE, yes.
18
Q. 1233
Would that view as held by Mr. Monahan have anything to do with the decision to
19
attribute the payment to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael in '92 as being a cost of
16:01:53 20
21
Cherrywood? A.
Well as I said to you, really all of the costs were attributed.
22
when he mentions, he mentions GRE as well.
23
to get 50% of it back from GRE.
24 16:02:12 25
Uh-huh.
A.
I don't think in general it mattered much where costs were attributed.
16:02:27 30
Can I ask you to assist the Tribunal with -They
were all sorted out at the end of the year, at the end of each year. Q. 1235
28 29
It would have made it a lot easier
Q. 1234
26 27
Obviously
That's not in fact the case, Mr. Glennane because these costs were allowed to accumulate?
A.
Yes.
Q. 1236
And they weren't in fact written out every year? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:02:29
16:02:52
145 1
A.
2 3
No, I didn't say that they were written out every year.
They were carried
forward and they were discussed every year. Q. 1237
With a number of cash payments in November of 1992.
4
please.
If you just look half way down that page.
5
17th of November 1992.
6
that?
If we could have 3875,
And you will see on the
Allied Irish Bank plc 10,000 pounds.
Do you see
7
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
8
Q. 1238
And that is debited I think to the account of Monarch Properties Services
9
Limited.
16:03:18 10
It's quite faint.
But it is at 4719.
Do you see very faintly
there?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1239
It's the second last entry?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 1240
And there is a second cheque.
16:03:30 15
At 3917.
And it's the sixth entry down.
And
it's 5,000 pounds to Allied Irish Bank.?
16
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
17
Q. 1241
And that's debited at 3920 on the 23rd of November '92.
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 1242
And that is on foot of a cheque which I think is signed by yourself at 8456.
16:03:55 20
Isn't that correct?
21
A.
That's correct, yes.
22
Q. 1243
A cheque made out to Allied Irish Bank.
That is attributed to the same
23
donations in the books of Monarch as Cherrywood.
24
3877.
16:04:16 25
3819, please.
Sorry.
Now, I want to draw to your attention there approximately to half way
down the page.
26
Both of those payments, AIB 10,000 pounds cash.
Do you see
that?
27
A.
I do, yes.
28
Q. 1244
And one beneath that.
29 16:04:27 30
Do you see that?
After S Barrett FG, AIB 5,000 pounds cash.
that? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see
16:04:28
16:04:39
146 1
Q. 1245
And most or a lot of the other payments that are listed on that schedule are
2
political payments that were made in connection the General Election of
3
November 1992.
Isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1246
So you can see Mr. Keating, Mr. Flood, Mr. O'Connor, Therese Ridge, Mr. Hannon,
6
Ms. Harney, Sean Haughey, Anne Ormond, Ms. McGuinness, Mr. Lenihan, Mr Lyons
7
Keogh, Mr. Boland, Mr. McGrath, Ms. Flaherty, Mr. Taylor, Ms. Coffey, Mr. GV
8
Wright, Mrs. Owens and then AIB 10,000 cash.
9
Nora Owen, do you see that?
16:05:03 10
Sean Barrett, AIB 5,000 cash and
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 1247
Isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 1248
Now, would you tell the Tribunal what that payment of 10,000 pounds and 5,000
14 16:05:19 15
pounds that was a cost of Cherrywood that was made in November 1992? A.
Bank statements.
16
Q. 1249
The first?
17
A.
Sorry, the cheque payments book, yes.
18
Q. 1250
The check payments book is at 3917 for the 5,000 pounds payment and it's the
19 16:05:43 20
21
sixth entry down.? A.
Sorry, I can't see that.
Q. 1251
Sorry.
22
it.
It's the entry that has Allied Irish bank plc.
If we could highlight
It's now in yellow?
23
A.
5,000 pounds, that's correct.
24
Q. 1252
Do you want the 10,000 pounds cheque payments?
A.
I'm just looking to see what difference that, that's more than likely I would
16:05:58 25
26
have thought a bank draft.
27
in that.
28
Q. 1253
No -- the cash appears --
29
A.
In the ledger.
Q. 1254
Yes.
16:06:10 30
However.
There's no reference to cash anywhere
It's after Sean Barrett and before Nora Owen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that?
16:06:16
16:06:31
147 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 1255
Do you want to see the other cheque payments?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1256
That is at 3875, and it's in the centre of the page.
5
A.
Yeah, again, no reference to cash in it.
6
Q. 1257
No.
7
But the reference to cash is from the extract for the general ledger, at
3877.
And if we go back to that.
That might assist you.
8
A.
No well, this is the source document.
9
Q. 1258
Yes.
16:06:55 10
11 12 13
The one before that. You will see it records AIB 10,000
Sean Barrett and the AIB 5,000 pounds cash?
I don't think it's right to mention names in the same breath as cash. However, I don't -- they might well have been bank drafts for various things.
Q. 1259
14 16:07:19 15
If we look at the centre of that.
pounds cash. A.
10,000 pounds.?
Well let's look at where they are allocated.
They are allocated as a cost of
Cherrywood; isn't that right? A.
Well they are included in the Cherrywood account.
I've already explained that
16
might well have happened two or three months afterwards when somebody said that
17
where will we post this to and the answer I don't know, post it to Cherrywood
18
and we'll sort it out at the end of the year.
19
accounts were scrutinised completely by the company's auditors KPMG and they
16:07:43 20
were at the end of each year.
21
I mean, all of these books and
So they would have, they would have, they would
have been, as I said, scrutinised completely at the end of the year.
22
Q. 1260
That figure of 65696 goes into Cherrywood stock?
23
A.
At that stage, yes.
24
Q. 1261
And it contributes to the build up of the Cherrywood stock?
A.
Yes.
Q. 1262
So now let's look at what the payment might have been for, Mr. Glennane.
16:08:00 25
26 27
Every -- or most of the other payments are rounded, are political payments;
28
isn't that right?
29 16:08:14 30
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 1263
They are payments that are made in November 1992; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:08:19
16:08:32
148 1
A.
Yes, yeah.
2
Q. 1264
And there's a General Election in November 1992?
3
A.
That's right, yeah.
4
Q. 1265
And on that list, on that list of payments with the exception of the third last
5
item of 19,500, they are the two biggest payments; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 1266
Now, does any of that assist you in trying to help the Tribunal in determining
8 9 16:08:52 10
what those payments would have been for? A.
No, not really, no.
Q. 1267
But it would have been a payment, as you described yourself this morning, in
11
association with Cherrywood?
12
A.
Well it would have been a payment that was allocated to Cherrywood.
13
Q. 1268
Okay.
So somebody when they make the payment of 10,000 --
14
A.
Sorry.
Whenever they come to post those entries, which could have been two or
16:09:11 15
three months later.
They then raise the query where will I post this to.
16
And they decide, for whatever reason, to post it to the promotions account and
17
it was presumably on the basis that it can be sorted out at the end of the
18
year.
19 16:09:28 20
21
Q. 1269
Is that speculation on your part?
A.
No, it's what I would have expected to happen, yes.
Q. 1270
These are two cheques made out to AIB, which according to your document being
22 23 24
Monarch's document, are cashed; isn't that right? A.
Well I don't, other than saying that on seeing it on this ledger I don't see anything that suggests that they were cash as against getting bank drafts.
16:09:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well if you go back to 3875 I think.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's the 10,000.
29 16:09:58 30
CHAIRMAN:
If you look at the -- do you see the one above the 10,000?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:10:03
16:10:16
149 1 2
There's -- I would think that probably is a bank draft. A.
Yeah, or something.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
Because the identity of the recipient is there.
All right?
That's a Sterling draft.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN:
So wouldn't it be absolutely amazing if the 10,000 was a draft and
8 9 16:10:24 10
no one identified who the payee was.
I mean, that wouldn't make the remotest
11
accounting sense; isn't that right? I mean, sure, wouldn't there have to be an
12
entry.
13
sure, wouldn't it be crazy accounting not to include some item?
14
A.
If it was a bank draft to be paid to some individual or to a company,
Well certainly it should have been at the time.
That's the point I'm making.
16:10:55 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
get specific direct detailed evidence about specific issues.
18
and decide what was probably the case.
19
that it is probable that it wasn't a bank draft because there's no identity of
16:11:16 20
21
Well isn't it much more likely.
We have to deal.
If we can't
We have to try
Isn't it probable or would you agree
the recipient? A.
Well it's -- I don't know is the short answer.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
mean, these are effectively your responsibility.
16:11:40 25
A.
Well you're the -- you're the Chief Financial Officer.
So would you not agree?
I would certainly have expected to see written after it some explanation.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Or written across in the columns.
29 16:11:57 30
And, I
CHAIRMAN:
And we have the reference elsewhere to cash?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:11:57
16:12:00
150 1
A.
Yes.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
were cash taken directly from Allied Irish Bank?
5
A.
So isn't it probable that these were not bank drafts but that they
Well I can't say they were, Chairman.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
9
I don't know.
Well what do you think is likely? I don't know.
It's between the two.
speculate between the two as to one or the other.
16:12:15 10
accounting or whatever.
11
I mean I could It could be just careless
They could, they could well have been a cash.
But I
would have expected them to have been made out to cash.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
amounts it would have been detected and corrected.
16:12:32 15
A.
16
In the strictest of accounting, surely given the size of the
Well it would have been.
Is that not probable?
It would have been scrutinised at the end of the
year.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
I mean --
16:12:38 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
23
And --
I know they are big amounts.
In the overall context of the Monarch Group they
weren't huge amounts.
24 16:12:44 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well they were significant enough.
I mean, if you look at all the
26
other figures they are the biggest item on that list there or it is the biggest
27
item.
28
A.
Yes.
29 16:12:54 30
CHAIRMAN:
In in relation to their designation into Cherrywood.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that a
16:12:59
16:13:20
151 1
decision that was unlikely to have been taken by a junior person in the
2
accounts? It would have been -- isn't it likely that it was taken, a decision
3
made by somebody, somebody with some seniority?
4
A.
5
They would probably have asked somebody more senior.
The actual posting would
have been done by a junior person.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
say that you are not certain.
9
designation of these sums or these items were made on the direction of somebody
16:13:35 10
11
Well can we take it then as a matter of probability, because you But as a matter of probability, that the
in a senior position in the accounts or financial division of the company? A.
More than likely, yes, yeah.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Ms. Dillon, it's now a quarter past four ....
14 16:13:51 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
Well I certainly.
I mean, I will do my very best but it
will take me another hour and a half.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Well, then it will have to wait until tomorrow.
19 16:13:59 20
MS. DILLON:
It can't be taken tomorrow, with respect, Sir, because Mr.
21
Dunlop is being cross-examined by Mr. Shipsey at nine o'clock.
And I don't
22
think anything can interfere with tomorrow or Friday. I think Mr. Sweeney is
23
only available to the Tribunal then.
24 16:14:13 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well --
26 27
MS. DILLON:
So it would be Tuesday week.
28 29 16:14:22 30
CHAIRMAN:
Tuesday week.
Well all right.
Well if you talk to Mr. Sanfey
and see if we can make arrangements for Mr. Glennane to come back on a day that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:14:27
16:14:29
152 1
suits him.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
And suits the Tribunal.
And we'll sit tomorrow at nine o'clock?
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Nine o'clock, yes.
That's for Mr. Dunlop.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
And then Mr. Sweeney?
16:14:39 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sweeney is going to commence his evidence at the conclusion
12
of Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination by Mr. Shipsey. Only, I think, tomorrow Mr.
13
Shipsey's cross-examination and then Mr. Sweeney.
14 16:14:48 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well, will we say not before half ten for Mr. Sweeney?
16 17
MS. DILLON:
I think that -- it really depends on Mr. Shipsey and Mr. Dunlop.
18 19 16:15:01 20
CHAIRMAN:
It's a guess at this stage.
So we'll say not before half ten for
Mr. Sweeney.
21 22
MR SANFEY: Chairman, you did say that I could ask questions of Mr. Dunlop.
23
don't anticipate that I'll have anything much but ...
I
24 16:15:10 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well, we will still say Mr. Dunlop at nine o'clock and Mr. Sweeney
not before half ten.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
29 16:15:20 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Glennane won't be unhappy about not being here tomorrow.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
You
16:15:25
16:16:58
153 1
can make an arrangement with him for some other date.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Most obliged to you, Sir.
4 5 6 7
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
8
THURSDAY, 29TH OF JUNE, 2006, AT 9:00 A.M..
9 16:17:13 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
1 08:24:22 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON
2
THURSDAY 29TH JUNE 2006 AT 9 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning.
09:04:13 5
6
MS. DILLON: Morning sir. Mr. Dunlop is to be cross examined by Mr. Shipsey.
7 8
CHAIRMAN: All right.
9 09:04:20 10
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman can I first express my gratitude to the Tribunal for
11
facilitating me and Mr. Sweeney in relation to the early sitting.
12 13
CHAIRMAN: All right. That's fine. I hope it won't become common practice.
14 09:04:36 15
FRANK DUNLOP, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, CONTINUED TO BE CROSS EXAMINED
16
BY MR. SHIPSEY:
17 18
Q. 1
19
Mr. Dunlop, my name is Bill Shipsey, I appear for Mr. Eddie Sweeney, and as I think you probably know, Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Sweeney has not had any prior
09:04:59 20
involvement with this Tribunal, so I just want to begin by asking you if his
21
understanding and my understanding is correct, in that prior to April of 2000
22
you, Mr. Dunlop, had denied on oath, that you had made any corrupt payments to
23
politicians?
24 09:05:24 25
A.
Correct.
Q. 2
And that some time in April of 2000, you had what I might characterise as a
26
type of Pauline conversion and decided that you would tell the truth in
27
relation to your personal involvement in making corrupt payments to
28
politicians, is that correct?
29 09:05:56 30
A.
That is correct and the phrase we have come to use Mr. Shipsey is crossing the rubicon, not to a Pauline conversion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
2 09:05:58 1
Q. 3
And therefore, it follows that insofar as you gave evidence on oath prior to
2
April of 2000, prior to what I've described as your Pauline conversion what you
3
have described as crossing the rubicon, you lied to this Tribunal on oath.
4 09:06:22 5
A.
Correct.
Q. 4
And what you want this Tribunal and the members of this Tribunal to believe is
6
that having decided to cross the rubicon, everything that you are now saying to
7
the Tribunal, if I can move from your Roman analogy to my Christian one, has
8
the ring of gospel about it.
9 09:06:54 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 5
And after April of 2000 you made a number of allegations in which you pointed
11
the finger at other companies who were involved in development in South County
12
Dublin, who knowingly participated along with you in enabling you, or
13
requesting you, to make corrupt payments to politicians?
14 09:07:42 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 6
And again I hope I am not spending too much time dwelling on Christian
16
analogies, but in terms of you betraying your former clients, you did this by
17
way of an asterisk on a list that you had provided to the Tribunal.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 7
There were a large list of developers and if they had an asterisk beside them
09:08:18 20
the Tribunal was to understand from that, that these companies had participated
21
to a greater or lesser extent with you in corruption of politicians for their
22
own benefit?
23
A.
To a greater or lesser extent, yes.
24
Q. 8
So that we are clear, you at this stage after crossing your rubicon in April of
09:08:48 25
2000 were putting your hands up, and were admitting to your own corruption and
26
presumably and I don't want to pry too much into it, Mr. Dunlop, but presumably
27
at great personal and professional expense to you?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 9
Because prior to April of 2000 and certainly if we go back to April or March of
09:09:19 30
1993, Frank Dunlop was a respected, much sought after and to all the world an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
3 09:09:39 1
upstanding professional person?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 10
Frank Dunlop was a man who had the ear of not only councillors and TDs, but the
4 09:09:55 5
6
ear of ministers and prime ministers. A.
Yes.
Q. 11
And in fact I will be coming on to a telephone attendance book from the 8th
7
March, I think maintained by your personal assistant or secretary, I will be
8
coming to it in a moment it's age 4041 in the Tribunal's Book of Evidence, but
9
if you look in fact, one page in terms of the persons who are calling, or
09:10:21 10
looking to speak with or meet with Frank Dunlop, it is a virtual whose who of
11
Irish business and politics, isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 12
You have Bernie Cahill, you have Dan McGing, you have Brian Cowan and you have
14
at the end of the day Bertie Ahern to name just four of those who are listed
09:10:49 15
there.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 13
And to use a somewhat slang analogy, at that time in terms of public relations
18
and in terms of companies or politicians communicating their message and trying
19
to persuade people, Frank Dunlop was the man?
09:11:14 20
21
A.
Well there were others but I was one of them, yes.
Q. 14
But in terms of the others, there were few if none others who had the level of
22 23
access that you had to, for example Mr. Ahern or Mr. Cowan at that time ? A.
24 09:11:42 25
There probably were but I might not have been aware of them, but certainly I had the access that you are describing.
Q. 15
And certainly in 1993 and indeed probably up to April of 2000, other than those
26
persons whom you allege you received corrupt payments from you and those whom
27
you say knew you were making those corrupt payments, the world at large did not
28
know, and could not have known and you would not have wanted the world at large
29
to know about this.
09:12:21 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
4 09:12:23 1
Q. 16
And when you cross your rubicon in April of 2000 it is largely the end of the
2
professional role for Frank Dunlop in terms of your professional calling as a
3
public relations communicator and consultant?
4
A.
Finito.
Q. 17
Now Mr. Dunlop, in -- now you are giving evidence on oath, isn't that correct?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 18
And you were giving evidence on oath prior to April of 2000?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 19
So nothing about the oath has changed but Frank Dunlop has changed since April
09:12:48 5
09:13:12 10
of 2000.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 20
And obviously other persons who come to this Tribunal including Mr. Sweeney
13
will have to give evidence on oath, and clearly that has implications for the
14
person swearing to tell the truth, insofar as if you are a believer in an after
09:13:37 15
life you have got to face your maker in relation to that, who presumably knows
16
if you are or are not telling the truth, it has that implication for you.
17
A.
Undoubtedly and that is a matter for me, not for anybody else Mr. Shipsey.
18
Q. 21
Absolutely it's a matter for you and your maker and it will be a matter for
19 09:13:58 20
21
Mr. Sweeney and his maker. A.
Correct.
Q. 22
But insofar as the temporal world is concerned, if you knowingly tell untruths
22
to this Tribunal or Mr. Sweeney knowingly tells untruths to this Tribunal there
23
are sanctions here on Earth, before you ever have to face your maker, isn't
24
that correct?
09:14:19 25
26
A.
Correct, correct.
Q. 23
And one of those principle sanctions or ultimate sanctions would be the
27
sanction of being prosecuted for perjury.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 24
And what I'd like to know Mr. Dunlop, is whether you have any agreement or
09:14:39 30
arrangement or understanding with the Tribunal or anyone else, which means that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
5 09:14:49 1
you will not or cannot be prosecuted for perjury in return for your cooperation
2
and your willingness to continue to give oath to give Tribunal?
3
A.
There is no such arrangement.
4
Q. 25
And therefore whatever you say to this Tribunal, if it turns out that it is
09:15:18 5
knowingly false, Frank Dunlop can go to jail for that?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 26
I'd like to see if we can get some measure of agreement Mr. Dunlop, in relation
8
to you and my client, Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Sweeney will say, and I think you
9
accept, that prior to the month of March of 1993 you never had any dealings
09:15:57 10
with him?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 27
Now, could I also just as I see you reaching for what I apprehend might be
13
Mr. Sweeney's statement given in private to the Tribunal, I think back in 2000,
14
can I just ask you to do me a favour Mr. Dunlop? And that favour is that when
09:16:21 15
I suggest to you that Mr. Sweeney is going to say something or give evidence
16
that contradicts the evidence that you have given, that you will answer that
17
question or that suggestion and not refer to what Mr. Sweeney may or may not
18
have said on a prior occasion to the Tribunal, I think back in 2000, do you
19
follow me ?
09:16:48 20
A.
I follow you, but just for clarification you are wrong, it was not
21
Mr. Sweeney's statement I was looking up, it was my diary of March 1993, so
22
let's get that clear first, so that was a wrong supposition on your part.
23 24
And secondly I have no difficulty, if you are going to suggest to me that
09:17:06 25
Mr. Sweeney will say something contrary to what I am giving evidence of I will
26 27
listen to what you have to say. Q. 28
Yes but my point is this though, insofar as it may be in contradiction with
28
some thing that Mr. Sweeney said to the Tribunal which you have seen, I would
29
ask that you would not say, but Mr. Sweeney said to the Tribunal. Mr. Sweeney
09:17:29 30
will have to explain any contradiction or change in his position to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
6 09:17:35 1
2
Tribunal subsequently, do you follow me ? A.
3 4
Yes, I follow you, yeah. So I'm not to refer to any statement that Mr. Sweeney has made when you are asking me a question.
Q. 29
09:17:51 5
No, you take Mr. Sweeney's gospel as coming from me. You take it that whatever I say Mr. Sweeney is going to say he is going to back me up on it?
6
A.
Grand, okay.
7
Q. 30
And if I can then just suggest to you that prior to March of 1993, Mr. Sweeney
8 9 09:18:12 10
will say he had no dealings with Frank Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 31
He will say that prior to March of 1993 he did not know very much about Frank
11
Dunlop and in terms of his involvement in business, did not have much cause for
12
knowing much about Frank Dunlop. And Mr. Sweeney was, you may or may not have
13
known it at the time, an executive director of Monarch, but was not a
14
shareholder in Monarch at the time, did you know or not know that?
09:18:57 15
16
A.
I did not know whether he was a shareholder or not.
Q. 32
And he is a chartered quantity surveyor by training, you probably learned from
17
the first meeting that he is Scottish by birth if Irish by decent, and he is a
18
very pronounced Scottish accent, you'll remember that, won't you?
19 09:19:19 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 33
Insofar as we are here today, Mr. Dunlop, it's because you put an asterisk
21
along side the name of Monarch in relation to Cherrywood and you followed that
22
up subsequently with a short statement in October of 2000, and then a further
23
statement, a much more detailed one in September of 2003, isn't that correct?
24 09:19:54 25
A.
Correct.
Q. 34
And we'll be coming to those statements and obviously I will be asking you some
26
questions in relation to those statements insofar as they are inconsistent and
27
also insofar as they don't tally with the sworn statement that you have given
28
on this module to the Tribunal I think starting on 13th June. But what is
29
clear, Mr. Dunlop, from your sworn evidence and obviously it is your sworn
09:20:34 30
evidence that the Tribunal and that we have to take as being the version of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
7 09:20:40 1
truth that you want the Tribunal to believe and for us to accept, that on the
2
basis of your sworn testimony given on principally the 13th and 14th of June,
3
we are here today because you allege that Mr. Sweeney said something to you in
4
the course of a meeting with you on the 8th March in Monarch's offices, which
09:21:18 5
lead you to understand that Mr. Sweeney knew that in carrying out the role that
6
you were to carry out for Monarch you would be involved in bribing politicians?
7
A.
Broadly, yes.
8
Q. 35
And but for that statement by Mr. Sweeney, the precise words you can't
9
understandably remember, you would not have a basis for your understanding or
09:22:08 10
belief that Monarch knew that you were going to bribe politicians?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 36
And therefore it logically follows and having watched you give evidence over a
13
number of days now, Mr. Dunlop, you are a person that believes in a logical
14
sequence in general, would that be unfair to suggest to you?
09:22:51 15
16
A.
Yes, I like logical, rational thought processes.
Q. 37
The logic of that therefore is that if the Tribunal was to disbelieve you in
17
relation to your evidence that Mr. Sweeney said something to you, the words of
18
which were not clear but which lead you to believe that Monarch knew that you
19
were to bribe politicians, there would be no basis for any finding that Monarch
09:23:35 20
were involved in corruption and the entire substructure of this module would
21 22
crumble, isn't that right? A.
Well I can't -- I can't attest to what the Tribunal would or would not do, in
23
logical consequence to the question you asked me, the penultimate question
24
which you asked me in relation to if I had not put the asterisk in front of
09:24:04 25
Monarch's name, then logic might be that Monarch might not be in the Tribunal
26
or they might not be such a module.
27
Q. 38
Sure.
28
A.
What happens after that I cannot either speculate about or attest to.
29
Q. 39
Yes, but an asterisk alone does not condemn a man or a company.
A.
Absolutely not.
09:24:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
8 09:24:27 1
Q. 40
And what condemns Monarch in your eyes is the statement or the words used by
2
Mr. Sweeney on the 8th March 1993 which lead you to understand that he knew
3
that you were going to bribe politicians?
4 09:24:46 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 41
And you may have misunderstood my question. If that is disbelieved, if the
6
Tribunal obviously, and you would not want them to do so, but if they come to
7
the conclusion that Mr. Sweeney either did not make that statement or any like
8
statement, or came to the conclusion that insofar as Mr. Sweeney made any
9
statement it was not on the balance of probabilities open to that construction,
09:25:21 10
then there would be no basis for a finding that Monarch were involved with you
11 12
in making corrupt payments to politicians, in logic. A.
Well I don't think I could accept that. But -- the premise of this question,
13
Mr. Shipsey is what the Tribunal will or will not do on foot of the evidence
14
that has been given to them, both by me and representatives of Monarch.
09:25:57 15
16
Q. 42
Yes.
A.
Now, that's not for me, may I suggest with the greatest respect, for you
17
either, to infer or suggest what the Tribunal might or might not do in certain
18
consequences. I can only say that I put an asterisk in front of Monarch on
19
foot of the meeting I had with Mr. Sweeney in March of 1993, consequent to the
09:26:19 20
21
comment that was made to me . Q. 43
Mr. Dunlop, if you don't want to answer my question that is fine, I think my
22
question was clear. I am not saying what the Tribunal will or will not do, I
23
am putting a hypothetical question.
24 09:26:40 25
A.
Hypothetical yes, it's hypothetical.
Q. 44
If hypothetically you are disbelieved in relation to what Mr. Sweeney is
26
alleged to have said to you on the 8th March, you say the 8th March, then there
27
is no basis for a finding that Monarch was engaged with you in corrupt
28
payments, isn't that right?
29 09:27:11 30
A.
Hypothetically, yes.
Q. 45
Now, can we then perhaps come on to the 8th of March of 1993, and I just want Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
9 09:27:27 1
to put to you firstly that insofar as Mr. Sweeney is concerned, his evidence
2
will be that the meeting that was to take place around five o'clock on Monday
3
the 8th March was postponed to around 11.30 on the 9th March, and I take it
4
from your sworn evidence that you don't accept that?
09:27:56 5
6
A.
No.
Q. 46
It is however the case that when you made your statement to the Tribunal in
7
September of 2003 that the date that you gave on that occasion was you
8
believed, the 9th March?
9
A.
Yes, yes it's at the bottom of a page, yes the 9th March.
Q. 47
Trust me on that.
11
A.
Yes, no you are quite right.
12
Q. 48
And that was a mistake?
13
A.
Yes, correct.
14
Q. 49
Because the meeting took place on the 8th March at around five and it took
09:28:23 10
09:28:35 15
place in Monarch's offices, isn't that right?
16
A.
(nods).
17
Q. 50
Now Mr. Sweeney's evidence as will be no, it was meant to be on the 8th but was
18
postponed to the 9th, so there we have our first conflict of evidence between
19
you and Mr. Sweeney.
09:28:51 20
21
Secondly you say that at the meeting on the 8th March it was you and
22
Mr. Sweeney and that Mr. Liam Lawlor was not present, isn't that correct?
23
A.
Correct, not at the first meeting.
24
Q. 51
And you are agreed however, that in relation to your first meeting with
09:29:12 25
Mr. Sweeney that there was but one meeting, and that subsequent to that meeting
26
you met, believe, with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 52
And you think it was on the next day at around four or five o'clock, is that
29 09:29:29 30
right? A.
That is correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
10 09:29:37 1
Q. 53
Now can I ask you to, could I ask the Tribunal to put up on the monitor page
2
4041? Sorry it's up already, and this, if I understand it correctly is the
3
Frank Dunlop & Associates telephone memorandum.
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 54
Or memoranda pad.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 55
Your secretary, receptionist or PA receives calls and notes them down?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 56
Not done by you but done by somebody in your office.
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 57
Is it the same person does them or --
12
A.
Well it was at the time you the secretary.
13
Q. 58
And who was that?
14
A.
The secretary.
Q. 59
Who was that, what was that person's name ?
16
A.
Norma , I think was her name .
17
Q. 60
So Norma takes all your calls, fields your calls or passes them on to you at
09:30:06 5
09:30:18 10
09:30:24 15
18 19 09:30:42 20
the time or notes them down, isn't that right? A.
Either in my absence or my unavailability.
Q. 61
Yes. Now the first on this page, we will come back to it, you will see there
21
is a reference to "Paul Walls 11 o'clock meeting here tomorrow".
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 62
That's a reference to a meeting with Mr. Paul Walls whoever he is, in your
24 09:31:00 25
26
offices and your offices are in Mount Street, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 63
And just to be precise in relation to that, your offices were then 25 Upper
27
Mount Street?
28
A.
Are now 25 upper Mount Street.
29
Q. 64
Are now and were then?
A.
Yes.
09:31:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
11 09:31:25 1
2
Q. 65
And Norma was your secretary then?
A.
I have had a number of secretary Mrs. Shipsey, I'm just saying Norma was one of
3 4
them, I cannot absolutely attest that she was the secretary at the time . Q. 66
09:31:42 5
No in fact I didn't know that, Mr. Dunlop, and I will come to a diary, Mr. Sweeney's diary, because he has in brackets the word (NORMA). So it looks
6
as if you are right and he is right in relation to that in fact.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 67
But you are going to meet Mr. Walls at 11 o'clock in your offices in Mount
9 09:32:07 10
11
Street on the following day, that would be the 9th, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 68
If you just go down to 9.55 there is a reference "Ann, Liam has arranged a
12
meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch House at five o'clock today". And we are
13
under no doubt but the Liam there is Liam Lawlor?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 69
And Ann is Liam Lawlor's secretary?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 70
And it's making it clear that Liam had arranged a meeting for you with Ed
09:32:28 15
18 19 09:32:38 20
Sweeney in Monarch house? A.
That's what the implication of the reference is.
Q. 71
Yes. And therefore we can be under no doubt, because there seemed to be some
21
doubt in your evidence maybe I misunderstood this, that Mr. Lawlor was the one
22
who arranged your introduction to Mr. Sweeney in 1993?
23
A.
The -- I don't think there is doubt in my mind about it Mr. Shipsey, as I said
24
in my recent statement, I went to meet Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request,
09:33:07 25
Mr. Lawlor subsequently alluded to the meeting in telling me that he knew that
26
I had met Ed Sweeney and I met Mr. Sweeney and Liam Lawlor together on a number
27
of other occasions subsequently.
28
Q. 72
But we are not talking about subsequently.
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 73
Before you ever meet Mr. Sweeney you say at five o'clock on the 8th, Liam
09:33:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
12 09:33:29 1
Lawlor's secretary rings you and says Liam, so we are not talking about
2
subsequent, we are talking about prior to it?
3
A.
Mm-hmm.
4
Q. 74
Liam Lawlor is your procurer of this meeting.
A.
That would, that message would suggest that, yes.
6
Q. 75
Yes and you would accept that that is the case?
7
A.
Well I have to accept that that is a message that has come from Ann Urell,
09:33:39 5
8 9
Liam's secretary, saying Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney, yes. Q. 76
09:34:08 10
Now if you go down to, after Mr. Cowan phoning you at 10.45 and Mr. Cahill phoning you at 10.50, down to 11.35 you will see the reference to Tim Collins.
11
I think Mr. Collins' name has come up before, in that Mr. Collins was also a
12
person who, if I can use a neutral term, procured introductions for you to
13
clients and including property developers?
14 09:34:29 15
A.
Yes, arranged introductions.
Q. 77
And if I understood the position clearly and I don't obviously pretend to know
16
it to the level that you know it, Mr. Dunlop, but Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Collins
17
were your, if I can move to an analogy with barristers, they were your best
18
solicitors?
19 09:34:56 20
A.
I accept the legal analogy, yes.
Q. 78
And at 11.35 Mr. Collins rings and says a meeting has to happen tomorrow with
21
Godfrey Higgins, Nasser Taher, FD Frank Dunlop and Tim Collins as Nasser is
22
going away, and there is a number for Mr. Higgins any time from 10 o'clock on,
23
do you see that?
24 09:35:16 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
And Mr. Taher was at that time or had been prominent in the me at trade in
26
Ireland, he was of Jordanian, Palistinian origin and Mr. Higgins worked for
27
him, isn't that correct?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 80
And they were involved in fairly high profile litigation with Mr. Phelan around
09:35:39 30
this time, you may or may not -- Mr. Pascal Phelan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
13 09:35:43 1
A.
I --
2
Q. 81
You don't know?
3
A.
Vaguely yes, vaguely.
4
Q. 82
If you just turn, the Tribunal turn over the page to 4042? You see at 4.45
09:36:01 5
after Mr. Dan McGing rings awe at 4.25, there is another message from Ann to
6
say Liam won't be able to make the meeting until 5.30.
7
Now that suggests that as of 4.45, 15 minutes before the meeting that's due to
8
take place with Mr. Sweeney at Monarch House, Mr. Lawlor is saying he is coming
9
to it but he's running late?
09:36:32 10
11
A.
That would appear to be the suggestion.
Q. 83
And then finally just on that day there is Mr. Ahern, Mr. Bertie Ahern is
12
returning your call at 5.05.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 84
You see that?
A.
Yes.
Q. 85
Now can I ask the Tribunal to bring up page 4045, which is an extract from your
09:36:50 15
16 17
diary? And would I be correct in inferring that your evidence in 2006 to this
18
Tribunal that you had a meeting on the 8th of March of 1993, some, in excess of
19
13 years ago, is based upon the entry for Monday 8th March at 5 o'clock, E
09:37:32 20
Sweeney?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 86
You don't have an independent recollection of the precise date or time ?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 87
Now could I ask you just to help us, Mr. Dunlop, is this diary in your hand, is
09:37:48 25
this in your own personal diary, do you make the entries here?
26
A.
Yes it is.
27
Q. 88
And it's your -- exclusively your handwriting?
28
A.
Yes it is.
29
Q. 89
Can I ask you to go to Tuesday 9th March and there is an 11 o'clock Paul Walls,
09:38:06 30
isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
14 09:38:08 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 90
And presumably that's the same Paul Walls that's referred to in the telephone
3 4 09:38:19 5
attendance at page 4041, 11 o'clock meeting here tomorrow? A.
Yes.
Q. 91
And it's probably safe to assume that meeting took place with Mr. Walls as
6
scheduled at 11 in your office?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 92
And then under that there is something not very clear but seems to be 11.30 and
9
it looks to be E Sweeney, it's not anything as clear because it's been squeezed
09:38:41 10
in at 11.30 but would you just see if you can assist me because you know your
11 12
writing, 11.30 appears to be E Sweeney? A.
Yes it is and it's squeezed in there, Mr. Shipsey, on the basis that there was
13
a meeting to have taken place as you alluded, as you referred to with Tim
14
Collins and the Taher people which is deleted because obviously that meeting
09:39:14 15
16
didn't occur. Q. 93
T Collins, Godfrey Higgins and Nasser at that her, just for completeness if you
17
go on to March 10th, 2 pm you see Nasser Taher, Godfrey and T Collins, re:
18
Taher, so that meeting and again, I don't know if it was due to take place at
19
whatever time 12 or 11.30 was cancelled or put off, isn't that right?
09:39:39 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 94
Now you see what I am going to have to suggest to you is that the evidence of
22
Mr. Sweeney will be that the meeting on Monday 8th was cancelled and
23
rescheduled for Tuesday the 9th and that that rescheduled meeting took place in
24
your office on Tuesday 9th and that's what Mr. Sweeney will say?
09:39:58 25
A.
In following along what you have said at the outset of your cross-examination
26
in relation to what Mr. Sweeney will say, well if Mr. Sweeney says that
27
Mr. Sweeney will say that.
28
Q. 95
But you don't agree?
29
A.
I don't agree.
Q. 96
Yes. And you see Mr. Sweeney will say that meeting took place in your office
09:40:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
15 09:40:18 1
it was a brief meeting --
2
A.
In my office.
3
Q. 97
In your office in Mount Street and it was a brief meeting for no more than ten
4
or 15 minutes and it was only you and he, there was no other person, Liam
09:40:32 5
Lawlor or any other person. So you agree at least that Mr. Lawlor was not at
6
the first meeting with you where he disagrees with you is in relation to the
7
date firstly and in relation to the venue?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 98
You both agree that there is only one meeting between --
A.
The two us.
11
Q. 99
The it would have you before you meet with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 100
So one of you is right in relation to this if you are both right that there was
09:40:51 10
14 09:41:06 15
16
only one meeting, isn't that correct? A.
Correct.
Q. 101
Now in circumstances where on Monday the 8th a meeting is being set up urgently
17
for Mr. Taher, Mr. Higgins and Mr. Collins on the 9th and where your
18
contemporaneous diary crosses that out and inserts Mr. Sweeney's name, is that
19
not suggestive, not determinative but suggestive on a balance of probabilities
09:41:44 20
that the meeting with Mr. Sweeney took place or a meeting took place with
21 22
Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th? A.
23 24
place with Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th. Q. 102
09:42:08 25
26
A.
Yes. No I am not saying that now, I would disagree with the words now. My diary shows two references to Mr. Sweeney, one on the 8th and one on the 9th.
Q. 103
29 09:42:25 30
And now you are saying that that means that there were two meetings between you and Mr. Sweeney?
27 28
Oh I think it's determinative of one thing Mr. Shipsey that a meeting did take
But listen if we assume for the moment that there is only one meeting, it's either the 8th or 9th?
A.
But that is your assumption. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
16 09:42:26 1
Q. 104
No sorry --
2
A.
An assumption you are making.
3
Q. 105
Let's back up a little bit, I hope it's not an assumption. My understanding of
4
your evidence is that there was one meeting before you met with Mr. Lynn and
09:42:37 5
6
Mr. Reilly, that's not my assumption that's your evidence? A.
7
Yes. There was a meeting with Mr. Sweeney before I met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
8
Q. 106
One meeting?
9
A.
I had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney on the 8th and on the 9th, both are in the
09:42:52 10
11
diary. Q. 107
You see I might be wrong, Mr. Dunlop, but I understood your clear sworn
12
evidence was to the effect that there was one meeting and it took place on the
13
8th, you are of course free to change that now, but my recollection from your
14
evidence was that there was one meeting and it took place on the 8th.
09:43:15 15
A.
No the diary --
16
Q. 108
Sorry forget the diary for a moment?
17
A.
No, no.
18
Q. 109
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, yes?
19
A.
No no.
Q. 110
Mr. Dunlop, I am here to ask the questions.
21
A.
Fine.
22
Q. 111
That's my job, you are here to answer the questions.
23
A.
Fine.
24
Q. 112
If there is anything inappropriate about my questions the Tribunal will tell me
09:43:22 20
09:43:34 25
26
and stop me . A.
I accept that, I have been here for a long time , Mr. Shipsey, I know the rules.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Well I think Mr. Dunlop it's my recollection, subject to
29
correction, that you said there was one meeting, so Mr. Shipsey is asking you
09:43:50 30
now is that still your evidence or are you changing your evidence? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
17 09:43:54 1
A.
No it's not a question, Chairman, in my view of changing evidence. My diary
2
shows I had two meeting with Mr. Sweeney after Mr. Richard Lynn's telephone
3
number is on the top of the page on Tuesday 9th, I had a meeting with Richard
4
Lynn and Phil Reilly at 5.15 on the 9th.
09:44:12 5
Q. 113
Yes well can I ask you then why in your sworn evidence on I think the 13th or
6
14th, you did not tell Mr. Murphy that you had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney on
7
the 9th of March?
8
A.
9 09:44:35 10
Because Mr. Murphy's questions were solely related to the meeting on the 8th of March and how it was established.
Q. 114
I am suggesting to you, Mr. Dunlop, that there was, and the evidence of
11
Mr. Sweeney will be that the meeting on the 8th was cancelled, just -- I am not
12
asking you to agree with me, I am saying that that's what Mr. Sweeney will say.
13
Mr. Sweeney had a dental appointment with a Dr. Wolf on Monday 8th March, that
14
the meeting that was due to take place in Monarch's premises at five o'clock
09:45:15 15
with you and Mr. Lawlor was cancelled or postponed and that you, Mr. Dunlop,
16
facilitated Mr. Sweeney with the meeting the following day at 11.30 but it was
17
in your offices?
18
A.
19
question you asked me previously in relation to what Mr. Sweeney will say, that
09:45:44 20
will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence. Let me just add one point, I have no
21 22
Well you are saying Mr. Sweeney will say that, well again in answer to the
recollection whatsoever of Mr. Sweeney ever being in my office. Q. 115
Can I ask you to just have a look at a document and it was provided by
23
Mr. Sweeney to the Tribunal, I am not sure if you have seen it or was made
24
available to you, but -- and I am not sure Chairman how best to get it up,
09:46:12 25
because it doesn't appear in the numbering system, I don't know if you have a
26
scanning --
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: What's the document? Q. 116
An extract from Mr. Sweeney's diary for the 8th and 9th of March of --
09:46:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
18 09:46:22 1
CHAIRMAN: We should be able to --
2 3
MS. DILLON: We don't have this document so Mr. Shipsey may not be aware of the
4
previous ruling of the Tribunal, that documentation that hasn't been discovered
09:46:35 5
to the Tribunal and hasn't been circulated can't be introduced without notice,
6
it can be put up on screen there's no difficulties, it's a matter for the
7
Tribunal but we don't have this document and it hasn't been circulated and it's
8
not part of the brief.
9 09:46:47 10
CHAIRMAN: All right. Is this -- this is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's diary.
11 12
MR. SHIPSEY: It is and was made available in Mr. Sweeney's Affidavit of
13
Discovery which he was required to swear for the Tribunal. I don't know why
14
it's not in the circulated documents, but --
09:47:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Well are there a number of, will you be making a number of
17
references to Mr. Sweeney's diary?
18 19 09:47:18 20
MR. SHIPSEY: No it's actually just the one and fortunately I don't think there are other persons named or --
21 22
CHAIRMAN: All right, well then, we can -- if I just give a copy.
23 24 09:47:28 25
CHAIRMAN: If you can produce hard copies for the moment and we'll put it into the system later.
26 27
MR. SHIPSEY: Very good.
28
Chairman I will certainly, it's certainly possible that I am mistaken but my
29
instructions are that it was included in our Affidavit of Discovery, I will try
09:47:52 30
and get the reference for that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
19 09:47:54 1
CHAIRMAN: All right we'll be able to put it up now on the screen.
2 3
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman I also have the original of the diary I don't know if
4
Mr. Dunlop or the Tribunal would like to see in case the copy is poor because
09:48:23 5
some of the entries are in different coloured pen. If anyone want to see the
6 7
original I have it here. Q. 117
If you just look at 8th of March, this Mr. Sweeney's diary, although it's not
8
very clear, 3.45 there is a reference to Dr. Wolf and then 5 pm Liam
9
Lawlor/Frank Dunlop.
09:48:46 10
A.
Mm-hmm.
11
Q. 118
Then if you go to Tuesday 9th.
12
A.
Mm-hmm.
13
Q. 119
You will see the words 15 minutes, you see that?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 120
11.30 and then 25 upper Mount Street.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 121
And then in brackets (NORMA).
18
A.
Mm-hmm.
19
Q. 122
And above the upper Mount Street, what looks to be obviously the same person,
09:48:54 15
09:49:11 20
but written in different sort of in capitals are the words "Frank Dunlop".
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 123
And what Mr. Sweeney will say in relation to that is that 11.30, 25 upper Mount
23
Street and Norma and 15 minutes were written contemporaneously and subsequently
24
he put Frank Dunlop in to identify the 25 upper Mount Street was the office of
09:49:39 25
Frank Dunlop.
26
And what Mr. Sweeney will say so that you are clear is that he had a brief 15
27
minute meeting with you in your offices at 11.30 on the 9th and no meeting at 5
28
pm on the 8th, and I take it although you are nodding to me you hear that but
29
you don't agree with it?
09:50:10 30
A.
As I keep saying that will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
20 09:50:13 1
Q. 124
2
But I am putting it to you and giving you an opportunity to say whether you think he is right or wrong?
3
A.
No I don't think he is right.
4
Q. 125
And if there was a meeting on Tuesday 9th as I now understand you to accept,
09:50:28 5
based on your own diary, am I right in that understanding?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 126
And if you met Mr. Paul Walls in your office at 11 on the 9th, isn't the
8
probability, forgetting for a moment Mr. Sweeney's diary entry suggesting that
9
the meeting takes place at 25 upper Mount Street, forgetting that for a moment,
09:50:51 10
isn't the probability that if you met Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th,
11
following on from a meeting in your office with Mr. Walls at 11 o'clock, that
12
that meeting took place in Upper Mount Street?
13
A.
There is logic to that, yes.
14
Q. 127
And the fact that you both agree that Mr. Lawlor wasn't at the meeting that
09:51:30 15
took place between you initially, coupled with the fact that at 4.45 on the 8th
16
Mr. Lawlor is making his way to Monarch House for a meeting, he believes is
17
taking place, is that not also suggestive that the Monday the 8th meeting was
18
cancelled or postponed because otherwise you'd both recall that Mr. Lawlor was
19
at the meeting, do you follow me ?
09:52:09 20
A.
No I don't and that is eminently illogical, Mr. Shipsey.
21
Q. 128
Well sorry we have a note at 4.45 on the 8th.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 129
Just let's take in baby steps, because I may be illogical but we'll take it in
24
smaller baby steps. 4.45 Ann phones your office to say that Mr. Lawlor won't
09:52:31 25
be able to make the five o'clock meeting in Monarch until 5.30.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 130
That certainly is suggestive that Mr. Lawlor is going to the meeting but is
28
ringing 15 minutes before it's due to start to say that he is going to be a
29
half hour late?
09:52:49 30
A.
Yes, it is suggestive that a meeting is taking place in Monarch House with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
21 09:52:53 1
2
Mr. Sweeney. Q. 131
3 4 09:53:01 5
Yes, well at this stage going to because it's a five o'clock meeting and this is 15 minutes before that?
A.
Correct.
Q. 132
And since both you and Mr. Sweeney are clear that the first meeting, where ever
6
it took place, did not have Mr. Lawlor, and you couldn't miss Mr. Lawlor in a
7
room isn't that fair to say?
8
A.
Certainly not.
9
Q. 133
Does that not suggest that that meeting on the 8th did not take place and was
09:53:25 10
cancelled or postponed based upon this entry in relation to Mr. Lawlor running
11
late for the meeting?
12
A.
Taking it in baby steps, Mr. Shipsey, my answer is no, it is not suggestive.
13
Q. 134
You see because if the meeting on the 8th did take place there is no reason for
14 09:53:52 15
Mr. Lawlor not showing up? A.
Well we don't know whether Mr. Lawlor did show up or not to meet Mr. Sweeney,
16
he certainly wasn't at the first meeting between Mr. Sweeney and myself
17
Mr. Sweeney and I agreed to that.
18
Q. 135
But we know at 4.45 he is on his way there?
19
A.
According to the telephone message.
Q. 136
And therefore it would follow that, seem to follow that he showed up and I am
09:54:08 20
21
trying to get an explanation for -- neither of you remembering him being there
22
if there was a meeting on the 8th, I have lost you?
23
A.
That escapes me, that does escape me, sorry, Mr. Shipsey, that does escape me .
24
Q. 137
Sorry. Now on the 9th and the meeting that took place on the 9th, Mr. Sweeney
09:54:38 25
will say that Mr. Phillip Monahan, that it was Mr. Phillip Monahan who
26 27
requested him, Mr. Sweeney, to meet with you? A.
28 29 09:55:16 30
Well my answer to that is I don't know. I have no knowledge of whose, of what Mr. Phil Monahan might or might not have said to Eddie.
Q. 138
But Mr. Monahan requested some time, either on the 8th or prior to the 8th, him to attend a meeting with you, that it was postponed, and that it took place on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
22 09:55:24 1
the 9th in your offices. He will say that insofar as there was a discussion
2
with you, it was a brief and general discussion about Cherrywood and that he
3
explained to you that he would leave the detail of the project to Mr. Lynn and
4
Mr. Reilly who you were to meet, or he was arranging for you to meet later that
09:55:58 5
day, does that sound about right?
6
A.
No, it doesn't.
7
Q. 139
Well we know you were to meet with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
8
A.
I met with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, yes.
9
Q. 140
And that was about the Cherrywood project?
A.
Nothing else.
Q. 141
And they were the ones, they were the team within Monarch who were the hands on
09:56:12 10
11 12
people involved in the lobbying exercise to secure an improvement in the zoning
13
for Cherrywood?
14 09:56:33 15
A.
Broadly, yes that is correct.
Q. 142
And therefore it would not be surprising that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly would be
16
the ones to provide you with the detail or the micro level detail about their
17
involvement in lobbying, which you were going and being asked to assist in?
18
A.
That would not be surprising, no.
19
Q. 143
And therefore when Mr. Sweeney says he provided you with a macro level picture
09:57:01 20
at the meeting he says took place on the 9th, that would not be surprising
21
either?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 144
Mr. Sweeney will say that you were being retained for your public relations or
24
he understood you were being retained by Mr. Monahan who was his boss, had
09:57:30 25
instructed him that you were to be retained for your public relations, and
26
lobbying professionalism or experience.
27
A.
Lobbying
28
Q. 145
Yes. And public relations?
29
A.
No public relations involved.
Q. 146
All right. Well we may be sort of engaged in sort of semantics, but in terms
09:57:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
23 09:57:57 1
of presenting Monarch to politicians and in terms of lobbying them, you are
2
trying to present Monarch and Monarch's position in a favourable light, you are
3
engaged in a form of it's a communications exercise you are engaged in, and
4
that is what, I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding of
09:58:24 5
what is certainly within the umbrella of public relations?
6
A.
Communications and persuasion.
7
Q. 147
Yes. So it is in the very broad sense a public relations, something public
8 9 09:58:43 10
relations consultants do in a general sense, but specifically it is lobbying? A.
Yes, specifically lobbying.
Q. 148
So your firm which is a public relations firm, you don't have on your letter
11
head lobbyists, that's a part of your public relations consultancy?
12
A.
I can't imagine anybody putting the word lobbyist on their headed notepaper.
13
Q. 149
Not now, Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
Not now, not after May 2000.
Q. 150
No but maybe before?
16
A.
Oh yeah.
17
Q. 151
Before May 2020?
18
A.
I don't think public affairs was the colloquial moniker everybody talked about
09:59:01 15
19 09:59:12 20
public affairs. Q. 152
21
Yes, you wouldn't put lobbyist now, you wouldn't put spin doctor or anything like that now, isn't that correct, Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 153
And when you attribute that to May of 2000 you have had a large part in that
24 09:59:31 25
26
situation? A.
Yes directly contributed to that, yes.
Q. 154
So, as it were, not to praise you too much in relation to it, but you are the
27
one that is largely responsible for that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 155
And Mr. Sweeney will say as I have said, that he had a brief discussion
09:59:53 30
outlining the position to you, that there had been a zoning decision I think in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
24 10:00:06 1
May of 1992 which was a one house per acre plus a district centre that was
2
Mr. Barrett's motion, isn't that correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 156
You will, he will say that he explained to you that one of your competitors had
10:00:25 5
been involved with Monarch back in 1992, Mr. O'Herlihy, and that Monarch were
6
to put it mildly, not happy or disappointed with the resolution from May of
7
1992?
8
A.
Certainly with the outcome of the resolution.
9
Q. 157
And he will say that what they were trying to achieve and the aim of Monarch
10:00:52 10
was to get to a situation where instead of it being one house per acre they
11
wanted to, you show me your four fingers I was getting the queue from the
12
solicitor and I had it from you, you are right to go to four houses per acre
13
plus this district centre?
14
A.
10:01:17 15
Correct and there were some discussion, I cannot specifically say that it was at that stage, but there was some discussion either then or subsequently about
16
an IDA sponsored science park.
17
Q. 158
Yes which I think was Mr. Sweeney's baby as it were?
18
A.
He certainly was very enthusiastic about it, and certainly subsequently I
19 10:01:34 20
remember him speaking to me in the end about it. Q. 159
And Mr. Sweeney will say that having outlined the generality of the project and
21
having set up a meeting for you with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly who were the
22
people you were going to be most closely liaising with, that there was a
23
discussion between the two of you in relation to the terms of your retainer.
24
And Mr. Sweeney will say that a fee of 4,000 a month was agreed with you and
10:02:15 25
that you requested or, yes requested I suppose, mentioned to him the
26
possibility of a success fee and Mr. Sweeney informed you that that is not
27
something that he could agree and that you would have to take that up with
28
Mr. Monahan.
29 10:02:41 30
Now there is three parts to that, there's obviously Mr. Sweeney says it was to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
25 10:02:47 1
be 4,000 a month, do you agree or disagree?
2
A.
No I don't agree with that.
3
Q. 160
That you raised the issue of success fee?
4
A.
There was no discussion of success fee at the outset.
Q. 161
And thirdly that you would have to take up with Mr. Monahan?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 162
So he is wrong in relation to those three points. And what you say is, before
10:02:57 5
8
we get on to other things that were said at that meeting, what you say is that
9
the agreed fee was 25,000 not sure whether it was with or without VAT or
10:03:20 10
inclusive of VAT, is that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 163
Is it just for my curiosity, was the 25,000 inclusive or VAT fee was it, or was
13 14 10:03:35 15
16
VAT to be paid on top of that? A.
A straight 25,000.
Q. 164
So VAT was to be included and you would account for the VAT?
A.
There are no invoices extant in relation to the 25,000 so I cannot absolutely
17 18
say that there was a discussion about VAT. Q. 165
19 10:03:51 20
the 25,000 was VAT inclusive? A.
21 22
10:04:13 25
Just 25,000, I am not saying whether VAT was discussed or not, but 25 was agreed, that was the agreed fee.
Q. 166
23 24
No sorry I hadn't asked you about invoices, I am asking you what was agreed so
Yes. And as a professional person that would carry with it, either 21 per cent plus VAT or have it included in it?
A.
Correct.
Q. 167
Mr. Sweeney will also say that you asked for 25,000 payment up front before you
26
commenced on the assignment that you were being asked to carry out?
27
A.
Yes, there was a discussion about fees and 25 was agreed.
28
Q. 168
No I know that, Mr. Dunlop, did you understand my question?
29
A.
Yes I did.
Q. 169
Yes. Well perhaps you'd now like to answer the question or what I put to you?
10:04:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
26 10:04:53 1
2
A.
There was a discussion about fees --
Q. 170
No sorry Mr. Dunlop, can I stop you again. Maybe I will put it to you again.
3
Mr. Sweeney will say that you requested a payment of 25,000 up front before you
4
started your assignment?
10:05:11 5
6
A.
I disagree.
Q. 171
And after that, and having set up a meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly,
7
Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that insofar as he was concerned with you, there
8
was no further discussion about fees, apart from the agreement in relation to
9
the 4,000 per month and the fact that you would take up the question of a
10:06:05 10
success fee with Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
I disagree.
12
Q. 172
Now you, in fairness to you in your evidence, can't assist the Tribunal as to
13
when precisely you had your alleged further discussion with Mr. Sweeney about
14
fees, isn't that correct?
10:06:29 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 173
Insofar as Mr. Sweeney suggests that you look for 25,000 up front, could I ask
17
you, Mr. Dunlop, as a professional person, have you ever asked for an up front
18
payment?
19
A.
Yes, I think I have.
Q. 174
In respect of fees?
21
A.
Sorry.
22
Q. 175
And could I ask you, without wanting to pry too much, is that something that
10:06:52 20
23
you did do and often did, I'm not attaching sort of criticism to you for that,
24
but again it may be sort of wearing my own profession, it's not unheard of
10:07:18 25
professional persons who agree a fee to say well here is to be my fee, it be my
26
brief fee or monthly retainer but I'd like an up front payment of X pounds or
27
now X euro not unusual at all.
28
A.
In your profession or mine.
29
Q. 176
Well you probably wouldn't know mine?
A.
I know certainly that it is not unusual in your profession for a briefing fee
10:07:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
27 10:07:41 1
but certainly I could not definitively say I never asked for an up front
2
payment, I would have to say to you that yes that I probably did on a number of
3
occasions, depending on the client.
4
Q. 177
10:08:04 5
Yes. So for Mr. Sweeney to suggest that you asked for it in this case is not completely outrageous in terms of your prior practice?
6
A.
Or subsequent.
7
Q. 178
Or subsequent.
8
A.
It's not outrageous, no it is not.
9
Q. 179
You are just saying it didn't happen in this case.
A.
Correct.
Q. 180
Okay. Now the other, and obviously most fundamental part of what is meant to
10:08:15 10
11 12
have taken place at this meeting that took place on your evidence on, as I
13
understood coming in today on the 8th, now I think on your evidence on the 8th
14
or the 9th but on Mr. Sweeney's evidence the 9th, was Mr. Sweeney said
10:08:44 15
something to you I'm not sure if it's as a parting shot or during the meeting
16
or whenever it took place, but so far as your sworn evidence is concerned on
17
page 122 of the transcript for day one of this module, you said in response to
18
question 953 "Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that he knew of my relationship with
19
Dublin County Council and that I had been successful in other matters" and
10:09:24 20
here's the important part, because up to that point you will agree there is
21
nothing sinister or untoward about saying that he knew of your relationship
22
with Dublin County Council and your success in other matters but he used the
23
words to the effect that, this is your words "You know, you have to do what you
24
have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council". And on that phrase
10:10:00 25
Mr. Dunlop, you are seeking to hang Mr. Sweeney and hang Monarch, isn't that
26 27
correct? Well hang in the sense of implicate them in your corruption? A.
I have given evidence to the effect in response to a direct question from the
28
Chairman as to the interpretation of those words used by Mr. Sweeney and I have
29
given my interpretation of the words at the time .
10:10:30 30
Q. 181
Mr. Dunlop, I just want to come back to my question to you, my question to you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
28 10:10:36 1
was on the basis of those words you want, and maybe you don't like the word
2
hang, but you want to, the Tribunal to conclude that Mr. Sweeney knew and was
3
recruiting you to engage in the corruption of politicians?
4
A.
10:11:05 5
No again Mr. Shipsey, I do not want the Tribunal to conclude anything. I am giving evidence in, to -- in relation to my relationship with Monarch and
6
particularly with Mr. Sweeney and I have given evidence to the effect that a
7
phrase of that nature was said, it was used, and on that basis, I in direct
8
answer to the question by the Chairman, I said that that was my interpretation
9
of Mr. Sweeney's understanding of what I was about.
10:11:30 10
Q. 182
And where Mr. Sweeney doesn't say to you "Frank, I want you to go out and bribe
11
politicians for Monarch to get us our zoning" you may not want, but in terms of
12
us being here, we are here because of the --
13
A.
Asterisk.
14
Q. 183
Now, understanding that you took from what Mr. Sweeney said, which was "You
10:12:22 15
have to do what you have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council" and
16
would you agree with me , Mr. Dunlop, before we come to the fact that you put
17
this in other ways at other times, let's park that for a moment. But would you
18
agree with me and indeed with an intervention from the Chairperson when you
19
gave this evidence, that that expression is capable of an interpretation which
10:13:02 20
does not involve or implicate Mr. Sweeney in any knowledge of corruption?
21
A.
I agree and I have already attested to that fact.
22
Q. 184
Well that's fair of you Mr. Dunlop. So what we are then down to, if
23
Mr. Sweeney comes here as a God fearing man like yourself, father of nine
24
children, chartered quantity surveyor, executive director but not shareholder
10:13:41 25
in Monarch, and says on oath to this Tribunal that he never intended in
26
engaging you at the direction of Mr. Monahan, for you to engage in making
27
corrupt payments, you wouldn't dispute that, would you?
28
A.
That is his interpretation and I would not dispute it.
29
Q. 185
No, no it's not his interpretation because he is the person that was at the
10:14:24 30
meeting and it is his words and now we know not just his words because you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
29 10:14:30 1
accept that his words are open to an innocent interpretation, we now know it is
2
your interpretation of his words that has us here?
3
A.
I have already attested to that fact.
4
Q. 186
And if he says, and will say, Mr. Dunlop, that there was no intention,
10:15:00 5
knowledge on his part to have you engage in corruption of politicians, that
6
would presumably, if you accept that, and if that evidence is accepted, and
7
that's a matter for the Tribunal, but insofar as you are concerned, that must
8
make you question the interpretation that you placed on it?
9 10:15:36 10
A.
No.
Q. 187
Well let me put it another way and just take Mr. Sweeney out of the equation.
11
If I say to Frank Dunlop or a Frank Dunlop who is my client and coming to give
12
evidence to a court, "Frank, you've got to do what you've got to do" and you
13
interpret that as meaning that as meaning that Bill Shipsey wants you to go and
14
lie to protect Bill Shipsey to the Tribunal, that is maybe an interpretation
10:16:21 15
that's open to you, but let's say that you ask for clarification from Bill
16
Shipsey and he says, you ask for example "Do you want me to lie?" and Bill
17
Shipsey says "Absolutely not, you have got to go Frank and tell the truth, do
18
what you have to do, is tell the truth" now where in that hypothetical
19
situation I tell you that, that must have a bearing on your original sinister
10:16:51 20
interpretation you put on what Bill Shipsey said, does that follow?
21
A.
It does, yes.
22
Q. 188
And therefore just to move it to Mr. Sweeney for a moment, if Mr. Sweeney, who
23
didn't say anything directly asking you to corrupt politicians, says that you
24
have got it so incredibly wrong, I have no knowledge, no intention and any
10:17:18 25
interpretation that you put on that Frank is incorrect, I'm suggesting to you
26
that that at least ought to make you question the interpretation you are now
27
placing upon it?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 189
And why, Mr. Dunlop, can you not accept that you may have got it wrong in terms
10:18:00 30
of your interpretation of what Mr. Sweeney said? Why are you so certain that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
30 10:18:08 1
your interpretation of these words which are open to a number of
2
interpretations is correct, why is that?
3
A.
That is my, was my interpretation and continues to be my interpretation.
4
Q. 190
No, no. I know that Mr. Dunlop, why? Why are you maintaining in the face of
10:18:34 5
what I put to you, that position?
6
A.
That is my position and has always been my position.
7
Q. 191
No but could you answer me Mr. Sweeney and the Tribunal as to why that is?
8 9
Telling me it is doesn't explain why? A.
10:19:02 10
Well that may be a difficulty for you and Mr. Sweeney and indeed the Tribunal, but it is not something that I interpreted from Mr. Sweeney lightly as
11
inferring or meaning, that was my interpretation and continues to be my
12
interpretation.
13 14
CHAIRMAN: But Mr. Dunlop given that we have evidence from you that a
10:19:18 15
16
particular expression -A.
Yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN: -- was used by Mr. Sweeney, you interpreted it in a particular way
19
which would implicate Mr. Sweeney and Monarch in wrongdoing?
10:19:33 20
A.
Yes.
21 22
CHAIRMAN: Or in the knowledge of wrongdoing or that there was to be
23
wrongdoing, you then accepted I think in response to the question from me, that
24
it was capable, that the particular expression that you say was used was
10:19:52 25
capable of both a, an innocent and a not so innocent meaning, you elected to
26
interpret it in the not innocent or not so innocent way, and Mr. Shipsey is
27
asking you and it seems to me to be a reasonable question, to explain why you
28
are so certain in your own mind that the not so innocent interpretation is the
29
correct one, given that it's capable of both, if you like, to an observer, it's
10:20:27 30
capable of both, so what was it that brought you in the direction of a not so Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
31 10:20:36 1
2
innocent interpretation? A.
Well I agree Chairman I, and in response to Mr. Shipsey I did point out that I,
3
in response to a question from you I did say yes it was capable of another
4
interpretation, I fully accept that and have repeated that here this morning.
10:20:53 5
But the whole and I think it was in relation to Mr. Murphy, though Mr. Murphy
6
didn't seem to understand what I was saying when I used the word culture, the
7
whole culture of the meeting in relation to what was happening for Monarch and
8
what had happened to Monarch and what Monarch wanted and I was being brought
9
in, if you take Mr. Shipsey's words for my expertise in relation to the
10:21:16 10
knowledge of how the system worked or relationship with councillors or
11
politicians, that was my interpretation of the phrase that was used to me .
12 13
CHAIRMAN: But that has to be put into the context of the meeting that was
14
taking place at the time ?
10:21:30 15
A.
Yes.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: But at the start of the meeting and as we understand this is your
18
first meeting in relation to Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes.
10:21:41 20
21
CHAIRMAN: So at the start of the meeting, if you were asked at the moment the
22
meeting starts what was your view, was Mr. Sweeney coming to suggest or to --
23
that some wrongdoing be undertaken or was he coming to suggest that a
24
legitimate PR exercise would be undertaken? I mean at that stage you don't
10:22:15 25
26
know, you never met Mr. Sweeney? A.
Correct.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: So you don't know anything about him or -- so I mean what, at that
29
point you don't know what exactly he is going to suggest or do you?
10:22:27 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
32 10:22:28 1
CHAIRMAN: No. He then comes in and he talks to you, and the words that you
2
suggested, give or take the words that you suggest, which based on your
3
evidence would implicate Mr. Sweeney, these were just spoken words, I mean
4
why -- it seems to me to be a reasonable question to put to you, what about
10:22:54 5
those words or what about the way they were said indicated to you that
6 7
Mr. Sweeney had a knowledge of the bribing of councillors? A.
Well Mr. Sweeney I think as I have said in my statement, Mr. Sweeney outlined
8
the problems that existed, that they were facing in relation to Monarch, in
9
relation to Cherrywood in relation to what had happened, in relation to what
10:23:17 10
had occurred in Dublin County Council, in relation to the dependabilty or
11
otherwise of politicians, and that he knew of my "expertise" in relation to
12
lobbying politicians, and the phrase was used in that context and I interpreted
13
it in that fashion.
14 10:23:40 15
16
CHAIRMAN: But you accept that it is capable of another -A.
Oh I absolutely, I have said that on a number of occasions.
Q. 192
MR. SHIPSEY: Mr. Dunlop, can I suggest something to you, something I won't say
17 18 19
a little unkind, probably very unkind? Can I suggest to you that the reason
10:24:08 20
that you want the Tribunal to accept the interpretation that you have placed on
21
the words that Mr. Sweeney used, and the reason you can't accept or agree that
22
another interpretation is as likely or more likely is because to do so would
23
involve you in admitting that having crossed the rubicon and fingered Monarch
24
with an asterisk, you have either made a mistake in relation to Monarch or you
10:25:04 25
have told a lie in relation to Monarch?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 193
Because if we are to believe your evidence that you are as amenable to perjury
28
as anyone who comes before this Tribunal, for to you do so having sworn
29
evidence to the contrary would obviously render you liable to that isn't
10:25:30 30
that -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
33 10:25:30 1
A.
Yes.
2
MS. DILLON: I wonder would it be possible to break for a few moments I think
3
Mr. Dunlop just needs a break.
4 10:25:49 5
CHAIRMAN: All right. We'll break for ten minutes.
6 7
THE TRIBUNAL ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED
8
AGAIN AS FOLLOWS:
9 10:26:12 10
MS. DILLON: I wonder sir, before Mr. Dunlop resumes the box might this be an
11
opportune time to indicate that Mr. Shipsey will continue to his
12
cross-examination it might take up to lunchtime , but it is unlikely anybody
13
else will be able to cross examine Mr. Dunlop because of the necessity of
14
commencing the evidence of Mr. Sweeney who is only available for a very limited
10:43:16 15
period.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: All right. Well we will have to make arrangements then for --
18 19 10:43:19 20
21
MS. DILLON: The return of Mr. Dunlop for the cross examination by other parties but in case other parties who is are here to cross examine Mr. Dunlop might like to leave that it's not going to happen. Thank you sir.
22 23
MR GORDON: I appear on behalf of Mr. Tony Fox and I understood that Mr. Fox's
24
position would be accommodated today directly after Mr. Shipsey's examination
10:43:39 25
and I just wish to inform the Tribunal --
26 27
CHAIRMAN: Well we are doing our best to try and ensure that we don't have
28
gaps in the evidence, we have a difficulty in relation to Mr. Sweeney after
29
this week, how long would your cross-examination be?
10:43:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
34 10:43:59 1
2
MR GORDON: I can't imagine Chairman that I would take any more than two hours with Mr. Dunlop.
3 4 10:44:09 5
CHAIRMAN: There is no question of that arising then today, if you said you only had a couple of questions we would certainly facilitated you but what
6
we'll have to do is make arrangements and your solicitor can talk to the
7
solicitor for the Tribunal and see at some other arrangements can be made
8
suitable to yourselves and to Mr. Fox.
9 10:44:26 10
MR GORDON: I am very grateful I am just anxious to point out that we were
11
prepared today and in fact I had to adjourn another matter to, because I didn't
12
want to discommode the Tribunal but --
13 14 10:44:44 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Well that's unfortunate, we understood that we would have a little bit more time this morning but we are not going to have it now, so we'll have to make some other arrangements.
17 18
MR GORDON: Is if Mr. Costello my instructing solicitor will liaise perhaps.
19 10:44:54 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Yes and we'll endeavour to facilitate yourself, your solicitor and Mr. Fox.
22 23
MR GORDON: I am very grateful.
24 10:45:01 25
CHAIRMAN: Now sorry Mr. Shipsey.
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
35 10:45:03 1
FRANK DUNLOP RETURNS TO THE WITNESS BOX AND CONTINUES
2
IN CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. SHIPSEY:
3 4
Q. 194
10:45:55 5
Mr. Dunlop, your interpretation of the words that you say that Mr. Sweeney used was and is of course conditioned or influenced by what you know and what you
6
knew about the modus operandi of Frank Dunlop?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 195
You knew on the 8th or 9th and 8th -- or alternatively 8th and 9th of March of
9 10:46:29 10
11
1993, that Frank Dunlop was a corrupt man who bribed politicians? A.
Yes.
Q. 196
Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that not only did he not know this, but had no
12
basis whatsoever in March of 1993 to know or believe or suspect that Frank
13
Dunlop confidante of the Taoiseach and government ministers was a corrupt
14
person who bribed politicians, and I'd have to suggest to you that there was
10:47:16 15
nothing known or that could have been known by Mr. Sweeney at that time to
16
support that?
17
A.
Well I don't know that.
18
Q. 197
And certainly, prior to April of 2000, the public picture of Frank Dunlop was
19 10:47:52 20
upstanding, upright, professional man, isn't that right? A.
You are saying that Mr. Shipsey.
21
Q. 198
Yes. I thought you'd agreed with me earlier?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 199
And that's the Frank Dunlop that Eddie Sweeney was coming to meet in March of
24
1993, so I am suggesting to you that whatever interpretation you put on it is
10:48:11 25
based upon your knowledge of the corruption of Frank Dunlop, but that that
26
knowledge has in a sense blighted or clouded your judgement in relation to your
27
ability to interpret the words that other people use.
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 200
Because it enables you either because it is what you believe or because what
10:48:46 30
you want to believe, to somehow suggest that "Well I may have been a corrupt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
36 10:49:02 1
man, but there were others who were the recipients of my corruption and there
2
were others who were the procurers of my corruption and therefore although
3
Frank Dunlop may be a bad man, I'm really only a pawn in their game" didn't it
4
enable you to do that?
10:49:22 5
A.
Oh no.
6
Q. 201
It doesn't?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 202
Now after this meeting on the 8th or 9th or 8th and 9th of March, within a
9 10:49:46 10
11
couple of days you received two cheques totalling 25,000. A.
Correct.
Q. 203
Now that is consistent, both with your version of events which is that your fee
12
was 25,000, and it's also consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version of events which
13
is that you asked for 25,000 up front. So up until this point you both can be
14
right, isn't that correct?
10:50:14 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 204
However prior to December of 1993 you don't issue any invoice claiming an
17
amount of 25,000 in respect of fees, isn't that right? I think on the 6th
18
December you issue an invoice which includes a fee for 25,000 plus VAT, it's
19
page 4772. Will you trust me on this for a moment Mr. Dunlop, if I'm wrong I
10:51:19 20
will stand corrected, but for the moment would you agree with me that you don't
21
issue any invoice for 25,000 prior to the 6th December 1993?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 205
And the invoice that you issue on the, on the 6th December 1993 is for 25,000
24 10:51:42 25
26
plus VAT? A.
Correct.
Q. 206
Which is different than what you understood had been agreed in March of 1993,
27 28
namely that it was 25,000 inclusive of VAT? A.
29 10:52:08 30
The 25,000 straight. Either inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the VAT issue did not arise, it was a 25,000 pound payment.
Q. 207
Yes. So we know that between March of '93 and the 6th December of 1993, Frank Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
37 10:52:17 1
Dunlop does not have any documentary evidence to support his contention of any
2
fee agreed at 25,000?
3
A.
I don't have documentary evidence, I have remittance notices from Monarch.
4
Q. 208
I know yes, but you never got 25,000?
A.
In a 25,000 pound amount, in that amount. No, two cheques 15 and ten.
Q. 209
Yes, so that doesn't tell you that you agreed a fee of 25,000 as your
10:52:37 5
6 7
professional fee, isn't that right?
8
A.
I don't understand your --
9
Q. 210
Well the fact that you get a cheque for 10,000 and 15,000 a couple of days
10:53:03 10
after your meeting in March doesn't assist the Tribunal or you in determining
11
that it was payment on foot of an agreed 25,000 or a payment on account of
12
25,000?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 211
And indeed in relation to your invoice of the 6th December which is 4772, there
10:53:26 15
are two invoices of that date or two documents that appear as invoices on that
16
date, one of which puts in an agreed fee of 17,500 and the other at 25,000.
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 212
And my recollection was you weren't able to explain why you had those two
19 10:53:50 20
documents. A.
Correct.
21
Q. 213
And still aren't?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 214
It is at best confusing, and perhaps at worst misleading, isn't that correct?
24
A.
They both have the same number, Mr. Shipsey.
Q. 215
Yes. But just in response, both have the same number, different amounts?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 216
They can't both be right and they are at best confusing, at worst misleading.
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 217
Mr. Dunlop, what I am going to do now, obviously the major issue for the
10:54:06 25
10:54:35 30
Tribunal is to determine whether you are telling the truth in relation to -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
38 10:54:45 1
well two things, actually a little more nuanced now, because it's not really
2
just whether Mr. Sweeney said the words that he said, but really whether the
3
Tribunal accepts that the interpretation you placed upon the words that
4
Mr. Sweeney said are correct or, sorry is correct, isn't that right?
10:55:10 5
6
A.
Yes, it's a matter for the Tribunal.
Q. 218
And what I want to do now obviously is really just so that you are aware of
7
where I'm coming from on behalf of Mr. Sweeney, I am now setting out and trying
8
to set out to, to be under no illusion, discredit your evidence so that it is
9
easier for the Tribunal to believe Mr. Sweeney and to disbelieve Frank Dunlop
10:55:43 10
and we start from this position that it is accepted that Frank Dunlop acted
11
corruptly by Frank Dunlop.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 219
It is accepted by Frank Dunlop that he lied under oath to this Tribunal?
14
A.
Correct.
Q. 220
And when we come on then to consider Frank Dunlop's evidence as to what was or
10:56:06 15
16
was not agreed or was not, was or was not done, it's in that context and for
17
the Tribunal to believe you they have to believe that in crossing the rubicon
18
if I can mix my metaphors, you also under went in that river crossing some type
19
of Pauline conversion if that's not too convoluted, as you are crossing the
10:56:58 20
river you decided I once was lost and a liar, I am now found and I tell the
21
truth, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 221
And we are now going to, as it were, test that position that you are
24
maintaining here, by reference to contemporaneous documents which I am going to
10:57:21 25
be suggesting to you suggest that no such conversion took place and the river
26
crossing was just a river crossing, do you follow?
27
A.
I follow.
28
Q. 222
On the 10th April 1993 document 4133, an invoice is raised by Frank Dunlop &
29 10:57:55 30
Associates, isn't that correct? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
39 10:57:55 1
Q. 223
And indeed all of the invoices that are raised by Frank Dunlop & Associates are
2
generated within Frank Dunlop & Associates, I mean it's pretty obvious but it
3
follows, these aren't Monarch dictating your invoices and you putting it on
4
your letter head and sending it out?
10:58:24 5
6
A.
No.
Q. 224
You tell, be it Norma, or whoever it is that is doing it, "Would you have take
7
a fee note" whether you do it on a dictaphone for do it by hand, "take a fee
8
note to Monarch Properties Services Limited to agreed fee Republic affair
9
strategy and it's implementation, 10,000 plus VAT", Norma does that and it's
10:58:50 10
generated and sent out, that's how it works isn't it?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 225
So on the 10th April when you sent out a fee note for 10,000 plus VAT, that's
13 14
on your direction? A.
It would be.
Q. 226
It would be on your direction. Was on your direction?
16
A.
Logically yes.
17
Q. 227
And when we see the reference there "CW/south" could we take it that "CW" is
10:59:02 15
18 19 10:59:28 20
Cherrywood and "south" is Dublin, South County Dublin, is that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 228
And that doesn't relate at all to the 25,000 fee that you have agreed, when I
21
say it doesn't relate, it doesn't correspond with the agreed fee?
22
A.
Correct yes.
23
Q. 229
Isn't that right.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 230
Because if you are right the fee that ought to have gone out after March of
10:59:44 25
26
1993 was to agree fee public affairs strategy and it's implementation 25,000,
27
either with or without VAT, probably with VAT because it's not a VAT exempt
28
service, isn't that right?
29 11:00:03 30
A.
Right.
Q. 231
And we know that didn't happen until the 6th of December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
40 11:00:07 1
2
A.
Correct.
Q. 232
So here you are sending out what is a, again at best confusing at worst
3
misleading invoice, suggestive of an agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT, isn't that
4
right?
11:00:21 5
6
A.
It's an invoice for 10,000 plus VAT.
Q. 233
No but it is misleading or confusing, whichever you like to take it, because
7
there is no agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT which you have agreed with --
8
A.
Oh there is no agreed fee exactly.
9
Q. 234
At 10,000.
A.
Yes.
Q. 235
To that extent it is. And you generate this and send it off to Monarch and on
11:00:37 10
11 12
it's face it purports to say we have an agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT, please
13
pay it?
14 11:00:50 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 236
And that's marked certified true copy and paid on 1st of June 1993 is that
16
right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 237
Now if you go over the page to 4142 please? That's the payment certificate in
19
respect of this invoice because it's referring to an invoice dated the 10th of
11:01:17 20
April 1993 from Frank Dunlop & Associates, description of the work PR strategy
21
and insofar as the paid on, go down to the bottom left hand corner, 1st of June
22
1993 that corresponds with what's stamped on your document at 4133, isn't that
23
right?
24 11:01:40 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 238
And it also has marked as payment one, the first payment they are making to
26
you, or suggests that it is, isn't that right?
27
A.
It's marked here as number one, yes.
28
Q. 239
And amount of quotation it says 4K or four K a month. Now insofar as that is
29 11:02:10 30
concerned or so far as that is entered, I think while Mr. Caslin's writing, Mr. Sweeney will say obviously he provided Mr. Caslin with the information Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
41 11:02:14 1
because you never spoke to Mr. Caslin?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 240
And Mr. Sweeney will say that he told Mr. Caslin what he had agreed with you
4
was 4,000 a month. And in him telling that to Mr. Caslin it may not be the
11:02:26 5
truth and can't be the truth if you are right, but it's consistent at least in
6
May of 1993 with what Mr. Sweeney says he had agreed with you in relation to
7
your retainer?
8
A.
Yes it would appear to be.
9
Q. 241
And it's not appear, it be?
A.
Nothing wrong in my view.
11
Q. 242
We know not what sees only what is?
12
A.
Well thank you for the classic --
13
Q. 243
But you agree with that?
14
A.
I don't agree at all that there was an arrangement between Mr. Sweeney and
11:02:41 10
11:02:55 15
myself for 4,000.
16
Q. 244
No no, my point was on the face of this it is consistent?
17
A.
On the face it have yes.
18
Q. 245
On the face of this it is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version and certainly
19 11:03:09 20
21
inconsistent with your version of 25,000? A.
On the face it, yes.
Q. 246
If you are right Mr. Sweeney ought to have put down amount of quotation 25,000
22
whether it was with or without VAT. So here we have what I might describe as a
23
straw in the wind, obviously not determinative against you because you don't
24
write it, but at least insofar as Mr. Sweeney is concerned, if he tells
11:03:33 25
Mr. Caslin this, he is either lying to Mr. Caslin, mistaken but he has to be
26
wrong because that's not what you agreed?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 247
And there obviously had to be some inquiry as to why Mr. Sweeney who doesn't
29 11:03:59 30
know you from Adam prior to March of 1993, who is, no reason to suspect he will say why, that you were involved in any corruption, we'll have to inquire as to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
42 11:04:04 1
what possible interest he could have in putting it down, maybe your counsel and
2
the Tribunal will inquire, but at least it's consistent with his version and
3
inconsistent with yours, isn't that right?
4 11:04:16 5
A.
My counsel will inquire into that.
Q. 248
Yes. If you just go over to, sorry over in my book because I have taken my out
6
but 4202, sorry 4204 I'm very sorry. This is an invoice from you or from Frank
7
Dunlop & Associates, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 249
It's dated the 19th of May?
A.
Yes.
Q. 250
Five weeks after the first one and this is for 12,396.69 pounds plus VAT. Now
11:04:39 10
11 12
I think we can take it you have never agreed a fee with somebody of 12,396.69
13
pounds?
14
A.
No, correct.
Q. 251
And what this is an invoice to reflect either a fee or a payment of 15,000?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 252
Could be either?
18
A.
Either.
19
Q. 253
Yes, if you get a cheque for 15,000 in and you are going to account for it
11:05:06 15
11:05:21 20
properly you will deduct, you'll calculate what the VAT is, isn't that right?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 254
So again just on the face of this document it's described as an invoice number
23 24
834, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 255
And then at the bottom it has paid with thanks, for VAT purposes only?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 256
That's typed in Frank Dunlop & Associates offices.
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 257
Isn't that right? So here on the 19th May a document which purports to be an
11:05:34 25
11:05:49 30
invoice is issued, which is in fact a receipt? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
43 11:05:54 1
A.
Paid with VAT yes, paid with thanks for VAT purposes only.
2
Q. 258
So firstly the invoice is a misnomer, it's a receipt?
3
A.
It's a receipt yes.
4
Q. 259
And it's a receipt for a payment that has already been made?
A.
Yes.
Q. 260
And the only payment that has been made at this stage of 15,000 pounds is a
11:06:07 5
6 7
payment of 15,000 that is paid on the 11th of March 1993?
8
A.
That is the only payment of 15,000, yes.
9
Q. 261
Therefore this receipt mis-called invoice logically must relate to the 15,000?
A.
Logically it would appear to.
Q. 262
And although it was suggested and I was just a little bit confused about this,
11:06:28 10
11 12
but that's going to be a recurring theme in my cross-examination, Mr. Dunlop,
13
and you will have to clarify matters for me, but my recollection of your
14
evidence in relation to this invoice, which you now accept is a receipt, was
11:07:14 15
that this was in fact an invoice and that it was paid in two tranches of 7,500
16
each in July of 1993 and September of 1993?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 263
And that must be wrong now, isn't that correct?
19
A.
No I draw your attention to the hand written note on the top of it.
Q. 264
Yes.
21
A.
That's not my handwriting, that's an officer in the company.
22
Q. 265
Officer in whose company?
23
A.
My company.
24
Q. 266
Yes. So where it says 19/5 and whatever it is 19/9 --
A.
17 or 19.
Q. 267
17 or 19, yes, what you have interpreted from that is since there was a payment
11:07:33 20
11:07:53 25
26 27
of 7,500 on the 9th, somebody in your offers made the assumption that this
28
actually relates at least partially to that payment because it was of 7,500?
29 11:08:24 30
A.
Well I wouldn't necessarily suggest to you, Mr. Shipsey, that he made the assumption, he was the person who is responsible for keeping the records. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
44 11:08:26 1
Q. 268
2
I know but Mr. Dunlop, that couldn't be right if this is a receipt, isn't that right?
3
A.
Well logically no.
4
Q. 269
I mean logically impossible, it's not even, we are not in the in the realm of
11:08:40 5
balances of probabilities or beyond a reasonable doubt, if this is paid with
6
thanks --
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 270
-- on the 19th of May --
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 271
-- it can have nothing to do with the payment in September or July?
A.
Well as I pointed out to you, that note in handwriting on the top of the
11:08:47 10
11 12
invoice or payment or receipt, whatever you like to call it, is not in my
13
handwriting it's in someone else's handwriting.
14 11:09:05 15
Q. 272
So you are disowning it?
A.
No, no I am not disowning it, I am just pointing out to you that that notation
16 17
is not in my writing. Q. 273
18 19
it? A.
11:09:21 20
Well I can't be responsible for somebody putting down paid on 19th of the 5th and 17 or the 19 of the 9th '93 I can't be responsible for that, that's not in
21 22
No. But that is not disowning it, it is not yours you can't be responsible for
my handwriting. Q. 274
I am not trying to make you responsible for it, but what I am suggesting to you
23
is that the suggestion you gave in evidence, that this invoice was paid in July
24
and September in two tranches is a nonsense.
11:09:40 25
A.
No. I am suggesting to you that what I am saying to you is that as a record
26
out of my company with a notation on it by the officer who had responsibility
27
for keeping the books, this was written by him, and on foot of that he put down
28
"paid" on these two dates.
29 11:10:01 30
Q. 275
Yes. But you --
A.
And that was, that is my evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
45 11:10:03 1
Q. 276
But you got no payment on the 19th of the 5th?
2
A.
Well he has put down --
3
Q. 277
No but sorry, you know Mr. Dunlop you got no payment on the 19th of the 5th?
4
A.
Correct.
Q. 278
And insofar as you got a payment on the 17th or 19th of the 9th it was 7,500?
6
A.
Yes, I think that was established later.
7
Q. 279
But the fact that this notation is there and presumably put on subsequently, it
11:10:14 5
8 9 11:10:30 10
wouldn't have been put on at the time . A.
I don't know when it was put on.
Q. 280
No. If this letter, invoice, statement goes out on the 19th of May 1993, you
11
couldn't put it on paid on the 17th or 19th of September?
12
A.
Correct well it's, correct absolutely.
13
Q. 281
So I am suggesting to you that any suggestion that I took from your evidence
14 11:10:56 15
that this related to payments in July and September is a nonsense? A.
No, I keep coming back to the point the only explanation I can give you is in
16
relation to the notation on the top of the page. I did not write that, it was
17
written by the officer in the company responsible for the receipts of money and
18
in fact the issuing of the invoices.
19
Q. 282
11:11:18 20
21
July and September? A.
22 23
And you are sticking to your version of events therefore that this relates to
I cannot do otherwise, in the context of the person who made this note and in the context of my knowledge of him.
Q. 283
24
Well can I suggest that there is another interpretation that I thought you had perhaps come around to agreeing with, which is inconsistent with that. If this
11:11:33 25
is in fact a receipt as of the 19th of May?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 284
For 15,000, the only payment it can relate to is the one you got on the 11th of
28
March because that's the only payment of 15,000 that you had received up until
29
the 19th of May 1995?
11:11:52 30
A.
No I don't accept that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
46 11:11:53 1
Q. 285
Well sorry which part of it don't you accept --
2
A.
First of all --
3
Q. 286
Let's do -- you don't accept it then I am asking you the questions Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Did you ask me what I didn't understand I went to reply and you interrupted me .
Q. 287
Well I'm sorry for interrupting you Mr. Dunlop, but I am going to try hopefully
11:12:09 5
6
to make it easier. You accept that you only got one payment of 15,000 prior to
7
the 19th of May of 1993?
8
A.
Yes in March.
9
Q. 288
You accept that this document which is your document insofar as there is typing
11:12:29 10
on it, reflects the fact that as of the date of this document you had already
11
been paid that 15,000?
12
A.
No. This is dated 19th of May and I received 15,000 in March.
13
Q. 289
Yes, sorry you received it, but by the 19th of May you have received it?
14
A.
I have received 15,000 pounds in March, yes.
Q. 290
And this document which reflects the receipt of a payment for 15,000 can only
11:13:00 15
16
refer to the payment you received in March because you received no other
17
payment for 15,000?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 291
Apart from the March one?
A.
Correct.
Q. 292
And you see therefore Mr. Dunlop, because I am trying to be logical and you are
11:13:09 20
21 22
logical, if that logically follows, this cannot be a receipt for a payment of
23
15,000 on the 9th of March or sorry 11th of March?
24 11:13:30 25
A.
11th.
Q. 293
11th of March and a receipt for two payments in July and September of 1993, do
26
you agree with me so far?
27
A.
I see the logic yes.
28
Q. 294
And you agree with it?
29
A.
Well I agree with the logic, yes.
Q. 295
And just taking these two invoices, one of which isn't an invoice, the 10th
11:13:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
47 11:13:54 1
April for 10,000 and VAT and one of the 19th of May of 1993 for 15,000, they in
2
fact could both relate logically, to the two payments you had received in March
3
of 1993, save in the case of the one for 10,000 plus VAT and in the one of the
4
15,000 it's inclusive.
11:14:29 5
6
A.
Yes, logically.
Q. 296
And we also know you got no payment on the first of June of 1993, isn't that
7
right?
8
A.
Well I am taking your word for it.
9
Q. 297
Well we can go to it, if you go to 4205?
A.
Yes.
Q. 298
No payment on the first of June and the only payment or the only two payments
11:14:45 10
11 12
that you had received up to that point in time are the 10,000 on the 12th March
13
and the 10,000 on the 26th of May?
14
A.
11:15:26 15
Yes. Sorry, sorry can you repeat that again, Mr. Shipsey, the only payments I got?
16
Q. 299
Only payments you received?
17
A.
Prior to the first of June.
18
Q. 300
Prior to the first of June, in an amount of 10,000.
19
A.
Oh in an amount of 10,000, yes but there was the 15,000.
Q. 301
But Mr. Dunlop we've dealt with that, we are talking about 10,000, you know
11:15:38 20
21
that?
22
A.
You have made it clear now you are talking about 10,000.
23
Q. 302
So the only payments you received prior to the 1st of June of 10,000 were on
24 11:15:54 25
26
the 12th of March and 26th of May? A.
Yes.
Q. 303
And we know that the payment that you received on the 26th of May is the
27
payment that finds it's way to Mr. Lawlor?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 304
And your evidence in relation to that will obviously come to it, is that
11:16:19 30
however it got to Mr. Lawlor it was not Frank Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
48 11:16:23 1
2
A.
Correct.
Q. 305
So insofar as the invoice of the 10th of April 1993 relates to an amount paid
3
up to the first of June of 1993, the only one that is could come close to
4
approximating is the one of the 12th March?
11:16:52 5
6
A.
Yes.
Q. 306
So again Tribunals being Tribunals, like courts being courts, on the balance of
7
probabilities it is connected or probably connected to that payment rather than
8
any other one?
9 11:17:09 10
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 307
And it is confusing and misleading to repeat what's becoming my mantra, in that
11
it has 10,000 plus VAT when you have only been paid a sum of 10,000?
12
A.
The cheque is for 10,000.
13
Q. 308
And it is confusing and misleading in relation to the invoice which is in fact
14 11:17:46 15
16
a receipt for 15,000 in that that is a 15,000 inclusive of VAT? A.
Yes.
Q. 309
So at the very least an accounts department receiving these is going to be
17
somewhat confused, that's an accounts department in Monarch, would have to ask
18
some questions in relation to this, isn't that right?
19 11:18:05 20
A.
Well logically, yes.
Q. 310
Could I ask just to put up 4219 and that's the remittance advice for the cheque
21
for 10,000, which finds it's way to Mr. Lawlor?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 311
And unlike the other remittance advices, it's actually to Frank Dunlop as
24
opposed to Frank Dunlop & Company or Frank Dunlop & Associates, there is a
11:18:54 25
Monarch document --
26
A.
It's not my document.
27
Q. 312
You can't be responsible for that but the cheque that's actually drawn is made
28 29 11:19:07 30
out to Frank Dunlop & Associates? A.
Correct.
Q. 313
Consistent with the other cheques that were drawn and the other payments made. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
49 11:19:12 1
So that person who is preparing this within Monarch is preparing it with the
2
intention that it is to go to Frank Dunlop & Associates and it is a crossed
3
cheque which ought to make it difficult to negotiate other than by Frank Dunlop
4
& Associates?
11:19:29 5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 314
It should go nowhere other than into a Frank Dunlop & Associates account?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q. 315
And if it does something has gone wrong in the banking process at least, isn't
9 11:19:40 10
11
that right? A.
Something has gone wrong somewhere.
Q. 316
Yes. Now whilst we have a remittance advice for this on the 26th of May, there
12
is according to you some mystery shrouding this cheque, Frank Dunlop's attitude
13
to this is not my signature on the back, not clear whether you are saying
14
whether you ever got it or not or it ever arrived in your office, but it's just
11:20:19 15
one of these mysteries, would that be an unfair characterisation of your view
16 17
in relation to this cheque? A.
Yeah well I mean I wouldn't characterise it simply as such I gave evidence to
18
the effect that one it is not my signature on the back of the cheque, I did not
19
give this cheque to any third party including Mr. Lawlor, and we now have
11:20:50 20
evidence to the effect as to how this cheque was negotiated.
21
Q. 317
Well --
22
A.
Sorry I shouldn't say that we haven't evidence as to --
23
Q. 318
It suggests it --
24
A.
We have a statement from a party.
Q. 319
Yes. There is just a few questions I have. I mean obviously Mr. Lawlor is not
11:21:01 25
26
going to be able to contradict that for obvious reasons, your evidence, so you
27
are home and dry in relation to that particular evidence that you didn't give
28
it to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right? Mr. Monahan is not going to be able to
29
throw any light on any involvement he might have had in relation to it?
11:21:24 30
A.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
50 11:21:25 1
Q. 320
However, you also accept, this is where I am just a little bit mystified, you
2
accept that Frank Dunlop & Associates received payments to the value of 85,000
3
from Monarch?
4 11:21:45 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 321
And included in that is the 10,000 that Mr. Lawlor seems to have been able to
6
negotiate?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 322
And I don't understand how you can on the one hand say I accept Tribunal, and
9
you are to find, Monarch paid me 85,000, but in fact 10,000 of that was stolen
11:22:07 10
11
from me, directed to somebody else, fell into other hands and I didn't get it? A.
Well the cheque is made out to my company and we have an invoice, a remittance
12
notice from Monarch, this was the copy of the cheque, Mr. Shipsey. I think you
13
are aware of this, and if you are stop me, or if you think it's irrelevant stop
14
me, this cheque was produced some 12 hours before I gave evidence here one
11:22:38 15
morning and there was always an argument as to a payment of 10,000. This
16
cheque was produced to me at about, copy of this cheque, a photocopy of this
17
cheque was produced to me at about 8 o'clock of a morning before I came down
18
here and I instructed my solicitors if they had the cheque, if they have
19
evidence of a cheque made payable to Frank Dunlop & Associates we accept, and
11:23:03 20
that instruction was carried out and given to Mr. Murphy by my counsel.
21
Subsequently in evidence when it was put up on the screen in relation to the
22
signature or the endorsement on the back of the cheque I realised it was not my
23
signature.
24
Q. 323
Was that for the first time ?
A.
Yes and I, we had this discussion with Mr. Murphy.
26
Q. 324
I know I was here for it.
27
A.
Yes. Bearing in mind that this copy of this cheque was produced to me that
11:23:23 25
28
morning in my solicitor's office, my solicitor produced the cheque and said we
29
have had this overnight, faxed communication from the Tribunal.
11:23:42 30
Q. 325
And you say that's the morning? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
51 11:23:44 1
A.
I gave evidence on --
2
Q. 326
In June. A number of hours before, are you saying you didn't look at the back?
3
A.
I didn't pay particular attention to it.
4
Q. 327
Oh no Mr. Dunlop.
A.
There was a cheque made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates.
Q. 328
Mr. Dunlop can I stop you here. I didn't ask you whether you paid particular
11:23:57 5
6 7
notice or attention, so would you please if you can answer the questions that I
8
am asking, and listen to the questions I am asking, and I asked you prior to
9
coming to give evidence, did you look at the back of the cheque?
11:24:26 10
A.
11 12
I looked at the documentation that was produced to me by my solicitor, which included a photocopy of the back of the cheque.
Q. 329
And if that is the case and I infer from that that's a yes you did look at the
13
back of the cheque, you must have realised looking at the back of the cheque
14
that that was not your signature?
11:24:49 15
A.
Well it's certainly -- well I cannot absolutely categorically tell you that at
16
the very moment I realised that that was not my signature. Yes, I looked at
17
the documentation that was produced to me by my solicitor my main, the main
18
orientation here was that there was a question about a payment of 10,000. My
19
solicitor told me that the Tribunal had produced a cheque of a payment of
11:25:14 20
10,000 to Frank Dunlop & Associates I said fine, if they have the cheque we got
21
the money. That was my immediate reaction.
22
Q. 330
But that's what you also said in evidence, isn't that right?
23
A.
Mm-hmm.
24
Q. 331
Actually just going to be a little bit persistent now in relation to the back
11:25:33 25
of the cheque because my understanding of your evidence now is that you did
26
look at the back of the cheque when you got the document in your solicitor's
27
office?
28
A.
I looked at the documentation.
29
Q. 332
Sorry, sorry could you -- Mr. Dunlop, just listen carefully please to my
11:25:51 30
question. Correct me if I am wrong, you did look at the back of the cheque for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
52 11:26:01 1
10,000, made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates, dated 26th of May of 1993 in
2 3
your solicitor's office? A.
4
I looked at the photocopied documentation including the front and the back of the cheque. The front of the cheque was the most important aspect as far as I
11:26:22 5
was concerned.
6
Q. 333
So it's a yes to the back?
7
A.
Yes I looked at the documentation.
8
Q. 334
And I would have to suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that if you looked at the back
9
of the cheque in the context of there being some controversy over this cheque
11:26:41 10
and whether it was paid or whether it was received, that you could not have
11 12
failed immediately to recognise that it was not your signature? A.
13 14
No I don't accept that, in the context of the presentation of the documentation.
Q. 335
11:27:07 15
And you want the Tribunal to accept that you looked at the back of the cheque, you saw what was written there and it didn't register with you immediately that
16
that was not your signature?
17
A.
I looked at the documentation.
18
Q. 336
No sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
19
A.
I looked at the documentation and it did not register immediately.
Q. 337
And it only registered some hours later when Mr. Murphy is asking you to look
11:27:22 20
21
at it?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 338
And you want the Tribunal to, and you want me and everyone to believe that?
24
A.
Well --
Q. 339
You do.
26
A.
I can only tell you what occurred.
27
Q. 340
And you accepted and you still accept that -- this is where I am not clear,
11:27:40 25
28 29 11:28:02 30
that your company got this cheque? A.
The cheque is made payable to Frank Dunlop & Associates.
Q. 341
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
53 11:28:04 1
A.
2
There is a remittance note from Monarch in evidence made payable to Frank Dunlop.
3
Q. 342
Yes.
4
A.
The history of this cheque was in dispute, the history of this payment was in
11:28:15 5
dispute. My main orientation in coming down here on that day was having been
6
given a photocopy of what the Tribunal sent to my solicitors overnight was if
7
they have a cheque made payable to me I accept that we got it, that was my
8
statement to my solicitor.
9
Q. 343
11:28:38 10
So the answer to my question is yes, you accept that Frank Dunlop & Associates received this cheque?
11
A.
The documentary evidence is to suggest that, yes.
12
Q. 344
And therefore any suggestion that it was sent by Monarch to anyone other than
13 14 11:28:56 15
Frank Dunlop & Associates can be disregarded? A.
No I don't accept that.
Q. 345
Mr. Dunlop, in relation to this cheque for 10,000, the person who is drawing
16
the cheque which is Monarch Properties Services, was drawing it in favour of
17
Frank Dunlop, that's who it's for?
18
A.
Frank Dunlop & Associates.
19
Q. 346
And associates, yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 347
And absent to any other evidence or suggestion, the probability is that this
11:29:38 20
21 22
was for Frank Dunlop & Associates and was sent to Frank Dunlop & Associates?
23
A.
The probability and logical conclusion would accord with that.
24
Q. 348
And if that is the case, unless something went wrong in the post or something
11:29:58 25
was intercepted in the post, the logic is that it was received in 25 Upper
26
Mount Street?
27
A.
The logic is, yes.
28
Q. 349
And therefore if it was received in 25 Upper Mount Street, somebody in Frank
29 11:30:29 30
Dunlop & Associates must have either directly or through an intermediary conveyed it to Mr. Lawlor? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
54 11:30:32 1
2
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 350
And it would be surprising you would agree, in a logical sense, that the
3
Tribunal concluded -- sorry it would be surprising if they did not conclude
4
that this cheque made it's way to Frank Lawlor, sorry Frank Dunlop -- from Liam
11:31:06 5
Lawlor from somebody in Frank Dunlop & Associates?
6
A.
It would be logical to suggest --
7
Q. 351
We have had --
8
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon sorry, Mr. Shipsey, I don't -- I'm just got lost in
9 11:31:24 10
your question. Q. 352
11
Well I understood we had logically got to the position that it had left Monarch and arrived in Upper Mount Street?
12
A.
Logically, yes.
13
Q. 353
And again I am just following it logically.
14
A.
Yes right.
Q. 354
If it makes it's way to Liam Lawlor then it must logically follow that it's
11:31:34 15
16
made it's way to Mr. Lawlor either directly or through an intermediary from
17
somebody in your offers?
18
A.
That would appear logical.
19
Q. 355
And again if we are talking about probabilities here, again logical
11:31:52 20
probabilities I don't know how many people are in your office, but you are the
21
principal in the office?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 356
And if there was an instruction to give it to Mr. Lawlor, logically it would
24 11:32:05 25
have come from you? A.
Correct.
26
Q. 357
Now you are saying it didn't?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 358
But the logic on my analysis points to that?
29
A.
The logic on your analysis, yes certainly.
Q. 359
Logic doesn't obviously always, isn't obviously borne out in reality we all
11:32:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
55 11:32:20 1
know that Mr. Dunlop but that's the logic of it. And again in terms of looking
2
for a rational, because I was going to say Tribunals are funny places but
3
Tribunals being operating on a basis similar to courts that they try to look
4
for the probabilities and they try to look for the motivation for this, but if
11:32:44 5
they came to the logical conclusion that this 10,000 got to Liam Lawlor at the
6
direction of Frank Dunlop that this was Mr. Dunlop paying Liam Lawlor for the
7
courtesy and kindness of the introduction to Mr. Monahan and Monarch Properties
8
on this assignment?
9 11:33:09 10
A.
Logically.
Q. 360
But again on your evidence we have got to ignore logic because that didn't
11
happen. And however Liam Lawlor gets this cheque he doesn't get it from Frank
12
Dunlop and Frank Dunlop had no hand, act or part in getting the cheque made out
13
to Mr. Dunlop's company to Mr. Lawlor?
14 11:33:34 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 361
And again the fact that we know from contemporary evidence that Mr. Lawlor is
16
the one that's setting up the meeting with Monarch, and we have that in your --
17
Norma's telephone attendance book, Liam has arrange as meeting with Ed Sweeney
18
in Monarch House that he was to be at the first meeting, the Tribunal would be
19
at least forgiven for assuming, assuming may be too strong, for suspecting at
11:34:11 20
21
least that this is Frank Dunlop paying Liam Lawlor's introduction fee? A.
22
There is a certain logic to that, yes. Can you assist me here, Mr. Shipsey? Could I ask you to put the invoice for the 10,000 back on screen.
23 24 11:34:43 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Do we have the page number? Q. 362
MR. SHIPSEY: 4133.
A.
I'd ask you, Mr. Shipsey, to compare and contrast the type face on that invoice
27
with other invoices that I have prepared in my office or were prepared in my
28
office.
29 11:35:09 30
CHAIRMAN: Well is it your evidence Mr. Dunlop that that is not a type face Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
56 11:35:17 1
2
that was used in your office at that time ? A.
3 4
I don't think that type face is a type face that was used in my office at that time .
Q. 363
And who produced this document?
A.
Produced it to Monarch?
6
Q. 364
Where was this document generated?
7
A.
I don't know where it was -- it could have come from us, I don't know.
11:35:29 5
8 9
CHAIRMAN: It came from Monarch, from Monarch discovery, so it came from -- it
11:35:49 10
was in the possession of Monarch.
11
Q. 365
MR. SHIPSEY: I take it that if you send out an invoice you keep copies?
12
A.
We would, yes.
13
Q. 366
Are you saying that this was not in the, this invoice was unknown to Frank
14 11:36:10 15
16
Dunlop & Associates or there was no copy in the office? A.
I think that is a logical conclusion.
Q. 367
Oh no not so much a logical conclusion, are you saying that this invoice dated
17
the 10th of April 1993 is a forgery and was forged by somebody outside of Frank
18
Dunlop & Associates?
19
A.
11:36:32 20
to look at the type face and in response to the Chairman's question, I do not
21 22
think that was a type face used by my office. Q. 368
23 24
A.
Q. 369
And what we have had for the last couple of minutes then would be some type of merry dance?
A.
29 11:37:08 30
Oh -- (nods). If a copy of was in my files I would have to suggest, I would have to say directly that it was generated in my office.
27 28
But if we found that that invoice or a copy it have was in the possession of your office?
11:36:53 25
26
I am not saying anything other than I am asking you to look at the invoice and
No no it's not a merry dance, you are the one asking me the questions you keep reminding me this, Mr. Shipsey.
Q. 370
Mr. Dunlop, you took us to this I didn't take you to it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
57 11:37:11 1
A.
Yes, deliberately.
2
Q. 371
So I didn't ask you any questions for the record?
3
A.
I need you to look at this invoice because you opened your cross-examination
4 11:37:19 5
after the break with this invoice. Q. 372
6
But you took me to this invoice to suggest to the Chairman that this did not emanate from your office.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 373
And we have agreed that if a copy is found in your office then that would be
9 11:37:31 10
wrong? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 374
And therefore if that is wrong you have led us on a merry dance?
12
A.
No because you were questioning me in relation to how a cheque made out to
13
Frank Dunlop & Associates could get into the possession of a third party.
14 11:37:46 15
CHAIRMAN: But Mr. Dunlop the only suggestion that this might be a fraudulent
16 17
document has come from you? A.
Yes.
18 19
CHAIRMAN: So it is your suggestion that this is a fraudulent document
11:38:01 20
21
prepared by somebody else without your authority? A.
Yes. I am trying to assist Mr. Shipsey, Chairman, in relation to both the
22
generation of the cheque for 10,000 and the payment of it and the evidence that
23
I have given that I did not authorise the payment.
24 11:38:16 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Yes but you have said, you have asked the question? A.
Yes.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Compare this to other invoices but you have to answer that question
29
as well?
11:38:29 30
A.
Yes well -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
58 11:38:29 1
2
CHAIRMAN: I mean is it your evidence that this document is a forgery,
3
prepared by somebody else without your authority?
4
A.
11:38:45 5
It is certainly not in the format or the type face that was used by Frank Dunlop & Associates at the time .
6 7
CHAIRMAN: But is there anything else about it other than the type face which
8
would suggest that it's not, that it didn't emerge from your office?
9
A.
11:39:05 10
I just in relation to what Mr. Shipsey brought my attention to, reference to CW south, I think any invoice that was issued by Frank Dunlop & Associates related
11
to public affairs in relation to public affairs, provision of public affairs
12
services in relation to Cherrywood or to Monarch directly or along those lines
13
I can't be exactly --
14 11:39:24 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Could you put up 4204 beside this one? A.
Yes.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: There is no invoice number on the -A.
Correct.
11:39:50 20
21
CHAIRMAN: -- on the one on the left. Do you know Mr, or can you say
22
Mr. Dunlop if there was always an invoice number on your invoice?
23 24 11:40:09 25
A.
Yes, generated by the officer that I mentioned to Mr. Shipsey earlier on, he kept a record of the invoices and to -- in 99 cases out of a hundred there was an invoice number.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: Could I ask, sorry Mr. Shipsey, just perhaps Ms. Dillon if I
28
could address something to her, the invoice 4204 the one on the right,
29
Ms. Dillon, the one that's marked 834 that came , it would appear from
11:40:57 30
Mr. Dunlop's discovery? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
59 11:40:59 1
2
MS. DILLON: That's correct. The one with FD 34 at the top, yes that came
3
from Mr. Dunlop's discovery.
4 11:41:04 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: Yes I am wondering do we have a match of that by way of original
6
from any Monarch discovery, just as a matter of interest?
7 8
MS. DILLON: I don't know if you just allow me to check that for a moment I
9
don't think so but I can't answer.
11:41:17 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: Because obviously if everything tallied and people had records
12
subject to people having kept records, both any copy retained by Mr. Dunlop and
13
indeed the original sent to Monarch should be discovered obviously, had they,
14
if they were retained thanks, you might just in due course do it. Sorry to
11:41:36 15
have interrupted you.
16 17
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman can I proceed?
18 19 11:41:42 20
CHAIRMAN: Oh, yes, sorry. Q. 375
MR. SHIPSEY: Mr. Dunlop I want you to look at document 4268? And this is an
21
invoice from Monarch to their joint venture partners GRE, dated the 29th of
22
June of 1993?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 376
And you will see insofar as Frank Dunlop and company is concerned, there is a
11:42:15 25
reference to paid on account, IM number 1, 25,000?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 377
And again, Mr. Dunlop, that is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's recollection of
28 29 11:42:42 30
the agreement insofar as he said you looked for a payment on account of 25,000? A.
Yes and it is consistent with the statement that I made and the evidence that I gave, that I got the 25,000. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
60 11:42:44 1
Q. 378
2 3
the agreement was a fee of 25,000? A.
4 11:43:00 5
Yes, but it is a payment on account, it's not as consistent with a view that
Well I can't account -- sorry I can't account for Mr. Sweeney putting in on account, I am just telling you what the agreement was.
Q. 379
6
No but you see if the agreement was as you suggest a fee of 25,000, you wouldn't have the words on account.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 380
It would just be Frank Dunlop fee 25,000, isn't that right?
9
A.
Mr. Sweeney would have to be, to give evidence to this effect.
Q. 381
Sorry not that Mr. Sweeney, I am suggesting to you.
11
A.
I don't accept that.
12
Q. 382
This is inconsistent with your version the reason I am suggesting that to you
11:43:17 10
13
is, that if it was a flat fee of 25,000 that you had agreed as you suggest
14
there is no reason to put on account?
11:43:34 15
16
A.
Oh there wouldn't appear to be logically, no.
Q. 383
That's my point. I would ask you to go to 4303 Mr. Dunlop, and this again is a
17
letter to Mr. Sweeney from GRE properties and if you go down to paragraph four
18
which is referring to that last invoice that I mentioned and it says "Although
19
at our meeting in May" and Mr. Sweeney will say that there was a meeting with
11:44:06 20
Mr. Baker I think on the 9th May of 1993, "I agreed the appointment of Frank
21
Dunlop, this was on the basis of 4,000 per month with no success fee."
22 23
Now again that on it's face suggests that Mr. Baker and Mr. Sweeney had a
24
discussion on what I am telling you is the 9th of May at which Mr. Sweeney and
11:44:36 25
Mr. Baker agreed that you would be retained on the basis of 4,000 per month but
26
that no agreement was reached in relation to a success fee?
27
A.
That's what the document implies.
28
Q. 384
And that, Mr. Dunlop, is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's recollection and
29 11:45:02 30
evidence, that the arrangement with you was 4,000 per month and also it's consistent but not conclusive with there being some discussion about a success Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
61 11:45:07 1
2
fee? A.
3 4 11:45:14 5
He not appointing me at all or having any recollection of my appointment. Sorry I have broken the rule.
Q. 385
Yes you have.
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon, Mr. Shipsey, I did make an agreement with you, sorry I
6
apologise.
7
Q. 386
I appreciate that.
8
A.
Yes it is consistent with what Mr. Sweeney has said.
9
Q. 387
And conversely inconsistent with your version?
A.
Well logically it would appear so but I don't accept that.
Q. 388
And it is either that Mr. Sweeney is right and you are wrong or alternatively
11:45:29 10
11 12
Mr. Sweeney is less than truthful with his joint venture partner?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 389
And it is at least a contemporaneous record which suggests, doesn't prove
11:45:55 15
Mr. Sweeney is telling the truth, but it's a contemporaneous or near
16
contemporaneous record as to what was agreed between you and he. Not as it
17
binds you but his recording of it or what his understanding was?
18
A.
With his colleague in GRE.
19
Q. 390
Yes. I think I say the 9th of May the diary I think is the 7th of May the
11:46:20 20
Friday was the 7th May. If you go to 4308 Mr. Dunlop? That's from Mr. Caslin
21
to Mr. Sweeney, Glennane and Lynn and item number six and it's referring to the
22
GRE invoice looking for the 15,125 which would be, just to be clear, it's 50
23
per cent of the payment on account plus VAT, that's how it comes to 15,125, I
24
think it's 12,500 --
11:46:58 25
A.
Sorry, Mr. Shipsey, which number are you referring to.
26
Q. 391
Six.
27
A.
Number six.
28
Q. 392
4308 item number six.
29
A.
Yes right.
Q. 393
This is Mr. Caslin writing to Sweeney, Glennane and Lynn and just making the
11:47:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
62 11:47:13 1
point that this item of 15,125 which they are seeking to recover from GRE is
2
not agreed on GRE's part because what Mr. Baker, that's MB agreed, was 4,000 a
3
month from May?
4
A.
On foot of the arrangement that Mr. Sweeney and he agreed.
Q. 394
Yes.
6
A.
Yes, without my knowledge, I know nothing about that.
7
Q. 395
No but Mr. Sweeney telling him that that's what was agreed?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 396
So here is another pointer as it were to -- because obviously no dispute has
11:47:32 5
11:47:51 10
arisen between you and Mr. Sweeney in fact, Mr. Sweeney doesn't know what you
11
are saying until April of this year.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 397
So here we have something back in 2003 which I say points to Mr. Sweeney being
14 11:48:03 15
right and you being wrong. A.
Well that's your point, that's your suggestion.
16
Q. 398
And logically there is some logic to that?
17
A.
There is a certain logic to it, yes.
18
Q. 399
If you go to 4310, this is subsequent to this July 1993 internal Monarch
19
document and subsequent to Mr. Baker's letter of the 7th July, but on the 12th
11:48:39 20
July a fresh invoice is issued to GRE, number 2068 and in which there is a fee
21
of 4,000 a month for the months of April, May, June and July and they are
22
looking for half of that from GRE, again consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 400
And if you go to 4314? This is from Mr. Sweeney to Mr. Baker, Mr. Sweeney is
11:49:19 25
responding to the letter of the 7th July and the last paragraph there he says
26
he "is prepared to cancel invoice number 2064", that's where he looked for
27
25 -- where he looked for half of the 25,000 on account, and "reissue invoice
28
number 2068 at 4,000 per month for April, May June and July if you feel that
29
you should pay only on a monthly basis." So he is not saying that they didn't
11:49:49 30
make a payment on account, but he is saying well we made a payment on account, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
63 11:49:55 1
it's 4,000 a month and if you only want to pay us on that basis that's fine,
2
isn't that what is clear from that?
3
A.
That's what that is saying, yes, or would appear to be saying I should stress.
4
Q. 401
It also says "Please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were engaged from
11:50:12 5
April and requested that part of their payment would be up front before they
6
would take on the assignment that is the reason for the payment by us of 25,000
7
to date."
8 9
And again that's wholly consistent with Mr. Sweeney's evidence that what you
11:50:26 10
agreed was at least insofar as the up front payment, 25,000.
11
A.
I agree, wholly consistent with Mr. Sweeney's construction of matters.
12
Q. 402
And again up to this point in time, can you think of any reason why Mr. Sweeney
13 14
would be suggesting this to GRE, did he offer any explanation? A.
11:50:56 15
16
No, I have no idea what the relationship between Mr. Sweeney or Monarch and GRE was at the time or subsequently in relation to payments to anybody.
Q. 403
If it was, there was nothing wrong with Mr. Sweeney having agreed a fee of
17
25,000 with you, so again there would be nothing wrong with him saying I have
18
done a great deal with this Frank Dunlop, we could have him for two years and I
19
have agreed a fee of 25,000?
11:51:18 20
21
A.
Nothing wrong.
Q. 404
Nothing wrong and if that was what was agreed, you'd expect Mr. Sweeney to have
22
said that to his joint venture partners?
23
A.
Logically, yes.
24
Q. 405
Document 4861? Invoice to GRE dated 31st of August, so we have the fifth month
11:51:59 25
at 4,000 and they are looking for half of that?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 406
Can I ask the Tribunal to just put up 4392? That says "With reference to your
28
letter of the 2nd September and our meeting on the 27th September, I would
29
confirm our approval to the following additional costs. All of these costs are
11:52:59 30
in Irish pounds and will be payable 50/50" and then it sets out a number and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
64 11:53:04 1
the first on the list is Frank Dunlop "A retainer of 4,000 per month from April
2
to December 1993 inclusive plus a success fee of 50,000."
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 407
Now, that agreement to pay you a success fee as of the 28th September 1993 is
11:53:25 5
prior to you saying that you asked for it of Monarch, which was after the vote
6
on the 9th or 11th of November of 1993?
7
A.
I issued an invoice, yes.
8
Q. 408
No sorry we know you issued an invoice but the invoice was issued you say at
9
the request of either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane, put it in and see how you
11:53:47 10
get on.
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 409
So there is a degree of prescience on the part of Mr. Baker in London in
13
September of 1993, because not only is he anticipating your success fee invoice
14
in December of 1993, but he is anticipating that after the vote in November of
11:54:11 15
1993 you are going to ask for it and you are going to ask for it in an amount
16
of 50,000?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 410
Pretty impressive.
19
A.
Very.
Q. 411
On Mr. Baker's part.
21
A.
Very.
22
Q. 412
Now the letter, two things that's referred to in the first paragraph of that a
11:54:20 20
23
letter of the 2nd of September and our meeting on the 27th of September, if you
24
accept from me at the moment that there is nothing in Mr. Sweeney's letter of
11:54:41 25
the 2nd of September referring to a success fee, that it can only have been
26
discussed between them on the 27th of September?
27
A.
I accept that, Mr. Shipsey.
28
Q. 413
And Mr. Sweeney's evidence in relation to this will be that subsequent to your
29 11:55:08 30
discussion back in March, he was informed by Mr. Monahan that a success fee in an amount of 50,000 pounds had been agreed by Mr. Monahan with you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
65 11:55:12 1
2
A.
No, I never discussed such an amount with Mr. Monahan.
Q. 414
It's certainly the case that you never discussed a success fee with Mr. Sweeney
3 4 11:55:27 5
prior to November of 1993, according to your evidence? A.
Yes.
Q. 415
And therefore, for Mr. Sweeney to have that information he must have got it
6
from somebody else, not you, he says Mr. Monahan, but it really can't be
7
Mr. Monahan because you never had that discussion with him?
8
A.
9 11:55:46 10
No I never had any discussion with Mr. Monahan in relation to fees, success fees or otherwise.
Q. 416
Well again when we are looking for straws in the wind as to who is telling the
11
truth about whether there had been a discussion back in March about a success
12
fee and Mr. Sweeney says there was, you say that there wasn't and that it only
13
arose after the vote in November, this letter evidencing a discussion about a
14
success fee of 50,000 in September would suggest that Mr. Sweeney is right and
11:56:21 15
you are wrong?
16
A.
Logically, yes.
17
Q. 417
And can I just ask you in relation to success fees, I'm not saying it's unheard
18
of in the legal world, obviously we operate in more on a what are called briefs
19
and refreshers as you know, but in terms of a success fee, would it not be more
11:56:47 20
usual than unusual that if you are looking for agreement in relation to a
21
success fee that you would ask the person who you are hopeful of getting
22
agreement to pay that success fee to agree it prior to you actually carrying
23
out that which will give rise to the success fee?
24 11:57:21 25
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 418
It's a bit like the horse bolting the stable, in other words once the horse is
26
gone it's a little bit late to be looking for a success fee.
27
A.
It's a bit late to catch him, yes.
28
Q. 419
And whatever hold you have over the horse or the client for the success fee,
29 11:57:42 30
you are far better getting agreement in relation to it before you have done your magic or succeeded in getting what the client wants, than afterwards? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
66 11:57:47 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 420
I have to suggest to you it makes no sense or at least very little sense to
3 4
suggest that you would look for a success fee after the event? A.
11:58:08 5
6
No, I don't think it does make normal sense but then nothing is normal in the context of the way I and some of my clients were operating.
Q. 421
7
Yes, but you see in terms of you Frank Dunlop wanting a success fee and your evidence is you didn't get it, your evidence is --
8
A.
Oh no, let me be absolutely categoric, I did not get it. A success fee.
9
Q. 422
No sorry your evidence is that you did not get it?
A.
Correct, I thought you suggested that I mean I had -- I did not get a success
11:58:33 10
11
fee.
12
Q. 423
No I think unless my diction is very imprecise it's --
13
A.
Well just for clarity yes.
14
Q. 424
Your evidence is you did not get a success fee?
A.
Corrects, correct.
Q. 425
And what I want to suggest to you is that firstly when you put in your request
11:58:49 15
16 17
or you had your discussion for it, I take it you raised it with Mr. Sweeney or
18
Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 426
After, I forget whether it was the 9th of November, after the vote?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 427
So this is your initiative, nobody in Monarch is coming to say great job Frank,
11:59:07 20
23 24 11:59:19 25
50 grand is on it's way to you? A.
Correct.
Q. 428
You went and said Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane, "I done a great job, I'd like
26
you to pay 50,000."
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 429
And your evidence is that they said "Bang an invoice in and we'll see what
29 11:59:38 30
we'll do for you." A.
See how far you'll get. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
67 11:59:40 1
Q. 430
2
Yes. You see I have to suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that that is so unlikely and implausible, almost to be farcical?
3
A.
Many things are farcical, Mr. Shipsey.
4
Q. 431
But I am suggesting to you that this is and I want to know whether you agree
12:00:10 5
with me that that's a farcical, if not fanciful suggestion?
6
A.
No, I don't agree.
7
Q. 432
Did you meet with the GRE people at any stage?
8
A.
Never.
9
Q. 433
Can I ask for 4587, here we have your telephone book, if you just go down to
12:01:11 10
2.07 it's a call from Richard Lynn, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 434
"Monarch would Frank Dunlop be available for a meeting tomorrow with Anthony
13
Pathfield a director of GRE in Royal Dublin at 11 o'clock or 12 o'clock." Then
14
something "will confirm 12 o'clock with Richard Lynn when he calls back this
12:01:28 15
afternoon."
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 435
That's obviously an instruction that you gave. Then at 3.45 Richard Lynn comes
18
back and he, it is confirmed with him that a meeting for 12 o'clock in the
19
Royal Dublin tomorrow.
12:01:40 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 436
And did that meeting take place?
22
A.
I have no recollection of ever meeting Mr. Pathfield or Mr -- Pathfield, yes.
23
Q. 437
I might be able to assist you in that regard, if you go to your diary which is
24 12:02:25 25
26
4589? If you look at the 14th of October at 12 o'clock. A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 438
And there is something crossed out which I think is Richard Lynn and Royal
27
Dublin and then M Green, Frank Fagan or something.
28
A.
You've lost me .
29
Q. 439
Frank Fagan?
A.
12 o'clock, yes something is crossed out -- oh, yes sorry I beg your pardon
12:02:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
68 12:02:44 1
yes.
2
Q. 440
And then E Sweeney above it.
3
A.
E Sweeney yes, circled yes.
4
Q. 441
And then sorry lunch I don't know whether you had lunch with M Green, Jack
12:02:58 5
Fagan or whether you crossed out the meeting with Mr. Lynn in the Royal Dublin
6 7
and slotted in Mr. Green and Mr. Fagan instead? A.
8 9
name, the other name refers to a journalist. Q. 442
12:03:21 10
11
I suggest that that is the explanation, Mr. Green represented a client and the
So when you cross something out that suggests you have cancelled the meeting and put something else in instead?
A.
Well if I could just suggest to you while you are staying on that, Mr. Shipsey,
12
if you look it's 12 o'clock and whatever is there is crossed out, E Sweeney is
13
circled and there is an arrow coming from circle on E Sweeney down to where the
14
cancellation takes place, do you see that?
12:03:40 15
16
Q. 443
Yes.
A.
And then Michael Green and Jack Fagan are included afterwards, but the logic
17
would appear to be that I met Michael Green and Jack Fagan in or around 12
18
o'clock instead of whatever it was referred to in the crossed out section.
19
Q. 444
12:04:07 20
Can I ask the Tribunal to go to 4633? Now, this also comes from the Monarch discovery, I want you to perhaps maybe look at this and see do you recognise
21
the type face on this invoice?
22
A.
Yes, I think that's the type face out of my office.
23
Q. 445
It has an invoice number on it and it says "For the provision of media and
24 12:04:33 25
communications training for 1993/94." A.
Yes yes.
26
Q. 446
15,000. What media and communications training did you provide for Monarch?
27
A.
None.
28
Q. 447
None. And can you just explain then why you described it in this manner?
29
A.
Obviously by agreement with Monarch for the payment of, or for an invoice of
12:04:50 30
15,000 and for the VAT exemptions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
69 12:04:52 1
Q. 448
2
Yes. So you are looking for a payment of 15,000 and you want it zero rated for VAT and you describe it in that manner?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 449
Are you suggesting that that description there was requested by Monarch?
A.
No no I am not suggesting who requested it, I am suggesting to issue an invoice
12:05:11 5
6
of that nature in that format, it would have been discussed in advance and
7
agreed.
8
Q. 450
It would have or it was?
9
A.
I am not suggesting that Monarch suggested it, I am not making that suggestion
12:05:27 10
11
at all. Q. 451
No but what possible benefit would there be for Monarch, I mean Monarch is
12
registered for VAT, VAT is neutral, there might be a cashflow implication but
13
it matters not a wit to Monarch whether they are charging that because they
14
will be able to recover it, isn't that right?
12:05:44 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 452
So the only person that benefits here in relation to a payment of 15,000 is
17
Frank Dunlop & Associates?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 453
So to suggest that it was discussed and agreed with Monarch I suggest to you is
12:05:56 20
a nonsense, this is?
21
A.
No it's not.
22
Q. 454
This is an invoice generated by Frank Dunlop & Associates for the benefit of
23 24
Frank Dunlop. A.
12:06:10 25
Well the first question as you referred to earlier on, an hour ago, some body in the accounts department of Monarch could immediately ask why this was VAT
26
exempt if an invoice came unsolicited without any pre knowledge.
27
Q. 455
So the onus would be on Monarch --
28
A.
No it would be a joint onus, maybe an agreement in advance.
29
Q. 456
And who did you have that agreement with?
A.
The only person I ever discussed fees with were Mr. Sweeney.
12:06:31 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
70 12:06:35 1
Q. 457
2
So we can assume therefore that you met with Mr. Sweeney on or about the 2nd of November 1993 and had such a discussion?
3
A.
Or before the 2nd of November 1993.
4
Q. 458
On or before?
A.
On or before or by telephone.
Q. 459
And you are saying that you and Mr. Sweeney agreed that you would invoice for
12:06:48 5
6 7 8
media and communications training for 1993? A.
9
invoice of that nature, VAT exempted unforewarned to somebody like a company
12:07:08 10
like Monarch, they could, they would legitimately come back and say why is this
11 12
not VAT inclusive or why is VAT not included. Q. 460
13 14
No what I am suggesting, Mr. Shipsey, is quite simple that for me to issue an
We know they could but I am talking about what agreement you allege or discussion you allege having with Mr. Sweeney?
A.
12:07:33 15
No I am not alleging any -- all I am saying is that to issue an invoice of that nature without VAT, without any pre notification that an invoice was going to
16
issue without VAT would be extraordinary, it would be the subject of a
17
discussion in advance because logically people would come back and say why is
18
this invoice not VAT inclusive.
19 12:07:54 20
Q. 461
I don't necessarily follow your logic there?
A.
No, we are sticking with logic, Mr. Shipsey, we are been at it all morning, so
21
if we stick with logic that is a logical explanation.
22
Q. 462
Yeah. But are you saying or not saying that you had a discussion?
23
A.
No I am not saying.
24
Q. 463
You are saying you must have had a discussion because of your invoice?
A.
Correct.
Q. 464
I suggest to you Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that there was no discussion in
12:08:09 25
26 27
relation to description of an invoice or having you describe it in such a
28
manner?
29 12:08:27 30
A.
That is will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence.
Q. 465
I will to come on then to the two invoices in December of 1993, both with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
71 12:08:37 1
same number and in different amounts. One is, in fact the four -- if you put
2
up 4845 along side 5697. Why are these two invoices, Mr. Dunlop, same day,
3
same invoice number but different amounts?
4
A.
12:09:37 5
That I cannot tell you, Mr. Shipsey, I'd like to be able to tell you but obviously if we are going to stick with logic and if my recollection is
6
correct -- sorry I cannot, I cannot tell you why the two invoices have the same
7
number issued on the same day, in different amounts, but only one of them was
8
paid.
9 12:10:09 10
Now, the one that was sent I cannot absolutely attest to this but I suspect the
11
one that was sent, actually sent, was the one on the left, the one on the right
12
appears to me to be a copy.
13
Q. 466
But not of the one that was sent?
14
A.
Not of the one that was sent, no no sorry, I agree with that. But I cannot
12:10:40 15
give you an explanation as to, unless as there was a discussion in relation to
16
a fee note being issued and the one was prepared and it was agreed that there
17
would be changes, I cannot give you a rational logical explanation, I would
18
like to.
19 12:10:59 20
Q. 467
There isn't one really is there?
A.
There is not, I mean as we look at the screen I cannot give it to you unless
21 22
some accountancy expert can come along and say why it was done in that fashion. Q. 468
23 24 12:11:47 25
Mr. Dunlop, you issue your invoice for the success fee on the 14th December 1993.
A.
Yes, I think that's correct, yes.
Q. 469
And some four days prior to that, if we can have 4832 up? Monarch are looking
26
for 50 per cent of that which you have not yet invoiced from GRE.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 470
And again I would have to suggest to you that the only logical explanation and
29 12:12:16 30
what's referred to there is referring back to the discussions in September, is that the success fee had been agreed by September with you and Monarch were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
72 12:12:22 1
looking for their joint venture partner now to pay half of that?
2
A.
That would appear logical.
3
Q. 471
And that your invoice on the 14th December 1993 is really playing catch up with
4 12:12:38 5
6
what has already been agreed? A.
That again is logical.
Q. 472
And if you are right, Mr. Dunlop, there is a sum of 50,000 pounds plus VAT
7
outstanding on at least was outstanding until the statute ran out after six
8
years?
9 12:13:08 10
A.
Correct.
Q. 473
And that's a 50,000 that having sent in the invoice you never sent a reminder
11
for.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 474
That you never chased up on the phone.
14
A.
Correct.
Q. 475
And also that you never mentioned in the course of your earlier statements to
12:13:21 15
16
the Tribunal, you denied that there was ever a question as I understood, of a
17
success fee?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 476
Now that might have been partially true in terms of you getting paid, but it
12:13:46 20
couldn't have been true that to state that there was no question or no
21
discussion of a success fee?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 477
That was untrue, if you said that?
24
A.
Correct, if I said that.
Q. 478
And why would you have said that, because you didn't remember it, because --
26
A.
Well I certainly didn't get it. If I knew then what I know now.
27
Q. 479
But you knew you had your invoice of the 14th of December --
28
A.
No if you knew then what I know now as to Monarch's modus operandi in relation
12:13:55 25
29 12:14:25 30
to getting the success fee from GRE I would certainly are followed it up. Q. 480
Yeah well you see that is not the answer to the question? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
73 12:14:30 1
2
A.
No but in my mind it is extremely relevant.
Q. 481
All right. Because what you are aggrieved about is A you putting a success fee
3
as you were questioned to do and these, forgive me, these ungrateful so and
4
so's in Monarch having achieved the great result for them, didn't pay it and
12:14:49 5
not only did they not pay it, but they recovered half of it from their joint
6
venture partners and didn't even pass that on to you, isn't that what you are
7
saying?
8
A.
Correct, as we now know.
9
Q. 482
Yes. However you see if Mr. Sweeney is correct, again that it was 4,000 a
12:15:10 10
month and a success fee of 50,000, the 85,000 that you were ultimately paid is
11
there or thereabouts in relation to what is owed to you and Frank Dunlop or
12
Frank Dunlop & Associates could have no sense of grievance or no entitlement to
13
look for further payment or to whinge about not getting a success fee, isn't
14
that right?
12:15:38 15
16
A.
Well I didn't whinge.
Q. 483
No but the reason you wouldn't whinge is that if you are paid 85,000 and the
17
agreement was that you got 4,000 a month for nine months, that comes to 36, and
18
you get a success fee of 50, and you add those together it's 86 and you are
19
paid 85, so you mightn't whinge over a grand?
12:15:59 20
21
A.
Oh you wouldn't whinge over a grand.
Q. 484
No, so if Mr. Sweeney is correct, Monarch in fact paid all you were entitled to
22
and on top of that, were perfectly entitled to go to their joint venture
23
partner to say we have paid this great PR consultant Frank Dunlop who helped us
24
get this great success and along the lines of all the others we want 50 per
12:16:33 25
cent, that would follow wouldn't it?
26
A.
It seems eminently logical as you put it, Mr. Shipsey.
27
Q. 485
It just according to your evidence, didn't happen that way, because you didn't
28
have that agreement or even request for a success fee prior to the vote and you
29
didn't get the payment of the success fee and you never did anything about it.
12:16:53 30
Now, I just want to know, you're a professional person, when you send out Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
74 12:17:03 1
2
invoices, do you have a reminder system? A.
There are two types of invoices, Mr. Shipsey. One is on a monthly regular
3
basis, where they are automatically paid on a retainer monthly basis and then
4
there is the client who pays on the receipt of an invoice. If the, there is
12:17:27 5
any break down in the system in relation to the retainer system obviously there
6
would be a telephone call but if you stick with me in relation to the
7
retainers, you agree a fee with a client for five grand a month, ten grand a
8
month plus VAT, that goes out automatically on the last day of every month and
9
payment is received normally within a week or ten days.
12:17:51 10
11
There is the other client where you do a job for them and you agree a fee and
12
the fee is paid and the work is more than anticipated, you go back and you talk
13
about extra fees, you send out the invoices and if there is a delay you make a
14
telephone call and say where is the payment.
12:18:10 15
Q. 486
Now, the success fee falls into the second category?
16
A.
Yes it does.
17
Q. 487
And I want to know is, what I want to know is, does, does Frank Dunlop &
18
Associates, or sorry did Frank Dunlop & Associates not have is system whereby
19
if that invoice isn't paid after a month or three months or whatever your
12:18:32 20
credit terms are, that you send out a reminder and you say this invoice is
21
outstanding because your accountants get it, and it stays there as a debt and I
22
am just wondering if you sent out the invoice why and you say you weren't paid,
23
why you never sent a reminder?
24
A.
12:19:02 25
sent a reminder and I would just posit it in the context of what was said to me
26 27
Well I have no recollection of sending a reminder, there is no evidence that I
at the time of the invoice being sent it, send it in and see how far you get. Q. 488
So presumably when somebody in your accounts department says to you Mr. Dunlop
28
Monarch owe us 50,000 for this unpaid invoice, you say don't worry about it
29
that's a wing and a prayer invoice, don't know if I'm going to get it, don't
12:19:38 30
worry about it, is that what you are saying? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
75 12:19:40 1
A.
It could well be.
2
Q. 489
Mr. Dunlop I have to say, to suggest to you that this is completely untrue?
3
A.
Well the invoice was sent.
4
Q. 490
I know but your evidence in relation to the circumstances surrounding the
12:19:58 5
success fee and not being concerned about it not being paid, it's completely
6 7
untrue? A.
Well again just to, for clarification, Mr. Shipsey, I sent out the invoice in
8
the circumstances that I did, I am quite straightforwardly said to you I have
9
no recollection of sending a reminder, if somebody was to suggest to you or
12:20:19 10
produce a piece of paper that I sent them a reminder fine, I will gradually
11
accept that is correct, I have no recollection of doing so, and I have no
12
recollection of anybody in Monarch ever saying to me you are not going to get
13
paid.
14 12:20:33 15
I have no recollection of having any discussion in relation to whether or not I
16
was going to get paid, I have the documentary proof that the invoice was sent
17
and we now have the documentary evidence in relation to what happened
18
subsequent to that in relation to the GRE and Monarch.
19 12:20:49 20
Q. 491
Yes.
A.
But I, in relation to what actually occurred, I cannot say to you that I have a
21
recollection of sending out a reminder or that I had discussions saying where
22
is the 50 grand. I accept in ease of your argument, I accept that if you sent
23
out an invoice for 50,000, based on success, which was a success and Monarch
24
were pleased with the success, that not to follow it up would appear illogical,
12:21:27 25
but the only explanation I can give you is in the context of the conversation I
26
had with either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane in relation to sending the invoice,
27
send it in and see how far you get, so I obviously didn't get very far.
28
Q. 492
29 12:21:52 30
Now insofar as that success fee or those discussions are concerned you never said anything in your private discussions with the Tribunal about that?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
76 12:21:52 1
Q. 493
2
That's something you either recollected or the first time in the witness box or as I would suggest, made up for the first time in the witness box?
3
A.
No because they have documentary evidence of the sending of the invoice.
4
Q. 494
Oh no but that doesn't tell you whether you had that discussion about sending
12:22:10 5
6
it and anything like that? A.
Sorry I do beg your pardon. No I recollected that that was a discussion. I
7
cannot say to you with whom exactly that discussion took place, but it was with
8
an officer of Monarch, either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane.
9
Q. 495
But in the course of your very extensive private interviews with the Tribunal
12:22:28 10
where you are asked for to say that you are asked for chapter and verse is to
11
do chapter and verse a disservice Mr. Dunlop. You never mentioned this at all,
12
I would have to suggest to you is both extraordinary and incredible?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 496
Now finally or penultimately, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the words or words to
12:23:02 15
the effect that you took an interpretation out of that are at the core of this
16
module, because if they weren't said the edifice crumbles, if some words were
17
said and they have an innocent explanation the edifice similarly crumbles, you
18
can't but be unaware of the significance of that portion of your evidence in
19
relation to what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have stated to you and which he
12:23:46 20
denies?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 497
And your realisation of the significance of that is not hitting you like a bolt
23 24 12:24:02 25
from the blue here today or last week? A.
No.
Q. 498
Because what I might describe as the betrayal of Monarch with an asterisk was
26
based upon what Mr. Sweeney said in his first meeting to you?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 499
And therefore I'd like to know why in October of 2000 having as I have perhaps
29 12:24:43 30
to colourfully characterised it as betrayed Monarch with an asterisk you are asked to explain this, and you do send in something in writing, you make no Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
77 12:24:52 1
mention whatsoever of Mr. Sweeney having said or said anything to the effect
2
along the lines of the evidence that you are now giving?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 500
Sorry we know it's correct because we have the documents, why is that,
12:25:12 5
Mr. Dunlop, why knowing the significance of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have
6
said or the effect of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have said, when you are
7
asked to say why it is that Monarch are a corrupt partner of yours in securing
8
a rezoning of their lands at Cherrywood, you put this down in writing, the one
9
thing you don't say is Eddie Sweeney said do what you have to do during the
12:25:46 10
11
course of that meeting, why Mr. Dunlop? A.
Because, Mr. Shipsey, the Tribunal as you now know seek extensive narrative
12
statements in relation to the detail that were given in broad outline
13
initially, here in the witness box subsequently in a statement in October, on
14
the 9th October 2000 and subsequently again in relation to the module or
12:26:16 15
structure, they seek narrative statements in relation to details about
16
payments, with whom, who was met, the dates, what was said. These are all of
17
the details that are provided.
18
Q. 501
19 12:26:34 20
21
No, Mr. Dunlop, I don't profess to have anything like the understanding of the workings of the Tribunal that you have?
A.
No no -- I don't --
Q. 502
Just, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the first statement that you make, in October
22
of 2000 you mention nothing about Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes, correct.
24
Q. 503
And I am asking you for an explanation, I mean it's not a question of giving a
12:26:49 25
suggestion of it and then fleshing out the detail later. If you are correct,
26
Mr. Dunlop, if your interpretation of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have said
27
is correct, all you needed to tell the Tribunal in October 2000 was on the 8th
28
March 1993 I met their development director and he said to me, or words to the
29
effect "Do what you have to do" I understood that to mean that they understood
12:27:20 30
that I was going to bum politicians to use an inelegant phrase, full stop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
78 12:27:28 1
That's all you needed to say, and my point, Mr. Dunlop, is when you are asked
2
to put it down in writing in October of 2000, the most important point, the
3
elephant in the room, Mr. Dunlop, is not identified by you, and I want to know
4
why that is?
12:27:49 5
A.
Well I have given you an explanation in relation to the statements required by
6
the Tribunal in October 2000, sorry 9th of October 2000 and subsequently in
7
relation to requests from the Tribunal vis-a-vis individuals with whom I dealt,
8
in companies, among clients, conversations that took place, telephone calls
9
that took place, meetings that took place and what was said and done. In that
12:28:19 10
11
detail, that is the request of the Tribunal. Q. 504
Mr. Dunlop, without being unfair to you, are you telling me and telling the
12
Tribunal you can't explain why you didn't mention Mr. Sweeney saying words or
13
words to the effect that you have now suggested?
14
A.
12:28:41 15
No I'm not suggesting that I can't explain. What I am saying to you is the progression that took place in relation to matters vis-a-vis the Tribunal. I
16
am in this witness box in May, April or May of 2000, identified that I had
17
received monies from various people, including Monarch. I was asked to make,
18
after the private sessions, I was asked to make a narrative statement, I made a
19
narrative statement, I was subsequently asked to make hundreds of narrative
12:29:11 20
statements, expansionary narrative statements in relation to all of the detail
21 22
that I have just suggested to you. Q. 505
Mr. Dunlop, I am suggesting to you emphatically that the reason you didn't say
23
it when it was fresher in your mind at the time when you were first asked about
24
it, is because Mr. Sweeney did not say to you what you are now suggesting he
12:29:37 25
said, and that's the explanation, because back in 2000 you were insofar as your
26
recollection of what happened with Mr. Sweeney, telling the truth, and no such
27
discussion took place?
28
A.
I don't accept that.
29
Q. 506
And then subsequently, Mr. Dunlop, because in the October 2000 statement you
12:30:03 30
only referred to Mr. Lynn having said anything, but subsequently in September Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
79 12:30:12 1
of 2003 when you do your long narrative statement and I am not going to take
2
you through the details or the inconsistencies in relation to it and it's
3
detail, but at page 425 you say at the bottom of the first main paragraph:
4 12:30:42 5
"The only discussions with regard to payment to politicians was with
6
Mr. Sweeney who at my original meeting with him indicated that he knew that I
7
would have to make payments to councillors to achieve success. He said that he
8
knew that this was the only way that things could get done" and that was not in
9
your first statement, was in this statement and now in fact Mr. Dunlop, insofar
12:31:06 10
as your sworn evidence is concerned, you are not saying that Mr. Sweeney said
11
that to you, because earlier I read to you what you did say, which was words
12
that were open to the implication, whereas what you told the Tribunal in
13
September 2003 was that he indicated that he knew that I would have to make
14
payments to councillors to achieve success.
12:31:31 15
16
And you are certainly resiling from any implication from what you said in
17
September 2003, that Mr. Sweeney said that?
18
A.
19 12:31:50 20
I have told you what, I have given evidence to the effect of what Mr. Sweeney said and my interpretation of it.
Q. 507
21
Yes. And that is not consistent with what you told the Tribunal in September 2003?
22
A.
Well I don't accept that, but --
23
Q. 508
And we can, because when you are speaking to the Tribunal, be it in October of
24
2000 or September of 2003, you are not under oath, isn't that right, you are in
12:32:20 25
to provide assistance to them, I am not sure whether you are actually sworn at
26
this stage?
27
A.
Is this in private session?
28
Q. 509
Yes.
29
CHAIRMAN: Well he was not speaking to the Tribunal in October or September.
12:32:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
80 12:32:33 1
2
JUDGE FAHERTY: He is making a statement. Q. 510
3 4
MR. SHIPSEY: Sorry, this, my mistake, but this statement is not a sworn statement?
A.
This is a narrative statement submitted to the Tribunal.
Q. 511
But it's not an affidavit, it's not sworn?
6
A.
No it's not.
7
Q. 512
And therefore we can take it that when you are here now, having put your hand
12:32:44 5
8
on the Bible and sworn to tell the truth to this Tribunal, that what you are
9
saying now is true and insofar as it is inconsistent with what you said in a
12:33:03 10
11
statement in September 2003, that should be ignored? A.
I am saying there is consistency in relation to my relationship with
12
Mr. Sweeney of Monarch, on foot of meeting that I had with them and the
13
statement that was made, that to me is consistent.
14
Q. 513
12:33:25 15
And I am putting maybe a hypothetical, if it's inconsistent, if it is inconsistent, Mr. Dunlop, it is your sworn statement that you wish the Tribunal
16
to accept and not anything you have said in an unsworn statement?
17
A.
Hypothetically, yes.
18
Q. 514
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
19 12:33:38 20
CHAIRMAN: All right. Thank you Mr. Shipsey. Just before we go any further
21
there are a couple of matters which I want to comment upon lest it be taken
22
that silence on the part of the Tribunal might be interpreted as agreement by
23
the Tribunal that certain, that two particular contentions put by Mr. Shipsey
24
are accurate.
12:34:06 25
26
Firstly, early in Mr. Shipsey's cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop and I think to
27
some extent more recently, he asked a question of Mr. Dunlop which in part
28
appeared to suggest that in the event of the Tribunal rejecting Mr. Dunlop's
29
evidence to the effect that in his view, that's Mr. Dunlop's view, Mr. Sweeney
12:34:30 30
knew of the practice and necessity of bribing councillors, that it would follow Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
81 12:34:35 1
that there could then be no adverse finding against Mr. Sweeney and/or Monarch.
2 3
While this contention can of course be properly made by way of a submission to
4
the Tribunal, it should be borne in mind that it does not necessarily follow
12:34:53 5
that any finding involving Mr. Sweeney or Monarch will depend on the acceptance
6
or rejection of Mr. Dunlop's evidence solely. In due course the Tribunal will
7
consider all the evidence, both that given to date and yet to be given before
8
making any findings involving those parties or any other parties.
9 12:35:15 10
Secondly, insofar as Mr. Shipsey has suggested, as I think he did, that the
11
placing of an asterisk by Mr. Dunlop opposite the name of Monarch was the only
12
determinant in the Tribunal's decision to publicly investigate this module was
13
not entirely or necessarily accurate. Other factors and evidence other than
14
that of Mr. Dunlop, contributed to the decision to conduct this particular
12:35:44 15
module, as has been stated often a number of occasions by the Tribunal, a
16
decision to investigate any particular issue is not dependant on an allegation
17
of wrongdoing being made either in advance of or during the investigation.
18 19 12:36:05 20
Just to clarify that. All right? That concludes Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination for today.
21 22
MS. DILLON: That's correct I hope possibly by the close of business, we might
23
have agreed a date for the conclusion of Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination.
24 12:36:14 25
CHAIRMAN: All right. Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
26 27
THE WITNESS WITHDREW.
28 29
MR. QUINN: Mr. Edward Sweeney.
12:36:34 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
82 12:36:34 1
EDWARD SWEENEY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS.
2
QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4 12:37:27 5
CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon Mr. Sweeney? A.
Afternoon.
6
Q. 515
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
Good afternoon.
8
Q. 516
Mr. Sweeney my name is Pat Quinn and I am counsel with the Tribunal and I will
9
be taking you through your evidence, is that okay.
12:37:41 10
11
Mr. Sweeney your involvement with the Tribunal to date I think includes
12
attending for interview with the Tribunal legal team on the 13th of June 2000,
13
isn't that right?
14 12:37:55 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 517
And then I think you were written to and you provided a statement through your
16
solicitors at, which is to be found at page 2078, that was a statement provided
17
on the 19th June 2000, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 518
And enclosed with that letter are 2079 I think was a list of political
12:38:21 20
contributions made by the Pavilion Leisure Complex Limited, is that correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 519
And then I think there was further correspondence between the Tribunal and your
23
solicitor and particularly Mr. Sowman on the 22nd of April 2002 which is at
24
2085?
12:38:40 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 520
And you recall that letter and that was responded to by Mr. Sowman on the 7 May
27
2002 and that response is at 2087 and 2088, isn't that right? And then you
28
were again written to I think on the 16th of May 2002 and there was a further
29
correspondence from your solicitors on the 24th of May 2002 and that's to be
12:39:14 30
found at 2091 and 2092 of the brief. Then I think there were orders made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
83 12:39:20 1
against you, but in any event the correspondence culminated in a statement from
2
you Mr. Sweeney, which was received by the Tribunal on the 18th of February
3
2003 and that's at page number 2096 and succeeding pages and I think that that
4
statement ran to over a hundred pages, isn't that right?
12:39:40 5
6
A.
Excuse me, am I supposed to be seeing these things.
Q. 521
Yes.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: There is a screen there beside you? A.
Yes, but I haven't been getting them.
12:39:49 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Sweeney is saying as you are mentioning documents they are
12
not coming up on the screen. So --
13
A.
I have got that one now.
14 12:40:01 15
16
CHAIRMAN: All right. Q. 522
17
MR. QUINN: Sorry about that Mr. Sweeney. But yes for your assistance it's intended that you should be able to read the documents I refer to.
18
A.
As you say that.
19
Q. 523
As I call them?
A.
Okay.
Q. 524
Now, I think that statement commences at 2097 by setting out a biographical
12:40:13 20
21 22
history with particular reference to your employment history, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 525
And since you are only available to the Tribunal I understand Mr. Sweeney this
12:40:34 25
week I don't intend to read the over a hundred pages of statement unless you
26
require me to do so, or your counsel requires me to do so, I will from time to
27
time refer to particular parts of the statement but unless you --
28
A.
I have no objections to that.
29
Q. 526
If you or your counsel insist, I don't intend to. You were born in Scotland I
12:40:58 30
think Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
84 12:40:58 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 527
And I think you went to third level college and your academic record is to be
3
found at 2098 in that you qualified with a Scottish certificate of education in
4
1963 and you have set out there the fellowships with which you were associated,
12:41:19 5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 528
And that's more or lesson a technical side on the quantity surveying Institute
8 9
of Chartered Surveyors. A.
Yes.
Q. 529
Profession.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 530
And then I think you went on in your statement to deal with your employment
12:41:30 10
13
history from your graduation in 1966, right through to the present day, isn't
14
that right and we can see that at 2099 and succeeding pages, isn't that right?
12:41:51 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 531
But suffice to say that prior to joining Monarch in 1974, you were employed
17
with a construction firm here in the city, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 532
PJ Walls and company.
A.
Yes.
Q. 533
And I think you have told the Tribunal that you were effectively head hunted by
12:42:03 20
21 22
Mr. Monahan, is that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 534
And I think you have told the Tribunal that you had, if we look at 2111 that
12:42:17 25
you joined Monarch Properties Limited as a chief surveyor in May 1974, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 535
And your employment ended I think in December 1996 and although the Tribunal
29 12:42:35 30
will not be going into it, it will be fair to say that the relationship between yourself and Mr. Monahan and other members of the Monarch team broke down Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
85 12:42:40 1
sometime in or about '95 or '96?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 536
Maybe even earlier I think would that be fair to say?
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 537
I think you have advised the Tribunal as we see there , that your initial
12:42:48 5
6
function and position was under the supervision of the Chairman and managing
7
director Mr. Phillip Monahan and the financial director Mr. Dominic Glennane,
8
isn't that right?
9 12:43:02 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 538
Now at 2132, you deal with your relationship, relative to the role of other
11
employees and members of the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 539
And I think you there tell the Tribunal that Mr. Monahan was the dominant force
14
behind the group and that Mr. Dominic Glennane, a chartered accountant, was the
12:43:27 15
financial director and you say that as chartered surveyor and, that you were
16
the chartered surveyor and the technical support director and generally worked
17
under the direction of both Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, is that correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 540
And is that your evidence to the Tribunal that over the 22 year period you were
12:43:46 20
with the company, that you effectively worked to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 541
In other words, both Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan had seniority over you within
23 24 12:44:02 25
the company and could direct you as to what you did? A.
Yes.
Q. 542
Now, again on that page I think you go on to say that Mr. Monahan dealt with
26
the core development issues including site acquisition, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 543
You say that he was, had entrepreneurial aspects of these acquisitions
29 12:44:31 30
specifically in dealing with securing of development opportunities, is that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
86 12:44:31 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 544
You say you dealt with all technical aspects of matters concerning development
3 4 12:44:38 5
and construction, is that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 545
And I think at 2134 you set out more or less the position within the company as
6
of 1990, isn't that right? And we see there that Mr. Monahan is the Chairman
7
and managing director, he is entrepreneurial site acquisitions, isn't that
8
right? You see that grid produced by your solicitors. And the financial
9
director is Mr. Glennane and you are seen as the development director, would it
12:45:06 10
be fair to say that apart from the fact that you have told the Tribunal that
11
you would have worked to Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, that it would appear
12
that other than yourself, there was no more senior person within Monarch that
13
is to say other than yourself, Mr. Monahan or Mr. Glennane?
14 12:45:23 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 546
At 2135 I think you go on to say that from 1990 onwards Phillip Monahan
16
operated most of the time if an annex to his new home in Somerton, Castleknock,
17
where he set up a separate team of people including personal assistant, Ann
18
Gosling, John Sherwood, as well as two of Phillip Monahan's sons Colm and Paul,
19
is that correct?
12:45:51 20
A.
That's correct from 1990.
21
Q. 547
That appears to be what the statement says Mr. Sweeney.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 548
So would you tell the Tribunal what the setup was in Somerton from 1990 onwards
24
and what was, what were the individual roles played by Mr. Monahan,
12:46:15 25
Mr. Sherwood and Ms. Gosling and both Phillip and Paul, sorry Colm and Paul
26 27
Monahan? A.
I don't think the setup in Monarch actually changed, just because Mr. Monahan
28
went to live in Somerton. He had set up an office there from 1990 but I am not
29
entirely clear when it actually functioned as a complete office, because he was
12:46:43 30
back and forward a lot in, while there was the lack of communication, that I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
87 12:46:52 1
have mentioned there, communications were still good, he did come in, he was on
2
the phone often and the communication between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane and
3
myself really didn't change.
4
Q. 549
12:47:17 5
Yes. I am more concerned at this stage, Mr. Sweeney, with evidence that you might be able to give the Tribunal concerning the setup in Somerton from 1990
6
forwards. You are I think dealing with Mr. Monahan's involvement with yourself
7
and Mr. Glennane in your offices in Harcourt Street I suspect, is that correct?
8
A.
I don't quite understand that.
9
Q. 550
I understood, Mr. Sweeney, that the Monarch Group had offices in Harcourt
12:47:42 10
11
Street, is that correct? A.
Yes the Monarch Group was in Harcourt Street. Phil had moved out to Somerton
12
and had set up an office there, but the main office was still in Harcourt
13
Street.
14
Q. 551
12:48:04 15
Ms. Gosling, Mr. Sherwood and his two sons Colm and Paul Monahan, if what you
16 17
But the office he set up in Somerton was an office staffed by himself,
have said in this statement is correct? A.
Well let me put it into context. The office was run from Harcourt Street,
18
Mr. Monahan had moved to Somerton and his secretary also moved out with him.
19
John Sherwood that you mentioned was an assistant to Mr. Monahan, the two sons
12:48:43 20
were coming back and forward all the time, but I am not very clear at this
21 22
stage whether they had anything to do with the business. Q. 552
23 24 12:49:02 25
Mr. Sweeney, what I have put to you and what's on the screen is a statement that you have supplied to the Tribunal in 2003?
A.
Yes.
Q. 553
Do you understand that. I am not putting to you hypothetical situation or
26
something I am dreaming up do you understand?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 554
And I take it when you prepare this comprehensive statement in 2003 you were
29 12:49:21 30
anxious to be of as much assistance as possible to the Tribunal, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
88 12:49:21 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 555
And you were anxious to be truthful to the Tribunal, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 556
And in that statement we can see there it's on screen and I can get you a hard
12:49:29 5
copy if you wish you say the followings "At this time Philip Monahan" sorry
6
"Also from 1990 onwards Phillip Monahan operated most the time from an annex to
7
his new home in Somerton, Castleknock, where he set up a separate team of
8
people including his personal assistant Ann Gosling and John Sherwood, as well
9
as two of Phillip Monahan's sons, Colm and Paul."
12:49:50 10
11
Now would you agree with me Mr. Sweeney that any reasonable interpretation of
12
that statement would lead one to believe that there was a separate team of
13
people operating out of Somerton, headed up by Mr. Monahan and included, which
14
included his two sons Colm and Paul?
12:50:09 15
16
A.
Well the answer is yes but you've got to take --
Q. 557
If I could just stop you there for a moment. Presumably that was the evidence
17
you wished to convey to the Tribunal in, or the information you wished to
18
convey to the Tribunal in 2003, isn't that right?
19 12:50:27 20
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman he did say yes but and I'd just like --
21 22
CHAIRMAN: Perhaps it would shorten matters considerably if Mr. Sweeney was to
23
tell us the extent to which, if you want to, you want to qualify what was said
24
in that statement read out by Mr. Quinn, so if you want to give us some more
12:50:51 25
26
detail then we'll take that from you now. A.
Well Chairman I am a bit confused about what you do want. I have said --
27 28
CHAIRMAN: No, no it's just that if the impression given as Mr. Quinn has
29
indicated from the statement is that from around 1990, Mr. Phillip Monahan
12:51:10 30
effectively set up a separate office of his own, if you like, personal staff, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
89 12:51:15 1
which included his two sons, Ms. Gosling and Mr. Sherwood, now your evidence is
2
that the main office as it were, for the company, was in Harcourt Street, so we
3
just need to know some information as to what the different roles were of the
4
people in Somerton on the one hand and the people in Harcourt, were they
12:51:45 5
effectively separate operations or to what extent was there contact or
6 7
interaction between the two? A.
Okay. I can understand that a bit better now. What you have to do here is
8
split up what the different roles are for Monarch Properties Limited and what
9
Mr. Monahan's other businesses might have been. For example, he was involved
12:52:08 10
in vintage cars which had nothing to do with the property and various other
11
things, so John Sherwood assisted him on that, as did his sons. It had really
12
nothing to do with me in Monarch. I was concentrating on development and, it
13
was only in his role as Chief Executive and Chairman of the development company
14
that I was talking about.
12:52:35 15
Q. 558
16 17
So other than the business of acquiring vintage cars, what other business was conducted by Mr. Monahan from Somerton?
A.
Well that's a good question. Mr. Monahan was involved in now -- I don't like
18
to say everything, but he was. He was out there looking for business
19
opportunities, not only in property but in other things and that was his job
12:53:10 20
21
really, but he was the primary mover in Monarch. Q. 559
22
When you say he was a prime mover in Monarch what do you mean by that Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
He was the guy that got the jobs.
24
Q. 560
And I think your statement goes on to say Mr. Sweeney, again at 2135 and I can
12:53:33 25
give you now a hard copy of your statement it might be easier to follow, and if
26
you, on the top right hand corner you should see a numbering system and
27
Mr. Sweeney if I could direct your attention to page number 2135.
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 561
You say that "At this time Phillip Monahan also employed Richard Lynn whose
12:54:04 30
initial role in the company and his terms of employment were at first unclear Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
90 12:54:08 1
to me. It later became clear that his role was as project coordinator for
2
various projects at first working directly for Mr. Phillip Monahan. What my
3
understanding as to what this entailed was the coordinating and interfacing of
4
projects with the relevant local authorities."
12:54:23 5
6
Now first of all, you were the third most senior person within the company,
7
isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 562
Did you know that Mr. Monahan had a vacancy within the company for a project
12:54:37 10
coordinator with local authorities?
11
A.
In advance of his employment?
12
Q. 563
In advance of Mr. Lynn's employment?
13
A.
Not in advance of it.
14
Q. 564
Was --
A.
Mr. Monahan didn't consult me on that.
Q. 565
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn's appointment by Mr. Monahan came as a
12:54:47 15
16 17
surprise to you?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 566
Yes. And you say that his role within the company together with the terms of
12:55:05 20
his employment were at first, unclear to you. What did you mean to convey by
21
that Mr. Sweeney, to the Tribunal?
22
A.
What I meant by that was that his role was unclear to me .
23
Q. 567
But you were the third most senior person within the company, isn't that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 568
Mr. Glennane was looking after the financial end of the company, isn't that
12:55:23 25
26
right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 569
Mr. Monahan was the Chairman and apart from his entrepreneurial skills and his
29 12:55:39 30
skills in acquiring projects for the company, he from what I can gather from your evidence took no greater interest in the day to day management of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
91 12:55:44 1
company, isn't that right?
2
A.
Sorry. Could you repeat the last bit.
3
Q. 570
It's a little convoluted I agree. Mr. Monahan's role, his day to day role was
4 12:55:56 5
6
that of acquiring and sourcing projects for the company? A.
Yes.
Q. 571
But the day to day technical aspect of the company was under your control,
7
isn't that right, apart from the financial aspects?
8
A.
Yeah in terms of projects, yes.
9
Q. 572
Yes. So if somebody was retained by Mr. Monahan as Mr. Lynn was, then it's
12:56:13 10
11
almost certain that he would be working to you, isn't that right? A.
Not necessarily. The process that happened in Monarch up until that time was
12
that anyone who was brought on to the technical team as I would call it, went
13
through a process of interview with myself and with other senior members of
14
staff and after that they joined the team. Mr. Lynn was an exception to that.
12:56:47 15
Q. 573
16
There was no vacancy, no interview and he was appointed by Mr. Monahan without reference to you, the most senior technical person within the company?
17
A.
There was no reference to me .
18
Q. 574
Yes. And even though he was employed by the company, his terms of employment
19 12:57:10 20
21
were unclear to you initially, isn't that right? A.
They were unknown to me .
Q. 575
There were unknown to you and his role within the company was also unknown to
22
you, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 576
And at some stage did Mr. Lynn's role become apparent to you?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 577
And at what stage did Mr. Lynn's role become apparent to you?
27
A.
Well it would have been sometime later.
28
Q. 578
When you say later, it was it weeks, months, years?
29
A.
What year are we talking about again?
Q. 579
It would appear from your statement that we are talking about from 1990
12:57:24 25
12:57:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
92 12:57:44 1
2
onwards? A.
Yeah well in 1990 I was based in The Square in Tallaght in a set of offices
3
there because I was responsibility for ultimately getting Tallaght finished on
4
time and on budget. And I believe that Mr. Lynn paralleled at that time with
12:58:09 5
Mr. Monahan and in what was then the Earlsfort Terrace office, now I was pretty
6
well tied up in this massive Square project, so the time that I would have
7
realised what Mr. Lynn was doing would have been subsequent to Tallaght and I
8
did recollect, I do recollect that he did work on legal things relating to
9
Tallaght in terms of leases, and at that time Cherrywood came into the frame
12:58:52 10
exactly when I just don't --
11
Q. 580
Yes. I think Cherrywood was aye acquired in June 1989?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 581
And I think Tallaght was being constructed in 1989 and was opened in October
14 12:59:08 15
16
1990, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 582
When you talk about Mr. Lynn's terms of employment being unclear to you, are
17
you talking about that period or a period prior to that?
18
A.
I am talking about that period.
19
Q. 583
Now, you say in your statement that he subsequently became a project
12:59:31 20
coordinator for various projects at first working directly for Phillip Monahan,
21
when you say at first working directly for Philip Monahan, do I understand by
22
that that he was reporting to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
23
A.
Yeah, that would be more accurate.
24
Q. 584
And in what sense would he be reporting to Mr. Monahan?
A.
As I recall he was reporting to him on a number of projects other than Tallaght
12:59:48 25
26 27
and other than Cherrywood. Q. 585
28 29 13:00:15 30
So would it be fair to say that insofar as Tallaght and Cherrywood were concerned Mr. Lynn was reporting to you and not Mr. Monahan directly?
A.
At some point, exactly when I don't know, but at some point he did report to me on Cherrywood. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
93 13:00:16 1
2
CHAIRMAN: It's now one o'clock, Mr. Quinn, so we'll adjourn until two
3
o'clock.
4 13:00:21 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
94 13:00:34 1
2 3
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney.
14:06:13 5
6
CHAIRMAN: Now, good afternoon.
7
Good afternoon.
8 9
CHAIRMAN: If during the afternoon you want a break, we normally don't take a
14:06:37 10
break in the afternoon. But if you want a break, say so.
11
Okay. Thank you.
12 13
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Sweeney.
14 14:06:44 15
Mr. Sweeney, before lunch we were talking about the terms of engagement of
16
Mr. Lynn by Mr. Monahan.
17 18
And if I could have 1384, the document coming on screen now, Mr. Sweeney, is
19
Mr. Lynn's statement to the Tribunal. And if I could just. It's a statement
14:07:02 20
dated 24th of April 2002. And just if you see the third paragraph there.
21 22
He says "I was engaged by MPSL", do you see that? "I was engaged by MPSL to
23
coordinate the team selected to the develop the Cherrywood site of 234 acres
24
which had been acquired by Monarch Properties in 1989." Now, prior to that he
14:07:25 25
had also said that he had actually applied to Monahan for the position.
26 27
Now, your recollection is, as I understand it, that Mr. Lynn was employed
28
directly by Mr. Monahan, without reference to you.
29 14:07:44 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 586
If I could have 2135 please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
95 14:07:50 1
I'm going back for a moment now to your statement, Mr. Sweeney. And at the
2
bottom of that page you say, "Mr. Lynn in his previous employment had been a
3
town Clerk, in Dundalk. And this background and his understanding of local
4
authority structures, were in my opinion, obviously key to his appointment by
14:08:10 5
Phil Monahan, as his brief extended to coordinating the dealings with local
6
authorities,s generally and specifically the Cherrywood project in Cabinteely,
7
for which Mr. Richard Lynn took on the role as project co-ordinator."
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 587
You had no vacancy for someone within the team, who would liaise with local
14:08:33 10
authority representatives; isn't that right?
11
A.
I had no vacancy within the technical development team.
12
Q. 588
But for some reason, Mr. Monahan retained Mr. Lynn and it was your belief that
13
he retained him because of Mr. Lynn's experience as a local authority employee;
14
is that right?
14:08:58 15
16
A.
Well it was certainly I think part of it.
Q. 589
Now, just in relation to Mr. Monahan himself, I think you have earlier given
17
evidence that Mr. Monahan was the entrepreneur and the and the Chairman within
18
the group; isn't that right?
19 14:09:18 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 590
Were there instances when Mr. Monahan himself spearheaded his own projects and
21 22
did his own thing, separate from the group? A.
23 24
Within development, very rarely, but out with development, he had a lot of different interests.
Q. 591
14:09:41 25
Yes. But were there instances of Mr. Monahan spearheading developments without consultations with the other directors?
26
A.
May I ask. Am I referring to this again?
27
Q. 592
No, I'm asking you to give evidence, Mr. Sweeney.
28 29 14:09:58 30
CHAIRMAN: I think it's just a general question. A.
Well, I can't pinpoint anything like that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
96 14:10:03 1
2 3
Q. 593
MR. QUINN: You think that that would be an unfair criticism of Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
Well certainly I wouldn't think it would be a fair criticism at all.
Q. 594
Yes. And you would say that there weren't separate instances where
14:10:11 5
6
Mr. Monahan might have spearheaded developments without consulting his fellow
7
directors?
8
A.
Mr. Chairman, I have difficulty with this word "spearheaded".
Q. 595
CHAIRMAN: Well I suppose, did he go off on frolics of his own in the business
9 14:10:25 10
11
world, without necessarily, initially, bringing with him his directors and
12
others -- did he do things on his own, unannounced, in relation to property
13
development and so on? Would he arrive in, for example into work and say I've
14
just bought, I've just agreed to buy some property here, there, or wherever?
14:10:58 15
A.
The answer to that Chairman, is yes. Very, very often he would be quiet for a
16
while and then suddenly you'd find something on your desk, that he had done.
17
And if that's what you mean by spearheading, certainly.
18
Q. 596
19
MR. QUINN: If I could have 8079. Mr. Sweeney, what I'm putting up on screen is an extract from an affidavit
14:11:22 20
sworn by you, in your proceedings, against Monarch.
Do you understand?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 597
And would you look at paragraph 20 of the affidavit that you swore.
23 24
This is your second affidavit. And you say "I think that in view of the
14:11:36 25
attack which Mr. Monahan has made upon my role as a director of the group, I
26
should point out that several instances where Mr. Monahan has spearheaded
27
developments, without consulting his fellow directors, or against our advice,
28
having caused serious difficulties."
29 14:11:54 30
A.
Well I can understand --
Q. 598
So what I'm putting to you, Mr. Sweeney, are your own sworn statements to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
97 14:11:59 1
High Court.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
To the High Court. Do you understand?
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 600
And I've difficulty -- I've difficulty understanding how you have difficulty in
14:12:02 5
6 7
confirming that to be the case. A.
Yes. Well it all goes down to this word "spearheaded". What you meant by it
8
and what I would mean by it. What you're talking about here are two
9
developments that have already been on the Monarch portfolio, for a
14:12:27 10
considerable length of time. And by spearheading, in these instances, I mean
11
that he went on his own to get planning permission. That was without
12
consultation to his own in-house experts.
13
Q. 601
14
Monarch Group? Was it the case that Mr. Monahan of his own volition did things
14:13:02 15
16
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, was there a difficulty of communication within the
independently of the other directors? A.
Certainly Mr. Monahan did things independently. And I regarded -- I do regard
17
that, in retrospect, as being one of his strong points. That when he did go
18
for something, he went for it. And then he brought it back to the office to
19
us, to sort it out for him.
14:13:29 20
Q. 602
21
Mr. Sweeney, was Mr. Monahan surrounded in the Somerton by his own advisors, independent of the group?
22
A.
Well, he certainly had advisors in Somerton.
23
Q. 603
Yes?
24
A.
He wasn't surrounded by them.
Q. 604
Okay. Who were his advisors in Somerton?
A.
Well, within the Monarch organisation, they would have been John Sherwood. It
14:13:51 25
26 27 28 29
would have been Ann Gosling, and that's it. Q. 605
Could I have 2138. Again, Mr. Sweeney, I'm putting up on screen extracts from your own statement.
Do you understand?
14:14:16 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
98 14:14:16 1
And you give is there a schedule of Somerton. Do you see that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 606
And you see you identify Mr. Monahan underneath Mr. Monahan we have John
4
Sherwood, personal assistant. Underneath Mr. Sherwood you have entered for
14:14:31 5
personal assistant Ms. Gosling and then you put in Colm Monaghan and Paul
6
Monahan?
7
A.
They were both his sons. They had both a very junior role.
8
Q. 607
And you've already told us that they were involved in Somerton from the 1990s
9 14:14:46 10
11
forward; isn't that right? A.
Well they were living in the house.
Q. 608
I was putting to you, Mr. Sweeney, what you yourself had told the Tribunal in
12
your statement, do you understand?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 609
I don't want to be unfair to you.
A.
Yes.
Q. 610
I can bring back up that portion of your statement where you dealt with his
14:14:57 15
16 17 18
team. A.
19 14:15:10 20
21
those two guys were young and inexperienced at that time . Q. 611
And was he visited in Somerton by very close associates?
A.
Well when you say surrounded by experts. He did have a number of auctioneers,
22 23
valuers, who came . Q. 612
24 14:15:37 25
26
I don't think in Chairman we're in conflict here at all. I just reckoned that
Yes. And did you identify in your statement to the Tribunal a Mr. Jack Whelan and a Mr. Richard Lynn, as numbering among those close associates in Somerton?
A.
Yes.
Q. 613
And you said in your statement I think that they spent much of their time at
27
his offices in Somerton, isn't that right?
28
A.
If I did, I did, yes. They certainly spent a lot of time there.
29
Q. 614
You went on to say that while these people would not have been regarded as
14:15:54 30
being advisors to the Monarch Group. They would not in my opinion have gone Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
99 14:15:58 1
through the normal strict interview process of Monarch. Rather their
2
appointment, renumeration and job specifications, would have been made by
3
Mr. Philip Monahan personally. Isn't that right?
4 14:16:08 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 615
And you say that you would from time to time be summoned to meetings by
6
Mr. Monahan to Somerton. Is that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 616
Now, can I ask you about Mr. Jack Whelan. Who was Mr. Whelan?
9
A.
Jack Whelan was an agent. An agent being a property agent, who brought
14:16:29 10
11
opportunities to various people, including Mr. Monahan. Q. 617
12
Can we have 8574. Do you know of any of the projects that Mr. Whelan was involved in with the Monarch Group?
13
A.
I can think offhand of two. One of them was Prague.
14
Q. 618
Yes.
A.
He was deeply involved in that.
16
Q. 619
We'll be getting to Prague later.
17
A.
Okay. The other one was one he interfaced very directly with me. And that
14:16:54 15
18
was the possible take over, or purchase, of a number of supermarkets/shopping
19
centres in Spain, which had been owned by a French company and were trying to
14:17:30 20
get out of it, I visited those in Spain.
21
Q. 620
When was that, Mr. Sweeney?
22
A.
When?
23
Q. 621
When, yeah.
24
A.
Oh, when was the last World Cup? It was the same day that Ireland beat Italy
14:17:45 25
one nil, in New York.
26 27
CHAIRMAN: That was a long time ago.
28
Q. 622
MR. QUINN: 1994 I think.
29
A.
That was 1994.
Q. 623
You were the project Manager of the Cherrywood site; isn't that right?
14:17:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
100 14:17:55 1
A.
Well, no. I would say that the term "project manager" really only came into
2
it when a site developed to the point of having planning and construction
3
happening. I would have been the director in charge.
4
Q. 624
The most senior person in charge, after Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 625
In respect of the Cherrywood site?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 626
So almost anything that went on in relation to the Cherrywood site, something
14:18:20 5
9
that would have been known, or ought to have been known, by you; isn't that
14:18:32 10
right?
11
A.
Yes, I certainly ought to have known it.
12
Q. 627
On screen, Mr. Sweeney, is an invoice dated the 16th of April 1991. Headed
13
Whelan land use specialists. And it's a fee in respect of services in
14
relation to residential consultancy at Cherrywood, for 150,000 plus VAT of
14:18:53 15
30,000. Do you see that?
16
A.
Was that in the brief?
17
Q. 628
Yes. Now, I wonder could you tell the Tribunal, as the most -- third most
18
senior person within Monarch, what services were provided by Mr. Whelan, that
19
entitled him to command a fee, in 1991 of 180, 000 pounds?
14:19:15 20
21
A.
I have absolutely no idea.
Q. 629
Who within the Monarch Group would be able to answer that question,
22 23
Mr. Sweeney, in your view? A.
24
Well, I would presume if it was an invoice it would be presented to the accounts and I would have suggested that the accounts personnel would have a
14:19:47 25
view on that.
26
Q. 630
And who would be in charge of the accounts personnel?
27
A.
Mr. Glennane.
28
Q. 631
Is it conceivable, Mr. Sweeney, that in relation to the Cherrywood project,
29 14:20:07 30
that there would be a -- an agent retained by Monarch, who could carry out services to the tune of 180, 000 pounds and you wouldn't be aware of his Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
101 14:20:12 1
2
existence, or to what those expenses related? A.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I've just recalled another instance of Mr. Whelan.
3
And that was that at some point he introduced a housing development company
4
called --
14:20:27 5
Q. 632
Dwyer Nolan?
6
A.
Dwyer Nolan.
7
Q. 633
Yes, we'll come to those in a moment. If we could just concentrate on this
8 9 14:20:38 10
invoice for 1991, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Yes.
Q. 634
And I want you to help the Tribunal in understanding how a company could be
11
retained to provide 180, 000 pounds worth of services, without any reference to
12
you, either in their retention by someone within Monarch, or indeed in relation
13
to the works which they would have done.
14
A.
14:21:12 15
have upset me had I seen it at the time. And it would have doubly upset me if
16 17
I knew that it had been paid without me knowing. Q. 635
18 19 14:21:31 20
Well, Mr. Chairman, I have to say I know nothing about this invoice. It would
Now, I can't tell you that it was paid, Mr. Sweeney. And in fact, the paper trail would seem to suggest that it wasn't paid.
A.
Oh.
Q. 636
But it was claimed. For the moment, I'm merely concerned about the contract
21
which would have given rise to the claim. Do you understand?
22
A.
Yes, I do.
23
Q. 637
Was Mr. Whelan involved in relation to the residential development in
24 14:21:46 25
Cherrywood? A.
Insofar as Dwyer Nolan was concerned?
26
Q. 638
No. Other than Dwyer Nolan, was he involved?
27
A.
Certainly I have no recollection of that at all.
28
Q. 639
In 1991, when this invoice was raised, was Mr. Whelan retained by the Monarch
29 14:22:10 30
Group, in relation to the Cherrywood site? A.
Certainly not to my knowledge. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
102 14:22:12 1
Q. 640
What services could Mr. Whelan have provided to Mr. Monahan or the Monarch
2
Group, or indeed you, in 1991, in April 1991, in relation to the Cherrywood
3
site?
4 14:22:29 5
6
A.
Well, I could only speculate.
Q. 641
Yes.
A.
That he might have been finding a purchaser for part of it, or something like
7
that.
8
Q. 642
And were you --
9
A.
I don't have any --
Q. 643
Seeking a purchaser in April 1991 for Cherrywood?
11
A.
Why would he be doing that?
12
Q. 644
No, I'm saying were the Monarch Group seeking a purchaser in April 1991?
13
A.
Not obviously, but in property development everything is always for sale.
14
Q. 645
Who do you think retained Mr. Whelan?
A.
Mr. Monahan would have.
Q. 646
And just in relation to the Dwyer Nolan involvement. If I could have 5040.
14:22:41 10
14:23:08 15
16 17 18
Mr.-- a summary of accounts due in relation to GRE was prepared. And sometime
19
after 1994. Sorry, if I could 5040, please.
14:23:41 20
21
And you will see there the third last entry Jack Whelan (introducing Dwyer
22
Nolan) 121,000 pounds. Is that the reference that you're making to, in
23
relation to Mr. Whelan and Dwyer Nolan?
24 14:24:01 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 647
Did you know that Mr. Whelan had instituted proceedings against the Monarch
26
Group claiming fees that is were due to him for various works?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 648
If I could have 4731.
29 14:24:18 30
This is a memorandum of Anglo Irish Bank. And it follows on a meeting between Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
103 14:24:27 1
Mr. Beery and Mr. Murray. And it refers to Mr. Noel Murray of Monarch
2
updating the bank on issues. Do you understand?
3
A.
Yes
4
Q. 649
In December 1993. And just under the heading Dwyer Nolan do you see the first
14:47:04 5
paragraph last sentence Noel Murray confirmed that Phil Monahan had been
6
carrying out all the negotiations with Eddie Dwyer directly and that the other
7
Monaghan direct Monarch directors were not fully informed of the arrangement.
8
Do you see that? That's at 4731. That Mr. Noel Murray was advising the bank
9
that Mr. Phil Monahan had been carrying out the negotiations in relation to
14:47:05 10
Dwyer Nolan's directly himself.
11
A.
I see that but I wouldn't agree with it.
12
Q. 650
Yeah. Is there any reason why Mr. Murray would tell the bank something that
13 14
was untrue in December 1993? A.
14:47:06 15
I presume, Chairman, that that must have been Mr. Murray's opinion at the time. From whatever source he was told that.
16
Q. 651
What was Mr. Murray's position in 1993?
17
A.
He was marketing director.
18
Q. 652
A very Senior position within the Monarch Group?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 653
And I think he was, in fact on your nomination, ultimately to be appointed to
14:47:06 20
21
the boar of directors of Monarch?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 654
And in fact I think at one stage you reported to him; isn't that right?
24
A.
At the very end, yes.
Q. 655
Now, just in relation to Monarch Properties Services Limited. Would you tell
14:47:07 25
26 27
the Tribunal what Monarch Properties Services Limited. What its function was? A.
Yes. Monarch Properties Limited, was the parent company, which had a number
28
of other companies under it. The actual service company, the one that was
29
used to employ all of the staff and the development and the accountancy and the
14:47:08 30
marketing ends were employed under Wilton House Limited, which was the initial Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
104 14:47:08 1
2
name which eventually was changed to MPSL. Q. 656
In your statement. If I could have 2113, please.
3 4
I think you do give and set out a narrative in relation to the Monarch
14:47:09 5
Properties Services. And you set out the contracts with which it was
6
involved; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 657
And I think you give a heading of the contract type. And a historical,
9
approximate historical value, of the works. Does that mean that in present
14:47:09 10
day values that the works carried out would have been 700,000, as in the case
11
of the Harcourt Street business, or at the time it was carried out it was
12
700,000?
13
A.
14 14:47:10 15
Well, when I was doing these things I tried to make them at the same time as the report. So it would have been the same date as you were reading.
Q. 658
Yes. So in 2003 values, values as of 2003 there was 700,000 pounds worth of
16
work carried out on the Harcourt Street property, if you look at the very first
17
one?
18
A.
No, that's a different office block.
19
Q. 659
Okay. An office block in Harcourt Street?
A.
Yes.
Q. 660
Okay. Well, I don't want to go through them. If I could have 2116. Just
14:47:11 20
21 22
if you look at No. 60, that is the refurbishment of the Somerton House in
23
Castleknock, which is described as residential. Construction planning
24
project. You said there was a million pounds worth of work carried out on
14:47:11 25
that Somerton House at present day values. Isn't that right?
26
A.
I'm trying to see that.
27
Q. 661
No. 60, Mr. Sweeney.?
28
A.
Oh, yes. Yes.
29
Q. 662
Now, I think you yourself then, throughout this period, had your own company,
14:47:12 30
Edward Sweeney and associates. Isn't that right? Which was a quantity Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
105 14:47:12 1
surveying company. And we can see that at 2118?
2
A.
No, that was much earlier on, Chairman.
3
Q. 663
Yes, yes. It operated for an eight year period, between 1976 and 1983; is
4 14:47:17 5
that correct? A.
Yes.
6
Q. 664
And you set out the works that it was engaged in?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 665
At 2118 to 2100. I think in October 1993 to the present day you operated a
9 14:47:18 10
11
company Pavilion Leisure Complex. At 2121 isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 666
And at 2123 you set out your introduction to the Monarch Group. And you
12
advised the Tribunal that you'd been previously employed by Walls and
13
headhunted by Mr. Monahan and you've given that evidence, isn't that right?
14 14:47:19 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 667
And between 1974 and 1986, I think you had been with the Monarch Group. And
16
it would appear that around 1984 you were appointed a director. Would that be
17
fair to say?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 668
I think you were appointed a director of the Monarch Properties on the 29th of
14:47:20 20
July 1983. And appointed a director of Monarch Properties Holdings Limited,
21
on the 20th of October 1984. Would that be?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 669
Now, could I just refer you to two meetings which appear to have taken place on
24
the 28th and 29th of May 1986. If I could have 8105, please.
14:47:21 25
26
Was it the case that in 1986, Mr. Sweeney, as a result of a Texaco -- a Tesco
27
transaction, sorry
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 670
That quite a substantial amount of profits were made by the Monarch Group?
A.
Yes.
14:47:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
106 14:47:22 1
Q. 671
2
And I think arising out of that, Mr. Monahan was anxious to settle his affairs. Isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 672
At that time. And if we look at the document on screen, which is a memo of a
14:47:22 5
meeting, of the 28th of May 1986. Which was attended at a later stage by
6
yourself and Mr. Glennane. It would appear that Mr. Monahan was there telling
7
his accountant, Mr. Mooney, that he wished to give you 150,000 pounds out of
8
the deal; isn't that right?
9 14:47:23 10
A.
I'm trying to read this.
Q. 673
Well if you look at paragraph No. 1 I'll read it you to, Mr. Sweeney. It says
11
"Monarch is in funds because of the completion of the Tesco transaction and PM"
12
which is presumably Mr. Monahan "now wants to make disbursements to Dominic
13
Glennane, Eddie Sweeney and to himself." In relation to Eddie Sweeney. I'm
14
reading from the third paragraph?
14:47:24 15
16
A.
I can understand.
Q. 674
Phil Monahan proposes 100,000 pounds by the company and that in addition a
17
previous advance of 15,000 be written off?
18
A.
I thought you had said 150.
19
Q. 675
Sorry, I should have said 115. I think you did in fact get monies out of that
14:47:25 20
project; isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 676
And I think if we could have 8056.
23 24 14:47:25 25
26
This again is your affidavit to the High Court, Mr. Sweeney. Looking at paragraph No. 10. And I'm deliberately jumping ahead. But if you wish for me to do so, I'll read the earlier paragraphs.
27 28
You say "I requested that any such agreement would be implemented on a
29
professional basis accordingly it was agreed accountants Stokes Kennedy Crowley
14:47:26 30
could be asked to make the necessary arrangements. Meetings were held between Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
107 14:47:27 1
Mr. Monahan and myself discussed a mechanism for the implementation of this
2
agreement. And it was agreed that an ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds
3
would notionally be made to me , for which I would receive a cash sum of 50,000
4
pounds in a tax efficient manner, with the balance of 50,000 being paid to
14:47:27 5
Mr. Monahan as consideration for the acquisition of a tranche of his existing
6
share holding equivalent to 15 percent of the issued share capital of Monarch.
7
" Isn't that right
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 677
You say at paragraph 12, that the cash sum of 50,000 was duly paid to you,
14:47:28 10
isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 678
At that time or in October of that year. If I could have 2767, these are
13
documents, Mr. Sweeney. The document coming on screen is a document disclosed
14
to the Tribunal by Mr. Monahan. It says 50,000 was paid to Bridie Sweeney on
14:47:29 15
the 31st of October 1986. Do you see that?
16
A.
I do.
17
Q. 679
Had that anything to do with the 50,000 that we've just referred to?
18
A.
Yeah, that's the same 50,000.
19
Q. 680
Now, if I could go back to 8105. I think Mr.-- as appears -- have you read
14:47:30 20
this document before, Mr. Sweeney. This is the document of the 28th of May
21
1986?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 681
And you will see that Mr. Monahan was anxious that a cash fund would be
24 14:47:30 25
available to him; isn't that right? At paragraph No. 2. From his own viewpoint, Mr. Monahan wants to ensure that there is sufficient cash available
26
to him and to his wife in the event of his death. And that this cash is free
27
and not tied up with Monarch. Philip Monahan would like to withdraw between 1
28
and 1.5 million from Monarch's tax free. This money would not be required all
29
at once, but it would be available on loan account to Phil Monahan as and when
14:47:32 30
he required it. Do you recollect Mr. Monahan discussing that with you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
108 14:47:32 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 682
And I think when you joined the meeting. And if we look at 8106. Yourself
3
and Mr. Glennane joined the meeting. And I think Mr. Glennane raised the
4
issue as to whether or not the company could make the disbursements at that
14:47:33 5
time , isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 683
And I think on the following day the company having been valued. If we look
8
at the bottom of the memo. We see that the valuation of the company was
9
somewhere between nine and ten million, isn't that right? There were
14:47:33 10
borrowings of about 16 and an asset value of about 25, isn't that correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 684
Now, I think that subsequently you were paid another tranche of money by
13 14 14:47:34 15
Mr. Monahan, or out of the Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
Are you talking about the same time, Mr. Chairman?
Q. 685
No, I'm talking about January 1992, when the Tallaght town centre came on line.
16 17
If we could have 8058, please.
18 19
Again, this is from your affidavit, Mr. Sweeney. This is paragraph 17. I
14:47:35 20
don't want to read it. I'm anxious, Mr. Sweeney, that you might recollect
21
matters rather than referring to the documents if you can at all.
22
A.
I understand.
23
Q. 686
I would understand for detail that you would have to refer to the documents.
24
This is a situation where I think 270, 000 came under your control, isn't that
14:47:36 25
right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 687
That's the type of thing, I suggest, that you would remember without having to
28 29 14:47:37 30
refer to a document. Do you remember in 1992 having received 270, 000? A.
In '92? No, I didn't receive 200 --
Q. 688
Did a company Isotope Limited, on your behalf? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
109 14:47:37 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 689
Receive --
3
A.
On behalf of my wife and myself, entered into an export credit relief, I don't
4 14:47:37 5
know what the word is, scheme . Q. 690
Yes.
6
A.
That enabled 270,000 to pass to us, over a number of years.
7
Q. 691
Yes. But it related -- the agreement that you would receive the 270, 000
8 9
stemmed from a 1.8 million disbursement in 1992, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 692
It was your share of that; isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 693
And are you saying that the monies came to you from Isotope limited. Or were
14:47:38 10
13 14
you -- were yourself and your wife the shareholders of Isotope? A.
14:47:39 15
16
Isotope was a company which was, of which my wife and myself were the shareholders.
Q. 694
17
And was it Isotope that was involved in an export sales relief business, or was to the Monarch Group?
18
A.
It was a group of companies within the Monarch Group.
19
Q. 695
Yes.
A.
Isotope is the one that dealt with the money that I was to receive.
Q. 696
Now, in relation to payments generally. If I could 2139. You set out the
14:47:39 20
21 22
system for dealing with payments; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 697
I take it that it would be fair to say that a company. And when I say
14:47:40 25
"company" I'm referring to the Monarch Group of companies obviously. That a
26
company like Monarch would have a fairly detailed system in operation for the
27
payments of invoices and the payment out of its funds?
28
A.
Yes, certainly on the development end.
29
Q. 698
But not just at the development end. At every end; isn't that right?
A.
Um, it should have but.
14:47:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
110 14:47:42 1
Q. 699
Yes. I think you took credit for putting in place a certification process at
2
some stage in relation to the payment of contractors and subcontractor's; isn't
3
that right?
4 14:47:43 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 700
And you set out there the procedure for the making of payments and the payments
6
on foot of instituted of chartered builders -- sorry. Royal Institute of
7
Architects and Ireland's building contracts and other payments; isn't that
8
right?
9 14:47:44 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 701
And I think you, at 2140. You advised that the procedures were strict and
11
required the following. Checking of the accounts or invoices by a particular
12
staff involved. A final check by the surveyor in charge. Signature of the
13
chief surveyor and a signature of Eddie Sweeney chief surveyor/director, isn't
14
that right?
14:47:46 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 702
You want on to say that cheques were normally signed by Phil Monahan or Dominic
17
Glennane and in the rare absence that I counter signed any cheques exceptions
18
to the above strict procedures were rare. Is that correct?
19 14:47:47 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 703
Quite a substantial amount of the cheques we have seen on screen and we'll be
21
dealing with some of them Mr. Sweeney, have two signatures. Was there a
22
situation where two signatures were sometimes required on cheques? One of
23
which was either Mr. Glennane, Mr. Monahan or yourself?
24
A.
That was my understanding of the system required.
Q. 704
Two signatures?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 705
But one of the signatures had to be Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, or in their
14:47:48 25
28 29 14:47:49 30
absence yourself? A.
It would depend on the particular circumstance.
Q. 706
Would it depend on the amount? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
111 14:47:49 1
2
A.
Not particularly the amount. But I suppose the particular company.
Q. 707
Yes. Now, at 2198. Under the heading political parties you deal with the
3
system for the payments to political parties and the democratic process.
4 14:47:50 5
You say before any local general or European election it would have been a
6
general policy in Monarch to give donations to those parties or politicians
7
that made representations for help with their political expenses. And you
8
named the various parties there. You say I believe that representations would
9
have been made to Monarch personnel from many of the members of the various
14:47:50 10
political parties, Monarch would also have presented Christmas gifts to many
11
politicians and councillors and local authority officials, usually a bottle of
12
whiskey, brandy or something, or flowers or sponsorship for golf outings and
13
dinner. Is that right?
14 14:47:51 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 708
That implies, Mr. Sweeney, that the donations for political parties were only
16
made at election time; isn't that right?
17
A.
That it implies that?
18
Q. 709
Yes.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 710
Well was that the position? Were donations given other than at election time ?
A.
I'm just trying to think now, Chairman. I suppose at any time if anybody
14:47:51 20
21 22
wrote in, it wouldn't necessarily need to be an election time. I just don't
23
want you to pull something out that is not an election time. That might be
24
quite correct: But you are quite correct. It would be normally at election
14:47:53 25
26
times. Q. 711
27
But are you saying that at any time you received a request for a political contribution you would have made it, Monarch would have made it?
28
A.
I would say in most cases.
29
Q. 712
Can you recall of any instance when a request for a political contribution was
14:47:54 30
received and that the group refused to sanction the payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
112 14:47:54 1
2
A.
No, I can't recall any.
Q. 713
If I go back to 2140 again. You say that, I do recall on several occasions
3
receiving letters from political parties or local representatives seeking
4
donations towards party political expenses. What I have done would have been
14:47:55 5
to pass these letters onto the council department with either a recommendation
6
to make a donation or not.
7 8
Did you ever pass on a request with the recommendation that the payment not be
9
made?
14:47:55 10
11
A.
No.
Q. 714
You say you recall recommending payments to councillor Mary Flaherty Mervyn
12
Taylor and Jim Barry at some stage, although the dates of such are unclear. I
13
cannot also recall the actual amounts recommended by me , but believe them to
14
have been nominal and in each case the monies were paid by Monarch, letters of
14:47:56 15
receipts and thanks would have been received by each of the recipients. Is
16
that correct?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 715
At 2191. I think you set out a list of personnel, namely, politicians, with
19
whom you would have had dealings; isn't that right? And the list is quite
14:47:57 20
extensive. It's at 2191 and 2192; isn't that correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 716
And then I think you -- just in relation to the political contributions. If I
23
could have 2866. Did you know, for example, that Mr. Monahan had made a
24
contribution to Mr.-- through Mr. Dermot Ahern to the Fianna Fail condalau,
14:47:58 25
General Election fund, in June 1989?
26
A.
No, not that I can recall.
27
Q. 717
Did you know -- if I could have 2864. That Mr. Monahan on the 9th of June
28
1989, had forwarded a cheque for 16,000 pounds, being a donation to the General
29
Election, to Mr. Frank Wall of Fianna Fail?
14:48:00 30
A.
No, but I did see these. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
113 14:48:00 1
Q. 718
You'd have seen these documents in the brief?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 719
And you'd have seen also I think the payment of 1,000 to Mr. Ciaran Haughey on
4
9th of June 1989, in relation to the election campaign of Sean Haughey, isn't
14:48:00 5
that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 720
And you'd have seen the remittance on 15th of June 1989 of 500 pounds to Mr.
8
Kitt. And I think there was a a payment to Mr. Chris Flood on 25th of July
9
1989 of 1,000 also. Is that correct?
14:48:01 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 721
Now, if I could have 2136, please.
12 13
I think the single biggest project after the Nutgrove Shopping Centre, in the
14
late 1980s, was the Tallaght town centre; isn't that right
14:48:01 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 722
And I think at 2136 of your statement, you set out the technical and project
17
management team which was assembled for that scheme; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 723
And we see there an array of well known architects, mechanical and electrical
14:48:02 20
engineers, interior designers, landscape architects and planning consultants,
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 724
You advised the Tribunal in the last paragraph of that statement that the site
24 14:48:03 25
set up was run very efficiently and had full catering facilities, capable of putting silver service lunches numerous politicians and businessmen from all
26
over the country as well as abroad. As Tallaght was at the forefront in terms
27
of the property development in Ireland at this particular time , from a public
28
relations and employment point of view. Many commercial and political people
29
visited the site, some of them arriving in Phil Monahan's helicopter and were
14:48:03 30
shown around the development as part of the marketing exercise to raise the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
114 14:48:03 1
profile of Tallaght which was seriously in need of such treatment, isn't that
2
correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 725
Do you recollect of any the political people you recollected there who visited
14:48:05 5
6
the site in Mr. Monahan's helicopter? A.
My recollection isn't perfect here now. But I have it in my mind that Padraig
7
Flynn arrived at some stage and that Tom Barry. They're the only two
8
political ones that I can recall. But I think there might have been more.
9
Q. 726
You think Mr. Flynn arrived in a helicopter at some stage?
A.
At some stage, yes.
11
Q. 727
I think the site was opened by Mr. Haughey in October 1990?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 728
But prior to that I think there had been a topping out ceremony at some stage?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 729
And was that done by Mr. Flynn?
16
A.
I just can't recall that.
17
Q. 730
Now, at 2165, under the heading, management team The Square, town centre
14:48:06 10
14:48:06 15
18 19 14:48:07 20
Tallaght, you set out the management structure there; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 731
And I think you're the development director, project Manager. And you have a
21
series of architects, engineers under your control; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 732
And similarly on his side, Mr. Glennane has Mr. Murray and Mr. Reilly, the
24 14:48:07 25
shopping centre management? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 733
No mention of Mr. Lynn at this time; isn't that right?
27
A.
No mention of Mr. Lynn.
28
Q. 734
Now, if I could have 2194, please.
29 14:48:08 30
It would be -- would it be fair to say that the Monarch got involved in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
115 14:48:08 1
Tallaght after an English company, London and Clyde Property. London
2
Clydeside Limited had been unsuccessful in developing the site; isn't that
3
right
4 14:48:09 5
A.
Yes, that's correct, it was a Scottish company.
Q. 735
Yes. And I think at 2194 you've advised the Tribunal that the site had been
6
up for public tender and had been won by London and Clydeside Limited a
7
Scottish public company in 1986. And you set out the negatives of both the
8
existing planning permission and legal agreement between London and Clydeside
9
and Dublin Corporation, isn't that right?
14:48:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 736
I'm just going to summarise this, if I may. You, that is to say Monarch,
12
acquired the London and Clydeside interest in the contract. And one of the
13
stumbling blocks was the insistence by Dublin Corporation because the entire
14
site was their's as I understand it, to hold on to the site, or to have some
14:48:11 15
say in the development of the site?
16
A.
Well, it was very complex.
17
Q. 737
Yes?
18
A.
Chairman. If you like I'll give you a summary of it.
19
Q. 738
If you can give a quick summary of it, Mr. Sweeney.
A.
Okay. When the site was acquired it was in an unusual situation that it was
14:48:18 20
21
own owned by a Dublin Corporation, that was situated geographically within
22
Dublin County Council. Which means that both authorities had a hand in it.
23
And there was a type of tug of war between the two. That coupled with 33%
24
shareholding, made it all very difficult. And that really is it. It was
14:48:57 25
26
very complex. Q. 739
27
Yes. Complex from the point of view of acquiring the full interest in the site; isn't that right?
28
A.
Not only that, but complex in terms of trying to reshape the development.
29
Q. 740
Yes?
A.
Or the details into something that was saleable, to third parties.
14:49:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
116 14:49:18 1
Q. 741
If I could have 2195 please, you say that the local politicians and councillors
2
in particular were also end pressure from the community to get the project
3
under with a way and provide the many jobs which would hopefully result from a
4
successful development, it was in these circumstances in 1984 85 that Monarch
14:49:36 5
Properties entered into the picture from L & C Limited. Monarch was suddenly
6
in the driving seat and faced with the same serious development difficulties.
7
I was given the responsibility of project managing the eventual development and
8
with a great deal of preparatory work on legal and acquisition end spearheaded
9
by Mr. Smith's solicitor, was needed to get the project into shape to enable
14:49:58 10
the procurement of finance. These needed serious negotiations with the local
11
authority. You say that local politicians and councillors entered into the
12
scene sensing that at last something was going to be done and the possibility
13
to seek political credit for any progress that possibly helped to optimise
14
their chances in future election within the community?
14:50:17 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 742
You go on to say, at around this point Philip Monahan, chairman and managing
17
director of Monarch introduced Liam Lawlor to the Tallaght scene, as someone
18
who could advice with the strategy of getting through the tangle of red tape
19
with Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation. Liam Lawlor was
14:50:48 20
subsequently asked by Phil Monahan to advise Monarch on contacts and protocol
21
to try to get the Tallaght project into shape, to encourage eventual
22
performance.
23
Liam Lawlor, who advised on who in the various departments in Dublin County
24
Council and Dublin Corporation and indeed Dail Eireann, who could help to sort
14:50:59 25
There were several meetings between Philip Monahan myself and
out the various problems in Tallaght. I was very impressed with Liam's grasp
26
of the complicated structures that existed in national and local government and
27
his advice was very helpful.
28 29 14:51:09 30
And you there then set out a series of examples of negotiations that were conducted by yourself Mr. Monaghan and Mr. Glennane; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
117 14:51:14 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 743
You had several meetings with Mr. Lawlor, as identified there, isn't that
3 4 14:51:23 5
right? A.
Yes.
Q. 744
And Mr. Lawlor was introduced to you and to the Monarch Group by Mr. Phil
6
Monahan; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 745
And he was introduced in the context of somebody who could be of assistance to
9 14:51:35 10
the Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 746
In their development of the shopping centre in Tallaght?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 747
Tallaght I think was one of the three designated towns in the Miles/Wright
14
Report and was identified as the shopping centre in the 1983 plan; isn't that
14:51:49 15
right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 748
And you set out there the assistance being provided to you by Mr. Lawlor; isn't
18 19 14:51:55 20
that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 749
And I think that assistance included being introduced -- first of all, included
21
in him identifying for you people within both the corporation and the County
22
Council who could be of assistance?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 750
Am I right in thinking that you're saying there that he would have identified
14:52:15 25
key personnel that would be of assistance?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 751
Did he ever introduce you to any of that personnel, or set up meetings with you
28 29 14:52:33 30
and the various personnel identified by him? A.
No, there were no introductions, Chairman, just indications of where to go.
Q. 752
You had, I think we have seen earlier, the array of experts available to you in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
118 14:52:42 1
relation to the Monarch site; isn't that right? If I could have 2136.
2 3
You had architects, mechanical and electrical engineers, quantity surveyors,
4
structural engineers, designers, landscape architects, planning consultants,
14:52:57 5
contract management advisors, solicitors and your own in-house professional
6
staff; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 753
And are you saying that but for the assistance of Mr. Lawlor, you would not
9
have been able to identify who within either the Corporation or the Council you
14:53:15 10
should negotiation with in relation to the development of the site?
11
A.
Yes, it short-circuited it dramatically.
12
Q. 754
And I think you also said that he identified people within Dail Eireann who
13 14 14:53:30 15
could be of assistance to you; is that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 755
Did Mr. Lawlor ever set up any meetings with you with any of the
16
representatives of the Council or the Corporation?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 756
You did I think and when I say you did, Monarch did. It would appear from the
19
diary entries for Mr. Redmond. Have meetings with Mr. Redmond in 1988; isn't
14:53:58 20
that right?
21
A.
Yeah, I did.
22
Q. 757
You did?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 758
And I'm sure you had meetings with other officials within the Council and the
14:54:02 25
Corporation in '88 and '89?
26
A.
Yeah, many of them.
27
Q. 759
Now, at 2196. You say that, I was not aware at any time of any agreement
28
between Phil Monahan and Liam Lawlor, or the fees, if any, he was being paid
29
for his assistance. You say that the negotiations with the local authorities
14:54:21 30
over the next few years were extremely extensive and involved Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
119 14:54:25 1
personnel, their solicitors and hundreds of meetings with the many and varied
2
personnel and departments in both the Corporation and the Council. At the
3
same time Monarch had made a request to the Government to allow Tallaght to
4
avail of a tax allowance which had already been given to other needy areas, or
14:54:42 5
towns around Ireland, isn't that right.
6
A.
7
Q. 760
8 9 14:54:58 10
A.
Well I certainly wasn't aware of that.
Q. 761
Are you saying that he assisted in the every other respect, save for the extension of the tax designation to the site?
A.
13 14 14:55:18 15
Did Mr. Lawlor's assistance to Monarch extend to assistance in lobbying or having the tax designation extended to Tallaght?
11 12
Yes.
I'm not aware if he did assist on that. But the assistance that came to me was of a technical nature.
Q. 762
When you say a technical nature. What do you mean by that Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Um, I'm talking about the roads departments, the sewers, lighting, the various
16
property departments.
17
Q. 763
And --
18
A.
And at that time Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council were all over the
19
place, literally all over the place. You would need a map to explain it. It
14:55:46 20
21
was tortuous, to say the least. Q. 764
And are you saying that of all the many experts available to Monarch, you could
22
not progress matters in relation to Tallaght without the assistance of
23
Mr. Lawlor?
24
A.
14:56:07 25
it. It short-circuited it, which was very, very helpful and I was very
26 27
Certainly it could have been done without his assistance. But it quickened
grateful for it. Q. 765
If we could have 2198, please.
28 29 14:56:21 30
You say having repeated what I've just said in relation to Mr. Lawlor and his assistance in getting the project off the ground, which you say was deeply Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
120 14:56:25 1
imbedded in local authority red tape. You say that Mr. Lawlor advised Monarch
2
on how to interface with two local authorities at the many different levels
3
required to achieve progress in some of the following areas. Acquisition,
4
legal, property, Valuation services for foul and surface water and community
14:56:42 5
relations. You say that I believe Mr. Lawlor's occasional input was very
6
helpful in the ultimate sorting out of some of the problems , at all the various
7
levels. I interfaced mainly on the technical and property aspects with the
8
rest of Monarch's technical team had numerous meetings and consultation with
9
local authority and personnel. While it took long period of negotiations
14:57:01 10
eventually all the problems were solved, to pave the way for the start of
11
construction in 1988. Eventually opening on time and on budget, in October
12
1990
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 766
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lawlor's involvement in relation to the
14:57:13 15
Tallaght site extended at least from 1988 to 1990?
16
A.
I would say even earlier.
17
Q. 767
Even earlier. Maybe 1986, '87 to 1990.
18
A.
19
Q. 768
So he had an almost constant involvement with the site for at least four years?
A.
Yes, on and off.
Q. 769
Now, one of the major achievements for the site I think was the tax designation
14:57:35 20
21 22
Yes, yes.
status, which was given to the site; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 770
Now, Mr. Lawlor advised the Tribunal.
14:57:55 25
26
If I could have 7583, please.
27 28
That Monarch Properties with an address care of Phil Monahan in Somerton, was
29
one of the individuals, or entities, that had made contributions to him by way
14:58:12 30
of political payments. And he advised the Tribunal that a sum of 40,000 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
121 14:58:16 1
pounds in his estimation, had been contributed towards his election campaigns
2
and running costs of his constituency.
3
Do you see that?
4 14:58:26 5
A.
I saw that.
Q. 771
Now, when asked or in response to the request as to the name and address of the
6
individuals who actually made the payments, Mr. Lawlor said Mr. Phil
7
Monahan/Edward Sweeney of Monarch Properties. And you have seen that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 772
And you were written to I think on the 22nd of April 2002.
14:58:50 10
If I could have 2085.
11
Your solicitors were written to. And if you look at the third paragraph of
12
that letter, Mr. Sweeney. It says, as your clients may be aware, Mr. Liam
13
Lawlor TD has informed the Tribunal of monies received by him from Monarch
14
Properties limited. He has named your client and Philip Monahan as having
14:59:06 15
been involved in the payments. Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 773
And you were asked the Sole Member considers it necessary to investigate fully
18
any dealings with Mr. Lawlor and it would be necessary to consider similar
19
dealings between such persons and other public representatives. And you were
14:59:22 20
asked for a narrative statement isn't that right? Can I just show you your
21
solicitor's response, presumably written on your instructions. A letter from
22
Messrs. Fries on the 7th of May 2002.
23 24
And do you see the third paragraph of that letter, Mr. Sweeney? And just about
14:59:43 25
half ways down it says we note that you assert that Mr. Liam Lawlor has named
26
our client as someone he would have dealings within connection with the affairs
27
of Monarch Properties Limited. Do you see that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 774
That is in response to a direct advice given to you in the earlier letter. At
15:00:06 30
2085. That in fact he was not advising the Tribunal of just an involvement or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
122 15:00:11 1
a connection with him. He was advising the Tribunal of someone who was --
2 3
from whom he had received money, isn't that right? A.
4
Tribunal wrote to me , saying that Mr. Lawlor had paid money to
15:00:36 5
Mr. Monahan/Mr. Sweeney. And that my solicitors responded by saying well what
6 7
Yeah, I'm getting a bit lost here. Because I do accept that Mr.-- or that the
did he say. And there was no response to that. Q. 775
No. You were -- if you look at the letter on screen Mr. Sweeney, that's a
8
letter of the 22nd of April, 2002. And I'm not going to dwell on this very
9
much. But if you look at the third paragraph of that letter. The letter
15:00:57 10
says, as your client may be aware Mr. Liam Lawlor TD has Monarch Properties
11
Limited, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 776
He has named your client and Philip Monahan as having been involved in the
14 15:01:08 15
payments? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 777
So that's a letter about payments, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 778
Now, if we look at your response. At 2087?
19
A.
If I may say.
Q. 779
Yes?
A.
That my response to that, through William Fries, was what was Mr. Lawlor saying
15:01:16 20
21 22
about payments?
23
Q. 780
Yes.
24
A.
Because there was no response to that. And I still can't see.
Q. 781
Yes.
26
A.
Mr. Lawlor saying anything.
27
Q. 782
Yes.
28
A.
That he gave any payments.
29
Q. 783
Did I not put on screen a moment ago, Mr.--
15:01:29 25
15:01:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
123 15:01:38 1
CHAIRMAN: That he received payments. Not gave payments
2
Sorry.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: That he received payments. And Mr. Lawlor had told the Tribunal
15:01:45 5
that he received payments. And he named Mr. Monahan and yourself
6
Yes.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: As the provider of those funds. A.
15:01:58 10
Yes, Chairman. But I asked after that time what payments. And I didn't get any response. And I still haven't got a response.
11 12
Q. 784
MR. QUINN: Well we'll deal with the payments now, Mr. Sweeney.
13 14
But before I do just to deal and finish on this matter. Your initial response
15:02:09 15
was a suggestion that you noted, or we noted, your solicitors noted, that the
16
Tribunal had asserted that Mr. Lawlor had named you, that is you, Mr. Sweeney,
17
as someone he would have had dealings with, in connection with the affairs of
18
Monaghan Properties
19 15:02:26 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 785
You said, other than the political contributions made by our client subsequent
21
to his departure from Monarch Properties, of which he has already informed you
22
in full and furnished you with all of the documentation in relation to same.
23
No payments were ever made by our client either personally or on behalf of
24
Monarch, to any politician or elected official, isn't that right? That was
15:02:46 25
your response?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 786
That you never made a payment to a politician or an elected official, other
28
than the payments that you had identified in the earlier statement that we've
29
seen this morning?
15:02:55 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
124 15:02:55 1
Q. 787
And those payments were made after you left Monarch. So effectively what you
2
are suggesting there. is in response to an allegation that you had paid
3
Mr. Lawlor, through your solicitors, you were advising the Tribunal that no
4
payments were ever made by you, personally, or on behalf of Monarch, to any
15:03:12 5
politician?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 788
Or elected officials?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 789
Now, if we could have 7797.
15:03:21 10
11
This is a letter Mr. Sweeney. You'll have seen it in the brief. It's dated
12
the 29th of June 1988. And it's directed to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing.
13
And it would appear to amount to a guarantee of sorts, by the Monarch Group in
14
relation to advances to a company Advanced Proteins Limited, which he we
15:03:42 15
understand to be a Mr. Lawlor related company. Did you know that Mr. Monahan
16
had given that security in 1988?
17
A.
No, I hadn't seen this before the brief.
18
Q. 790
This would have been at a time when Mr. Lawlor was providing the assistance
19 15:03:59 20
21
that you have just referred to in relation to Tallaght; isn't that right? A.
1988?
Q. 791
Yes. And if we look at 7798. We see the actual leasing agreement itself;
22
isn't that right? Now, Mr. Lawlor in his lifetime wrote to Mr. Monahan.
23 24
If we could have 7875. Advising that he had a recollection, of receiving from
15:04:28 25
the company, Sincentering Public Life, in 1977, a sum of 40,000 pounds. Did
26
you know that Mr. Lawlor was alleging in August of 2001 that Monarch had given
27
him political contributions amounting to 40,000 pounds in August -- since he
28
entered public life in June 1977?
29 15:04:53 30
A.
Are we talking about 2001?
Q. 792
Yes. That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
125 15:04:55 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 793
You didn't know that he was make that claim in 2001?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 794
When did you discover that any monies had been paid to Mr. Lawlor?
A.
When I saw the brief.
6
Q. 795
Does that surprise you Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
That any monies had been paid?
8
Q. 796
Yes.
9
A.
A bit, yeah.
Q. 797
Does it surprise you that monies having been paid that you didn't know they
15:05:02 5
15:05:12 10
11
were paid?
12
A.
Well that wouldn't surprise me .
13
Q. 798
Why would that not surprise you?
14
A.
Um, well because I -- I was aware that Liam Lawlor had done a lot of work and
15:05:32 15
put in a lot of time and effort into helping us out in The Square in Tallaght.
16
So it did surprise me that he wasn't remunerated in some way for that.
17
Q. 799
Did you understand at the time that he was likely to have been remunerated?
18
A.
He never came into any of the conversations.
19
Q. 800
Did you ever mention to Mr. Monahan how he was going to -- proposing to look
15:05:55 20
after Mr. Lawlor for all of his assistance?
21
A.
No, never.
22
Q. 801
Was it ever discussed between yourself, Mr. Monahan, or indeed Mr. Glennane the
23 24
financial director of the company? A.
15:06:11 25
26
No, never. The dealings with Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Monahan were all very informal.
Q. 802
If we look at 1249.
27 28
This is a letter from Mr. Monahan's solicitors. Of the 16th of April, 2002.
29 15:06:30 30
If we look at the third paragraph of that. It says with regard to Mr. Lawlor. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
126 15:06:35 1
Our client notes what he says but neither Mr. Philip Monahan, who is now
2
retired, or Paul Monahan the managing director of Monarch Properties Limited,
3
have any recollection that Mr. Liam Lawlor received a sum or any sum as high as
4
40,000 pounds. However our clients have instructed us that they will again
15:06:51 5
trawl through whatever records it may have, or make further queries to try and
6
ascertain if any further payments were made.
7 8 9 15:07:02 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 803
Did anybody contact you in 2001 or 2002 querying what monies, if any, had been
11
paid to Mr. Lawlor?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 804
Who contacted you?
14
A.
Mr. Monahan phoned me .
Q. 805
And what --
A.
At night one night. And he said, did you give 40,000 pounds to Mr. Lawlor?
15:07:16 15
16 17
And I said no.
18
Q. 806
Did you ask him why he was asking you that question?
19
A.
I couldn't figure it at all. I hadn't heard a word from him since 1996 before
15:07:39 20
21
that. Q. 807
22
And was he -- did you think that he was surprised at a suggestion that 40,000 had been paid to Mr. Lawlor?
23
A.
That was the tone.
24
Q. 808
Yes. Well did a discussion develop between you and as to?
A.
It was a short call.
Q. 809
That would imply that whoever paid monies to Mr. Lawlor, it certainly wasn't
15:07:52 25
26 27
Mr. Phil Monahan?
28
A.
Well I -- I don't know if that would imply that or not.
29
Q. 810
Well if he had paid the monies, he presumably would have remembered them; isn't
15:08:13 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
127 15:08:13 1
2
A.
Presumably.
Q. 811
And it came as a surprise to him that Mr. Lawlor was making this claim; isn't
3 4 15:08:27 5
that right? A.
That was the tone of the call.
Q. 812
Who else within the Monarch Group would have authority to pay Mr. Lawlor monies
6
at this time ?
7
A.
I can think of no one other than Mr. Monahan.
8
Q. 813
So you don't believe that any monies were disbursed towards Mr. Lawlor at this
9 15:08:47 10
11
time ? A.
I have no knowledge of that.
Q. 814
But certainly from what you say Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Monahan was amazed to the
12
extent that he rang you to know if you had paid Mr. Lawlor 40,000 pounds at
13
this time; isn't that right?
14 15:09:10 15
A.
I beg your pardon?
Q. 815
Mr. Monahan was -- had taken the unusual step of ringing you in 2001 or 2002,
16
to see if you had made a payment of 40,000 to Mr. Lawlor; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 816
That would have been a difficult phone call for Mr. Monahan to have made,
19
having regard to the nature of the relationship between you at that time; isn't
15:09:31 20
that right?
21
A.
I don't know if it would be difficult for him or not.
22
Q. 817
You had left the company in 1996?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 818
As a result of litigation; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 819
Had you spoken much to Mr. Monahan between 1996 and the receipt of that phone
15:09:39 25
26 27
call?
28
A.
No, very, very little, if at all.
29
Q. 820
So this phone call would have been a phone call out of the blue from a former
15:09:54 30
colleague, work mate and possibly adversary; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
128 15:10:00 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 821
So if monies were sanctioned for Mr. Lawlor, then would you agree with me, that
3 4 15:10:17 5
it's unlikely that Mr. Philip Monahan sanctioned them? A.
I wouldn't agree with that. I have no idea.
Q. 822
Now, you, as project co-ordinator, for the Tallaght site, would have been
6
responsible for the budget on the site; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 823
And there would be regular budgetary meetings. And you would discuss the
9 15:10:35 10
various contracts for the development of the site; isn't that right? A.
The Square.
11
Q. 824
The Square.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 825
And I'm talking now about that period between 1987 and 1990 when the site was
14 15:10:44 15
coming on line and was -A.
Yes.
16
Q. 826
Being developed; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 827
And would there have been regular meetings where yourself and possibly
19
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray or Mr. Reilly would get together and discuss the
15:10:55 20
budgets?
21
A.
Yes. And the banks.
22
Q. 828
And the banks?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 829
Particularly the banks perhaps?
A.
Yes.
Q. 830
So there was a fairly a tight budgetary control at this time in relation to the
15:10:59 25
26 27
site. And I think you've told us that through your efforts and perhaps that
28
of your staff, you brought the site on board on time and on cost; is that
29
right?
15:11:13 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
129 15:11:13 1
Q. 831
2
And all outgoings in relation to the site would be -- would be checked and kept under control; isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 832
And you would be reasonably familiar with the major project or project
15:11:30 5
contributors to the site, the -- Sisk I think were the contractors?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 833
Did you have, for example, if we could have 1254, please. This is a document,
8
Mr. Sweeney, that's included in the brief. It's headed L & C payments by
9
accounts. Do you see that? It would appear to be up to perhaps the 29th of
15:11:59 10
June 1992. If you look across the top?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 834
You would have seen a document like this in your time during these projects
13 14
isn't that right? A.
Not necessarily. I don't recognise that one.
Q. 835
You don't recognise that document?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 836
I see. Well maybe I'll put up a document that you might recognise. Could I
15:12:10 15
18
have 1255, please. This is an extract from the cash payments book and it
19
refers to cheque payments. Do you recognise that document, Mr. Sweeney?
15:12:27 20
A.
I wouldn't have seen that document.
21
Q. 837
You wouldn't have seen that document?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 838
Well would you have seen a document which would show outgoings of about 58,000
24 15:12:42 25
26
pounds at this time, Mr. Sweeney? A.
No, at this time I was concentrating only on the construction payments.
Q. 839
You've a agreed with me that you would have attended regularly at financial
27
meetings in relation to the budget on the site, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah but that was the budget for the construction.
29
Q. 840
And you would have been dealing with the outgoings; isn't that right?
A.
For construction.
15:13:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
130 15:13:01 1
Q. 841
Yeah?
2
A.
And for the professional team.
3
Q. 842
Yes. And we see on the document on screen. About two-thirds of the way
4
down. Two payments on the 16th of October 1990 to an entity entitled Comex
15:13:13 5
Trading Corporation. Do you see those payments?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 843
They are about two down from Monarch Properties Services payroll account. Do
8 9 15:13:22 10
11
you see that? A.
Yes.
Q. 844
Can I ask you, what services did Comex Trading Corporation provide on the site?
A.
Yeah. I've no idea now because I -- I haven't seen this before. Definitely
12 13
it wasn't construction, because I would have remembered it. Q. 845
14
This document Mr. Sweeney, was included in the circulated book of documents. Do you understand? And it's a payment, two substantial payments in October
15:13:58 15
1990 to an entity, Comex Trading Corporation. Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 846
Do you see the very last entry. Modern display artists 25,860 pounds? Do you
18 19 15:14:08 20
see that, for the 18th of October? A.
25,000?
Q. 847
Yes. Each of those Comex payments on that document, Mr. Sweeney, represent
21
the highest payments on that page from the 15th of October to the 18th of
22
October 1990?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 848
Which would have been about a week off the opening; isn't that right? Can you
15:14:28 25
tell the Tribunal what contribution Comex Trading Corporation made to the
26
development of the site in Tallaght?
27
A.
I've no idea.
28
Q. 849
Did you ever retain Comex Trading Corporation?
29
A.
No, never.
Q. 850
Did you know that Comex Limited, was an entity Mr. Lawlor has advised the
15:14:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
131 15:14:50 1
Tribunal was used by him for the purpose of raising invoices?
2
A.
Not until I saw it coming up in the Tribunal.
3
Q. 851
If we could have 1269, please.
4 15:15:00 5
This is a letter to the Tribunal, on the 1st of May, 2002. From Mr. Lawlor's
6
then solicitors, Messrs. Coins. Do you see that? And it says we are advised
7
by Mr. Lawlor that the following is a list of names used by him for the
8
purposes of creating invoices. And the second entity identified there is
9
Comex Limited. Do you see that? And then in the second part of that that
15:15:25 10
letter it says Mr. Lawlor advises that the following entities received or may
11
have received invoices under the above titles. And item C, Monarch
12
Properties.
Do you see that?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 852
Would you agree with me, that based on that letter, and having regard to what
15:15:39 15
you've had to say about your lack of knowledge of this company, that it is
16
almost certain that the two payments to Comex Trading Corporation were payments
17
made to Mr. Lawlor?
18
A.
Well that is the way it seems to pan out, yes.
19
Q. 853
In fact, one of those payments was lodged to an account of Economics Reports
15:15:58 20
Limited.
21 22
If I could have 1256, please.
23 24
There's a lodgement on the 26th of October 1990 of 28,300 to the current
15:16:08 25
account number 63551061, of Economic Reports Limited.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 854
Does it surprise you that Monarch paid Mr. Lawlor 56, 300 pounds in October
28 29 15:16:36 30
1990, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Well it seems a lot.
Q. 855
Why do you think Monarch paid Mr. Lawlor 56, 300 pounds in October 1990? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
132 15:16:42 1
A.
2 3
No, the only inference I can come to is that it's a payment for the services that he provided over a number of years.
Q. 856
4
If we could have 1267. This is a document complied on the 5th of February 1992. And it's an L & C property year end general ledger report, fiscal year
15:17:06 5
'91. Do you see that? Would you be familiar with these documents,
6
Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
I wouldn't. But I've definitely seen them in the brief.
8
Q. 857
Yeah but other than seeing them in the brief?
9
A.
I would find it very difficult to read them.
Q. 858
I see. In your time in Tallaght and in your involvement with L & C Properties
15:17:19 10
11
would you have seen this type of documentation?
12
A.
No, they wouldn't have come across my desk.
13
Q. 859
And what sort of documentation from a financial point of view in relation to
14
the outgoings of L & C Properties would have come across your desk,
15:17:36 15
16
Mr. Sweeney? A.
Well when we were meeting in relations to budgets. The budgets would be split
17
into various sections. One of which was construction. Of which I was
18
responsible. The other one would be marketing. The other one would be
19
legal. And possibly legal and accountancy.
15:17:55 20
21
Q. 860
And strategic planning, which one would that fall into Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Sorry. I have to say, in my own technical end, I knew every single thing that
22
was happening. But when it came to the other ends, I always had a difficulty
23
with there being open ended agreements, particularly in accountancy and in
24
legal.
15:18:22 25
Q. 861
Yes. Accountancy and legal --
26
A.
I could never get to grips with how that can be controlled so ....
27
Q. 862
Yes. But I take it that you were involved in, as you've described it, in the
28 29 15:18:37 30
development and in the construction; isn't that right? A.
In the construction.
Q. 863
But you would also have been involved in the planning; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
133 15:18:40 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 864
And strategic planning is something that would fall under your charge, isn't
3 4 15:18:57 5
that right? A.
No, I would say town and country planning.
Q. 865
Well the designation given to these payments, see you can see on screen. If
6
we look at the second and third entry there, Mr. Sweeney. Is strategic
7
planning. Do you see that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 866
And which category or whose responsibility was strategic planning in 1990 in
15:19:05 10
Tallaght?
11
A.
There was no such thing as strategic, responsibility for strategic planning.
12
Q. 867
Well of the various sub-headings that you've given us, legal and accounting and
13
planning and development. Would you agree with me that strategic plan is more
14
likely to fall under development than it is under either legal or accountancy?
15:19:28 15
16
A.
No, I don't agree with that.
Q. 868
Well what strategic plan was there in operation in relation to the accountancy
17
end of L & C Limited in 1990, Mr. Sweeney?
18
A.
I've no idea, if any.
19
Q. 869
Would you, for example, be concerned with the professional consultancy fees
15:19:52 20
21
generally? A.
Most certainly when they were related to construction. But my bone of
22
contention always with the Board was that I never found the same constraint
23
being on the other ends of the development.
24
Q. 870
15:20:15 25
Is it credible, Mr. Sweeney, that there would be 56,300 pounds of the development budget paid out on foot of a strategic plan that wouldn't have been
26
brought to your attention or that wouldn't come to your attention?
27
A.
Yes, it certainly could have been done without coming to my attention.
28
Q. 871
How could that possibly have happened, Mr. Sweeney?
29
A.
That could have happened because it didn't come within the ambit of the
15:20:39 30
development end to which I was responsible. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
134 15:20:43 1
Q. 872
2
But you were responsible for the planning, you were responsible for the construction; isn't that right?
3
A.
Exactly.
4
Q. 873
So a strategic plan?
A.
Strategic planning, if I may say, is nothing to do with town and country
15:20:52 5
6
planning. Town and country planning is to do with the planning or buildings on
7
site.
8 9
CHAIRMAN: Yes. You understand, Mr. Sweeney, what the term strategy plan or
15:21:07 10
11
strategic planning means in the development world. Does it mean anything? A.
I don't think it does.
Q. 874
MR. QUINN: Who within Monarch would have responsibility for checking that
12 13 14 15:21:22 15
16
outgoing, those outings, Mr. Sweeney? A.
17
As I said before, if an invoice went to accounts, it would be looked at by accounts.
18
Q. 875
Well what does that mean, Mr. Sweeney?
19
A.
Well what I'm trying to say is that the accountancy side of the business would
15:21:50 20
21
have looked at that. Q. 876
Well assuming I'm a junior clerk in the accounts department of Monarch,
22
Mr. Sweeney. And I receive on my desk an invoice for a strategy plan for a
23
company, Comex, for 28,300 pounds on the 21st of March 1990. Do I
24
automatically pay it?
15:22:14 25
A.
Well you wouldn't bring it to my attention. Because I was out in Tallaght.
26
Q. 877
Well -- ?
27
A.
Trying to get the --
28
Q. 878
Had you no phones in Tallaght?
29
A.
Yes, there were phones in Tallaght.
Q. 879
And if I didn't know what services were provided by Comex Corporation, surely
15:22:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
135 15:22:31 1
in the first instance I would have to find out what services had been provided
2
by this company; isn't that right?
3
A.
You would, if you were.
4
Q. 880
Yes?
A.
A junior in the accounts department.
Q. 881
And I'd have to ring somebody and say well what services did this company
15:22:40 5
6 7
provide and --
8
A.
Well you wouldn't ask me, with all due respect.
9
Q. 882
And who would I ask?
A.
You would ask the accounts department.
11
Q. 883
But I'm in accounts, Mr. Sweeney.
12
A.
You're a junior in accounts. You would ask a senior person within accounts.
13
Q. 884
And who is the most senior person within accounts?
14
A.
Mr. Glennane would be.
Q. 885
So therefore Mr. Glennane, in the first instance, would have to know that Comex
15:22:51 10
15:23:04 15
16
Corporation had provided some services for the L & C Properties; isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
I'm not saying it did. But I would presume he would.
19
Q. 886
As a matter of probability, he should have known; isn't that right? And if he
15:23:24 20
didn't know somebody else would have to provide the information?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 887
Now, Mr. Glennane has told the Tribunal he knows nothing of these payments.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 888
Does that surprise you?
A.
Yes.
Q. 889
In any event, you're telling the Tribunal you did not know that these payments
15:23:34 25
26 27
had been made at this time; isn't that right? But it doesn't surprise you that
28
some payments would have been made, having regard to the level of input of
29
Mr. Lawlor at the time. Is that correct?
15:23:53 30
A.
That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
136 15:23:53 1
Q. 890
Now, I think you have advised the Tribunal.
2 3
If I could have 4536.
4 15:24:03 5
That in September I think 1993. Mr. Lawlor got involved with the Monarch
6
interest in relation to a project in Prague; is that correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 891
And we see there a memo to you from Mr. Philip Monahan. That is to say you,
9
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray; isn't that right? Enclosing information received
15:24:30 10
from Ambrose Kelly, via Liam Lawlor, for your information. Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 892
And was that a request that Monarch might get involved in Prague?
13
A.
I can't surmise from that what information he's providing.
14
Q. 893
Yes?
A.
But the answer is around about that time we did get involved in Prague.
16
Q. 894
And you got involved in Prague at Mr. Lawlor's invitation; is that right?
17
A.
I personally had been to Prague.
18
Q. 895
Sorry?
19
A.
I personally had been to Prague.
Q. 896
Had you been to Prague by September '93?
A.
Yes, I'd been there several times. And I'd looked at the property scene
15:24:49 15
15:25:10 20
21 22
myself. And I'd suggested it at some stage to the Board as being a
23
possibility, along with, if I may say, other areas in the world. So Prague
24
when it did come up, it wasn't a surprise to me. And I was very enthused by
15:25:38 25
26
it. Q. 897
27
And who else was involved in that consortium other than Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Kelly and the Monarch Group? Was --
28
A.
Um, we're talking about the space of a good few months now, so ....
29
Q. 898
Yes?
A.
You definitely had Jack Whelan. And you had Frank Dunlop. Noel Murray.
15:25:54 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
137 15:26:02 1
Phil Monahan. Connor McElligott, who worked for, he was an architect who
2 3
worked for Liam Lawlor. Q. 899
4 15:26:21 5
6
He worked for Mr. Lawlor in Prague or did he work for Mr. Lawlor here, can you remember?
A.
In Prague.
Q. 900
Right. And I think the arrangement was that a sum of 6,000 a month would be
7
paid by Monarch; isn't that right? As a contribution. And at least one
8
payment was made.
9 15:26:31 10
If we could have 5754, please.
11 12
Mr. Murray forwards 6,000, being the November contribution
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 901
And we see that cheque at 4755?
A.
Yes.
Q. 902
How long did the Monarch Group remain committed to the Ambrose Kelly
15:26:43 15
16 17 18
partnership and the Prague venture, Mr. Sweeney? A.
19
It wasn't long. I recall being out there in '93. I think it was November '93. And with a bunch of them. And they all went off and looked at millions
15:27:14 20
of jobs. Whereas, I concentrated on the one job in -- called the Alpha
21
Building, which is the one that enthused me. And I wanted really to get
22
involved in that, because I saw great possibilities. When I got back I
23
instructed the in-house development team to prepare, in conjunction with
24
Ambrose Kelly and a Swedish company, an outline scheme for which we could do
15:27:47 25
feasibility studies and stackups. The result of that still looked good. And
26
on the opposite end, the legal end was coming along nicely. And for some
27
reason, I think in early '94, March maybe '94, the whole thing fizzled out.
28
Much to my disappointment.
29
Q. 903
Yes.
15:28:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
138 15:28:10 1
If we could have 5402, please.
2 3
Mr. Monahan was written to by Rotary who I think were also involved in the
4
project, referring to a meeting of the 20th, where Mr. Monahan had advised that
15:28:22 5
he no longer wished to be an investor in the Alfa project. Isn't that right?
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 904
That slightly post dates?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 905
The period referred to by you. Do you recall any payment to Ms. Hazel Lawlor
15:28:38 10
in November 1993 by the Monarch Group?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 906
If we could have, please, 4880.
13 14
You see in the bottom left hand corner a reference to Hazel Lawlor, 3,000
15:29:01 15
pounds.
Do you see that?
16
A.
No, I don't.
17
Q. 907
And if we could have 1201, please. And again, the bottom. Third from the
18
end, there appears to be a Hazel Lawlor payment on the 30th of April '94 of
19
3,000 pounds. Do you see that?
15:29:19 20
21
A.
Is that the same payment?
Q. 908
The earlier payment is November '93. This payment appears to be dated April
22
'94 but may in fact have been reversed out in later in April '94.
23
A.
No, I have no knowledge of those.
24
Q. 909
Yes. If we could have 1202.
15:29:43 25
26
This shows a lodgement on the 23rd of November '93 of 3,000 pounds to a bank
27
account. Do you see that? Do you have any knowledge of any such payment to
28
Mr. or Mrs. Lawlor?
29 15:30:01 30
A.
Not at all.
Q. 910
Now, there were further meetings I think throughout late '93 with Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
139 15:30:15 1
and I will in time be coming to deal with the payments to Mr. Dunlop. And
2
you've heard Mr. Dunlop's evidence this morning. I'm not just going to deal
3
with that just now. But on the 28th of July 1994.
4 15:30:19 5
If we could have 1641.
6 7
There appears to be a 199 -- 28th of July 1994 payment to a Lawlor A and L.
8 9
And again if we could have 5279, please.
15:30:35 10
11
Do you see that? A 3,000 pounds payment. That appears to have been a payment
12
to Mr. Lawlor. Do you know anything about that?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 911
On the 5th of January 1995.
15:30:47 15
16
If I could have 5522, please.
17 18
There's a payment of 2,500 to Mr. Liam Lawlor. Do you see that? And if I
19
could get the cheque up, please. 5523.
15:31:07 20
Do you see the cheque made payable to L Lawlor? You see that, do you?
21
A.
I see that.
22
Q. 912
Did you have anything to do with that payment?
23
A.
No, nothing at all.
24
Q. 913
You see Mr. Glennane's signature I think on the cheque. And then I think
15:31:27 25
there's another signature on the cheque. Whose is the other signature?
26
A.
I can recognise Mr. Glennane's but I'm not sure about the other one.
27
Q. 914
And that cheque seems to have been negotiated at P Murphy, Lounge Bar,
28 29 15:31:45 30
Inchicore but you know nothing about the cheque? A.
I heard all about this in the Tribunal.
Q. 915
At 6050. There's a further cheque of 1,000 pounds. Do you know anything Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
140 15:31:51 1
about that cheque to Mr. Liam Lawlor, golf classic?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 916
Did you ever attend any of Mr. Lawlor's fundraising golf classics?
4
A.
No, none at all.
Q. 917
Now, there are a series of entries in Monarch Properties Services accounts.
15:32:02 5
6
If I could have 4763. In relation to Prauge. You see Prague strategic
7
studies. Do you know anything about those payments, Mr. Sweeney?
8
A.
Prague strategic studies. 1293. No, they don't mean anything to me .
9
Q. 918
Who would be the best person within the Monarch Group to advise the Tribunal in
15:32:44 10
11
relation to those entries? A.
12 13
that, you know. Q. 919
14 15:33:02 15
A.
Well I suppose anyone Senior in the accountancy department would be able to understand those.
Q. 920
18 19
Who was the expert within the Monarch Group in relation to those sheets and suppliers?
16 17
In fact, I'm quite confused about the particular sheets, suppliers and all
Certainly it's not within the realm of my expertise.
Yes. Now, in 1980 -- in June of 1989, Mr. Sweeney, the Cherrywood lands were acquired; isn't is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 921
Did you know that Mr. Monahan was interested in acquiring those lands?
21
A.
No, it came as a surprise to us when it eventually was ...
22
Q. 922
It surprised you that he had acquired them, or was interested?
23
A.
Yes, it was bought by tender.
24
Q. 923
Yes?
A.
So we kind of knew.
26
Q. 924
You knew that they were for sale; is that right?
27
A.
Um.
28
Q. 925
You knew that they were for sale by tender?
29
A.
Certainly.
Q. 926
Did you discuss it, did Mr. Monahan discuss it with you the prospect of the
15:33:27 20
15:33:41 25
15:33:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
141 15:33:56 1
Monarch Group buying these lands?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 927
Does that surprise you?
4
A.
No, because this had happened before.
Q. 928
Who would Mr. Monahan have discussed the purchase of these lands with, within
15:34:01 5
6
the company?
7
A.
Within the company I -- maybe nobody within the company.
8
Q. 929
Who outside of the company might he -- might he have discussed the lands, the
9 15:34:17 10
acquisition with? A.
11
Well in this case, I know from reading the files that he was dealing with a gentleman called McCarthy.
12
Q. 930
Who was Mr. McCarthy?
13
A.
He was a -- I didn't hear of him until then. He was also a developer and it
14 15:34:42 15
looked as if he was also interested in the lands in a joint venture capacity. Q. 931
16 17
Mr. Monahan in Somerton? A.
18 19
Was he one of the people like Mr. Whelan and Mr. Lynn who would meet up with
Well he certainly would have been in Somerton. But he wouldn't have been an agent, he was more like a developer.
Q. 932
15:35:08 20
Yes. Now, I think just at the outset, in relation to the Cherrywood lands, you take credit for convincing the Council to rezone the lands; isn't that
21
right?
22
A.
Well, no.
23
Q. 933
You don't?
24
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 934
I'm -- could I have 8063. I'm surprised that you say that, Mr. Sweeney.
15:35:18 25
26
Because again I'm going to quote to you extracts from your affidavit to the
27
High Court.
28 29 15:35:38 30
You say, by way of background. I say that Cherrywood Limited is involved in a commercial and residential property development at Cherrywood County Dublin. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
142 15:35:51 1
The development itself only became possible after "I" succeed in the convincing
2
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council to rezone the property in question for
3
industrial commercial and residential purposes. Residential uses
4
A.
15:36:01 5
Certainly no one can take personal control or credit for that. But I did. And what I meant by that was that I did put forward very strongly the Science
6
and Technology Park ethos which eventually resulted in the zoning of the
7
non-residential bit.
8
Q. 935
9
And we'll get to that, Mr. Sweeney. But what I had put to you and what you denied and I'm not sure whether you still deny it. That you take
15:36:21 10
responsibility for having succeeded in convincing Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
11
Council to rezone the property in question for industrial commercial and
12
residential use.
13
A.
14
Yeah, I don't think that is exactly what I meant. What I meant was that I was responsible for the science and technology end. And that's not to say that I
15:36:46 15
wasn't very instrumental in the residential end also. Because we did present
16
a very, very good case. But I couldn't take personal control or personal
17
credit for it.
18
Q. 936
19 15:37:11 20
Mr. Sweeney, this development and the rezoning of these lands reflected a significant added a value to the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
A.
May I say, Mr. Chairman. When we're talking about rezoning. I've noticed
21
this point coming up before. In terms of increased density, I was very much a
22
team effort. But in terms of the rezoning of the agricultural to industrial,
23
I did feel that I had an enormous input into that. Excuse me .
24
Q. 937
15:37:39 25
Thank you, Mr. Sweeney. The question I put to you, Mr. Sweeney, was that the rezoning and the development of these lands represented a significant added
26
value to the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 938
Were you happy with the initial purchase or acquisition of the lands?
29
A.
Um, I wouldn't say happiness would come into it.
Q. 939
Well were you critical of the decision to buy the lands?
15:38:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
143 15:38:05 1
A.
Um, I looked at it as a very difficult challenge.
2
Q. 940
For example, the price paid for the lands, I understand was nine/10 million?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 941
In 1989?
A.
Yes, roughly 50,000 pounds an acre.
6
Q. 942
I think agricultural land was five or six thousand an acre at this time ?
7
A.
This wasn't agricultural land.
8
Q. 943
Slightly better than agricultural land from a zoning point of view, isn't that
15:38:16 5
9 15:38:30 10
right? A.
No, I think the price didn't deter me , or didn't put me off.
11
Q. 944
Was the price unjustifiably high at the time ?
12
A.
No, I don't believe so. It was a high price but someone's always going to pay
13 14 15:38:47 15
16
a high price. Q. 945
You wouldn't say it was an unjustifiably high price?
A.
No, because it was zoned. And it had a great potential.
Q. 946
If I could have 8081.
17 18
This again is an extract from an affidavit sworn by you. And it's in the
19
brief Mr. Sweeney.
15:38:59 20
21
Paragraph 27. By way of background, I say that the price of 10 million
22
pounds, paid for the Cherrywood lands which was negotiated by Mr. Monahan was
23
at the time an unjustifiably high price. And I would be the first to agree
24
that this undoubtedly placed financial constraints upon the group.
15:39:18 25
26 27
I put to you, Mr. Sweeney, your very own sworn statement. A.
28 29 15:39:36 30
Well possibly at the time it could have been that. But certainly in looking back it wasn't. It's now two million an acre.
Q. 947
And you went on to say, that the purchase of the lands at such a high price with no appreciable zoning left me with an enormous task to accomplish. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
144 15:39:42 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 948
It didn't leave the company, it left you Mr. Sweeney with the task?
3
A.
Sorry for being so objective.
4
Q. 949
Over the next six years however together with the development team I succeeded
15:39:50 5
in having the zoning for the property changed, so as to significantly enhance
6
the value of the group; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 950
If we revert to 8063, please.
9 15:40:03 10
I think you say in that affidavit that, the development was without doubt the
11
single most valuable and significant asset within the Monarch Group. Upon
12
which you worked diligently for over six years to become the main Monarch
13
development, with a net value of approximately 12 million. If retained the
14
development should yield to the Monarch Group a fee income over the next seven
15:40:30 15
years of approximately five million, in respect of the group's total project
16
management, marketing and letting input, excluding a provision for property
17
management income , estimated at 130, 000 pounds per annum, together with a
18
potential development profit for the Monarch Group of 20 million,
19
approximately. They are the type of figures we're talking about isn't that
15:40:54 20
21 22
right? A.
Yes. Now, when the lands were --
23 24
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman, I'm just wondering in relation to this.
15:40:58 25
26
I'm not critical of Mr. Quinn at all. He is quoting from this affidavit which
27
is sworn in 1996. I just don't know if it's come out yet. That that's when
28
this affidavit was actually sworn.
29 15:41:10 30
CHAIRMAN: We're aware that this is a '96 document. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
145 15:41:14 1
2
Q. 951
MR. QUINN: If I could have 2128, please.
3 4
You set out in your statement the works that the Monarch Group would have been
15:41:32 5
involved in in 1989, isn't that right? And we see there the submission for the
6
development of the Tallaght Hospital, completion of the west link industrial
7
estate, Navan shopping centre, phase two, reverse take over of Europe Green,
8
development of Phoenix Park Race Course, Blackrock Business Park, Somerton,
9
Castleknock House refurbishment, purchase of Cherrywood, Cabinteely, Tallaght
15:41:54 10
civic offices and the Tallaght swimming pool/leisure centre. They are all of
11
the activities that the group were involved in in 199; isn't that right? Did
12
you know that when the lands were acquired that they had the zoning
13
difficulties that you had to overcome over the succeeding years?
14 15:42:21 15
A.
When the lands were acquired? No, I didn't know the full extent of them.
Q. 952
Did you know, for example, that Mr. Monahan had visited the Minister not long
16
after the acquisition of the lands, on the 24th of May '89. At 7661.
17 18 19 15:42:42 20
It's a diary entry for Mr. Flynn for 5 p.m. meeting on the 24th. A.
No, I didn't know at the time.
Q. 953
Mr. Monahan never discussed with you the fact that he was going to meet the
21
Minister at this time ?
22
A.
No, not that I recall.
23
Q. 954
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you his meetings with Ministers or
24 15:42:57 25
politicians? A.
26
Um, I suppose yes, but I don't recall too many of them. In fact, I don't recall any of them hardly.
27
Q. 955
You don't recall any of the discussions?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 956
But such discussions would have taken place, is that fair to say?
A.
I can't recall. At the moment I can't recall a single instance of him talking
15:43:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
146 15:43:23 1
to me about visiting a politician.
2
Q. 957
Either proposing to visit a politician or having visited a politician?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 958
And it's not just any politician. He's visiting the Minister for the
15:43:35 5
Environment; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 959
Do you know why Mr. Monahan visited the Minister for the Environment, on the
8 9
24th of May 1989? A.
No.
Q. 960
You can't?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 961
Could it have been in the context of the Cherrywood lands which he had just
15:43:50 10
13 14 15:44:04 15
acquired? A.
It could have been.
Q. 962
Now, I think that you asked or Mr. Monahan in the first instance asked Mr.
16
McCabe. Mr. McCabe is the planner that used by the Monarch Group, isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 963
And we see that request. Sorry, the advices given by Mr. McCabe on 16th of
15:44:21 20
May '89. At 2846.
21 22
And I think Mr. McCabe was to subsequently write to you on the 7th of June '89.
23
At 2852. In relation to the development possibility. And at that stage the
24
Development Plan was under review by the Council, isn't that right?
15:44:51 25
A.
In 1989?
26
Q. 964
In 1989.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 965
He's writing to Mr. Monahan and he's writing to you, presumably.
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 966
Yeah. You had a meeting with him on the 1st of June. You don't recall that?
15:45:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
147 15:45:04 1
2
A.
Sorry, I really don't know.
Q. 967
Yes. Well this letter of the 7th of June, it's on screen, refers to a meeting
3
on the 1st of June. And it wouldn't be unusual presumably that you would meet
4
with the planner, consultant planner, being employed by you at that time , to
15:45:20 5
discuss the --
6
A.
It's like 16 years ago.
7
Q. 968
I appreciate that, Mr. Sweeney. But it wouldn't be unusual that as having
8 9 15:45:29 10
regard to the position within the company? A.
No.
Q. 969
And having regard to the fact that your company and with regard to the fact
11
that your company had just spent 10 million on a site acquisition that you
12
would speak with a planner in relation to its potential?
13
A.
Well what I see there is what would normally happen.
14
Q. 970
Yes.
A.
A planning consultant would have been brought in.
16
Q. 971
Yes.
17
A.
Albeit after.
18
Q. 972
Yes.
19
A.
The purchase.
Q. 973
Yes.
21
A.
Possibly before the purchase.
22
Q. 974
Yes.
23
A.
But after the purchase. And he would have given his overview when work was,
15:45:42 15
15:45:50 20
24 15:46:02 25
the potential of the site that. Would then have passed over to me . Q. 975
Yes.
26
A.
And then I would have then passed it over to others.
27
Q. 976
Yes. You see, Mr. McCabe, when he gave evidence, has given evidence of all of
28 29 15:46:18 30
these advices? A.
Yes.
Q. 977
But he felt it unusual. And I think it's -- I suspect that you're saying that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
148 15:46:18 1
it's also unusual that you would go to Mr. McCabe after you had bought the
2
lands?
3
A.
Most certainly.
4
Q. 978
Yes. Now, Mr. McCabe's advice at the time then that it would be better that
15:46:28 5
the zoning could be secured in the initial draft plan. Wasn't that his
6
immediate advice to you? That if it came on the draft plan, that was the best
7
way to proceed?
8
A.
9
Well, the one thing I would say there, Mr. Chairman isn't that all of this terminology about draft plans and motions and this and that, weren't familiar
15:46:51 10
to me at the time. I was more into the construction end of it. I had to
11
become familiar, and I did become familiar. But at that time I wasn't clear
12
at all about what a draft plan was even.
13
Q. 979
This is in 1989?
14
A.
In 1989.
Q. 980
So would it be fair to say that you had no real familiarity with the zoning
15:47:10 15
16
process?
17
A.
No, I'm a quantity surveyor. Not a planning surveyor.
18
Q. 981
Of course Mr. Lynn, because of his employment with the local authority, he
19 15:47:26 20
21
would have quite extensive knowledge of the process? A.
Yes, this is true.
Q. 982
And Mr.-- we see as I say, that on the 7th of June, '89. You got advices in
22
relation to the potential. And I think there were a series of meetings and at
23
which the development of the site were considered; isn't that right? And if we
24
look at 2992. This is a meeting on the 18th of August '89. And it's
15:47:54 25
attended by Fergal McCabe, Dr. Brian Meehan, who I think was another planner.
26
Your associates I think were a firm of well represented engineers. And then
27
yourself and Mr. Cassidy and Mr. Lynn also attended; isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 983
Would you agree with me, Mr. Sweeney, that from here on this in, that is to say
15:48:12 30
from June 1989 forward. That the objective from Monarch's point of view is to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
149 15:48:18 1
improve the development potential of these lands by improving their zoning
2
and/or getting planning on the lands; isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 984
And in order to do that, from time to time strategies have to be devised as to
15:48:34 5
6
how best to achieve those objectives; isn't that right? A.
7
Well, again, to use the word strategy. There's nothing wrong with the word strategy.
8
Q. 985
I'm not suggesting there is, Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
Yes, certainly, strategy.
Q. 986
In a commercial sense you have an objective. You device a strategy to achieve
15:48:51 10
11
that objective isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes. You try to plan your way out of it.
13
Q. 987
Yes. And the strategy is devised by you at this meeting in August '89. And
14
we see you there in the centre of the memo of that meeting was to move the
15:49:11 15
roadway, increase the density of housing, provide for a retail shopping centre
16
and provide for a business park. They were the objectives and the strategy
17
was to achieve those objectives; isn't that right?
18
A.
Those are the objectives that are laid down.
19
Q. 988
And again, nothing at all wrong with that. It was a --
A.
No.
Q. 989
And again, I think that on the 11th of August '89 Mr. McCabe wrote again to
15:49:33 20
21 22
you. If we look at 2894. And I don't propose to go in in any detail to his
23
advises to you but he was more or less advising you on how a case might be made
24
to achieve some of those objectives; isn't that right?
15:49:56 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 990
And amongst the strategies that you would have to devise, or one of the
27
strategies, I suggest to you, apart from retaining experts, both in-house and
28
outhouse, so to speak, would be to develop some sort of rapore with the
29
planners and find out how they were, what their views were on the site and its
15:50:18 30
development; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
150 15:50:19 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 991
And one obvious way of doing that would be to set up a meeting with the
3 4 15:50:25 5
planners; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 992
And such a meeting did take place I think on the 29th of August 1989. If I
6
could have 2902.
7 8
Did Mr. McCabe or Mr. Lynn advise you that they had difficulty setting up a
9
meeting with the planners in August 1989?
15:50:42 10
A.
11 12
setting up meeting with planners. Q. 993
13 14 15:51:07 15
Um, I can't imagine that they did. Because there's never been any difficulty
Yes. You see, when you were dealing with Tallaght and Mr. Lawlor's involvement. I got the impression, and maybe wrongly, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Yes.
Q. 994
That Mr. Lawlor was necessary in order to advise you who to meet and where you
16
should go, despite the fact that you had all of these experts; isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
Yes, but not on the planning end.
19
Q. 995
Not on the planning end?
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 996
What about the Roads Department?
22
A.
Yes, certainly, the roads, the sewers.
23
Q. 997
One of the difficulties with this site was a roads difficulty; isn't that
15:51:11 20
24 15:51:22 25
right? A.
Yes, there were three main difficulties. One was roads. One was --
26
Q. 998
Sewage?
27
A.
One was access and one was sewage.
28
Q. 999
And one was zoning?
29
A.
Well the zoning was there.
Q. 1000
Yes. But not for a --
15:51:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
151 15:51:35 1
A.
Just to clarify, Mr. Chairman. The zoning was there. And the zoning had an
2
arbitrary line down it, which meant that the zoning -- you see, I find it hard
3
to explain this. But if you imagine a field with a line down it and one side
4
of it is housing and the other side of it is agriculture. It's a pretty well
15:52:00 5
established fact and principle, that if you go for planning with a business on
6
the other side of the line. Then the planners are quite open to that, as
7
would be An Bord Pleanala. Because it's kind of an overlap. And there's no
8
logic to making one half of a field agriculture and the other half housing.
9
So I was quite comfortable with that from a planning point of view.
15:52:32 10
Q. 1001
At 2177, you set out your dealings with local authorities concerning re zoning,
11
planning permission, acquisitions, disposal of lands. Again, from your
12
statement. I think throughout that page, 2177 and for at least half the
13
following page, at 2178. You set out various people and personnel that you
14
would have had contact with and within outside local authorities, isn't that
15:52:55 15
right? In relation to rezonings?
16
A.
No, in relation to planning.
17
Q. 1002
Planning. And in relation to the Cherrywood rezoning. If I could have 2181
18
and in fairness to you, Mr. Sweeney. I better put to you what you -- just to
19
develop what you were telling the Tribunal. You set it out there.
15:53:17 20
21
I think that the -- your view was -- you say that when Monarch bought the lands
22
in 1989 by tender, the majority of the zoning was for one house per acre on
23
septic tanks. On the face of this seemed to be a ludicrous and elitist zoning
24
density, but the reality was very different. And it was generally known and
15:53:36 25
crystal clear from advice from planning consultants and indeed the planners
26
themselves the that the professional planners did not intend such a
27
zoning/planning to be performed or executed in practice, rather the
28
planners/officials fully intended and in fact had themselves recommended normal
29
density since the 1983 Development Plan and indeed in previous history back to
15:53:55 30
1972, the one house per acre was in fact an artificial density Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
152 15:53:59 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 1003
You go on to say that the real reason for the zoning of one house per acre on
3
septic tank was to avoid the strong possibility of a compensation claim for
4
developers further to refusal permission non-availability of services, such as
15:54:11 5
sewers water etc...In the case of Cherrywood the foul sewer has not yet been
6
completed and the lack of the sewer could have been used by a developer to
7
claim substantial compensation from the local authority as has been the case in
8
several other circumstances in the past.
9 15:54:26 10
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 1004
And you go on to say that, in your view, to suggest that the increase of
13
existing density on septic tanks from one house to four houses per acre indeed
14
six-hours per acre, was in any way against the policy of the planning
15:54:39 15
department or officials is very misleading and is wrong. This is very clearly
16
reflected in the recommendations of planning officials and planners in Dublin
17
County Council and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, throughout the past
18
12 years in all of the Development Plans.
19 15:54:52 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 1005
We spoke about difficulties that you had with meeting representatives or
21
officials in the Council. And you say that there were no difficulties meeting
22
the Planning Department. What about the Roads Department?
23
A.
24 15:55:15 25
There was no difficulties in meeting with them. The difficulties were in trying to get some result out of a meeting with them.
Q. 1006
And that's where Mr. Lawlor came in; is it?
26
A.
In Cherrywood?
27
Q. 1007
No, generally.
28
A.
In generally, no. The difficulties in The Square in Tallaght, were much
29 15:55:34 30
different, in that it was exacerbated by the fact that Dublin County Council owned the land and Dublin Corporation had the site inside it. And that meant Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
153 15:55:41 1
that you were dealing with all of them. And that was very, very tortuous, but
2 3
in Cherrywood that didn't happen at all. Q. 1008
4
Now, I think on the -- I think on the 4th of September '89. At 8799 we see the transfer and conveyance of the property to Perivale Limited, which became
15:56:04 5
Cherrywood Properties Limited, isn't that right? By Mr. Galvin?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 1009
And I think by October 1989 although they had not yet been involved at an
8
official level. GRE Properties at 8798.
9 15:56:24 10
Referred to previous meetings and discussions and conversations regarding a
11
possible involvement in relation to the site, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 1010
And I think that that letter was to lead on to a more formal agreement in 1990.
14 15:56:41 15
16
December 1990 between Monarch and GRE, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 1011
And I can if necessary open all of those agreements. But in a nutshell would
17
you agree with me ?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1012
That it more or less resulted in an agreement to be jointly involved in the
15:56:52 20
development of the lands that Monarch Properties Services Limited were going to
21
provide the development services for the lands and that the fees would be
22
shared 50/50; is that correct?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 1013
And I think it was also intended, as appears from the very last sentence of
15:57:15 25
that letter. That Monarch would be prepared to pay a million pounds once
26
Cherrywood had achieved sales or pre planning sales of 10 million, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
Could you repeat that again.
29
Q. 1014
Sorry. The last sentence of the second last paragraph. It says, however as I
15:57:29 30
feel we should have perhaps moved more quickly to make the monies for this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
154 15:57:35 1
transaction available. We would be willing to make an extra 1 million once
2
Cherrywood had achieved sales or pre planning permission sales of 10 million to
3
the joint venture. Isn't that right?
4 15:57:53 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 1015
Now, I think in time the submissions prepared by Mr. McCabe and Mr. Meehan and
6
you were submitted isn't that right? To the planners.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1016
In fact, they were initially advised in the July of Monarch's interest in the
9
lands. I think at 2192, on the 20th of October '89, following on meetings
15:58:19 10
with Mr. Davin, draft structural plans were forwarded, isn't that right? And
11
then ultimately I think on the 27th of November '89 a draft plans were sent
12
forward for consideration. And they are at 2898. Again, I don't propose to
13
go into those unless you require me to do so, isn't that right?
14 15:58:41 15
A.
No, that's fine.
Q. 1017
But on the 22nd of November '89 I think Mr. Monahan had a second meeting with
16
the Minister, isn't that right? At 7663. We see the Department of the
17
Minister is -- did Mr. Monahan discuss that meeting with the Minister with you?
18
Do you see 4:15 P Monaghan?
19 15:59:00 20
A.
I have no recollection of that.
Q. 1018
You have no recollection of the meeting, or you have no recollection of a
21
discussion concerning the meeting?
22
A.
Of the discussion or of the meeting.
23
Q. 1019
Yes. And then I think at 2128 you set out in your statement the developments
24
that you were involved in. And the various interests that you had throughout
15:59:21 25
1990; isn't that right? And they included development in Wales, there were at
26
least four of them, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1020
Science and Technology Park. Proposals for the Cherrywood Science Park,
29 15:59:36 30
American Movie Corporation, negotiations conducted in the relation to Tallaght town centre, Malahide Road neighbourhood centres, Jervis shopping Street Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
155 15:59:41 1
centre, developments of a shopping centre in Madrid, Glasgow 17 million
2
comprising an 8 acre site bordering on the Forth of Clyde canal. Gobles
3
shopping centre Glasgow, Waterford shopping centre, Dundalk town centre,
4
Bachelor's Walk development. In October 1990 the opening of The Square in
15:59:59 5
Tallaght. They were all projects being undertaken by the Monarch Group in
6
1990, isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1021
I think on the 24th of January 1990 you had a further meeting in relation to
9
the Cherrywood lands. And we see those at 2954.
16:00:16 10
11
And one of the issues at this stage that you were considering was a possible
12
application for outline permission on the site, isn't that right
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 1022
And the advice of Mr. McCabe. And I think advice that you took on board at
16:00:27 15
the time. Was that such an application was premature?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 1023
Since the planners themselves hadn't worked out a strategy for the site, isn't
18 19
that right? A.
Well mainly because of the access to sewers etc...
16:00:39 20
21
CHAIRMAN: All right, Mr. Quinn, it's four o'clock. So we'll rise.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Ten o'clock tomorrow morning?
24 16:00:59 25
CHAIRMAN: Yes. Will Mr. Sweeney finish tomorrow do you anticipate or?
26 27
MR. QUINN: There's a possibility that he may not finish tomorrow. I don't
28
know who has -- I don't know who is proposing to cross-examine him and for how
29
long.
16:01:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
156 16:01:03 1
2
CHAIRMAN: I'm sure there will be some cross-examination. Because we may. There is a suggestion that we might sit next week for a day even.
3 4 16:01:18 5
MR. QUINN: I understand that Mr. Sweeney is available on Monday and Tuesday of next week but isn't available thereafter, for the rest of the month.
6 7
MR. SHIPSEY: Sorry, Mr. Sweeney leaves first thing on Wednesday morning.
8
And obviously he will make himself available. Preference would be for Monday.
9
But ...
16:01:32 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Well we'll see. Perhaps there could be some discussion between
12
the legal teams tomorrow to make a decision. We'll sit, there is a slight
13
preference for Tuesday. It doesn't really make an awful lot of difference.
14 16:01:49 15
MR. SHIPSEY: Thank you.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: All right?
18 19
MR. SHIPSEY: Thank you.
16:02:04 20
21 22 23 24 16:03:57 25
26
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, FRIDAY, 30TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.
27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
09:43:13
10:08:25
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
30TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Sir.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
9 10:08:28 10
MR. EDWARD SWEENEY, ALREADY SWORN, CONTINUED TO BE QUESTIONED
11
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Sweeney.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. Sweeney.
16
A.
Good morning.
17
Q. 2
Mr. Sweeney, yesterday we were speaking about the period 1990, and the position
10:08:42 15
18
of the Monarch Group vis-a-vis the Carrickmines lands.
19
to say that as you went into the early 1990s you were in a position where Mr.
10:09:04 20
And would it be fair
McCabe on your behalf had made submissions to the planners in relation to the
21
possible zoning for these lands? Isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 3
And I think one of the issues in addition to the zoning issue in relation to
24
the lands was the question of where the Southeastern Motorway might be sited in
10:09:23 25
relation to the lands.
Isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 4
And there were a number of different proposed lines for the road at that stage,
28
isn't that right? Some of which would have been advantageous to the
29
development of the site others of which would have been disastrous.
10:09:43 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't
10:09:43
10:10:07
2 1
A.
2 3
Q. 5
A.
10:10:25 10
Maybe I'm a bit excessive in disaster but certainly would have been less
Well if I may say so, Chairman, the object or the desire of Monarch was to get all of the lands within the cartilage of the new motorway.
Q. 6
8 9
I mean, the
advantageous from development or a rezoning point of view from the lands?
6 7
I don't quite agree that it would have been disastrous.
road was a moveable object.
4 5
No.
But one of the issues from your point of view, was where might the road be aligned, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 7
And you were anxious to find out what alignment might be put for -- on the
11
lands for the roadway, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 8
And if we could have 2956, on the 24th of January 1990, in a memo recording a
14
meeting at Monarch Properties, you, Mr. Sweeney, are recorded there under
10:10:46 15
heading paragraph No. 4.
As having stated that the political decision had
16
been made to align the motorway on the western edge of the site.
Although the
17
forward planners in roads and the planners were continuing meeting/discussions
18
options.
19 10:11:01 20
MR. SHIPSEY:
I don't think it's come up.
21 22
Q. 9
23
MR. QUINN: Sorry.
That's 2956.
If we go to paragraph No. 4, Mr. Sweeney.
24 10:11:10 25
Do you see under paragraph No. 4.
Do you see the middle paragraph? It was
26
stated by ES, who presumably you.
That the political decision had been made
27
to align the motorway on the western edge of the site.
Do you see that?
28
A.
I do see that.
29
Q. 10
That's a record of what you are reported to have said at that meeting, isn't
10:11:34 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:11:36
10:11:54
3 1
A.
Is the rest of that meeting there?
2
Q. 11
Yes.
If we could have the full document, please.
It's a document supplied
3
to the Tribunal by Muir Associates, who were, I understand, consultants
4
employed by Monarch, isn't that right?
5
A.
Is the second page there?
6
Q. 12
Yes.
7
A.
Yes, I don't recall making that statement.
If I could have 2957, please? And I find it perplexing,
8
Chairman, to think that anyone could have made a statement of that nature at
9
that time because my understanding is that the roadway was eventually decided
10:12:21 10
11
by an EIS prepared by the NRA, the National Roads Authority. Q. 13
And that was I think in 1997.
If we could have 2956 again, please.
Let's
12
look, Mr. Sweeney, at the other matters that are recorded on that memo and see
13
if they are correct.
14 10:12:43 15
Firstly it says "An extension has been requested by Dublin County Council to
16
the Minister for delay to presentation of the Draft Development Plan.
17
expected that it will now not go on the wall before October/November 1990."
18
In fact, I think it didn't go on the wall until September 1991, isn't that
19
right?
10:13:01 20
21
A.
I don't really have a memory of that.
Q. 14
Yes.
"Consideration was given to the submission to an outline planning
22
application now as the further delays are expensive."
23
given in the early 1990s to an outline planning application?
24
A.
10:13:22 25
26
It is
Yes, I recall that, Chairman.
Was there consideration
And the upshot of that was that it was
considered to be ... Q. 15
Premature.
We dealt with that yesterday, isn't that the right? Mr. McCabe's
27
advice to you was that an outlining planning application at this time would be
28
premature since the planners hadn't formulated a view as the zoning of the
29
lands, isn't that right?
10:13:44 30
A.
That's true. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:13:44
10:13:45
4 1
Q. 16
So that portion of the memo is correct, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 17
So it's possible that was said at a meeting in January 1990, isn't that
4
correct?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 18
And it's also possible -- sorry.
It was also the case that the Development
7
Plan was out of date at that stage and that the five year period would have to
8
be extended, isn't that right? I think we're dealing with the 1983 plan.
9
A.
10:14:03 10
I have to say I wasn't really up to all the Draft Development Plan stuff at that the stage.
11
Q. 19
Yeah.
12
A.
I was up to my neck in The Square in Tallaght.
13
Q. 20
"It was agreed that we would wait the publication of the Draft Development Plan
14 10:14:17 15
or at least an indication of the final structure of it." A.
I really can't recall that.
16
Q. 21
Yeah.
17
A.
It says it was agreed so ...
18
Q. 22
So it's probably true.
19
If we go to 2957, please:
sewer appears to be slipping backwards.
10:14:37 20
prioritised.
22
discussion on the sewer at this time?
McDaid has advised Richard Lynn that
This sewer does not fall into this category." Do you recall a
23
A.
Yes, I recall several discussions on the sewer.
24
Q. 23
Yeah.
10:14:54 25
The contract documents I think were being prepared within the council
at this stage.
26
The go ahead having been given on the 1st of May '89, isn't
that right by the department?
27
A.
If you say so.
28
Q. 24
Paragraph No. 6.
10:15:13 30
"The programme for the
there are sections of the county with overloaded systems that require to be
21
29
Was that agreed?
I don't have any memory of that. "A discussion took place in regard to the IDA's stated need
for a significant industrial land in the southeast of the city.
They have
about 40 acres in Carrickmines although no sewer and we have planned some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:15:18
10:15:30
5 1
industrial.
F McCabe discussed the option of mobilizing the IDA's support in
2
order to expedite the construction of the sewer."
3 4
Was there discussion about expediting the sewer by involvement of the IDA and
5
the possible zoning or proposed zoning of these lands for industrial purposes?
6
A.
7 8
Yes, Chairman.
May I say that all of these things are recorded in a meeting.
It's obvious that they were discussed. Q. 25
9
No.
But the reason I'm going through them, Mr. Sweeney, is that the one issue
that's recorded concerning you, you don't agree with.
If we could have 2956.
10:15:55 10
11
"It was stated by ES", who presumably is you.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 26
"That the political decision had been made to align the motorway on the western
14
edge of the site."
10:16:09 15
That's the one statement in that memo that you don't agree
with, Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah, I don't recall that.
17
Q. 27
Yeah.
18
A.
And I must say, how would I have known that?
19
Q. 28
Unless somebody in political circles told you, isn't that right?
A.
Well certainly no one in political circles told me anyway.
Q. 29
But certainly whoever wrote this memo had a recollection at this time of you
10:16:21 20
21 22
having said this Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
23
A.
The only thing I can say is that it's possibly not me that said it.
24
Q. 30
Well, were you present at a meeting in early 1990 when somebody at the meeting
10:16:41 25
advised the meeting that the political decision had been made to align the
26
motorway on the western edge of the site?
27
A.
Again, I note it there but I have no recollection of it.
28
Q. 31
No.
29 10:17:01 30
I know it's said here and it is stated here that you said it but you say
you didn't say it.
But what I'm asking you, Mr. Sweeney, is have you a
recollection of being at a meeting when somebody else might have said that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:17:04
10:17:19
6 1
A.
I don't have a recollection.
2
Q. 32
And can you proffer any explanation to the Tribunal as to why somebody within
3
Muir Associates would record that as having been said in the first instance and
4
that as having been said by you in particular?
5
A.
Could you go to the second page again?
6
Q. 33
2957, please.
7
A.
I'm not sure this is Muir Associates.
8
I wouldn't be sure that this is Muir
Associates minutes.
9 10:17:32 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
They've got my name wrong for a start ...
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
At the top of the first --
14 10:17:41 15
MR. QUINN: 2956 please.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
Sweeney.
19
A.
At the top of the first page, if it is you, you are down as G
Yes.
10:17:47 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Is that likely to be you or was there a G Sweeney
A.
It would definitely be me.
There's no other Sweeney as around.
Q. 34
MR. QUINN: Was there anybody else within the Monarch group that the had the
23 24 10:18:01 25
initials ES, that is somebody at a Senior level within Monarch?
26
A.
No, Chairman
27
Q. 35
In any event you have no recollection of stating this to the meeting or having
28 29 10:18:12 30
heard anybody else state it to that meeting? A.
No.
Q. 36
Now, I think that Mr. McCabe was able to say in March of 1990 that the western Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:18:23
10:18:45
7 1
most line was the option being considered.
If we have 2970.
He advised Mr.
2
Lynn I think in correspondence on the 2nd of March 1990 "That he now believed
3
for good reason that the motorway option selected by the planner road section
4
was the western most line." Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 37
And one of the problems for Monarch at this stage was the Carrickmines sewer
7
and having it come on line, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 38
And you were anxious to expedite the construction of the sewer, isn't that
10:19:01 10
correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 39
It was one of the key features of developing this site.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 40
In the services and Carrickmines sewer was probably one of the most important
10:19:12 15
necessary developments to facilitate housing or industrial development on the
16 17
site, isn't that right? A.
18 19
Q. 41
One was the
So therefore, a strategy would have to be designed to expedite the construction of the sewer, isn't that right?
A.
22
Strategy.
I think what had to happen there was, as much pressure had to be
put on to the local authority.
23
Q. 42
Yes.
24
A.
To do it.
Q. 43
Yes.
10:19:45 25
There were three criteria that were essential.
access, one was the road location and one was the sewer.
10:19:31 20
21
Yes, Chairman.
And one would be the strategy.
And one of the points of pressure being considered.
If we could have
26
2976.
27
Mr. Sweeney, and if we go to the second page, at 2977.
28
last paragraph.
29
be in a position to get a letter from Ikea requiring 100,000 square foot
10:20:12 30
This is a note of a meeting held on the 16th of March 1990.
It says ES, which is presumably you.
With you,
And if we look at the "Indicated that he may
development on the retail park, which could be used with the IDA to speed up Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:20:16
10:20:29
8 1
the drainage contracts or ML", whom I presume is Mr. Lynn "to make contact with
2
the IDA and ascertain whether they would back Ikea in their application."
3
you recall that type of discussion going on between yourself and Mr. Lynn?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 44
And that's a strategy discussion, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes, that's an attempt to ...
7
Q. 45
To expedite the sewage system?
8
A.
To accelerated the sewer.
9
Q. 46
Yes.
10:20:45 10
Do
And if we go to 2980, this is a meeting on the 3rd of May 1990, attended
by Dr. Meehan, who was the planner, Fergal McCabe planner yourself and Mr.
11
Lynn.
And again, under the heading "Carrickmines Valley sewage system".
12
you look at the last paragraph.
If
13 14
"It was agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the
10:20:59 15
Carrickmines sewerage scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F McCabe
16
indicated that -- and reference to another developer "would accompany ES", who
17
is presumably you, Mr. Sweeney.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 47
"to see Minister Flynn to indicate an overall need in the area."
10:21:14 20
right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 48
So this was another strategy at this stage, that is May 1990.
23 24
Isn't that
Namely, that
yourself and another developer would approach Minister Flynn, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 49
And did you approach Minister Flynn?
26
A.
No, I didn't.
27
Q. 50
And why not?
28
A.
Well, that appeared in a meeting.
29
Q. 51
But it was being considered in May 1990 that you would approach the Minister to
10:21:23 25
10:21:38 30
There was no action ever taken on it.
expedite the construction of the sewer.
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:21:40
10:22:07
9 1
A.
Yes, my understanding of, that Chairman, is that Fergal McCabe acted for a
2
number of landowners in the area.
3
effected by the progress of this sewer.
4
us should get together to go and see Minister Flynn.
5
That certainly didn't happen.
6
Q. 52
7
One of whom his land was also very deeply And he suggested really that both of Now, that didn't happen.
You didn't go to Minister Flynn. Did Mr. Monahan go to Minister Flynn at this time?
8
A.
That I'm not sure of.
9
Q. 53
We know that he did visit Minister Flynn twice in '89 June and again in
10:22:22 10
November and we saw those meetings yesterday, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 54
Now, another difficulty that you were having with the site at this time was the
13 14
access to the site, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 55
And we discussed the motorway and the alignment of the motorway?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 56
But I think that by July 1990 you had come to the conclusion that in fact not
10:22:30 15
18
just the line of the motorway required to be fixed but that the motorway itself
19
ought to be constructed, isn't that right?
10:22:45 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 57
And if we look at a meeting then on the 5th of July 1990, at 2985.
It's a
22
meeting between yourself and Mr. Lynn.
And if we go to 2986, under the
23
heading "access to the site".
24
"indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the motorway
10:23:08 25
established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the development
We see "RML" which presumably is Mr. Lynn
26
and recommended that contact be made at highest level i.e. ministerial level to
27
ascertain the position."
Do you see that, Mr. Sweeney?
28
A.
I do, yes.
29
Q. 58
This is yourself and Mr. Lynn now trying to devise a strategy in relation to
10:23:26 30
the construction of the motorway line, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:23:28
10:23:37
10 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 59
And the strategy that's being recommended to you by Mr. Lynn is another visit
3
to ministerial level, isn't that right, in relation to the matter?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 60
Did such a meeting take place?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 61
Why not?
8
A.
Well I was -- it didn't happen because I wasn't in the habit of going to see
9 10:23:57 10
ministers about roads and I would have no access. Q. 62
But there was discussion between yourself and Mr. Lynn in relation to the
11
possibility of meeting with ministers on two key issues which concerned the
12
development of the site, isn't that right?
13
A.
14
The whole purpose of trying to accelerated the three
obstacles was to reach into the air and see what could be done anywhere to
10:24:20 15
16
Certainly, yes.
accelerated them. Q. 63
And I think that we know that a memo was prepared within the Department of the
17
Environment in relation to an upcoming meeting between the minister and
18
Mr. Monahan on the 6th of December 1990.
19
This is an internal department memo which says:
If we could have 8511, please.
10:24:45 20
21
"We are awaiting the submission of contracts documents -- CD -- by Dublin
22
County Council for the Carrickmines Valley sewer scheme. The work on these is
23
substantially complete and the CD -- which presumably refers to contract
24
documents -- should be examined at the latest by sorry -- should be received at
10:25:02 25
the latest by January 1991.
A branch sewer to service the Cabinteely area
26
will service the something lands acquired by Monarch Properties.
This will
27
be -- will link the Shanganagh treatment works which is currently working at 25
28
percent capacity."
29 10:25:20 30
That's a memo being prepared within the department. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Would you agree with me
10:25:24
10:25:55
11 1
that by December 1990, it was anticipated that Mr. Monahan would meet with
2
Minister Flynn in relation to the Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme?
3
A.
I can't say that.
I can't say that at all.
4
Q. 64
Now, I think the planners presented their report to the council, isn't that
5
right? In November and December -- October and November 1990.
6
matters came to a head on the 6th of December 1990, isn't that correct?
7
A.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean.
8
Q. 65
Okay.
9
On the 6th -- could I have 3068, please.
And it came --
This is a letter,
Mr. Sweeney, written to you by Mr. McCabe following on a meeting he attended in
10:26:18 10
his capacity as a representative of the Planning Institute.
And a meeting
11
held with three politicians.
12
other and he wasn't sure but he thought that Mr. Wright was the third.
13
was on the eve of the vote on the 6th of December.
14
advising you of the outcome of that meeting.
10:26:46 15
He felt Mr. Lawlor was one, Mr. McGrath was the
And he's writing to you
Do you recall receiving that
letter, Mr. Sweeney?
16
A.
I don't recall it specifically, no.
17
Q. 66
Do you recall discussing the letter with Mr. McCabe?
18
A.
It's um, may I read it.
19
Q. 67
Yes.
10:27:00 20
21
And it
Certainly.
I'll get you a hard copy of it if it would be more
convenient. A.
Therefore our support is tenuous .... irritated? I can understand the context
22
of this now.
23
from whatever discussions he had (document handed to witness).
24
the councillors were a bit fed up that the council officials had gone ahead and
10:27:36 25
This is Fergal McCabe, planner, saying that he had understood
done a particular plan without consulting them.
26
That some of
I believe that's the context
of that.
27
Q. 68
And did you discuss the matter with Mr. McCabe?
28
A.
No, he's reporting to me.
29
Q. 69
I accept that but having received the letter did you speak with him concerning
10:27:51 30
its contents? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:27:52
10:28:06
12 1
A.
No, I don't think I did.
2
Q. 70
Yes.
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 71
Now, I think the agreements then were entered into between Cherrywood
Did you ever discuss the matter with Mr. Lawlor, for example?
5
Development Limited and Cherrywood Properties Limited, at 8808.
6
don't intend to go into those unless you require me to do so.
7
the joint development of the lands.
8
effectively in essence, it meant that you were going to share the costs of
9
development 50/50 and you were going to share the rewards on the development
10:28:32 10
And again, I
In relation to
It was a complex structure set up but
50/50, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 72
And I think there was a 1 million pounds bonus that we discussed yesterday when
13 14
planning came through, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I saw that yesterday.
Q. 73
Did you not know about that until yesterday?
16
A.
I did, I knew that.
17
Q. 74
So as we head into 1991, if I could have 2128, please.
10:28:41 15
You set out in your
18
statement the projects being developed at that time.
19
Russia, Moscow, Air Rianta shopping centre, St Petersburg bar and restaurant,
10:29:01 20
Developments of sites in
Clonskeagh Business Park, Singapore science park, isn't that right?
21
A.
Which year are you on?
22
Q. 75
I'm on 2128 the very bottom of the page, 1991.
23
A.
Oh, yes, yes.
24
Q. 76
You knew that the manager's proposals had been unsuccessful as of the 6th of
10:29:20 25
December 1990.
Isn't that right, Mr. Sweeney? The Manager had proposed wide
26
sweeping changes for the zoning of these lands in his map DP90/123, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
I don't recall that.
29
Q. 77
You don't recall that?
A.
No.
10:29:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:29:35
10:29:51
13 1
Q. 78
2
Did you not know the planning status of the lands or the zoning status of the lands in early 1991?
3
A.
I did.
4
Q. 79
You see, I would have understood, Mr. Sweeney, as the head of the project team
5
dealing with the -- and with overall responsibility for the site in Cabinteely,
6
that you would have been aware at every stage of the zoning status of these
7
lands and the proposed zoning options from the planners point of view in
8
relation to the lands?
9
A.
Yes, I was totally aware of the planning status of the --
10:30:12 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
effect that he didn't know the precise detail that you were putting to him in
13
relation, say, to the map.
14
I'm wrong, that you knew in general?
10:30:28 15
A.
Yeah.
I think, I understood Mr. Sweeney's reply to be to the
But I assume, and Mr. Sweeney can correct me if
Yes.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
What happened, what the sort of zoning history was?
Yes.
19 10:30:35 20
CHAIRMAN:
21 22
Although you mightn't now be in a position to say it was in
November of a particular year or December of a particular year. A.
Yes.
23 24 10:30:43 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Is that fair or?
Yes, Chairman.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
happening on such and such a date in relation to such and such a map, for
29
example.
10:30:53 30
A.
It's just that when Mr. Quinn put something to you about something
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:30:53
10:31:09
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
that you really don't know in even in general what's being, or that you're not
4
aware in general of what is being put to you or are you saying that you don't
5
know the precise detail, which is a slightly different thing?
6
A.
And you say well I'm not quite certain.
Do you mean to indicate
Well the only thing that I'm sure of is I did know that the zoning status of
7
the land in 1991 was one house per acre on septic tanks on two-thirds of the
8
land and one-third agricultural.
That is the extent of my knowledge.
9 10:31:31 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
A.
Of it.
Q. 80
MR. QUINN: And are you saying, are you telling the Tribunal, Mr. Sweeney, that
12 13 14
you did not know that the manager had proposed a comprehensive rezoning of the
10:31:42 15
lands in October and November 1990?
16
A.
1990?
17
Q. 81
Yes.
18
A.
No, I don't --
19
Q. 82
If we could have 6936.
10:31:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
you recall that there was a Planning Institute meeting.
23
A.
Just on that, Mr. Sweeney.
A few moments ago you said that
Yes.
24 10:32:00 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That Mr. McCabe reported on.
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
And where you understood the situation to be that the politicians, the
10:32:13 30
Between Mr. Lawlor and Mr. McGrath and perhaps another person.
councillors were complaining that the planning department had proposed plans Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:32:19
10:32:31
15 1 2
without consultation at that early stage with the councillors. A.
Yes, Chairman, that's what the letter says.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
have had some idea of what caused the concern to the councillors or the
6
disquiet amongst the councillors at the time.
7
zoned one house to the acre on septic tank.
8
A.
Yes.
But I took it from that, maybe I'm wrong, that he must
You knew that the lands were
Yes.
9 10:32:43 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that's the way it was from 1983, isn't that correct?
Yes.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
Internally.
10:32:55 15
A.
And we know that a review had commenced in '89 of the plan.
But you were meeting, certainly Mr. McCabe is reporting to you.
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
council.
19
A.
Having met some councillors and they are complaining about the
Yes.
10:33:00 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
gone on and made plan without consulting them
23
A.
And what they are complaining about is that the council had
Yes.
24 10:33:09 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: And were you not aware at all of the sort of plans that were
26
envisaged by the council back in -- when -- I think that's where Mr. Quinn is
27
coming from.
28
A.
In 1990.
29 10:33:21 30
MR. QUINN: In October/November 1990. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:33:23
10:33:34
16 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
progress the matter and put it out to the public at is some point.
3
A.
These were the council's plans Mr. Sweeney.
They had to
I explained yesterday that this was all pretty new territory to me.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I understand that you were employed in Monarch from the 1970s.
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
for example.
10:33:44 10
A.
And would you not have had any idea, there was a plan in 1983,
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
house per acre on septic tank perhaps earlier.
14
Monarch.
10:33:56 15
A.
Would you not have had -- I know the lands were zoned from one Certainly in your time within
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
at the time and I appreciate that, particular lands.
19
have had input into, not input but knowledge of the making of what happens
10:34:07 20
21
If Monarch had lands and obviously they didn't own the lands But Monarch may well
within the County Council when a plan is made for a particular area. A.
22
No, it went back as far as 1983 I would have been completely oblivious to a Development Plan.
23 24 10:34:18 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
I became very educated in it, at the end.
But at the beginning, I was ....
26 27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
And we didn't have any land that came within that category.
29 10:34:33 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:34:34
10:34:54
17 1
Q. 83
MR. QUINN: So you, did you ever see that map on screen, Mr. Sweeney, the
2
Monarch lands would have been in the bottom right hand corner of that map.
3
The blue line represented a notional line for the Southeastern Motorway.
4
purple area that you see there, is a proposed industrial zoning.
5
area is a town centre.
6
The green area open spaces.
7
Mr. Sweeney
8
A.
9 10:35:18 10
The
And the red
And the yellow area would be residential development. You were unaware of that, is that your evidence,
May I say, Mr. Chairman, that I would have replied on the planning professional consultants to absorb that type of detail.
Q. 84
But leaving aside the detail, Mr. Sweeney, the proposal in 1990, if it had been
11
successful, would have resulted in the manager recommending to the councillors
12
that they develop these lands for industrial, residential and town centre
13
development.
14
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 85
Which would have been the ideal development from Monarch's point of view?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 86
And are you saying that in late 1990 you had no idea that the manager was
10:35:38 15
18 19
recommending that these lands be so developed? A.
10:36:00 20
pro-development for those lands, which included the shopping element of it,
21 22
Well I was always aware that the officials, including the management, were
which was our major concern. Q. 87
But, Mr. Sweeney, all of your efforts since the lands were required, through
23
Mr. McCabe and the various meetings both in relation to the road department and
24
planning department and the various submissions put in, were to try and
10:36:20 25
convince the planners that they would recommend development on these lands,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
No, the planners themselves in my opinion were already convinced.
28
Q. 88
But do you accept, Mr. Sweeney, that Monarch were paying Mr. McCabe to put in
29 10:36:38 30
plans or sorry to put in submissions to the planners to have the lands zoned for residential, industrial and town centre development? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:36:40
10:36:51
18 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 89
And are you telling the Tribunal that the manager could produce proposals in
3
October and November 1990 recommending that the lands be so developed and you
4
wouldn't have known about it?
5
A.
I would have found out about that subsequently.
I have to repeat again, that
6
I was up to my neck at that time in Tallaght, which was opening around about
7
then.
8
anyone coming to me to interrupt my flow and trying to get the project
9
completed on time.
10:37:13 10
Q. 90
And it was a 24 hour a day job.
And I kind of internally resented
Mr. McCabe was telling you tittle tattle that kind of a meeting he had with
11
Mr. Lawlor and Mr. McGrath in relation to the manager's plan, isn't that right
12
and their dissatisfaction of consultation with them as councillors by the
13
managers, isn't that right? On the eve of the vote concerning the manager's
14
proposals and we saw that letter a moment ago on the screen and you recalled
10:37:38 15
receiving the letter?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 91
And are you saying that he would have told you that and you would have known of
18
that but you wouldn't have known of the manager's proposals as published that
19
the lands, the Cherrywood lands, for which your company had spent 10 million
10:37:53 20
the previous year to have those developed for residential, industrial purposes?
21
A.
I knew that the manager and the officials and the planners were all for it.
22
Q. 92
And therefore, you must have known that it had, the manager's objectives for
23
the lands had suffered a setback at the meeting in December 1990.
24
right?
10:38:12 25
Isn't that
A.
That's what I'm a bit unclear about.
26
Q. 93
I see.
27
A.
I would like, if possible, to find out what that setback was.
28
Q. 94
Well I can bring up for you, if you wish, the motion of the 6th of December
29
1990, which was successful.
10:38:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:38:28
10:38:50
19 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
it mightn't have been while you mightn't have been familiar of the detail of
3
what was going on at council, that you would have been made aware in general
4
terms by Mr. McCabe or other colleagues, as to developments.
5
developments in the sense of the matter winding its way through the council
6
which either benefited or were to the detriment of Monarch.
7
A.
Well is it likely, Mr. Sweeney, that during this period, that while
I mean
Yes, certainly people would have kept me up-to-date.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:39:12 10
So if something happened, such as Mr. Quinn is going to give you
the detail of now, without knowing or without necessarily being informed of the
11
precise detail.
12
what happened at the council and the different stages that the resulting from
13
council meetings and so on, council votes.
14
general terms, what was going on surely.
10:39:40 15
A.
You would have been told as a matter of probability as to
You'd have been aware of, in
Well certainly in general terms, but specifically at that time I don't think --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
you'd have been told or if they had a good day or a good outcome you'd have
19
been told?
10:39:55 20
A.
Yes.
So if you had a bad day, if Monarch had a bad day at the council,
The key figure that would have emerged for me but would been what the
21
status at that present time would have been in terms of zoning.
22
have recognised that as being what I described earlier.
And I would
23 24 10:40:14 25
Q. 95
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, I'm going to put on screen.
I'm going to give you a
hard copy and put on screen document No. 6952, which is the minutes of the
26
meeting of the 2nd of December 1990.
27
on this but since it might help to revive your memory on the issue.
28
see on the document that I'm going to give you A motion which was proposed at
29
the meeting by Councillor Coffey.
10:40:42 30
And I don't want to spend too much time
If we could have 6953, please.
handed to witness) Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
You will
(document
10:40:44
10:41:06
20 1
Now, at the bottom of 6953, you will see a motion proposed by councillor
2
McDonald and seconded by Councillor Coffey.
3
the net effect of that motion, if we could have 6953, was that there would be
4
no development south of the proposed Southeastern Motorway line.
5
6954, please.
And you can read the motion but
Could I have
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just for clarification, Mr. Quinn.
I think you should advise
8
the witness that it was the 1983 Southeastern Motorway line.
9 10:41:19 10
MR. QUINN: That's correct.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Which you I understand was a dissection of the Monarch lands.
A.
Yeah, I can recall that now.
Q. 96
MR. QUINN: I see.
A.
I thought in fact, Chairman, that you were talking about zoning, in terms of
14 10:41:28 15
16 17
density but in fact you're talking about the geographical location of the line
18
of the motorway.
19
Q. 97
10:41:47 20
No, we're talking about the zoning being limited to an area east of the line, isn't that right?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 98
Which was -- the manager has given evidence, Mr. Sweeney, more or less to the
23
effect that he regarded that motion as a water shed.
24
stopped his proposals as we saw them in DP90/123 which would have opened up the
10:42:03 25
In other words, it
entire area for development?
26
A.
Yes, yes, I understand that.
27
Q. 99
That's something you would have recollected, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes, I understand that.
29
Q. 100
And you would have known about it.
A.
And that correspondence is my understanding from the zoning status at that
10:42:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:42:16
10:42:22
21 1 2
time. Q. 101
3
And it was back to the drawing boards for you at that stage and indeed for the manager, isn't that right, after the motion?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 102
And if we look at 3089.
On the 22nd of January 1991, Mr. McCabe and
6
Mr. Meehan were being now asked to urgently prepare um, a -- plans at that
7
meeting on the 22nd and more particularly at the meeting on the 23rd.
8
is at 3094.
9 10:43:00 10
Which
Fergal McCabe tabled two zoning structure maps.
A.
Yes.
Q. 103
And at this stage, you were looking for new zonings to include town centre,
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 104
You hadn't been looking for town centre.
14
You are now looking for town center.
You had to go back and revise your submissions in relation to the matter, isn't
10:43:16 15
that right?
16
A.
Well, I'm not entirely sure of the mechanics at that time.
17
Q. 105
Yes.
18
A.
But I can tell you that our major ambition was town centre.
19
Q. 106
So in early 1991, as you went into early 1991, the manager's proposals, which
10:43:31 20
would have benefited the site, had been rejected by the councillors, isn't that
21
right? And Mr. McCabe was being asked to prepare maps and plans in relation to
22
an alternative zoning, isn't that right?
23
A.
The -- is this the line you're talking about again?
24
Q. 107
No, I'm still talking about zoning but I'm talking about zoning now --
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 108
-- up to the line?
27
A.
Up to the line. Yes, that's correct.
28
Q. 109
And the line at that stage, as I understood it, divided the land, the Monarch
10:43:52 25
29 10:43:59 30
lands? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:43:59
10:44:19
22 1
Q. 110
The '83 map?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 111
And in early 1991 I think, if I could have 8716.
Mr. Monahan made a
4
contribution I think to the -- Mr. Haughey and the party leaders fund.
5
see that at 3100 on the 6th of February '91.
6
contribution, Mr. Sweeney?
And we
What do you know about that
7
A.
I knew nothing about that contribution until I saw it in the brief.
8
Q. 112
You did not know in 1991 that Mr. Monahan had made that contribution?
9
A.
I did not.
Q. 113
And you say that you did not know that that contribution had been made until
10:44:44 10
11
this year, when you received the brief?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 114
But Mr. Monahan gave evidence at another Tribunal on the 31st of October 2000
14
in relation to the contribution, and that's at 7814.
10:45:01 15
Are you saying you you
didn't know in 2000 that Mr. Monahan had made that contribution?
16
A.
I didn't read up or pay any attention to --
17
Q. 115
So Mr. Monahan came and gave evidence at another Tribunal in relation to this
18
contribution given during your time with the Monarch Group and you didn't know
19
that he had given that evidence?
10:45:15 20
A.
Sorry.
21
Q. 116
On the 31st of October 2000.
22
A.
Well I wasn't at the Monarch Group at that time.
23
Q. 117
No, no, the contribution was given whilst you were with the Monarch Group.
24
A.
Um, I understand, Chairman, that that was a personal --
Q. 118
Albeit a personal contribution, Mr. Sweeney, are you saying that in October
10:45:32 25
May I ask you when he gave it?
26
2000 Mr. Monahan could give evidence in public in relation to the contribution
27
and you wouldn't have known about it?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 119
Okay.
10:45:49 30
I didn't keep track of that at all.
Now, I think a number of motions then were tabled, which would have
assisted the Monarch Group.
If we could have 6972, on the 6th of February
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:45:54
10:46:09
23 1
1991.
This is a motion by Councillor McDonald.
"That the council agreed to
2
provide for a district shopping centre in the rezoning of the lands."
3
know anything about how Councillor McDonald came to table that motion?
4
A.
Um, no.
5
Q. 120
And there was a subsequent motion I think at 6974.
Do you
And there were other
6
motions by Councillor Brady and Coffey, at 6976, which appear to have been
7
lodged on the 13th of February '91 and a motion by Councillor Carroll and
8
Mitchell on the 14th of February, '91.
9
At 6978?
A.
No, I didn't know anything.
Q. 121
You don't know how those motions came to be tabled?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 122
I think on the 12th of February, '91, Mr. Monahan met with Minister Flynn, at
10:46:31 10
13 14 10:46:54 15
7664.
Did you know anything about that meeting, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Um, no.
Q. 123
So this is the third time that Mr. Monahan has met Minister Flynn and you
16
haven't been told by him that that meeting was taking place or what was
17
discussed?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 124
And there's been no discussion amongst you as to what he might discuss with the
10:47:09 20
Minister if and when he met him?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 125
But there had been discussion between yourself and Mr. Lynn about possibly
23
meeting a minister to make representations in relation to the construction of
24
the roadway and the expedition of the construction of this Carrickmines sewer?
10:47:23 25
26
A.
Well I could speculate that the connection was there but that would be ...
Q. 126
Now, I think there was a meeting on 7th of May 1991.
If we could have 3664,
27
Mr. Sweeney, attended by Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, you, Mr. Lafferty,
28
Mr. Murray and Mr. Lynn.
29
intended to submit a planning application by the 1st of September 1991 which
10:47:52 30
And you tabled a master plan and advised that it was
would include for circa 250 square foot retail industrial business park and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:47:57
10:48:02
24 1
residential development.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 127
That was your -- that was your proposal at that stage?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 128
And I think if we look at 3665, under the heading "project management
6
agreement.
7
project management agreement was to cover management costs only and not to
8
cover design input made by MPSL.
9
raised at an upcoming meeting with GRE."
10:48:27 10
11
Mr. Glennane indicated that the 100,000 pounds included in the
It was agreed that the matter would be Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 129
Now, later that month I think on the 24th of May 1991, there was a council
12
meeting which was going to determine the status of the lands in the draft 1991
13
Development Plan, isn't that right?
14 10:48:43 15
A.
Can you say that again?
Q. 130
I said on the 24th of May, later that very same month, that is the 24th of May
16
1991, there was to be a special meeting of the County Council which would
17
determine the proposed zoning status for these lands in the 1991 draft plan.
18
Do you recall?
19 10:49:02 20
A.
Well I don't recall it but I accept that.
Q. 131
And at 7006, the manager put forward three possible proposals in relation to
21
these lands.
22
is to be found at 7019.
23
zoned for residential purposes on piped sewage.
24 10:49:30 25
The first of which was accepted, which is DP90/A -- 129A, which And that effectively proposed that the lands would be Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 132
That was something that would be of benefit to the Monarch interest in that it
26
increased the zoning status of the lands, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, and it also established the -- that the sewer was going to go in.
28
Q. 133
Yes.
29 10:49:56 30
Do you recall any discussion within Monarch in relation to the -- to
that upcoming meeting and the possibility of asking councillors to vote in support of a proposal that the lands be so zoned? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:50:01
10:50:19
25 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 134
I think the next thing that happened was that the council fell and that there
3
was a Local Election in June 1991, isn't that right? If I could have 3241.
4
Between the 30th of May and the 3rd of October I think 23,450 pounds had been
5
disbursed in political contributions by the Monarch Group, isn't that right, in
6
respect of that election campaign?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 135
Were you aware that those contributions had been made or given?
9
A.
Not specifically but I knew generally.
Q. 136
Well what did you know, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
I knew, to repeat what I have said earlier.
10:50:34 10
11
That if anyone applied for help
12
in the -- in their election campaigns, that it was pretty certain that they
13
would get it.
14 10:50:57 15
16
Q. 137
Was there any discussion on the level of contribution that might be made?
A.
No.
Q. 138
We know, for example, if you look at that page.
The very second name on the
17
page, that is to say Mr. Hand, was given a sum of 5,000 pounds.
18
right?
19
Isn't that
A.
Yes.
Q. 139
That was the single largest contribution at that time?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 140
Can you assist the Tribunal as to how it was decided within Monarch that
10:51:08 20
23
Mr. Hand would receive such a generous contribution for his Local Election
24
campaign?
10:51:21 25
A.
26 27
10:51:44 30
And I've -- I've also noticed later that that might
not have been for Mr. Hand but have been for the Fine Gael Party. Q. 141
28 29
Well, it seems enormous.
Was there any discussion within Monarch concerning the question of payment of -- payment of political contributions for this election?
A.
Could you repeat that again?
Q. 142
Was there any discussion at board level or otherwise, within the Monarch Group, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:51:48
10:51:54
26 1
concerning the possibility of contributing to that Local Election?
2
A.
Most certainly.
3
Q. 143
There was?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 144
And were you privy to that discussion?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 145
And who else would have been involved in that discussion?
8
A.
I think the board would have been.
9
Q. 146
The board at that time would have been you, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 147
Well were there other board members?
12
A.
Um ...
13
Q. 148
At that time, that is 1991, June 1991?
14
A.
No, that was the board.
Q. 149
Would it be fair to say that when you refer to board decisions, Mr. Sweeney,
10:52:08 10
10:52:16 15
16
you are referring to a decision of yourself, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 150
And there was a board decision as to how you might approach a situation of
19 10:52:40 20
requests for political contributions during this election campaign? A.
Well I wouldn't go so far as to say there was a board decision.
But I would
21
have repeated what you said at the beginning, that the board was aware of these
22
things were happening.
23
Q. 151
But --
24
A.
There wouldn't have been --
Q. 152
Were they aware that it had happened or were they aware that it was likely to
10:52:51 25
26 27
happen, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Um, just to get away from the fact that it's a board meeting and the board
28
meeting would not have had something on the agenda that said councillors are
29
going to apply for -- but the board would have been aware that this was
10:53:17 30
happening. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:53:18
10:53:42
27 1
Q. 153
Uh-huh.
2
A.
Well the board should be aware of everything.
3
Q. 154
Well who would advise the board that this was actually happening?
4
A.
I would say Mr. Lynn would have been.
5
Q. 155
Did Mr. Lawlor have any input into the selection of persons who might receive
6
And how would the board be aware that this was happening?
political contributions in 1991?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 156
Did you know who had received money in 1991 in that election, in a general way?
9
A.
In a general way but not certainly specific.
Q. 157
Yes
11
A.
I wouldn't have known that list, for example.
12
Q. 158
Yes.
13
A.
And I wouldn't known the extent of it.
14
Q. 159
Yes.
10:54:01 10
10:54:14 15
Looking at that list, Mr. Sweeney, the one name missing from the list
and he was I understand a candidate, I understand in June 1991, was Mr. Lawlor.
16
Does that surprise you, having regard to your evidence yesterday in relation to
17
his assistance to the Monarch Group in the Tallaght context?
18
A.
Again, the fact that he's not on that list, does that surprise me?
19
Q. 160
Yes.
A.
And was he going for election?
21
Q. 161
Yes.
22
A.
Then it does surprise me.
23
Q. 162
Now, 3122.
10:54:37 20
24
Is a list prepared of initials and parties and contributions.
And again, it's -- whilst it amounts to 22,150, the actual amount paid out,
10:55:00 25
Mr. Sweeney, was 23,450.
But again, I'm not going to take you through the
26
financial detail necessarily unless you wish me to do so, but I'm going to ask
27
you to accept as I go forward now that the documents establish a particular
28
pattern.
29 10:55:23 30
Do you understand?
A.
Yes.
Q. 163
Was there any discussion within Monarch as to, and certainly discussion with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:55:29
10:55:53
28 1
GRE, as to the headings of expenses in relation to Cherrywood that might be
2
recoverable by the Monarch Group?
3
A.
I really don't understand that question.
4
Q. 164
Okay.
It might be better, therefore, if I were to put up 8769.
This is a
5
schedule which accompanied a letter dated the 16th of March 1992.
6
accounts department of GRE Properties.
7
projections, Cherrywood Properties Limited Draft Development Plan cashflow
8
projections.
9
accountancy level between GRE and Monarch in relation to the development costs
10:56:21 10
To the
And it's headed Cherrywood project --
Would it be fair to say that there was ongoing contact at some
for Cherrywood?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 165
And in fact, we'll come to see your involvement in recovering some of those
13 14 10:56:31 15
costs -- or the GRE contribution for some of those costs, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 166
And there were negotiations and GRE were refusing to pay some of the costs,
16
isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 167
And you had to negotiate the recovery of some of those costs yourself, directly
19 10:56:43 20
21
with Mr. Baker, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 168
And you spearheaded those discussions.
You were the highest person within
22
Monarch to deal with the recovery of the costs.
23
speaking to Mr. Baker you were speaking at the highest level within GRE in
24
relation to the matter?
10:56:58 25
Presumably when you were
A.
Certainly but there were several strands and layers.
26
Q. 169
I accept that but they were lower strands and layers, isn't that right?
27
A.
There was accountant to accountant.
28 29 10:57:14 30
There was Richard Lynn to some other
executive and there was myself and Martin Baker I think. Q. 170
Mr. Beele, I think also. But yourself and Martin Baker did the final balancing, isn't that right? You were the two most senior people to deal with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:57:18
10:57:34
29 1
the matter.
2
discussions between yourself and Mr. Baker?
3
A.
4 5
Yes.
Any issues that arose and other discussions were left over to
When an impasse reached and I had to come in with Mr. Baker to sort it
out. Q. 171
Now, this letter, the letter accompanying this schedule is at 8767 and it's
6
dated the 16th of March 1992.
7
shows the monies, it proposes to show the monies paid to the 31st of January
8
1992, isn't that right? And that's the first column on the left?
9
And if we go back to the schedule at 8769.
A.
May I ask you to see the second page of the letter.
Q. 172
Of the letter, yes.
11
A.
Uh-huh.
12
Q. 173
And it attaches a breakdown of the invoices now claimed and it asks that if
10:58:06 10
It's at 8768.
Yes, thank you.
13
there are any queries perhaps Mr. Mullen would make contact with the under
14
signed, who was Mr. Lynn, or Ken Lawless.
10:58:29 15
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 174
What position did Mr. Lawless hold within the company?
17
A.
Mr. Lawless was an accountant.
18
Q. 175
Yes.
19 10:58:43 20
Now, I think a further projection was prepared, if we could have 3736,
please, on the 27th of April, '92. A.
Sorry, I missed that.
21
Q. 176
Sorry.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 177
-- being prepared on the 27th of April 1992.
24 10:58:57 25
This is a second similar type of projection --
Do you understand? You are
getting familiar, I take it now, Mr. Sweeney, with the format? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 178
Isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 179
And at the bottom of that list prepared on the 27th of April '92, there is a
29 10:59:10 30
It
handwritten note to Richard, who is presumably Mr. Lynn.
Which says "I can't
find the 25,000 pounds in respect of strategy consultancy fees. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Can you be
10:59:15
10:59:26
30 1
specific."
Do you see that note? Do you recognise that handwriting
2
Mr. Sweeney?
3
A.
I don't.
4
Q. 180
Mr. Glennane thought it might be the handwriting Mr. Lawless , that we saw
5
referred to in the March letter a moment ago.
6
A.
No, definitely not.
7
Q. 181
If we had 3992.
But it's not your handwriting?
This is a list prepared on the 28th of April.
That's the
8
following day, Mr. Sweeney.
9
manuscript instruction contained in the statement of the 27th of April '92.
10:59:56 10
And it takes account of the instruction, the
And it includes, as you will see there, four from the bottom under the heading
11
"strategy consultancy fees.
12
you to accept this for the moment, Mr. Sweeney, that that figure in fact should
13
be higher, but for the moment, do you see the 22,150?
14 11:00:16 15
April '92.
22,150."
A.
Yes.
Q. 182
That corresponds with, if we could have 8579.
Now, as I say and I ask
This is an internal document
16
produced, I understand, by Mr. Glennane.
17
the politicians in June '91.
18
moment, Mr. Sweeney, but in fact the 22,150 is shy of the actual amount paid.
19
Do you understand?
11:00:39 20
21
And it relates to the payments to
Now, you have to take my word for it, for the
A.
Yes.
Q. 183
But if we could go back to 3992.
When we're talking about strategy
22
consultancy fees, Mr. Sweeney, we're talking about payments to politicians
23
during this election, isn't that right?
24
A.
If that amount --
Q. 184
Yes.
26
A.
-- relates to that list.
27
Q. 185
Yes
28
A.
Then that is the case.
29
Q. 186
Yes.
11:00:57 25
11:01:06 30
Do you recall yesterday you were talking about being involved in the
preparation of budgets and projections for site development costs? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:01:13
11:01:27
31 1
A.
Um.
2
Q. 187
That you would have an involvement and you recall being involved in Tallaght
3 4
and in particular in relation to the construction costs? A.
5 6
Certainly in Tallaght.
When it came to construction cost, yes, certainly, I
would have been involved. Q. 188
Now, looking at that list, at 3992, there is a claim being submitted to GRE and
7
we'll see in a moment as we go through, how you negotiated 50 per cent of that
8
claim on behalf of Monarch.
9
fee of 22,150.
11:01:53 10
And indeed, in time when we add in a further 3,000 pounds
which was paid in May 1991.
11
But the claim attributes a strategy consultancy
figure comes to 27,850.
And we take account of an adjustment.
The
So if you for the moment, Mr. Sweeney --
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 189
-- and just bear with me on this, Mr. Glennane has dealt with this in evidence.
14
When we look at 22,150 we're really looking at 27,150 as having been paid by
11:02:14 15
May 1991.
16
A.
That's an additional 5,000?
17
Q. 190
It's 27,850.
18 19
It includes 3,000 and it includes an adjustment to bring the
21,000 -- the 22,150 up to the 23,450 that it should have been. A.
Yes.
Q. 191
That's terribly confusing I know.
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 192
If I could have 8579.
11:02:32 20
Whoever did up the list of political contributions in
23
June '91 and prepared the list that we see on screen, they came to a figure of
24
22,150.
11:02:55 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 193
In fact, they should have come to a figure of 23,450.
27
there was a further 3,000 pounds made payable to cash.
28
A.
Does that mean that that adds up wrong?
29
Q. 194
Yes.
A.
Yeah.
11:03:03 30
And then in May '91
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:03:03
11:03:22
32 1
Q. 195
That should in fact be a higher figure is what I'm saying.
2
A.
And then?
3
Q. 196
You add-on a figure of 3,000 pounds cash, cheque made payable to cash in May
4
1991.
And that takes you up, Mr. Sweeney, to a figure of 27,850.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 197
Under the headings "strategic consultancy fees".
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 198
And 24,850 of that is attributable to the payments to politicians in June 1991?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 199
And we call that strategy consultancy fees?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 200
And we see it in that list there and we see it as being submitted to the GRE
11:03:38 10
13
company for the purpose of establishing a claim, 50 percent of which they're
14
liable to Monarch, isn't that right?
11:03:59 15
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 201
Did you know that such a claim was being made?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 202
Did you have input into a claim or an attribution for these figures to the
19 11:04:22 20
strategy consultancy fees? A.
Where are the -- where the actual heading came from I'm not entirely sure.
21
Q. 203
Yes.
22
A.
It sounds a pretty typical heading.
23
Q. 204
Yes.
24
A.
Well you have to call it something.
Q. 205
Well you could call it political contributions, presumably?
26
A.
Yes, you could have.
27
Q. 206
Now, I think that the agreement between yourselves and GRE were for the payment
11:04:39 25
28 29 11:04:55 30
Well what do you mean by "typical heading" Mr. Sweeney?
of third party 50 percent of third party costs, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 207
And the claim in relation to the strategy consultancy fees fell under a claim Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:05:02
11:05:10
33 1
for third party costs?
2
A.
Um, they did.
3
Q. 208
Yes.
4
A.
Right.
5
Q. 209
I can -- I'll take you through the correspondence.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 210
I'm anxious not to get weighed down too much on the correspondence.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 211
I will take you through it.
11:05:24 10
And perhaps I should in fairness to you, to show
you how you came to argue for it, Mr. Sweeney.
As you say, and if I could
11
start at 3987.
12
financial records of the Monarch Group.
13
fourth down.
14
of Monarch Properties Services, of those payments totalling 15,350.
11:05:55 15
This is the entry in the records of the Monarch Group, the And you will see there just third or
A whole series of entries in the sponsorship account of GRE --
see those?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 212
And they were transferred across to the promotions account.
18
promotions account together with a further 8,100 pounds.
19
3988.
11:06:16 20
Do you
A.
21
You see further entries there?
The Cherrywood
If we could have
Again third or fourth down "J Hand."
Mr. Chairman, I have seen these documents in the brief.
And it may short
circuit things a little bit to know that I have read most of them.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And --
11:06:27 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
That will speed up things.
27 28 29 11:06:40 30
Q. 213
MR. QUINN: And those documents, and those payments, came into the general promotions, Cherrywood promotions account. expenses.
They were queried.
They were included as third party
We have correspondence in relation to the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:06:46
11:07:08
34 1
querying of them.
2
1992 to Mr. Baker.
3
matter? And then he wrote back to you on the 24th of August in relation to the
4
expenses.
5
a letter of the 2nd of October 1992, at 3837.
6
on that letter, Mr. Sweeney? That's a letter signed by you to Mr. Baker and it
7
sets out the position of your claim for your share.
8
management fees for the period September '89 to June '92 and from July '92 to
9
March '93.
11:07:39 10
'92.
And then you got involved I think and you wrote in July We have that at 3789, isn't that right, in relation to the
There was further correspondence.
And I think it culminated with
And do you see item No. 2 there
And you're claiming
You're claiming costs, Monarch costs for September '89 to June
And then you're making a claim for third party outlay from September '89
11
to June '92 of 556,288.
12
less whatever has been paid to date.
13
up a moment ago, which related to the payments, are included in that figure of
14
556.
11:08:11 15
They are entitled to, you claim 50 percent of that The strategy management fees that we had
A.
I don't see the figure 556.
16
Q. 214
You see No. 2? Third party outlay from September '89 to June '92?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 215
If you take it from me, that that strategy management fee is in there?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 216
And you're seeking that?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 217
And you're seeking that and you're justifying your claim in the context of the
11:08:14 20
23 24 11:08:26 25
agreement which you had, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 218
And you're setting out a strategy.
And you're talking about what you have
26
done to date in relation to the lands.
If we look at 3838, which is the
27
second page of that letter, just to put it in context.
28
the recent meeting.
And you referred to
Do you see that?
29 11:08:45 30
"Where I told you at a recent meeting that we'd been asked -- we had asked some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:08:50
11:08:59
35 1
representatives to request Dublin County management that the Dun
2
Laoghaire/Rathdown portion of the Draft Development Plan be finalised ahead of
3
the other two areas comprising Fingal and south Dublin."
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 219
That was a strategy that you had embarked upon, isn't that right? Who had
6
made, come up with that strategy or that suggestion, Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
Could I have the date of that letter again?
8
Q. 220
That's October '92?
9
A.
October '92.
Q. 221
Yes.
11
A.
Regarding strategy.
12
Q. 222
Yes.
13
A.
And they would have developed from one of those meetings.
14
Q. 223
Okay.
11:09:19 10
11:09:29 15
Well there would have been numerous meetings in-house.
Somebody, but you can't say who, had come up with this suggestion; that
you would expedite matters if the council were just to approve the plan in
16
relation to the area where these lands were situated, isn't that right?
17
A.
Oh, absolutely.
18
Q. 224
And you advised there that there were upcomings meeting on the 29th and 30th of
19
The expedition was the key word.
September in relation to the written statement, isn't that right, and how they
11:09:51 20
might effect the lands?
21 22
And you said "In order to achieve these results it was and is necessary to
23
continue contacts with those representatives favourable to our side.
24
Unfortunately, there is still a strong core of members opposed to any
11:10:01 25
development and we'll take every opportunity to limit development of the lands.
26
We must continue to hold our support and recent discussions with other parties
27
suggest that additional support has been attracted to our side."
28
right?
29 11:10:13 30
Isn't that
A.
Yes.
Q. 225
Now, you've set up another strategy. You go on to say "That unemployment is a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:10:17
11:10:38
36 1
big issue here at the moment and will be the main feature in the next General
2
Election which will take place in mid '93.
3
fore as a source of creating employment and it may be that we should add an
4
additional 5/20 acres to the business park element to make the scheme even more
5
employment friendly.
6
and we see the attached map as a possible lay out to achieve this end.
7
would like you to make yourself available to meet with senior politicians to
8
emphasis your concern about the delay in bringing this project to a
9
commencement date."
We have taken Cherrywood to the
We are sounding this out with a few of the politicians I
11:10:53 10
11
You were seeking the support of GRE in making themselves available to so that
12
he that they could meet with senior politicians?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 226
Because of the delay in the implementation of the Development Plan?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 227
Did any such meetings take place, Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 228
What politicians, what senior politicians had you in mind when you wrote this
11:11:03 15
19 11:11:11 20
letter? A.
21 22
Just anyone who might have had the power to
influence. Q. 229
23 24
Um, I can't recall specifically.
I think the Minister for the Environment in 1992 might have been Mr. Flynn. Isn't that right?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 230
You don't know, but in any event, you say no such meetings took place?
26
A.
With?
27
Q. 231
Politicians?
28
A.
With GRE, no.
29
Q. 232
You say that I am also enclosing the planning construction programme for the
11:11:33 25
11:11:44 30
project. This is based on a Draft Development Plan being finalised in April Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:11:48
11:11:59
37 1
1993 or at least we knowing that at that stage that it will -- what it will
2
contain.
3
with only holding four meetings per month, it is frustratingly slow."
The progress of the review of the Development PLan is torturous and
4 5
You said that "I am also enclosing a background memo as to the input of the
6
Monarch technical team and also the political input made to date which you may
7
find useful."
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Can we have the next page?
11:12:10 10
11
Q. 233
MR. QUINN: That's at 3839.
Now, first of all, can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
12
And I have to tell you that unfortunately Monarch have been unable to discover
13
to the Tribunal, the schedules that accompanied this letter.
14
what was the political input background that you were able to advise Mr. Baker
11:12:31 15
of in that letter?
16
A.
Can I see that?
17
Q. 234
Yes, it's at the very top.
18 19 11:12:49 20
Can I ask you,
"I am enclosing a background memo."
Do you see
that? A.
Yes.
Q. 235
"As to the input of the Monarch technical team and also the political input
21
made to date which you may find useful."
22
think the Tribunal is anxious to establish from you as the author of this
23
letter.
24
date?
11:13:06 25
So what I'm anxious to know and I
What did that memo contain in relation to political input made to
A.
The answer is I don't know what I meant there.
26
Q. 236
This is October 1992, Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 237
You were writing in the context of seeking to recover the GRE share of the
29 11:13:22 30
outlay -A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:13:22
11:13:39
38 1
Q. 238
2
-- incurred.
That claim includes 556,000 for third party outlay, isn't that
right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 239
As we see.
5
Included in that 556,000 is the 27,000 odd payments under
strategy, which had been paid to councillors.
Isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 240
You are putting forward a case, you're setting out the strategy for the future,
8 9 11:13:48 10
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 241
And you're setting out a memo which shows the input of the Monarch technical
11
team to date.
But also you're setting out a memo which includes the political
12
input to date, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes, I'm trying to figure that out but I really can't put anything around it.
14
Q. 242
Well doing the best you can, Mr. Sweeney, what do you think it might have
11:14:09 15
included? What was the political input to date other than the contributions
16 17
made to the political system in June 1991? A.
Well that's what I would have thought.
I would have thought that the
18
political input would have been what you just mentioned, for the strategy
19
payments.
11:14:33 20
Other than that, I can wrack my mind about it but I really can't
get anything that would fit in.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn, can I ask just when the discovery.
I know you say
23
that Monarch have been unable to discover the political input memo.
24
about the other background memo?
What
11:14:48 25
26
MR. QUINN: No, no.
27
But --
It might all in fact have been the one memo I think.
28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Maybe one document.
11:14:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:14:56
11:15:01
39 1
MR. QUINN: One document.
In any event it hasn't been discovered.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
4 5
Q. 243
6
MR. QUINN: And Mr. Sweeney, you can't assist the Tribunal in relation to what that memo might contain in relation to the political input to date?
7
A.
No but I'll certainly wrack my mind about it.
8
Q. 244
Yes.
9
A.
It's possible that it could be just a phrase.
11:15:20 10
11
You know, to mention what had
been mentioned before but it doesn't look like that. Q. 245
12
Well can I approach it another way Mr. Sweeney.
I can't recall it.
You had meetings with GRE,
isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 246
And you said that the board were aware that there were going to be payments
11:15:35 15
made in June '91 for that Local Election, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 247
Were GRE aware that contributions were made in advance of them being made in
18 19 11:15:47 20
June '91? A.
They certainly were.
Q. 248
And was it a source of discussion between the -- yourselves, Monarch and GRE in
21
relation to your approach that that Local Election?
22
A.
Was it a source of?
23
Q. 249
Of discussion or agreement as to what would happen in relation to requests for
24 11:16:06 25
26
contributions for that Local Election? A.
Yes, everything to do with the project was discussed.
Q. 250
And those payments were strategy payments, isn't that right? They were
27
described as such --
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 251
-- in the document.
11:16:20 30
"Strategy consultancy fees."
please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
If we could have 3992,
11:16:21
11:16:33
40 1
A.
2
Yeah, what I'm finding it difficult to understand, Chairman, is was there a thing called political payments on that list?
3
Q. 252
Not -- no.
4
A.
So it's just a summary of what the --
5
Q. 253
They come in under the heading strategy consultancy fees.
6
A.
So that last paragraph you were talking about was really to indicate a summary
7
Not on the list, no.
of what the political input had been to date?
8
Q. 254
I suspect so, Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 255
No, the money -- the political contributions are in under "third party costs"
11:16:49 10
11
But there's certainly no money attached to it?
and they're in a sub-heading called "strategy consultancy fees".
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 256
On the 15th of October 1992, at 3842, there was simultaneous correspondence I
14
Well it doesn't help me remember but ...
think in relation to outstanding monies on the Tallaght project, isn't that
11:17:26 15
right written bring Mr. Monahan?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 257
But in any any event, I think that Mr. Baker wrote to Mr. Monahan on the 15th
18
of October 1992.
19
comments in appendix two in relation to the claim.
11:17:49 20
And we see it, as I say, 3842.
see at the very bottom of 3843.
21
And he sets out his Now, that's at 3843.
You
You would have got a copy of that letter
yourself and Mr. Glennane, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 258
And if we look at the accompanying.
24
If we could get to 3845, please.
And
you see there heading "agrees fees to be paid" and under item 14 heading
11:18:10 25
"Cabinteely outstanding development costs."
26
And there's our figure; 556
again?
27
A.
Right.
28
Q. 259
And just to confuse matters somewhat, Mr. Sweeney, in fact, that figure shut be
29 11:18:29 30
netted back to 550,977, but I'm not going to go into that detail. A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:18:29
11:18:47
41 1
Q. 260
You can take it that GRE are prepared at that stage to make that payment.
And
2
if we go to 3850.
Under the heading "third parties costs" it says "GRE
3
confirmed that they would be responsible for 50 percent of 556,288.
4
this is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable
5
and in this respect I would refer to the recent correspondence between Monarch
6
and G Beng."
However,
7 8
Paragraph 2.
9
third party costs amounting to 18,500 pounds on the receipt of proper
11:19:01 10
"GRE confirmed that they would agree to pay 50 percent of future
invoices."
11 12
So subject to proper invoices, that figure has been agreed, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 261
And when I say proper invoices, that is to say an invoice between the third
11:19:12 15
party and Monarch rather than an invoice between Monarch and GRE?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 262
But of course the recipients of that money wouldn't be providing invoices, I
18 19
take it? A.
This is the political contributions?
Q. 263
Yes.
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 264
And I think an invoice was indeed raised between Monarch and GRE.
11:19:29 20
They might be sending letters acknowledging receipt. And we see
23
that at 3955, that's an invoice No. 1932 raised on the 15th of December 1992.
24
And the figure, you see the figure 55,978? That's the revised figure?
11:19:54 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 265
The 50 percent contribution is 275,489.
And a payment had already been made
27
by them of 71,463 leaving a balance outstanding of 261,878 allowing for VAT,
28
isn't that right?
29 11:20:08 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 266
Do you know if that figure or sum was ever paid by GRE? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:20:19
11:20:28
42 1
A.
Which figure?
2
Q. 267
That is the amount outstanding on that invoice.
3
A.
Like 261?
4
Q. 268
261.
5
A.
I would think it would have been paid.
6
Q. 269
Yes.
7
A.
But I -- yep.
8
Q. 270
But there is no doubt, Mr. Sweeney, that the payments to the politicians --
9
sorry.
11:20:51 10
11
in connection with the Cherrywood lands? A.
12 13
The payments made in 1991 Local Elections were considered as payments
Yes, in so far as the Cherrywood lands was the only big job that was going on at the time.
Q. 271
14
Yes.
There were payments in connection with the Cherrywood lands and the
Cherrywood lands were being -- were in the process of being rezoned at that
11:21:12 15
time, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 272
And the councillors would have to vote on the rezoning of the lands and the
18
upcoming meetings of the council after the publication of the Draft Development
19
Plan?
11:21:25 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 273
And the monies paid were described as strategy consultancy fees, isn't that
22
right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 274
And GRE, a claim was made on GRE for the recovery of 50 percent of those fees?
A.
Yes.
Q. 275
And GRE agreed to make the contributions in relation to the fees but that any
11:21:36 25
26 27
third party outlay in the future was limited as per that letter at 3850 to 50
28
percent of 18,500 pounds and only on receipt of proper invoices, isn't that
29
right?
11:21:55 30
A.
Yes, that was the position at that time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:21:57
11:22:14
43 1
Q. 276
Yes.
Therefore, we can take it, Mr. Sweeney, that when we see the reference
2
to strategy consultancy fees, we're looking at a reference to payments to the
3
political system, isn't that right?
4
A.
In this particular case, yes.
5
Q. 277
Now, yesterday we spoke about projected payments, isn't that right? And the
6
possibility of budgets.
I mean, large organisations operate on budgets and
7
coming in, setting themselves targets, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 278
And presumably joint ventures, as this was, would also involve itself in
11:22:39 10
projections.
11
Your partners would want to know, as you did, what the likely
projection for the future was?
12
A.
Yes, that would be normal.
13
Q. 279
And you would try and seek agreement in advance in relation to upcoming
14 11:22:45 15
16
payments? A.
Yes, if possible.
Q. 280
Yeah.
17
And you try and project insofar as you could, the outlays that you
would make in a particular area, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 281
And if we go back now to the schedule at 3992 for the 28th of April 1992.
11:23:07 20
see the claim for the 22,150 as having been paid in April '92.
In fact, it
21
had been paid in May June '91, but the claim is coming in here in April '92,
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 282
Under the heading "strategy consultancy fee".
A.
Yes.
Q. 283
For the Cherrywood village.
11:23:25 25
26
We
And we have agreed that that figure in fact is
27
27,850.
28
strategy consultancy fee.
29
words, these are the projections for payments under this heading for April and
11:23:46 30
But leaving that figure aside for the moment and just looking at the
May -- sorry.
Just look to the figures to the right.
In other
May and June 1992, a sum of 10,000 and a sum of 50,000.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't
11:23:53
11:24:13
44 1
it fair to say that it was anticipated in April '92 that under this heading
2
strategy consultancy fee, which is a payment to the political system, it was
3
projected that the payments for May and June of 1992 would be 60,000?
4
A.
Yes, that looks like that.
5
Q. 284
And can I ask you, who would have projected that level of payment at that time?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 285
Well, as one of the three board members, Mr. Sweeney, who within Monarch would
8 9
have been projecting that level of payment at that time? A.
I can only speculate on that.
Q. 286
Well, I think it's probably best that you should, Mr. Sweeney.
11
A.
Well I would think Mr. Lynn would have provided those figures.
12
Q. 287
So Mr. Lynn was figuring that it was going to -- he was going to layout 60,000
11:24:35 10
13
pounds in May and June 1992 as of April '92, he was anticipating an expenditure
14
for the political contributions for May and June of 60,000?
11:24:59 15
16
A.
Well provided my speculation is right, yes.
Q. 288
Yes.
17
And that would have to receive approval from somebody within Monarch, I
presume?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 289
At a senior level?
A.
Yes.
Q. 290
And who was the most senior person within Monarch who had responsibility to
11:25:09 20
21 22
sanction payments?
23
A.
Well ...
24
Q. 291
Or expenditure?
A.
Payments of this type?
26
Q. 292
Yes.
27
A.
Um, it would be a mixture of the individual members of the board, myself,
11:25:20 25
28 29 11:25:39 30
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan. Q. 293
And that was the projected expenditure at that time, isn't that right? Now, if I move forward then to July 1992.
If we could have 3789, please.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Now, this
11:25:46
11:26:08
45 1
is your letter to Mr. Baker in July of 1992.
And it again relates to the
2
outlay claim that we referred to earlier, which seems to have been resolved
3
around October 1992.
4
in relation to the second paragraph there.
But if I could refer you to the heading "costs" and just You say:
5 6
"I attach an estimate of future costs which may be incurred on the Draft
7
Development Plan amounting to 63,500 exclusive of project management fee".
8
Do you see that?
9 11:26:20 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 294
Now, that's -- you are advising.
11
You are seeking recovery of costs to date
and you are now giving a projection of costs into the future, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 295
And you accompany that document with a schedule, isn't that right, making up
14
that 63,500?
11:26:42 15
And if we could have 8753, please.
Do you see the figure of
63,500?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 296
These are projected expenditures for August to December '92.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 297
"Irish Productivity Centre 1,500 pounds" and Mr Gilmore has given evidence,
11:26:55 20
Mr. Sweeney, which you may or may not be familiar with, to the effect, that he
21
had asked or challenged figures that were being produced in relation to the job
22
creation prospects of a science park and the Irish Productivity Centre I think
23
had been asked?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 298
And that figure presumably would relate to that element of costs.
26
A.
Yes, I remember that.
27
Q. 299
Yes.
11:27:12 25
28 29 11:27:31 30
Legal fees -- legal of 7,000.
MPSL staff costs 35,000 and then
strategy consultancy 10,000. A.
Yes.
Q. 300
Now, what payments did you envisage amounting to 10,000 pounds for strategy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:27:35
11:27:48
46 1
consultancy were likely to take place between August and December '92?
2
A.
I don't know.
3
Q. 301
Who would have provided you with the schedule accompanying your letter,
4
Mr. Sweeney?
5
A.
The schedule accompanied that letter and parts of the letter themselves --
6
Q. 302
Yes.
7
A.
-- would have been as a result of me asking various executives for their input.
8
Q. 303
And who --
9
A.
Into that letter.
Q. 304
And who would have given you the figure strategy consultancy 10,000, do you
11:28:01 10
11
think?
12
A.
It would have been the same as I said before.
13
Q. 305
Mr. Lynn.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 306
And I think also accompanying that letter was a projection for planning costs.
11:28:09 15
16
If we could have 3791.
17
relation to Cherrywood Properties Limited.
18
item there.
19
third month."
11:28:37 20
This is a planning application cashflow projection in
"Strategy consultancy fees.
And if we look at the second last Total 40,000.
Payable on the
Presumably the third month after planning application had been
lodged?
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 307
Yes.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 308
And perhaps it might have been fairer to you had I done it from the outset.
A.
Yes.
Q. 309
It's at 3789. And I can get you a hard copy of it.
11:28:55 25
26
Can I see the context of that letter? In fact, I should open I think in total the letter to you, Mr. Sweeney.
And you say:
27 28
It's written by you.
29
letter of the 16th of July 1992.
11:29:12 30
It's to Martin Baker.
It says "Many thanks for your
And at the outset I wish to keep the
Cabinteely project separate to Tallaght and in this letter will address those Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:29:16
11:29:30
47 1
issues relevant to Cabinteely. I understand a separate communication will
2
issue in relation to the position on Tallaght.
3
regarding the zoning position and it accurately reflects the position.
4
dates for the particular meetings have not as yet been set but prior to the
5
summer recess, the council was meeting on a weekly basis to deal with the Draft
6
Development Plan.
7
behalf.
I have noted your note The
Richard Lynn has attended most of these meetings on our
And will let you have the dates of the said meetings in due course."
8 9
Just to stop there, Mr. Sweeney. Would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn was the
11:29:46 10
representative of Monarch at the cold face in relation to the Development Plan
11
review?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 310
Now, then you go on to say under the heading 'costs'.
14 11:29:58 15
"I note that you've approved payments of 149,898 pounds and are presently
16
checking the further invoices per schedule eight which amount to 99,858 pounds
17
and not 56,784 pounds as mentioned in yours.
18
costs which may be incurred on the draft development plan amounting to 63,500
19
exclusive of project management fee.
11:30:22 20
21
I attach an estimate of future
You will appreciate that this is an
estimate only and depending upon the outcome of the September meeting this sum could vary either up or down.
22 23
however, as costs are incurred we will continue to forward same to you. In
24
this connection, Richard Lynn has indicated that your Mr. Geoff Beng was to
11:30:38 25
clarify queries he had previously raised.
As far as we can ascertain you are
26
in receipt of all of the relevant invoices and should be in a position to deal
27
with these."
28 29 11:30:47 30
Under the head "planning application cashflow". "I enclose as requested a schedule of projected costs associated with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:30:51
11:31:00
48 1
planning application.
The schedule is based on our overall application but
2
does not include for a planning appeal."
3 4
Fees to Monarch.
5
forwarded to Brian Gillies, a breakdown of the staff costs involved by MPSL of
6
the Draft Development Plan submission and result in lobbying.
7
will talk to Brian about this sum as no queries have been raised to date.
8
in complete agreement with you that it is essential that the matter be resolved
9
as quickly as possible and in that you may have the schedule to hand since the
11:31:20 10
14th of July '92.
By letter of letter of 14th July '93 Richard Lynn had
Perhaps you I'm
Perhaps we could hear from you."
11 12
Joint venture agreement: "We agreed at our meeting that you would instruct Ian
13
Scott to prepare a new agreement to take us through the completion of the
14
zoning/planning and we look forward to receiving this in due course which will
11:31:32 15
have our earlier attention.
I would like to conclude by saying that you in
16
recognition must be given to what has been achieved in obtaining commercial
17
zoning on 25 acres of land.
18
assisted by the fact that Monarch had engaged in the Dun Laoghaire project.
19
We were able to convince the councillors that the Cherrywood project would not
11:31:53 20
21
This decision we have, we belive was greatly
have an adverse impact on Dun Laoghaire and demonstrated our confidence in Dun Laoghaire in going ahead simultaneously with that development.
22 23
We are of the opinion that four houses to the acre will be achieved and the
24
residue of the lands and we continue to keep contact with the vital public
11:32:12 25
representatives to ensure that this objective is met.
There have been total
26
commitment given by the Monarch staff and management to the Cherrywood project.
27
And it would be greatly appreciated if due recognition was given to this by the
28
release of the monies due on Cherrywood by your good selves.
29
that a meeting between us would be beneficial to progress to matters, I am of
11:32:24 30
course available.
Yours sincerely."
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
If you may feel
11:32:28
11:32:35
49 1
It might have been fairer in a way had I read that letter to you.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 311
But I don't think that it greatly alters matters.
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 312
The schedule if we put it back up at 3791, is your schedule of projected fees
6
in relation to a planning application excluding the possible fees incurred in
7
an appeal, isn't that right? And what I'm asking you, Mr. Sweeney, is who
8
provided for you the figure of 40,000 pounds strategy consultancy fee in
9
relation to a planning application?
11:32:57 10
A.
I don't know.
11
Q. 313
And can you speculate as to how that figure was arrived at?
12
A.
There seem to be very bald figures put in there generally.
13 14
There's a
contingency of 100,000 also I see. Q. 314
11:33:28 15
But you agree with me that a strategy consultancy fee of that order is -anticipates a contribution to the political system?
16
A.
It seems to be the same.
17
Q. 315
Yes.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 316
It's now half eleven, Sir.
As the earlier payments?
I propose to move on to a new topics.
11:33:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
So we'll take a ten minutes break.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
24
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
11:34:10 25
26
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
27 28
MR SANFEY:
I wonder if I could just address the position of Mr. Paul Monahan?
29 11:50:59 30
Chairman, after Mr. Monahan gave his evidence earlier in the week, you made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:51:04
11:51:19
50 1
certain observations and said that you would give Mr. Monahan a further
2
opportunity in the course of this week to give additional evidence to the
3
Tribunal. And I had said that we would meet with Mr. Monahan and advise him
4
and take instructions and so on.
5 6
Now, can I say Mr. Chairman, we have done that.
7
considering his position.
8
opportunity for Mr. Monahan to give evidence this week anyway because
9
Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Dunlop had to be taken.
11:51:37 10
And Mr. Monahan is
I should say, it appeared that there wouldn't be an
So the present position is that
we hope to meet with Mr. Monahan and determine his position early next week.
11
And if we were to ask the Tribunal at that time for an opportunity for him to
12
give further evidence, we would make that clear to the Tribunal at the earliest
13
possible opportunity
14 11:51:49 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thanks fine.
16 17
MR SANFEY:
I'm grateful.
Thank you, Sir.
18 19 11:51:59 20
Q. 317
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Sweeney.
Mr. Sweeney, just before the break we were
dealing with the period June 1991 and if I could have 8927, please.
In August
21
1991 there appears to have been a meeting between Monarch representatives and
22
Anglo Irish Bank.
23
of this meeting.
24
working on it", that presumably is Phil Monahan.
11:52:28 25
And just if you look at the -- this is a handwritten note But if you look under the third line heading "sewer.
"PM
"Said to be on Minister's
desk awaiting approval."
26 27
That I presume is the contract document hadn't been received back by the
28
minister in relation to the Carrickmines sewer and the minister had to give
29
approval for the sanction of the funds for the construction of the sewer.
11:52:41 30
And
that somebody is updating the bank at that time, that is to say August 1991 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:52:46
11:52:59
51 1
it's an unsatisfactory letter I accept.
But would you accept that it does
2
appear to show that somebody from Monarch is advising the bank that the
3
document is on the minister's desk awaiting approval?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 318
And I think in September 1991, at 3326.
There was a meeting attended by you,
6
Mr. Lafferty, McCabe and Messrs. Lynn. And again, under the heading Cherrywood
7
"ES advised F McCabe that consideration was being given towards submitting an
8
outline planning application to bring forward construction of the sewerage
9
system", isn't that right? This was a strategy being devised at this stage
11:53:26 10
that is to say September 1991, to advance the construction or expedite the
11
construction of the sewage system that you would lodge a planning application?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 319
And you were advising there your planner that consideration was being given to
14
that.
11:53:46 15
And again, on the 25th of September 1991, at 3341.
There's a further
meeting between Monarch Properties Services Limited representatives and
16
representatives of experts retained by the company.
17
to 3342, which is the very last paragraph.
And if we could just go
18 19
Under the heading Carrickmines Valley sewage system "ES requested that a letter
11:54:05 20
be sent to each of the directors requesting assistance and having the
21
Carrickmines sewage system sanctioned."
22 23
I take it that you are requesting that a letter be sent to Mr. Glennane and
24
Mr. Monahan that they provide assistance in trying to have that constructed?
11:54:19 25
A.
26
No, Chairman.
What that means is a letter to the directors of each of the end
users mentioned in the previous paragraph.
27
Q. 320
Oh, I see, I'm sorry.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 321
In other words that the people who might take up options on the site.
A.
Yes.
11:54:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:54:37
11:54:53
52 1
Q. 322
That they might put exercise some influence in having the matter expedited?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 323
Yes.
Now, that takes us then I think to the end of November 1991 and at this
4
stage between September and November 1991, Mr. McCabe has put in a further
5
submission during the display period.
6
was the 3rd of December 1991.
And at 8095, I think there is a further meeting
7
held on the 25th of November.
Under the heading "Cabinteely zoning submission
8
to be lodged further meetings with O'Herlihy on Tuesday."
9
stage you had retained the services of Mr. O'Herlihy in relation to the matter,
11:55:18 10
I think the final date for submission
isn't that right, and he was PRI consultants, is that correct?
11
A.
Yes, it would be around about that time.
12
Q. 324
Yes.
13 14 11:55:31 15
And I think at this
And these led on to the road shows and the briefings and the videos that
we've heard about, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 325
And at 3522.
On the 3rd of December 1991, Mr. Lafferty is sending you a
16
memorandum advising you that himself and Mr. Richard Lynn had met Ms. Coffey,
17
Fianna Fail councillor for Dun Laoghaire, in connection with the Cabinteely
18
scheme.
19
any shopping development outside Dun Laoghaire.
11:55:59 20
And while she stated that she liked the scheme she would not support And they were able to tell
her that you were considering development in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 326
And again, would it be fair to say that whilst you did go on to develop both
23
the Bloomfield site and the Pavilion site, that it was a strategy at this time
24
to advise local councillors that you were not neglecting Dun Laoghaire.
11:56:18 25
you were going to develop Dun Laoghaire.
26
That
And try and calm their fears in
relation to the development of Cabinteely at the expense of Dun Laoghaire?
27
A.
Yes, this became a particular bone of contention with some councillors.
28
Q. 327
Yes.
29
A.
Who were very protective of Dun Laoghaire town centre.
Q. 328
But there was a benefit from Monarch's point of view at this time in promoting
11:56:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:56:42
11:56:59
53 1
their presence in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
The benefit at that time was to be towards the Cherrywood scheme.
3
Q. 329
Yes.
And in fact, I think you sought contributions from GRE at some stage in
4
relation to your outlay in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 330
And you sought it on the basis that this would be of benefit to the Cabinteely
7
project, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 331
Now, I think then at 2129, to return to your statement and dealing with 1992.
11:57:14 10
You there set out the involvement of Monarch in 1992, isn't that right? And
11
you say "This year also saw the planning stages for a road show in respect of
12
the lands at Cherrywood to explain the merits of the Monarch scheme to the
13
community. Bill O'Herlihy, public relations was involved in this and also
14
conducted staff training in meeting public representatives I think."
11:57:35 15
"In media/public relations expertise", isn't that correct.
Sorry.
And you say "As
16
part of this road show I would have met certain public representatives to lobby
17
in respect of the development in Cherrywood as part of this process I can
18
recall having lunch in the Shelbourne with Mary Flaherty TD, dinner with
19
Senator Councillor Don and Maeve Lydon in Kielys in Donnybrook and lunch with
11:57:54 20
Councillor Tom Hand at a Chinese restaurant in Sandymount."
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 332
And you deal with the other areas the Phoenix Park race course, the Blackrock
23
baths, the golf course and hotel resort in Donegal and the science conferences
24
in Hong Kong and Singapore."
11:58:11 25
Isn't that right? They were all projects that
you were involved in at that time?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 333
Just in relation to your meetings with Mary Flaherty, Don Lydon and Tom Hand,
28
can I ask you just in relation to Mary Flaherty, she has given evidence to the
29
Tribunal that you had asked her to have a word with her colleagues and seek
11:58:24 30
their support.
Would that be fair, a fair representation of what happened
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:58:30
11:58:53
54 1 2
between you? A.
No, Chairman.
That was near enough what happened but what my recollection of
3
what happened at that lunch was that we discussed the success, if you like,
4
that we had in Finglas shopping centre, of which she was very helpful to us.
5
And I didn't ask for any introductions but I simply said that I would be
6
meeting various councillors and would I have her permission to ask them to
7
contact her for basically a reference to sound our praises, hopefully.
8
was my recollection of it.
9
Q. 334
I see.
A.
She certainly did.
11
Q. 335
Yes.
12
A.
But I must say, she did not introduce me to anyone.
13
Q. 336
Now, at 2183.
11:59:16 10
14
That
And did she give that permission to you?
Again, you deal with that early period in late '91 early '92.
And you say "That Monarch started a road show with video models drawings and
11:59:38 15
perspectives of development taking it on public display over six or seven
16
consecutive weekends at various schools and other locations around the
17
Cherrywood area.
18
show and many of these were trained in media/relations where Bill O'Herlihy has
19
come from so that they could deal with the general public.
11:59:53 20
Each member of the Monarch Group was involved in this road
At the same time
a lobbying exercise was started with politicians and councillors, especially
21
those who were local and near the Cherrywood area including Donal Marren, Larry
22
Lohan, Larry Butler, John Barrett, Frank Smith, Don Lydon, Eamonn Gilmore.
23
This was co-ordinated by Richard Lynn and many of the Monarch staff were given
24
certain councillors to contact for their support.
12:00:13 25
I would have contacted
Flaherty, Don Lydon and Tom Hand in this respect."
Isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 337
Now, we do know that the councillors, if I could have 7144.
That is to say
28
Councillors Lydon and Hand.
29
department of Dublin County Council a motion which if successful would have
12:00:37 30
On the 4th of May 1992 lodged with the planning
improved the zoning on the lands, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:00:40
12:00:56
55 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 338
Now, you were assigned these two councillors you've told us in your statement.
3
Can I ask you, your involvement with these councillors and in particular any
4
involvement you may have had which led to the tabling of this motion by them?
5
A.
Yes.
I met them I think one for lunch and one for dinner.
And basically, I
6
was trying to explain Cherrywood to them.
7
attention on the science and technology end of it.
8
those meetings we didn't talk specifically about Cherrywood.
9
social and it was talking about travel and talking about this that and the
12:01:34 10
other.
11 12
I have to say that at It was pretty
And then at some point we would have talked about Cherrywood but not
an awful lot of it. Q. 339
13 14
And specifically having a bit of a
Do you know how Councillors Hand and Lydon came to table this motion, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Not specifically.
Q. 340
Who would have asked them to table the motion, do you know?
16
A.
Yes.
Most certainly it would have been Mr. Lynn.
17
Q. 341
Yes.
And did Mr. Lynn advise you that he had been successful in asking these
12:01:52 15
18 19 12:02:08 20
gentlemen to table a motion? A.
Not that I recall specifically but certainly I would have become aware of it.
Q. 342
Can I ask you how the -- how these two particular councillors were assigned to
21
your allocation of councillors that you would lobby?
22
A.
I can't say specifically but there was the luck of the draw.
23
Q. 343
Yes.
24 12:02:32 25
26
But from what you say Mr. Lynn also would have lobbied them at this
time? A.
Yes.
Q. 344
When you spoke with them you didn't speak with them in the context of putting
27
in motions?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 345
Did they ever ask you for any contribution towards the cost of putting in this
12:02:45 30
motion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:02:45
12:03:00
56 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 346
Did you know that a motion had been lodged by Councillors Lydon and Hand in May
3
'92?
4
A.
Um, did I know that the time?
5
Q. 347
Yes.
6
A.
Um, I would have known at that time, yes.
7
Q. 348
Did it -- it didn't surprise you I take it therefore having regard to your
8
discussions with them that they were promoting a motion which would have been
9
beneficial to Monarch interest?
12:03:13 10
A.
Yes, yes.
You mentioned previous to that the video.
11
Q. 349
Yes.
12
A.
I just wonder, Mr. Chairman, has the Tribunal seen that video?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
We haven't seen it.
12:03:27 15
16
Q. 350
MR. QUINN: I don't think we have, Mr. Sweeney.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 351
But we'll make efforts, you think it might be beneficial to the Tribunal's
19 12:03:35 20
deliberations? A.
Yes. I certainly think it would.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll certainly look at it.
23 24
Q. 352
12:03:42 25
MR. QUINN: In any event, as it happened.
The two councillors that you were
detailed to canvass, lobbied -- lodged a motion which was -- which if sucessful
26
would have been beneficial to the Monarch interest.
Isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 353
The text of that motion, did you have any input into the text of that motion?
29
A.
No.
Q. 354
Who would have advised Councillors Hand and Lydon about the text of the motion
12:04:04 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:04:05
12:04:08
57 1
do you know?
2
A.
Again, I'm speculating.
3
Q. 355
Yes.
4
A.
It would have been Mr. Lynn.
5
Q. 356
Now, that motion came on for hearing I think on the 27th of May 1992.
When
6
the manager at 7203 produced his own report, DP92/44.
7
if successfully carried, would have result in the a zoning of the lands to a
8
new line of the Southeastern Motorway at a density of residential piped sewage
9
on an action area plan, isn't that right?
12:04:36 10
11
Which was a map which
A.
Yes.
Q. 357
And some of the, but not all of the agriculturally previously zoned land would
12
have now been included in the action area plan for residential development?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 358
This would have been a significant uplift on the rezoning of the Carrickmines
12:04:51 15
land if successful?
16
A.
Yes, this would have been very successful.
17
Q. 359
Did you know that the manager was proposing that the lands be rezoned as we see
18 19 12:05:02 20
on this map? A.
Yes.
Q. 360
Was there much discussion within the Monarch Group in relation to the manager's
21 22
proposals and how they might be dealt with on the day? A.
23 24 12:05:20 25
26
Um, the main discussion would have been on the proposal that Monarch were putting across.
Q. 361
Which was being --
A.
Which was.
Q. 362
Being spearheaded by Councillor Lydon's and Hand's motion which we saw a moment
27
ago?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 363
Do you know how Councillor Lydon and McGrath came to propose the manager's
12:05:32 30
proposal on the day? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:05:33
12:05:46
58 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 364
Had there been any discussion within the Monarch Group on whether or not the
3
manager's proposals ought to be voted upon or supported?
4
A.
Not that I can recall.
5
Q. 365
In any event, the manager's proposals were not successful but a motion by
6
Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan for a C zoning was successful.
7
right?
isn't that
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 366
Why it was successful or why they had brought such a motion?
A.
Why the manager's thing ...
11
Q. 367
Wasn't successful?
12
A.
Wasn't successful.
13
Q. 368
This was a major setback within the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 369
Did it take you by surprise that the manager's proposal was unsuccessful?
A.
Yes, it took me by surprise because I think anything supported by the manager
12:06:04 10
12:06:14 15
16
I could never figure out why that happened.
I could never figure that out.
17
and his professional planners ought to be given a lot more credibility than to
18
be turned down on a vote.
19
Q. 370
12:06:44 20
And I think at 3706.
This is a note, possibly of a telephone conversation,
with somebody within Anglo Bank in relation to the what had happened on the
21
27th of May.
Possibly a conversation, a note of the conversation between you
22
and the note taker.
You'll have seen this in the brief?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 371
Do you recall having this conversation?
A.
I do.
Q. 372
And I think you were there advising the note taker of what had actually taken
12:07:03 25
26 27
place, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 373
And you were advising that the C zoning had in fact been successful?
A.
Yes.
12:07:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:07:14
12:07:30
59 1
Q. 374
2 3
on -- held at one house to the acre, isn't that right? A.
4 5
But that the residential zoning because of Sean Barrett's motion, had been held
Yes.
I tried to bring him down gently there, Chairman, by saying that there
was good news and bad news. Q. 375
And he concludes the note by saying that you were absolutely -- it was
6
absolutely inevitable that this will get the residential, presumably
7
residential zoning and that you would explain later.
8
manuscript entry there?
9 12:07:50 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 376
What were you going to explain to him later about the residential zoning that
11 12
you couldn't have told him at the time? A.
13 14
Do you see the very last
Well, it seems to have been a very short conversation and obviously, I kicked it a bit into touch.
Q. 377
12:08:11 15
And then I think on the 6th of July you advised Ansbacher of the situation, isn't that right? At 3768.
And again, you again highlighted the fact that
16
you had got the commercial zoning and that the residential zoning was -- you
17
were querying I think the procedures adopted on the day.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 378
And I think we know that Mr. Lydon at a follow-up meeting on the 12th of June
12:08:33 20
'92.
At 3743 queried the procedures adopted on the day, isn't that right?
21
A.
Yeah, I found that out but I didn't recollect that.
22
Q. 379
You didn't recollect that at the time?
23
A.
No, I knew that there was something funny about the manager's report getting
24 12:08:49 25
26
knocked. Q. 380
Now, so there matters lay as of May '92 you had the C zoning but you were back to square one in relation to the residential zoning.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
to me now.
12:09:05 30
Mr. Quinn, could I just ask Mr. Sweeney something that occurs
Mr. Sweeney, we know from the records that when the vote on the
manager's map was unsuccessful, the motion that Monarch had before them, the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:09:13
12:09:22
60 1 2
council, tabled by Mr. Hand, the late Mr. Hand and Mr. Lydon was withdrawn. A.
Yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
aware that the manager was putting a proposal on the table?
6
A.
Can I ask you.
You've already told Mr. Quinn that you were
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
terribly dissimilar to your motion?
12:09:34 10
A.
At that time and not extraordinarily dissimilar to -- not
Correct.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
Monarch about what would happen either of the manager's proposal was accepted
14
or not accepted?
12:09:49 15
A.
Was there any discussion -- contingency plan discussed within
Not in advance, Chairman, but I can say that I asked the same question as you
16
just did afterwards.
And I was told that it became -- the people became aware
17
that the motion had no chance because of the manager's thing going down.
18
therefore, why make things worse is the sort of thing.
And
19 12:10:16 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Fine, Mr. Quinn.
21 22
Q. 381
23 24 12:10:29 25
MR. QUINN: So the next matter or the thing of interest that arises, Mr. Sweeney, I think is the November 1992 General Election, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 382
And again there were disbursements made in relation to that election, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 383
There were two withdrawals and the Tribunal has been unable to find the cheques
29 12:10:47 30
of the source of the payments. of November 1992, at 3875.
One is for a sum of 10,000 pounds on the 17th
And the other is a sum of 5,000 pounds on the 19th
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:10:56
12:11:18
61 1
of November 1992, at 3917.
The 5,000 pounds cheque is at 8546.
2
you, Mr. Sweeney.
3
either of those, the proceeds of those cheques?
Can I ask
Do you know anything about the ultimate destination of
4
A.
Sorry, could you repeat again?
5
Q. 384
The first payment appears to be by way of cheque on the 17th of November '92
6
for 10,000 pounds.
And it's at document No. 3875.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think these are cheques written to Allied Irish Bank plc in
9
fairness to the witness.
12:11:33 10
11
Q. 385
12
MR. QUINN: Yes.
They appear to be written to the bank on which they are
drawn, Mr. Sweeney.
13
A.
Yeah, I did she these in the brief.
14
Q. 386
Yes.
A.
But I have no knowledge.
16
Q. 387
Who within Monarch would have knowledge of the ultimate payee of those cheques?
17
A.
Well the accountancy department would.
18
Q. 388
Was there any discussion, to your knowledge, at board level or otherwise, in
12:11:40 15
19
connection with 15,000 pounds worth of funds being made available to anybody
12:12:07 20
within Monarch during the election of 1992, November '92?
21
A.
Was there any discussion?
22
Q. 389
Yes.
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 390
Can you assist the Tribunal in any way in relation to those cheques?
A.
No.
Q. 391
The cheques were attributable to the Cherrywood stock.
12:12:18 25
26
Can you think of
27
anything as the project leader in relation to the Cherrywood development that
28
would require a 15,000 pounds expenditure in the middle of the election in
29
1992.
12:12:37 30
A.
What does "Cherrywood stock" mean? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:12:40
12:12:49
62 1
Q. 392
2
Yes.
You can take it when I say" Cherrywood stock" it's a cost in relation to
the Cherrywood development.
3
A.
Okay.
No, I can't.
4
Q. 393
Can you speculate?
5
A.
No, I can't, no.
6
Q. 394
Would you agree with me that it's unusual that there would be such large
7
disbursements by way of two cheques at that time attributable to the Cherrywood
8
project?
9
A.
Would I think it's unusual?
Q. 395
Yes, yes.
11
A.
Well looking at it now, no, I don't think it's unusual.
12
Q. 396
Why not?
13
A.
Well I have no reason to say that it's unusual.
14
Q. 397
But it's a -- looking at the books and records of Monarch Properties Services
12:13:07 10
12:13:25 15
Limited.
16
One doesn't see the payee of those cheques, isn't that right, or the
beneficiary of those funds?
17
A.
The beneficiaries are Allied Irish Bank.
18
Q. 398
Well, I mean, I suggest to you that they were cheques written for the purpose
19 12:13:46 20
21
of putting somebody in funds.
Isn't that right?
A.
Well I don't know.
Q. 399
Did you -- did the Monarch Group, Monarch Properties Services Limited have
22
borrowings with Allied Irish Bank in November '92?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 400
And do you think that that 15,000 was applied towards those borrowings?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 401
If it weren't applied towards those borrowings would you agree with me that it
12:14:01 25
26 27
would be an unusual way to treat the funds of Monarch Properties Services
28
Limited in 1992?
29 12:14:20 30
A.
I couldn't say whether it was unusual or not.
Q. 402
Yes.
One would normally I -- you gave evidence yesterday, Mr. Sweeney, of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:14:21
12:14:38
63 1
procedures that you put in place in relation to the payment of invoices etc.
2
A.
Exactly.
3
Q. 403
The payments are designated promotions and cash in the books of Monarch
4
Properties Services Limited?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 404
And one -- presumably procedures were in place so that an auditor or an officer
7
of the company would know where the funds of the company were being
8
distributed, isn't that right?
9
A.
12:14:58 10
Yes, I presume when it came to the end of the fiscal year that that the auditor would be questioning that sort of thing.
11
Q. 405
Yes.
12
A.
I'd be -- I wouldn't be surprised, no.
13
Q. 406
No.
14
And you wouldn't be surprised that he might question these two payments?
You a would be astonished if he didn't question them? They wouldn't be
found in the general promotions account if they were in relation to the
12:15:19 15
payment -- if they were assigned to the repayment of interest on a loan
16
outstanding, isn't that right? Maybe that's an accountancy point that should
17
be taken up with somebody else.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 407
But what I'm surprised at, Mr. Sweeney, is that you're not surprised there
12:15:37 20
should be two such large payments without any designation in the books and
21
records of the -- of Monarch Properties Services Limited.
And that they
22
should be assigned to the costs associated with the Cherrywood lands.
23
A.
Well I -- I'm not surprised because I can't see the whole thing in context.
24
Q. 408
I'll try and put it in context for you maybe by putting document No. 3877 on
12:16:07 25
the screen, Mr. Sweeney.
This is a -- an extract from Monarch Properties
26
Services Limited's journal accounts.
27
account" and you will see there a series of payments at this time, which we'll
28
be coming to in a moment, which were made to candidates in that election.
29 12:16:29 30
And it's under the heading "promotions
A.
I see that.
Q. 409
And in the middle of those payments you will see these two payments about half Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:16:34
12:16:53
64 1
way down the page you will see "AIB cash 10,000.
2
see that?
AIB 5,000 cash."
Do you
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 410
Does that help you, Mr. Sweeney, in coming to a view in relation to these
5
payments?
6
A.
In coming to a view?
7
Q. 411
As to whether they are unusual payments or unusual withdrawals from the books
8 9 12:17:09 10
and records of Cherrywood? A.
Well I would expect the accountancy guys to be able to answer that.
Q. 412
You feel that Mr. Glennane and his staff would be able to tell the Tribunal
11
what those payments were in respect of?
12
A.
I certainly don't know.
13
Q. 413
But you don't know.
14 12:17:22 15
16
And you say there was no discussion in relation to these
payments at the time. A.
No.
Q. 414
Would you as a director of the company have to sign off on the books and
17
records of Monarch Properties Services Limited at year end?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 415
And you would have signed off on the accounts in relation to these?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 416
And you would have signed off on these payments as a director of the company?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 417
And can you not tell the Tribunal what these two payments were in relation to?
24
A.
Well they were never brought to my attention.
Q. 418
Had you -- had you stumbled across the document on screen when you were signing
12:17:32 20
12:17:43 25
26
the books and records of Monarch Properties Services Limited as director, would
27
you have raised or queried with the accounts department in relation to those
28
payments?
29 12:18:04 30
A.
I may have.
I can't positively say.
Q. 419
But would you have had had you seen those payments as we see them there now on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:18:09
12:18:15
65 1
screen?
2
A.
I don't know for sure.
3
Q. 420
Would you have raised a query in relation to them, Mr. Sweeney?
4
A.
I don't know for sure.
5
Q. 421
Does it surprise you that Mr. Glennane doesn't know what they were in relation
6 7
to? A.
Yes.
8 9 12:18:26 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn, would you mind.
Would you go back up to the top
of the document I want to see the heading?
11 12
MR. QUINN: 3877.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could you increase the heading?
12:18:33 15
16
MR. QUINN: To get a designation one has to go to the previous page which is --
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
you.
12:18:44 20
Just before you do that, Mr. Quinn, I'm sorry to interrupt
There is a reference there to journal.
transaction.
And then there's the word
Is that cheque number? Or maybe Mr. Sweeney might help us.
21
you see the very top.
22
there's a number.
Journal is first.
And then there's something and
23 24 12:18:58 25
MR. QUINN: It's a transaction number I think.
I don't believe it's a cheque
number because we have the cheque in relation to one of them.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just could I look at the cheque for the a moment.
28
really I point I just want to ...
29 12:19:13 30
MR. QUINN: 8456 on the screen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
That's
If
12:19:13
12:19:16
66 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thank you very much.
2 3
MR. QUINN: That's the cheque for 5,000.
We don't have the cheque for 10,000.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Do we know the number of that cheque?
6 7
MR. QUINN: Yes, the cheque No. is 7102 I think.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
11
MR. QUINN: Yes.
And in relation to the 10,000 it's 7055.
12
to the one on screen, it's the last of the centre columns at 3877.
12:19:35 10
But in relation
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thanks very much.
12:19:52 15
16
Q. 422
17
MR. QUINN: In any event, Mr. Sweeney, you can't advance the Tribunal's inquiry in relation to these payments.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 423
And you say there was nothing unusual about the payments?
A.
Well I can't comment on that.
Q. 424
Well you were a director of the company.
12:20:03 20
21
You signed off on the books and
22
records of Monarch Properties Services Limited as a director.
23
books and records as certified by you, Mr. Sweeney.
24
input in relation to the payments.
They are your
You may not have a direct
But I'm asking you to comment as a
12:20:21 25
director and as somebody who had responsibility in relation to the payments and
26
the keeping and books and records of the company as to whether or not you see
27
anything unusual about those two payments?
28
A.
29 12:20:43 30
Well if I may say so, Chairman, the first time I saw these internal accountancy documents were a short time ago in the brief.
Q. 425
What I had asked you, Mr. Sweeney, was if you saw anything unusual about the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:20:47
12:20:56
67 1
payments?
2
A.
If I had known.
3
Q. 426
Yes.
4
Had you seen the document on screen when you came to write your name as
a director to the books and records of the company --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 427
-- would you have raised a query in relation to those payments?
7
A.
Well I may have or I may not have.
8
Q. 428
There were two fairly large round sum payments at that time.
9
that they weren't in relation to the repayment of interest to Allied Irish
12:21:14 10
Banks, are you saying or is it your evidence to the Tribunal that there was
11 12
nothing unusual about them? A.
I did in my recollection I did query payments in the accounts but they were
13
generally payments that were out of my own field of expertise.
14
said yesterday, related to accountancy and legal.
12:21:45 15
16
And assuming
And, that as I
I generally queried those.
I was also quite content about the construction side of it. Q. 429
Uh-huh.
Well, would you have a necessity on the construction side of
17
Cherrywood to make disbursements in November 1992? There was no planning in
18
place.
19 12:22:04 20
There was nothing being constructed in November '92 in Cherrywood?
A.
No.
Q. 430
So whatever they were in relation to, it wasn't in relation to construction.
21
Isn't that right?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 431
That required a 15,000 pounds payment in November '92?
24
A.
No, no, no. I'm not saying that.
Q. 432
Where do you think those payments went, Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
I have no idea.
27
Q. 433
Well can you not speculate as the project leader or the person with overall
12:22:19 25
28 29 12:22:42 30
But there were construction things going on at the time.
responsibility for the Cherrywood site in November '92? A.
Um, I could speculate but I don't know what it was.
Q. 434
Well speculate? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:22:43
12:23:09
68 1
A.
Well I really don't know what it was. So ...
2
Q. 435
Well you were a director of the company, so you're in the best position to
3
speculate in relation to what the payments may have been in relation to.
4
A.
Well, I can't speculate on it.
5
Q. 436
Nobody brought them to your attention?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 437
They wouldn't appear to have been properly written up in the books and records,
8 9 12:23:18 10
I don't know what they were for.
isn't that right? A.
In the books and records?
Q. 438
Yes.
That is to say it doesn't appear from anything that has been discovered
11
to the Tribunal that the ultimate payee of those cheques is identified, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
It's just Allied Irish Bank?
14
Q. 439
Yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 440
They appear to have been cheques written, I suggest to you, for the purpose of
12:23:32 15
16 17
putting somebody in cash.
And indeed, one of the cheques has a designation
18
"cash" written after it and you see on the screen.
19
pounds?
You see the one for 10,000
12:23:48 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
They both have.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Do you see on the left AIB 10,000 cash?
24 12:23:55 25
CHAIRMAN:
They both have.
26 27 28
MR. QUINN: And so does the -A.
So they must have been for cash then.
Q. 441
MR. QUINN: Yes.
29 12:24:05 30
Well do you have any idea who within Monarch Group would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:24:10
12:24:25
69 1
have required 15,000 pounds in cash in the middle of that local -- General
2
Election?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 442
Does that raise any -- or help to raise any queries in your mind Mr. Sweeney,
5
in relation to the payments, the fact that they have a cash designation?
6
A.
No but it appears that they were cash.
7
Q. 443
Yes.
8 9 12:24:45 10
Was it usual, for example, to write cheques to cash for such large sums
within the Monarch Group? A.
I don't know.
Q. 444
Yes.
11
I would have thought it was.
And what in Cherrywood would in 1992 would require the expenditure of
15,000 pounds in cash?
12
A.
In Cherrywood?
13
Q. 445
Yes.
14 12:25:03 15
16
In connection with Cherrywood.
What in connection with Cherrywood in
November 1992 would require a 15,000 pounds cash expenditure? A.
I can't think of anything.
Q. 446
Who within Monarch would be the best person to ask for an explanation in
17
relation to that, Mr. Sweeney?
18
A.
The accounts department.
19
Q. 447
Mr. Glennane?
A.
Mr. Glennane.
21
Q. 448
Mr. Glennane doesn't know.
22
A.
Well Mr. Monahan.
23
Q. 449
Mr. Monahan is dead, Mr. Sweeney, unfortunately.
24
A.
Yeah, God rest him.
Q. 450
Anybody else?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 451
So here we have, as we see it on the screen, a promotions account, general
12:25:14 20
12:25:33 25
Anybody else?
28
promotions account in connection with Cherrywood.
29
cheque payments to the political representatives in that election, in November
12:25:56 30
1992.
Which contains all of the
And in the middle of those we have these two cheque payments to Allied Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:26:02
12:26:21
70 1
Irish Banks with the designation "cash" isn't that right? And you say that
2
that does not cause you any concern or doesn't come as a surprise to you.
3
A.
I have to keep repeating myself here.
4
Q. 452
No.
I don't know about those cheques.
But had you known about them when you signed off on the accounts having
5
regard to the -- where they were assigned and the designation given to them and
6
the lack of supporting documentation.
Would you have found it surprising?
7
A.
I did not know about them when the accounts were signed off.
8
Q. 453
Yes.
9 12:26:44 10
But had you known about them would you have raised queries in relation
to why these two cheques had been written? A.
I may or I may not have was my answer, for the third time.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
think, well certainly the total would make them the second biggest item in that
14
list.
12:27:10 15
Would you -- does it not surprise you, given your experience in
business, that there is no identity of the person or persons who benefit from
16 17
Mr. Sweeney, would you, given the large amounts involved and I
these cheques? A.
Well it does surprise me now.
18 19 12:27:27 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yeah.
But I didn't see it at the time.
So ....
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
I know you can't be certain now.
24
A.
But had you -- this is the question -- had you seen it at the time.
Yes.
12:27:37 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
you noted them at the time and seen the designation "cash" in both cases.
28
were not told as to who was to benefit from these cheques or the -- these cash
29
amounts.
12:28:02 30
No one can.
As to what your reaction would have been.
But had
Is it -- do you think it likely that you would have raised a query
as to what they were for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And
12:28:03
12:28:18
71 1
A.
Yes, I think it would be likely but I don't know whether I would have or not.
Q. 454
MR. QUINN: Now, if I could have 1582 please.
2 3
This is a list supplied,
4
Mr. Sweeney, by Monarch in relation to payments to the political system during
5
that election.
6
Election.
And that is to say the General Election and the Seanad
Did you know that payments were being made at that time?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 455
And was that discussed at board level?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 456
And was there agreement as to the amounts that would be paid by the company?
A.
There was general agreement. Again, to repeat what happened in the previous
12:28:33 10
11 12
one, it was generally discussed but the amounts weren't discussed specifically.
13
Q. 457
And who had the overall responsibility for the determining the amounts?
14
A.
The amounts appeared to me to have been determined by, in the main, requests
12:29:04 15
16
from people. Q. 458
They range from 1,000 to 2,000.
And we know some of the people who had been
17
unsuccessful in the General Election were also in receipt of further funds for
18
the Seanad election.
19 12:29:21 20
A.
Yes, I've seen this list.
Q. 459
Yes.
21
Isn't that right?
Did you know of the list at the time? Did you know that these payments
were being made at the time that they were being made?
22
A.
I knew that payments were being made to various councillors and politicians.
23
Q. 460
Did you know that they were being written up in the books and records in
24 12:29:39 25
26
relation to general promotions Cherrywood? A.
Yes, I knew that they were being allocated under Cherrywood.
Q. 461
And again, I don't want to bog you down on detail, unless you require me to do
27
so but I think you've accepted that they were part of the accumulation of the
28
costs of the Cherrywood site.
29 12:30:05 30
A.
Yes, at that time.
Q. 462
Yes.
Isn't that right?
And that was a board decision, presumably? Now, if I could bring to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:30:08
12:30:29
72 1
your attention to further payments.
If I could have 3889.
There were two
2
payments I think made in November '92 to the leaders of Fine Gael and Fianna
3
Fail, isn't that right? One in the sum of 2,500 and the other in the sum of
4
5,000.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 463
Did you know that those payments were being made?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 464
And at 3904, we see the payment request in relation to the cheque to the leader
9
of Fine Gael, and that cheque is at 3905.
12:30:40 10
to the leader of Fianna Fail.
And then at 3894 we have the cheque
And we have an accompanying letter of 18th
11
November 1992 at 3891.
Did you have any input, Mr. Sweeney, into the text of
12
that letter that's now on screen?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 465
Did you know that such a letter had been written?
A.
At that time, no.
16
Q. 466
When did you come to know that such a letter had been written?
17
A.
When I saw the brief.
18
Q. 467
Does it surprise you that the cheques, the letter accompanying the cheque
12:31:01 15
19
speaks about the assistance provided by the members of that party in relation
12:31:18 20
to the rezoning of the lands?
21
A.
It doesn't surprise me, no.
22
Q. 468
Now, I think that you were to have an involvement in relation to those payments
23
in that there were invoices raised for them, isn't that right at 4317?
24
there is a document dated the 29th of June '93.
12:31:49 25
The --
Which sets out the basis of a
figure of 20,307 pounds which includes fees to Noel Smyth but also includes
26
these contributions of 2,500 and three?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 469
And I think that that figure of 20,370 then was contained in an invoice dated
29 12:32:15 30
the 29th of June '93, at 4302 and invoice No. 2066, isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:32:15
12:32:28
73 1
Q. 470
This was part of the 15,500 third party costs that we dealt with before lunch
2
which was the future projection limitation of payment, isn't that right?
3
18,500 I should have said.
Sorry.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 471
And then I think there was a further invoice raised then in relation to
6
management fees.
Isn't that right? At invoice No. 2062.
Which is the 29th
7
of June '93 and these invoices were submitted, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 472
And you got involved when GRE raised issues in relation to those invoices.
12:32:52 10
Isn't that right? I think on the 7th of July '93.
If we could have 4303,
11
please.
Invoice No. 2062, which contained the sums to the party leaders was
12
queried, isn't that right? And it says the writer of that letter.
13 14
This that is to say Mr. Baker in a letter to you says under heading paragraph 3
12:33:17 15
invoice No. 2062.
"This matter relates to the additional management fee. And
16
should therefore include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 included in
17
invoice 2066.
18
No. 2062 to be passed for payment."
If you should arrange confirm this I shall arrange for invoice
19 12:33:34 20
What was the special management fee?
21
A.
Where is that?
22
Q. 473
Do you see at paragraph No. 3.
23
A.
Additional management fees?
24
Q. 474
Yeah.
12:33:52 25
Effectively what Mr. Baker is saying to you there, Mr. Sweeney is that
you have included a sum for 7,500 in that invoice but in fact it should have
26
been included in another invoice which related to special management fees.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 475
Isn't that right?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 476
You'll recall that?
12:34:04 30
Heading invoice No. 2062?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:34:06
12:34:16
74 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 477
And I think that you had occasion then to write back to him on the 13th of July
3
1993, at 4314.
If we look at the third paragraph.
4 5
You say that "As regards invoice No. 2062 in your reference to the two payments
6
of 2,500 and 5,000 you will note that these sums were bona fide to the parties
7
concerned.
8
have been disbursed through the additional management fee.
9
therefore feel that they could not be written out in the way that you suggest."
They therefore would not rank within the payments envisaged which And I would
12:34:36 10
11
That seems to imply, Mr. Sweeney, that fees written out under the heading
12
"special management fee" are fees which are not bona fide paid to third
13
parties, isn't that right?
14 12:34:55 15
A.
Well that's not right.
Q. 478
Well you tell the Tribunal now, Mr. Sweeney, what that -- what the special
16
management fee was.
17
A.
Well there was a number of fees being presented to GRE --
18
Q. 479
Uh-huh.
19
A.
-- for 50 per cent input into the joint venture.
12:35:22 20
headings.
They came under various
I was at pains to try to make sure that Monarch weren't going to be
21
at any loss in this.
22
was becoming increasingly and more increasingly involved from a management
23
point of view.
24
tried to negotiate and I did negotiate with GRE that they would recognise the
12:35:46 25
26
And Monarch, as you'll notice from the build up to this,
And I was very anxious to try to get that money back.
So I
input being put in by Monarch to achieving the zoning and the progress on the development.
So all of these were headings.
27 28
What Martin Baker, of GRE, would have indicated to me at various times, would
29
have been that they preferred one heading rather than another.
12:36:17 30
matter to me what heading, so long as we got the money. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And it didn't
12:36:24
12:36:43
75 1
Q. 480
Yes.
But you advised Mr. Baker in that letter that they were bona fide
2
payments.
And therefore, weren't payments that were envisaged within the
3
additional management fee heading, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 481
You agree with me, Mr. Sweeney, that that implies that payments envisaged under
6 7
I think possibly that Mr.--
the heading additional management fee were not bona fide payments? A.
I don't accept that for a moment.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
12:37:06 10
fee, if you like, for labour supplied by Monarch.
11 12
Well I think, I mean, it could mean that the management fee is a
parties.
It wouldn't involve third
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 482
MR. QUINN: As a result of your negotiations, you issued two new invoices were
13 14 12:37:24 15
issued, isn't that right and the fees were ultimately paid? Or 50 percent of
16
the fees were ultimately paid?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 483
Now, if I move on to 1993 and if I could have 8129, please.
19
is reverting to your statement, Mr. Sweeney.
12:37:49 20
You set out, this
And you say that under the
heading 1993 development submissions for the -- sorry.
2129, I'm sorry.
21 22
You are setting out here what, from your statement what's happening in 1993
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 484
And you say meetings in Brussels Metropole Hotel re science park for
12:38:09 25
Cherrywood.
I also attended a science park conference in Montpelier, France
26
also represented was Donal Marren from Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council. Science
27
park proposals for Prague science park and Tallaght shopping centre Prague.
28
As part of these I would have been present at meetings involving Ambrose Kelly,
29
Liam Lawlor, Frank Dunlop and Philip Brendan O'Mara, Philip Monaghan and these
12:38:30 30
would have involved discussions regarding a proposal -- sorry regarding a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:38:34
12:38:50
76 1
possible purchase of the Alpha Building in Prague and we dealt with that
2
yesterday, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 485
This is what was going on in 1993.
And I think that in July 1993 you had a
5
meeting I think with the manager, isn't that right? If we could have 4312.
6
And at this stage, Mr. Sweeney, you were formulating your proposal in relation
7
to the possibility of a science and technology park on the site, isn't that
8
right?
9 12:39:08 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 486
And would it be fair to say that the strategy here was to put forward to the
11
planners a planning gain which might be of -- have an attraction to them which
12
would facilitate their attitude towards accommodating an uplift in the rezoning
13
of the lands?
14
A.
12:39:35 15
16
Yes, I may say though, Chairman, that that wasn't the very first start. They'd been working on the science park for two years in advance of that.
Q. 487
17
Did the manager know that you had been promoting the concept of a science park prior to this meeting?
18
A.
The meeting was when?
19
Q. 488
July 1993.
A.
Um, I can't say for sure but I would believe he would.
Q. 489
But just to put it in context, the strategy at this time, Mr. Sweeney, is to
12:39:49 20
21 22
bring the planners on board in relation to the -- the Carrickmines area, isn't
23
that right?
24 12:40:07 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 490
And the carrot, so to speak, from their point of view, is to put forward
26
something which would improve the prospect of job re creation in the area?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 491
And the science park was being formulated as something that would achieve that
29 12:40:22 30
end, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I have to say that every time the science park was put forward it was an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:40:26
12:40:40
77 1 2
open door both to councillors and to the public and to anyone. Q. 492
3
Yes.
But your proposals at this time related to a possibility of industrial
zoning on the site, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes because a science park doesn't come under --
5
Q. 493
Yes.
6
A.
-- the category of industrial.
7
Q. 494
Yes.
And we see there from that memo where you're discussing the matter with
8
the county manager.
9
within his county would -- is something that would have attraction to him.
12:40:59 10
And obviously anything that would promote job creation
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 495
And you had, as you -- throughout this year and earlier I think you as you say
13
had been promoting the concept of a science and technology park.
14
picked up on this idea internationally and you had decided that this might be a
12:41:17 15
very good location for such a park.
You had
Isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 496
Would it be fair to say that there were two areas of progress at this stage
18
vis-a-vis the rezoning.
19
in relation to the Development Plan which was under review and there was also
12:41:34 20
There was the question of convincing the councillors
the question of convincing the planners themselves in relation to the lands?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 497
And was one of the difficulties at this stage the fact that there was no
23
industrial zoning on the map at this time? In other words, that what was on
24
display or what was under review were the amendments, the 1992 amendments, so
12:41:57 25
to speak.
So, in other words, since industry wasn't included in the '92 plan
26
it wasn't something that was likely to come back before the current council.
27
Isn't that right?
28
A.
The industrial had been put forward by the planner earlier.
29
Q. 498
Yes.
A.
And they had been --
12:42:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:42:14
12:42:25
78 1
Q. 499
That's way back in 1990 and that was knocked?
2
A.
So in this form it was kind of trying to bring it back again.
3
Q. 500
Yes but there was a legal impediment as far as the manager was concerned I
4
think, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 501
I understand?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 502
So you were negotiating with the manager on the concept of putting in some
9
industrial zoning on the site.
12:42:36 10
And at councillor level you were seeking to
reverse the density in relation to the residential zoning?
11
A.
Not to reverse it, to increase it it.
12
Q. 503
To increase the density?
13
A.
From one to four.
14
Q. 504
When I say reverse, yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 505
-- that limited density to one house per acre.
12:42:48 15
16
To reverse a decision --
17
prepared.
18
by Mr. McCabe on the 30th of July 1993.
19
sought to have an industrial zoning put on the lands.
12:43:09 20
If we look at 4321.
And I think submissions were
There were a series of submissions prepared
Can you advise or help
the Tribunal, Mr. Sweeney, as to whether any of those submissions were lodged
21
in 1993?
22
A.
Could I see the date of that?
23
Q. 506
30th of July 1993.
24
A.
That to me looks as if it is a submission.
Q. 507
Yes.
12:43:28 25
One of which at least related --
26
4321.
There were three different submissions, one of which we know for certain
wasn't submitted.
27
A.
Oh,.
28
Q. 508
And we're not sure if either of the other two were submitted, Mr. Sweeney.
29 12:43:47 30
I'm just wondering if you may or may not know whether or not it was submitted. A.
There are three letters. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:43:49
12:44:00
79 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Three drafts I think.
2 3
Q. 509
MR. QUINN: Three drafts.
4
gone there in.
5
did go in?
And one of them may have gone in or may not have
I'm just wondering can you assist the Tribunal if any of them
6
A.
Could I have the hard copies and I might ...
7
Q. 510
Yes.
I won't delay you now.
8
They are at pages 4321.
9
sent is at 8556 to 8558.
I'll get them to you over lunch Mr. Sweeney.
The second is at page 7221.
To 7223 and the one not
12:44:26 10
11
Now, Mr. Sweeney, we move on in the early part.
12
But if I just go back a little bit to -- I had start in the July '93 with that
13
meeting with the manager in relation to the possibility of the science and
14
technology park.
12:44:43 15
I've slightly jumped ahead.
And you agreed with me that you had the difficulty of trying
to get industrial zoning at this stage of the review of the plan because of
16
what had happened in May of '92.
17
1990, in 1993, you came to be involved with Mr. Dunlop in connection with the
18
site.
19
But at some stage and possibly in March
Isn't that right?
A.
In March?
Q. 511
Of 1993.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 512
Now, your counsel has taken Mr. Dunlop through -- your counsel has taken Mr.
12:45:03 20
23
Dunlop through your evidence or what your evidence would be in relation to
24
that.
12:45:28 25
And you were here yesterday and you heard his examination of Mr. Dunlop
and you heard Mr. Dunlop's replies?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 513
And just in a broad sort of a way, there is enormous difference between your
28
recollection of what happened and Mr. Dunlop's recollection of what occurred in
29
relation to his appointment to this project, isn't that right?
12:45:42 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:45:42
12:46:11
80 1
Q. 514
And in a moment, you are going to give your recollection of what transpired,
2
Mr. Sweeney.
3
Monarch have suffered the reversal in May '92.
4
March '93.
5
either before the summer or after the summer.
6
in November '93, isn't that right? It comes back before the council on the
7
11th of November '93, as it happens.?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 515
Yes.
12:46:30 10
But in the first instance, we are at a situation where the -We have moved forward now to
The review of the draft '91 plan is coming forward at some stage, In the event it comes forward
You have lobbied it and you have told us about your efforts with
Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand.
And we know that Mr. Lydon and Mr. McGrath had
11
proposed a manager's proposals which would have been assistance.
12
your astonishment had been unsuccessful in May '92?
And they to
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 516
That had been proceeded by a fairly detailed campaign involving PR consultant
12:46:47 15
Mr. O'Herlihy, the road show and your efforts to deal with the concerns of
16
those objecting and local residents.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 517
Now, if we could have 4041.
19
documents Mr. Sweeney.
12:47:06 20
this in some detail.
This is -- and you will have seen it in the
And I have no doubt that you will have gone through
But it may in some way assist you.
This is a telephone
21
attendance taken within Mr. Dunlop's office.
22
9:55 on that morning, that Monday morning, at ten to ten Mr. Lawlor's secretary
23
appears to have rang to say and to advise Mr. Dunlop that he had arranged a
24
meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch House at five o'clock for that very same
12:47:29 25
day.
And you will see there that at
Do you see that attendance?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 518
Now, Mr. Monarch -- Mr. Lawlor was somebody well known to you.
You had been
28
dealing with him since 1987 and had quite a substantial amount of dealings with
29
him in relation to Tallaght.
12:47:44 30
A.
Isn't that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:47:45
12:48:06
81 1
Q. 519
2
And had Mr. Lawlor been involved in any of the strategy or the campaign or the lobbying which had taken place in the lead up to the May '92 vote?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 520
Had he been involved post May '92 and prior to March '93?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 521
Does it surprise you that Mr. Dunlop's office would produce a document which
7
purports to show and a meeting being arranged by Mr. Lawlor with you for Mr.
8
Dunlop?
9
A.
Does it surprise me?
Q. 522
Yes.
11
A.
Well I can see it.
12
Q. 523
I can accept that it exists.
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 524
But from what -- does it surprise you that Mr. Lawlor was in a position or that
12:48:29 10
12:48:39 15
a document exists which purports to show that Mr. Lawlor was in a position to
16 17
arrange a meeting between Mr. Dunlop and yourself? A.
18 19
No.
Because I -- I've -- I believe that Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor met and
between them decided that Mr. Dunlop was going to be brought on to the team. Q. 525
12:49:07 20
Okay.
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
And this may have been my fault.
asked you was Mr. Lawlor involved in the period up to May '92.
21
When I
You said no.
But could he have been involved without you knowing about his involvement?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 526
And when I asked you had he been involved after May '92 and before March 1993.
24
You said no.
12:49:30 25
extent that he had discussions with Mr. Monahan in relation to Mr. Dunlop, at
26 27
But you now believe that he must have been involved to the
least? A.
Yes.
28 29 12:49:41 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And just before you go on.
You'd agree, Mr. Sweeney.
Earlier this morning you told -- Mr. McCabe reported to you that Mr. Lawlor had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:49:48
12:49:56
82 1 2
some involvement in a meeting with him on the 5th of December '91? A.
Oh, yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
correct?
6
A.
Regarding the plans for the Carrickmines area is, that
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: So pre '92 he had an involvement and certainly a recorded
9
involvement on the 5th of December 1991.
12:50:04 10
A.
Not with you directly.
I didn't notice that.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But do you accept that?
Yes.
14 12:50:07 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You didn't demur when Mr. Quinn put it to you earlier today
16
that Mr. McCabe reported to you I appreciate, I don't think you were at the
17
meeting?
18
A.
That's quite correct.
Q. 527
MR. QUINN: Now, you -- you have advised the Tribunal that it was your belief
19 12:50:21 20
21 22
that Mr. Lawlor met with Mr. Monahan and it was decided that Mr. Dunlop would
23
become involved.
24 12:50:36 25
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 528
And that was a strategy, presumably, being devised at that stage in relation to
26
the rezoning? A strategy being devised between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 529
At what stage -- and leaving aside your first meeting with Mr. Dunlop now,
29 12:51:01 30
Mr. Sweeney. A.
At what stage did you become aware of that strategy?
The strategy? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:51:02
12:51:12
83 1
Q. 530
Of involving Mr. Dunlop in the project.
2
A.
When Mr. Monahan phoned me or talked to me about it.
3
Q. 531
Okay.
4 5
Well you better tell the Tribunal then what Mr. Monahan said to you
Mr. Sweeney. A.
6
He asked me to go and meet with Mr. Dunlop with a view to bringing him on to the team, that would assist in the lobbying of councillors.
7
Q. 532
That Mr. Dunlop would assist in the lobbying of councillors?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 533
Did he tell you how he came to suggest that Mr. Dunlop be brought on board?
A.
No.
Q. 534
Did he tell you, for example, that he had -- it was at the suggestion, as you
12:51:33 10
11 12
imply, of Mr. Lawlor?
13
A.
Not that I can recall.
14
Q. 535
That it was Mr. Lawlor.
A.
Well he may have mentioned that he had met him.
16
Q. 536
That he had met Mr. Lawlor?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 537
So we now have a situation some time prior to you meeting with Mr. Dunlop of a
12:51:49 15
19
But I had to assume that. Why do you assume that it was Mr. Lawlor?
discussion between you and the late Mr. Monahan, at which Mr. Monahan advised
12:52:04 20
you that having discussed the matter with Mr. Lawlor, he would like you to take
21
Mr. Dunlop on board?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 538
To assist with the lobbying of councillors?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 539
Did you know of Mr. Dunlop at this time?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 540
You had, I think, previously engaged the services of at least two PR
12:52:15 25
28 29 12:52:27 30
consultants.
Isn't that right?
A.
Um, ...
Q. 541
Mr. O'Herlihy and I think you had some in-house PR consultants and others? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:52:32
12:52:39
84 1
A.
Yes, Pembroke.
2
Q. 542
Yes?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 543
And I think you have told us this morning that Mr. Lynn was interfacing with
5
councillors in relation to what had taken place to date.
Isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 544
So what was it that Mr. Monahan told you Mr. Dunlop would add to the efforts
8 9 12:53:07 10
with councillors? A.
He didn't say anything specifically.
Q. 545
Did you discuss with Mr. Monahan the terms of which you would engage Mr.
11
Dunlop?
12
A.
Generally.
13
Q. 546
Well how long was Mr. Dunlop to be engaged for?
14
A.
Until the vote.
Q. 547
Okay.
16
A.
That was left up to me within various parameters.
17
Q. 548
Well what were the parameters?
18
A.
The parameters would have been -- well the fee was 4,000 a month.
12:53:19 15
19
And that
arose really from the previous employment of Mr. O'Herlihy, who tended to pan
12:53:50 20
21
How was he to be paid?
out that amount per month. Q. 549
Can I take it that at this stage, as a Director of Monarch Properties Services
22
Limited, that you could counter sign the payment of any amount of money within
23
the Company? I'm not saying that you would have done so.
24
have done so if you wished?
12:54:11 25
A.
Counter sign?
26
Q. 550
Well you could have sanctioned or authorised the payments.
27
A.
I think that's not quite accurate.
28
Q. 551
You don't think you could have sanctioned payments?
29
A.
Any amount of money.
Q. 552
Well within reason.
12:54:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
But that you could
12:54:25
12:54:38
85 1
A.
Within reason.
2
Q. 553
Yes.
3
But most of these things were within reason.
If we -- you were the person who was responsible, I take it, for
engaging professionals on this project?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 554
In fact, if we could have 2971, please.
6
This is at a meeting held way back on the 13th of March 1990 under the heading
7
"professional engagement and payments".
8 9
"At the outside Eddie Sweeney indicated that the procedures for engaging
12:54:55 10
professionals was through himself and PL."
Who is P L? Pat Lafferty is it?
11
A.
Pat Lafferty.
12
Q. 555
"The method of arranging payments to professionals was through DC", which
13 14
presumably is Dominic? A.
No.
Q. 556
Mr. Clarke is it?
16
A.
Damien Clarke.
17
Q. 557
"And PL to countersign". Who is PL, Mr. Lafferty?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 558
Was that the procedure in relation to Cherrywood?
A.
That had been the procedure for a considerable time.
21
Q. 559
Yes.
22
A.
And it was intended to be the procedure and --
23
Q. 560
So all other things being equal, you would place an ad or source a PR firm --
12:55:07 15
12:55:18 20
24
you would engage that professional firm or people within the professional firm
12:55:38 25
and the payments would be arranged through DC, PL to counter sign?
26
A.
Um, that would relate mainly, Chairman, to construction professionals.
27
Q. 561
Well it doesn't say construction professionals on the document we have on
28 29 12:55:59 30
screen, Mr. Sweeney. A.
But DC and PL were involved in nothing other than --
Q. 562
Construction. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:56:00
12:56:15
86 1
A.
-- than construction.
2
Q. 563
I understand.
So now you knew that Mr. Dunlop, did you have any say in the
3
circumstances under which Mr. Dunlop came to be retained? In other words, did
4
you have any input into whether or not Mr. Dunlop ought to be retained?
5
A.
I was asked to go and meet him.
6
Q. 564
Yes.
7
A.
To bring him on to the team.
8
Q. 565
Yes.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 566
By the time.
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 567
Did you raise with Mr. Monahan the prospect of maybe re-engaging Mr. O'Herlihy,
12:56:21 10
13 14 12:56:33 15
The decision had been taken?
You had no input into the decision, isn't that right?
for example? A.
No, I didn't.
Q. 568
Did you raise with Mr. Monahan the fact that Mr. Lynn may be upset since he was
16
carry carrying out that type of function?
17
A.
No, I didn't.
18
Q. 569
Did you ask Mr. Monahan if he had discussed or considered the decision with
19 12:56:52 20
21
others, that is to say other than with Mr. Lawlor? A.
No, I didn't.
Q. 570
Did you discuss with Mr. Monahan the success of Mr. Dunlop in other projects or
22
in this type of activity?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 571
Or his background in this sort of activity?
A.
No, I knew nothing about his background.
26
Q. 572
Yes.
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 573
Yes.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 574
And that was explained to you at the time?
12:57:03 25
12:57:19 30
You did not know Mr. Dunlop or you did not know of Mr. Dunlop? It was explained to me he was a PR consultant. But he was being retained for the purposes of lobbying councillors?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:57:21
12:57:31
87 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 575
And you were to bring him on board, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 576
Was there any good reason why Mr. Monahan himself would not have contacted Mr.
5
Dunlop?
6
A.
He may well have, I don't know.
7
Q. 577
Yes.
But certainly as far as your conversation with Mr. Monahan is concerned,
8
it was in the context of a direction to you by Mr. Monahan that Mr. Dunlop be
9
brought on board to assist in lobbying councillors in relation to this matter?
12:57:48 10
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 578
This is your final chance in the review of the '83 Plan, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 579
It was a critical period in relation to the lands in question and increasing
14 12:58:01 15
the zoning density on the lands? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 580
Very crucial period from Monarch's overall financial situation?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 581
These lands had to be developed.
19
Permission had to be gained on the lands so
that some of the lands could be sold off and reduce the indebtedness of
12:58:17 20
Monarch?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 582
And the strategy as outlined to you and directed to you by Mr. Monahan was that
23
Mr. Dunlop be brought on board.
24
somebody ring Mr. Dunlop so that you could meet with him and talk to him about
12:58:32 25
26
Now, did you ring Mr. Dunlop or did you have
his possible engagement? A.
My recollection having looked at all of the brief and the diaries and the thing
27
is that Mr. Monahan asked me to meet him on the 8th of March at five o'clock
28
but for some reason, I couldn't do that.
29
day.
12:58:58 30
Q. 583
So it was deferred to the following
And --
Sorry, apologies.
I'm interrupting you now, Mr. Sweeney, and I shouldn't and
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:59:02
12:59:12
88 1
I'm sorry. But you are saying that your recollection has been improved by the
2
documents contained in the brief?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 584
That it wasn't always your recollection that you had been involved in hiring
5 6
Mr. Dunlop. A.
7
No.
Isn't that right?
In fact, in my statement, Chairman, I have to apologise for that.
when I did the statement in ...
8
Q. 585
2003 I think.
9
A.
In '03.
Q. 586
Yeah.
11
A.
I did it without really thinking of the importance of Mr. Dunlop.
12
Q. 587
Yes.
13
A.
And I had nothing in terms of any paper.
12:59:25 10
14 12:59:39 15
That
I had been away from Monarch for six
years. Q. 588
16
You are now giving an explanation, Mr. Sweeney, of why your statement was incorrect?
17
A.
Yes and I'm sorry.
18
Q. 589
And I think in your interview to the Tribunal you were also incorrect in your
19 12:59:52 20
recollection in relation to this matter. A.
That was in?
21
Q. 590
In 2000.
22
A.
Did I say that?
23
Q. 591
Yes.
24
June 2000.
I think you -- I think you -- and I can open it if necessary to you.
But I think you were of the view that you might not have been involved in the
13:00:05 25
26
Isn't that right?
appointment of Mr. Dunlop at that time? A.
Yes, it's possible.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
It's one o'clock.
Sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
Sorry.
13:00:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
13:00:12
13:00:42
89 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
It's one o'clock.
We'll adjourn until two o'clock.
Yes.
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
13:00:49
14:03:39
90 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
4 5
Q. 592
Good afternoon, Mr. Sweeney.
6
A.
Good afternoon.
7
Q. 593
We were dealing before lunch with your involvement with Mr. Dunlop.
8
1993, but just before I get to that and maybe to short circuit matters
9
somewhat.
14:03:59 10
In March
You recall or your evidence in relation to the two cheques for 10
and 5,000 pounds in November 1992 made payable to Allied Irish Banks which had
11
the designation "cash" you recall that before lunch?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 594
Now, you'll have seen similar type cheques in the brief for '93, '94, '95 and
14
'96.
14:04:18 15
Can the Tribunal take it that your evidence is the same in connection
with those cheques?
Namely, that you can't offer any explanation in relation
16
those cheques and it's more or less the same.
That is to say your evidence as
17
it was in relation to the cheques that we dealt with before lunch?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 595
And is it your evidence effectively that these are matters for the accounts
14:04:36 20
department and in particular Mr. Glennane?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 596
And possibly Mr. Lynn?
23
A.
I don't know about Mr. Lynn.
24
Q. 597
Okay.
14:04:52 25
Now, just to revert to your meeting then with Mr. Dunlop.
advised the Tribunal I think before lunch that you had this conversation with
26
Mr. Monahan.
27
were initially to meet him on the 8th.
28
you met him on the 9th.
29 14:05:08 30
You've
You were to meet Mr. Dunlop.
Your recollection is that you
You couldn't meet that appointment and
Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 598
And it would appear from the telephone attendance that maybe Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:05:11
14:05:23
91 1
organised the meeting insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
And now would you tell the Tribunal your recollection of that meeting with Mr.
4 5
Dunlop? A.
Yes, the meeting was held in his office in 25, Upper Mount Street.
And I
6
explained to him that we wished to employ him as a PR consultant to assist with
7
the lobbying of Cherrywood.
8
of Cherrywood.
9
per month.
14:06:25 10
We discussed the project briefly.
He was aware
And we discussed and agreed fees in the amount of 4,000 pounds
Mr. Dunlop requested that an up front payment be made.
And that
was also agreed.
11 12
A success fee was also brought up by Mr. Dunlop.
13
was beyond my scope.
14
in relation to the detail of the meeting or the detail of Cherrywood, I have
14:06:58 15
And I said that I was, that
And that it had to deal with Mr. Monahan on that.
posted that to a subsequent meeting with the executives, some executives of
16
Monarch, which would be Richard Lynn and Phil Reilly.
17
Q. 600
You -- sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
18
A.
And as I recall, that was the extent of the meeting.
19
Q. 601
That's a fairly detailed recollection of what transpired at the meeting,
14:07:26 20
Mr. Sweeney, isn't it?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 602
You didn't always have that detailed recollection of what transpired at that
23 24
meeting.
Isn't that right?
A.
It was helped dramatically by the brief.
Q. 603
Yes.
26
A.
And all of the information.
27
Q. 604
Yes.
14:07:36 25
28 29 14:07:53 30
So
What was it within the brief that allowed you to give such detail that
you had obviously forgotten? A.
Well, the various figures were there.
The fact that I went back to the
office, as I recall now, and reported to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan what had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:08:01
14:08:26
92 1
happened.
I then subsequently reported to our joint venture partner, GRE.
2
Q. 605
Did Mr. Glennane know that you were going to meet Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
Oh, I don't know.
4
Q. 606
When you originally recalled that meeting I think you had a recollection that
5
He certainly knew of it later.
Mr. Lawlor was at the meeting, isn't that right?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 607
You say that when you met with the Tribunal legal team in 2000 you didn't tell
8 9
them that Mr. Lawlor was at the meeting? A.
No, I would have said that Mr. Lawlor was at several meetings.
Q. 608
Yes.
11
A.
Yes, certainly he was at subsequent meetings.
12
Q. 609
Now, Mr. Dunlop was paid an up front payment, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 610
Did you agree the amount of up front payment?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 611
So you agreed a monthly retainer and an up front payment?
17
A.
I agreed the monthly retainer.
18
Q. 612
Yes.
19
A.
And I think he then requested an up front payment which we then agreed.
Q. 613
Yes.
21
A.
It was.
22
Q. 614
And the monthly retainer was 4,000?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 615
So he was getting little in excess of six weeks fees up front, sorry six months
14:08:41 10
14:08:58 15
14:09:10 20
14:09:25 25
I'll come to the subsequent meetings.
And I think the up front payment was 25,000 pounds?
fees up front.
26
A.
Approximately, yes.
27
Q. 616
And this was in March.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 617
So you were paying him up to October?
A.
Exactly when, yes, I suppose so.
14:09:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:09:38
14:09:56
93 1
Q. 618
And I think the vote was in November, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 619
So really in essence you were paying him effectively the entire of his payment
4
up front, save for one month, namely, October or November?
5
A.
A very big portion of it.
6
Q. 620
Yeah.
7
Now, there's nothing in writing between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in
relation to that agreement, isn't that right?
8
A.
No, you but I would have taken notes at the time.
9
Q. 621
And are you surprised Monarch have been unable to produce those notes in
14:10:06 10
discovery to the Tribunal?
11
A.
Well it would be helpful if they did but I am surprised.
12
Q. 622
They did exist at some stage?
13
A.
I always take notes of things like that.
14
Q. 623
Who would have sanctioned the payments?
A.
The payments --
16
Q. 624
That is to say the up front payments, if we could have 4051.
17
A.
I would have.
18
Q. 625
You would have sanctioned that payment?
19
A.
I would have reported that to accounts and said this had been agreed.
Q. 626
The admittance advice that we see on screen here, Mr. Sweeney, is initialled
14:10:20 15
14:10:34 20
21
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
22
A.
At the bottom?
23
Q. 627
Yes.
24
A.
It's PC, I think that's --
Q. 628
Mr. Clarke is it?
26
A.
Pat Caslin.
27
Q. 629
Caslin, yes.
28
A.
There were two PCs.
14:10:50 25
29 14:11:04 30
Do you recognise who initialled that?
There was Pat Caslin and Pat Cooling. I'm not too sure
which one that was. Q. 630
I'm sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
What direction would you have given Mr. Caslin in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:11:09
14:11:20
94 1 2
relation to that payment? A.
I don't know if I spoken to Mr. Caslin.
I would certainly have spoken to
3
Mr. Glennane and told him. He would have transmitted the same information to
4
Pat Caslin.
5
Q. 631
Do you recall discussing the matter with Mr. Glennane?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 632
Do you recall telling him that Mr. Dunlop had been retained?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 633
And do you recall telling him that you had, at Mr. Monahan's suggestion, spoken
14:11:30 10
with Mr. Dunlop.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 634
Sorry.
13
A.
And that was after the meeting.
14
Q. 635
I accept it was after the meeting.
14:11:38 15
But after the meeting and before the
payment, are you saying you had a conversation with Mr. Glennane where you
16
discuss with Mr. Glennane the terms in which Mr. Dunlop had been retained?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 636
Including the payments per month and the up front payment?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 637
And you would have directed Mr. Glennane to release monies to Mr. Dunlop on
14:11:52 20
21
foot of that agreement?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 638
And either you directly to Mr. Caslin or through Mr. Glennane, directed that
24
that payment as we see on screen, for the 15,000 and also if we could have
14:12:12 25
4062, a further payment for 10,000, be released?
26
A.
I didn't differentiate between 15 and 10,000.
27
Q. 639
Yes.
28 29 14:12:34 30
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney, why was it necessary to issue two separate
remittance advices and two separate cheques to Mr. Dunlop? A.
I've noticed that.
Q. 640
Yes.
I've no idea.
It may have been at his request.
That request would have been made, would have to have been made to you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:12:38
14:12:45
95 1
at the meeting.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 641
Do you think it might have been made subsequently?
4
A.
Well I don't understand it.
5
Q. 642
Now, if we look at 4045.
We see the entries in relation to the possible
6
meeting on the 8th.
7
meeting perhaps with Messrs. Lynn and Reilly for 5:15 on the 9th.
8
are no further meetings entered as I can see it on that diary with you or any
9
representative of Monarch between the 9th and the 12th.
14:13:18 10
11
A possible meeting with you at 11:30 on the 9th.
And a
But there
Isn't that right?
A.
No.
Q. 643
So it's -- if there were -- if it were Mr. Dunlop's desire to receive two
12
cheques, that would have been -- would have had to have been communicated to
13
you perhaps at that meeting on the 9th which you say it took place on the 9th?
14
A.
Not necessarily, Mr. Chairman.
Q. 644
Was Mr. Dunlop on the telephone to you after your meeting with him on the 9th.
16
A.
No, not that I recall.
17
Q. 645
Yes.
18
A.
Yes, to set up the --
19
Q. 646
Yes.
A.
-- the agreement.
21
Q. 647
Yes.
22
A.
But after this agreement was set up, I didn't have an awful lot to do with it
14:13:37 15
14:13:53 20
23 24
It's a surprise to me to see that it's two cheques.
But you were the one who had contact with him, isn't that right?
for some time. Q. 648
14:14:06 25
Yes.
Did you say that -- do you think that it was Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly that
gave the direction that two cheques issue?
26
A.
I wouldn't think so, no.
They wouldn't be --
27
Q. 649
The amount of 25,000 as being an up front payment, was that agreed with you?
28
That sum.
29
up front payment but the precise amount that there be an up front payment.
14:14:25 30
In other words, not just at agreement in principle that there be an
Was that agreed at that meeting? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:14:27
14:14:45
96 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 650
As a matter of probability would you agree with me that Mr. Dunlop must have
3
sought the two cheques at that meeting at that time?
4
A.
No, he didn't.
5
Q. 651
He didn't.
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 652
And who would Mr. Dunlop have contacted after you had spoken with him and asked
8 9 14:14:46 10
for two cheques to be made payable to him? A.
I don't know that.
Q. 653
Did you, other than Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn, did you give any any other contact
11
They must have been in contact some how or other.
names within the company?
12
A.
Did I give him contact names?
13
Q. 654
Yes.
14
People that he might be able to contact in relation to monies which he
was alleging were due to him.
14:15:07 15
Namely, 25,000 so that he could give the
direction that had been given to him in two separate cheques?
16
A.
Not that I recall.
17
Q. 655
So that's why I say to you, Mr. Sweeney, that as a matter of probability the
18 19 14:15:22 20
direction of the two cheques was given to you at your meeting with him? A.
No, it certainly was not.
Q. 656
And can you give any explanation as to how Mr. Dunlop dealing fresh with a
21
company, could have asked for two separate cheques be issued to him and the
22
person he had negotiated those cheques with was the only person he had contact
23
with at that time?
24 14:15:43 25
A.
No, I'm surprised myself.
Q. 657
But in any event, you believe it was at Mr. Dunlop's request that the two
26
cheques were issued?
27
A.
That's one explanation and one explanation that I can ...
28
Q. 658
It might have been to facilitate Monarch Properties Services Limited that they
29 14:16:01 30
decided to issue two cheques? A.
I don't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:16:02
14:16:14
97 1
Q. 659
Certainly there was no invoice for these cheques?
2
A.
I noticed that.
3
Q. 660
Yes.
4
So the cheques issued in the absence of an invoice on your instruction
after your discussion with Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
Yes, it was very quick.
6
Q. 661
Yes.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 662
Now, then I think you had a meeting with Mr. Dunlop or at least you are noted
9
Almost immediately?
as having a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 18th of March.
14:16:27 10
7971.
If I could have
Do you recall a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 18th of March?
11
A.
Not specifically.
I'd a number of meetings with him after that.
12
Q. 663
We'll deal with the meetings as we come to them in the brief, Mr. Sweeney.
13
But this was a meeting some six days after the cheques were drawn, isn't that
14
right?
14:16:54 15
A.
Where is that?
16
Q. 664
The bottom left hand corner.
17
A.
Question mark?
18
Q. 665
Yes.
19
A.
I don't know if that was a meeting or not.
14:17:09 20
You see Eddie S, you?
And I would like to know if I have
got that in my diary.
21
Q. 666
Yes.
22
A.
Well not from that I don't.
23
Q. 667
Okay.
24
You don't believe you met him so soon after your initial meeting?
If we could have 4133.
Monarch Properties Services Limited did
receive I think an invoice dated the 10th of April 1993 from Mr. Dunlop.
14:17:28 25
Do
you see that invoice?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 668
Now, you had dealings with Mr. Lawlor going back to the Tallaght development.
28
You had no contact with Mr. Lawlor in relation to Cherrywood but you knew as a
29
result of your conversation with Mr. Monahan that at his, at Mr. Lawlor's
14:17:49 30
suggestion, you were now being instructed to involve Mr. Dunlop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't that
14:17:53
14:17:59
98 1
right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 669
So you knew that Mr. Lawlor was now involved in the strategy concerning
4
Cherrywood?
5
A.
Well I knew he was in the background.
6
Q. 670
Yes.
7
A.
He had made that introduction.
8
Q. 671
Yes.
9
A.
I met with Mr. Lawlor several times after that.
Q. 672
Did he?
11
A.
Frank Dunlop was present.
12
Q. 673
Yes.
14:18:15 10
Did you speak to Mr. Lawlor after you spoke with Mr. Dunlop? At meetings at which --
Would it be fair to say that after Mr. Dunlop's involvement in March '93
13
and up until November '93, Mr. Lawlor came back into the picture so to speak as
14
a strategist or an advisor in relation to the Monarch Group in relation to
14:18:34 15
Cherrywood?
16
A.
I don't recall him talking about strategy or anything like that.
17
Q. 674
Well what involvement did he have?
18
A.
Well the only clear involvement I can recall was about Prague which was really
19 14:18:46 20
in his head at some point. Q. 675
I think that starts around September '93?
21
A.
I think it may have been earlier.
22
Q. 676
You think it was earlier? But the big project as far as you were concerned at
23 24
this stage was Cherrywood, isn't that right? A.
Certainly, yes.
Q. 677
Do you recall receiving that invoice that we see on screen, Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
I've signed it so I've ...
27
Q. 678
You have' approved it for payment?
28
A.
Ivor' said "okay."
29
Q. 679
Yes.
14:18:58 25
14:19:17 30
That means that the accounts department could issue a cheque on foot of
it, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:19:18
14:19:43
99 1
A.
I'd say so.
2
Q. 680
And it appears to have been paid on the 1st of June 1993?
3
A.
I don't know when it was paid.
4
Q. 681
We -- you do know that the Tribunal cannot find a cheque to Mr. Frank Dunlop &
5
Oh, there, yes.
Associates of the 1st of June 1993 in the sum of 12,100 pounds?
6
A.
There seems to be great confusion about all of these cheques.
7
Q. 682
There shouldn't be confusion, would you agree with me, Mr. Sweeney?
8
A.
Well I can't add to it.
9
Q. 683
Well there shouldn't be confusion.
14:19:55 10
This is a retainer of a PR consultant for
a development company, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 684
There should be no confusion.
There should be correspondence.
We should see
13
your memo of your meeting in terms of which Mr. Dunlop was retained.
14
should see invoices, isn't that right?
14:20:08 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 685
But there is confusion and you heard Mr. Dunlop's evidence in relation to that
17
invoice yesterday.
18
Isn't that right?
19 14:20:19 20
We
A.
I did.
Q. 686
Yes.
21
He didn't think that that invoice had issued from him.
In any event, would it be fair to say that you treated this as a Frank
Dunlop & Associates invoice that ought to be certified as being payable?
22
A.
Obviously.
23
Q. 687
But in fact, what you should have been certifying for payment was an invoice
24 14:20:39 25
26
for 25,000 pounds.
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah, exactly.
Q. 688
Now, the services being provided there were public affairs strategy and its
27
implementation, isn't that right? That's what you certified as being payable?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 689
Not lobbying of councillors?
A.
No.
14:20:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:20:57
14:21:26
100 1
Q. 690
And I think you drew a certificate.
If I could have 4142.
2
payments certificate, 80884.
3
April '93.
4
the 1st of June '93.
5
to the invoice we saw a moment ago?
This is a
Which appears to have been drawn on the 10th of
Do you see that -- sorry.
The 1st of June -- which was paid on
Isn't that right? Which would suggest that it's related
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 691
Are you certifying the payment or are you certifying that it should be paid in
8 9 14:21:45 10
that certificate? A.
It looks as if I am certifying the payment.
Q. 692
That it should be -- well the certificate.
If we could go back to 4133.
11
Your certificate on the invoice is "okay" and your initials.
12
right?
Isn't that
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 693
And a moment ago you said that based on that, that a cheque should issue, isn't
14:21:58 15
that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 694
Now, if we go to 4142.
This is a payments certificate.
18
certificate to anybody that would wish to see it.
19
fact been made by Monarch Properties Services Limited?
14:22:11 20
Is this a
That this payment had in
A.
This looks as if it's trying to provide the paper back up.
21
Q. 695
For somebody else?
22
A.
To the payment that they had been made or part of the payment that had been
23 24
made. Q. 696
14:22:30 25
Yes.
In other words in, this is a certificate to a third party that payment
had been made of 12,100 pounds to Frank Dunlop & Associates and that payment
26
was effected on the 1st of June '93.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 697
If I could have 4133 again.
29 14:22:53 30
Isn't that right?
Are you saying, Mr. Sweeney, that a payment of
12,100 pounds was paid to Frank Dunlop & Associates on the 1st of June 1993? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:22:54
14:23:20
101 1
Q. 698
Now, I think you -- we have a -- Mr. Dunlop has produced.
If I could have
2
4204.
This is a copy invoice No. 834 dated the 19th of May 1993.
3
of 15,000 pounds in respect of public affairs consultancy services.
4
that right? Do you recall seeing the original of that invoice?
For a sum Isn't
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 699
That invoice appears to have been paid per Mr. Dunlop's records by way of two
7
cheques on the 19th of May and the 17th of September in the sum of 7,500 pounds
8
each.
9
A.
14:23:45 10
Um, can I say, Mr. Chairman, all of these invoices are all very mixed up. what I'd agreed was 25,000 be paid up front.
And
There seems to be an attempt
11
here retrospectively, to provide invoices and back up to cover that.
12
is getting very confused.
And it
13 14 14:24:05 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well we're equally confused.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 700
MR. QUINN: There's no reason why Mr. Dunlop couldn't have provided to you and
16 17 18 19 14:24:14 20
why you couldn't have certified a 25,000 pounds payment to him by this date? A.
None at all.
Q. 701
And yet your certificate certifies a much lesser sum as having been paid to him
21
and having been paid to him on a date when it wasn't paid, isn't that right, on
22
the 1st of June '93?
23
A.
That's why I think it's very confusing.
24
Q. 702
Yes.
14:24:33 25
And Mr. Dunlop has said that the invoice of the 10th of April '93 wasn't
one of his invoices even though it appears to be one of his invoices, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Which one?
28
Q. 703
That's the one on the 10th of April 1993.
29 14:24:48 30
4133.
pounds. A.
Yeah, I heard that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
For the sum of 12,100
14:24:49
14:25:06
102 1
JUDGE KEYS:
Mr. Sweeney, I wonder could I just ask you one question.
2 3
Why would you okay a payment in June of '93, that's the 1st of June '93.
4
can't remember the sum.
5
Why would you okay that payment when you'd already come to an agreement with
6
him for a payment of 25,000 which he had been paid already? If the terms of
7
the agreement in relation to his remuneration is correct as described by you at
8
the meeting on the 9th of March?
9
A.
14:25:36 10
I think it's 4133.
I
For, was it 12,000? 12,100.
Well, Chairman, because it fell within the amount of the 25,000.
And it seems
to try in some way to reflect the fact that the 25,000 was split into two
11
payments.
12 13
JUDGE KEYS:
14
this, he was paid 15,000 and 10,000 very shortly after the meeting of the 9th
14:25:53 15
16
Yes but my understanding was, and I'm subject to correction on
of March. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
terms of the agreement you had reached with him.
14:26:01 20
A.
That meant he was fully paid up to October or November on the
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE KEYS:
23
now sanctioned a further payment of 12,100.
24
agreement which you had reached with him in relation to remuneration? In fact
14:26:18 25
But does that not contradict the
you're paying him more than what you said you had agreed on the meeting on the
26 27
Isn't that correct? And yet before November had come, you had
9th of March. A.
Yes but I would have thought that that was to back up the previous payments.
28 29 14:26:34 30
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Of the 12 and the 10 and the 15?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:26:35
14:26:47
103 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
see what other ones are put to you.
3
A.
But -- how can that be? I mean, wasn't there other -- well we'll
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE KEYS:
6
this was being done all retrospectively then?
7
A.
But it seems rather strange to me, did you not -- you thought
I think it was an exercise to get the paperwork in order.
8 9 14:26:56 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
In order.
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
I see.
13 14
Q. 704
14:27:03 15
MR. QUINN: If we could have 4219, this is a certificate that 10,000 be paid to Mr. Dunlop on the 26th of May '93 and we see a cheque at 4221 made payable to
16
Frank Dunlop & Associates in the sum of 10,000.
17
Mr. Sweeney.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 705
That's nine months.
14:27:26 20
We're now up to 35, 000,
So that's going to take us beyond the relevant date.
Isn't that right? And take us outside the contract period?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 706
Now, Mr. Dunlop says he never received that cheque.
23 24
You heard his in evidence
that regard. A.
I heard that, yeah.
Q. 707
Can you assist the Tribunal in any respect in relation to this cheque?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 708
Did you authorise this payment?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 709
Who would have authorised that payment?
A.
I don't know.
14:27:36 25
14:27:49 30
The payment is there.
I didn't authorise it.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:27:52
14:28:10
104 1
Q. 710
2
If we could have 4209.
Did Mr. Glennane authorise the payment, Mr. Sweeney?
You see the top right hand corner of the ...
3
A.
That's Mr. Glennane's signature.
4
Q. 711
Yes.
5
Does that imply that he had something to do with the issue of that
cheque?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 712
And he knew that Mr. Dunlop had been retained and he would have known the
8 9 14:28:18 10
circumstances under which he had been retained? A.
Yes.
Q. 713
And he would have known that by issuing that cheque to Mr. Dunlop he was paying
11
Mr. Dunlop outside the period of his contracted, that he was now being paid
12
35,000.
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 714
Well in any event, you can't assist the Tribunal in any respect in relation to
14:28:38 15
that cheque or how it came to be written or how it may have fallen into
16
somebody else's hands?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 715
Did you know that by June 1993 Mr. Dunlop had received 35 -- or was per the
19
books and records of Monarch Properties had received 35,000.
14:28:56 20
take the invoice for 12,100 into account, he had received 47,100 pounds?
21
A.
Yes, he seems to have been doing very well.
22
Q. 716
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop has an entry for an eight o'clock meeting with you, at 4266.
23
For the 28th of June 1993.
24
on the 28th of June that Mr. Dunlop might have attended?
14:29:24 25
A.
26
Do you recall a meeting an eight o'clock meeting
I can't recall it specifically but that would fall into the category of meeting at that time.
27
Q. 717
Yes.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 718
Was that in connection Cherrywood?
A.
Yes.
14:29:34 30
In fact, if you
Would you have an early morning meeting with Mr. Dunlop?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:29:35
14:29:54
105 1
Q. 719
Who would have attended that meeting other than yourself and Mr. Dunlop.
2
A.
I can't really say.
3
Q. 720
Who was in the habit of attending those meetings between yourself and Mr.
4 5
Dunlop? A.
6 7
Well, it could have been Richard Lynn, Phil Reilly, Noel Murray.
All of them
had inputs into ... Q. 721
8 9
But it could have been a number of people.
They would all have -- they would all have attended from time to time meetings between you and Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yes, they would all have inputs into the lobbying.
Q. 722
And would there have been minutes taken of those meetings?
11
A.
Notes, yes.
12
Q. 723
Those meetings should be noted and there should be minutes available for those
14:30:04 10
13 14 14:30:14 15
meetings? A.
Notes, yes.
Q. 724
Yes.
16
Who would have attended with Mr. Dunlop? Would Mr. Lawlor have attended
those meetings?
17
A.
It's possible.
18
Q. 725
In relation to the lobbying at Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 726
Could you give the Tribunal a flavour of the type of conversation one would
14:30:26 20
21 22
Mr. Lawlor did attend briefly at some of those meetings.
hear at those meetings? A.
Yeah.
I think we'll be saying how are things going and then people would give
23
a short description of how they were getting on with the lobbying and that's
24
the sort of thing, it would be a monitoring meeting.
14:30:49 25
Q. 727
Yes.
You recall --
26
A.
There wouldn't be a long meeting, now.
27
Q. 728
Yes.
You recall earlier this morning, Mr. Sweeney, that you indicated that in
28
the run up to the, I think it was the '92 vote, you had been assigned an
29
allocation of councillors.
14:31:08 30
A.
I think Councillor Lydon and Hand and Flaherty?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:31:09
14:31:24
106 1
Q. 729
2
Had there been an allocation of councillors to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly and Mr. Dunlop and indeed perhaps yourself and maybe Mr. Murray?
3
A.
To a loose extent, yes.
4
Q. 730
And who were the councillors assigned to Mr. Dunlop?
5
A.
That I don't know.
6
Q. 731
Yes.
7
A.
If you recall.
8 9 14:31:34 10
11
That was very much up to Mr. Dunlop.
If you would take on board my role was really to set him up
and do it. Q. 732
Yes.
A.
And hopefully gain the result at the end.
Q. 733
And was he bringing back a positive feedback to the meetings in relation to his
12
efforts at lobbying?
13
A.
The meetings were positive.
14
Q. 734
Yes.
14:31:57 15
And all three, that is to say well all four, and everybody at those
meetings were updated at each meeting on the extent of the lobbying of the
16
individual people assigned to the lobbying.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 735
There's an -- on the 1st of July 1993.
19
Eddie Sweeney, Monarch.
14:32:19 20
Isn't that right?
At 4266, there is a 12:30 meeting for
Could you have had a meeting on the 1st of July with
Mr. Dunlop? That's on Thursday the 1st of July.
21
About midway.
Bottom left hand corner.
You see 12:30 Eddie Sweeney?
22
A.
I could have but I have no recollection.
23
Q. 736
Again, that would be a meeting similar to the one you have described?
24
A.
No, I think the one I've described would be the early morning meetings.
Q. 737
Okay.
14:32:41 25
If we could have 4277.
Mr. Dunlop appears to have come in into
26
possession of a cheque from Monarch for 7,500 pounds on the 1st of July 1993.
27
Do you see that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 738
That remittance.
14:33:04 30
Again, do you see Mr. Glennane's signature on the top right
hand corner of that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:33:05
14:33:10
107 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 739
Does that signify that Mr. Glennane would have known that that cheque was
3
written?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 740
And did you ask Mr. Glennane to write that cheque?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 741
Mr. Dunlop would now have an additional 42 -- he would this in fact have a
8
42,100 excluding the 12,100 which he may or may not have been paid.
9
that right?
14:33:28 10
Isn't
A.
Uh-huh.
11
Q. 742
He would have been paid substantial monies at this stage?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 743
Did you give Mr. Dunlop that cheque at that meeting on the 1st of July?
14
A.
I never gave Mr. Dunlop any cheques.
Q. 744
Did Mr. Glennane ever attend any of those meetings?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 745
Did anybody at those meetings give Mr. Dunlop a cheque?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 746
Did Mr. Dunlop ask for money at that meeting?
A.
No.
Q. 747
So are you saying that the timing of the meeting and the issuing of the cheque
14:33:42 15
14:33:54 20
21 22
are just coincidental?
23
A.
If the meeting did take place.
24
Q. 748
Yes.
A.
Then it was definitely coincidental.
Q. 749
If we could have 4319.
There's a further meeting at ten o'clock.
27
I think Monarch again.
You see the top left hand corner, Mr. Sweeney for the
28
26th of July? Do you recall that meeting? It's the last entry on the Monday.
14:34:03 25
26
29 14:34:34 30
A.
At 12.
Q. 750
It's 12. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Eddie and
14:34:34
14:34:49
108 1
A.
I thought. Yeah.
2
Q. 751
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop at 12 on a Monday in July?
3
A.
I can't recall the actual meeting.
4
Q. 752
There's 30th of July.
5
On the same page.
The on the following "Friday 11:00
Eddie/Monarch."
6
A.
I see that.
7
Q. 753
Would Mr. Lawlor have attended those meetings?
8
A.
I can't recall that meeting.
9 14:35:01 10
MR. SHIPSEY:
Chairman, sorry.
If I can just give some assistance here in
11
relation to this.
I mentioned yesterday that we had made discovery of
12
Mr. Sweeney's diary.
13
Mr. Quinn has been referring to, entries in Mr. Sweeney's diary.
And there are in respect of some of the matters that
14 14:35:19 15
Now, some of them, at least two of the three that have been mentioned so far,
16
include not only Mr. Lawlor, LL, FD but also Mr. Ambrose Kelly.
17
Now, that might give some assistance as to what the purpose of the meeting was.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
I suppose --
14:35:34 20
21
Q. 754
MR. QUINN: If Mr. Ambrose Kelly was, is signified as having been present at
22
the meetings, Mr. Sweeney, does that suggest that it was a meeting in relation
23
to the Prague project?
24 14:35:49 25
A.
Well certainly you would jump to that conclusion.
Q. 755
Did Mr. Ambrose Kelly have any involvement in relation to Cherrywood at this
26
time, that is 1993?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 756
And he had no involvement in relation to Cherrywood at any stage --
29 14:35:59 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn, perhaps you would take from Mr. Shipsey the diary.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And
14:36:05
14:36:22
109 1
where you are putting to the witness an entry in Mr. Dunlop's diary.
You
2
might just see if there is a similar entry in Mr. Sweeney's diary and put the
3
content of that to him as well.
(diary handed to Mr. Quinn)
4 5
Q. 757
6 7
relates to solely to Prague? A.
8 9
MR. QUINN: So where there is an Ambrose Kelly entry, we can take it that it
Well it certainly might have related to Prague.
Again, I can't recall
exactly. Q. 758
14:36:46 10
You have no entry in your diary for the 30th of July, isn't that right? Now, the next entry that Mr. Dunlop has for you is an entry for ten o'clock on the
11
20th of August.
At 4974 and there is no entry in your diary for that.
12
that signify to you Mr. Sweeney, that no such meeting took place?
13
A.
It's possible it could have been deferred or whatever.
14
Q. 759
Yes.
14:37:09 15
The next entry you have, Mr. Dunlop has is a ten o'clock meeting on the
27th of August.
And you have a ten o'clock meeting for FD on the 27th of
16
August.
17
was in connection with Cherrywood?
There are no other entries in your diary.
18
A.
Could you just repeat that one.
19
Q. 760
Okay.
14:37:29 20
Does
On the 27th of August.
Does that mean that it
If we could have 4327, please.
On Friday the
27th of August Mr. Dunlop has a ten o'clock meeting for E Sweeney.
And your
21
diary for Friday the 27th of August has a ten o'clock meeting for FD, which I
22
suggest to you is Frank Dunlop.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 761
Now, there is no other entry in your diary.
A.
It coincides --
26
Q. 762
That it coincides and that it was a Cherrywood meeting?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 763
You also have an entry in your diary for the 25th of August for a ten o'clock F
14:37:48 25
29 14:38:06 30
Dunlop meeting.
So does that mean --
But we know from Mr. Dunlop's diary on screen that he had
Nora appointment at 9:30 that morning.
Can we take it that that meeting
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:38:11
14:38:34
110 1
didn't take place and may have been deferred to the 27th?
2
A.
I don't really know.
3
Q. 764
Mr. Dunlop's, if I could have 4365 Mr. Dunlop's next entry for a meeting with
4
you is an 8:30 meeting for the 14th of September.
You have no entry in your
5
diary for that day.
6
is it possible that you did have an entry early morning meeting with Mr. Dunlop
7
on the 14th of September in relation to Cherrywood?
Having regard to the timing of the meeting, Mr. Sweeney,
8
A.
It's possible.
9
Q. 765
And that would have been attended by the other representatives?
A.
It's really hard to say who was at any of these meetings.
14:38:54 10
11
conglomeration of different people.
12
them.
13
Q. 766
14 14:39:08 15
Yes.
There was such a
It certainly wouldn't have been all of
But it would have been Mr. Lynn presumably and Mr. Reilly would have
been vital -A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 767
-- because they were lobbying, like Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
Yes, I would have been hoping that there would have been a co-ordination effort
18 19 14:39:22 20
21
between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop. Q. 768
Did Mr. Lawlor have any lobbying functions?
A.
No.
Q. 769
Now, on the 17th of September, Mr. Dunlop, again on the same page, Friday the
22
17th of December.
23
that on the screen? And you have an entry --
24 14:39:37 25
A.
December is it?
Q. 770
Sorry.
26
September.
He has an eight o'clock meeting for Eddie S.
The 17th of September 1993.
Do you see
And you have an eight
o'clock meeting in your diary for FD/RL/PR?
27
A.
Yes , that would coincide.
28
Q. 771
Frank Dunlop, Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 772
Now, on the 17th September Mr. Dunlop again had a cheque drawn in his favour in
14:39:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:39:58
14:40:16
111 1
the sum of 7,500 pounds, at 4366.
Do you see that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 773
That's -- did Mr. Dunlop ask for a cheque in that sum that the meeting?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 774
Again, are you saying that it was coincidental that there was a meeting
6
attended by Mr. Dunlop on this -- which happened to be on the same day that a
7
cheque in his favour was drawn for 7,500 pounds?
8
A.
I didn't have any conversation with him about cheques.
9
Q. 775
Would Mr. Reilly or Mr. Lynn have had any conversation with him about cheques?
A.
No.
Q. 776
If we are still dealing with Mr. Dunlop's retainer, we are now up to 50,000
14:40:37 10
11 12
pounds by September 1993.
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 777
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop by the end of that meeting on the 17th of
14:40:52 15
September 1993 had received 50,000 pounds from the group?
16
A.
I don't think I did.
17
Q. 778
Are you surprised that he had received such money from the group?
18
A.
Well I knew that around about this time he was given a success fee.
19
Q. 779
Yes.
A.
Mr. Monahan.
21
Q. 780
When did he first seek the success fee?
22
A.
He first -- when did?
23
Q. 781
Mr. Dunlop first seek the success fee?
24
A.
At the first meeting.
Q. 782
Yes.
26
A.
He asked for a success fee and I said that that was beyond my scope and --
27
Q. 783
Did you raise the issue of the success fee with Mr. Monahan?
28
A.
No, he raised it with me.
14:41:20 20
14:41:31 25
29 14:41:46 30
Who approved the success fee, Mr. Sweeney?
He said that a fee had been agreed.
prior to -- some time around about then. Q. 784
Around about September 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Some time
14:41:48
14:41:54
112 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 785
And you had discussed it with Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 786
And had you discussed it about Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 787
And had Mr. Monahan and/or Mr. Glennane sought your views on whether or not Mr.
7 8
Dunlop was worth a success fee? A.
9 14:42:11 10
No, it was the other way about.
It was Mr. Monahan informed me that a success
fee had been agreed with Frank Dunlop. Q. 788
Who had agreed it?
11
A.
Mr. Monahan.
12
Q. 789
And how much was the success fee for?
13
A.
50,000.
14
Q. 790
Were you surprised?
A.
I wasn't surprised, no.
Q. 791
Was Mr. Dunlop advising you on the success or otherwise of his lobbying
14:42:22 15
16 17 18
campaign at this stage? A.
19 14:42:42 20
He was channelling at, mainly through Mr. Lynn, but did report at the meetings that things were going okay.
That was about it.
Q. 792
But the meeting of the 17th of September, an eight o'clock meeting --
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 793
-- in the morning on the run up to a most crucial vote in relation to
23 24 14:42:53 25
Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 794
You, the most senior person within Monarch Properties dealing with the
26
Cherrywood site in attendance, this would have been one of the crucial
27
meetings.
Isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 795
Did Mr. Dunlop tell you who had indicated to him, that is to say what
14:43:10 30
councillors had indicated to him, that they would support the proposals in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:43:14
14:43:29
113 1
relation to Monarch?
2
A.
Not that I recall.
3
Q. 796
And any discussion on which councillors were being approached by which
4 5
lobbiests? A.
6 7
Simply that things were going okay.
No, no discussion on that.
I wouldn't have been particularly interested in
that. Q. 797
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
Just listening to your evidence.
8
in-house lobbiests, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
9
and both of whom had been involved previously.
14:43:48 10
Both of whom knew councillors What extra did Mr. Dunlop
bring to Monarch by way of lobbying that was disclosed at any of these meetings
11
to date.
That is to say up to September 1993?
12
A.
What did he bring to the party?
13
Q. 798
Yes.
14
A.
I suppose a third experienced lobbiest.
Q. 799
But you had two experienced lobbiests, isn't that right?
16
A.
We had two and now we had three.
17
Q. 800
Yes.
18
A.
I presume he was doing the same as the others.
19
Q. 801
Now, at 4387.
14:44:07 15
You had to
14:44:39 20
Exactly.
You had two experienced lobbiests.
But what extra did Mr. Dunlop do?
You will see an 88 -- 8:15 Monarch meeting.
Which although in
under Tuesday the 28th, there is an arrow pointing to the 29th of September
21
1993 and again, I should tell you that there is no entry in your diary for that
22
date, Mr. Sweeney.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 802
But it's possible that a meeting did take place between maybe Mr. Dunlop
14:44:58 25
Then it's possible I may not have attended that meeting.
Mr. Reilly and/or Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 803
Did any other senior person attend those meetings other than yourself,
28 29 14:45:11 30
Mr. Sweeney? A.
I think Noel Murray might have attended some of them.
Q. 804
Yes.
When you weren't able to attend Mr. Murray you think might have stood Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:45:16
14:45:21
114 1
in?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 805
Did he ever attend a meeting attended by you?
4
A.
Yes, he did.
5
Q. 806
Did Mr. Lawlor attend any of these meetings do you think?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 807
Now, on the 8th of October, at 4561, Friday the 8th of October.
8
has a ten o'clock entry for Eddie S.
9
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop on the 8th of October?
14:45:42 10
And there is no entry in your diary.
A.
The 8th of October at ten o'clock?
11
Q. 808
Yes.
12
A.
I don't recall that.
13
Q. 809
No.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 810
You don't recall that meeting.
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 811
Then there is a telephone attendance, at 4587.
14:45:55 15
Mr. Dunlop
It's a ten o'clock meeting on the 8th?
Where you rang Mr. Dunlop re a
18
meeting for the 14th of October.
19
meeting might be about if we look at the entry at 207 where Mr. Lynn has rang
14:46:15 20
And we get some indication of what that
asking if Mr. Dunlop would be available for a meeting with Mr. Pat Field.
21
I think Mr. Pat Field a director of GRE at the Royal Dublin on the 11th.
22
Sorry.
23
meeting.
24 14:46:32 25
At 11 or 12 o'clock on the 14th.
And Mr. Dunlop's confirming the
A.
Yes.
Q. 812
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Pat Field and possibly Mr. Sweeney in
26
the Royal Dublin on the 14th of October?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 813
There is, I should say to you, an entry in your diary for 12 o'clock for F
29 14:46:55 30
And
Dunlop on the 14th of October. presumably Mr. Lynn.
You also have a 9:30 entry for RL, which is
Is that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:46:57
14:47:09
115 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 814
And you have an 8:15 entry for KOS.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 815
Did you meet Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan on Thursday the 14th of October at 8:15?
5
A.
It seems very early for ....
6
Q. 816
Now, you also have an entry for the same day under the heading Ongar stud.
7
Ongar vote.
8
October 1993?
9
Could that be Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan?
Was there a vote in relation to a Monarch property on the 14th of
A.
Yes.
Q. 817
Had Mr. Dunlop any involvement in relation to that vote?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 818
Mr. Dunlop was retained in relation to Cherrywood and Ongar.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 819
And I think there was some rezoning going on in relation to Somerton.
14:47:24 10
14:47:37 15
Was Mr.
Dunlop retained in relation to that also?
16
A.
I don't recall that he was involved in Somerton.
17
Q. 820
So he had two projects for Monarch at this time?
18
A.
Yes. Though there was really only one project because the Ongar one was pretty
19 14:47:57 20
well straight forward. Q. 821
Now, on the -- just to, for completeness I should put up Mr. Dunlop's entry for
21
that date, the 14th of October, at 4577.
22
Mr. Dunlop in evidence yesterday.
And Mr. Shipsey dealt with that with
23 24
Now, at 4665, there is an eight o'clock entry for Eddie S.
14:48:25 25
Do you see that,
for the 2nd of November?
26
A.
Yes
27
Q. 822
And there is nothing in your diary for the 2nd or indeed the 3rd of November.
28
There's another entry for eight o'clock on the third of November.
29
that, Mr. Sweeney? Just top right hand corner Monarch.
14:48:42 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Do you see
14:48:42
14:48:57
116 1
Q. 823
There is no entry in your diary for either the 2nd or the 3rd.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 824
Now, just in relation to the -- to those entries.
Do you think that Mr.
4
Dunlop may have met representatives of Monarch other than yourself at the
5
meeting on the 3rd but that he would have met you at the meeting on the 2nd?
6
A.
I can't say.
7
Q. 825
He seems to be making a distinction there in his diary entries between meetings
8 9 14:49:21 10
with you and meetings with Monarch, isn't that right? A.
Oh, well yes.
Q. 826
And coincidentally, Mr. Sweeney, at 4633, Mr. Dunlop presents an invoice for
11
yet another payment, this time in the sum of 15,000 pounds which now brings his
12
payments to 65,000 pounds.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 827
And you certified that invoice.
14:49:41 15
Do you see that invoice?
Because I think that's your signature or your
initials on the left?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 828
You certified it for payment?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 829
And you met with Mr. Dunlop on the same day.
14:49:53 20
dated the 2nd of November '93.
And the cheque at 4634.
Is
As matter of probability, Mr. Sweeney, Mr.
21
Dunlop must have presented that invoice to you at that meeting on the 3rd -- on
22
the 2nd of November '93.
23
A.
I don't think so.
24
Q. 830
So you think it's coincidental that on the same morning that you met Mr. Dunlop
14:50:12 25
I don't think he ever presented me with anything.
you would have received from him an invoice which you paid on the same day?
26
A.
Certainly I didn't receive any invoices from him.
27
Q. 831
At 4633.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 832
And the invoice we know was paid on the 2nd of November.
A.
Yes.
14:50:38 30
You certified the invoice, isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:50:38
14:50:50
117 1
Q. 833
So you must have received it and paid it on the same day, isn't that right?
2
A.
Well it's been paid.
3
Q. 834
Yes.
4
But it was certified for payment on the day that it was received, which
was the 2nd of November?
5
A.
Well if you go back to that.
6
Q. 835
Yes.
7
A.
It doesn't really say when I certified it.
8
Q. 836
I accept that.
9
A.
It is dated that.
Q. 837
So are you saying that you --
11
A.
I may not have received it on that day.
12
Q. 838
So you think that this might have been an invoice that was received within
14:51:04 10
13 14 14:51:15 15
4633, please.
But it's dated the 2nd of November?
Monarch after the payment had been made? A.
Yes.
It certainly may have.
Q. 839
Now, you were certifying a payment on foot of an invoice for a contractor who
16
was purporting to provide media and communications training for '93 and '94,
17
isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 840
Which he was suggesting was a VAT exempt activity?
A.
Yes.
Q. 841
Mr. Dunlop never provided media and communications training.
14:51:34 20
21 22
Did he,
Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Not to Monarch he didn't.
24
Q. 842
Well to any of the Monarch Groups?
A.
No.
Q. 843
So you were certifying there a payment which effectively was a VAT free payment
14:51:44 25
26 27
to a supplier whom you knew from previous invoices was supplying a vatable
28
activity?
29 14:52:03 30
A.
Can I short circuit that.
Q. 844
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:52:03
14:52:31
118 1
A.
By saying that when I agreed the payment -- when I agreed with Mr. Dunlop the
2
4,000 was to be exclusive of VAT.
3
as far as I was concerned from that point on, all payments should have
4
attracted VAT because VAT would have been of no importance to Monarch.
5
Q. 845
6
Yes.
The 25,000 was a payment on account.
And
But why did you certify a payment to Mr. Dunlop which was VAT exempt in
November '93?
7
A.
I don't recall even noticing that it was VAT exempt.
8
Q. 846
If we take your theory a moment ago, Mr. Sweeney, that you did not receive that
9 14:52:58 10
invoice on the 2nd of November, that you got it subsequently? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 847
After the cheque had issued?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 848
That would mean you would have needlessly certified the payment after the
14
cheque had issued, isn't that right? Because the cheque had issued on the 2nd
14:53:10 15
of November.
16
A.
Yes, I noticed that.
17
Q. 849
So somebody would have had to sanction the issue of the cheque on the 2nd of
18 19
November? A.
Yeah, the accounts would have issued the cheque.
Q. 850
Yes but they would have issued a cheque in the absence of an invoice?
21
A.
That's possible.
22
Q. 851
And subsequently, you would have sanctioned an invoice for a cheque that had
14:53:22 20
23 24
issued? A.
Yes.
Q. 852
And who would have sanctioned the cheque on the 2nd of November?
26
A.
The accounts would have.
27
Q. 853
Who within accounts would have?
28
A.
I would have said any senior member, include Mr. Glennane.
29
Q. 854
But why would it have been necessary for you to certify the invoice if the
14:53:34 25
14:53:54 30
cheque had issued? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:53:56
14:54:09
119 1
A.
To keep the paperwork correct I suppose.
2
Q. 855
But isn't that the one thing that's absent here, Mr. Sweeney?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 856
Is paperwork?
5
A.
I must agree, it's very confusing and I can't figure it out.
6
Q. 857
And highly unusual.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 858
And very confusing.
9
A.
Yes. And I have to say, that didn't apply in the construction end.
Q. 859
Yes.
11
A.
Which I was dealing with on a day-to-day basis.
12
Q. 860
But you're dealing here now with Mr. Dunlop and you're certifying his fees,
14:54:24 10
13 14 14:54:33 15
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 861
You within, Monarch are taking responsibility for certifying Mr. Dunlop's
16
retainer, isn't that right?
17
A.
I took responsibility for agreeing with him the brief and the amount.
18
Q. 862
And you certified his payments?
19
A.
And after that it seems to me that the payments got into a very confused state
14:54:50 20
21
and there was all sorts of paperwork flying around to try and sort it out. Q. 863
Aren't you the most senior man within Monarch, Mr. Sweeney, that's dealing with
22
Mr. Dunlop at this time? You have retained him, albeit on the direction you
23
say of Mr. Monahan.
24
sanctioning and certifying his invoices.
14:55:12 25
A.
26 27
You have had meetings with him.
Isn't that correct?
Well if he had invoiced properly, then everything would have been fine.
But I
can't make head nor tail of the trail of paper that's there. Q. 864
But you were the one person within Monarch that had primary responsibility for
28
this supplier.
29
assistance to the company?
14:55:33 30
You have been
A.
Isn't that right? This professional that was providing
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:55:34
14:55:54
120 1
Q. 865
And you were certifying his invoices?
2
A.
Yeah but once the invoices were within the threshold of the agreement that I
3 4
had made, then that, that would have been okay. Q. 866
But why didn't you raise with Mr. Dunlop the issue of proper accounting and the
5
provision of proper invoices so that he could be properly paid, isn't that
6
right?
7
A.
8 9
Well I should have.
I wouldn't have been wanting to start a fight with
someone who is just about to help us in a lobbying exercise. Q. 867
14:56:12 10
Were you not curious as to why Mr. Dunlop was supplying all of these different invoices?
11
A.
I didn't see a lot of these until the end.
12
Q. 868
But you were certifying them, isn't that right?
13
A.
Some of them.
14
Q. 869
You were certainly certifying this one as being payable even though it doesn't
14:56:21 15
contain a VAT amount, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah and I didn't understand that.
17
Q. 870
You can't understand why Mr. Dunlop would submit a fee for works which he says
18 19
were VAT exempt, works that were not done by him, isn't that right? A.
14:56:44 20
21
Yes.
I would have assumed in that invoice that the 15,000 would have included
VAT. Q. 871
Under normal circumstances, Mr. Sweeney, we should be looking there on the 2nd
22
of November 1993 at an invoice for either the month of October or indeed the
23
month of November for the sum of 4,000 pounds plus VAT being the retainer for
24
that month in relation to the provision of lobbying services to Monarch
14:57:03 25
Properties Services Limited in connection with the rezoning of Cherrywood
26 27
lands. A.
28 29 14:57:25 30
Isn't that right?
Yes, it does seem to me, Chairman, that within the umbrella of a very simple agreement, all the payments got very confused.
Q. 872
And in fact, if we go to 4634, Mr. Sweeney.
And we look again at the cheque.
If you look at the reverse of the cheque, you see that it's date stamped in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:57:30
14:57:55
121 1
bank on the 2nd of November 1993.
2
of November, the cheque was drawn on the 2nd of November and the cheque appears
3
to have been negotiated on the 2nd of November.
4
according to his diary, on the 2nd of November.
5
assist the Tribunal in any way in relation to those sequence of events?
6
A.
7
So it was the invoice was raised on the 2nd
And you met with Mr. Dunlop,
Do you think that you can
Well I can understand the sequence of events but I did not receive an invoice from him personally on the 2nd of November.
8
Q. 873
The 2nd of November was nine days off the vote, isn't that right?
9
A.
Uh-huh.
14:58:17 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Quinn, in fact I understand the vote was
12
scheduled for the 3rd of November.
13 14
MR. QUINN: And was adjourned to the 9th.
14:58:26 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
If my recollection is correct.
17 18
MR. QUINN: Yes, that's correct, Judge.
19
understood it on the 2nd when you met with Mr. Dunlop?
14:58:37 20
A.
This was on the eve the vote as you
Well I understood the vote was on the 11th.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
the records are correct of the County Council was on the agenda for the 3rd of
24
November.
14:58:49 25
It was indeed, Mr. Sweeney, did take place on the 11th.
If
A.
It had been deferred.
Yes, I understand now.
Q. 874
MR. QUINN: And you were putting Mr. Dunlop on that day in funds to the tune of
26 27 28
15,000 pounds by drawing a cheque drawing a cheque which had no VAT element
29
insofar as the invoice was concerned.
14:59:09 30
A.
Isn't that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:59:15
14:59:39
122 1
Q. 875
Now, at 4690.
2
entry.
3
Monarch/Eddie.
On the 9th of November Mr. Dunlop has a 12.00 or an 11.00
If you just look at the 9th, which is Tuesday about midway down Do you see that?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 876
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop on that date and I tell you there is no entry
6
in your diary for that date?
7
A.
Well I can understand the logic of it though being immediately before I think.
8
Q. 877
Yes.
9
A.
Vote?
Q. 878
The vote was on the following Thursday, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 879
A an entry in your diary D day?
13
A.
D day.
14
Q. 880
And we see Mr. Dunlop's diary on the 11th equally and the word Monarch written
14:59:48 10
15:00:13 15
on it.
Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 881
Now, there were subsequent invoices.
I think you may have phoned looking for
18
Mr. Dunlop on the Friday, that's the day following the vote, at 4699.
19
again on the Monday the 15th.
15:00:37 20
At 10.50 at 4707.
further invoices appear to have been raised.
21
dated the 6th of December 1993.
22
have seen that.
23
1993 at 4772.
24
it's in the sum of 31,371.94, do you see that?
15:01:07 25
26
And
But in any event, two
A copy of an invoice at 4768
In the sum of 22,296.94 was raised.
And then there is a further invoice dated the 6th of December Which again is invoice No. 955 as that one on screen is.
A.
Yes.
Q. 882
And again, Mr. Sweeney, that's an invoice that's okayed and certified for
27
You'll
And
payment by you, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 883
Can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you came to certify
15:01:19 30
that invoice for payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:01:24
15:01:46
123 1
A.
I've looked at this and it appears that the accounts were very anxious to get
2
paperwork to cover all the monies that had been expended in Frank Dunlop's
3
favour.
4
what had been paid to him.
5
Q. 884
6 7
Why were you involved in getting the paper together Mr. Sweeney? Why not Mr. Glennane or Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly? Why you?
A.
8 9
And that these were again a retrospective paper exercise to justify
Well it would have been at the request of the accounts department. would have been at their behest.
Q. 885
15:02:06 10
But it was a request to you because Mr. Dunlop as a contractor fell under your jurisdiction so, to speak, within the company.
Is that correct?
11
A.
Yeah, it was more or less go and get invoices from the guy.
12
Q. 886
Because he was your -- your retainer.
13 14
So it
Isn't that right? You had retained
him. A.
Yes.
Q. 887
You were responsible for him within the company?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 888
Yes.
18
A.
Within the agreement that had been made.
19
Q. 889
Yeah.
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 890
And you had responsibility to produce the paperwork to the accounts department?
22
A.
Not only for our own particular reasons but also for our partner.
23
Q. 891
Claim against GRE.
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 892
For 50 percent of his contribution.
26
A.
Yeah, who would be very lost to pay without the paperback up.
27
Q. 893
And in fact we see that, Mr. Sweeney, if we look at the paperback up.
15:02:17 15
15:02:28 20
15:02:41 25
He more or less fell into a category of a contractor, isn't that right?
28
first of all produce, based on those invoices three certificates.
29
with the one dated the 1st of June '93, which is at 4142.
15:03:07 30
You,
We dealt
Where you certified
that Mr. Dunlop had been paid on the 10th of April '93. A sum of 12,100 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:03:12
15:03:51
124 1
pounds.
2
had been paid on the 14th of December '93 on foot of invoice No. 1251, 60,500
3
pounds.
4
as having been paid a sum of 32,371.94 on the 6th of December '93 on foot of
5
invoice No. 955 and I'll put that document on screen in a moment, Mr. Sweeney.
6
I'll come back to that document.
7
moment.
8
Properties and forwarded to GRE seeking 50 percent of the 25,000 up front
9
payment, isn't that right? And we see that at 4819.
15:04:45 10
11
And if we could have 4846.
There's a certificate that Mr. Dunlop
And then there was a third invoice where you had certified Mr. Dunlop
I just don't have the reference on it at the
But on the 29th of June 1993 invoice No. 2064 was raised, by Monarch
A.
Yes.
Q. 894
That's invoice number -- there are three different types of invoices here,
12
isn't that right? There's Mr. Dunlop's invoice raised on Monarch.
13
there's Monarch's invoice raised on GRE.
14 15:05:00 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 895
So it's quite confusing.
And then
So what I'm talking about know--
So when are we're talking about Monarch's
16
relationship with GRE, Monarch would normally raise an invoice with GRE and
17
they would back that invoice up with third party invoices?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 896
In this case Mr. Dunlop's invoice to Monarch?
A.
Yes.
15:05:16 20
21 22
There were two.
There was Dunlop's invoice to Monarch and Monarch's
subsequent invoice to GRE. Q. 897
Now, that document on screen, which is the invoice of the 29th of June '93.
23
Was the subject -- was forwarded for payment to GRE.
24
if we could have 4822.
15:05:48 25
And on the 7th of July,
Mr. Baker wrote to you following on a meeting which
you had with him on the 29th of June, isn't that right? You had some regular
26
contact with Mr. Baker, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 898
And these sort of issues between Monarch and GRE would be trashed out between
29 15:06:02 30
you, isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:06:02
15:06:25
125 1
Q. 899
And you had a meeting with him I think in May '93, isn't that right? Because
2
we see from that letter under item No. 4 invoice No. 2064.
3
advises you that at the meeting in May he agreed the appointment of Mr. Dunlop
4
but only on the basis that it was 4,000 per month with no success fee.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 900
Sorry.
7
That Mr. Baker
The 7th of May 1993 I think is the date of that meeting, isn't that
correct?
8
A.
Sorry, am I looking at something here?
9
Q. 901
Yes.
15:06:43 10
Item No. 4.
Although it says meeting in May.
In fact I understand
from Mr. Shipsey and indeed I understand from the documentation as well that
11
that meeting may have taken place on the 7th of May.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 902
So you had retained Mr. Dunlop as far back as March on the instructions of
14 15:07:02 15
16
Mr. Monahan. A.
Yes.
Q. 903
And then you had a meeting the following May.
On May 7th.
7th with
17
Mr. Baker and you advised Mr. Baker that you had retained Mr. Dunlop.
18
a meeting in your diary for the 7th of May E S/MB in Dublin.
19 15:07:21 20
That's
A.
Yes.
Q. 904
So at that meeting you are advising Mr. Baker of third party costs effectively
21
being incurred.
22
isn't that right?
And you're going to recover some of those costs from GRE,
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 905
And you're advising Mr. Baker that Mr. Dunlop has been retained, isn't that
15:07:36 25
right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 906
And you advise him of the terms of his employment?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 907
Namely, that it would be 4,000 per month but you must have also advised him
15:07:45 30
that Mr. Dunlop was looking for a success fee and Mr. Dunlop said he wouldn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:07:50
15:07:58
126 1
pay a success fee, isn't that right?
2
A.
No, that's not correct.
3
Q. 908
Okay.
4
A.
What happened there was I advised him a that a success fee had been requested
5
and that I had said that it was out of my control and that's why I said there
6
was no success fee and that we really meant it to be at that moment in time.
7
The fact that he said there was no success fee means that I had said to him --
8
Q. 909
9 15:08:21 10
That there was no success fee at that stage.
He was envisaging a success fee
that stage? A.
No, he wasn't.
11
Q. 910
I see.
12
A.
He was just noting the fact that there was no success fee.
13
Q. 911
And now he had received, having been advised or appraised of Mr. Dunlop's
14
appointment.
15:08:35 15
He had now received an invoice for half of 25,000 pounds which
had been received by Mr. Dunlop and he is querying that invoice.
He is
16
reminding you of the meeting that you'd had.
17
difficult to understand an invoice for 25,000 pounds in which you employ -
18
which would employ over six months work when Mr. Dunlop was only appointed in
19
May.
15:08:55 20
21
And he goes on to say I find it
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 912
And I think you responded -- I think you responded to that letter in
22
correspondence on the 13th of July '93.
23
paragraph on that page you say.
If we look at 4825.
The very last
24 15:09:13 25
Your item No. 4, invoice No. 2064.
"I am prepared to cancel invoice 2064 and
26
re issue invoice 2068 for April, May June and July if you feel that you should
27
pay only on a monthly basis.
28
engaged from April and requested that part of their payment be up front before
29
they would take on the assignment.
15:09:41 30
Please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were
That is the reason why the payment by us
of 25,000 to date" Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:09:44
15:10:03
127 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 913
And I think there were subsequent correspondence between you.
And on the 28th
3
of September 1993, at 4817. By the 28th of September you had again met with
4
Mr. Baker, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I must say I was in constant communication with Mr. Baker.
6
Q. 914
And he refers to that meeting.
7
A.
Both by phone and by letter.
8
Q. 915
And although there's no entry in your diary, that letter of the 28th of
9
September suggest that is there may in fact have been a meeting on the 27th of
15:10:21 10
September, isn't that right? Because he says "With reference to your letter of
11
the 2nd of September and our meeting on the 27th of September".
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 916
And then he under the heading F Dunlop he says "a retainer of 4,000 per month
14
from April to December '93 inclusive, plus a success fee of 50,000 pounds."
15:10:38 15
So by 27th of September 1993 Mr. Dunlop had been given a success fee of 50,000
16
pounds, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 917
And I think there followed then in December and January '93 and early '94 a
19
series of correspondence where you sought to recover 50 percent of the fees due
15:10:59 20
to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? And that correspondence relied on the
21
certificates which we have seen earlier.
I put up two of the certificates.
22
And the third of the certificate is at 4773.
In the sum of 32,371.94.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 918
And those certificates were forwarded on the 15th of December 1993 at 4848 by
15:11:20 25
Mr. Caslin, isn't that right?
26
A.
That 32 is wrong.
27
Q. 919
Yes.
That should be 31, isn't that right? There had been I think -- you had
28
spoken to Mr. Baker on the 14th of December Because if we look at 8608 in
29
correspondence between Mr. Caslin and Mr. Binge.
15:11:46 30
He says "I understand that
Eddie Sweeney is spoken to Martin Baker in the last few minutes and that Martin Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:11:51
15:12:02
128 1
has confirmed that the situation is that he just requires copies of the third
2
party invoices to enable payments to take place acknowledging that we cannot
3
make payments of this order without having received half from yourselves."
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 920
And then the response to that was a letter which we have seen at 4848.
6
Forwarding the Dunlop invoices or sorry certificates that we have seen there.
7
And it all culminated in correspondence I think in a further letter on the 16th
8
of December '93 at 4853.
9
Dunlop invoices which he, Mr. Caslin, had certified as having been true copies
15:12:33 10
Where again Mr. Caslin attaches copies of the Frank
of the originals. "My original certified copies are in the mail to you today."
11
Presumably he forwarded the various invoices that we see from Mr. Dunlop, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 921
And ultimately I think on the 20th of December 1993.
15:12:50 15
A cheque in the sum of
52,030 pounds as we see at 4815, was drawn by GRE and in favour of Monarch
16
Properties Limited.
Effectively putting them in funds for 50 percent of the
17
Frank Dunlop & Associates payments to date?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 922
Now, just to go back to the retainer of Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Sweeney.
15:13:21 20
And I
listened with care to what your counsel had to say to Mr. Dunlop in his
21
cross-examination and I may be incorrect in this and if I am, please correct
22
me.
23
that you had not used the words that Mr. Dunlop had ascribed to you, namely,
24
that you had said to him that he had to do what had to be done or words to that
15:13:45 25
But I did not understand him to suggest to Mr. Dunlop, that Mr. Dunlop --
effect.
Are you saying that you never used those words?
26
A.
I don't recall using those words.
27
Q. 923
Yeah.
28
A.
I have to say that the very first time, Chairman, that I came across those
29 15:14:09 30
I know that it is your case that --
words was six or seven weeks ago.
And my immediate reaction was to set in
place legal advice to be able to take steps to redress what I regarded as a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:14:16
15:14:36
129 1
slight on my character.
2
privilege of the court I couldn't do that but I was outraged to see that
3
speech.
4
Q. 924
And I discovered that because it was within the
And that was only a few weeks ago.
Not to put a tooth in it, Mr. Sweeney.
Mr. Dunlop's evidence to this Tribunal
5
was to the effect that you, in particular, and Monarch in general, knew that he
6
was about to bribe councillors when he was retained, isn't that right?
7
A.
That is absolutely ludicrous.
8
Q. 925
Yes.
9 15:14:57 10
11
You agree with -- I'm not going it to go into detail of what you said
what he said but you don't believe what he says you said, isn't that right. A.
I certainly don't.
Q. 926
You do agree I suggest to you -- I suspect Mr. Sweeney, that there were unusual
12
features of Mr. Dunlop's relationship with Monarch?
13
A.
From what point of view?
14
Q. 927
Well we'll go through them.
15:15:16 15
You already had a lobbiest in-house.
You had
two in fact; Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, when Mr. Dunlop was retained?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 928
Mr. Dunlop's retention was as a result of the suggestion of Mr. Lawlor.
18 19 15:15:43 20
Mr. Lawlor, that is to say at that time a TD and a former councillor himself. A.
Yes, I understand that.
Q. 929
Who had not been involved, you say, in any strategy in relation to Cherrywood
21
up to that point?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 930
Mr. Lawlor attended some of the meetings.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 931
That took place subsequently.
15:15:44 25
26
relation to the project.
27
now 1993?
28
A.
29 15:16:02 30
Mr. Dunlop's involvement was late in the day in
It had been going on I think since '89.
And it was
He didn't really have any involvement in the project except for that introduction.
Q. 932
Yes.
No, that's Mr. Lawlor but Mr. Dunlop's involvement with the project was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:16:07
15:16:22
130 1 2
late -- was late on in the project? A.
3
Yes.
And it was at a point where I may say that the other two lobbiests had
tried and failed.
4
Q. 933
And the previous PR consultant had been involved, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 934
And you had in-house PR consultants.
7 8
isn't that right? A.
9 15:16:37 10
You had Pembroke PR and at that time,
Yeah, Pembroke PR would have handled the openings of shopping centres and stuff like that.
Q. 935
11
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop's appointment was not done by the project leader, namely,
you, isn't that right?
12
A.
Say that again.
13
Q. 936
His appointment didn't come about as a result of any suggestion by you as
14 15:16:50 15
16
project leader? A.
No.
Q. 937
There are major controversies between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in relation to
17
his appointment and the terms of his appointment?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 938
The invoices don't tally.
15:17:04 20
Isn't that right? The invoices in relation to the
payments don't tally?
21
A.
No, they don't.
22
Q. 939
Mr. Dunlop alleges that in the case of one of the cheques for 10,000 pounds he
23 24 15:17:18 25
didn't receive the benefit of the proceeds of that cheque. A.
Yeah, so I heard.
Q. 940
And it would appear from the reverse of that cheque.
26
That it was negotiated
with two publicans in Lucan?
27
A.
Yes, I saw that.
28
Q. 941
The only payment that was made on foot of an invoice was a same day payment on
29 15:17:42 30
the 3rd of November 199 -- or the 2nd of November 1993. A.
That was the 15,000? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't that correct?
15:17:43
15:17:55
131 1
Q. 942
Yes.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 943
The payment was made on a day that you met with Mr. Dunlop but on a day in
4
which Mr. Dunlop did not raise with you any issue concerning money?
5
A.
No, he didn't raise any issues with me about money or invoices.
6
Q. 944
That invoice itself was not a correct invoice.
That is to say that it
7
purported to suggest that the works or the services being provided were VAT
8
exempt, isn't that right?
9 15:18:12 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 945
Yet the works being provided by Frank Dunlop & Associates as per the previous
11
invoice were not VAT exempt?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 946
It was understood between you that VAT would be payable on any fees that he was
14 15:18:27 15
16
to receive? A.
Yes, that was the arrangement.
Q. 947
One of the invoices, that is to say the invoice of April 1991 for 12,100
17
pounds.
18
correct invoice from him?
19 15:18:47 20
Is now being queried by Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? As being a
A.
Yes.
Q. 948
Although marked paid in June 1993, and certified by you for payment, no cheque
21
in the sum of 12,100 pounds can be found in relation to that payment.
22
A.
I noticed that.
23
Q. 949
There are no memos or records of the meetings that you had either initially
24 15:19:12 25
with Mr. Dunlop or subsequently as I have detailed them here? A.
Well there were records of the meetings.
26
Q. 950
But they are no longer in existence?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 951
Your evidence and your account of the circumstances under which Mr. Dunlop came
29 15:19:37 30
to be retained, differs now from that given previously to the Tribunal.
And
I'm not going to go into detail in how it differs but you accept in a broad way Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:19:43
15:19:54
132 1
that it does differ?
2
A.
Yes, it does.
3
Q. 952
And in fact your evidence now in relation to the circumstances under which Mr.
4
Dunlop came to be retained is a very detailed recollection of what transpired.
5
Isn't that right?
6
A.
7 8
Well I've had the benefit now of all of the brief and it did open up my memory substantially.
Q. 953
9
In your diary, Mr. Sweeney, you have an entry I think for a one o'clock meeting in Sandymount with Mr. Tom Hand for the 13th of December 1993, isn't that
15:20:27 10
right?
11
A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
12
Q. 954
And I think you had a 4:30 meeting with Kevin O'Sullivan on the same day, isn't
13 14 15:20:39 15
that right? A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
Q. 955
On the 17th of December 1993.
16
I think you have an entry in your diary to
phone Don Lydon re lunch, is that's correct?
17
A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
18
Q. 956
And also you have an entry for Tom Hand for the 17th of December 1993, that's
19 15:20:57 20
21 22
the same day? A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
Q. 957
In his interview with the Tribunal Mr. Dunlop said.
If I could have page 575,
Mr. Sweeney. Just looking at the answer at question 7.
23 24 15:21:31 25
He says "Eddie Sweeney actually said at the meeting in the presence of Liam Lawlor that an awful lot of people had already been looked after and they were
26
ungrateful bastards like you know every time a difficulty arose or they got
27
pressure from -- there was one man in particular who was orchestrating things P
28
Doyle I do not know his first name but he lived in the area."
29
comment to make in relation to that Mr. Sweeney? Did you ever say in the
15:21:57 30
Do you have any
presence of Mr. Lawlor or indeed at any stage to Mr. Dunlop, that there were a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:22:01
15:22:13
133 1
lot of people who had to be looked after?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 958
Did you ever say to Mr. Dunlop that disbursements had already been made in
4
relation to councillors?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 959
Messrs. Lydon and Hand had been very -- very helpful to the Monarch Group by
7
December '93, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 960
And they'd been very much associated with the project in September '93, isn't
15:22:52 10
that right?
11
A.
Both of those councillors were very much pro-development and pro Monarch.
12
Q. 961
And if I could have 2199.
13
Just to return just to your statement, Mr. Sweeney.
And just taking the fourth paragraph.
14 15:23:08 15
You say "The next contact with Liam Lawlor was in 1993/1994 during the
16
Cherrywood campaigns when he advised on zoning strategy with public relations
17
consultant Frank Dunlop, who was employed as a consultant around the time that
18
the second Cherrywood rezoning was attempted by Monarch.
19
of when exactly or who appointed Frank Dunlop but can recall that some of the
I have no knowledge
15:23:32 20
late Liam Lawlor/Frank Dunlop meetings were related to the promotion of a
21
number of developments in the Czech Republic especially the Alfa project in
22
Prague."
23
given evidence on.
24 15:23:45 25
And you go on to deal with the Prague connection which you have
A.
Yes.
Q. 962
But the earlier portion of that statement Mr. Sweeney suggests that Mr. Lawlor
26
was very much involved in the Cherrywood campaign in that he advised on zoning
27
strategy in '93 and '94?
28
A.
By that I meant that he had arranged the introduction of Frank Dunlop.
29
Q. 963
That was the extent of his involvement in the zoning strategy?
A.
Yes, in looking back on it, that's about it but then it kind of drifted into
15:24:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:24:12
15:24:24
134 1 2
Prague. Q. 964
3
And again, if we could have 2200, please.
Under the heading Frank Dunlop and
Bill O'Herlihy.
4 5
"You say spanning a period of about one and a half years I would have met Frank
6
Dunlop about six times.
7
proposed development in Prague and some of the meetings would have concerned
8
Frank Dunlop's role as public relations advisor in relation to land rezonings
9
particularly in Cherrywood to which he was introduced some time after the
15:24:40 10
Some of the meetings would have been about the
services of Bill O'Herlihy were no longer required (the road show).
11 12
I can recall no part in any agreement with either Bill O'Herlihy or Frank
13
Dunlop for the services that they provided to Monarch but I believe that such
14
consultancy agreements would probably have been formalised in writing.
15:24:59 15
I
personally however at no time negotiated any agreement, agreed any payment or
16
certified or recommended any payments to Frank Dunlop or Bill O'Herlihy
17
whatsoever.
18
appointments."
Philip Monahan or Richard Lynn would have dealt with such
19 15:25:12 20
I think you have resiled from that contribution to the Tribunal this afternoon,
21 22
Mr. Sweeney? A.
Yes, if I could explain again.
At the time that I did that, I didn't have any
23
information at all on Monarch files or any contact with Monarch personnel.
24
And I regret it, but I didn't afford it the importance that I have seen in it
15:25:39 25
now since the brief and since the accusation that was made against me by Mr.
26 27 28
Dunlop. Q. 965
It's now almost half three I was going to go on to another topic, Sir.
Would
it be fair to say perhaps half eleven on Tuesday?
29 15:26:02 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah.
Half eleven on Tuesday.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And how long approximately more
15:26:07
15:26:17
135 1
do you think you would have?
2
MR. QUINN: I would hope to finish with the witness by lunchtime.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
And then there is some cross-examination in the afternoon?
5 6
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney --
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, Mr. Redmond and ....
9 15:26:21 10
11
MR. QUINN: I don't know how long Mr. Sanfey or Mr. Redmond are likely to be or indeed Mr. Shipsey.
12 13
MR SANFEY:
14
at very most.
I won't have very much, Mr. Chairman.
I think 15 or 20 minutes
15:26:40 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
17 18
MR. QUINN: And I understand Mr. Redmond will be the same.
19
eleven or do you want to say half eleven on Tuesday?
So not before
15:26:42 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll say not before half eleven.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Yes.
Okay.
24 15:26:46 25
CHAIRMAN:
Tuesday.
Thank you.
26 27
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
28
TUESDAY, 4TH JULY, 2006, AT 11:00 30 A.M.
29 15:27:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:36:13
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
2ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
9 10:36:17 10
Mr. Sean Haughey, please.
11 12 13 MR. SEAN HAUGHEY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
14
AS FOLLOWS BY MS DILLON.:
10:36:22 15
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Haughey.
19 10:36:46 20
Q. 1
21
MS. DILLON:
Good morning Mr. Haughey, you are presently a member of the
current Dail; isn't that correct?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 2
And you were previously a member of Dublin County Council and indeed were Lord
24 10:36:55 25
26
Mayor at one stage; isn't that the position? A.
Well, I would say Dublin City Council and I was Lord Mayor of Dublin yes.
Q. 3
You were never a member of Dublin County Council and therefore had no
27
involvement in the planning decisions made in connection with the Cherrywood
28
lands; isn't that the position?
29 10:37:07 30
A.
That's the position.
Q. 4
Now, I think the Tribunal wrote to you on 7th of March 2006. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
At page 1068,
10:37:13
10:37:35
2 1
please.
2
narrative statement from you.
3
matters that you were asked to address included at paragraph 1, any contacts or
4
meetings you had had with any servants or agents of Monarch Properties Limited
5
Monarch Properties Services Limited, or any company in the Monarch group. 2,
6
any contacts or meetings you had with the late Mr. Phil Monahan, Mr. Richard
7
Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeny, Mr. Dominic Linane, Mr. Philip Reilly Mr. Frank Dunlop,
8
or any individual or company associated with Monaghan or the Monarch Group,
9
whether a servant, agent, or otherwise.
10:37:54 10
And the Tribunal asked you a number of questions and sought a And at 1068, please.
You will see that the
3, any payment or benefit you may
have received from, or on behalf of, listed at 1 or 2.
And also any payment
11
or benefit you may have received from Frank Dunlop & Associates or Shefran
12
Limited, when such payments or benefits were made and the reasons therefore.
13
And then you were asked some further questions.
14 10:38:07 15
And I think you provided a reply to the Tribunal.
At page 1070.
16 17
Through your solicitors Frank Ward & Co.
18
had never had any involvement with lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin and
19
therefore I'm not in a position to assist you or provide a statement in the
10:38:25 20
manner as sought.
You advised the Tribunal that you
Isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 5
Now, if we go back to the questions you were asked, Mr. Haughey.
At 1068.
23
And can I ask you, was there any part of that request from the Tribunal that
24
you didn't understand?
10:38:37 25
26
A.
No, I understood the letter.
Q. 6
Yes.
And you note that you were asked to provide details of any payments or
27
benefits you had received from the Monarch Group, or anybody associated with
28
the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
29 10:38:55 30
A.
That's right.
I did consult with my solicitors and the letter that I sent,
dated March 10th, arose out of that.
I understood that any payments made to
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:39:00
10:39:11
3 1
me were sought in the context of rezoning at Cherrywood.
2
misunderstanding.
3
Q. 7
Certainly the letter on its face, Mr. Haughey, is quite clear.
Maybe that was a
You are asked
4
to provide to the Tribunal information in relation to your contacts with
5
certain named people, certain companies and any payments or political donations
6
you might have received from them.
7
A.
That's what's stated in the letter.
Isn't that what's stated in the letter?
To be honest with you, I relied very much
8
on the first paragraph of the letter, where it states, arising out of same the
9
Tribunal now requests you to provide a detailed narrative statement regarding
10:39:30 10
any involvement that you had with the lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin.
11
Once I answered no to that I didn't think that the rest of the letter was
12
relevant to me.
13
Q. 8
You didn't consider then the balance of the request, which stated your
14
statement should include but not be limited to, any contacts you had had with
10:39:45 15
certain people and then in a separate category, any payments or benefits you
16
might have received from companies and parties identified.
17
position?
Is that the
18
A.
That's the position, yes.
19
Q. 9
So that in fact, if the Tribunal had relied upon the letter that you had sent
10:39:58 20
it, at 1070, the Tribunal would have understood from that, that you had no
21
contact with anybody associated with the Monarch Group and that you hadn't
22
received any payments from it them.
23
A.
24
Well I regret that very much.
Isn't that the position?
But as I said, having consulted with my
solicitors and taken legal advice on it, on the basis that I never heard of
10:40:21 25
Cherrywood, I didn't believe the letter in relation to payments by the -- by
26
the Monarch Properties, was relevant to me.
27
for that to the Tribunal.
28 29 10:40:45 30
Q. 10
And I regret that and I apologise
Because the position isn't I think, Mr. Haughey, and you now accept and I believe this morning you have provided supporting documentation, that you did receive payments from the Monarch Group; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:40:47
10:41:10
4 1
A.
2 3
Yes, I have very careful records of all payments received.
So there was
never -Q. 11
I'm going to come to talk to you it about your careful records in a moment.
4
The Tribunal received a letter on 29th of May 2006 from your solicitor, at
5
8496.
6 7
And you will note here, in the second paragraph, where the Tribunal is recorded
8
as outlining through its solicitor to Mr. Liam Guiera, yesterday, three
9
donations which Monarch Properties made to you, namely, June 1989 1,000 pounds.
10:41:21 10
May 1991, 300 pounds.
11
And November 1992, 750 pounds.
My client has checked
his own records and can confirm the same.
12 13
So the sequence of events then Mr. Haughey is as follows.
14
information from the Tribunal.
10:41:38 15
16
You provided no information; isn't that the
position A.
17
No, that's not the position.
I provided information to the effect that I
never had any dealings with Cherrywood.
18
Q. 12
Yes.
19
A.
I misunderstood the second part of your letter.
Q. 13
Yes.
10:41:48 20
21 22 23
You were asked for
But you --
But you did not disclose any payments you received from Monarch
Properties or anybody associated with it isn't that the position? A.
That's the position.
But I understood that that was an order.
Obviously, it
was not.
24 10:42:00 25
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, could you put back up the letter that went to Mr. Haughey.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
Certainly, Sir.
It's at page 1068.
28 29 10:42:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:42:30
10:42:52
5 1
CHAIRMAN:
I just want to read, I think possibly the second paragraph is
2
capable of an interpretation.
3
intention was to get information in relation to payments.
4
people who have received a letter in these terms have responded in that way.
I know this has arisen before.
I know the
And I think most
5 6
But it is possible, I suppose, to interpret the letter as meaning only payments
7
relating to Cherrywood.
8 9
I mean, it's just -- I know that wasn't the intention but it's certainly
10:43:10 10
capable of that interpretation.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
13 14
In any event, at 8496, Mr. Haughey.
10:43:20 15
Your solicitor is informed of the
payments that are contained in the documentation, which with which you've been
16
supplied; isn't that right
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 14
And your solicitor then confirms on your behalf of the receipt of those
19 10:43:30 20
payments by you? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 15
And you indicate in that documentation that you have records isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 16
Now, you have this morning provided records and these are not yet on the
24
system, but they will be in the system.
10:43:43 25
But the 1989 document is headed, list
of subscribers to Sean's election campaign, 1989; isn't that the position?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 17
And identified on that as one of the donaes, is Mr. Philip Monaghan of Monarch
28 29 10:43:55 30
Properties Services Limited. A.
Yes.
Q. 18
Now, I'll hand to the Tribunal a copy of this documentation, because it's not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:43:59
10:44:12
6 1
yet in the system.
(document circulated).
2 3
So you would have had this documentation freely available to you, Mr. Haughey,
4
when you got the original request from the Tribunal; isn't that right?
5
A.
6 7
out. Q. 19
8 9 10:44:29 10
Well if it was in my office certainly yes, it would have taken a bit of rooting I always have them on hand in this Tribunal era.
And in -- certainly for the second payment then in the Local Elections of 1991, you attribute a sum of 300 pounds to Mr. Philip Reilly?
A.
Yes.
Q. 20
He was one of the people, I think that was listed on the original letter that
11
you received.
Yes.
From the Tribunal.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 21
Isn't that right? And I think then also in relation to the third payment which
14
is the election fund in 1992.
10:44:49 15
Again, it's Mr. Philip Monaghan, a sum of 750
pounds.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 22
So you had available to you, when you received the information, the request for
18
information from the Tribunal, documentation that would have confirmed to you
19
that you had been in receipt of payments from named individuals within the
10:45:03 20
21
Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
I had it available to me, but I didn't consult it on the basis that I never had
22
any involvement in Cherrywood.
23
that you -- arising out of subsequent correspondence that you needed further
24
clarification, then I consulted my records.
10:45:20 25
Q. 23
Yes.
It was only when it subsequently became clear
And certainly the documentation that you've been supplied with by the
26
Tribunal.
And indeed, from your own records, record that you did receive
27
1,000 pounds in June of 1989; isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 24
And that that was sent to your brother I think, Mr. Ciaran Haughey.
10:45:41 30
Mr. From Mr. Philip Monaghan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
286 5,
10:45:42
10:45:52
7 1
A.
No, I'm not sure where you got that from.
2
Q. 25
2865?
3
A.
I never saw that document.
4
Q. 26
You have been circulated in the brief of documents which you have been
5 6
circulated? A.
7 8
Unfortunately it's not going to me.
It's going to a relative in error.
Sean
Haughey, of a similar name, I only discovered that this week. Q. 27
9
That's to be regretted. documentation.
10:46:14 10
This letter would have been included in that
If you want to take a moment to consider it.
That was
supplied to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties Services Limited and again
11
confirms from the Monarch Properties side, that a sum of 1,000 pounds was paid
12
to you in June of 1989, which mirrors your own records isn't that right?
13
A.
14 10:46:27 15
Yes, yes, I hadn't realised my brother was involved in the collection of that subscription.
Q. 28
16
But now I accept that, yes.
That would appear to be the position, if this is an accurate record isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, yes.
18
Q. 29
I think in relation to the payment in May of 1991.
19
don't dispute this.
10:46:45 20
It's mirrored in your own records at 3251.
Monarch Properties.
22
3944.
23
beneath -- sorry.
24
Whelan.
26
Sean Haughey 300 pounds.
The fifth
On 19th of November at page -- sorry. 3923.
And I think again in 1992 at
3923.
Just slightly
Just slightly beneath half way under the name Jack
And then beneath that the Barkly Court Senator, Sean Haughey.
A.
Yes.
Q. 30
And I think in fact a copy of that cheque is available at 3946.
27
And that's a
cheque drawn on the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
28
A.
Yes, so all of the records coincide.
29
Q. 31
Yes.
10:47:40 30
Again, you
name down on that list, which is an extract from the cheque payments book from
21
10:47:19 25
At 3251.
And there is a note.
An internal note that you will probably not have
seen, Mr. Haughey, at 3943.
And this appears to be the request for 750
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:47:48
10:48:06
8 1
pounds.
2
Lynn signs that and it appears he is authorising the payment of 750 pounds.
3
Did you know Mr. Richard Lynn?
4
A.
And it's I think it's sanctioned, Sean Haughey, 750 pounds.
No, but I am at a disadvantage here.
5
me.
6
acting for another Sean Haughey.
7
here.
Mr.
In that the documentation never came to
All of this documentation never came to me.
It went to the solicitors
So I'm really, sort of, doing this on spec
No, I never heard of a Mr. Lynn.
8
Q. 32
You didn't deal with Mr. Lynn?
9
A.
No.
10:48:21 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
Mr. Haughey, if you want time to.
I know you
12
are under pressure and the other TDs are under pressure here today.
13
you want time to consider the documentation, that it was intended that you get,
14
that you should get and didn't apparently get.
But if
10:48:39 15
16
You can certainly either stand down briefly and look at it and we'll deal with
17
another short witness.
18
and come back some day next week if that suits you.
19
No, I think it's straight forward enough, I'd like to continue.
Or alternatively, you can look at it over the weekend
10:48:58 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
Thank you.
If you do have a problem we can facilitate you
23 24 10:49:07 25
MS. DILLON:
Would you have met Mr. Philip Reilly?
A.
Not to my knowledge, no.
26
Q. 33
Would you have known or met Mr. Phil Monahan, that's the late Mr. Monahan?
27
A.
I have no recollection of ever meeting him.
28
Q. 34
Do you know in what circumstances Mr. Philip Monaghan became a political
29 10:49:22 30
supporter of your's, Mr. Haughey? A.
I certainly never sought a donation from him personally. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
It's possible that a
10:49:30
10:49:50
9 1
family member may have.
2
brother or a sister wrote to him seeking a contribution, in the context of
3
three specific election campaigns.
4
Q. 35
5
So the donations were either unsolicited, or else a
So you yourself have never had any contact with anybody from Monarch Properties.
Is that the position?
6
A.
That's the position.
7
Q. 36
And you were therefore never asked by anybody in Monarch Properties to support,
8
or seek support in respect of the Cherrywood lands.
9
wouldn't it?
10:50:00 10
11
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 37
And just to drew to your attention.
That would also follow
Again, you won't have seen this.
But
12
Mr. Eddie Sweeney in his statement to the Tribunal, at 2191.
13
Identifies a list of political representatives with whom he had contact.
14
the second page at 2192, he identifies you, councillor Sean Haughey Dublin
10:50:26 15
Corporation Mayor.
You will see that.
16
page on that page.
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 38
As having met you.
19 10:50:39 20
And 2192.
It's the longest entry across the
Is it your position that you haven't met Mr. Edward
Sweeney? A.
I can't say that I know Mr. Edward Sweeney.
I have no recollection of ever
21
meeting him.
22
Perhaps I bumped into him at a reception or something.
23
of ever meeting with him to discuss any business or anything like that.
24
Q. 39
10:51:02 25
It maybe in the context of me being Lord Mayor of Dublin? I have no recollection
And it's your position, is it, Mr. Haughey, that you regret the misinterpretation of the letter that the Tribunal sent to you seeking
26
information.
27
connection to you by Monarch Properties?
You have now provided all information that you have in
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 40
Thank you very much, Mr. Haughey.
10:51:14 30
On
If you answer any questions that anybody
else may have. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:51:15
10:51:20
10 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
4 5
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
6 7 8
MS. DILLON:
From Frank Fahy, please.
9 10:51:25 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:51:25
10:51:52
11 1
MR. FRANK FAHY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Fahy.
6 7
Q. 41
8 9 10:51:59 10
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Fahy, you were never a member of any local authority for
Dublin; isn't that the position A.
Yes.
Q. 42
And I think you, similarly to Mr. Sean Haughey, received a letter from the
11
Tribunal in connection with the lands at Cherrywood and you were asked the same
12
questions, at page 611 as the last witness, Mr. Haughey?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 43
And you I think similarly to Mr. Haughey at page 615, provided information to
10:52:18 15
the Tribunal, that you, from your best recollection, that you could not say
16
that you had any involvement with the contacts or companies named in the
17
letter?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 44
Is that factually correct Mr. Fahy?
A.
That is correct.
10:52:27 20
That was the response I gave at the time and it's only when
21
I had a communication from the Tribunal last week, that I became aware that I
22
may have received a cheque for 250 pounds.
23
Q. 45
24
At 8340, Mr. Haughey.
It might assist you in deciding whether in fact you did
or did not receive the cheque.
10:52:56 25
Fahy TD.
This is a copy of a cheque, made out to Frank
I think at 8341.
26 27
From Monarch Properties Services Limited.
28
that it was lodged to Bank of Ireland.
29 10:53:18 30
A.
Yes.
The reverse of the cheque shows
Does that assist you?
Well, as I say, when I responded to the letter I received I had no
recollection of any communication with any of the people involved, or I didn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:53:24
10:53:49
12 1
even know where Cherrywood was.
2
from Monarch Properties.
3
solicitor for the Tribunal and he mentioned that I had received a cheque for
4
250 pounds, that I can vaguely remember following a meeting socially with
5
Philip Monahan, that I did receive a cheque.
6
that.
7
Q. 46
8 9 10:54:06 10
I had no recollection of receiving a cheque
And it was only last week when I talked with the
But I just vaguely remember
And you don't dispute, therefore, now that you've seen the documentation. 8340, please.
At
That you did in fact receive this cheque?
A.
No, I don't dispute that.
Q. 47
And you say that that was following a social meeting with Mr. Philip Monaghan,
11
the late Mr. Philip Monaghan, is that the position?
12
A.
That's my recollection, it's a hazy recollection.
13
Q. 48
Did you ever have any contact or communication with Mr. Richard Lynn, or Eddie
14 10:54:20 15
Sweeney? A.
No.
16
Q. 49
Mr. Dominic Linane?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 50
Mr. Frank Dunlop?
19
A.
No.
Q. 51
Have you never met Frank Dunlop?
A.
Oh I've met Frank Dunlop, but never in the context of this planning or zoning
10:54:25 20
21 22
in Dublin.
23
Q. 52
Would you have met Mr. Frank Dunlop in 1993?
24
A.
I may have done, but I never had is any involvement with him, in regard to
10:54:38 25
26
Cherrywood or anything else. Q. 53
There are a number of entries in Mr. Dunlop's diaries that appear to relate for
27
completeness, Mr. Fahey, I will show them to you and ask you to comment on
28
them.
29 10:54:49 30
At 4045.
This is the 11th of March 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And if we could increase the entry
10:54:57
10:55:12
13 1
at three o'clock on the 11th of March 1993, please.
2
entry for F Fahy, at the show house.
3
you?
4
A.
No, that's not me.
5
Q. 54
All right.
6
Do you think that that's likely to be
At 4117 on the 31st of March 1993.
Frank Fahy.
That appears to be an
There is an entry for senator
Were you a senator in 1993, Mr. Fahy?
7
A.
I was, yes.
8
Q. 55
And do you see the telephone number that's there? Is that your telephone
9 10:55:29 10
number at 11.25? A.
11 12
the time, yes. Q. 56
13 14 10:55:44 15
I wouldn't be able to recall, but it must be if I was senator Frank Fahey at
Can you recollect what business you would have had with Mr. Frank Dunlop in March of 1993?
A.
No, I can't recall any communication with him.
Q. 57
And again in March of 1996.
At 5773, on the 24th of March 1996.
There is an
16
entry at 9:30 LL with Frank Fahy and F D.
17
reference to LL is a reference to the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
18
any business that you would have had with Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Lawlor, in March
19
of 1996?
10:56:13 20
A.
21
Absolutely not.
And it's understood that that
And that doesn't refer to me.
Can you recollect
That's not my -- that's not
me.
22
Q. 58
It's not you?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 59
Are you aware of another Frank Fahy, whom it could be?
A.
No, I'm not.
Q. 60
Did you ever have occasion to meet Mr. Willie Murray or any of the planners in
10:56:28 25
26 27
Dun Laoghaire County Council?
28
A.
Never.
29
Q. 61
Never.
10:56:41 30
Thank you very much, Mr. Fahy.
Would you answer any questions that
anybody else might have. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:56:44
10:56:48
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Mr. Fahy.
3 4 5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9 10:56:50 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. David Andrews, please.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:57:05
10:57:21
15 1
MR. DAVID ANDREWS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE:.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Andrews.
5
MR. McCABE:
Chairman, if I may apply for limited representation for
6
Mr. Andrews.
I am with Mr. Quigley, instructed by Kent Carty & Co.
7
Solicitors.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Granted.
10:57:35 10
11
RORY McCABE:
12
Minister and member of the Dail, isn't that correct?
13
That is correct.
14
Member of the Dail for Dun Laoghaire as well; isn't that correct?
10:57:41 15
16
Good morning Mr. Andrews, I believe you're a former Government
A.
Yes, I was there for some 38 years.
Q. 62
Mr. Andrews, I think on the 1st of February 2006 a letter was written to you
17
requesting any information that you might have regarding the Cherrywood lands
18
And I think on 12th of January 2006 you have written to us and -- advising us
19
that you weren't aware of any details regarding Cherrywood?
10:58:02 20
21
A.
That's correct.
Q. 63
I think that on May 30th 2006 at 8489, please.
22 23
I think you wrote a statement, a letter to us by way of statement, in relation
24
to your recollection of certain events regarding the Cherrywood lands?
10:58:17 25
A.
Yes. I do beg your pardon.
What happened there was that having studied the
26
files and -- received in the boxes and the various bundles of papers, my legal
27
team and myself, discovered a number of references to myself, arising from the
28
receipt of two cheques.
29
1992.
10:58:47 30
One was when I was Minister for Foreign Affairs in
I visited Somalia, on my own for the first occasion and the President
of Ireland accompanied me.
Or I should say that I accompanied her to Somalia
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
10:58:51
10:59:10
16 1
on the second occasion, in the same year.
2
country that contribution should be made to Somalia and clearly I received a
3
number of these contributions which I passed on to non-governmental
4
organisations.
5
cheque, in the sum of 2,000.
6
Q. 64
7
All right.
And there was a feeling in the
But again, I have no recollections of receiving a particular
I'll be very brief.
But you can be certain it went to an N G O. I'll Just to take you through those
payments, vis-a-vis your statement to the Tribunal?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 65
30th of May last?
A.
Yes.
Q. 66
I think in your statement as I says at 8489 you say that you received two
10:59:23 10
11 12
cheques one in '93 I think you say, was for 276 pounds and as you've stated
13
that was as a result of the Somalia...
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 67
And I think...
16
A.
Looking for support for Somalia at that time.
17
Q. 68
Page 1048.
10:59:42 15
18 19 10:59:55 20
21
That appears in Monarch Properties Services Limited in one of
their ledgers? A.
Yes.
Q. 69
You can see there that its David Andrews Somalia appeal?
A.
Yes, I didn't look for that cheque of course it was sent to me as a donation
22
purely as a Minister and probably my private secretary handled the situation.
23
Q. 70
Did you acknowledge the payment?
24
A.
I can't recall.
Q. 71
All right.
A.
But you can be certain that the cheque went to an N G O, I would have thought
11:00:09 25
26 27 28 29 11:00:35 30
probably GOAL. Q. 72
I have great respect for to John O'Shea and still have.
I think that at 4354.
Cherrywood development report, at appendix H, Monarch
Properties services Limited, have attributed this payment and it's stated there D C Andrews Somalia appeal 23rd 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:00:41
11:00:51
17 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 73
They attributed that cost to sponsorship regarding Dun Laoghaire mixed use
3
development costs. Have you any idea why they might have attributed... ?
4
A.
I have no idea.
5
Q. 74
There was, there seems to be a payment of either ten pounds or 100 pounds.
6
And if we could have page 3835.
7
for Somalia, on 30th of September 1992.
8
there in that document there's a number of documents there.
9
there was a fundraiser, as you've said again, you were obviously raising funds
11:01:19 10
at the time for Somalia.
There was a cheese and wine night. There's a payment.
Again,
You can see In particular
At 3836 there's a signed memo, Richard M Lynn.
And
11
it states the following you can see that, I shall be obliged to receive a
12
cheque for 100 made payable to David Andrews TD Dail Eireann, payment for
13
tickets received for cheese and wine night.
14
that?
11:01:40 15
16
A.
Well I don't no.
Q. 75
Very good.
Have you any recollection of
And then I think just going back to your statement again.
I
17
think you say it's in or around 1996 you received 1,000 pounds; isn't that
18
correct?
19 11:01:58 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 76
And I think in your statement, you attribute it to monies towards funding for a
21
researcher for the...
22
A.
That's correct, yes.
23
Q. 77
Isn't that correct? And I think at page 6109 we have record of that payment
24
there.
11:02:20 25
You can see just second from the bottom there October 25th Andrews TD
1, 000, in relation to that.
26
And there is a cheque at 6112.
And that is
made out to yourself, in the sum of 1,000 pounds.
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 78
And again, were you ever approached in relation to the Cherrywood lands by Mr.
29 11:02:41 30
Lynn, Mr. Monaghan, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Glennane or any of the parties associated? A.
No, I was never on a local authority.
Absolutely nothing to do with the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:02:46
11:02:56
18 1
Cherrywood lands, nothing what ever.
2
Q. 79
And I think in fairness to you, you weren't County Councillor at any stage?
3
A.
I was never a County Councillors, no.
4
Q. 80
Thank you very much, Mr. Andrews, you might answer any questions.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much, Mr. Andrews
Thank you:
8 9
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
11:02:59 10
11 12 13 14
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Ardagh ah, please.
11:03:21 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:03:43
11:03:50
19 1
MR. SEAN ARDAGH, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY BY MS. FOLEY.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Ardagh.
MS. FOLEY:
Good morning, Mr. Ardagh.
5 6 7 8
Q. 81
9 11:03:59 10
Mr. Ardagh, I think you were first elected to Dublin County Council in 1985; is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
11
Q. 82
And again in 1991?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 83
And then from January 1994 you were with South Dublin County Council; is that
14 11:04:09 15
16
correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 84
And at that point you would have had no further involvement with Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council; is that correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 85
And you were a member of are you a member of the Fianna Fail party?
A.
I am.
Q. 86
Mr. Ardagh, I think the Tribunal wrote to you.
11:04:25 20
21 22
Could I have page 40, please,
on the 1st of February, 2006.
23 24 11:04:39 25
And at the second paragraph there asking you to provide a detailed narrative statement regarding any involvement that you had with the lands at Cherrywood
26
County Dublin from January '90 to 31st of December '94.
Your statement
27
should be limited to but include but not limited to any context, or meetings
28
you had with agents of Monarch.
29 11:04:54 30
And then at the third paragraph, any payment or benefit you may have received Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:04:57
11:05:11
20 1
from, or on behalf of, agents of Monarch listed above.
2 3
I think at page 42 your letter of reply indicates I am not aware of having any
4
involvement in the lands at Cherrywood, County Dublin from the 1st of January
5
1990 to 31st of December '94 or at any other time.
6 7
Is that still your position, Mr. Ardagh?
8
A.
That is still my answer to the letter that was sent on the 1st of February.
9
Q. 87
Is it -- would it be correct to say that you had no involvement with these
11:05:27 10
lands?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 88
Were you not a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council at the time of
13 14
the voting on these lands took place? A.
No.
Q. 89
Or Dublin County Council, sorry Mr. Ardagh.?
16
A.
I understand from the records that were presented that I was.
17
Q. 90
So in fact you would have been voting on motions that effect the these lands?
18
A.
The evidence appears to be to so.
19
Q. 91
Is that -- do you not recollect?
A.
No.
Q. 92
On the 7th of March 2006 the Tribunal wrote to you a further letter asking for
11:05:35 15
11:05:59 20
21 22
a statement and details of any payments from the 1st of January 1989 to date.
23
And the Tribunal received your reply, dated 8th of March 2006.
24
page 44, please.
Could I have
11:06:30 25
26
You will see in this letter, Mr. Ardagh, you listed a number of donations
27
received from the parties post, December 1994?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 93
The first payment being in April 1996 in the amount of 250 pounds.
11:06:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:06:56
11:07:16
21 1
Could I please have page 1581.
2 3
This is a list of donations from Monarch's records.
And you will see about
4
maybe 15 or so from the end, 13th of June 1991 S Ardagh, F F local elections
5
expenses, 300 pounds?
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 94
And it appears from their records that their cheque journal that, at 3197, on
8
13th of June was written to you, Sean Ardagh FF.
9
cleared on 19th of June 1991.
11:07:38 10
cheque No 3691, which then
Do you believe you may have received this
cheque?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 95
But you have no recollection of it?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 96
Is that the reason it wasn't included then in the letter?
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 97
Monarch have told the Tribunal that all of the contributions are believed to
11:07:46 15
16 17
have arisen on foot of requests for assistance.
18
would have requested assistance from an agent of Monarch for this donation?
19
Would you believe that you
A.
Which donation?
Q. 98
The 300 pounds in 1991.
21
A.
No, I would not because -- no.
22
Q. 99
At that point Mr. Ardagh, did you have contact with any of the agents of
11:08:04 20
23
Monarch, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Gillane, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray,
24
Mr. Monaghan?
11:08:18 25
A.
I'd have to be informed when The Square in Tallaght was actually built and when
26
it was opened.
27
functions and they were turning the sod and there was the foundation stone and
28
the roof was put on and every possible occasion I think that there was some
29
form of is ceremony to mark it.
11:08:46 30
Because around that time there was, at numerous social
And I would have been invited to those so
that's ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:08:47
11:09:02
22 1
Q. 100
I think those events did take place before the June '91 elections, Mr. Ardagh?
2
A.
Then I would be I would acknowledge I would have met some of the people
3 4
involved. Q. 101
Mr. Sean Gilbride has given evidence to the Tribunal that around the time
5
shortly after the Local Elections when the new council was formed.
6
came up at a meeting, at a council meeting, that a number of councillors had
7
received donations from Monarch.
8
meeting, discussing donations from Monarch?
9 11:09:25 10
That it
Do you recollect any such conversation or
A.
No.
Q. 102
I think the next payment, as per your own statement, is of April 1996, is 250
11
pounds.
12 13
Could I have page 5803, please.
14 11:09:35 15
16
A.
Sorry, I'm lost.
17
Q. 103
Annette Foley.
18
A.
Thank you very much, Ms. Foley.
19
Q. 104
Sorry.
11:09:48 20
I don't know your name.
The 12th of April 1996.
Monarch's records also indicate 250 pounds
payment for a lunch fundraiser in respect of yourself, Mr. Ardagh.
21
have also disclosed that to the Tribunal.
Do you
At 5800, please.
22 23
This is a letter -- I see that it's signed Sean, but I believe that may not be
24
yourself, I believe that may be a member of the committee
11:10:11 25
26
A.
That looks like my signature.
Q. 105
The letter is addressed to Mr. Richard Lynn.
And reads.
27 28
A letter seeking assistance for your general election campaign, which is coming
29
up the following year
11:10:22 30
A.
Yes.
This was a mail merge letter, that was sent to a number of people so... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:10:30
11:10:49
23 1
Q. 106
And how would Mr. Lynne have gotten on the list for the mail merge Mr. Ardagh?
2
A.
What date was that?
3
Q. 107
April 1996.?
4
A.
There were a number of people on -- friends of Sean Ardagh, who actually
5
organised the fundraiser. And there would have been a trawl through people's
6
minds and records of all of the potential contributors to a fundraising lunch
7
and who might attend.
8
relatives, friends, business acquaintances, professional colleagues, of all
9
descriptions.
11:11:20 10
Mr. Lynn was included on that, along with many of my
Any person that I may have met, anybody who I felt that would
be likely to contribute to the democratic process.
11
It was just a general
trawl of er...
12
Q. 108
But the list would have been confirmed or approved by yourself?
13
A.
Well.
14
Q. 109
So it's your friends and people that you know and the final list would be
11:11:38 15
16
approved by yourself? A.
17
The list would have been approved by me, yes.
Insofar as I wouldn't have sent
a request to somebody that I didn't want to get a request.
18
Q. 110
Yes.
19
A.
That would be very few and far between, now.
Q. 111
If I could just look at the top of that page there, there's a handwritten note?
A.
Uh-huh.
11:11:52 20
21
You'll have to read it to me.
Oh, yeah two tickets.
22
Yes, sorry it says I think, recommend that we take two tickets S Ardagh is (and
23
was) first to vote.
24
Mr. Lynn.
11:12:17 25
This seems to be a note by the agent of Monarch, possibly
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 112
Can you say what significance that would have?
27
A.
Well, first of all, obviously it was a lunch.
28
tickets were.
29
250.
11:12:38 30
And I don't know how much the
You'd have to go back to the letter, probably 125 if it was
So there were two tickets and the cost of the lunch and that would
probably be about 50 or 60.
So the net amount of the contribution would be
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:12:44
11:13:07
24 1
about 130 pounds.
2
Dublin County Council, at the time, were done on an alphabetical basis.
3
the first person to vote at all times, if I was present.
4
surname started with A, I think I was the only -- I was the first at all times,
5
yeah.
6
Q. 113
7
Sean Ardagh, is and was, the first to vote.
All votes in I was
And because my
And why would that do you think -- that would have been notable by the author of the note?
8
A.
No idea.
9
Q. 114
Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that the list, being alphabetical, the person
11:13:20 10
who was called first called a vote that his wording was that the domino effect
11
would begin, that people would, he was suggesting I think that people might
12
have a tendency to follow the first person to vote.
13
ever been made to you before, or would you have been aware of any such
14
tendency?
11:13:42 15
A.
Not particularly.
Would this comment have
But I can see where if there was a tendency for people to,
16
as has been suggested, that if I voted in one way.
17
have said in some way that if it was a political vote that they would have
18
followed me.
19
purposes, I don't see any reason.
11:14:22 20
for others.
21
If it was a Fianna Fail political vote.
Well then people would
But on a general
I mean, it would be a lazy way of voting
I don't know how other people voted in relation to it or what
their reasons for voting were.
I was first to vote always.
22
Q. 115
And do you think that --
23
A.
The domino effect, I can't really make any comment on it.
24
Q. 116
Do you think people of your own party would have been inclined to follow you?
A.
Well, in politics generally, if it is a political question then the first
11:14:40 25
I really can't.
26
person has got to be more aware of what way the party, as such, is voting on
27
it.
28
TD.
29
confidence to some extent, that if I voted in a particular way that it was the
11:15:19 30
And I am a Fianna Fail, I was Fianna Fail councillor, I am a Fianna Fail And the people would have -- I'm not saying that they would have
way that people that might be of a like mind would vote. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And they might feel
11:15:24
11:15:46
25 1
safe in voting that way.
2
votes in the County Councils and the Dail and every where else.
3
Q. 117
You know, that's the way it happens.
When you say the political vote.
The council meetings, the special meetings
4
would have been on zonings and maps and those kind of things.
5
deal -- would that still follow?
6
A.
I don't know whether it would follow with.
7
vote.
8
other people that voted had a vote.
9
Q. 118
11:16:09 10
If somebody
Would that
As you say, I was the first to
So I could speak for myself, I could only speak for myself.
The only
I can't speak for them.
The Tribunal has heard evidence that before council meetings there would be more informal meetings, conducted among the different political parties,
11
perhaps, in the council chamber, perhaps in Conways.
12
evidence that from councillor Geraghty that everybody would vote as a block and
13
the decision was already made before?
14
And they have heard
A.
Yeah.
Q. 119
The members went into the council chamber?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 120
What is your view on that?
18
A.
Um.
19
Q. 121
Would that be your recollection?
A.
I wasn't able to attend a lot of those meetings, because at that time I was
11:16:25 15
11:16:33 20
21
very busy in my business and I wasn't a frequent attender at those meetings pre
22
council meetings.
So I couldn't confirm that.
23
Q. 122
So in instance where you hadn't attended the meeting beforehand.
24
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 123
And it was in an area that you weren't familiar with.
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 124
As you say yourself, you were the first to vote.
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 125
How would you form a view on how to vote?
A.
Well, it was always a little more difficult for me, than it would be for others
11:17:08 25
11:17:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:17:23
11:17:49
26 1
because I'd have to form a view, Ms. Foley.
2
it would be on a sort of a consensus basis.
3
for how the councillors, in the area generally, thought about it.
4
to what the Manager might have to say in relation to it.
5
think that, certainly in the early '80s when I started in the council, there
6
was a lot of investment going over to London at the time and that it wasn't
7
fashionable to put money into Ireland.
8
investment, for job creation, for houses and for that.
9
that-- that ethos, sort of, played a role in the way that I voted.
11:18:27 10
It would be basically I would -You would have to get a feeling Listening
Whether the -- I
So there was a need always for And that type of -And I
consistently voted over the period a of time that I was in the council.
So,
11
taking all of those things together, I made up my mind which way that I wanted
12
to vote and I voted on it.
13
say that I would have been informed of the discussion in the pre council
14
discussion.
11:19:01 15
favour of, or opposed to, the development. Q. 126
18 19
Would you be more inclined to listen to your colleagues within the Fianna Fail party?
A.
11:19:29 20
21
I would be aware of the general thrust of how the majority of the
councillors and Fianna Fail would be -- would have -- whether they were in
16 17
That would be -- I certainly would have -- I would
No.
It would be a combination of all of those matters that I have mentioned
to you. Q. 127
I think that I would have been bound to take everything into account.
I think also one of the people that were named in the statement, the request
22
for a statement and the request for details of any benefits received, was Frank
23
Dunlop and Frank Dunlop & Associates.
24 11:19:39 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 128
And I think that you informed the Fianna Fail Inquiry that in 1996 you received
26
a donation for a fundraising lunch from Frank Dunlop & Associates.
27
omitted that from the letter that you sent to the Tribunal.?
28
A.
29 11:20:08 30
I didn't.
I think that I've already said in the letter to the Tribunal that
I've already informed the Tribunal of contributions from Mr. Dunlop. Q. 129
But you
Could I have page 6177, please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:20:13
11:20:26
27 1 2
The next payment you received as per your own statement, was in February 1997.
3
In the amount of 250 pounds.
4
I have page 6179, please.
That again was a fundraising lunch.
And could
5 6
And it appears not to dissimilar to the previous year in that
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 130
Is that the same letter, same style of letter?
9
A.
That's right. I don't know how the committee were deleted from the previous
11:20:46 10
11
letter. Q. 131
But obviously the way it was copied.
Uh-huh.
And then the next donation is in February 1998, as to the sum of 250
12
pounds which you disclosed to the Tribunal.
13
services.
14
Ewart.
11:21:15 15
16
The 1997, the Monarch lands and Monarch, were taken over by Dunloe
At that point you seem to have been aware to address your requests to
Dunloe Ewart. A.
That was from Dunloe management
Is this because Mr. Richard Lynn would have been your contact?
Yes, Richard Lynn was my contact.
And it's probable, that as a result of the,
17
this February '97 letter, it may have been that the response came on a Dunloe
18
Ewart slip or something, so I'm not ....
19
Q. 132
11:21:40 20
And can you recall Mr. Lynn ever speaking to you about the Cherrywood lands during the period before you joined Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
21
A.
No, I can't.
22
Q. 133
Could I have page 6752, please.
23 24
Item No. 9 there is further payment 25th of February 1999 of 400 pounds.
11:22:02 25
payment wasn't disclosed in your statement to the Tribunal Mr. Ardagh.
26
A.
Sorry, where is that now?
27
Q. 134
It's No. 9.
28
A.
No. 9.
29
Q. 135
Do you believe that may be an error on behalf of Mr. Lynn that you received
11:22:20 30
And ...
this payment, or do you believe that it may have been an oversight on your Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
This
11:22:24
11:22:47
28 1 2
part? A.
Well, any cheque that came from or that arrived in The Friends of Sean Ardagh
3
would have been lodged to the account that is listed on my -- so I can't
4
confirm or deny.
But, you know, there is a trail that is possible there that
5
you can sort out.
I can't confirm it or I can't deny it.
6
that it's material anyway.
7
Q. 136
But I don't think
And then a further payment in the 10th of March of 2000, of 250 pounds.
8
Again, The Friends of Sean Ardagh committee a fundraising dinner.
9
also disclosed in your own letter.?
11:23:08 10
A.
11 12
11:23:27 15
It's the same time of the year that I
had these fundraisers. Q. 137
13 14
It's likely that No. 9 was February.
And then in March 2001 another fundraising dinner payment of 500 pounds. Mr. Sweeney who worked with Monarch?
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 138
Up until 1996.
Has told the Tribunal that it would have been a general policy
16
in Monarch to give donations to those politicians or parties that made
17
representations.
18
assistance, you weren't ever refused?
19
Would it have been your experience that when you sought
A.
From Richard Lynn or Monarch and...
Q. 139
Yes.
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 140
Moving on to the planning now, Mr. Ardagh.
11:23:48 20
This is
23
Page 7021, please.
This is the
first public display, which took place in September to December 1991.
24 11:24:12 25
So this is the first -- your first involvement, with the Cherrywood lands, if I
26
might use that word.
27
A.
Okay.
28
Q. 141
And the history is that in 1983 the lands were zoned agriculture and A,
29 11:24:31 30
residential. A.
AS 1, one house to the acre per septic tank?
Okay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:24:32
11:24:44
29 1
Q. 142
2
And the line, I think if you can see a line through the lands there a sort of a blue line, dividing the yellow from the white. Do you see that?
3
A.
I don't know which line.
4
Q. 143
The Monarch lands are outlined in red?
5
A.
Oh, in red, okay.
6
Q. 144
And then there's the line that divides the yellow from the white.
7
That was
the old line of the south eastern Motorway?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 145
But at the time of the first public display was a decision to move the line of
11:24:57 10
the South eastern Motorway, but it was not yet fixed as to where it was going
11
to be.
In 1990 there had been a motion limiting development to the east of
12
the south eastern Motorway?
13
A.
I see.
14
Q. 146
Which meant that the line at the south eastern Motorway had a purpose.
A.
Oh I see. Okay.
Q. 147
There was a council meeting on 13th of May 1992, at which you weren't present.
11:25:14 15
16 17
Where the Manager introduced a further map, map No. 92/44.
18
page 7203, please.
DP92/44.
It's at
19 11:25:37 20
The map was discussed at this meeting of the 13th and then voted upon at a
21
meeting subsequently, at which you were present.
22
after the first public display.
23
Plan for the residential zoning, which would mean that there wouldn't be a
24
limit on the density at this point.
11:25:59 25
The Manager is proposing
What he was indicating was an area Action
The agricultural land to be turned to
residential and a retail element, to be included, but not specifically located.
26
So this was completely different as you can see to the map on the first public
27
display.
28 29 11:26:16 30
And then in May 1992, this is the first council meeting. maps.
And you were present at this meeting. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Voting on these
The first vote that came up was
11:26:21
11:26:42
30 1
a vote proposed by Councillors Lydon and McGrath.
Recommending that this map
2
be approved.
3
number of other votes to reduce density on the lands from the Manager's map.
4
And these you voted consistently against any reduction in density.
5
there was a motion proposed by Councillor Barrett which was successful to
6
reduce the density to one house per acre.
This vote was unsuccessful but you voted for it.
There was a
At the end
You voted against this motion.
7 8
Would it be correct to say that it was your view that these lands should be
9
developed?
11:26:57 10
A.
11 12
It would -- I was always in favour of development and it would have followed through to these lands as well, yeah.
Q. 148
At this point, it has been indicated by Mr. Dunlop, that this was prior to his
13
own involvement with the lands, that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were often around
14
the premises of Dublin County Council.
But you say you don't --
11:27:24 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Lynn.
18
MS. FOLEY:
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, sorry, Mr. Ardagh, were often in the
19
environs of Dublin County Council talking to councillors.
17
11:27:35 20
21
Do you recall
meeting either of them at this time? A.
Yes, I remember them being around that -- well I'm not saying at this time.
22
But in the period that I was in Dublin County Council, I do remember Mr. Lynn
23
and now that you mention Mr. Reilly, I have a vague recollection of his face
24
being around at some stage.
11:27:55 25
Q. 149
Mr. Dunlop has also told the Tribunal that senator Don Lydon was considered by
26
Mr. Lynn as the main access to the Fianna Fail support for the Cherrywood
27
proposal.
28
about these lands?
29 11:28:19 30
Would you have any recollection of Senator Lydon speaking to you
A.
No, no.
Q. 150
The next important meeting at which the lands were discussed was on the 11th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:28:24
11:28:34
31 1
November 1993, again, Mr. Ardagh, you were present.
2
reduce the density, you were consistently against.
Again, any motions to
3 4
There is one particular motion I would like to draw your particular attention
5
to.
Page 7226, please.
And 7227 side by side.
6 7
This is a motion proposed by councillors Marren and Coffey and signed by
8
councillors Marren, Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and Ormonde. And at this point in
9
the meeting the vote to confirm change three, in other words to reduce the
11:28:54 10
lands to one to the acre, had not succeeded and other votes to reduce the
11
density to one per acre had not succeeded.
12 13
At this point the motion that is proposed is a motion, as you can see there, to
14
delete the 1993 amendment i.e. this would have been the vote proposed by
11:29:13 15
Councillor Barrett which reduced them to one to the acre, in respect of the
16
lands outlined in red.
17
lands, the Monarch lands.
18
particular lands would have been singled out for an increase in density and the
19
remaining lands to remain at one per acre, as is indicated on the motion?
11:29:36 20
21
The lands outlined in red are in fact the Cherrywood Can you explain to the Tribunal why these
A.
No.
Q. 151
I have no further questions, Mr. Ardagh.
22
If anybody else would like to ask
you questions.
23 24
Q. 152
11:29:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
So could I just ask you, Mr. Ardagh.
You said that Mr. Lynn, you
couldn't recall him ever talking to you about Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 153
CHAIRMAN:
27 28 29 11:30:19 30
Clearly, you knew him over the years and he occasionally gave you
donations, for -- or at least political donations.
Do you recall him ever
talking to you about any other development, any other Monarch development or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:30:19
11:30:36
32 1 2
lands? A.
Can I first of all say, Chairman, that the question of political donations.
I
3
think that it is important that the actual donations are recognised as the net
4
amount after the costs of the...
5 6
Q. 154
CHAIRMAN:
7
A.
Of the lunch.
Oh, yes. Because there has been a tendency for the amounts to be added
8
up without taking into account the costs involved.
9
that is the actual donation.
So it is the net amount
11:30:49 10
11
Q. 155
CHAIRMAN:
12
A.
Which reduces the 250 or the 300 to 100 and something.
13
All right. Okay.
So I just want
to make that point.
14 11:30:59 15
Q. 156
CHAIRMAN:
Given that Mr. Lynn did occasionally over the years make
16
contributions to you.
17
talk to.
18
recollection of him talking to you about Cherrywood.
19
developments going through the system during these years.
11:31:29 20
21
So clearly you'd have known him, to see and possibly to
Can you recall -- you say he didn't mention.
You have no But Monarch had other Can you recall if
he ever mentioned those to you, or lobbied you, or asked you for support? A.
Mr. Lynn I know very well.
23
Q. 157
CHAIRMAN:
24
A.
I always operated with any person lobbying in a very professional manner.
22
11:31:52 25
26
Uh-huh. And
Mr. Lynn, I always felt, I know that other people have different comments. But I always felt that he operated in a very professional way.
27 28
As regards specific developments.
29
that he lobbied me on.
11:32:14 30
I cannot remember any specific developments
We would have been very cordial in our relationships,
in our relationship to each other.
And I am sure that most of the time that I
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:32:21
11:32:35
33 1
talked to him was on a social how are you? How is the weather? And that type
2
of arrangement.
3 4
I never got involved in signing motions or seconding motions throughout my
5
period of -- in the County Council.
6
as being of great professional humble and, you know, would under no
7
circumstances do anything that was untoward.
So -- and I was always, I think, regarded
8 9
Q. 158
11:33:00 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
But, I mean, we know from many witnesses that there was a lot of
lobbying going on by... A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 159
CHAIRMAN:
14
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 160
CHAIRMAN:
17
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 161
CHAIRMAN:
12 A number of people.
11:33:04 15
Which is in itself a perfectly legitimate exercise.
18 19 11:33:15 20
legitimately for support in -- of any other lands besides Cherrywood? Before
21 22
And it was just, I mean -- do you recall Mr. Lynn lobbying you
votes? A.
Could I just suggest an analogy, Chairman.
23
and Supreme Court matters.
24
Section 4s and motions and rezonings.
11:33:41 25
It's like District Court matters
Planning was -- there were so many different That it was done like a District Court.
It was summarily just dealt with in the Supreme Court there would be written
26
judgements and reasons and explanations.
So I certainly do not -- I do not
27
remember any specific lobbying in relation to Cherrywood or any other
28
specific -- any other lobbying.
29
lobbied on by Mr. Lynn.
Any other area that I was specifically
I don't.
11:34:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:34:09
11:34:20
34 1
Q. 162
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 163
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
But you would you remember him as a lobbiest? Yes.
3 4
Just on that point, Mr. Ardagh.
Would you be surprised now?
5
I mean obviously you have been here this morning, I can understand that.
6
the records would show.
7
to have been rather meticulous in how he documented things and how he went
8
throughout his job as lobbiest for Monarch.
9
councillors, who encountered Mr. Lynn.
11:34:46 10
But
The documentation from Monarch, that Mr. Lynn seemed
Indeed some witnesses, some
We have yet to hear from Mr. Lynn.
So I'm only if you like summarising what some councillors have said.
And he
11
has been variously described as being aggressive in his approach as to lobbying
12
down to being consistently around the County Council chambers.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 164
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 11:35:00 15
16 17
I just want to ask you.
In retrospect, I mean, that was Mr.
Lynn's job A.
Yes.
Q. 165
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18 19 11:35:14 20
Would it not seem strange that he wouldn't lobby every single
councillor because he is documenting down to, it seems to me, the cost of
21
either phoning people or meeting people down in the County Council chambers and
22
elsewhere.
23
seems to have any specific recollection, save in vague terms, as to -- nobody
24
has told us yet.
11:35:44 25
26
His time for the benefit of Monarch.
That -- because nobody
I suppose it may be long-winded, that Mr. Lynn sat them down
and said look, this is -- I want a good proposal. A.
Yeah.
First of all, the question of Mr. Lynn's aggression.
I didn't --
28
Q. 166
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
A.
I found that he operated in a very professional manner at times.
27 I'm not calling it aggression.
11:36:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:36:03
11:36:15
35 1
Q. 167
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I said variously people described him at various times, one
councillor, that he was certainly forth right in his approach. A.
4
Yeah.
I felt that I would take the opportunity to take the contrary point of
view.
5 6
Q. 168
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Absolutely.
7
A.
With regard to -- I think that I've already told Ms. Foley, that I was very
8
much in favour of development generally, on the basis of investment, the jobs,
9
providing houses.
11:36:40 10
And I wasn't -- I'm not a professional planner.
I'm
not -- I felt that it was very much, as I said earlier, like a District Court
11
matter.
Just come in, you do it, that's it.
You go ahead on the route that
12
you want to go.
13
the type of detail that a judge would go into in a particular case.
I think that, whether it was right or wrong, I didn't go into
14 11:37:05 15
16
Q. 169
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
So I didn't need to.
Uh-huh. Or I didn't want to get the full details of -- and all
17
of the environmental and physical infrastructural reasons why and wherefore.
18
That wasn't my -- I wasn't a professional in that way.
19
I was a County Councillor. I was there to vote for to push forward development
11:37:29 20
I was a politician.
to try and improve the economic well-being of the country.
And that was the
21
way that I looked at it.
And I think that people recognised that that was the
22
approach that I adopted.
23
understand that Sean Ardagh has a particular point of view and that there isn't
24
the need to lobby him in the way that there may be, that other people may be...
And it may be that people felt well, you know, we
11:37:57 25
26
Q. 170
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's fair enough.
27
Mr. Ardagh.
28
display for these lands.
29
the largest tract of undeveloped land.
11:38:15 30
Back in '92 I think.
Can I just ask you on that point,
We know that the plan went out the first
And these were the, I think it was described here as These lands were all zoned or most of
them, the Cherrywood area within the Carrickmines Valley. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:38:17
11:38:27
36 1
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 171
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2 3 4 5
And that the Carrickmines Valley certainly in South County
Dublin as I understand it was what was going to be proposed to be developed. A.
Right.
Q. 172
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6 7
We heard of the various proposals by the Manager in 1990 that
8
were shot down.
9
displays first and the Manager had been saying and it was agreed because it
11:38:41 10
happened.
11 12
But in 1992 certainly -- when they went out on the first
That these should be low density, four houses to the acre.
And
that went out on the first plan A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 173
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13 14 11:38:51 15
We know that when it comes back in to the council again in
1992, there's is if you like, what happens is that the Manager in fact has a
16
slightly more ambitious proposals than in fact what went out on the first
17
display
18
A.
Yeah.
Q. 174
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19 11:39:05 20
That he still wanted the four houses to the acre on piped
21
sewage, but with an area Action Plan.
22
density.
23
residential he wanted to put further south.
24
that map you put up on the day.
11:39:26 25
26
He was still described that as low
He wanted to extend the area, in fact, of what would be zoned And then you had obviously -- and
I think the record shows that you voted for
that A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 175
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 11:39:36 30
That you thought obviously -- you said there earlier that you
weren't a planner indeed wouldn't be going into it in the ins and outs.
The
Manager as was his job and being paid to do presumably, was to put in proposal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:39:43
11:39:56
37 1
form the certain pros and cons of -- that was the job of the planners and you
2
would listen to the planners presumably.
3
A.
4
Judge Faherty you certainly have become an expert on it the way you are explaining things.
5 6
Q. 176
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I don't know about that.
7
A.
What you are saying has gone over my head already.
Q. 177
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's speaking honestly.
8 9 11:40:08 10
11
clear.
That's fair enough.
Maybe I'm not making myself terribly
I'm just talking about your voting record, Mr. Ardagh
A.
Yeah.
Q. 178
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12 13 14
He says still
four houses to the acre on piped sewage area Action Plan but extend the
11:40:19 15
16
In 1992 You support the Manager's proposal.
residential zoning.
And you vote for that.
A.
That motion is lost?
18
Q. 179
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
A.
Yeah.
21
Q. 180
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
A.
Okay.
Q. 181
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That motion is lost.
17 Yes, indeed, by a majority.
11:40:27 20
That was the first motion on the day
23 24 11:40:42 25
one house to the acre.
And that happens.
A.
Okay.
Q. 182
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
So it was one house to the acre?
That actually...
28 29 11:40:46 30
They
propose -- there was a series of other motions for it to go back to one acre,
26 27
And then Mr. Sean Barrett and some other councillor.
Is the result of the May '92 meeting.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:40:48
11:40:59
38 1 2
Q. 183
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
It goes out on the second display I am coming to this question
in a very long-winded way. A.
Okay.
Q. 184
JUDGE FAHERTY:
As you said, it's a long time ago.
5 6
I just want to put it into context for you, it goes out on
7
second display then and it's one house to the acre.
8
finally comes around for consideration again.
9
A.
We have then -- When it
It's November 1993.
Uh-huh.
11:41:11 10
11
Q. 185
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And the Manager comes back.
He is recommending that it goes
12
back to what more or less, what the position had been in 1992 or 1991.
13
wants to go back basically, four houses to the acre, in a nutshell
14
A.
Uh-huh.
16
Q. 186
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
A.
Okay.
Q. 187
JUDGE FAHERTY:
He
11:41:25 15
And he wants to delete the change, that was made on the map.
18 19 11:41:37 20
21
And Ms -- Ms. Coffey and Mr. Marren propose a motion that's
before the council, that you vote on. A.
Right.
Q. 188
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24 11:41:45 25
And they were also in agreement that the lands should go back
to four houses to the acre. A.
Okay.
Q. 189
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27 28 29
But they are limiting, if you like, the lands to go back to
actually, to the Monarch lands. A.
Okay.
11:41:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:41:52
11:41:57
39 1
Q. 190
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Not the lands that had been zoned four houses to the acre in
the '91. A.
Okay.
Q. 191
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4 5
The tranche of lands that had already been zoned since '83.
6
Indeed, I'm just about to ask you, when you were pro investment and pro
7
development and wanted houses...
8
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 192
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9 11:42:11 10
Why there wasn't, if you can recall, maybe you can't, any
11
debate as to why it should just be this tract of lands as opposed to the area
12
that had been ear marked as far back as 1983, for zoning in this particular
13
area?
14
A.
11:42:39 15
I don't know.
What I voted on and what came before the council were those
motions that were proposed and seconded.
So I was thinking about this and it
16
probably shows to some extent now, the value of having a lobbiest.
17
the owners or the people who owned the other land, wished to have it rezoned,
18
then I'm sure that if they went through the process, that Monarch went through,
19
that there would have been no difficulty in their land also being rezoned.
11:43:16 20
But it depends on who takes the action and if the action is taken.
Because if
So if the
21
action isn't taken, you can't do anything about it if there's no motion there
22
if --
23 24
Q. 193
11:43:29 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You see this wasn't a motion for zoning this was a a motion
about density, housing density.
And there already had been proposals and
26
expert recommendations by the Manager, as to why it could be four houses to the
27
acre, which was still I think considered low density zoning.
28
A.
Yeah.
Q. 194
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29 11:43:42 30
I'm just wondering why it would have to fall to -- the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:43:47
11:43:57
40 1
planners have told us in other modules, maybe as well in this Module.
2
the council didn't approach the question of what was best for the county in
3
terms of who owned what tract of land.
4
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 195
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
A.
Yeah.
Q. 196
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That
5 You understand?
8 9 11:44:05 10
debate as to with -- why this tract should not -- only this tract should go
11 12
I'm just wondering why, within the council, there wasn't
back to four houses to the acre. A.
I would also suggest that if Councillor Coffey and Councillor Marren signed a
13
motion, two people that we would have great respect for, that we would support
14
the proposal on a political basis.
11:44:27 15
16
Q. 197
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
And what was your ward, just as a matter of interest
in South Dublin County Council? A.
My ward was Terenure.
Where there wasn't a blade of grass to be rezoned.
19 11:44:37 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Ardagh.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Sir.
11:44:42 25
26
There is one small correction to the transcript if you permit me to do it now.
27 28
And I think then there is one further witness.
29 11:44:49 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Ardagh is finished.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:44:51
11:44:54
41 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Mr. Ardagh.
3 4 5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9 11:44:55 10
11
MS. DILLON:
12
a letter from the estate of Mr. Larkin.
13
641.
14
of June 1 3. And what is recorded is the 30th. 3 0.
11:45:14 15
16
There is an error on one transcript.
The page is 94 and it's line 2.
The Tribunal has received
The Late Mr. Larkin. The day is day And the date recorded should be 13th
their point of view that it's accurately recorded.
And it's important from
If that correction could
be made to that transcript.
17 18
There is one witness left, Mr. Helen Keogh.
Would you like to take the?
19 11:45:29 20
CHAIRMAN:
Well maybe.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
I would anticipate really if you were to sit straight through
23
that you should be finished just before lunch, or very shortly into the lunch.
24 11:45:34 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
We might just take a very short break and then sit to finish
Ms. Keogh.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
All right.
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you.
29 11:45:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:45:48
11:46:02
42 1 2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
5
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
6 7
Doyle:
Ms. Helen Keogh, please.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:57:14
11:57:42
43 1
MS. HELEN KEOGH, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE.:
3 4 5
Q. 198
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Ms. Keogh.
MR. DOYLE:
Miss Keogh, I believe you were a County Councillor for Dublin
6
County Council and latterly from '94 for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council
7
;isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yeah.
9
Q. 199
And that was I think you are presently a County Councillor is that right?
A.
No.
11
Q. 200
You're not.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 201
For the Progressive Democrats?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 202
What I plan to do is just take you through your statements and thereafter
11:57:57 10
11:58:05 15
I think you were previously a TD for Dun Laoghaire?
16
dealing with one or two matters arising.
17
any aspects regarding payments as well?
And then deal with the planning and
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 203
Now, there is a screen in front of you and the documents will be coming up on
11:58:20 20
that screen.
21 22
Now, I believe the Tribunal wrote you a letter requesting, in 2002, by way of
23
request for details regarding lands in Carrickmines and other related lands.
24
And you replied on the 26th of August 2002 by way of letter.
11:58:36 25
26
Could we have page 1133, please.
27 28
This is your replying letter to the letter sent by the Tribunal.
29
fairness to you, I believe that you dealt largely in the first part of the
11:59:01 30
And in
letter in relation to the Jackson Way lands, the Carrickmines Jackson Way Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
11:59:05
11:59:17
44 1
lands?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 204
And the second part of the letter, that's at 1135.
4
You deal with general
matters regarding the development and strategies and lobbying etc...
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 205
In relation to planning.
And I think that you say, you'll see 3 A.
This is
7
in reply to the Tribunal's letter.
As you may be called to give evidence to
8
the Tribunal furnishing written statements Tribunal in relation to all requests
9
for representations in relation to any Development Plan or planning matter.
11:59:40 10
11
And I think you responded as saying, 3 A, B and C.
12
down there you state that some representations were made to me personally in
13
relation to various matters.
14
And you say that this was not in relation to the Carrickmines lands, or the
11:59:58 15
Jackson Way lands.
If you will see half way
You met representatives of Monarch Properties.
I was not approached by any person in relation to those
16
lands and made no requests or representations.
And you finish off by saying
17
that you have no knowledge of who the owners of the lands were.
18 19 12:00:16 20
On the 7th of March 2006, more recently, you were written to specifically in relation to the subject lands Cherrywood.
And you were asked in relation to
21
any contacts with Monarch Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services
22
Limited or companies in the Monarch Group and whether or not you had any
23
meetings with various persons associated with the Monarch lands.
24 12:00:32 25
You replied at page 1138.
10th of March 2006.
And you say that I met from
26
time to time, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Philip Reilly during the course of the
27
discussion with the Development Plan.
28
involvement with Monarch Properties.
29
landowners sometimes lobbied in relation to their specific projects.
12:00:57 30
And you say you knew of their Your developers and their agents and
say that they provided some documentation in relation to same. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And you
12:01:01
12:01:18
45 1 2
If I could just in relation to that.
3
ever lobbied by Mr. Lynn or in any way advised in relation to any vote or how a
4
vote might best proceed?
5
A.
And Mr. Lynn in particular.
Were you
I would have been lobbied on a number of times by Mr. Lynn during the course of
6
the Development Plan.
And certainly that would include, asking to vote for
7
their particular project.
It wouldn't be unusual.
8
Q. 206
If I could have page 1414.
This is statement of Mr. Richard Lynn.
9 12:01:45 10
At one there you will see that he states having met most members of Dublin and
11
latterly Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown.
12
on, 6th of October 1992 which he has placed a tick against those members that
13
I recall having met in the context of Cherrywood, the reasons for the various
14
meetings was to inform the respective member of and elicit support for the
12:02:07 15
And he provides an extract from a meeting
Cherrywood project.
16 17
You can see that at page 1416.
18
tick beside your name.
19
eliciting support from you for this and other occasions?
12:02:28 20
A.
21 22
That's a copy of the meeting and there is a
Do you recall having been elicited -- Mr. Lynn
I wouldn't remember the actual date.
I can certainly confirm that he would
have been looking for support for the project on a number of occasions. Q. 207
I think further going back to your statement at 1138.
23
with Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Philip Reilly.
24
Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
12:02:49 25
A.
26 27 28
Q. 208
And there is no mention of
Do you remember meeting Eddie Sweeney?
I don't remember meeting him. company.
You refer to a meeting
I mean, it's possible that he was in the
But I don't remember meeting him particularly.
Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
In his statement to the Tribunal.
If we could have,
please, page 2191, please.
29 12:03:07 30
He states there in the second paragraph I specifically recall having had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:03:11
12:03:27
46 1
contact sometime or other with the following political representatives, at the
2
bottom of the page you will see yourself, senator Helen Keogh.
3
A.
4
That's possible.
I don't remember an individual appointment or anything.
He
may have been in the company of others and I just don't recollect him.
5
Q. 209
You say, you go on to say that you never had any discussions with Frank Dunlop?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 210
Your second last paragraph, you say, on page 1138.
I received no payments
8
from any of the individuals companies you have listed.
9
did receive in 1992 a cheque for 500, which I believe you cancelled.
12:03:47 10
A.
I returned it.
11
Q. 211
It was cancelled.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 212
And I think that payment.
And you say that you
You returned it.
If we could have page 3866, please.
14 12:04:17 15
In the note there about half way down that page there's reference on the 17th
16
of November '92 reference to 500 pounds.
17
document.
And that's a Monarch generated
Monarch Properties document.
18 19
Again, at 3865.
12:04:46 20
3865 half way down again there's a line through it 500.
In
fairness to you
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 213
At 3868 there is top November 13th it says at top a bank reconciliation
23
statement 13th of March 1993 Monarch Properties Services Limited document and
24
500 pounds cancelled.
12:05:05 25
You see that at the top of the page there you'll see
it?
26
A.
Yes, I see it.
27
Q. 214
Now, you say that was the only one as far as you can recollect, that you
28
received from Monarch Properties. The only personal donation that I ever
29
received.
12:05:14 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:05:14
12:05:43
47 1
Q. 215
Would you have elicited, would you have sought or solicited that donation?
2
A.
No, I never sought any personal donations.
3
Q. 216
There was a statement in to the Tribunal from Mr. Phil Monahan.
4
1579.
5
request for assistance to defray Local Election expenses.
6
number of lists in that.
7
from him?
In which he refers to payments and contributions that arise on foot of
8
A.
No, I don't believe I did.
9
Q. 217
Very good.
12:06:12 10
1991.
And page
And he refers to a
You are saying that you never sought any payment
Now, Ms. Keogh, could I just going to -- your election was in June
You were elected on 27th of June?
11
A.
County Council elections.
12
Q. 218
To the County Council elections?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 219
And I think prior to that I think you received a payment of 300 pounds from
12:06:25 15
16
Monarch. A.
Do you recall that?
I don't recall receiving a payment directly to me.
I know that from time to
17
time Monarch would have contributed towards events in the constituency.
18
don't recall a direct payment to me.
19
Q. 220
But I
Maybe --
Page 3241, please.
12:06:49 20
21
And you can see there, again it's about half way down the page.
22
H Keogh Local Elections expenses 300
11th of June
23
A.
I'm afraid I just didn't.
24
Q. 221
And could you have sought that payment?
A.
I didn't think so.
26
Q. 222
You weren't --
27
A.
Individually.
I mean, things may have been done on behalf of the constituency
28
at that time.
I wouldn't have directly been involved in that perhaps.
29
have no recollection of it anyway.
12:07:11 25
12:07:32 30
Q. 223
All right.
I have no recollection of that at all.
I don't remember us seeking donations.
And have you any recollection of speaking -- have you any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
I
12:07:36
12:07:48
48 1
recollection of speaking with anybody in relation to this prior to -- in
2
relation to Cherrywood Monarch Properties or any of the individuals prior to
3
the election in June?
4
A.
No, I don't.
5
Q. 224
1991?
6
A.
No, I don't, no.
7
Q. 225
Now, in relation to the 500 pounds that you say is the only donation that you
8
can recollect and you returned that.
9
might have returned that?
12:08:03 10
A.
Could you tell the Tribunal why you
Well the whole process of the Development Plan was ongoing.
And I just was a
11
bit uneasy about accepting a personal donation.
12
period of time I would have sought, on behalf of the party, to have donations.
13
But this was addressed specifically to me.
14
accepting a personal donation knowing that, you know, that there would be a lot
12:08:29 15
16
I mean, I know that over a
And I just was a bit uneasy about
of debate about the ongoing planning issues and so on. Q. 226
This was the cheque of course for 500 was in '92.
Going back to' 91, page
17
3181.
18
This shows the payment of 300 pounds, the debiting of 300 pounds from the
19
account of Monarch.
12:08:58 20
This is an AIB bank statement for Monarch Properties Services Limited.
On cheque 3646.
And if we could have document 3180,
please.
21 22
And about 12 from the top there it has H K PD, 11.6.91 cheque No. 3646, 300
23
pounds.
That cheque is the cheque made out to you.
24
lodged.
Do you recall or would you have any idea why you would not have sent
12:09:28 25
26
And that cheque was
that payment back? A.
Well all I can imagine is that went to defray local expenses and it wasn't
27
personally to me.
28
mean, that's only an assumption I'm making at this stage.
29 12:09:44 30
I don't remember one way or the other.
But that's, I
Q. 227
Yes?
A.
And also perhaps because -- I suppose really that knowing that there was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:09:51
12:10:10
49 1
ongoing payments, that one wouldn't like to feel personally beholden to people.
2
But, no, I couldn't tell you now at this stage.
3
Q. 228
4
Now, and you are aware that it doesn't say Progressive Democrats.
It's H K,
it's attributed to you and not the Progressive Democrats?
5
A.
It has PD after it.
6
Q. 229
It does, indeed.
7
A.
No, I don't.
You have no recollection in any event?
I didn't tend to handle the finances within the constituency.
8
And I tried to ensure that they were all separate.
9
don't remember it or got it and immediately passed it on, which would be the
12:10:30 10
normal circumstance within the constituency.
11
Q. 230
All right.
12
A.
Remember accurately on that I'm afraid.
13
Q. 231
All right.
14 12:10:49 15
But I couldn't ...
Now, just moving back to the planning.
elected in June 1991.
So I either got it and
Now, when you were
There had been agreement for the first public display
of map 27, effecting the subject lands.
16 17
If we could have page 7020, please.
18 19
Now, you can see from that map there that the Monarch lands were outlined in
12:11:04 20
red, as you can see.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 232
And the subject lands there Cherrywood in yellow.
Now, this was map 7021.
23
It was the first public display from September '91 to December '91.
24
recall that map and the matter of the public display?
12:11:21 25
26
Do you
A.
Well I can just about recall it at this stage, yes.
Q. 233
And you will see that from that map that there was a number of discussions and
27
in May '91 before you were elected of course to the council.
28
of those discussions this map shows residential development east of the South
29
eastern Motorway.
12:11:42 30
A.
You will see the line going through?
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And as a result
12:11:43
12:12:01
50 1
Q. 234
2
Residential zoning was changed from AS 1 to AP, that is from one house per acre on septic tank to four houses on piped sewage.
3
A.
Piped drainage, yeah.
4
Q. 235
And you can see that there is a slight potential revising of the line of the
5 6
South eastern Motorway and that's the black dotted line? A.
7 8
Yeah.
I think there was some discussion about the line of the motorway that
the time. Q. 236
Now, I believe that if we could look at page 3337, please.
9 12:12:13 10
Now, this is a note of a meeting and present at the meeting you can see from
11
the top there it's dated 11th of September.
12
page.
13
Lafferty, Reilly, Murray and Cassidy were in attendance.
14
written by Michael Cassidy.
12:12:45 15
good.
We'll deal with that in a moment.
I can sell you from the following
It's a meeting which Mr. Sweeney, And the note is
And in, you can see in the top there progress is
Notes on meeting held in Monarch House. One, progress is good. Public
16
relations aspects to be explored as soon as possible, as soon as a deposit is
17
paid. And then there is a number of people's names with the initials it would
18
seem beside them with the initials of members of Monarch Group.
19
Helen Keogh and beside that is PR, possibly Phil Reilly
12:13:09 20
21
And your name
A.
Yeah.
Q. 237
And have you any explanation as to why your name would appear on such a
22
document?
23
A.
I'm not exactly sure what the purpose of this document is, sorry.
24
Q. 238
Public relations aspects to be explored.
It seems that there is a list of
people on this, on this documentation.
And underneath the heading which is
26
public relations aspects to be explored.
Have you any reason to understand
27
why your name might appear on the document such as that?
12:13:28 25
28
A.
No, except it seems to be quite a number of the members of the council.
29
Q. 239
Yes.
12:13:54 30
I think in total about 18 members of the council on that.
All right.
I think in November 1991 a number of representations were received by the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:14:00
12:14:29
51 1
council in relation to the map No. 27.
2
from Monarch.
3
As well as certain other matters regarding density.
4
'92 you are aware that hearings had concluded and a number of representations
5
and objections of representations regarding the first public display on map No.
6
27?
7
A.
8 9
And in particular representation 1117
And that sought change in the zoning densities of the land.
Yeah, I'm quite sure I did.
And by the 10th of April
I don't have a very vivid recollection at this
stage of it. Q. 240
12:14:44 10
I think there was a meeting at which you were at on the 13th of May. that's 7192.
That was at this meeting.
7192.
And
That the Manager reported to
11
the council regarding the various reports and objections, representations
12
received.
13
that is DP92/44.
And he also proposed certain amendments to map 27.
Arising out of
And that's at 7203, please.
14 12:15:10 15
16
Now, do you recall seeing this map and having this map circulated to you? A.
I'm sure that that map was circulated.
As I say, at this stage my
17
recollection isn't very vivid but I do remember maps being circulated that the
18
time, yeah.
19
Q. 241
And you can see that there's a number of changes to the map in relation to the
12:15:39 20
subject lands.
21
from A to A1?
And that change in density.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 242
It's four houses per hectare.
24
You can see there in the map
And that's on the subject lands.
rezoning of B, that is agricultural lands to A1P.
12:15:55 25
of the South eastern Motorway.
26
And also a
And they are on lands west
You can see that just below the large black
line that goes through the subject lands?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 243
And there is also again, you see a possible re alignment of the Southeastern
29 12:16:13 30
Motorway and a number of other proposed changes. Nothing turns on that.
Now, the important meeting.
The meeting didn't make any decision.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
No vote taken.
12:16:17
12:16:40
52 1
On 27th of May 1992.
At 7205, please.
2 3
Now, at this meeting there was a number of motions had been received, as I've
4
stated, in relation to, as you would be aware, the public display.
5
number of these motions were dealt with, 11 in all, at this meeting.
And a
6 7
And in particular, DP 90/44 was considered.
8
relation to same 7207, please.
And there was a motion in
From Mr. Lydon and Mr. McGrath.
9 12:17:00 10
And that was, this motion sought to adopt the changes, that is in the zoning
11
densities re alignment of Southeastern Motorway etc..
12
and lost.
13
motion? I can tell you that you voted against.
14
A.
12:17:23 15
16
And that motion was put
Do you remember that motion? Do you remember voting on that
Yeah, I would imagine that I would have voted against it yeah.
Actually, I
mean, I should say that I remember that occurring. Q. 244
And I think then there was a motion, 7211, please.
17 18
And that's as you can see there's -- this is in relation to your own motion,
19
Mr. Lohan and yourself were responsible for putting in a motion.
12:17:56 20
motion 3 1 A 5.
That's
That's at page 7155, if we could have that, please.
21 22 23 24 12:18:07 25
And 7156.
And at 7157.
7157.
26
and your name is written in there.
27
that motion?
Now, on that you can see the subject lands Do you recall having signed your name to
28
A.
I must have, yeah.
29
Q. 245
And I think your motion was seeking to have two houses per acre on the subject
12:18:40 30
I'm not exactly sure what the motion was.
lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Can you ...?
12:18:41
12:19:10
53 1
A.
2 3
Oh, I think, yeah, it was a, designed as a sort of a compromise or whatever suggested but I don't think it received any support.
Q. 246
4
You lost that motion was lost and there were two subsequent motions. Mr. Eamonn Gilmore and O'Callaghan.
One by
And that's at 7214, please.
5 6
And that was motion 3189.
That was seeking a district centre, or what's known
7
as objective C, district centre, on the lands.
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 247
Now, you abstained in that vote.
A.
I wasn't convinced that that was the right way to go but I didn't particularly
12:19:22 10
11 12
want to vote against it. Q. 248
13 14
You weren't ...?
Page 7216.
This was the motion by Barrett and Dockrell.
3 1 A 11.
This
motion was sought to reduce the residential density to one house an acre? A.
Yeah.
Q. 249
And you voted for this?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 250
You voted to have the lands not as DP92/44 would have had with a higher
12:19:41 15
18
density.
19
acre?
12:19:53 20
21
But you voted for Mr. Barrett's motion seeking to have one house per
A.
Yeah, I think following discussion we decided that we would support that.
Q. 251
Why did you vote for that as opposed to the motion for Lydon and McGrath; which
22
was the higher density?
23
A.
I think it was on the recommendation of the hang Manager at the time.
24
Q. 252
No, the Manager's recommendation was for DP 90/44 which would have allowed for
12:20:17 25
26
o four houses per acre? A.
I'd say it was then on foot of the debate that occurred there.
Because that's
27
what I usually based my decisions upon was mostly the advice of the Manager
28
and/or the advice and discussions that took place.
29
exact content of that.
12:20:37 30
Q. 253
Now, I don't remember the
But that would have been my general approach.
You see your own motion sought for a higher density? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
So ...
12:20:40
12:20:58
54 1
A.
Yeah.
But it lost.
We weren't looking for a high density.
2
to the acre.
So this is one to the acre.
3
was -- I thought that that was a better solution.
So I suppose we thought that that
4
Q. 254
The lower density was a better solution?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 255
All right.?
7
A.
I don't know that the services were available at the time.
8 9
now. Q. 256
12:21:12 10
It was only two
I can't recollect
But that may have been one of the reasons.
Well I believe as a result of the Manager's representations on the 30th of May. He recommended in fact a higher density as a result of the area Action Plan and
11
piped sewage?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 257
So I think he was envisaging?
14
A.
That that would be viable.
12:21:24 15
We thought that wouldn't be there in time.
think there was also a little bit of debate about progress and so on.
I
I mean,
16
I don't remember exactly.
I wouldn't have seen a huge difference between the
17
one and the two per acre.
I think we were trying to arrive at some kind of
18
compromise, which wasn't very successful.
19
Q. 258
12:21:45 20
All right.
Now, again, on the 17th of November '92.
500 pounds.
This is the payment for
This is the cheque you say you sent back.
Indeed it seems to
21
have been cancelled by Monarch Properties.
22
saying was because you were uncomfortable with the cheque being sent to you
23
directly.
24 12:22:03 25
A.
Yeah.
Q. 259
Okay.
26
And you say that your reasons for
Is that correct?
And on the 23rd of June 1993.
At page 4018, please.
Do you see
there, Ms. Keogh, 23rd of June ticket fundraiser 100 pounds?
27
A.
That would have gone directly to the party.
28
Q. 260
Do you remember receiving that?
29
A.
I know that certainly when we were doing fundraising for the party that we
12:22:32 30
It wouldn't have gone to me.
would have sent out letters to, you know, all and sundry really. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Unless they
12:22:37
12:23:03
55 1
were people that we really didn't want to deal with.
2
that's -- tickets fundraiser.
3
auction or something like that.
4
Q. 261
8398, please.
That might have been something like a dream I'm not exactly sure now.
This is the cheque it's cheque No. 8269.
5
clearest but it's dated 23rd of June '93.
6
You'll see that PD?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 262
Made out for 100 pounds.
9 12:23:21 10
signature.
But so I would say that
It's written to you.
Helen Keogh.
And I think you've endorsed it on the back.
Your
At 8399, please.?
A.
Yeah, that would mean that I endorsed it for the party.
11
Q. 263
For the party?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 264
I think that was cashed.
14
And it's not the
If we could have 4262.
That's an AIB account for
Monarch Properties services limited bank statement.
And you'll see one-third
12:23:35 15
down the page 8269, 100 pounds debited.
4262.
16
93 and under that third down 100 pounds.
You didn't feel it necessary to
17
return that cheque?
18
A.
It wasn't to me.
19
Q. 265
Well it was written out.
A.
I've noted that a few times.
12:24:06 20
You will see there 26 of July
I mean. You'll see the cheque? I didn't have the opportunity to trawl through
21
all of the documentation.
22
actually -- that maybe cheques were written out to me.
23
endorsed them immediately and passed them on.
24 12:24:26 25
26 27
But I was quite surprised to see that things were But I would have
And I really don't recall --
Q. 266
But you will accept that this cheque was written out to you?
A.
Oh, absolutely.
Q. 267
And cashed.
Now, I think the second public display was July to August 1993.
And that was map 27.
7217, please.
28 29 12:24:51 30
And you can see that the change No. 3 and No. 4. motions the previous May.
And this would reflect the
The Barrett motion and the O'Callaghan Gilmore
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:25:01
12:25:21
56 1
motions.
If you can see the map there.
You'll see that again the Monarch
2
lands are outlined in red.
3
the map.
4
That is the agricultural land to C and some of the residential land to C, town
5
centre also.
6
council that there below density on the subject lands and that there be a town
7
centre.
You can see that there's change No. 3 written on
That's density one house per acre.
And also there's change No. 4.
And in other words, this map is reflecting the views of the
Can you follow that? You can see it on the map
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 268
Again, I have to ask you do you remember this map?
A.
I remember the process, you know, I may not remember each individual map
12:25:39 10
11 12
because there were many of them but yeah, I certainly remember the process. Q. 269
On the 11th of November 1993, 7258, please.
There's another meeting of the
13
council.
14
meeting which came to discuss the changes on the map 27.
12:26:22 15
Again, you were present at this meeting.
the Manager proposed deletion of change No. 3.
And this meeting was the And at this meeting
And it was Mr. Barrett's.
16
to delete the very low density of one house per acre.
17
motions at this meeting.
So
And there were two
7224, please.
18 19 12:26:45 20
Now, this motion sought to confirm the change No. 3. there would be very low density on these lands.
21
confirm Mr. Barrett's motion from May of '92.
22
motion.
That is to confirm that
The one house per acre to
Now, you voted against that
23 24
At 7262, please.
12:27:01 25
26
If you will see the motion proposed by Councillor Gilmore and a O'Callaghan
27
resulted in for 26 and the motion was lost and against 44.
28 29
At 7263, please.
12:27:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:27:20
12:27:38
57 1
You will see there against and your name is recorded as having voted against,
2
confirming the low density on the lands.
3
A.
Right.
4
Q. 270
Now, there was a subsequent motion.
That was the motion of Marren and Coffey.
5
And that was to delete change No. 3.
On the subject lands only.
6
been dealt with this morning, you would have heard evidence.
This has
7 8
At 7226, please.
9
And at 7263 you will see that you voted for.
12:28:19 10
And 27.
That motion seeks to delete that change three. Again, you can see that
following the motion proposed by Councillor Marren and seconded by councillor
11
motion.
For the motion was won and you voted for that?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 271
If we could go back, please, to 7226, please.
14 12:28:34 15
And you can see, if we could highlight please what the top of the motion what
16
it seeks.
You can see that Dublin County Council hereby resolves to accept
17
the County Manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of
18
the lands outlined in red and attached map.
19 12:28:58 20
And also there's an amendment to that.
21
And that seeks to have the remaining
lands that is the non-monarch lands at two houses per hectare.
22
A.
Right.
23
Q. 272
Now, the 18 months, Ms. Keogh, from May '92 to November '93 there seems to have
24
been a significant change.
12:29:25 25
have voted against keeping the change that you had previously voted for, 18
26
months before.
27
against 18 months before.?
28 29 12:29:49 30
Could you advise the Tribunal as to why you would
A.
Yeah.
And voted for a change in the density that you had voted
I think that's down to the fact that sometimes we sought compromise
that didn't work.
And then time went on and generally speaking we would have
tried to follow the Manager's advice.
And then if we thought that perhaps
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:29:53
12:30:06
58 1
with amendment the manager's advice would be taken.
2 3
I don't remember the exact.
4
that's, you know, probably what I would do.
5
reasonable and achieving the best results that we could at the time.
6
would have been my general approach.
7
individual motion at this stage obviously but that would have been my general
8
approach
9
Q. 273
12:30:21 10
I'm just saying that's a general approach.
So
Trying to be, I suppose, That
I don't specifically remember each
And this, you would accept, the approach was completely in contract to your earlier view in regards to low density?
11
A.
Well, you know, the densities aren't hugely different, you know.
12
Q. 274
Well one house per acre versus four would be significant if you were attempting
13 14
In fact.
to develop the lands; wouldn't you agree? A.
12:30:42 15
Well I think there was a view at the time.
That was, I don't want to go into
sort of some of the kind of speculation that there was.
But, you know,
16
terribly wealthy people would have an acre a ground and this sort of stuff.
17
There was a lot of speculation and discussion.
18
would have done is try to get the best result possible at that time.
19
Generally speaking what I
Q. 275
Were you approached by any?
A.
No.
21
Q. 276
Parties?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 277
Anybody at all in relation to these votes?
24
A.
No, definitely not.
Q. 278
Or advised any way in relation to these votes?
26
A.
No, no.
27
Q. 279
The change then resulted in the Monarch lands having a zoning of four to the
12:31:02 20
12:31:09 25
28
acre and ten to the hectare.
29
have voted specifically for the Monarch lands only having this zoning density
12:31:38 30
Now, have you any understanding why you would
and not the other lands? In other words, if I might put it to you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
The
12:31:43
12:32:03
59 1
Monarch lands were to have this significantly, I would suggest to you, zoning
2
advantage of four houses to the acre with the balance of the lands as a result
3
of this motion having only two houses per hectare.
4
A.
Now...
Well, I would imagine, as I say, I don't remember each and every motion that
5
was put forward, because goodness knows there were very many.
6
would imagine, and I'm speculating now because I don't recall exactly, that I
7
would have, in all circumstances, tried to get the best result on the advice of
8
the Manager and following the discussion that took place.
9
was not concerned who owned what land.
12:32:28 10
relation to the planning.
11
land.
I would have rather not even know who owned the
Because I thought that that --
Q. 280
Were you aware who owned the land?
13
A.
Oh, I probably was aware.
14
Q. 281
That would suggest that you?
A.
Yeah, I mean, but that wasn't of major concern to me.
16 Q. 282
Now, you say you would have followed the Manager's --
18
A.
Insofar as possible.
19
Q. 283
You hadn't in '92.
A.
I would say that was following the debate at the time.
Q. 284
All right.
21
My concern would have
been to try to get the best result possible within the county.
17
12:32:59 20
And I didn't -- I
And I didn't like that approach in
12
12:32:39 15
But I think, I
You had gone against the Manager's recommendation?
You say that you weren't -- a few moments ago you said that you
22
wouldn't have been happy with notion of very wealthy people on one house per
23
acre?
24
A.
12:33:15 25
wouldn't take that fairly seriously.
26 27
That's part of the kind of stuff that was being talked about at the time.
I
But I think, you know, there would have
been some talk about that. Q. 285
Could we have 7217, please.
28 29 12:33:37 30
Now, you can see these again.
The subject lands.
There is the balance of
the lands now, which you can see from the map, is a significant portion of land Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:33:45
12:34:04
60 1
is and remains as a result of this motion, which you voted for, remains this
2
two houses per hectare.
3
any way? Did you discuss it with anybody that it might have struck you as
4
unusual?
5
A.
Was that not -- did that not strike you as unusual in
I don't remember particularly discussing it.
I think generally speaking I
6
don't know that we would have been focussing on that.
7
focussing on, you know, the authority of the proposals and so on.
8
particularly remember discussing it.
9
Q. 286
12:34:26 10
Now, returning to the meeting.
We would have been I don't
There were a number of other motions in
particular a motion by Mr. Smith and that sought to change the zoning that
11
change four A back to B.
12
lands back to agriculture be changed for the town centre.
13
map there.
14
sorts from the subject lands.
12:34:53 15
As will see in the
Four A is at the bottom of that map where there is a square of
centre lands.
16
That is the change that part of the agricultural
That's the town centre.
The proposed town
This motion sought to have that part of the zoned town centre
lands put back as agricultural.
And do you remember that motion?
17
A.
Not particularly.
18
Q. 287
Would you remember that you voted against changing that land back to
19 12:35:14 20
21
agricultural? A.
Well I wouldn't be surprised if I had.
Q. 288
All right.
Now, I think that there was again a motion to affirm the changes,
22
that is the changes regarding town centre on those lands again in that box you
23
can see.
24
Lohan.
12:35:42 25
And that was from Counselor Marren and your colleague councillor And that vote was taken.
on a show of hands.
That's 7267, please.
That vote was taken
So, in other words, this was a vote to affirm the changes
26
4 A and 4 B notwithstanding that on foot of the Manager's recommendation the re
27
tailed space was to be limited to enable retail size.
Do you remember that?
28
A.
I don't specifically remember that.
29
Q. 289
And do you remember how you might have voted? It say as show of hands.
12:36:10 30
there's no record of the vote.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
So
12:36:12
12:36:34
61 1
A.
2 3
I don't particularly.
I don't specifically remember.
I may have voted for
it but I couldn't be definite about that. Q. 290
All right.
Now, arising out of that.
4
Development Plan was adapted.
5
highlight the subject lands.
On 10th of December 1993 the County
That's 7278.
And that's 7278.
If we can
6 7
The map now shows that on the subject of Monarch lands, and they are in green.
8
They should be, it's not a very good coloured map.
9
zoning on part of the subject lands is ten houses per hectare.
12:36:55 10
town district centre.
But in any event, the
You can see the purple box there.
There is also
And below or west
11
of the Southeastern Motorway you can see what is blue, of sorts.
12
can you follow the map there? The town centre is the squarish area, that's the
13
town centre area.
14 12:37:16 15
A.
Yeah.
Q. 291
And then you can see that.
16
lands.
And then just north of that is blue agricultural
You can see that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 292
Anyway.
19
If you can,
Arising out of that.
This was the situation in 1993.
And I think
in 1994 the council's or the County Council in Dublin was split up; isn't that
12:37:39 20
correct?
21
A.
That's correct, yeah.
22
Q. 293
And I think the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council of which you were a
23 24 12:37:44 25
member? A.
Yeah.
Q. 294
And if I could just page 4941, please.
Now, this is February 1st 1994.
26
this is now indeed it says Progressive Democrats PDs 2,000.
27
fund raiser interest free loan hello Keogh?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 295
Do you recall having received this money?
A.
Not at all! I saw this and I was quite surprised.
12:38:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
And
You see that says
I think at the time the
12:38:22
12:38:39
62 1
Progressive Democrats had a system of fundraising by seeking interest free
2
loans of a period of time.
3
nothing to do with me personally.
And that's what that must have.
Certainly it's
4
Q. 296
Did you seek this funding from Monarch?
5
A.
I don't know that I actually did myself because I think it may have been done
6
through the party.
7
asked to, sort of, do this through the constituencies or whether it came
8
through headquarters.
9
was note for me.
12:39:01 10
Q. 297
All right. cheque.
12
relation to that.
13
free? A.
12:39:22 15
I don't remember.
And then at 4961.
11
14
But I don't specifically remember now whether we were
But it certainly very definitely
We can see there's there outlined is the
Again, in the sum of 2,000 pounds.
And interest free.
Just in
What was -- why would they be described it as interest
Well I think at the time the party was badly in need of funds and this was seen as a way of ...
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
MR. DOYLE: That's right
19
It's definitely not me.
12:39:39 20
Q. 298
5065, please.
The cheque -- the name of that cheque is Progressive Democrats.
The name on the cheque is Progressive Democrats.
And again, this is a -- an expenses claim form of Richard
21
Lynn's.
22
can see the bottom of the writing there you have your name is written there
23
Helen Keogh 82 pounds.?
24 12:40:11 25
There's something in front of that I can't quite make it out.
Q. 299
It's something review.
Development review or something.
review it would seem.
And it has H Keogh.?
A.
28 29 12:40:35 30
22nd of April '94.
A.
26 27
And you can see it's dated April '94.
I have no idea what that is.
You
Development Plan
I can't he can't seen spell my name right I
notice. Q. 300
H Larkin.
Have you any recollection of meeting Mr. Lynn around this time for
a lunch or for a dinner in relation to the Development Plan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:40:42
12:41:08
63 1
A.
2
No.
No.
I mean, unless there was some sort of function on or something like
that.
3
Q. 301
Because it would be --
4
A.
It seems to be something else there as well.
5
Q. 302
Larkin I think?
6
A.
I certainly didn't have.
7
Q. 303
All right.
I don't know anybody called Larkin.
But you have no recollection of that meeting.
You see, in May
8
'94 I think the council came to seek a variation of the 1993 plan.
9
a draft area Action Plan.
12:41:24 10
that.
7294, please.
That's map P L 94/39.
By way of You can see
And there was a meeting on 23rd of May '94 of the planning development
11
and tourism committee to discuss this area Action Plan.
12
Gilmore sought agreement from the County Council that they would review zoning
13
for the '93 plan for a science and technology park?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 304
Do you remember discussions in relation to that?
16
A.
I remember there were discussions, yeah.
17
Q. 305
And if we could see page 83156, please.
12:41:43 15
I think Mr. Eamonn
18 19 12:42:10 20
Now, this is a document, a memo of sorts, from Richard Lynn. Cherrywood political strategy.
And you can see
The next planning meeting at which Cherrywood
21
may be debated is on Wednesday 29th June 1994, at which meeting Eamonn
22
Gilmore's motion is to be clarified as regards the siting of science and
23
technology park.
24
members to move a motion from the floor in the context of the area Action Plan.
29th of June 1994 meeting may offer an opportunity for
12:42:30 25
26
And at the bottom it says action specific members should be approached on the
27
basis of moving and supporting such a motion from the floor.
28 29
8316, please.
12:42:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:42:41
12:42:54
64 1
Support of the following members must be obtained.
2
there second from the bottom, Helen Keogh
And you can see your name
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 306
Now, do you remember being approached by Mr. Lynn?
5
A.
I don't specifically remember being approached by Mr. Lynn.
But obviously I
6
knew of their involvement in that so it wouldn't be a surprise, surprising if
7
he had.
8
remember it.
9
Q. 307
12:43:15 10
I would be very surprised if he hadn't actually.
But I don't really
And he -- so you have no recollection of him approaching you in relation to this?
11
A.
No but I wouldn't be surprised if he had.
12
Q. 308
Do you accept that -- all right.
13
1994.
Now, I think the meeting on the 29th of June
2363, please.
14 12:43:24 15
This is a meeting of the planning development and tourism committee.
16
were reporting on the Cherrywood Action Plan.
17
at this meeting.
18
in relation to the Action Plan.
And they
Now, I believe you were absent
And it was at this meeting that certain matters were agreed
19 12:43:47 20
There was a subsequent meeting on the 14th of November 1994.
21
I believe you
were present at that meeting.
22 23
And it was at that meeting that on the 14th of November 1994 that management
24
presented to the councillors proposed variation to the 93 Development Plan to
12:44:10 25
provide for a science and technology park.
And he also advised regarding
26
certain agreements had been entered into between Monarch GRE and Dun
27
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
28
at it?
29 12:44:34 30
A.
Do you recall that meeting.
were present
Well, I know that I was present at meetings where those things were discussed. But as to the precise dates and meetings, I don't have, as I said before, a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:44:39
12:44:53
65 1
vivid recollection.
2
meetings.
3
Q. 309
4
But I can remember these being discussed at various
And do you remember the Manager proposing the science and technology park and reciting the town centre north of the relief road?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 310
You remember that?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 311
And also rezoning part of the agriculture lands?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 312
You remember that?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 313
Could we have 7284, please.
12:44:58 10
13 14
Again, you can see from this map here that what is proposed is a science and
12:45:12 15
technology park south of the district town centre.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 314
The proposed link road being moved, if you can see, northwards, with the town
18
centre moving proportionately as well.
19
the subject lands, being rezoned 16 houses to the hectare.
12:45:37 20
And lands north of that, in blue on Now, in relation
to the science and technology park and the proposed variation to the plan.
21
Both proposed changes were proposed by councillors Coffey and Butler by way of
22
a show of hands.
Both were passed.
Do you recall how you voted?
23
A.
I don't actually, no.
24
Q. 315
And would you have any idea in relation to the changes -- you have no idea how
12:46:06 25
you voted on this or what your views would have been or any discussions you
26 27
would have had? A.
I think if the Manager was in favour of it I know that we had a lot of
28
discussion about this.
29
having the science and technology park and how good that would be for Dun
12:46:23 30
And, you know, there was a lot of discussion about
Laoghaire/Rathdown and so on and so forth. I would imagine if the Manager was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:46:27
12:46:50
66 1 2
in favour of it that it was good proposal, that I would have supported it. Q. 316
And again, we have the subject lands in relation to the rezoning of
3
agricultural land on the subject lands from agricultural to 16 houses per
4
hectare.
5
of November '94 to 10th of March '95.
The area Action Plan you might remember was put on display from 13th Do you remember -- at 7563, please.
6 7
Again, this is almost a duplicate of the map that's just been on the screen and
8
the relevant proposed amendments or changes are there.
9 12:47:11 10
Now, on the 26th of January 1995.
If I could have page 5529, please.
11 12
You write a letter to Mr. Richard Lynn regarding a national draw for the
13
Progressive Democrats.
14
that, this document came as a result of discovery from Monarch Properties that
12:47:44 15
the writing on the bottom of this is seeking to have a cheque for 200 made out
And that's dated 19th of January 1995.
16
for the Progressive Democrats.
17
seeking?
18
A.
19 12:48:05 20
Written on
Do you remember writing this letter and
I'm sure that I would have written to Monarch looking for, asking them to buy tickets in the Progressive Democrats.
Q. 317
All right.
21 22
Now, on foot of that, back to the planning and public changes to the map.
23
24th of April 1995 there was another meeting.
24
meeting in fact.
12:48:29 25
26
On
You were absent again at this
And I was at this meeting that the Manager discussed various
representations and objections that had been received on foot of the public display.
27 28
And there was a change in relation to this.
29
were confirmed in the lands.
2428, please.
12:48:43 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
The changes, all of the changes
12:48:43
12:49:05
67 1
Sorry.
That's the wrong page.
7284, please.
2 3
7281.
4 5
Now, again, you can see this is a map of the lands where the zoning earlier
6
zoning had been ten house per acre.
7
At map 7283.
8
the lands are now zoned agricultural -- all residential either ten to the
9
hectare or 16 to the hectare.
12:49:33 10
Part agriculture and part town centre.
This was the final map that was confirmed in April '95.
Where
E1 science and technology park and town centre.
All Monarch lands as are outlined in this map.
You will see all Monarch lands
11
are now zoned some form of development there's no agricultural lands left in
12
the Monarch lands.
13 14
Do you remember this map at the time? You weren't at the meeting I accept.
12:49:48 15
16
Did you have discussions with anybody regarding this? A.
17 18
this, yeah. Q. 318
19 12:50:06 20
I'm sure there would have been a lot of discussion obviously at council about
Do you remember any specific -- do you remember being approached from anybody from Monarch or being approached by any interested party?
A.
Oh, I'm sure that myself along with other councillors were approached by
21
representatives of Monarch in relation to this.
22
present in the public gallery and so on from time to time.
23
Q. 319
24
Very well.
I remember that they were
Now, the review of the 1993 Development Plan.
place from 1996.
Ultimately took
However, in April 1996, 6027, please.
12:50:37 25
26
Now, this is a note generated by Richard Lynn.
27
dated it seems 12th of April.
28
Again, it states in writing please let me have a cheque for 100 pounds in
29
favour of Helen Keogh.
12:51:06 30
A.
I think it's for a ticket.
And you will see that it is
It could be 12th of March it's not very clear.
Do you remember receiving this 100 pounds Or a lunch or something.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
As I said, any monies
12:51:13
12:51:32
68 1
like that, if they were made out to me personally I endorsed them.
My usual
2
practice would be to, well I hope my constant practice would have been to
3
endorse them for the constituency.
4
Q. 320
Do you remember soliciting these funds or ...?
5
A.
Oh, I'm sure, that like, in general fund-raising terms, you know, we would have
6 7
sent out considerable number of letters and so on. Q. 321
5815, please.
8 9
Again, this is now a letter written by you to Mr. Lynn.
12:51:54 10
this letter, indeed you are seeking monies for.
And you are again in
We are organising a business
11
lunch on Friday 3rd of May 1996 at the Doyle Tara Hotel.
12
is a letter generated by Monarch.
13
I have a cheque in the sum of 500 pounds.
14
A.
12:52:25 15
Do you remember writing this letter
Yeah, I remember that we were fundraising and as you can see, the personal
Although I wrote the letter that was on behalf of the party obviously. Q. 322
18 19
Again, at the bottom of this similar could
contact is actually the people who are the treasurers in the constituency.
16 17
At the bottom this
And the figure written by Mr. Lynn on the bottom says 500 pounds.
Do you
remember receiving 500 pounds? A.
12:52:45 20
Well I don't think I would have received it myself.
Or if I, you know, if it
was received by one of the people mentioned there in my name they would have
21
asked me to endorse it.
22
Q. 323
And you don't recall receiving it?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 324
Could I have page -- sorry.
12:53:06 25
I think the May '96, the review of the '93
Development Plan was put by way of position papers prepared by the council
26
officials and presented to members?
27
A.
Uh-huh.
28
Q. 325
Do you remember being presented with these and circulated with these documents?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 326
And I think on 27th of May '96 there was a report by the Manager in relation to
12:53:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:53:23
12:53:30
69 1
the proposed changes?
2
A.
There would have been, yes.
3
Q. 327
And 6023, please.
4 5
This is a letter again from you.
6
this is again seeking national fund-raising draws and making this personal
7
appeal to you.
8
will see by Mr. Lynn it would seem, please let me have a cheque for 200.
9
you see that?
12:53:57 10
24th of June 1996.
To Richard Lynn.
Now,
Again, at the bottom of the letter is written in hand and you
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 328
Again, do you remember writing this?
12
A.
Yes, it was a fundraiser for the party.
13
Q. 329
And could I have page 5803, please.
Do
14 12:54:07 15
And you will see thereabout a third from the bottom up 27th of June Helen Keogh
16
PD lunch 200.
17
A.
Yeah, a fundraising lunch.
18
Q. 330
If we could have 8320, please.
19 12:54:35 20
And this is a cheque writ earn on 27th of the
6th 96 in the sum of 200 pounds.
This is made out to yourself personally.?
A.
Progressive Democrat on it as well.
21
Q. 331
That's right but it's Helen Keogh Progressive Democrat?
22
A.
I assume that that's endorsed and given to the treasurers of the fundraiser.
23
Q. 332
Right.
24 12:54:59 25
Unfortunately, I'm not able to assist you either on that.? A.
26 27 28
Well there's no copy of the reverse side of this cheque.
Well I can tell you, you know, I would be very surprised -- it should be certainly.
Q. 333
All right.
At 7659.
We can see that the said cheque was debited on 20th of
August 1996.
29 12:55:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
12:55:22
12:55:51
70 1
Q. 334
Now, in December 1996 the draft map and statement were prepared and furnished,
2
as I said, in advance of January '97 meeting.
3
the members proposed review of the '93 Development Plan.
4
2545, please.
5
1997 was a further meeting discussing the proposed changes.
6
This is map 10.
7
provides no density limits in relation to the subject lands.
8
receiving this map? I accept you weren't at either the meeting on the 29th of
9
January or 4th of February '97.
12:56:29 10
A.
11 12
Q. 335
And this is 2728, please.
Again, on 4th of February
This is map 10.
2549.
At 2728.
And this map Do you remember
I'm quite sure that I would have received all of those, all of that
Would you have made any representation to your party colleague or other councillors in relation to same?
A.
12:56:44 15
16
Again, you were absent for this.
At 2549, please.
documentation.
13 14
And this was to certainly to
I don't believe so, no.
I may have discussed it but I wouldn't have made any
representations. Q. 336
17
I think that on this there was no vote taken on this occasion on 4th of February.
The matter was put back.
If we could have 6186, please.
18 19
This is a letter from you to Mr. Richard Lynn.
12:57:13 20
And it's dated February 1997.
National need to finance our upcoming campaign.
Generously supported us in
21
the past and I would be very grateful if you would attend.
22
dinner Michael McDoole spokesperson on finance would be attending.
23
head or 500 per table.
24
see by Mr. Lynn and dated February '97.
12:57:39 25
A fundraising 60 per
At the bottom again there is a note written you will Please let me have a cheque for 500.
Do you remember sending that letter
26
A.
Yeah, as part of our fundraising drive, I did.
27
Q. 337
And did you acknowledge this payment do you remember by way of letter or
28 29 12:57:58 30
otherwise? A.
I'd imagine that we would have.
Q. 338
All right.
6184, please.
This again is a Monarch generated document.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
It
12:58:06
12:58:17
71 1
shows February 28th Helen Keogh PD 500 for lunch draw.
2
A.
The same applies.
3
Q. 339
And the same applies?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 340
And the same was cash 6214 AIB bank statement. 6190.
The same sum was cashed in
6
March '97.
There's a cheque made out to you Helen Keogh 500.
7
Indeed, you endorsed it on the back we can see there?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 341
Now, can I have 6322, please.
12:58:57 10
This is the 14th of March.
councillor Helen Keogh sum of 100 pounds PDs.
11
And again, it's to
You can see that.
That's six
from the top.?
12
A.
More party fundraising, I'm afraid.
13
Q. 342
More party fundraising.
14
And again you can see that at 6213, sixth from the
bottom there H Keogh Helen Keogh 100 pounds.
12:59:25 15
And this is a document that is
generated by Dunloe management services limited.
And I think that this is in
16
relation to the -- I think Dunloe Ewart or one of their other companies at this
17
stage had taken over the development of the subject lands?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 343
All right.
12:59:53 20
Now, you accept that these sums were either sought or not sought
but were received by you and/or the party?
21
A.
Yeah, by me on behalf of the party.
22
Q. 344
All right, Ms. Keogh.
On 2nd of April '97 again there was another meeting of
23
the County Council regarding the proposed changes to the -- you weren't, again,
24
you weren't at this map -- at this meeting.
13:00:17 25
26
proposed changes to the lands. confirmed.
But at this meeting indeed the
That is changes 1, 13 and 14 and 4 and 5 were
7465, please.
27 28
And this map here shows that the -- there is no residential density on the
29
subject lands at 1, 13 and 14.
13:00:44 30
on the map.
And you can see the numbers 13 and 14, there
If we could enlarge that, please
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:00:46
13:01:01
72 1
A.
I see that, yeah.
2
Q. 345
And 13 and 14 are Monarch lands.
And then change 4 and, 5 is an extension
3
south of the science and technology park.
And you can see that.
4
purple and grey striped area moving south?
That's the
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 346
Again, we can see the motorway south of that?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 347
Now, do you recall notwithstanding your absence, do you recall discussing this
9
or in any way advising anybody or discussing how people might vote, your
13:01:13 10
11
colleague or other councillors, in relation to this meeting? A.
12 13
I'm sure I discussed it.
But I don't remember giving advice to anybody or
making representations. Q. 348
14
On the -- this map then.
7470, please.
statutory display period to August 1997.
13:01:41 15
to enlarge the area, please.
Was put on public display.
Again, you can see that there's now,
Now zoning E1, D, C and residential.
16
and technology park, town centre and no density residential.
17
seeing this map? Do you remember?
18
A.
Yes, I do.
19
Q. 349
Yes.
13:02:08 20
All right.
were present at.
The 31
Now, on the 21st of January 1998.
Science
Do you remember
This is a meeting you
That is 2617, please.
21 22
It was at this meeting that there was a number of motions.
23
motions discussed in relation to the subject lands.
A large number of
And the said map.
24 13:02:32 25
The Manager recommended no change in density in relation to these.
And there
26
were a number of motions.
27
accept that.
28
in relation to the changes on the lands were by way of show of hands.
29
remember how you might have voted at this meeting on 21 of January 19 #- 8. I
13:03:00 30
You weren't involved in any of the motions and I
However, you were present in relation to same.
And the votes
don't specifically remember but I think I would have voted with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
Do you
13:03:05
13:03:27
73 1
recommendation of the Manager at the time.
2
meeting.
3
Q. 350
All right.
But I don't remember the specific
And I think you will see the -- page 2730, please.
This was the
4
second public display of the maps.
5
were passed in January '98 there are now a number of changes on the lands.
6
And that is at page 2730.
7
Now, this proposal shows an increase at change 5 of the district centre albeit
8
with a cap on the size of retail development.
9
area.
13:04:00 10
Arising out of the various motion that is
Can we enlarge the subject lands there, please.
5 is marked out in black.
You can see that in the orange
Below that, that is west of that, southwest
of that, is the increased science and technology park.
11
We can see that as
well?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 351
And again, the science and technology bark has moved also south of the subject
14
lands.
13:04:29 15
Encompassing a very large area.
the 16th of June 1998.
2643, please.
Now, again, there was a meeting on
And you were at this meeting which
16
there was a motion seeking to change or rescind change No. 4, that is to
17
rescind the densities on residential -- the lateral residential density on
18
these lands.
19 13:05:00 20
Do you remember that motion?
A.
Not specifically.
Q. 352
You were present at the meeting.
21
rescinding the change to the map.
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 353
All right.
24
I can tell you that you voted against Do you remember that?
(laughter) I think I'm getting confused at this stage. Basically, at the end of this process, there are the subject lands
are now -- there are no agricultural lands, as previously said.
13:05:23 25
and technology park has been increased.
The town centre, albeit with a cap on
26
retail, has been almost doubled in size.
27
residential density restrictions in relation to the lands?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 354
Could we have a look at 1374, please.
The science
There is, as I say, there is no
13:05:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:05:45
13:06:17
74 1
Now, this is document generated on foot of statements received.
2
A.
Christmas card list.
3
Q. 355
Yes.
From Mr. Lynn I believe.
And in 1998.
You can see there on the
4
document it's about.
Sorry it's small.
5
centre Helen Keogh.
This is donations unspecified provided by Mr. Lynn.?
6
A.
Sorry, what's the date of this?
7
Q. 356
It's a Christmas list, yes.
8 9 13:06:38 10
11
A.
Christmas cards or something like that.
Q. 357
Do you remember seeking anything?
A.
I got a Christmas card, yeah.
16
I'm incorrect in
I did, yeah.
I don't think I sent one back
but maybe I did. Q. 358
14 13:06:50 15
Yes, it's not donations.
saying donations?
12 13
But it's about 15 from the bottom
All right.
And there was something similar in 1999 as well.
Do you remember
that? A.
Oh, I'm sure I did.
Q. 359
At page 137 5, please.
17 18
This is a document also generated by Mr. Lynn.
19
fundraising draw tickets for Progressive Democrats.
13:07:07 20
At No. 13.
National
Donated 15th of March
1999, following request from Mary Harney TD, senator, Helen Keogh.
21 22
Do you remember seeking... ?
23
A.
More fundraising, yeah, I'm afraid so.
24
Q. 360
All right.
13:07:29 25
And again at 1377, please.
At 47 there.
document generated by Mr. Richard Lynn.
26
Keogh.
27
that?
600 contributed in October '99.
28
A.
Oh, yeah, yes.
29
Q. 361
Did you seek that support?
A.
Oh, yeah we sent out the letters, we did.
13:07:42 30
Again, this is the
Organised through senator Helen Do you have any recollection of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:07:44
13:08:05
75 1
Q. 362
All right.
Okay.
If I might, Ms. Keogh, bring you back to your statement
2
where we started off.
Very briefly, you say at the second last paragraph I
3
received no payments from any of the individuals, or companies you have
4
listed.
5
unsolicited personal donation by cheque from Monarch Properties for 500, which
6
I returned.
I did receive, during the course of 1992 General Election an
7 8 9
Do you wish to change your statement in relation to what has just been added? A.
13:08:17 10
No, I think it's obvious that any monies that I received were for party fundraising.
I'm sorry.
I assume that any monies received for the '91 Local
11
Elections, that would have just been passed on.
12
that.
13
don't know that it was a personal contribution or not.
Certainly, I didn't seek any contribution.
And I had no recollection of And when I see it there, I
14 13:08:40 15
Generally speaking, if I got a contribution like that, I would just endorse it.
16 17
But I couldn't be absolutely definite about that. Q. 363
Yes.
Now, again, in relation to your earlier evidence.
18
interview that you gave to the Tribunal.
19
personal cheques.
13:09:05 20
21
And I believe an
You believed you were easy accepting
That is cheques with your name written on them?
A.
During the election campaign, yes.
Q. 364
That is the reason you gave both in your statement and here today.
22
The reason
you sent back the 500 cheque?
23
A.
It was to me personally.
24
Q. 365
We have dealt with 12, possibly 13 or 14 payments that would seem to indicate
13:09:22 25
that monies were provided to you.
26 27
And in certain circumstances cheques were
written out to you personally? A.
Yeah well they -- I think it's a little different to receive a cheque that's,
28
you know, unsolicited to you personally as opposed to a fundraising campaign
29
for the party, which all of those were.
13:09:45 30
And I sincerely hope and believe that
all of those payments by cheque would have been endorsed by me and given Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:09:49
13:10:09
76 1 2
straight over to the party. Q. 366
Right.
I believe that they all were.
And I think that you clarified that by saying certainly not during
3
Development Plan process.
Now, during this whole period, as has been outlined
4
here today, there was Development Plans were continually being reviewed or
5
revised right up to 1998?
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 367
During the whole of this process?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 368
There are some solicited and some unsolicited?
A.
Payments for the party.
11
Q. 369
To you?
12
A.
For the party.
13
Q. 370
To the party?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 371
Indeed, some of which are written out by way of cheque personally to yourself?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 372
One of which you returned.?
18
A.
No, no.
13:10:19 10
13:10:22 15
19
Let's be clear about this.
The cheque that I returned was an
unsolicited cheque that came during the election campaign.
13:10:41 20
for contributions.
We hadn't looked
It came and as it wasn't part of a sort of fundraising
21
drive or anything like that, and because I was a little bit uneasy knowing that
22
I didn't in any sense want to be compromised.
23
would have been compromised.
24
returned it.
Like any other politician, you know, we were involved in party
13:11:07 25
fundraising.
And I think that's a very different issue.
26
Q. 373
Yes.
Not that I believe that I ever
But that I just felt uneasy about it so I
Following from that, I think that if your stance is that notwithstanding
27
the practicalities as you've outlined in relation to fundraising and election
28
expenses.
29
your direct evidence here today.
13:11:39 30
If your view as advised in writing to the Tribunal and again in Was that you didn't or you felt uneasy
accepting monies personally made out to yourself, cheques personally made tout Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:11:46
13:12:05
77 1
yourself from a developer during a Development Plan.
2
would suggest at no stage should you receive or seek monies at any time from
3
any developer involved in lands for which you as a councillor were going to be
4
voting on?
5
A.
6 7
The logic of that I
Well, I mean, I just felt uneasy at the time about getting a personal donation. And I hadn't solicited anything specific for myself soy sent it back.
Q. 374
But isn't -- again, if the principle is set out initially regarding the 500
8
pounds that you sent back.
9
advised view, that should have been consistent throughout.
13:12:31 10
11
If that was your view at the time and presently And I suggest to
you it wasn't. A.
No, because they were two different things.
12
me, I believed.
13
campaigns that were organised through the constituency or through national head
14
office.
13:13:01 15
And so I sent it back.
That was a personal donation to
And the others were, you know,
And I could -- you may not see a difference but I did at the time.
Q. 375
Thank you, Ms. Keogh.?
16
A.
Thank you very much.
17
Q. 376
You might answer any questions anybody might have.?
18
A.
Of course.
Q. 377
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19 13:13:08 20
Just one small thing.
Obviously, could I ask you -- was
21
there ever within the party a discussion as to who would, if you like, look for
22
fundraising.
23
member of that in '94, it was a much smaller body than the County Council?
24
Obviously in Dun Laoghaire County Council, when you became a
A.
Yes.
Q. 378
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13:13:29 25
26
And I know you've answered the questions put to you by Counsel
27
for the Tribunal.
28
suppose given that you were in Dun Laoghaire County Council.
29
putting your name to letters seeking, albeit for the party -- I'm just asking
13:13:52 30
Did you ever have any qualms about being the person I That you were
this in the context that in this fund raiding drive for various things, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:13:58
13:14:21
78 1
obviously over a number of years especially '94 '95.
2
would be obviously keen to have development on their lands.
3
obviously and I know you can't speak for them.
4
pattern if you like.
5
where the four houses to the acre.
6
I'm just wondering.
7
drive.
8
being asked to do this at a time when, indeed, they may have to make decisions
9
about, in respect of lands, owned by people to whom the party was targeting as
13:14:52 10
11
Obviously Monarch who They would have
But I've seen your voting
Particularly the vote on the confirmation back in '93 You know, they got the increased density.
Obviously you were selected or asked to do a fundraising
Within the PDs was there any ever any discussion about councillors
businesses? A.
Well, I think, first of all.
13
Q. 379
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
A.
No, I understand exactly what you're getting at.
12
13:15:02 15
That's a very long-winded question. I don't think any of us
liked -- none of us would like as we say going around with a begging bowl.
16
knew, you know, in order to run political campaign it is had to be done.
17
I didn't particularly like doing it.
18
certainly within the party and certainly my own view was that I would take
19
decisions based on the best evidence put in front of me.
13:15:31 20
And I don't believe
21 Q. 380
CHAIRMAN:
23
A.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you very much.
24 13:15:40 25
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
26 27 28
MS. DILLON:
That concludes the business of the Tribunal today.
29 13:15:43 30
And
Now, I would say that there was
I ever deviated from that.
22
We
I understand that we are sitting at eleven o'clock on Tuesday next. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
13:15:48
13:15:51
79 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Eleven o'clock.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
May it please you.
5 6 7 8 9
13:40:55 10
11
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, TUESDAY, 6TH JUNE, 2006, AT 11:00 A.M.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 647
09:27:57
10:05:51
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
7TH JUNE 2006, AT 10 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Morning sir. Mr. Finbarr Hanrahan please.
7 FINBARR HANRAHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
8 9
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
10:06:04 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. Hanrahan
12
Morning Chairman.
13
Q. 1
Good morning Mr. Hanrahan.
14
A.
Morning.
Q. 2
You were elected to Dublin County Council in 1985 and in 1994 you became a
10:06:38 15
16
member of South Dublin County Council, is that correct?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 3
Therefore your involvement with the Cherrywood lands, insofar as you had an
19
input into the zoning or planning of those lands, occurred between the years
10:06:54 20
1990 and ended in the end of 1993, December 1993, is that correct?
21
A.
I guess so, I wouldn't remember it in detail but I guess so, yes.
22
Q. 4
I will show you the documents. I believe you were elected as member of Fianna
23 24 10:07:09 25
Fail, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 5
Can I ask you first of all whether or not you recollect the members of Fianna
26
Fail having pre council meetings upstairs in Conway's pub?
27
A.
Yes we had pre council meetings, yes.
28
Q. 6
And the Tribunal has been told that in general the party tended to go through
29 10:07:28 30
the matters that were on the agenda for the meeting, do you agree with that? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:07:29
10:07:48
2 1
Q. 7
2 3
Would the local councillors concerned with the lands that were on the agenda give their opinion on what should happen with the lands?
A.
Sometimes, yes, sometimes no. Sometimes it wouldn't necessarily be a local
4
councillor, but we'd generally debate the agenda, it was considered to be good
5
practice to have the agenda looked at and considered by ourselves before we go
6
into the Council. Because the Council was a very big Council, 77 members, and
7
it was a bit chaotic at general Council meetings so that as our party was the
8
biggest party, we always found it a good idea to have a look at the agenda
9
before we go inside.
10:08:10 10
Q. 8
And the Tribunal has been told that, by some members of your party,
11
Mr. Geraghty and Mr. Madigan in particular, that effectively a decision was
12
made by the Fianna Fail party at that meeting before you you went into the
13
Council Chamber, do you agree with that?
14 10:08:27 15
A.
I do not agree with that.
Q. 9
The Tribunal has also been told that in general the Fianna Fail party tended to
16 17
present a united front at the Council meetings, would you agree with that? A.
No I never considered myself voting in terms of a united front with the Fianna
18
Fail party. If I felt that something should be voted on and if my party voted
19
in the same way, then you can call it that we all voted the same way, but there
10:08:50 20
were times when councillors voted freely and according to their own decision.
21
And there was never a situation where the party actually decided inside of the
22
meetings in Conway's, that we'd all vote in a particular way outside.
23
Q. 10
Do you remember the late Mr. Pat Dunne?
24
A.
I do.
Q. 11
And Mr. Dunne has been described to the Tribunal as the whip of the Fianna Fail
10:09:07 25
26
party during a particular period of time in Dublin County Council, do you agree
27
with that?
28
A.
He was the whip, yes.
29
Q. 12
And the Tribunal has also been told that it was, it appeared to be, part of
10:09:20 30
Mr. Dunne's function to get numbers into the chamber for particular votes, do Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:09:24
10:09:40
3 1 2
you agree with that? A.
Well I believe its the function of all whips, in all organisations, to get
3
people into the chamber, people of their own party, into a particular chamber
4
in order to do the business of the, in our case the business of the County
5
Council.
6
Q. 13
The Tribunal has also been told that on occasion Mr. Dunne would give the nod
7
to the Chairman and matters would be moved up or down the agenda depending on
8
the numbers that were in the chamber, do you ever recollect anything like that
9
happening?
10:09:53 10
11
A.
No, I do not, no.
Q. 14
Now I think the Tribunal wrote to you in connection with the lands at
12
Cherrywood and you replied, I think by letter, of the 16 March 2006, at 984
13
please and you provided a narrative statement to the Tribunal, in which you
14
said the only involvement you had with the lands at Cherrywood was when you
10:10:12 15
voted in support of the Cherrywood Development when it came before Dublin
16
County Council in the early 1990s. You said the only interaction you had with
17
either the servants or agents of Monarch Properties, or any of the individuals
18
listed in part 2 or part 4 of your correspondence, was with Mr. Richard Lynn.
19 10:10:27 20
And you said that you believe that had in relation to part 3 of the inquiry you
21
received a cheque in the post from Monarch Properties for 300 or 400 Punts as a
22
donation towards the local election in 1991. And a similar contribution was
23
also made in the general election of the 1992. And those monies were used in
24
the general day to day expenditure of the election campaigns. Is that your
10:10:47 25
statement?
26
A.
That is correct yes.
27
Q. 15
Do you confirm the contents of that Mr. Hanrahan to be true?
28
A.
Well in the meantime you have sent me documentation which suggests that in fact
29 10:10:58 30
my figures were wrong. Q. 16
Yes. From the documentation that you have been provided with Mr. Hanrahan, by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:11:04
10:11:18
4 1
the Tribunal, it would appear that you received three political payments, isn't
2
that right, from Monarch Properties?
3
A.
It would appear to be so yes, I presume the figures Monarch Properties gave you
4
are correct, but I wouldn't have -- my memory is this, the statement that I
5
gave.
6
Q. 17
Yes your memory in relation to the 1991 payment was 300 or 400 punts and
7
according to Monarch Properties, at 3241 please, and you will see just slightly
8
above halfway down on that, that you were recorded as receiving 600 pounds on
9
the 6th June 1991 and at 3252, seven from the bottom, a cheque payments book of
10:11:47 10
Monarch records you as receiving 600 pounds. Do you see that?
11
A.
Yes I do.
12
Q. 18
Do you dispute that record Mr. Hanrahan?
13
A.
Well I have no records of my own, so I can't dispute their records if I have no
14
records of my own. So I am accepting it as, I presume that the Tribunal has
10:12:06 15
well and truly checked their details already and I believe it may be true all
16
right, yes.
17
Q. 19
I mean your own recollection was that you had received money in 1991?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 20
But you put it at 300 or 400 pounds an not 600, is that right?
A.
That's true.
Q. 21
The records you have also been provided with by the Tribunal at page 3809,
10:12:23 20
21 22
record a contribution in November 1992 of 1,000 pounds, and that's just
23
slightly above halfway down on that document, do you see, F Hanrahan, Fianna
24
Fail, general election expenses?
10:12:41 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 22
13th November 1992. And you had no recollection or sorry, you did not in your
27
statement to the Tribunal provide any information in relation to that payment,
28
isn't that correct?
29 10:12:58 30
A.
Oh I do. I did tell the Tribunal that I got a similar amount, I couldn't remember the actual amount, so in my letter that you had on the screen just a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:13:02
10:13:18
5 1
moment ago, I actually said in '92 I got a similar amount, but because I
2
couldn't remember the amount, I called it a similar amount. I trusted that you
3
would probably find the correct amount from Monarch Properties as in fact they
4
did send out cheques anyway.
5
Q. 23
Sorry, I obviously didn't make myself clear, what I had said to you
6
Mr. Hanrahan was you didn't tell the Tribunal in your letter to the Tribunal of
7
the 16th March 2006 that you had received a thousand pounds, in November of
8
1992, isn't that the position?
9 10:13:39 10
A.
Sorry, I didn't tell the Tribunal -- when?
Q. 24
In your letter, what you said to the Tribunal was a similar contribution of 300
11 12
or 400 pounds was received for the general election in 1992, isn't that right? A.
13 14
No its not. I said a similar contribution, but I didn't say a similar contribution of 300 or 400 pounds.
Q. 25
10:14:01 15
Very well, we'll just look at the letter, 984 please. Do you agree first of all that in your letter you disclose two donations?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 26
The first is a payment of 300 or 400 pounds in 1991?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 27
The second is described as "A similar contribution was made for the general
10:14:15 20
election of 1992", by the words a similar contribution, was the Tribunal to
21 22
understand that you were saying you had received 300 or 400 pounds in 1992? A.
No, the reason I actually said a similar contribution was, that I couldn't
23
recall what the contribution was. But I did recall that I got a contribution
24
and since I couldn't actually put a figure on it I called a similar
10:14:39 25
contribution.
26
Q. 28
Similar to what?
27
A.
Similar to the contribution that I received in '91.
28
Q. 29
Which was 300 or 400 pounds.
29
A.
But I didn't mean it to be the same.
Q. 30
I see. In any event...
10:14:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:14:53
10:15:03
6 1
A.
2 3
If I actually wanted to say it was the same, I would have said the same contribution was made in '92.
Q. 31
4
But you weren't aware of the precise amount you received in 1991 either, isn't that the position?
5
A.
No, in fact that's true.
6
Q. 32
I think you were provided with a cheque, at 8346, this is a copy of a cheque in
7
the sum of 1,000 pounds in favour of yourself dated 13th of November 1992,
8
isn't that correct?
9 10:15:19 10
A.
Yes, I see it.
Q. 33
Now can you recollect having any contact with anybody in Monarch Properties
11
leading up to the receipt of that cheque?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 34
Can I show you a document of 4655 Mr. Hanrahan. And you will have seen this in
14
the brief of documents, with which you were furnished and these are expenses
10:15:42 15
sheets provided to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties and this one is made out
16
in the name of Mr. Richard Lynn and its for the weekend of the 12th November
17
1993, and you will see there that you -- sorry I beg your pardon its 1993 so
18
its not relevant to the point that I was making, I beg your pardon.
19 10:16:02 20
21
The next payment I think Mr. Hanrahan is 1997, is that right? A.
22 23
records that in fact it was made. Q. 35
24
At 6322 you will note some seven or eight from the bottom of the 3rd of June 1997, an election contribution of 495 pounds, do you accept that that's a
10:16:28 25
26
So you tell me, I had no memory of it myself, but I accept if its in the
payment that was made to you? A.
I accept that that's what's in the records. I don't have any memory of getting
27
it at all, but obviously if it was sent out, if its recorded properly and if
28
you have checked it out properly, I will accept that I must have received it.
29 10:16:46 30
Q. 36
Well according to the cheque payments book of Monarch Properties which records the cheques that are written by Monarch properties, at 6335, you will see on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:16:58
10:17:13
7 1
that page, in the top half of that page, there are a series of payments that
2
are political payments, commencing with Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour Party,
3
Democratic Left, Fine Gael Dun Laoghaire, Fine Gael -- and then Finbarr
4
Hanrahan, Fianna Fail and beneath that Michael Joe Cosgrave?
5
A.
Yes, I see that, yeah.
6
Q. 37
That is a record of payments made by Monarch Properties in 1997. And would you
7
accept that it is likely that you received a sum of 495 pounds in 1997?
8
A.
It is quite likely, but I have no memory of it at all.
9
Q. 38
Yes. Who did you deal within Monarch Properties, or did you deal with anybody
10:17:36 10
11
in Monarch Properties Mr. Hanrahan, in connection with those payments? A.
Well, I wouldn't really call it dealing with anybody. I met Mr. Richard Lynn
12
who was actually, a person who was actually promoting their proposals,
13
generally, and I met him probably on a number of occasions actually. I don't
14
recall meeting others, but I may have.
10:18:05 15
Q. 39
16
Were you aware that Mr. Lynn was lobbying for support for the development at Cherrywood?
17
A.
Absolutely, yes.
18
Q. 40
And would Mr. Lynn and did Mr. Lynn seek your support in connection with the
19 10:18:17 20
Cherrywood Development? A.
Oh he would have, yes. I mean we wouldn't have been -- we wouldn't have been
21
talking about yesterday's race meeting, obviously if Mr. Lynn sought me out it
22
would be to discuss Cherrywood, I expect.
23
Q. 41
24 10:18:38 25
26
And Cherrywood wouldn't have been situate in your constituency, isn't that right Mr. Hanrahan?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 42
You are the other side of the county, you are west Dublin, isn't that the
27
position?
28
A.
That's correct yeah.
29
Q. 43
Would you have had any experience or knowledge of these lands yourself?
A.
No personal knowledge, no.
10:18:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:18:47
10:19:03
8 1
Q. 44
And did you discuss with any of your colleagues on Dublin County Council, the
2
zoning of these lands, or changes that were proposed to be made to these lands
3
in the review of the Development Plan?
4
A.
Well, it may have been discussed at one of our Fianna Fail meetings for
5
instance and I may very well have heard discussions or been involved in
6
discussions but, I can't remember them now.
7
Q. 45
The record records Mr. Hanrahan, that you voted in favour of the Manager's
8
report in May of 1992, at 7207, if I can show you first a map at 7203, now the
9
lands outlined in red are the Cherrywood lands that were owned by Monarch
10:19:34 10
Properties, would you have been shown any maps or documents by Mr. Lynn?
11
A.
I probably would, but I can't recall at this stage.
12
Q. 46
And the Manager was proposing in May of 1992, that the residential density
13
would be changed to Action Area Plan and that the extent of the residential
14
lands owned by Monarch would increased, and that was reflected on the map
10:19:58 15
that's on screen, do you see that?
16
A.
I see the map on the screen.
17
Q. 47
Well do you see where it says A to A1?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 48
And the first A with the P is, residential zoning on piped sewerage, isn't that
10:20:14 20
right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 49
And the second, A1P, is residential zoning on Action Area Plan, isn't that
23 24 10:20:21 25
right? A.
Correct.
Q. 50
So what the Manager is suggesting insofar as the words A to A1, is a change in
26
the density, from residential on piped sewerage, to Action Area Plan, isn't
27
that right?
28
A.
Correct yes.
29
Q. 51
And included in an Action Area Plan would be provision for schools and
10:20:45 30
provision for retail, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:20:45
10:20:53
9 1
A.
That's correct yeah.
2
Q. 52
And the Manager is also showing on that map a change in zoning from B to A1P,
3
do you see that?
4
A.
I do, yes.
5
Q. 53
And that's a change from agriculture to residential Action Area Plan?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 54
So now having considered the map, do you agree that the Manager was proposing a
8
change in the residential density on the lands, together with an increase in
9
the residentially zoned area?
10:21:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 55
Now that map came before the meeting of the Dublin County Council on the 27th
12
of May, 1992 and it was proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded by Councillor
13
McGrath, at 7207 please. Now Councillor Lydon and Councillor McGrath proposed
14
that the Manager's report, DP 92/44 be adopted and approved by the Council, do
10:21:38 15
you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 56
And you voted in favour of that, isn't that right?
18
A.
That's correct, yes.
19
Q. 57
Now would you outline to the Tribunal having looked at the map, the reasons why
10:21:48 20
21
you would have voted in favour of that? A.
Well, we are going back a very long time now. Any vote I made in the County
22
Council was as a result of listening to arguments in favour of, or against a
23
particular proposal, over a period of time. Not necessarily in a short few
24
moments inside at that particular council meeting. I would have listened to
10:22:11 25
the various arguments and I would have come to the conclusion that that was the
26 27
correct way for me to vote. Q. 58
28 29 10:22:31 30
Yes and that was a very close meeting in May of 1992, 35 against and 33 for, with no abstentions, isn't that right?
A.
Yeah I see that now, I would have no memory of that, but I can see it now, yes.
Q. 59
Is it likely that these, this map and these lands were discussed by the Fianna Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:22:34
10:22:50
10 1
Fail party at their meeting in Conway's pub in advance of the full Council
2
meeting?
3
A.
It is probably likely, yes, we may have discussed it, I am not sure, we didn't
4
always have meeting before every meeting of the County Council by the way, so I
5
have no memory of the meeting I couldn't say, we mightn't have a meeting at
6
all. By the way you keep saying in Conway's, we did have meetings in other
7
venues besides Conways, it just happens I might stress about the Conway's
8
situation, we had very small office in the County Council offices in O'Connell
9
Street, to accommodate our very large numbers, it was a room that would be very
10:23:14 10
small for ten councillors and we were a membership of, I think we were 37
11
members, Fianna Fail members, who had to use that room and normally you'd have
12
your group meetings in your own -- in your actual party room, but it was so
13
small that we had to repair to other places to have our meetings. And that's
14
why one of the venues we attended frequently was Conways, because there was
10:23:39 15
enough space for us and it was convenient to the County Council as well, I just
16
thought I might point that out because you keep mentioning meetings in Conways
17
all the time, I feel that's its important to perhaps people should know why we
18
were meeting in Conway's and not the County Council itself, we just didn't have
19
the accommodation.
10:23:59 20
Q. 60
21
I think the Tribunal has heard evidence from your other of your colleagues also as to the lack of accommodation in Dublin County Council?
22
A.
Well I wasn't aware of that.
23
Q. 61
I think in fact Mr. Kitt described the Council facilities as being inadequate.
24
And I think other members, not limited to Fianna Fail, have given similar
10:24:18 25
evidence to the Tribunal?
26
A.
Yes I agree totally with Minister Kitt.
27
Q. 62
On the 27th of May 1992 there was a second vote at which you voted, which was
28
the one to put a town centre zoning on the lands at 7215, and this was a motion
29
by Councillor Gilmore, seconded by Councillor O'Callaghan, to provide a C
10:24:46 30
zoning on a portion of the lands and the land in question are the Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:24:50
10:25:14
11 1
Property lands at Cherrywood -- sorry 7214, I beg your pardon. 7214, you will
2
see there there is a motion by Councillor Gilmore, seconded by councillor
3
O'Callaghan, to put a C zoning on a portion of the lands?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 63
And you will see that you vote in favour of that motion?
6
A.
Yes, I see that.
7
Q. 64
Right. And again can you outline to the Tribunal the reasons why you would
8 9
have voted in favour of that motion? A.
10:25:33 10
to the various arguments for and against and I would have come to the
11 12
I wouldn't remember the actual detail again, but in fact I would have listened
conclusion, obviously, in that particular case, to vote for. Q. 65
There were also a number of motions, you will have seen in the records
13
Mr. Hanrahan, that took place on that date, including a motion by councillor
14
Sean Barrett, which had the effect of reducing the residential density to one
10:25:53 15
per acre, do you remember that happening?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 66
You voted against all of the low density motions, including voting against
18
Councillor Barrett's motion at 7216, but Councillor Barrett's motion was in
19
fact passed.
10:26:11 20
21
A.
Okay.
Q. 67
Now the effect of that at 7217. 7217 please, this is the map that went out on
22
the second public display and the yellow lands are the residentially zoned
23
lands in the Carrickmines Valley and the lands within the red outline are the
24
Monarch lands. And the cut out portion at the centre of the Monarch lands is
10:26:41 25
the new town centre zoning?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 68
It should have been coloured pink, the effect of Councillor Barrett's motion,
28
was to change the density from four per acre, to one per acre for all of the
29
yellow lands, which are the residential lands, including Monarch's lands. You
10:27:01 30
will have seen that in the documentation Mr. Hanrahan, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:27:04
10:27:14
12 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 69
And the effect of that was to reduce the density for Monarch from four per acre
3
to one per acre, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 70
Now the matter came back before the Council in December, in November of 1993
6
for the confirming meeting, and the Manager had recommended that that change be
7
deleted, in other words that the density go back to four per acre and a motion
8
was brought, on the 11th of December 1993, seeking to confirm the change at one
9
per acre, at 7262 please. And this is the vote, on seeking to confirm
10:27:53 10
Councillor Barrett's motion and you vote against that, in other words you vote
11
against low density, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 71
Now what happened after that -- can I ask you Mr. Hanrahan when that happened
14
and the Council voted against confirming change 3 or against Councillor
10:28:11 15
Barrett's proposed change, did it automatically revert to the previous map, the
16
map that had gone out on the first public display?
17
A.
I'm not sure, it may have.
18
Q. 72
Well you were the councillor Mr. Hanrahan, you were there?
19
A.
Yes but we are talking about a long time ago, I'm afraid.
Q. 73
You are still a councillor?
21
A.
No I am not.
22
Q. 74
When did you retire?
23
A.
99.
24
Q. 75
Now let's go to - take it up to recent times, if a motion was brought to, in a
10:28:27 20
10:28:39 25
Development Plan, seeking to confirm a change, and it was lost, what was the
26
effect of that?
27
A.
Yeah, you go back to the original.
28
Q. 76
The map that had been displayed previously?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 77
So that if the map that had been displayed previously was four to the acre and
10:28:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:28:55
10:29:09
13 1
the change was one to the acre and the motion sought to confirm one to the acre
2
and was lost, automatically would it have reverted to four to the acre?
3
A.
It would yes, I should imagine, yes.
4
Q. 78
The next motion that was brought, on the same date, was a motion by Councillor
5
Marren and Coffey at 7263. Now this motion is in connection with the Monarch
6
lands, I am going to get you to the map attached to the motion, but the map
7
attached to the motion is at 7227, and this relates only to the Monarch lands,
8
it's the same outline Mr. Hanrahan, you can see that?
9 10:29:40 10
A.
All right yes.
Q. 79
If you go back to 7263 and the record of the meeting, Councillor Marren and
11
Coffey propose a motion that, to accept the Manager's report, insofar as it
12
relates to the Monarch lands, do you see the motion that's on screen straight
13
in front of you?
14 10:30:02 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 80
So what Councillor Marren and Coffey were proposing, was delete the amendment,
16
insofar as the Monarch lands are concerned and confirm it in relation to the
17
balance of the lands?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 81
The effect of that if it was passed was that Monarch's density would be four
10:30:18 20
houses to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands in the
21
Carrickmines Valley would be one house to the acre, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 82
That motion was passed by 44 to 27 and you voted in favour of it?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 83
Now can I ask you Mr. Hanrahan, if that motion hadn't been brought, in view of
10:30:33 25
26
the fact that the previous motion was lost, if that motion hadn't been
27
proceeded with, the effect would have been that all of the residentially zoned
28
lands would have reverted to four to the acre?
29 10:30:54 30
A.
I'm not absolutely certain but --
Q. 84
Well subject to anything -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:30:55
10:31:09
14 1
A.
I can't definitively say that, I would need some advice on that myself.
2
Q. 85
It would seem --
3
A.
I'd need professional advice on it.
4
Q. 86
Yes. But it would seem logical, that if the change was defeated, the
5
confirming change was defeated as happened here, the density on the lands had
6
to be some density, it had to revert to something isn't that right? It would
7
have had to have gone back to what was on the previous map?
8
A.
9
I'm afraid I would have had to have -- I would have had to have the advice of management in the County Council, or the advice of a town planner, to help me
10:31:29 10
in my deliberations on that particular issue.
11
Q. 87
How long were you a councillor Mr. Hanrahan?
12
A.
14 years.
13
Q. 88
In that 14 years you are not in a position to assist the Tribunal and tell the
14
Tribunal what would happen to a Development Plan map or a zoning on a
10:31:43 15
Development Plan map, in the event that the confirming motion was unsuccessful?
16
A.
It would normally revert to the original motion.
17
Q. 89
Isn't that the point. That's what would normally happen?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 90
In those circumstances, can you think of any reason as to why anybody would
10:31:58 20
have proceeded with the motion, that would have had the effect of giving four
21
houses to the acre to the Monarch lands only and leaving the balance at one to
22
the acre.
23
A.
24 10:32:17 25
The motion in question, only refers to the Monarch lands, it doesn't refer to the other lands at all.
Q. 91
26
Well with respect, it does, because it says that the balance of the lands will remain at two per hectare, isn't that right?
27
A.
It does yes.
28
Q. 92
Isn't that right, so that this motion is dealing with all of the residentially
29 10:32:32 30
zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley isn't that the position? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:32:32
10:32:46
15 1
Q. 93
2
As a result of the defeat of the prefers motion these lands would automatically have reverted to four to the acre, isn't that likely?
3
A.
Likely, but I am not absolutely certain.
4
Q. 94
The effect of this motion was to ensure, four to the acre for the Monarch lands
5
and one to the acre for the balance of the lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
It would appear to be the case, yes.
7
Q. 95
Can you give any reason to the Tribunal as to why that would be so?
8
A.
No its quite a long time ago now at this stage, all I can imagine is that the
9
lands immediately around the town centre, you know to make the town centre more
10:33:07 10
viable, the immediate lands around it would probably, would probably give a
11
better service to the town centre, if the zoning was higher, but I can't recall
12
it myself now at this stage, I don't know if that was the reason why I voted
13
for, I would have taken all the various arguments into consideration, I would
14
have listened to everybody speaking, local councillors and councillors from
10:33:26 15
outside as well, because everybody was entitled to their opinion and at the end
16
of the day I was entitled to vote for, against, or abstain and I ended up
17
voting in this particular case, I voted for.
18
Q. 96
19
Can you see any reason as to why the decision was made to zone the Monarch
10:33:57 20
lands at four to the acre and the balance of the Carrickmines residentially
21 22
And looking back at it now Mr. Hanrahan and looking back at the map, at 7217.
zoned lands at one to the acre? A.
I am sure the proposers at the time and the others who spoke in favour of it
23
would have outlined very good reasons why they proposed that particular
24
proposal in that particular end result and I voted in favour of that particular
10:34:18 25
26
end result. Q. 97
Yes obviously I didn't make myself clear Mr. Hanrahan, looking at the map can
27
you give the Tribunal any reason as to why the Monarch lands would have been
28
zoned at four to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands at
29
one to the acre?
10:34:35 30
A.
Are you asking me to give an opinion, 15 or 16 years later, I have no opinion Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:34:41
10:34:51
16 1 2
to give on that. Q. 98
3 4
I'm asking to you give the Tribunal a reason as to why you voted the way you did Mr. Hanrahan?
A.
I already told you. I listened to all the arguments in favour of that
5
particular motion and would have paid very strict attention to what people said
6
at the time and at the end of the debate, when the vote was called, my duty was
7
to vote for, or against, or abstain. And I voted for the motion having
8
listened attentively to all the various arguments and I am sure I may have
9
heard arguments about the other lands as well at the time, but I can't recall
10:35:17 10
it at this stage, and I wouldn't be in a position to give an opinion now, just
11
looking at a map that's come up from many years ago. I'm not in a position to
12
give it, I just wouldn't be able to.
13
Q. 99
Yes.
14
A.
To suggest anything --
Q. 100
Just to confirm, did you receive all the documents from the Tribunal is that
10:35:29 15
16
right?
17
A.
Oh I did yes.
18
Q. 101
Thank you very much Mr. Hanrahan would you answer any question that is anybody
19 10:35:38 20
else might have? A.
Thank you.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
Mr. Hanrahan, could I just ask you, in 1992 approximately what was the biggest
24
or political payment or political donation you received outside of your family?
10:35:57 25
A.
26
Anybody here who wishes to ask Mr. Hanrahan questions?
Chairman, I -- 1992 was the one where the cheque for Monarch was for a thousand pounds?
27 28
Q. 102
CHAIRMAN: For a thousand, yes.
29
A.
That was the biggest, I didn't even recall that, but that --
10:36:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:36:09
10:36:21
17 1
Q. 103
CHAIRMAN:
Would it have been the biggest by far? Can you recollect?
2
A.
I don't know, but the biggest anyway.
Q. 104
CHAIRMAN:
3 4 5 6
And surely that would have helped you to recall it when you were
providing the information to the Tribunal. A.
Honestly Chairman I couldn't remember that. I thought, I didn't have legal
7
advice now when I was writing my letter, I wrote the letter in all serious --
8
you know, gave it full consideration and tried to recall as best I could. I
9
gave you the answer that I was capable of and only that, otherwise if I had
10:36:47 10
remembered that I received a thousand pounds, I would have no problem actually
11
informing the Tribunal.
12 13
Q. 105
14 10:37:04 15
CHAIRMAN:
And up to 1999 when you left the council would that have remained
the single largest donation? A.
It would yeah.
Q. 106
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16 17
Just one thing Mr. Hanrahan, on the 11th November, the first
18
substantive motion that's put, that was a motion I think, I have forgotten who
19
brought it now, but it was to confirm change 3 simplisitor, change 3 was where
10:37:22 20
21
the zoning had gone back from four houses to the acre, to one to the acre. A.
Yes.
Q. 107
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24 10:37:35 25
The first motion, substantive motion put to the floor on the
11th November is to confirm that, and you vote against that? A.
That's correct.
Q. 108
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27
And that would appear consistent with your earlier vote back
28
in 1992 where you were voting for the Manager's proposals, because he wanted
29
four to the acre, low density four to the acre, on an Action Plan?
10:37:51 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:37:52
10:38:05
18 1 2
Q. 109
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That would appear, certainly your vote against the confirming
of the one house to the acre, would appear consistent. A.
Yes. That's correct yeah.
Q. 110
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5 6
And from what you have said to the Tribunal, you would have
7
considered, you say, not just what would happen on the day, but all matters,
8
and presumably including all documents you would have received as a councillor,
9
in advance of the votes?
10:38:21 10
A.
Absolutely, yes, yes Chair moon, yes.
Q. 111
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12 13 14
And can I just ask you, I'm taking it from that, that when you
voted against confirming change 3, you didn't agree with change 3? A.
Yes, I mustn't have.
Q. 112
JUDGE FAHERTY:
10:38:38 15
16
And it would appear you didn't agree with change 3 regarding
17
all of the yellow lands that's on the map that's before you there, I think
18
that's the same map, 7217?
19
A.
I think it is yeah.
Q. 113
JUDGE FAHERTY:
10:38:49 20
21
But leaving aside the issue of what would happen or what
22
happened legally if you like, because you say you can't answer that, but a
23
little while later, there is a motion brought for the Monarch lands and you
24
vote in favour of that -- and for four houses to the acre for Monarch, but for
10:39:13 25
26
only one house to the acre for the balance of the lands? A.
Yes.
Q. 114
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 10:39:37 30
And can you explain at all, why you would have taken, taken
that stance, having, if you like, voted against a motion to confirm change 3 at the same meeting? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:39:40
10:40:03
19 1
A.
Well, as I said, its a long time ago now, and I guess there would have been
2
various arguments for and against a particular motion at the time and
3
notwithstanding whether there was another motion earlier or not, the arguments
4
on that particular one -- I can't actually recall why people would have argued
5
against four to the acre for the other lands but this was the motion that was
6
before us, and if the owners of the other lands had a proposal for four to the
7
acre later on I might very well have voted for or I might not have voted for
8
it. I would have listened again how they put their case and what I felt was
9
good planning for the area. But at the time the motion in question, I believed
10:40:28 10
it was in the interests of good planning for the county, to have actually
11
supported that particular motion.
12 13
Q. 115
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And did you, when you were voting on that the words of the
14
motion, I think they are on page 7263, it mentions the lands outlined in red
10:40:45 15
on the map and the balance then, at one to the acre, did you know that they
16 17
were the Monarch lands Mr. Hanrahan? A.
I might have, I probably did actually but --
Q. 116
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Well there was quite a considerable amount of lobbying, of course, going on and
18 19 10:41:03 20
And how would you have known they were the Monarch lands?
21
these maps were actually posted to us, if not handed to councillors and to
22
officials as well of course and to other interested parties. So I would have
23
known at that stage I'm sure, but at this stage I don't recall it so well, but
24
I would have known at the time, yes.
10:41:25 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Right. Thanks very much.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Right thank you very much Mr. Hanrahan.
29 10:41:29 30
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:41:38
10:41:57
20 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Bill O'Herlihy please.
3 4
MR. O'HIGGINS: I should say sir I appear for Mr. O'Herlihy, instructed by
5
Martin E Marren solicitors.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Okay we grant representation.
8 9 10:42:05 10
MR. O'HIGGINS: I think representation was granted last week, or the week before.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:42:05
10:42:19
21 1
BILL O'HERLIHY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. O'Herlihy.
5
A.
Good morning.
6
Q. 117
Good morning Mr. O'Herlihy, I think that at some date, probably towards the
7
late, latter part of 1991 you were retained by Monarch Properties as a public
8
relations consultant, is that right?
9 10:42:34 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 118
Can you outline to the Tribunal first of all who you met in Monarch Properties
11 12
and the brief as you understood it? A.
The person who worked most closely with was Richard Lynn, and the brief that I
13
was -- there were quite a few, the very first meeting had quite a few Monarch
14
executives, I can't remember who they were offhand at this stage to be
10:42:59 15
truthful. The name escapes me, but the principle person was a Scots man.
16
Q. 119
Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
Exactly. Eddie Sweeney, exactly. Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn were the two
18
people I worked most closely with. My brief essentially was to create a
19
climate of opinion where the Cherrywood project would be appealing, first of
10:43:25 20
all to the community, secondly to the -- that there would be positive media
21
response to it and thirdly that the councillors, particularly the councillors
22
of the area, but generally speaking, the councillors of Dublin County Council
23
would be supportive of the project. That was the brief.
24 10:43:43 25
My function then was to actually develop a strategy and to actually talk to and
26
bring the Monarch people on board in the context of how they themselves would
27
fully represent that strategy, rather than me, because the function of public
28
relations, is to stay in the background.
29 10:44:03 30
Q. 120
And can I ask you Mr. O'Herlihy, prior to your involvement with the Monarch Group, did you have any experience in any particular aspect of lobbying that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:44:08
10:44:23
22 1
would be associated with the Development Plan, or making of a Development Plan
2
in Dublin County Council?
3
A.
Oh not at all. But lobbying with respect is a bit of an emotive word, because
4
what I was involved in, was asking the members of Dublin County Council to view
5
the plans and to view the model that had been made, I wasn't lobbying in the
6
sense of asking them to vote for it or anything like that, that was not my
7
function.
8
Q. 121
9
But insofar as the making of a Development Plan was concerned, or as the Tribunal is concerned, with the changes that happened to these lands in the
10:44:42 10
making of the Development Plan, prior to being engaged by Monarch had you
11
engaged in any other similar exercise?
12
A.
Oh no.
13
Q. 122
So was this your first introduction?
14
A.
This was my first and only association ever with the construction industry.
Q. 123
Was there any particular reason why you were sought out by Monarch to bring
10:44:55 15
16 17
your expertise to bear on this particular project? A.
I would like to think talent came into it for a start, I'd say principally
18
let's be honest about it was I had an association in those days, a fairly
19
strong association, with the Fine Gael parliamentary party and with Garrett
10:45:14 20
Fitzgerald and people at that level and presumably the thinking of Monarch was
21
that I was a person that could make contact with, positively, with the Fine
22
Gael councillors particularly, I'd say that's the primary reason I was taken on
23
board.
24
Q. 124
10:45:30 25
Was there any particular Fine Gael councillor who would be seen of particular importance, in that area?
26
A.
Oh yeah.
27
Q. 125
Who was that?
28
A.
Absolutely. The most important person emphasised to me in the course of my
29 10:45:44 30
dealings with Monarch was Sean Barrett. Now they put a huge weight on Sean Barrett's opinion, because Sean Barrett was highly influential, he had been in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:45:47
10:46:07
23 1
the previous Fine Gael coalition administration and presumably was ear marked
2
again for office, if they ever got back into power, which they did and he
3
became a Government Minister, he was considered to immensely influential and I
4
was asked specifically to get him to view the plans and to meet with the
5
Monarch people, which he agreed to do in their headquarters in Harcourt Street.
6 7
He made it very clear to me from the word go that he was opposed to it, he felt
8
it wasn't right environmentally and felt it wasn't right commercially, as far
9
as the area was concerned.
10:46:22 10
11
He told me that we not be voting for it, but because I was a friend of his he
12
certainly come along and view the plans.
13 14
He came along, viewed the plans, thought they were extremely good, but
10:46:34 15
indicated at that meeting, which would have been attended by Richard Lynn and
16
by Eddie Sweeney and maybe Noel was there as well, I'm not quite certain who
17
else, there would have been more than two anyway and he indicated he was not
18
going to vote for it and he was consistent all the way.
19
Q. 126
10:46:56 20
discuss with you, or did they tell you, what the zoning was on the lands at
21 22
And when you were retained by Monarch initially, Mr. O'Herlihy, did they
that time and what they hoped to achieve? A.
I don't have any recollection of such a conversation. I think its important to
23
make the point that I thought Monarch were a highly professional operation, I
24
thought they were extremely good, they knew exactly what they were going up to
10:47:15 25
do, what they wanted to achieve. They had been involved of course as well in
26
Tallaght, the team was a very strong powerful team, who knew exactly what they
27
wanted to get.
28 29 10:47:33 30
My role I suppose if I was to define forensically was almost a bit tangental to the whole thing, it was a media role as much as anything else, it was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:47:39
10:47:48
24 1
essentially to deal with communications, I wasn't ever involved in the planning
2
side of it or anything like that.
3
Q. 127
But you would --
4
A.
Because there was a series of people within the company who were experts in
5 6
that area. Q. 128
7 8
anxious to put a lot of houses on the lands? A.
9
terrific project all the way through, so presumably I was told that, I can't
11
remember it, but I am sure I was. Q. 129
13 14 10:48:22 15
I suppose the answer is yes. I can't be specific, but I mean I thought personally, I was enthusiastic about the project, because I thought it was a
10:48:05 10
12
But would you have known in general terms, Mr. O'Herlihy, that they were
And did you bring out a free sheet edition called The Valley News, on behalf of Monarch property?
A.
Cherrywood News, yeah we did, which was distributed locally.
Q. 130
Can I just show you a page of that document I don't seem to have a Tribunal
16
reference for it, at 7765. Is this part of the document that you put out?
17
A.
I can't remember honestly.
18
Q. 131
And on the document that you prepared, Mr. O'Herlihy, would you have included
19 10:48:53 20
maps, or sorry, drawings of what they wanted to achieve? A.
Again I can't remember, but I would certainly say that if we were putting out a
21
free sheet that was being dropped into all the homes in the area, you certainly
22
would want to give them a fair idea of what was happening, but specifically I
23
can't remember.
24
Q. 132
10:49:12 25
But certainly if Monarch wanted to put 950 houses, or thereabouts, on a portion of the lands that's something that you would have informed or they would, the
26
local people community would have been informed about?
27
A.
I would imagine so, yeah.
28
Q. 133
And if I can take you through some documents then Mr. O'Herlihy, that might be
29 10:49:29 30
relevant, and ask you to comment on them, at 3375, this is an extract from Mr. Sean Barrett's diary and on Monday the 18th of November, 1991 he records a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:49:36
10:49:49
25 1
meeting with you.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 134
And I just want to draw to your attention that on the 22nd November 1991 you
4
also had a meeting with Monarch Properties, so can I ask you do you think its
5
likely that that meeting might have been in connection with the Cherrywood
6
Development?
7
A.
Sorry I am a bit confused would you go back on that again please.
8
Q. 135
This is 3375?
9
A.
Yeah the meeting with Sean Barrett.
Q. 136
This is Mr. Barrett's diary.
11
A.
Yeah and what does it say?
12
Q. 137
It records on the 18th Bill O'Herlihy 3 pm.
13
A.
Yeah. In his office is it?
14
Q. 138
I can't tell you that because I don't -- it just records in his diary.
A.
Well my recollection, for what its worth, after so many years, is that I only
10:50:00 10
10:50:12 15
16
met him once and that was, that my conversation with him was by telephone and
17
that I met him, that I met him then in the Monarch offices, but if I had a
18
previous meeting and its so recorded, I can't deny it obviously.
19
Q. 139
10:50:36 20
No I don't suggest that that meeting is in connection with Cherrywood Mr. O'Herlihy, I am asking you do you think in view of the fact that on, within
21
two or three days of that on the 22nd, you had a meeting with Monarch people,
22
that it may have had something to do with Cherrywood?
23
A.
24
to me, its possible. But I don't recall that, there was such a meeting but I'm
10:51:05 25
26
It may have had yeah. Could I have been reflecting the views that he expressed
not going to contradict you. Q. 140
27
Certainly there are other documents Mr. O'Herlihy that we will come to look at that indicate a longer meeting with Mr. Barrett at the offices of Monarch?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 141
At 3383 this is an extract from a diary of Mr. Dominic Glennane, who was one of
10:51:16 30
the people in Monarch, and it records on the 22nd of November Bill O'Herlihy at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:51:23
10:51:34
26 1
Monarch re Cabinteely?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 142
That's the first recorded document in the Monarch documentation that records a
4
contact with you?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 143
And based on that is it likely that it was around November 1991 that you were
7 8
retained? A.
9
Probably, I would imagine so, yeah. I mean there were, there was a whole series of meetings. I mean the normal public relations practice would be that
10:51:48 10
if you were dealing with a client on a short-term basis, as I was, over a
11
period of about eight months, you would have extremely regular meetings. They
12
to be kept up to date, they to look at how the strategy was unfolding whether
13
it was successful or unsuccessful. I would imagine I had a meeting at least
14
once a week probably twice a week with Monarch.
10:52:07 15
Q. 144
16
Certainly the records seem to indicate that you did have a number of meetings with Monarch on an ongoing basis?
17
A.
Did I absolutely.
18
Q. 145
When you were retained was there also another public relations company retained
19 10:52:19 20
at the same time? A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 146
Pembroke PR?
22
A.
Oh yeah, I saw that in the papers that I was sent, but I had no contact with
23
them at all. I don't know whether they were employed before me and were just
24
being phased out, or whether they continued to be employed on a different
10:52:33 25
26
basis, do I not know, or for a different project. Q. 147
If I could have page 3521, I think in fact they were in connection with the
27
same project, this is another extract from Mr. Sean Barrett's diary, you will
28
see on 2nd of December 1991, it records a meeting at 12 o'clock with Bill
29
O'Herlihy?
10:52:52 30
A.
Mm. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:52:53
10:53:12
27 1
Q. 148
And if we go to 7768 Mr. O'Herlihy and this is part of an invoice submitted by
2
you to Monarch Properties, you will see that you record meeting Mr. Sean
3
Barrett for one and a half hours on the second of December, do you see that?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 149
Is that the meeting that you were thinking about earlier on, when you mentioned
6 7
that you had met with Mr. Barrett? A.
8 9
Well I mean if its there in black and white and I'm billing them for it, I obviously had the meeting.
Q. 150
10:53:30 10
Yes the actual invoice is 7767 and you will have seen that in the documentation and attached to that doc -- that invoice was the document at 7768 where you set
11
out the meetings that you had had?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 151
And on that --
14
A.
Well John Butterly now was Pembroke PR, I see there on December 3rd, so
10:53:46 15
16
presumably they were still involved, in what role I do not know. Q. 152
17
And you will note also there that you had a meeting with Mr. Alan shatter and a meeting with Mr. Michael Keating?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 153
And would they have been members of Fine Gael at that time?
A.
Yes they were indeed, yeah. They were both TDs I think at the time.
Q. 154
And Mr. Keating has told the Tribunal that he remembers you speaking to him in
10:53:58 20
21 22
connection with the Cherrywood Development. Now what was the purpose of these
23
meetings Mr. O'Herlihy, was it to seek the support of these people for the
24
project?
10:54:14 25
26
A.
It would have been, yeah, yeah.
Q. 155
And again I think in January of 1992. At 7770. You also put in another
27
invoice, in respect of the fee -- work that you had done in the intervening
28
period, so you were working throughout December and into January for Monarch,
29
is that right?
10:54:40 30
A.
I'm sure it is yeah. If it's billed it's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:54:43
10:55:02
28 1
Q. 156
Now did you meet Mr. Frank Dunlop at any stage in connection...
2
A.
No, he was not involved at all.
3
Q. 157
Well I want to show you 7771. Which is a document that's attached to this
4
invoice Mr. O'Herlihy and I want to draw to your attention the entry 7/18
5
January, phone calls, briefing discussions, meeting Frank Dunlop, do you see
6
that?
7
A.
I do indeed yeah.
8
Q. 158
That's your document as provided to Monarch Properties as I understand it?
9
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 159
Can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why you would have been meeting
10:55:13 10
11 12
Mr. Dunlop sometime in early January of 1991? A.
Haven't a notion. It may have followed out of some discussions that had taken
13
place or something like that, it may have been a follow-up call, do I not know
14
honestly. I can't remember. Because to my honest recollection he was never
10:55:33 15
involved at all in the period I was involved.
16
Q. 160
But did you know Mr. Dunlop, as a lobbyist in Dublin County Council?
17
A.
I knew Frank Dunlop very well from working in RTE in the first instance, he was
18
a northern correspondent and then I knew him when he was the special advisor to
19
John Boland, when he was Minister for Public Service and I knew Frank very
10:55:55 20
21
well. Q. 161
But did you know that he was a lobbyist to councillors in Dublin County
22
Council, did you know that Mr. Dunlop had a business that involved seeking the
23
changes of zoning of lands?
24
A.
10:56:14 25
26
I suppose it would be naive of me to say I didn't, but I can't remember to be honest, I don't know.
Q. 162
27
What I'm asking is it possible you might have gone, in view of the fact this was your first job in connection with the Development Plan?
28
A.
And asked for his advice is it?
29
Q. 163
Exactly.
A.
I don't know.
10:56:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:56:24
10:56:39
29 1
Q. 164
Do you think its possible you might have met him about that?
2
A.
I honestly can't remember.
3
Q. 165
Again on that document at 7771 Mr. O'Herlihy, you set out there certain phone
4
discussions with East Coast Radio, organising a newspaper and certain meetings
5
with Monarch, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 166
And was the newspaper you were organising this free sheet?
8
A.
That would be the Cherrywood News.
9
Q. 167
That was going to be sent out to the all of the houses in the area?
A.
Correct, correct.
Q. 168
Now I think that again in February of 1992, at 7772, you furnished an invoice
10:56:50 10
11 12
in connection with the provision of a copy of the special edition of The Valley
13
News, you gave a break down of that at 7773?
14 10:57:13 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 169
Again I think you would accept that its likely that you would have put in
16
information in relation to what Monarch wanted in that document, that was the
17
whole purpose that have isn't that right?
18
A.
O, yeah, yeah.
19
Q. 170
So it was to provide information about the development, to the local community?
A.
Mm-hmm.
21
Q. 171
And that would have been given to everybody, is that right?
22
A.
Sorry what would have been given to everybody?
23
Q. 172
24
A.
Oh, yes, dropped into the houses, yeah.
Q. 173
Now obviously what Monarch were seeking had to be different to what they
10:57:24 20
10:57:35 25
To the local community -- the free sheet.
26
already had in the Development Plan, isn't that right Mr. O'Herlihy, they were
27
seeking to change the status of their lands?
28
A.
29 10:57:52 30
Yeah, they were more than anything else they were seeking from my perspective to change the climate of opinion towards it.
Q. 174
And that was based in the community and also with councillors? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:57:56
10:58:16
30 1
A.
Well Monarch had the belief that this was a very very good project and that it
2
was a project that was going to materially benefit the area and they wanted to
3
convey that information by The Cherrywood News and they wanted to convey it
4
through the media generally and we also developed a television documentary as
5
it were, which was used for community meetings.
6
Q. 175
7
But in order for Monarch to put 950 houses on that land Mr. O'Herlihy, they had to change the zoning density on their lands in the Development Plan?
8
A.
Mm-hmm.
9
Q. 176
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah well obviously yeah.
Q. 177
In your meetings with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney, you would have been made aware,
10:58:30 10
11 12
I assume, that they made a submission to Dublin County Council seeking to
13
change the density on their lands?
14 10:58:45 15
A.
I'm sure I was, yeah.
Q. 178
Because you became aware of the fact that, there would be a vote in Dublin
16
County Council, which was regarded by Monarch as important, isn't that right?
17
A.
Absolutely, sure that was the whole point in it yeah.
18
Q. 179
Wasn't the entire exercise in which you were engaged with Mr. Lynn and
19
Mr. Sweeney and the other Monarch personnel geared towards changing the climate
10:59:03 20
so that there would be support for the changes Monarch wanted?
21
A.
That's correct, that's correct.
22
Q. 180
So the whole thrust of the PR campaign and submissions that were made by the
23
professional people on behalf of Monarch, was to change the status of the
24
lands?
10:59:14 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 181
Because Monarch couldn't built on what they wanted to build on it, with the
27
zoning that they had on the lands isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 182
So everything was going to end up on the floor of Dublin County Council?
A.
Absolutely.
10:59:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
10:59:26
10:59:39
31 1
Q. 183
And you would have known, as did everybody else involved in the exercise, that
2
at the end of the day the people who were going to make the decision on this
3
were the councillors?
4
A.
Yeah and there was a belief also that politicians were influenced by climate
5
and if the climate of opinion was very supportive towards it, that that in turn
6
would actually be something that would support Monarch.
7
Q. 184
And the -- you had gone and you had spoken to Mr. Barrett but Mr. Barrett had
8
made his position absolutely clear that he was not going to support what
9
Monarch wanted?
10:59:57 10
11
A.
Correct, that's right.
Q. 185
Did he in anyway resile, or change from that, from the time that you were
12 13
involved in the exercise? A.
14
plans and viewed the model he said he wasn't going to vote for it, he thought
11:00:11 15
16
Not at all, not at all. Even at the meeting with Monarch when we viewed the
it was wrong for the area. Q. 186
And therefore whatever influence was perceived with in Monarch rested with
17
Mr. Barrett, it could not be brought to the assistance of the project, isn't
18
that right, because he never supported the project as far as you were aware.
19 11:00:24 20
A.
No no.
Q. 187
So that created an added urgency to the get the balance of support elsewhere,
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
I presume so, yeah.
23
Q. 188
Because what you were told the Tribunal earlier is Mr. Barrett was regarded as
24 11:00:35 25
26
influential. A.
Oh yeah, yeah.
Q. 189
When you couldn't bring Mr. Barrett to the table, as it were, to support this
27
project you had to get that support elsewhere?
28
A.
When you say you now, you mean Monarch.
29
Q. 190
Mean Monarch Properties and yourself as part of the team.
A.
Yeah but I wasn't canvassing support in the sense that you are implying it.
11:00:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:00:53
11:01:09
32 1
Q. 191
Well were you meeting with councillors?
2
A.
I had very -- obviously from some of the documentation you have provided I had
3
some meetings with them, but it was very few. My essential contact was by
4
telephone and what I -- what I did primarily was to set up meetings for
5
Monarch, so that I would ring whatever councillor was involved and I'd say look
6
we'd like to you look at the plans, this is a very good development or whatever
7
I'd say something to that effect and the plans will be on view in the Royal
8
Dublin Hotel or in the Monarch headquarters and we'd like to you come along and
9
see them, and they'd come along and view them, I had practically no
11:01:31 10
relationship with them at all, in fact I wasn't at most of those meetings
11 12
because it wasn't my function to make the presentation to them. Q. 192
Certainly in February of 1992, at 7776 Mr. O'Herlihy, you provide another
13
invoice and again you provide back up details at, 7777 and on the 11th February
14
you record a meeting with Monarch or meeting Monarch and Senator Lydon two
11:01:59 15
hours, do you see that?
16
A.
Do I yeah.
17
Q. 193
Do you have any recollection of that meeting and what it involved?
18
A.
I have no recollection whatever of it. I'm just wondering though whether or
19
not, they were meetings that I attended, or if that could well be a meeting I
11:02:18 20
21
set up as it were, but didn't necessarily attend. Q. 194
22
If you just look at the top of the document Mr. O'Herlihy it says executive time Mr. O'Herlihy isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 195
And then it details set out, under meetings that took place and the duration of
11:02:33 25
the meetings, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 196
And that would suggest that what you are itemising there, if you go to 7778
28 29 11:02:45 30
please, it says total executive time Bill O'Herlihy 18 hours? A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 197
That would suggest if you go back to 7777 subject to anything you have to say Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:02:50
11:03:00
33 1
yourself Mr. O'Herlihy, that the meeting of two hours involving Mr. Lydon
2
involved yourself?
3
A.
4 5
interpretation. Q. 198
6 7
That's a reasonable interpretation, I don't remember it but that's a reasonable
And can you recollect anything that would have brought you to meet with Mr. Lydon, in connection with Monarch Properties?
A.
Nothing specific, I would have thought that as far as I was concerned that
8
Senator Lydon would have been just, one of the senior members of Fianna Fail
9
and he would have been viewing the plans and that would be it, I would imagine
11:03:25 10
that the meeting with Monarch would have been to go through the plans and go
11 12
through the model, same as other people as well. Q. 199
13 14 11:03:45 15
And I think again at 7779, I think this document is part of the other document, this details the involvement of Mr. Ian Sherwin who I think worked with you?
A.
He did yeah that's correct.
Q. 200
And what's set out on this document is what Mr. Sherwin was doing and he was
16
setting up meetings in local community schools and matters such as that sort?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 201
I think part of the PR campaign involved what has been described as road show?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 202
Where you would have had drawings and a scale model of the development and you
11:04:01 20
21
brought it around to the community?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 203
And that appeared to have been Mr. Sherwin's function?
24
A.
That's correct.
Q. 204
Your function seems to have been a more senior dealing with senior Monarch
11:04:10 25
26
personnel and indeed on occasion some councillors?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 205
Now were you made aware of the when the vote was coming up in the were
29 11:04:25 30
important vote in Dublin could County Council? A.
Was I made aware of it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:04:27
11:04:41
34 1
Q. 206
Yeah.
2
A.
Oh indeed I was. I was actually I went for the very first time in my life into
3
the Dublin County Council Chamber, prior to the meeting starting, because I had
4
never been at a Dublin County Council meeting of any sort I said my myself as
5
the vote is coming up today I'd like to see what the setup is, I spent about
6
three or four minutes in there and that was it.
7
Q. 207
8 9 11:04:57 10
I suggest to you Mr. O'Herlihy that that meeting is likely to have been a meeting on the 27th May 1992 which, where Monarch lost --
A.
Yeah that's correct.
Q. 208
They lost by two votes in fact, what they sought and they ended up with their
11
lands zoned at one house to the acre as a result of a motion by Councillor
12
Barrett?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 209
Now was that your first and only time in the offices of Dublin County Council?
A.
First and only time, yeah. Never since.
Q. 210
And were you going that meeting because you were made aware of the importance
11:05:09 15
16 17 18
of that meeting from the zoning point of view of Monarch? A.
19
No, I was going -- I went to the meeting first of all because professionally I was interested in seeing whether or not the campaign was going to be successful
11:05:28 20
and the ultimate determination of success was whether we got the motion through
21
or not. So I was extremely interested because I had worked very closely with
22
Richard Lynn and worked very closely with Monarch I was very impressed by
23
Richard Lynn, I thought he was a really good professional operator and I was
24
impressed by the whole Monarch set up, so it would have been completely I think
11:05:51 25
illogical for me to actually miss out on something like that, so -- but I was
26
there for as I said about three or four minutes before it started and I spent
27
the rest of the time in the Royal Dublin Hotel.
28
Q. 211
Who was in the Royal Dublin Hotel with you Mr. O'Herlihy?
29
A.
Well definitively I can say Richard Lynn was with me, others may have come and
11:06:11 30
gone, Noel Murray may have come and gone, I am not certain. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:06:14
11:06:26
35 1
Q. 212
2
Now as far as you were aware who was dealing with the matters on behalf of Monarch in the chamber, did you know?
3
A.
I have no idea.
4
Q. 213
And who was handling that part of the exercise, the motions and matters such as
5
that sort?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 214
Did you ever see any motion on behalf of Monarch, a motion that would be
8 9 11:06:40 10
brought before the Council in order to change the zoning on the lands? A.
I have no recollection, honestly.
Q. 215
But you did know that the meeting of the 27th of May 1992 was regarded by
11
Monarch as a critical?
12
A.
Absolutely, of course I did yeah.
13
Q. 216
Everything you had been engaged on up to this point in time, was leading to
14 11:06:52 15
that position? A.
Correct.
16
Q. 217
Right. When you were -- did you go to the hotel in order to await the results?
17
A.
Oh yes.
18
Q. 218
Who was going to bring the results to yourself and to Mr. Lynn?
19
A.
I can't remember, I can't remember. It was felt that would take about two
11:07:11 20
hours before the decision would come through, that could be because they were
21
other motions on the agenda, but we were anticipating a delay of about two
22
hours and we were there from whatever time the Council started, which was
23
around 11 o'clock I think and then I think we got the result sometime and 12.30
24
am -- p.m. I mean.
11:07:29 25
Q. 219
26
In the course of your meeting with Mr. Lynn did you have a conversation with Mr. Lynn about how to achieve zoning changes in Dublin?
27
A.
I did.
28
Q. 220
Can you outline to the Tribunal the content of that conversation as you
29 11:07:44 30
recollect it now Mr. O'Herlihy? A.
I will. We were waiting for the result, I'd say fairly late into the day, in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:07:51
11:08:12
36 1
The sense that the result would have been coming maybe within half an hour or
2
thereabouts, and I said to him, I said to Richard, well I said, I hope the
3
Council will see the merits of this and recognise the quality of the
4
development that's proposed and he said to me are you joking me? I said what
5
do you mean? He said the councillors never recognise quality and merit, it has
6
nothing whatever to do with it, he said if you want to get a planning change or
7
a material contravention through, you have to buy it and he said that planning
8
changes and material contraventions were worth, in his judgement, about 50,000
9
a year into the back pocket of the councillors, if they cooperated with the
11:08:36 10
developers.
11 12
So frankly, because I had never been involved, with any building company or any
13
development like this in my life, I was absolutely staggered at this, to be
14
truthful and I said well how does it work? And I was told that you -- he told
11:08:56 15
me that you develop a lead councillor and you deal with him and he deals with
16
all the other councillors and he determines what exactly is required to
17
actually get the votes required to pass a particular planning approval or
18
motion.
19 11:09:17 20
So I said did you, did Monarch pay money for this? And he said yes. And again
21
I was, to be honest I was staggered and he said -- I said how much? And he
22
said, to the best of my knowledge he said a hundred thousand. Now I don't know
23
whether he was talking about generally, or whether, on that particular project,
24
but my question related to the project.
11:09:43 25
26
Now I want to say and its very important that I say this, in all my dealings
27
with Monarch money never came up, there was never any question of anything
28
untoward whatsoever in my dealings with Monarch. I found them a company of
29
extreme probity, all the way through. Therefore what was said to me was
11:10:01 30
completely out of character with the whole development and programme that I was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:10:04
11:10:17
37 1
involved in and the whole campaign.
2 3
I have no idea and its very important that I make this point, I have no idea
4
whether what he said to me was true or not, or the context in which he said. I
5
have no idea of the no evidence whatsoever to back up the claim he made,
6
because money never ever came into any discussion that I was part of in, with
7
Monarch.
8 9
And it was extremely, as I said a company of great probity all the way through
11:10:35 10
and they were highly professional in the approach to the campaign. I was not
11
involved in providing financial inducements or bribes, I was never asked to
12
offer them, I was never -- there was never any discussion on that, it never
13
came up whatsoever. Therefore when that point was made to me, I was to be
14
honest about it, I was gob smacked.
11:10:57 15
16
Now I don't know whether he was talking about, he might have been talking, to
17
be honest, in fairness to him, he could have been talking about the way things
18
happened generally. But unquestionably I asked the question very specifically.
19 11:11:11 20
Q. 221
You asked him had Monarch paid monies?
A.
I think I may have said have you paid monies, like I was talking -- it was
21
clearly understood it was Monarch I was talking about yeah.
22
Q. 222
And he said yes?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 223
And did you ask him did they have a lead councillor, did Monarch have a lead
11:11:25 25
councillor?
26
A.
Yes I did.
27
Q. 224
And did Mr. Lynn indicate to you who the lead councillor was?
28
A.
Yes he did.
29
Q. 225
Who did he tell you who the lead councillor was?
A.
I have a problem with that now Chairman because the evidence I am offering here
11:11:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:11:36
11:11:45
38 1
is entirely anecdotal and completely out of character with the whole campaign.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
assessing evidence?
5
Yeah but sorry excuse me, my difficulty is I don't want to be naming a person
6
who might be completely innocent of the allegation, let me put it that way, if
7
I am being asked to actually name publicly a person without any evidence
8
whatsoever to back up that claim I think its very unfair, so the best -- sorry
9
what I'd like to do is give it to you privately write down the name and you can
11:12:07 10
We appreciate that and we take that into account when we are
do whatever you want thereafter.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
The Councillor in question is on notice first of all and is here and is
14
represented and this is part of this Module, it wasn't mentioned in the opening
11:12:18 15
Yes we can --
out of deference --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
Yes.
Is that person aware that --
19 11:12:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
That this evidence is going to be given.
Yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
we take it on the basis that its not, if you like, direct evidence on your
11:12:34 25
26
Well from those circumstances we must ask you to name the name, but
part, that this person did anything wrong? Absolutely.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
That's right. Completely hearsay, it could be entirely untrue, so may I give
11:12:46 30
Simply evidence of what you were told by another individual?
it to you then under protest. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:12:47
11:12:56
39 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
Okay. Senator Lydon.
4
Q. 226
5
Absolutely?
You asked the question, who was the lead councillor? Is that right Mr. Herlihy?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 227
And the answer you got to the best of your recollection from Mr. Lynn, is that
8 9 11:13:03 10
11
it was Senator Don Lydon? A.
Yeah.
Q. 228
Were you shocked by that?
A.
Of course I was shocked, because I was one of the people at the time who
12
believed in the, that things were decided on merit. I had no idea that there
13
was corruption in the planning system at all, or that money came into it, or
14
financial inducements, I had no idea in the wide world, as I said I had never
11:13:22 15
ever been involved in any of that, that aspect of Irish life at all, so of
16 17
course I was shocked. Q. 229
If I understand you correctly Mr. O'Herlihy, you had an absolutely professional
18
relationship with Monarch and its employees and personnel up to this point in
19
time?
11:13:40 20
21
A.
Absolutely they were terrific.
Q. 230
You had never heard any suggestion of money for votes, or matters such as that
22 23
sort, up to this particular time? A.
24 11:13:53 25
Not at all and if I had I wouldn't have stayed with the campaign let me tell you.
Q. 231
And on the of May 1992 the date of the critical vote for Monarch you are having
26
a conversation with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lynn volunteers this information to you,
27
is that what happened?
28 29 11:14:15 30
A.
Yeah, yeah. Well it was, it follows directly on the first question I asked him about -- it flowed out of his response to my question of a decision being taken, both on the merits and quality of the proposition. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:14:17
11:14:31
40 1
Q. 232
2
And you were impressed if I understand you correctly and taken with both the merits and quality of the project that Monarch were proposing?
3
A.
I was yeah I thought it was very good.
4
Q. 233
You were an enthusiastic supporter of it, on its merits?
5
A.
I would have been.
6
Q. 234
It was in that context you raised with Mr. Lynn the question it should get by
7
on merit, as I understand it?
8
A.
Absolutely.
9
Q. 235
It was in that context Mr. Lynn made the response you have outlined to the
11:14:45 10
Tribunal?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 236
Which as I understand it and correct me if I'm wrong, which is that, merit had
13
nothing whatsoever to do with it, did had all to do with the purchase of votes,
14
is that right?
11:14:51 15
A.
That was my understanding of it yeah.
16
Q. 237
Were you taken aback, blown away by this Mr. O'Herlihy?
17
A.
Well I had no -- I had no experience of how the planning system worked at all,
18
I had no idea how the council system responded to the planning motions, so I
19
was completely surprised and shocked, and to be honest about it I was disgusted
11:15:15 20
21
as well. Q. 238
22
And you then asked him how the system worked effectively and Mr. Lynn explained to you about the lead councillor?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 239
To that point in time had you ever heard anything that have nature before?
A.
No, nothing, nothing.
Q. 240
By lead councillor did you understand Mr. Lynn mean you needed a lead
11:15:27 25
26 27 28 29 11:15:42 30
councillor in each party? A.
That I'm not sure, I couldn't tell you, because for some reason or other which is I suppose as I think I made the point to John Gallagher against my inquisitive nature, I never pursued the discussion and the reason I may not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:15:47
11:16:03
41 1
have was because we could have been interrupted, I can't remember, but I'm not
2
sure whether or not he would have been the -- there was a lead councillor would
3
have been somebody who represented the company in relation to all parties, or a
4
specific party, I do not know.
5
Q. 241
6
But you then proceeded to ask the question about who effectively was Monarch's lead councillor?
7
A.
I did.
8
Q. 242
You were given the name, you recollect, of Senator Lydon?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 243
Was any amount of money mentioned in connection with any payment that was made
11:16:12 10
11 12
to the lead councillor, that you can recollect? A.
13
that went to him now necessarily, that was money, as I understood it, was to be
14 11:16:30 15
A figure was mentioned of a hundred thousand but that wasn't necessarily money
distributed, if its true and it may not be true at all. Q. 244
And in your explanation that was provided to you by Mr. Lynn, of what the lead
16
councillor did, did you understand it that the lead councillor would make
17
disbursements to other councillors?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 245
So if you just outline in your own words how Mr. Lynn explained to you how this
11:16:47 20
21
system of the lead councillor worked? A.
Well my recollection going back these 15 years would be that what he said to
22
me -- I can still visualise the scene, inside in the bar of the Royal Dublin
23
Hotel, we were drinking coffee if I remember correctly, because it was only
24
about quarter past 12, and when he mention it had, he said what happened was
11:17:11 25
that you would appoint a councillor, a lead councillor he called him, who would
26
be your point man as it were, in the, in terms of the councillors at large, and
27
that he would determine, you know, how money would be distributed to buy the
28
votes on the basis of whatever the requirement would be to get the motion
29
through. Now that was my understanding of it.
11:17:36 30
Q. 246
And this was volunteered to you by Mr. Lynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:17:38
11:17:50
42 1
A.
It was yeah, yeah.
2
Q. 247
And that followed on your initial question about the councillors approaching
3 4
this matter on merit? A.
5
Oh, yes, that was the -- I mean if I had never mentioned that there would never have been any discussion about it at all.
6
Q. 248
And was this your last involvement with Monarch Mr. O'Herlihy?
7
A.
Oh yeah it was. Now its important to recognise that my -- my appointment was
8
not in indeterminate one, it was a finite one for a specific project and the
9
project was over once the vote came through, they said thank you and good bye.
11:18:14 10
And that was the end of me.
11
Q. 249
Monarch lost the vote?
12
A.
They did by two votes if I remember correctly.
13
Q. 250
On that date and that was the meeting of the 27th of May 1992 and I think that
14
after that, I think you put in a final fee note of the 29th of May, at 3731.
11:18:33 15
And this covers the period 13 of April to 29 of May 1992 and that is your last
16
fee note?
17
A.
Yeah, yeah.
18
Q. 251
So that would indicate that you concluded your business with Monarch in or
19 11:18:45 20
21
around the 29 of May of 1992? A.
That's correct.
Q. 252
So that would appear to agree with the documents that we have looked at, you
22
were retained to change public opinion coming up to the important vote in May
23
of 1992?
24
A.
Correct.
Q. 253
That vote was lost?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 254
And they didn't continue with you thereafter?
28
A.
No, nor did I expect them to either.
29
Q. 255
Yeah. And in that meeting you had with Mr. Lynn would he have seen from your
11:18:55 25
11:19:09 30
demeanour that you were shocked by what you were hearing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:19:11
11:19:32
43 1
A.
I don't know. He may have thought me a complete innocent, I don't know or
2
he -- I can't remember, I certainly was shocked whether he recognised it is
3
another matter, I don't know.
4
Q. 256
Do you remember ever discussing any, leaving aside what happened with Mr. Lynn
5
at the meeting of the 27th of May, did you ever have any discussion with
6
Mr. Lynn about the importance of individual councillors, or maybe councillors
7
changing their attitude in relation to Monarch?
8
A.
9
No. Now you see Mr. Lynn was the person who -- Mr. Lynn was a highly professional operator in my judgement and he had years of experience in
11:19:53 10
operating the Monarch what would you call it, or in developing the Monarch
11
Properties and indeed going about achieving what was to be achieved, both with
12
the Council and people like that, he also made a point I think that he didn't
13
necessarily see the value of public relations, because he was a very very good
14
operator.
11:20:15 15
16 17
Having said all that now I have forgotten what you asked me. Q. 257
18 19
Did Mr. Lynn ever mention the importance of any other particular individual councillor, or changing their position in relation to Monarch?
A.
No, because sorry to go back to the point I was about to make or that I should
11:20:29 20
have made, Mr. Lynn was dealing with, dealt with, the Council pretty well all
21
the time, the councillors themselves all the time, he had loads of experience
22
it have, my involvement was kind of marshalling them into meetings but I had
23
very little part in the meetings myself, that wasn't my function.
24
Q. 258
11:20:49 25
Insofar as presentations were made to councillors or matters such as that sort that was dealt with by the Monarch people?
26
A.
Yes correct.
27
Q. 259
And were you surprised when he identified Senator Lydon as being the person who
28 29 11:21:08 30
he said was the lead person for Monarch? A.
I'd have to say yes, but I don't honestly remember. But I would have been surprised all right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:21:11
11:21:24
44 1
Q. 260
Was there any discussion before the meeting took place in Dublin County Council
2
of the numbers, of how many votes they had or how many numbers were in place or
3
anything such as that sort?
4
A.
5
There probably would have been a discussion, like a casual discussion as to how many votes we need.
6
Q. 261
Yes.
7
A.
Whether or not they weren't through it in a forensic sense and said we had X
8 9
number against Y, I can't remember. Q. 262
11:21:39 10
11
In the PR strategy committee or the unit that was in place to get this job done, who was the person who was dealing with getting the numbers?
A.
Well Richard Lynn would have been the project man basically, Eddie Sweeney and
12
himself, but Richard was the guy, as it were, who was on the road and who was
13
dealing with most aspects of it.
14
Q. 263
11:21:58 15
effectively, was there a post mortem, did anybody sit down and analyse where it
16 17
And when the result came through and you were told that Monarch had lost
had gone wrong? A.
I don't recall it to be honest, I don't recall that that there was a post
18
mortem. I think there was a general recognition, if there was a post mortem
19
there might have been a casual discussion in the Royal Dublin Hotel afterwards,
11:22:17 20
which would indicate that they would have to go back to the drawing board, but
21 22
that's as far as I can recall it, the most that would have happened. Q. 264
23 24 11:22:37 25
And would it be fair to say that Monarch wouldn't have regarded that setback as the end of the road, as far as they were concerned?
A.
Probably not, they knew the system better than I did so probably not.
Q. 265
Did any of the councillors come into the Royal Dublin afterwards, can you
26
remember?
27
A.
I can't remember.
28
Q. 266
When Mr. Lynn told you about the lead councillor and about the fact that the
29 11:22:56 30
matters had to be paid for, material contraventions or zoning, was it your understanding from what you were hearing, that Monarch had themselves paid in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:22:59
11:23:05
45 1
order to achieve rezoning?
2
A.
In this particular instance.
3
Q. 267
Yes?
4
A.
Yeah, that was my understanding.
5
Q. 268
Thank you very much --
6
A.
But again, with no evidence whatsoever. No evidence, purely based on anecdotal
7
information given to me, no evidence whatsoever to back it out and everything
8
that I had -- I think its hugely important to say, all the dealings I had with
9
Monarch were contradicted by that particular statement that was made, so
11:23:26 10
11
whether it was factual or not I do not know. Q. 269
12
I understand that Mr. Lynn will say that no such conversation took place, I assume that you would disagree with that?
13
A.
Yeah, the conversation took place.
14
Q. 270
And you are absolutely satisfied the conversation took place?
A.
Absolutely. What is in it for me to come in and here and make up a
11:23:39 15
16 17 18
conversation? Q. 271
Thank you very much Mr. O'Herlihy, would you answer any questions that anybody else might have.
19 11:23:48 20
CHAIRMAN:
Just before that happens I think we'll take a ten minute break now
21
and you might return then after ten minutes and hopefully you won't be here too
22
long.
23 24 11:24:40 25
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK, AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
26 27 28 29 11:41:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:41:27
11:41:31
46 1
CHAIRMAN:
Now.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
I don't know whether the order has been agreed.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well who would like to start the.
6 7
MR SANFEY: Chairman I'm Mark Sanfey, I am senior counsel and I represent among
8
others Mr. Lynn, my other clients are Monarch Properties Limited, Paul Monahan,
9
Dominic Glennane, Noel Murray, Philip Reilly and estate of Philip Monahan. I
11:41:53 10
think you were told previously Mr. Mohan would be here, but in fact it's myself
11
Chairman.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
All right we can live with that. Would you like to cross examine?
14 11:42:03 15
MR SANFEY: Yes.
16 17
THE WITNESS WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR SANFEY:
18 19 11:42:08 20
Q. 272
MR SANFEY: Mr. O'Herlihy, as I said, my name is Mark Sanfey I'm senior counsel and for today's purposes I represent Richard Lynn. I should say Chairman
21
before I commence questioning Mr. O'Herlihy, that I did wish to refer to the
22
notes of the private session that Mr. O'Herlihy had and I take it that there is
23
no objection to that, my solicitor wrote in formally during the week...
24 11:42:27 25
CHAIRMAN:
No you can do that certainly, if you have the page number.
26 27
COUNSEL: My difficulty is that our copy of the private session doesn't have
28
the usual four digit number at the top, so I may require some assistance, I do
29
obviously have the internal pagination, which I hope to refer to.
11:42:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:42:44
11:43:02
47 1 2
CHAIRMAN: Q. 273
If you use that then we can see that it goes up on the screen.
Very good. Thank you.
3 4
Mr. O'Herlihy, leaving the conversation with Mr. Lynn aside for a moment, in
5
your private interview, which took place on the 6th July 2000 and in fact today
6
I think its fair to say, you have nothing but praise for Monarch Properties and
7
its operatives in general is that right?
8
A.
9
company. I thought Richard Lynn was a highly professional operator, I was
11:43:22 10
delighted to be working with him, because he was apart from being professional
11 12
Oh that's absolutely correct I thought they were a very very professional
he was good humoured, he was a pleasure to work with. Q. 274
In fact I am instructed that my clients will say equally that you were also a
13
pleasure to work with and extremely professional and they had no difficulties
14
and while they didn't achieve the result they wanted, they had no problem with
11:43:41 15
your work.
16
A.
That's nice to know, thank you.
17
Q. 275
Just given the seriousness of what you have said about the conversation with
18
Mr. Lynn, I would like to go back through your notes and just see exactly what
19
you said about Monarch or Mr. Lynn in those notes, I wonder if those could be
11:43:58 20
put up on the screen, this is an interview you did with Mr. Gallagher Senior
21
Counsel for the Tribunal on the 6th July 2000, I understand that they are part
22
of the brief.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
is there a page number.
11:44:11 25
26
MR SANFEY: We don't have a page number on our copy unfortunately.
27 28 29 11:44:27 30
CHAIRMAN: Q. 276
Is there any page number on it?
MR SANFEY: There are two sets of pagination, I am going to refer to the one of the top right hand corner and I'd like to begin with page 18. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:44:38
11:44:55
48 1 2 3
MS. DILLON: Q. 277
7996.
Thank you. The first answer there, in fact we don't see the first part of that
4
answer, but just the last sentence that was, the Monarch people that made the
5
presentation and the people who did it were professional. And I think you were
6
referring to the presentation that this taken place in the Royal Dublin Hotel
7
in that?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 278
All right. Page 22.
11:45:08 10
11 12
MS. DILLON: Q. 279
8000.
The question is "Had you been asked by anybody for money or had it been
13
suggested to you that money should be offered? Answer: Oh not at all. There
14
was never any discussion that the entire relationship between Monarch and me
11:45:25 15
was entirely kosher, there was no suggestion of money there was no suggestion
16
of anything other than a campaign, that was of the highest integrity, there was
17
no question of anything untoward ever mentioned, money was never mentioned in
18
terms of buying votes and there was never any suggestion that I should actually
19
make contact with councillors by any means to achieve anything like that, there
11:45:42 20
was never any question of anything like that." I take you stand over that?
21
A.
Absolutely.
22
Q. 280
Would you have a look at page 24 please.
23 24 11:45:53 25
MS. DILLON: Q. 281
8002.
You were asked about the possibility of money changing hands and as you will
26
see at the very top of the page you said the standards were the very highest in
27
the dealings that I had between Monarch and myself. There was never any
28
question.
29 11:46:07 30
And if you move on to page 32. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:46:11
11:46:23
49 1 2 3
MS. DILLON: Q. 282
8010.
Now once again you are being asked about the conversation with Mr. Lynn here
4
and at the end of the page you say "It was entirely, the conversation was
5
entirely anecdotal in the sense that it could have been a fellow boasting in a
6
bar for all I know. There was no evidence whatsoever in my dealings with
7
Monarch at any stage that suggested that this was part and parcel of the way
8
that they did business" and I take it you stand over that as well?
9 11:46:39 10
A.
Oh absolutely yeah.
Q. 283
On page 34.
11 12 13
MS. DILLON: Q. 284
14
8012.
In the second paragraph you say, the whole question of money as a means of getting planning permission was raised you say "There was no sign of it any
11:46:55 15
dealings that I had or it was never mentioned. Nobody ever asked me for money
16
and the councillors never asked me for money, there was no suggestion by
17
Monarch that I should consider offering money." you go on to say that if that
18
had been said, you would have left the project immediately, because that's not
19
the way I do business, I would have been shocked if anybody did business that
11:47:12 20
way, which makes me very innocent. Then you say but their entire dealings with
21
me at all stages were entirely of the highest standards. I take it you stand
22
over that?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 285
On the next page, page 35, its a short page but you say simply "There was never
11:47:30 25
26
any evidence shown to me or employed in anyway that suggested that that was the way to do business, that was the one and only example."
27 28
And at page 42.
29 11:47:41 30
MS. DILLON:
8020.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:47:49
11:48:08
50 1
Q. 286
You refer to your finishing your involvement with the project and Mr. Gallagher
2
asked you when they lost and you said "Yes when they lost and I never had any
3
contact with Monarch thereafter. I mean I found Monarch very good to deal
4
with, they were very nice guys, very decent people I thought". Do you have
5
any --
6
A.
No I agree with that.
7
Q. 287
Any reason to resile from that?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 288
And finally, if we look at page 46.
11:48:16 10
11 12
MS. DILLON: Q. 289
8024.
You were asked a general question by Mr. Gallagher in relation to having
13
anything else to say about the project, in the second paragraph of your answer
14
you said "At no stage in any conversations at that took place involving Phil, I
11:48:30 15
assume that should be Monahan, or any of his executives, or right up to the
16
conversation that I told about there in the bar in the hotel, there was never
17
ever, ever, ever any suggestion that their normal practice was to buy anything,
18
there was never any snide comments, or there was never any kind of subtextual
19
comments that is gave you the impression that this was only all a charade and
11:48:51 20
that the work was really going on underneath the surface. There was never
21
anything like that.
22 23
I got the impression all the time that that was a campaign that was what it
24
looked like, that it was entirely an up front campaign and I got that
11:49:02 25
impression all the way through" do you stand over that?
26
A.
I stand over that.
27
Q. 290
In that answer you seem to be suggesting that not only was it not said that
28
there was any question of giving money to politicians, but that there was no
29
means to infer. That...
11:49:15 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:49:17
11:49:31
51 1
Q. 291
That there was --
2
A.
If somebody had dropped in from Mars and sat at any of the Monarch strategy
3
meetings, not for one minute would they imagine that it was anything other than
4
the campaign that was being mounted and presented.
5
Q. 292
Right. I think you intimated in your evidence this morning that the
6
conversation with Mr. Lynn was out of character, in the sense of going against
7
all of that, all of your dealings with Monarch?
8
A.
9
That's what shocked me the most, because it was completely out of character. As I said I haven't the slightest idea whether it was accurate or inaccurate,
11:49:49 10
whether he was reflecting on my naivete or whatever it was, but it certainly
11
was not in character in any sense what ever with what had gone before for the
12
six or eight months.
13
Q. 293
14 11:50:10 15
All right. Would you agree that if the conversation did take place, that it has very serious implications for Mr. Lynn's honesty and integrity?
A.
I'd have to say first of all the conversation did take place it, wouldn't
16
profit me for a minute to come here and as I said, make up a conversation,
17
there is no gain in it for me, its the last thing I need to be in front of a
18
Tribunal. So I wouldn't dream of making up something like that its too
19
serious, I understand precisely what you are saying, it is a very very serious
11:50:30 20
allegation, but what I am really reporting is simply a conversation, I am not
21
saying that its a factual conversation, or that the conversation represents a
22
fact. I'm not saying that for one minute because I have no evidence to that
23
effect, I am simply saying the conversation took part, if he was taking -- he
24
could have been taking the Mickey out of me, I don't know whether he was or he
11:50:52 25
wasn't, there was no evidence or subsequently that I saw to justify what was
26
said, but nonetheless, I am saying and I have sworn before God for this, it
27
took place.
28
Q. 294
There is no possibility that you could be mistaken?
29
A.
No, I'm sorry, there isn't.
Q. 295
Yes.
11:51:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:51:08
11:51:22
52 1
A.
2 3
I say that with a heavy heart because I have an awful lot of time for Richard Lynn, he was a very good guy to work with. But it was said.
Q. 296
4
You are aware from what Ms. Dillon said that Mr. Lynn utterly denies that the conversation took place?
5
A.
I'm aware of that.
6
Q. 297
In fact he will go further, not only does he deny the conversation took place,
7
but it was an impossibility for it to have taken place, because he wasn't in
8
the Royal Dublin Hotel that day?
9
A.
Of course he was. He was there with me.
Q. 298
He will say that he was not?
11
A.
We were waiting for the result of the vote.
12
Q. 299
All right. I will come back to that Mr. O'Herlihy, can I ask you a couple of
11:51:35 10
13
questions about your general involvement, could we look at page 14 of your
14
private session interview? That's 8005 apparently.
11:51:57 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Page 14 is 7992.
17 18
MR SANFEY: I'd just like to ask you one or two questions about your
19
involvement, prior to the 27 of May 1992, you say on the third paragraph down
11:52:15 20
on that page "Thereafter I was asked to set up a series of meetings in the
21
Royal Dublin Hotel with various councillors, who would have included Greens,
22
who would have included Fine Gael councillors. I don't know if they included
23
Fianna Fail or Labour, I just don't know, I can't remember" would you stand
24
over that statement now that you were asked to set up a series of meetings in
11:52:35 25
26
the Royal Dublin Hotel? A.
I would in the sense that -- I don't understand why you are asking me that
27
question in the first place, so maybe you might like to tell me why you are
28
asking the question.
29 11:52:53 30
Q. 300
I'd like an answer to the question Mr. O'Herlihy, you said in the statement you were asked to set up a series of the meetings in the Royal Dublin Hotel, did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:52:56
11:53:12
53 1 2
you or did you not? A.
Oh I did, the series of meetings was set up by telephone, it was a question of
3
ringing councillors, saying the plans and the model would be available in the
4
Royal Dublin Hotel, which was adjacent to the Council offices and presumably
5
the councillors would have been going in and out for different reasons and I
6
was asked to set up the meetings and I set up the meetings.
7
Q. 301
Well did you attend any of those meetings?
8
A.
I would have attended a couple, but not all.
9
Q. 302
Do you recall the dates of those meetings?
A.
Oh no I don't.
Q. 303
So you have just a general recollection of having gone to a couple of these
11:53:25 10
11 12
meetings which you set up?
13
A.
Yeah, yeah.
14
Q. 304
My clients can only recall one meeting, they recall one meeting which was taken
11:53:35 15
in a break in the Council activities and they refer to it colloquially as the
16
goulash meeting, because they recall that the hotel served Hungarian goulash to
17
the councillors, when they came in to see the project, but they can't trace any
18
reference in their records to any more than one meeting. I'm just wondering do
19
you have any more detail...
11:53:56 20
A.
Well, a series of meetings doesn't imply they all took place on different days,
21
it means a as series of meetings with various councillors, that could have
22
taken place and probably did take place on one day, but that I cannot remember.
23
Q. 305
Which are we talking about, a lot of meetings on the one day?
24
A.
Well certainly, what I have in my mind would be a series of, a series of
11:54:17 25
meetings with different councillors on the one day, but whether there was more
26
than one day I can't remember. You see there were meetings that took place in
27
Monarch and there were meetings that took place in the Royal Dublin and as I
28
said, my function was to actually make sure that, or to work with Richard to
29
make sure that people saw the plans and saw the model, so they saw the scale
11:54:39 30
and quality of the project. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:54:41
11:54:51
54 1
Q. 306
2
All right. A page 21 of the private session interview there is an answer to a question --
3 4
MS. DILLON:
5
Can you remember the vote in Dublin County Council and the circumstances
6
surrounding it and you say "Yes. Well as I said, we were working quite a lot
7
in the Royal Dublin Hotel which was next to the Council chambers and we had,
8
obviously there were full meetings in the council or committee meetings of the
9
council which made the hotel a very convenient place next door to the Council
11:55:10 10
7999.
offices to have these presentations. But I had never been to the Council
11
offices I had never been to the Council chamber in my life." would you agree
12
with me Mr. O'Herlihy that that would tend to suggest that you were of the view
13
when you gave this interview that there were presentations on different days
14
and that you had been there on a number of occasions?
11:55:26 15
A.
Yeah that is a reasonable assumption yeah.
16
Q. 307
Which is it then were there a lot of meetings on the one day?
17
A.
I can't remember. I would have thought if I had to be definitive about it I
18 19 11:55:40 20
21
would have thought there were a series of meetings. Q. 308
On the same day?
A.
No, that there was more than one, but I am open to being corrected on that.
Q. 309
Well my clients can only recall one meeting on one day, you have no reason to
22 23
gain say that have you? A.
24 11:55:57 25
No but I have no reason to say that there were meetings that didn't take place either, you know.
Q. 310
Okay. All right. At page 14.
26 27 28 29 11:56:17 30
MS. DILLON: Q. 311
7992.
Just the very last question on that page, can you remember any of the councillors who actually attended? You said I can't. The question was you genuinely can't? No. And you went on to say that you weren't involved in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:56:23
11:56:39
55 1
construction industry and you were never involved in planning before or since.
2
You can't remember any of the councillors you met?
3
A.
Well from the documentation that's been presented, I obviously met Sean Barrett
4
and I met Alan Shatter and I met Michael Keating, that's obvious from the
5
documentation I presented to Monarch, I remember there was a Green councillor
6
but I can't remember -- I think it was a woman if I recall and I can't remember
7
her name. I honestly don't know, I would be -- I just don't know, I can't
8
remember.
9 11:56:58 10
11
Q. 312
Why didn't you give those names to Mr. Gallagher when he asked you?
A.
Because I couldn't remember then either.
Q. 313
But you have just given us a few names there, why didn't you give those names
12 13
to Mr. Gallagher? A.
14
very obvious in the course of the documentation, as far as the Michael Keating
11:57:15 15
and Alan Shatter, my memory has been jogged by the invoices I sent up -- that
16 17
To be honest about it, well Barrett's name I certainly gave, because that's
have been shown this morning. Q. 314
All right. Obviously in preparing for today you have had a chance to look at
18
some of the documentation and so on, would you have had the chance to look at
19
the documentation prior to this interview with Mr. Gallagher?
11:57:33 20
A.
No, not at all. You see, you must -- you must take into account that I am
21
nearly 35 years in the business of public relations, that was a period of about
22
six or search or eight months I don't have the files. I got rid of the files,
23
I don't have any diaries, I have no information whatever. As far as I was
24
concerned that was only a short-term project, that I never figured out at the
11:57:55 25
end of the day was going to end up in a Tribunal.
26
Q. 315
Yes?
27
A.
So I didn't keep anything. So there was nothing to, nothing to jog my memory,
28 29 11:58:07 30
as it were. Q. 316
I am just trying to get a feel for the state of your recollection Mr. O'Herlihy, obviously the famous meeting of May 27th 1992, was some eight Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
11:58:12
11:58:23
56 1
years prior to this interview and some 14 yours prior to today?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 317
So I just want to get a feel for...
4
A.
That's the conversation with Richard Lynn, is that what you are saying?
5
Q. 318
Which took place in May 1992.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 319
And your interview with Mr. Gallagher took place on July 6, 2000.
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 320
I am just trying to get a feel for what your recall of your involvement was in
11:58:36 10
11
July, which was some eight years after the events you have described. A.
I think if you read the documentation of Mr. Gallagher's interview you see
12
there are a lot of things I don't remember, but the interview with Mr. Lynn or
13
the discussion with Mr. Lynn I do remember because it was so, as you said out
14
of character. It was as far as I was concerned, so extraordinary.
11:58:55 15
Q. 321
Are all right. Would you look at page 20 of your interview please.
16 17 18
MS. DILLON: Q. 322
19
7998.
You will see down towards the end of that page, question 28 "Did you have local presentations in the area, in the Dun Laoghaire area?" and your answer was "I
11:59:19 20
can't remember. I really genuinely can't remember. I would be surprised if we
21
hadn't but it wouldn't have necessarily followed that had I would have been
22
present at them at all?"
23
A.
At them all.
24
Q. 323
Sorry I beg your pardon "At them all", now I am just wondering why, given that
11:59:38 25
you would have been very involved with the local presentations at that time
26 27
your memory of what did you wasn't a bit better? A.
Well you will recall from the documentation presented this morning, that there
28
were three people working on the account and in the context of presentations
29
two other names were mentioned, so I wouldn't necessarily have been present at
12:00:00 30
that, at those presentations, but other members of my staff would have been. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:00:04
12:00:14
57 1
Q. 324
2
But you have described this morning to the Tribunal, that what you were trying to do was to create a climate.
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 325
Whereby this development would become acceptable to the local people?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 326
Am I right in thinking that the main component of that campaign as regards the
7
people, as opposed to councillors, was a road show, which took place on 14
8
weekends, I am instructed on a Friday night from 6 o'clock to 10 o'clock and
9
Saturday from 10 o'clock to 6 o'clock in the evening, in local schools and
12:00:37 10
halls, over that 14 week period, throughout the area, and in addition there
11
were radio and TV adds, newspapers, leaflet drops, a video and so on, do you
12
not recall that road show?
13
A.
14 12:00:55 15
different question. Q. 327
16 17
Do I of course, but I wasn't necessarily present at all of them, which is a
You were asked did you have local presentation in the area, local Dun Laoghaire area and you said, I can't remember.
A.
Well if I said I can't remember at the time, I couldn't remember at the time,
18
and obviously let's be Frank about it, my memory has been jogged between then
19
and now.
12:01:14 20
Q. 328
But you worked on this project from November 91 until the end of May '92 a
21
period of some 7 months is that right? And this would have been fairly intense
22
high profile project for you during that time would it?
23 24 12:01:40 25
A.
I it would be, but the nature of my business wouldn't have meant that, and if you look at the fees that I was charging, it wouldn't have meant that I was working exclusively on the Monarch project, I would be working on many other
26
projects, which would have been on a retainer basis, over a period of a lot
27
longer than six or seven months, so for that reason I would have been diverted
28
into other things and other people on the staff -- you see my function at the
29
start was to actually create a strategy, the implementation of the strategy
12:02:01 30
could have been done by other people within my company and primarily, let's be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:02:05
12:02:21
58 1 2
Frank about it, was done by Richard Lynn who was an outstanding operator. Q. 329
3
But if you remembered anything at all about this campaign, Mr. O'Herlihy, surely you would have remembered the local presentations?
4
A.
Even Homer nods.
5
Q. 330
Okay. Now can I just ask you about your involvement on the 27th of May, which
6
you have described for the Tribunal this morning, if you want to refresh your
7
memory of what you said in 2000 you can look at page 26 and you will see that,
8
you say that you went to see the council chamber --
9 12:02:47 10
11
MS. DILLON: Q. 331
8004.
And you described yourself as an open mouthed observer, somebody who had never
12
been there before, was wandering around to see how it worked and so on. I take
13
it from what you said here as well, that you went to the hotel around 11
14
o'clock?
12:03:04 15
A.
Well obviously once it started, I don't know whether or not the public goes
16
into these meetings, but I didn't go into the meeting, nor did anybody with me
17
go into the meeting, so we went into the hotel and waited. We had a couple of
18
cups of coffee.
19
Q. 332
12:03:23 20
Yes I am just looking at your paragraph just over halfway "And I remember we were in there not longer than a maximum would have been around, roughly would
21
have been 11 o'clock and we stayed in the hotel and that have wouldn't about I
22
would imagine roughly around 11 o'clock and we stayed in the hotel until we got
23
the results, which would put us after the vote, which was I would say maybe
24
between half 12 and 1 o'clock" I take it you stand over that, you went to the
12:03:45 25
hotel around 11 and got the result sometime around half 12?
26
A.
That's very approximate.
27
Q. 333
Did I understand you putting the vote earlier this morning?
28
A.
I don't know I can't remember.
29 12:03:56 30
CHAIRMAN:
Half 12 he said this morning. Approximately.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:03:58
12:04:11
59 1
A.
I don't know precisely when the vote came in.
2
Q. 334
Well it's of some importance Mr. O'Herlihy, my solicitor has a note of 12.15,
3
my own recollection was the same as the Chairman, would you like to plump for
4
a time?
5
A.
6
If I was to plump for a time, I would say around 12.30, but I am open to contradiction.
7
Q. 335
All right. Now can you remember who was with you between 11 o'clock and 12.30?
8
A.
Richard Lynn was certainly with me, I would suspect but I can't -- you see I
9
don't want to be definitive about these things, I just don't remember, but I
12:04:32 10
would be surprised if Noel Murray didn't come in and out as well you know
11
because he was the marketing man, but I don't know that for an absolute fact.
12
I remember Richard Lynn because there was so much riding on it from Monarch's
13
point of view, he was there.
14
Q. 336
Right. And at page 32.
12:04:52 15
16 17
MS. DILLON: Q. 337
sorry, page 2?
32.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:05:05 20
8010 -- Sorry we have handed a copy containing the page numbers
to my friend Mr. Sanfey if he could use that, it would probably speed the
21
process up.
22 23
Mr. O'Herlihy you will see the second paragraph there "As it transpired they
24
were beaten by one vote and I remember it was a desperate disappointment and
12:05:20 25
when the vote came through we drowned our sorrows for a while", who was with
26
you when you were, when the vote came through?
27
A.
Richard Lynn was with me.
28
Q. 338
He is the only one you remember?
29
A.
He is the only one I remember.
Q. 339
When you say we drowned or sore owes?
12:05:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:05:34
12:05:46
60 1
A.
2
That's figurative, it probably was a cup of coffee, I don't think which were drinking at that hour of the day.
3
Q. 340
I think drowning our sorrows would normally refer to having a few drinks.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 341
But you think it was coffee?
6
A.
I think so, it was too early to take a jar, I am not a heavy drinker anyway.
7
Q. 342
But when you say drowning sorrows, how long did it go on for?
8
A.
I don't know, I couldn't tell you. When I say drowning sorrows I'm referring
9
to the fact it was acutely disappointing to Monarch, they put a lot of work,
12:06:07 10
very professionally, into the campaign and they lost the vote, therefore we in
11
a figurative sense we drowned or sorrows in the sense that we expressed a huge
12
level of disappointment and we probably had another cup of coffee and looked
13
forward to the future, but the future didn't include me.
14
Q. 343
12:06:29 15
drinking coffee after that, how long would you say, would you put it at an
16 17
hour, an hour and a half less? A.
18 19 12:06:42 20
21
If the vote came through at half 12 and a certain amount of time was spent
I don't know. I honestly can't remember, but I would imagine the very maximum would be an hour, but I don't know.
Q. 344
So there wasn't a long coffee drinking session?
A.
It wasn't a long session no.
Q. 345
Now Mr. Lynn, as you are aware, was effectively the project leader in relation
22
to this?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 346
He was the one coordinating the entire project in terms of getting rezoning and
12:07:04 25
liaising with councillor, liaising with you, liaising with the professions so
26
on, you agree with that?
27
A.
Oh absolutely.
28
Q. 347
Now Mr. Lynn will say that in relation to every single meeting that Dublin
29
County Council had in relation to the Cherrywood Development, he entered the
12:07:24 30
chamber and remained in the gallery, adjacent to the chamber, watching every Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:07:29
12:07:41
61 1
minute of the meeting and that in none of those meetings did he step outside
2
the chamber, or leave the gallery and that that invariable practice also
3
applied on May 27th 1992.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
I thought my friend had said that Mr. Lynn wasn't present on the
6
27th of May 1992.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Wasn't present -- well at the meeting or --
9 12:07:50 10
MS. DILLON:
That's my understanding maybe my friend will clarify that.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
mean simply at the meeting, in the hotel, or in the chamber.
14
Q. 348
12:08:11 15
We understood you to say that he wasn't present, now whether you
Well I'm glad to have the chance to clarify that Chairman. I haven't begun to spoke about Mr. Lynn's involvement with the County Council, if I said that he
16
wasn't present at the meting I refer purely to the meeting at which the
17
conversation is alleged by Mr. O'Herlihy to take place, he wasn't in the Royal
18
Dublin Hotel, for that conversation.
19 12:08:27 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 349
But you said he was in the chamber that day?
Yes. You are clear on that Mr. O'Herlihy? That what I am saying is that
22
Mr. Lynn will say that he was present in the gallery, which is adjacent to the
23
chamber, because non councillors are not allowed into the chamber itself and
24
was there attending on the meeting from the time it started, in fact before
12:08:55 25
that until, five past ten two when the minutes say that it ended and that he
26
did not go to the Royal Dublin Hotel at any time between those times?
27
A.
That's not my recollection.
28
Q. 350
You see, Mr. Lynn has gone back over his movements as closely as he could, and
29 12:09:14 30
what he will say is this, he will say that he arrived in the County Council hall, between 10.15 and 10.30 and the reason he did this was because the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:09:20
12:09:42
62 1
meeting was scheduled to start at 10.30 am, you have to get a member to sign
2
you into the public gallery, which is behind the chamber and there is limited
3
seating, so if you don't get there early, you don't get a seat. And he says
4
that the meeting would have commenced at 11 am at the latest, he will say that
5
he stayed with the meeting for the entire time. The Manager's report was the
6
first matter voted on and I wonder if we can have page 3720?
7 8
Now that is a page of the minutes of the meeting produced by the council,
9
Mr. O'Herlihy, and on the previous page it says that it was agreed that the
12:10:27 10
Manager's report and the amendments to the draft plan and the motions were to
11
be discussed together, but voted on separately. And then at page 490, there,
12
you see it says "Following discussion to which Councillors Lydon, Hand, Gordon,
13
Fitzgerald, Dillon-Byrne, Breathnach, Smith, Lohan, Gilmore, O'Callaghan, C
14
Breathnach, Barrett, Dockrell, Coffey, Mitchell, Butler, Cass, Marren, Higgins,
12:10:54 15
contributed, the Manager replied to queries raised by the members" so I'm not
16
sure quite how many that is, but its perhaps about 15 different councillors got
17
up and spoke to the motion on one side or the other, and it was then proposed
18
by Councillor Lydon and seconded by Councillor McGrath that the Manager's
19
report recommended and shown therein be adopted, it was put to a vote and the
12:11:19 20
motion was lost.
21 22
And Mr. Lynn will say that he was present for all of that. And Mr. Lynn will
23
say that he had to be present for all of that, because as the point man, as it
24
were, for Monarch Properties there was no question of anybody else being at
12:11:40 25
that meeting and that he could co not leave the meeting and if anybody had a
26
point they wanted to ask him about the development, he had to be there to
27
answer it and he had to be there to monitor developments and he says that he
28
did not leave that meeting at all until the entire meeting ended. Do you have
29
any comment to make on that?
12:12:00 30
A.
That's not my recollection. I'm not suggesting that he wouldn't have been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:12:04
12:12:43
63 1
there for part of the meeting, but he was certainly in the Royal Dublin Hotel
2
with me.
3
Q. 351
Now I wonder could we refer to page 588? I want to refer you to something
4
Mr. Dunlop has said, now this relates to Mr. Lynn's involvement, so I would
5
just like you to have a look at this Mr. O'Herlihy, at question 58 there, there
6
was talk of a motion and they are trying to fish for the date that that motion
7
took place --
8 9 12:12:54 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 352
Is this Mr. Dunlop's evidence?
It's Mr. Dunlop. The answer to 58 he says, three lines down "Remember that a
11
lot of the motions fell, or were withdrawn on the basis that the case could not
12
be made, or that people did the figures in the room and said, withdraw that
13
immediately because its not going to run" and Mr. Dunlop was asked were you
14
present on those occasions he said I would have been present, yes. Was
12:13:18 15
Mr. Lynn present and the answer is "Always, always present. Not Phil Reilly,
16
not always, but Richard Lynn, always" he is then asked who would make a
17
decision that a particular motion should be withdrawn? And the answer is "I
18
remember on one particular occasion Richard Lynn signalling Don Lydon to come
19
out of the chamber after he had made a disastrous speech in relation to why you
12:13:41 20
this was required, and not required and he came back in and withdrew.
21
Question: Withdrew the motion? Answer: The motion." and then there is some
22
debate as to when that motion actually took place, but if you go forward to
23
page 596, now you see just below short discussion off the record Mr. O'Herlihy?
24 12:14:07 25
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 353
Mr. Gallagher for the Tribunal said "What year is that, it looks like December
26
is it? It is the special meeting of 27 May 1992? Answer: Yes, that could be
27
one of them. A special meeting of the councillors, in other words a
28
Development Plan meeting. Question: It was a Development Plan meeting.
29
Question yes. Answer: Yes. Question: Councillor Mitchell it say here, she
12:14:32 30
had no interest in the lands. The Manager reading to the words, to propose Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:14:33
12:14:51
64 1
amendments where in etcetera: Then question 100 "Lydon withdrew the motion
2
Answer: That motion Question: Having spoken outside the chamber with Richard
3
Lynn having been called out of the chamber by Richard Lynn, is that correct
4
Answer: Yes."
5 6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: Q. 354
What page is that?
Page 600 Chairman. Sorry Chairman I didn't go consecutively there, question 100 on page 600 up on the screen.
9 12:15:04 10
And at question -- in question 102 Mr. Dunlop says "I have to admit that's its
11
earlier than I would have anticipated, it is earlier in 1992 than I would have
12
anticipated it, but I do vividly recollect and I have on a number occasions
13
mentioned the fact that a compromise motion was proposed by Sean Barrett, so
14
that if that was the day that the motion was proposed that is it. Question:
12:15:32 15
The motion that was withdrawn was one proposed by Councillor Lydon, seconded by
16
Councillor Hand and it proposed that the lands at Cherrywood be rezoned
17
residential within a density not exceeding an average of 12 houses per hectare
18
with the parks taken into account, or in any event to be provided for, not more
19
than 956 housing units. It is a lengthy motion. Is that the motion that you
12:15:53 20
21
were referring? It is referred to at page 492 of the minutes of Dublin County Council, of 27 May of 1992".
22 23
So we see there Mr. O'Herlihy, that Mr. Dunlop is identifying the motion which
24
was withdrawn by Mr. Lydon as the one that occurred on the 27th of May of 1992
12:16:24 25
and he refers to a confab held between Mr. Lydon and Mr. Lynn, in relation to
26
that, I think Mr. Lynn might take some issue with the characterisation of that
27
by Mr. Dunlop, but that shows that Mr. Lynn was available to the councillors at
28
the time when that motion was withdrawn.
29 12:16:46 30
MR. O'HIGGINS: Just to interject for a moment on behalf of the witness, this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:16:49
12:17:09
65 1
is of course potentially legitimate material to put to Mr. O'Herlihy, but
2
Mr. O'Herlihy has been circulated with none of the material which is now being
3
put to him, nor has it ever been suggested, in any of the material circulated
4
to Mr. O'Herlihy that Mr. Lynn would say of the things which are now being put
5
by Mr. Sanfey so Mr. O'Herlihy, so that to the extent that he is being asked to
6
comment on evidence given it appears several years ago, by Mr. Dunlop, which he
7
hasn't had an opportunity to consider or address, he may have very reasonable
8
difficulties in recalling this, on the hoof, so to speak, I'd just like to make
9
it clear, as I say none of this material has been circulated nor has any
12:17:35 10
statement suggesting that this approach would be taken by Mr. Lynn being
11
circulated to him either.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
whether, having heard your account as read from the transcript, does he in
12:17:53 15
Well I suppose Mr. Sanfey all you can really put to O'Herlihy is
anyway change the evidence or wish to change the evidence or consider the
16
evidence, that he has given, in relation to the fact that the conversation he
17
says the fact that the conversation took place. This is Mr -- this, at the end
18
of the day this is Mr. Dunlop's account as to what he recalls, I mean its not
19
something that Mr, that Mr. O'Herlihy has any direct knowledge of.
12:18:25 20
Q. 355
Precisely Chairman, you are absolutely right, I wasn't expecting Mr. O'Herlihy
21
to have a view on whether what Mr. Dunlop said was true or untrue, I didn't
22
want to be subject to the criticism that I didn't put to Mr. O'Herlihy that
23
there is evidence to suggest, from other parties, that Mr. Lynn was in the
24
chamber until after the vote took place, because as we know from the minutes
12:18:47 25
Mr. Lydon's motion was withdrawn after the vote on the Manager's report.
26 27
So I literally wanted to just put that to him, you are quite right, all I
28
really wanted to say to Mr. O'Herlihy was not to comment on what Mr. Dunlop
29
said, but just to say does that give him any reason to suspect his recollection
12:19:07 30
may not be correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:19:08
12:19:28
66 1
A.
My recollection of the conversation is absolutely correct. The only thing at
2
issue from what you have raised would be the timing, the time, my time and the,
3
that I have put forward at around 12.30 might be wrong, that's all I can say,
4
but the conversation took place.
5
Q. 356
Well Mr. O'Herlihy, isn't it true that the conversation with Mr. Lynn in the
6
way that you described it in your interview took place while you were waiting
7
for the vote?
8
A.
Yeah, that's my recollection.
9
Q. 357
Now if Mr. Dunlop is correct, and once again you can't have a view on this, but
12:19:47 10
let's say assume for a moment he is correct, Mr. Lynn is put in the gallery of
11
the chamber, after the vote has been taken and in fact when Mr. Lydon, Senator
12
Lydon was considering whether or not to persevere with his motion?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 358
So the time something fairly crucial from Mr. Lynn's point of view isn't it?
A.
Well I think its a red herring to be honest. Because it seems to me that the
12:20:05 15
16
point at issue is, did the conversation take place? That's far more important
17
than the time in which the conversation took place. If I am completely wrong
18
in my timing, that doesn't mean the conversation didn't take place, it simply
19
took place at a later time than I have indicated at 12.30, but the conversation
12:20:30 20
21
took place. Q. 359
But Mr. O'Herlihy you have said and you have had a chance to think about it,
22
that the conversation took place at 12.30 while you were waiting for the vote
23
to come through?
24 12:20:41 25
A.
That's right that's my understanding.
Q. 360
And in fact it was asked in a that context, how do you think the vote is going
26
to go?
27
A.
That's right.
28
Q. 361
So its not just a matter of timing is it, if this evidence from other people
29 12:20:53 30
tends to suggest that Mr. Lynn, was in fact in the chamber until long after the vote was taken, in fact when Senator Lydon's motion was considering then you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:20:59
12:21:13
67 1 2
are quite wrong aren't you? A.
I'm not wrong in what I am saying, I am wrong in my timing if everybody else
3
can say he was there until 2 o'clock, then the conversation took place after 2
4
o'clock, but it took place. And I'm not going to yield on that, it took place.
5
Q. 362
I appreciate that Mr. O'Herlihy, but you would be wrong in saying that it took
6
place at 12.30. You would be wrong in placing it in the context of a
7
discussion of waiting the vote?
8
A.
Yeah that's right.
9
Q. 363
And wondering how it was going to go, isn't that right?
A.
Obviously if the other indication of time is correct, I'm wrong in that.
11
Q. 364
Right, right.
12
A.
Yeah but I'm not wrong, you see the material point is the conversation took
12:21:26 10
13 14
place. Q. 365
12:21:43 15
Yes but I mean you have couched that conversation in a context where you were waiting for the vote to come through?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 366
And you are asking Richard Lynn, how do you think its going go? And you get
18 19 12:21:53 20
this very cynical response from Mr. Lynn. A.
Yeah and that's my understanding.
Q. 367
But if that conversation took place at 2 o'clock, when you knew the vote, it
21
couldn't have happened in that way is that right?
22
A.
That's true, yeah.
23
Q. 368
Now just to finish this, Mr. Lynn will say that he remained, for all of the
24 12:22:13 25
motions, as you know there were a number of motions and all of them were voted on and so on, and that Mr. Lynn, as is his normal practice, waited in the hall
26
way, thanking members for their support, in fact he specifically remembers
27
shaking hands with Mr. Sean Barrett, on the footpath outside, because Mr. Lynn
28
and Mr. Barrett were then approached by RTE to do an interview and they agreed
29
do the interview and it was switched to the Fine Gael room, because the noise
12:22:44 30
outside made interviewing impossible. And Mr. Lynn duly did that interview and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:22:49
12:23:01
68 1
in fact we have a tape of it, if you want to see it --
2 3
MS. DILLON:
4
heading back into the territory of people producing evidence or documentation
5
or information to the Tribunal which has not been provided before today so we
6
haven't been in a position to circulate it to Mr. O'Herlihy, or indeed to
7
anybody else, we are unaware of any suggestion of an interview with anybody for
8
any purpose, at any particular date or time and in fairness to Mr. O'Herlihy
9
and indeed anybody else, including Mr. Lydon who might be affected by this
12:23:23 10
Sorry before question is finally put to Mr. O'Herlihy, we are
before any further reference can be made the matter will have to be circulated.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
tape, or viewing of the tape, to go into evidence and to be referred to in
14
cross-examination of witnesses you will have to submit it to the Tribunal and
12:23:44 15
If you want the Tribunal to consider permitting the content of the
if the Tribunal believe it appropriate to do so, it will then be circulated.
16
If necessary Mr. O'Herlihy can be recalled to deal with anything that might
17
arise as a result of the tape, but what you can't do is refer to a tape which
18
nobody has seen but yourself.
19
Q. 369
12:24:08 20
Well Chairman, I will be glad to turnover the tape, but absolutely nothing turns on it.
21 22 23 24 12:24:19 25
CHAIRMAN: Q. 370
Well that's fine.
I am not going to refer to the content of the tape or anything like that, I simply want to establish that an interview did take place, I have no reason to believe that Mr. O'Herlihy will gain say that, or have any opinion on it in
26
anyway, if he did or wanted to see the tape there is no difficulty in
27
circulating the tape.
28 29 12:24:32 30
CHAIRMAN:
We would be anxious to see the tape, if its going to be referred to
in evidence because its been, if you like opened by you on the basis that it in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:24:40
12:25:04
69 1
some way supports your client's case, that he was in attendance until a certain
2
time or until the conclusion of the meeting or whatever, so whatever --
3
whatever evidential value it has, obviously we would have to have it, if its
4
appropriate to do so, to have it circulated.
5 6
Q. 371
Chairman we have no difficulty what so ever in making the tape available, I think you may well conclude that it doesn't have much evidential --
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
All right well then its of no relevance to your cross-examination
9
of Mr. O'Herlihy.
12:25:20 10
11
MR. O'HIGGINS: Chairman on behalf of Mr. O'Herlihy here could I just say for a
12
moment while Mr. O'Herlihy is quite happy I think to answer any of the
13
questions which are put to him now, I am slightly concerned that there may be
14
material which I was meant to have received and haven't. Now I am not sure
12:25:34 15
because certainly I am in position possession of many statements by Mr. Lynn,
16
but none which even makes reference to the question of a meeting, or the
17
absence of a meeting, between Mr. Lynn and Mr. O'Herlihy, I am just somewhat
18
concerned before I go on, whether through my inadvertence or anyone else's,
19
that there has been a failure to provide me with documents in which Mr. Lynn
12:26:04 20
21
gives some alternative account of what was meant to have happened on the 27th of May.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
24
Mr. Lynn, we do not have any further statement from Mr. Lynn detailing,
12:26:19 25
26
No my friend Mr. O'Higgins has all of the documentation from
following his receipt of Mr. O'Herlihy's statement, detailing any further material or information in relation to that matter.
27 28
MR. O'HIGGINS: I am grateful sir, because what does concern me is and I note
29
this and I don't make any criticism in doing so, that it was indicated in the
12:26:36 30
opening of the Module, at which time I hadn't looked at all the documents that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:26:43
12:27:03
70 1
Mr. Lynn denied the conversation with Mr. O'Herlihy, but I have to say that
2
none of the materials with which I have been circulated, even includes a denial
3
of the fact of the conversation, and I ask there for no reason other than if
4
there is some document I don't have I would be anxious to have it and if there
5
isn't then I don't press the matter any further.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Where did we get the information.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
I understand it was indicated in telephone conversation by the
12:27:12 10
solicitors, with solicitor for the Tribunal, that Mr. Lynn would be denying
11
that the conversation took place, but the Tribunal has no statement from
12
Mr. Lynn detailing his version of the meeting, or any of the other material
13
that Mr. Sanfey had indicated, or mentioned earlier.
14 12:27:30 15
MR. O'HIGGINS: I am grateful for that, it puts matters in context, I was just
16
somewhat concerned that I was, that these matters are coming out of the blue
17
then from everyone's point of view.
18
Q. 372
19
Chairman can I just say too there appears to have been one private session interview with Mr. Lynn, after 27 of May 1992, as I understand it no reference
12:27:50 20
was made to Mr. O'Herlihy's reference to that conversation to Mr. Lynn, in that
21
private interview.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: Q. 373
I know that yes.
So if Mr. Lynn didn't refer to it in that interview he can't be criticised.
12:28:02 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
statement, we now know that it was said by your solicitor to the Tribunal's
28
solicitor, that's how it was stated in that way in the opening time opening by
29
Ms. Dillon, but there is no mystery now, there is no mystery as to why Mr. Lynn
12:28:21 30
There is no criticism of him not dealing with it in a formal
didn't make a further statement. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:28:25
12:28:45
71 1
Q. 374
Mr. O'Herlihy, to wrap it all up, you will understand that Mr. Lynn will say
2
that he was at the County Council meeting for the whole of it, that he didn't
3
leave the gallery, or the chamber and that in fact he didn't go to the Royal
4
Dublin Hotel until after he had done the interview and that only for a sandwich
5
on his own. I take it you say that that cannot be the case?
6
A.
That is not my recollection.
7
Q. 375
Can I ask you something about the conversation itself, just a few questions I
8
want to ask you about it, Mr. Dominic Glennane and Mr. Noel Murray are both
9
also my clients and each of them will say that they remember you being in the
12:29:14 10
Royal Dublin Hotel, but that they don't remember Mr. Lynn being there and in
11
fact would have been, wouldn't have expected him to be there because his place
12
was down in the chamber, do you recall Mr. Glennane Mr. Murray being there?
13
A.
14 12:29:36 15
I recall Mr. Murray, in a coming and going situation, but I don't remember Mr. Glennane.
Q. 376
Yes. Could we have a look at page 36, 8014? Mr. O'Herlihy you were asked at
16
the top of the page there, was anybody else present when you were having this
17
conversation the answer was "I would have thought, I don't know. I mean its
18
possible that Noel Murray was present but the conversation if I remember
19
correctly we were standing at the bar, and it was probably a private
12:30:07 20
conversation and I would think that -- I can't, I don't know. We were not the
21
only people there, but I think the conversation was maybe Noel Murray was
22
there, I don't know honestly. I suspect not. But I don't know, I mean we
23
would have been in a little island talking to each other" do you have any
24
position today as to whether Noel Murray was there?
12:30:27 25
A.
26 27
conversation. Noel Murray was certainly in the hotel. Q. 377
28 29 12:30:46 30
In terms of the conversation, the conversation would have been a private
But you seem unsure during the course of that answer as to whether Noel Murray was party to the conversation with Mr. Lynn?
A.
No to my knowledge he wouldn't have been party to the conversation but he would have been thereabouts, you know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:30:48
12:31:02
72 1
Q. 378
But you were less sure in 2000, you said we were not the only people there but
2
I think the conversation was, maybe Noel Murray was there, I don't know
3
honestly.
4
A.
I'll have to stick to that then won't I. I don't know honestly but my
5
recollection, such as it is now is that he was certainly not part of the
6
conversation but he was there.
7
Q. 379
8 9
as this? A.
12:31:19 10
11
Would you not remember him being part of such a momentous conversation as such
That's exactly the point. The fact that I don't remember him being part of the conversation suggests to me that he wasn't part of the conversation.
Q. 380
12
But you seemed less sure when you were in private interview with the Tribunal in July 2000?
13
A.
Well I don't know. I can't answer that.
14
Q. 381
I mean wouldn't it, when you were told this by Mr. Lynn, if Mr. Murray was
12:31:39 15
16
present, one assumes you would turn to Mr. Murray and say, Noel did you -A.
I think the difficulty I have in a situation like that is I am attempting to be
17
as honest as I can and you know to make declamitary comments, about people
18
being there, or not being there, is not my normal style for a start, certainly
19
in terms of trying to be careful you can actually do yourself a certain amount
12:32:03 20
21
of damage by suggesting that you are unsure. I am sure of only the basic fact. Q. 382
22
All right. Could I ask you to have a look at page 8006, you see that Mr. O'Herlihy?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 383
Now this is when you asked Mr. Lynn about the project and he said "merit
12:32:33 25
doesn't come into it, the quality of the project has nothing to do with it", he
26
then said "you cannot get through a planning application or material
27
contravention in Dublin County Council unless you buy it" and you said "what do
28
you mean buy" it he said "planning permissions and material contraventions were
29
worth 50,000 a year in the back pocket of councillors in the Dublin County
12:32:54 30
Councillors who play ball with developers". Is that your best recollection of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:32:57
12:33:06
73 1
what he said?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 384
Do you stand over that today as your recollection?
4
A.
I, absolutely -- because as I said to the Tribunal earlier, I had no
5
involvement whatever with planning applications or construction industry or
6
whatever, and that to me was such an extraordinary comment that it just stuck
7
in my mind.
8
Q. 385
9 12:33:25 10
11
permission nor a material contravention? A.
I'm not aware of that.
Q. 386
Well you must be aware, Mr. O'Herlihy, what was happening was a review of the
12 13
You know that what was afoot that day was neither an application for planning
development plan, it wasn't an application for planning permission? A.
14
Well I can't remember that either, but I will tell you this much, it was material as far as the go ahead for Cherrywood was concerned, it was important
12:33:44 15
from that point of view for Monarch. The technical detail, I can't answer at
16
this stage.
17
Q. 387
But you mentioned twice planning application, material contravention?
18
A.
That is what was said to me. I am not saying that this was a planning
19
application or material contravention. What was said to me is that, that a
12:34:04 20
material contravention or a planning application could not go through on its
21
merits, it had to be bought, and that 50,000 a year was the calculation that
22
was made by the councillors if they played ball with the developers. Now how
23
would I make up a statement like that, would you ask me? How could I possibly
24
make up a statement like that when I have no idea in the wide world what the
12:34:28 25
dynamics of the industry was, or the whole question of getting planning
26 27
permission. Q. 388
Well I suppose what I am trying to find out Mr. O'Herlihy, is whether those
28
were the exact words said or whether it's a paraphrase? Because my client, who
29
is intimately familiar with the mechanics of planning applications and
12:34:46 30
development plans and so on, can't understand why it's alleged he would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:34:51
12:35:07
74 1
referred to a planning applications at all in the context of a review of the
2
development plan. Why talk about oranges when he was concerned with apples?
3
A.
I don't know.
4
Q. 389
You may well be aware from your own public knowledge that planning permissions
5
are not decided by councillors, they are decided by the officials of the low
6
authority, and that therefore the question of paying money to councillors in
7
respect of planning permissions doesn't arise; so why would Mr. Lynn who would
8
know that, even if you didn't, refer to planning applications, putting 50,000 a
9
year in councillors pockets.
12:35:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
can't really comment on.
13
A.
But isn't that -- obviously that's something that Mr. O'Herlihy
Yeah.
14 12:35:38 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
It's a matter which obviously your client can give in evidence in
support of his contention that he couldn't have said anything of this nature. Q. 390
Can I ask you this then Mr. O'Herlihy, in that context Mr. Lynn will say that
18
he, even if it were true he wouldn't have said that; so are you standing over
19
the exact words that you have used here?
12:35:59 20
A.
I am standing over these words, yeah.
21
Q. 391
Planning applications and material contraventions?
22
A.
That's what I was told. You see, going back to the point that I made earlier,
23
he could have been talking at that particular point about planning applications
24
and material contraventions in a much broader context than the Monarch property
12:36:21 25
26
context, I don't know, you will have to ask him that. Q. 392
At page 8008, you see that middle paragraph there, and a note of caution
27
entered what you were telling Mr. Gallagher at this point and you said, you
28
were being asked Mr. Lydon you said "I have to be very careful here now because
29
everything I am talking about anecdotal, there is no material or tangible
12:36:55 30
evidence of anything like this in my relation with Monarch. This was a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:36:58
12:37:13
75 1
conversation in a bar, in a bar of a hotel and it is entirely anecdotal. I
2
don't have any evidence of any sort to back it up" and you return to that topic
3
two pages later, at 8010.
4 5
You see at the bottom of the page there you are talking about the conversation
6
and you say the "The conversation was entirely anecdotal in the sense that it
7
could have been a fellow boasting in a bar, for all I know. There was no
8
evidence what so ever in my dealings with Monarch at any stage that suggested
9
that this was part and parcel of the way that they did business." Now your
12:37:36 10
reference there to "it could have been a fellow boasting in a bar", can I ask
11 12
you Mr. O'Herlihy, did you take this conversation seriously? A.
I did. You see, as I said to you earlier, I have no experience, I have had
13
since no experience and up to then no experience what so ever of that
14
particular industry. If a person says that to me and he says it with authority
12:37:58 15
I take it to be a fact, or I take it to be, you know, but I did make the point
16
that it could have been a reaction to the fact that I was naive, it could have
17
been an exaggeration. I have no evidence and this wasn't caution, this was
18
realism. I have no evidence whatsoever to indicate that this was a fact, and
19
therefore I entered that as caveat on the basis of being fair and being honest.
12:38:23 20
Q. 393
All right, well it's very fair of to you say that, but did you ever afterwards,
21
immediately afterwards or in the week afterwards, write down the contents of
22
your conversation?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 394
You didn't take a note of it?
A.
No.
Q. 395
Even to fix it in your own mind for your own purposes not to show to anyone
12:38:38 25
26 27 28
else, you didn't write it down? A.
29 12:38:50 30
No, it fixed in my own mind because it was such an extraordinary conversation, but I didn't write it down.
Q. 396
Did you ever discuss it with anyone? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:38:52
12:39:03
76 1
A.
2
I may have, I probably did make a reference to it along the lines somewhere, you know, about the council and that.
3
Q. 397
To whom?
4
A.
I don't know, I can't remember.
5
Q. 398
Well when Mr. Lynn said it to you, did you say it to Dominic Glennane or Noel
6
Murray, "can this be true, you will never guess what Richard has just told me",
7
something of that nature?
8
A.
I have no recollection of that.
9
Q. 399
By your own time line and given that you may have reservations about your own
12:39:25 10
time line, this conversation would have taken place waiting for the vote of
11
which you have informed at half 12?
12
A.
That's what I thought.
13
Q. 400
You think you may have had a cup of coffee for about another hour after that.
14
In the hour that you spent, did you discuss it any further with Mr. Lynn or
12:39:39 15
Mr. Murray or Mr. Glennane or anyone else, you had just been told something
16
that according to your evidence this morning was staggering, you were gob
17
smacked by it, and you were disgusted by it, now given that you were disgusted
18
by it, did you not mention it to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Murray?
19
A.
12:40:02 20
No, because my interpretation of the conversation was that it was a private conversation, at that time and I didn't discuss it with anyone, I wasn't going
21
to start raising a hair at that particular point in time. It didn't occur to
22
me to say to anybody else at that time.
23
Q. 401
24
involvement with Monarch was at an end, you could have been retained on an
12:40:25 25
26
ongoing basis? A.
27 28
I'd say there wasn't a slightest prospect of that, I would be a realist about these things.
Q. 402
29 12:40:35 30
At that stage is it not fair to say that you weren't aware that that your
You thought from that day on you wouldn't have any more association with Monarch?
A.
Yeah, I mean I was specifically appointed for a particular project and the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:40:41
12:40:57
77 1
project finished with that vote, that was the end of my involvement, it was
2
never understood by me, nor never implied by Monarch that I was to continue or
3
anything like that, so I assumed that was the end it, and I was right, it was
4
the end of it.
5
Q. 403
You then, up to that day had been associated with the PR for a project, which
6
if what Mr. Lynn told you was true, involved whole sale bribery and corruption,
7
did that concern you from the point of view of your own personal reputation?
8
A.
9
I think you're ignoring one fact, or one point I made, I have no idea whether it was true or not. And if I was to exercise my judgement on the basis of the
12:41:26 10
eight months I spent with Monarch as I said it was entirely out of character, I
11
would not have been party to something that was, if there was a sniff of
12
corruption in it, I wouldn't have been part it have under any circumstances,
13
there was no such sniff, it was a very legitimate campaign. So when that was
14
said to me, I said to myself okay, as I said in the thing that was somebody
12:41:50 15
boasting, was it somebody taking the Mickey out of me, was it somebody
16
reflecting on the fact that I was such an innocent, I don't know, I never knew
17
whether it was true or not and certainly, like the whole campaign as far as I
18
was concerned, was over at that stage anyway.
19
Q. 404
12:42:07 20
21
You didn't know whether it was true, but I asked you a few minutes ago did you take the conversation seriously and you said, absolutely?
A.
I did because I would have assumed that this was a person talking from the
22
basis of understanding the dynamics of the industry, which I did not and
23
therefore in that sense I took it to be true.
24
Q. 405
12:42:28 25
You took it to be true. So you have the project leader, the person with whom you have worked most closely, telling you that this is true, telling you this
26
and you take it that it is true and yet you never mention it to Mr. Glennane,
27
you never mention to Mr. Murray, you don't discuss with anybody else, you don't
28
write it down, can I ask you did you raise it with Monarch, with the board of
29
directors?
12:42:46 30
A.
I didn't, I had no further contact with Monarch, as far as I recall after that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:42:53
12:43:03
78 1
Q. 406
Did you take up with Fine Gael?
2
A.
No, why would I take it up with Fine Gael?
3
Q. 407
Would it not have been a matter of great interest to Fine Gael the matter that
4 5
there is rampant bribery in Dublin County Council? A.
I wasn't involved with Fine Gael in those days if I recall I think my
6
relationship had finished I don't know I can't remember, I didn't anyway is the
7
answer.
8
Q. 408
9
A.
No I did not.
Q. 409
Did you take any kind of advice about it?
A.
No I didn't, because I didn't know whether it was facts all or not as I said to
12:43:15 10
11 12
Did you speak to your solicitor about it?
you earlier on.
13
Q. 410
Did you consider reporting to the Gardai?
14
A.
No I did not.
Q. 411
So despite the fact that you took the conversation seriously and assumed that
12:43:26 15
16
Mr. Lynn was telling you, what he believed to be true, you didn't write it
17
down?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 412
You didn't see a solicitor, you didn't say it to the other representatives of
12:43:39 20
Monarch who were present, you didn't follow it up with Monarch, you didn't say
21
it to the party, with whom you had an association and because of which
22
association you got involved in the project in the first place, and you didn't
23
consider reporting to the Gardai?
24
A.
12:44:00 25
Because I had no evidence whatsoever. I mean if you want to go to the Gardai, you have to go with more than a conversation in a bar, you have to go on the
26
basis of the fact that I can tell you categorically A B C D and E, there was no
27
evidence whatsoever that was true, it may be true, but there was no evidence
28
therefore I wasn't going to go and run to, from Billy to Jack and tell them
29
something, a conversation in which I couldn't say was true or not.
12:44:21 30
Q. 413
Were you not concerned that if all this came out at a later stage it would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:44:25
12:44:38
79 1 2
damage your reputation? A.
Well what you are saying is damaging my reputation now. In fact the reality is
3
that if never dawned on me that this thing would actually get to a Tribunal,
4
you know. That wouldn't be the reason I wouldn't say it, the reason I didn't
5
say it was that there was no evidence.
6
Q. 414
Okay. Can I have a look at page 8007? Now Mr. O'Herlihy this is where you
7
refer to Mr. Lynn telling you that, what do is you pick off a lead councillor
8
in each of the parties and you discuss the matter with them and you get an
9
estimation from him as to the amount of money and the kind of money involved
12:45:12 10
that would be required to actually buy the votes, and you give that money to
11
the lead councillor and he does everything after that. Now do I understand you
12
to come back from this morning, from asserting that Mr. Lynn said you pick a
13
lead councillor in each of the parties, am I wrong in that?
14 12:45:32 15
A.
As against what.
Q. 415
Did I understand to you suggest this morning that in fact it might be only one
16 17
lead councillor that would be picked? A.
I said there to John Gallagher, that it was each of the parties, but only one
18
name was mentioned so I did make the supposition that that person could be
19
working for all the parties but that I do not know.
12:45:54 20
Q. 416
Yes but Mr. Gallagher understandably, asked you about why you didn't follow
21
that up, if you have a look at page 36, 8014, now if you see halfway down, you
22
are asked was any other politician mentioned that you can recall? Answer "No
23
well I don't know. I mean the natural inquisitive question for me would have
24
tonne to say well who was the person in Fine Gael and who was the person in the
12:46:31 25
Labour Party, but I never asked that question, I don't know why I didn't ask
26
the question. Now do you have any view today as to why you didn't ask that
27
question?
28
A.
29 12:46:47 30
No I haven't, it could well be that we were interrupted, I don't know. I have no idea.
Q. 417
Well was it not a question crying out to be asked? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:46:51
12:47:08
80 1
A.
It certainly would logically suggest, it should be asked, but therefore there
2
must be a logical reason why it wasn't asked and it could be because we were
3
interrupted and that was the end it, I don't know. I actually do not know.
4
Q. 418
5
I think your background Mr. O'Herlihy is as an investigative reporter isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 419
And I think we know that one of your greatest attributes as a broadcaster is
8
your ability to ask the question that the audience wants asked, if there had
9
been an audience or a fly on the wall there, would they not have been screaming
12:47:23 10
who is the Fine Gael guy, who is the Labour guy, ask, but you didn't ask?
11
A.
I didn't ask.
12
Q. 420
You are a dyed in the wool Fine Gael person, whether or not you have a formal
13
association with the party, I don't think I am mis-describing you when I say
14
that, would you not at least have been dying to know who the Fine Gael person
12:47:43 15
16
was? A.
I can't -- I honestly can't answer the question, I don't know. I don't know
17
why I didn't ask the question, there must have been a logical reason but I
18
can't remember what it might have been, I don't know.
19 12:48:28 20
Q. 421
All right. Now could I have a look at that, page 8016, now, sorry, if I just look at the last question on page 8016, to your best recollection that was Don
21
Lydon who was the person to whom the hundred thousand was to be paid? Answer
22
Yes to the best of my recollection. My understanding was that he didn't get
23
the 100,000 he got the 100,000 to distribute, how much he got of it I have no
24
idea, but the idea was that he would actually ensure that the votes -- that the
12:48:48 25
Fianna Fail votes would be -- although there might have been other votes as
26
well, but that he would be able to deliver a certain number of votes on that
27
and that he would pay them he would regard as the appropriate fee, as it were,
28
for the vote and that what was left over, he would keep himself. That was the
29
function of the man who was point, as it were, and the way they explained it to
12:49:10 30
me was that there was usually on from each party and that that was the way it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:49:11
12:49:35
81 1
usually worked. And then you go on to say, now I'm not saying that was the way
2
it worked for Monarch on this particular project, but what he was explaining to
3
me is that it was a general principle for construction industry people --
4
looking for planning permissions, I assume that should be, sorry that doesn't
5
appear to be on screen.
6 7
Just the second paragraph, Now I am not saying that that was the way it
8
worked... Do you see that?
9 12:49:44 10
A.
Do I yeah.
Q. 422
Now do I understand that to be consistent with the evidence that you gave this
11
morning that effectively you seemed to be rowing back from saying that Mr. Lynn
12
was saying that this would happen, was what had happened on this particular
13
project and saying he may have been talking in a general way?
14 12:50:03 15
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 423
I understood you to say that this morning and that appears to be what you are
16 17
is a saying here? A.
Yeah I think I was making two points. The question was really was raised by me
18
in relation to the specific project, the question of the, the answer in terms
19
of the lead councillor could have been a generic answer in the context and way
12:50:24 20
in which it normally operates.
21
Q. 424
So, so in Mr. Lynn describing how...
22
A.
How the System operates...
23
Q. 425
This payoff may take place he may have been talking...
24
A.
He could have been talking generally, or generically, in that context.
Q. 426
But Ms. Dillon then asked you, did he say he paid a hundred thousand? And your
12:50:42 25
26
answer to that was, yes.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 427
So he was talking directly on the one hand and on on the other...
29
A.
No no, I am only speculating, he said it, I didn't say it. I am telling you
12:50:55 30
what he said and I asked him the question on the hundred thousand and that's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:50:59
12:51:32
82 1 2
the answer I got. What is down in black and white was what I was told. Q. 428
All right. Can I ask you then about the hundred thousand pounds, mention of a
3
figure of hundred thousand spent by Monarch, seems to have been circulating
4
around the time of the Council meeting were you aware of a figure of a hundred
5
thousand pounds which it was suggested Monarch had spent in trying to get this
6
rezoning?
7
A.
I wasn't aware of any figure of any sort.
8
Q. 429
Yes?
9
A.
I wasn't aware of any money of any sort being mentioned, I never heard of that
12:51:47 10
11
figure of a hundred thousand until then. Q. 430
Yes. Ms. Eithne Fitzgerald was asked by Counsel for the Tribunal on Tuesday of
12
last week about a quote attributed to her, in an Irish Times article, now
13
Chairman I don't want to be -- I don't want to disturb Mr. O'Higgins in
14
relation to this, this was the article Ms. Fitzgerald was asked about, its part
12:52:17 15
of the brief and I would like Mr. O'Herlihy to see it, I am not expecting --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
I think he probably has it.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:52:27 20
It's in the brief, the earlier objection related to material we
didn't have, but this is in the brief so no difficulty.
21 22 23 24 12:52:52 25
CHAIRMAN: Q. 431
All right is there a page number for it.
7764. Now you see the bit in the centre Mr. O'Herlihy the bit around the headline quotes, it says "A leading public relations consultant Mr. Bill O'Herlihy is engaged for the campaign as well as architects planners and
26
landscape designers. Monarch have told me that they were spending 100,000
27
pounds to bring pressure to bear on us to rezone their land said Councillor
28
Eithne Fitzgerald, Labour. To put this in context it is more than the
29
nationwide campaign to elect Mary Robinson cost.
12:53:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:53:15
12:53:28
83 1
Now there is a hundred thousand pounds and you in the same paragraph
2
Mr. O'Herlihy, you weren't aware of a general suggestion abroad, that Monarch
3
had spent a hundred thousand pounds?
4
A.
No but I think you are, to use your own analogy, you are confusing apples with
5
oranges. Hiring of public relations consultant and all the various experts
6
that are mentioned there by Mrs. Fitzgerald, costs money, developing a road
7
show costs money, developing a television promotional film costs money, so a
8
hundred thousand wouldn't be out of the ordinary at all, and would have nothing
9
whatsoever to do about which I am talking.
12:53:53 10
11
Q. 432
Yes. So the 100,000 figure wasn't in anyway unusual then?
A.
It could be the promotional figure that they decided was the right figure for
12 13
that particular project. Q. 433
14
Yes. Ms. Fitzgerald, before this Tribunal, said she didn't recall the 100,000 pound figure and didn't think it was anybody in Monarch who had mentioned it
12:54:12 15
to her.
16
A.
Well I hope you are not suggesting it was I said it to her.
17
Q. 434
No I am not, I'm not. But she said and I quote "If you are trying to read into
18
that particular quote that I thought money was being spent to buy councillors,
19
that would not have been something at that time that I would have contemplated
12:54:30 20
was going on, so just for the record Ms. Fitzgerald was distancing herself from
21
any discussion of 100,000 was spent in anyway corruptly, what I am saying to
22
you is that, given that a figure of 100,000 pounds was being bandied about in
23
this article, appearing along side your name, although it's not suggested that
24
you had anything to do with that, is it possible that someone else mentioned
12:55:03 25
this figure to you and that your recollection has become jumbled in some way
26
and that it has become part of another conversation you may have had in
27
relation to this?
28
A.
29 12:55:23 30
I don't remember having a conversation with Monarch in relation to the promotional costs of the campaign at all.
Q. 435
Is it possible that somebody else, whether in Monarch or outside Monarch, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:55:28
12:55:56
84 1
mentioned the figure, in a completely different context?
2
A.
I have no recollection of such conversation.
3
Q. 436
Certainly Monarch were spending monies of that order on the campaign around
4
about that time, is it at all possible that somebody would have mention that
5
had as a figure which represented expenditure to you and it would have got into
6
your head in that way?
7
A.
In the context in which I am talking, no.
8
Q. 437
Right. You will be aware as I have said, that Mr. Lynn not only denies the
9
conversation which you had and says that it couldn't possibly have taken place,
12:56:20 10
and that's most unfortunate because you are somebody for whom he and the other
11
Monarch people have regard, do you have any theory as to why Mr. Lynn who, to
12
use your own words was a nice, decent very professional guy, why he would
13
certainly blurt out to you the details of a scheme to bribe councillors?
14
A.
12:56:50 15
whatever it might have been, I don't know you will have to ask him that
16 17
I have given you a few propositions, maybe in responding to my naivete or
question. Q. 438
My client's position Mr. O'Herlihy is that while they are not suggested in
18
anyway that you are activated by ill will or malice or anything like that, they
19
say that your account of the meeting or the conversation with Mr. Lynn is
12:57:15 20
inherently unbelievable and could not have taken place because Mr. Lynn simply
21 22
was not there? A.
Well my response to that is that it is unbelievable that I would come into a
23
Tribunal, either now or in 2000 and fabricate a story that would damage the
24
reputation of a person for whom I have a lot of respect, it is inconceivable I
12:57:46 25
would do that. And I am simply reporting what was said to me. I do so, I can
26
assure you, with a very heavy heart, I don't want to be in this situation,
27
there is no gain in this for me at all, in fact a lot of the questioning of you
28
in the last couple of minutes have been damaging in my judgement to my
29
reputation, which I think is unfair, because from my perspective I did nothing
12:58:06 30
wrong. I have never been involved in my entire life, in anything to do with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
12:58:12
12:58:31
85 1
financial inducements, or bribery of any sort, I never was part and parcel of
2
any meeting with Monarch or any other client through more than 33 years that
3
had anything to do with something that was either illegal or immoral, so it is
4
unbelievable that I would take a position that would be damaging to people in
5
the way that -- so I reject completely out of hand the notion that this is all
6
fabricated.
7
Q. 439
Well in fairness Mr. O'Herlihy, I never used the word fabricated, I wasn't
8
suggesting it, what I said was it was inherently unbelievable, in fact what I
9
was going put to you next, was the fact, would you -- what way would you go
12:58:52 10
with me on the suggestion that because Mr. Lynn wasn't there and because of
11
your lack of recall of certain details and the fact that you did absolutely
12
nothing afterwards, not even to write down details of the conversation, could
13
it be that you are simply mistaken in your recollection and that the
14
conversation never took place or that it is a miss remembered version of a
12:59:17 15
16
conversation you had with somebody else? A.
No, that would not be my -- I'd have to reject that, the only concession I make
17
to you is maybe my timing is incorrect, that's the only concession I could make
18
to you, that the time of the conversation was different to the time I gave that
19
the conversation took place.
12:59:43 20
21
Q. 440
Thank you Mr. O'Herlihy.
A.
Thank you.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 12:59:50 25
MR O'TUATHAIL: Mr. Chairman before the Tribunal rises, if that's the proposal,
26
Seamus O'Tuathail here I appear for Senator Lydon, I would ask you in lieu of
27
the fact that our client was certainly not present at this conversation, that
28
you would repeat for the benefit of the media, the warning that you issued when
29
you ruled that this evidence, naming my client, would be accepted and opened in
13:00:17 30
this Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:00:17
13:00:34
86 1 2
I do that because of the severe damage that a misrepresentation of this
3
evidence could make in the public mind. Its very important matter, its been
4
followed along. Mr. O'Herlihy has already said that this is pure hearsay, he
5
couldn't swear to it, he hasn't sworn to it and its a remembrance situation, in
6
which I propose to cross examine in the afternoon, so I ask you please to
7
repeat your ruling so that that will be carried with any reports of this
8
morning's proceedings.
9 13:00:51 10
CHAIRMAN:
Well just, I am not quite clear as to what you are referring to,
11
but I mean certainly as far as the Tribunal is concerned this is evidence of a
12
conversation that Mr. O'Herlihy says he had with Mr. Lynn, Mr. Lynn says that
13
conversation didn't take place and I assume Mr. Lydon will contest any
14
suggestion that might arise from Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence, that he, Mr. Lydon
13:01:20 15
did anything inappropriate.
16 17
MR. O TUATHAIL: Sorry Mr. Chairman, finally I am simply asking, this was
18
allowed in on a certain basis, that we were notified in advance that Senator
19
Lydon could be named in this session.
13:01:38 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
22 23
MR. O TUATHAIL: Mr. O'Herlihy objected in evidence to the naming of Senator
24
Lydon, wanted to write down the name, it was simply allowed in on the basis
13:01:47 25
that it may be of assistance in the general running of the Tribunal.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
informed and his legal team had been informed, so its only reason he,
29
Mr. O'Herlihy would have been asked to write down the name would be that if the
13:02:06 30
Well it was allowed in on the basis that Mr. Lydon had been
party to be named had not been informed. But the name has to come out Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:02:12
13:02:19
87 1
obviously and -- all right.
2 3
MR. O TUATHAIL: And the fact that its pure hearsay, that is correct should come
4
out as well and accompany any reports.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Yes but that's, even Mr. O'Herlihy himself said that, he has no
7
direct knowledge.
8 9
MR. O TUATHAIL: That's the point I'm obliged Mr. Chairman.
13:02:28 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right you'll want to cross examine for a short while?
12 13
MR. O TUATHAIL: Certainly yes.
14 13:02:33 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. O'Herlihy you will have to come back at 2.00, I'm afraid. All
right?
17 18 19 13:02:54 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
13:02:56
14:04:07
88 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AFTER LUNCH
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Yes, sir good afternoon Yes, sir I think Mr. O Tuathail.
6 7
THE WITNESS WAS THEN EXAMINED BY MR. O TUATHAIL.
8 9
MR. O TUATHAIL: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Herlihy Seamus O Tuathail is my
14:04:17 10
name and I appear with Mr. Humphreys, for Senator Lydon, I have some questions
11
arising out of your, particularly out of your evidence to Mr. Gallagher in the
12
year 2000.
13 14
Now just to give, I think we agree that these matters or these events if they
14:04:38 15
happened at all, happened in May 1992, isn't that correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 441
You spoke to Mr. Gallagher in what you believe was confidence?
18
A.
I may interrupt, you are a bit off mic would you --
19
Q. 442
Sorry, that's the old RTE experience kicking in there.
14:04:54 20
21
Now thank you very much for that, you spoke with Mr. Gallagher, in confidence
22
in July 2000 and now six years later in this year and this moment, and this
23
morning, for the first time this evidence has come to light, isn't that so. I
24
think you mentioned that you hoped when you were talking to Mr. Gallagher that
14:05:24 25
this matter would never come to light isn't that?
26
A.
That's absolutely correct.
27
Q. 443
Yeah. And you said that, I think, in the context where you were dealing with
28 29 14:05:39 30
the conversation in the bar which is my main concern? A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 444
And you protested valiantly in relation to having to give the evidence and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:05:46
14:06:05
89 1
particularly naming Senator Lydon, that's so?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 445
Yes. Now, just generally a few background questions. You were retained by
4
Monarch Group and your job was to, you campaigned for a period of eight or nine
5
months and you had a threefold objective if I'm correct. You wanted to
6
establish a climate, using public relations techniques in the local community,
7
of support for the Cherrywood project?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 446
And in that sense you say quite honestly that you were probably contracted for
14:06:27 10
this business because of your Fine Gael connections?
11
A.
I'd say that was a big, had a big bearing on it, yeah.
12
Q. 447
Now just going briefly as you can, through your Fine Gael connections, with you
13
have, you mentioned that you worked for 35 years in public relations, what are
14
the Fine Gael connections you are referring to?
14:06:52 15
A.
The Fine Gael connections really go back to the end of my period in current
16
affairs and I was particularly friendly with Ted Neilan, he and I worked on 7
17
days together. And he set up a group of people that subsequently became known
18
as the national handlers, if you remember working with Garrett Fitzgerald,
19
Peter Barry, people like that, and I worked on various campaigns. I was the
14:07:18 20
first paid public relations consultant to work on a political campaign in
21
Ireland, that was the first direct elections to the European Parliament. I
22
worked also on piles of general elections, well a number of general elections
23
and I did the party political broadcasts for them and I ran the press office
24
for a number of campaigns, as a consultant.
14:07:44 25
26
Q. 448
You did that for the Fine Gael party, or for Fine Gael in Government?
A.
Well initially for the Fine Gael party and then for Fine Gael in Government, it
27
alternated, depending on whether they were in or out, most of the time as you
28
know they were out.
29 14:08:03 30
Q. 449
I think the gentleman you mentioned Ted Neilan became a Fine Gael TD for Sligo?
A.
He did, but when I worked with Ted Neilan he was the communications director of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:08:08
14:08:22
90 1 2
Fine Gael. Q. 450
Fine Gael, yes. And what Ministers, over the period, in term terms of your
3
professional public relations involvement, what Ministers or ministerial
4
departments might you have worked for?
5
A.
Well I worked for Peter Barry, I worked for Enda Kenny, I worked for Michael
6
Lowry. I can't remember any others but, you know they took up a lot of my
7
time.
8
Q. 451
I think you mentioned that Mr. Frank Dunlop --
9
A.
Oh, I worked for John Boland, sorry I worked for John Boland and Jim Mitchell.
Q. 452
He was the Minister to for Public service?
A.
Public Service that's right and Jim Mitchell Transport and Power, that's
14:08:52 10
11 12
another.
13
Q. 453
You worked for them as a civil servant or professionally?
14
A.
No no as a paid political, as a public relations consultant.
Q. 454
Yeah. And going on from that then you say in your conversation with
14:09:05 15
16
Mr. Gallagher which is recorded, that you believe in terms of the Monarch
17
retainer that it was principally to make contact with Sean Barrett, would that
18
be correct?
19
A.
14:09:29 20
No that would be overstating it a little bit to be honest. He was a key person in it obviously because they felt that he was leader of opinion in South Dublin
21
and therefore in the Dun Laoghaire constituency area and council area he'd have
22
been immensely important and getting his support for the project was seen
23
initially when I first joined, to be hugely important, but he made it clear he
24
wouldn't support it.
14:09:50 25
26
But it was also to make contact with other party people, in order that the
27
message of Cherrywood would be planted firmly in the minds of everybody in
28
terms of its quality and its merits.
29 14:10:12 30
Q. 455
Yeah. Just referring there, I'm looking at page four internally or page number eight of the Tribunal, the Gallagher conversation, question 22, or answer 22 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:10:22
14:10:38
91 1
rather --
2 3 4
MS. DILLON: Q. 456
7986.
7986 now on that page there, if you look at that Mr. O'Herlihy, you see that
5
clearly, you say in relation to the Monarch project, you say at line 17 "And
6
together we planned" that's Mr. Lynn "Together we planned the media campaign,
7
we planned the community campaigns and we both liaised together in the context
8
of the political campaign per se" and you are asked the question "What did you
9
do as part of the that political campaign? Answer: Well principally I was
14:11:07 10
asked to make contact with Sean Barrett, that was one of the primary objectives
11
because of his status and leadership within the Council or in terms of the
12
influence in the Council."
13 14
So I think, I don't think we are in disagreement that initially you were
14:11:20 15
employed as it were to head hunt Sean Barrett's support for this project, would
16
that be correct?
17
A.
That would have been an imperative all right, yeah.
18
Q. 457
Yeah and how would you define a lead councillor just -- how would you define
19 14:11:42 20
the lead councillor in any Council group, how would you define that person? A.
Well my definition could be entirely wrong, but as, in terms of the
21
conversation that I re told earlier today the definition I would have of it, he
22
would be the main point of contact between the client or the company and the
23
council, and the councillors more accurately.
24
Q. 458
14:12:09 25
and leadership within the council or in terms of the influence in the council,
26 27
Yes. Just in relation to that matter on screen there, because of his status
would that qualify in your description as a lead councillor? A.
I didn't see it in those terms at all, as I interpreted it and I could be wrong
28
about this, as I interpreted it, it had nothing to do with status within the
29
council area, it was a question of his ability to make contact with other
14:12:32 30
members of the council for this particular project at the time, therefore I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:12:35
14:12:48
92 1 2
suppose it included automatically a certain status. Q. 459
3
Yes. And but you wouldn't define him in your sense of what a lead councillor is, as a lead councillor?
4
A.
Sean Barrett.
5
Q. 460
Yes?
6
A.
In the context of his importance within Fine Gael and his importance within
7
Fine Gael in his own constituency I think he was a hugely important person, but
8
not in the way that you are implying.
9
Q. 461
14:13:08 10
But also, when you were talking of Mr. Barrett earlier this morning, you described him I think as a friend?
11
A.
Mm-hmm.
12
Q. 462
So the liaison with Mr. Barrett goes beyond politics?
13
A.
Oh yeah and he made that very clear to me in coming to see the Monarch plans
14
and model, he made it very clear to me that the only reason he was coming was
14:13:25 15
because we were friends, otherwise he wouldn't because he was voting against
16 17
it. Q. 463
18 19 14:13:38 20
And you had worked I think, when Mr. Barrett was a Minister, had you worked for any of his Ministries?
A.
No I don't think so, I don't think I did.
Q. 464
And the overall campaign and I just want to ask you if I can, coming back to
21
the Mick, political campaign, you were liaising in, with Monarch on a political
22
campaign per se?
23
A.
Mm-hmm.
24
Q. 465
Now what did that involve precisely?
A.
As far as I was concerned as I explained earlier T, meant that I made contact
14:13:58 25
26
with councillors. I asked -- I talked to them about the quality of this
27
particular proposal and I asked them to come and view the plans and the model
28
in where ever was appropriate, where ever it was there at the time. It could
29
have been in community areas or it could have been Monarch's headquarters or
14:14:21 30
could have been in the Royal Dublin. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:14:23
14:14:34
93 1
Q. 466
2
And in 1992 there was a series of general elections around that period, were Fine Gael in power at that time?
3
A.
I don't think so, I think they were out of power.
4
Q. 467
Yeah.
5
A.
I think, if I remember.
6
Q. 468
Yeah. And -- but looking at the transcript of Mr. Gallagher, you seem to
7 8
confine your efforts largely, if I'm correct, to Fine Gael councillors. A.
9
quite honest about it, because my contact with them would have been fairly low
14:14:55 10
key or non existent in many cases, so I think what I was trying to do was
11 12
Well I mean I wouldn't have been well known to councillors of any party, to be
accentuate the positive. Q. 469
Yes. And you say that they would have, that people who visited the project or
13
looked at it at your request would have included Fine Gael councillors and a
14
Green -- that you weren't able to name this morning?
14:15:15 15
16
A.
Yeah.
Q. 470
A Green councillor. But you don't know if they included Fianna Fail or Labour,
17 18
I'm looking at page 7 of Mr. Gallagher's? A.
19
I don't know, but you can take it for granted that would be the case. It has to be recognised also that Monarch had a very sophisticated operation
14:15:33 20
themselves in the contact they had with councillors, so in a way I was gilding
21
the lilly I suppose you could say, because already the ability to make contact
22
with the councillors was there.
23
Q. 471
24 14:15:56 25
Yes. And I think the retainer if I'm correct, looking at the invoices that were shown this morning, the retainer was a hundred pounds per hour, was it?
A.
26
Well in what we have seen yeah, I can't remember but it was fairly modest let me tell you.
27
Q. 472
Well was it a minimum of five hours per week?
28
A.
I can't remember, you see I don't have the contract, I don't know.
29
Q. 473
Well you were meeting at least twice a week for a nine month period with
14:16:16 30
Monarch people isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:16:17
14:16:41
94 1
A.
Yeah, yeah.
2
Q. 474
And then if I could come along to the -- I think you now accept that the
3
council meeting, when it finished on, in May of 1992, finished around the 2
4
o'clock mark or a few minutes later in the afternoon?
5
A.
That point has been made strongly.
6
Q. 475
By Mr. Sanfey, and that your timing, I think you conceded that your timing
7
could be out. Your timing is then running between 11 o'clock and at least 2
8
o'clock in the Royal Dublin?
9
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 476
Now do you recollect, did you have lunch in that period?
11
A.
I have no -- I can't remember, I can't remember.
12
Q. 477
Yeah?
13
A.
I would suspect I didn't actually, but I don't know. I could have had a
14:16:59 10
14 14:17:10 15
sandwich, I don't know. Q. 478
Yeah well the detail that you can remember is that when you were asked about
16
drowning your sorrows after the vote was made known, that more than likely
17
there was no drink in the company, it was coffee?
18
A.
Yeah there wasn't any drink.
19
Q. 479
And are you saying that everyone else in that company was not drinking?
A.
I have no idea, I can't remember. I honestly can't remember.
Q. 480
So the other three people, I think you have identified up to three people, some
14:17:31 20
21 22
of them coming and going, could have been drinking?
23
A.
Theoretically yes, but I don't know.
24
Q. 481
And certainly if they started at 11 in the morning they would be well on by two
14:17:52 25
in the afternoon?
26
A.
No there was no question of drinking -- if they drank.
27
Q. 482
Well which is it Mr. O'Herlihy, either you can remember or you can't remember?
28
A.
I'm saying to you, that to imply that people were drinking, from 11 o'clock in
29 14:18:11 30
the morning until two in the afternoon, is completely absurd. Q. 483
But for you to say that you have no recollection and then to say its completely Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:18:15
14:18:31
95 1 2
absurd and rule it out is also absurd? A.
I'll tell you why its absurd, because people were waiting for the count or
3
waiting for the result of the Council vote, so they were not likely to be
4
completely jarred or hammered, by the time the result came in, so it was
5
important.
6
Q. 484
I'm not even suggesting?
7
A.
That's the implication of drinking for three hours.
8
Q. 485
Well I asked you the question were the other people in the company drinking?
9 14:18:41 10
You deny that you were drinking. A.
I'm not --
11
Q. 486
You said you couldn't remember. Now are you changing your evidence?
12
A.
If you want to call it changing my evidence, I can't remember but I doubt very
13 14
much if any of us was drinking. Q. 487
14:18:57 15
16
Well surely the phrase drowning your sorrows relates to drink and not to coffee.
A.
I made that point already this morning that that was simply a figure of speech,
17
obviously you guys who are very literate can tell me I was wrong to say it, but
18
I didn't say it in the context of drink.
19 14:19:15 20
Q. 488
But its a suspicious factor in the very suspicious scenario that's arising in relation to this conversation. Could I come along to, as it were, the meat of
21
the situation here. This is the remembered conversation between yourself and
22
you allege Mr. Lynn and that's denied since this morning. And I'm looking at
23
page 15 internal, page 30 of the transcript and you say here -- I'm looking at
24
line 6 on page 15 internal, he said "A hundred thousand pounds" he mentioned
14:19:56 25
specifically Fianna Fail. Now and then you go ahead on page 9, there seems to
26
be a question missing but that's a matter for the Tribunal, you go ahead anyhow
27
in reply to some other type of question and you say "And well I mean hang on a
28
second now, my recollection is that he mentioned Fianna Fail, I had to be very
29
careful here now because everything I am talking about is anecdotal" we can
14:20:21 30
agree on that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:20:21
14:20:32
96 1
A.
Oh absolutely.
2
Q. 489
Even today its anecdotal "There is no material on tangible evidence or anything
3
like this in my relation with Monarch" is that correct?
4
A.
Absolutely correct.
5
Q. 490
Yeah. This was a conversation in a bar --
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry Mr. O Tuathail what's the page number?
8 9
MS. DILLON:
14:20:44 10
The page reference Mr. O Tuathail are giving me are not the
correct references.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: Q. 491
14
What page.
Page 15 internal, page 30 on top right hand it would be helpful maybe to get it up.
14:20:56 15
16
MS. DILLON:
17
Sorry 8008 that's page 30, is that the page?
18
Q. 492
19
Well page 30 is page 8008 and its not the page in question.
Sorry that the page? Yes I think it is, I'm told it is. Yes it is. And he said a hundred thousand pounds, he mentioned specifically Fianna Fail.
14:21:19 20
21
Now I am simply putting to you Mr. O'Herlihy how tenuous your own evidence is
22
in its own terms. First of all its anecdotal, we have covered that, then you
23
say there is no material or tangible evidence of anything like this in my
24
relation with Monarch. Then you follow that on by saying, this was a
14:21:37 25
conversation in a bar, in the bar of a hotel and it is entirely anecdotal. Now
26
why would you -- what do you imply by saying this was a conversation in a bar,
27
in the bar of a hotel?
28 29 14:22:03 30
A.
Because it was entirely outside the parameters of the normal formal meetings with Monarch, that's what I am implying in it, nothing whatever to do with normal meetings with Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:22:05
14:22:25
97 1
Q. 493
"I don't have any evidence of any sort to back it up" is that correct?
2
A.
That's absolutely correct.
3
Q. 494
Yes. You said, then you go ahead at line 20 there "And he said he had. And if
4
my memory is accurate, and I would in the swear to this" now I want to pause
5
there, you are not swearing to this today either I take it?
6
A.
Well I've given the evidence under oath.
7
Q. 495
No I am asking you, because of the seriousness of the allegation that's been
8
floated around, "If my memory is accurate, and I would not swear to this
9
because I just can't be a hundred per cent certain that I am giving you the
14:22:49 10
right name, but I am almost sure the name was Don Lydon" now you are not
11 12
swearing even today that it was? A.
Well I suppose what that reflects is a kind of, the natural caution of taking a
13
person's character and my recollection is that the name that I have given is
14
the accurate name.
14:23:15 15
16
Q. 496
Yeah because --
A.
But I couched it as I always would in a case like that, I hope to God I'm not
17 18
wrong. Q. 497
19
Well if I go ahead to page 16, we will come back to that recollection because its central to the issues that you have raised here, albeit in terms of
14:23:32 20
hearsay. Just looking at page 16 now, that's page 32 in the right hand top,
21
once the vote was over there my involvement was ended, now I want to emphasise
22
very strongly that I could be inaccurate with the name I have given you --
23 24 14:23:59 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Q. 498
Where is that, wait now --
That's on page 16 internal, page number 32 on the top right, we better get it up.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
Its up.
29 14:24:10 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah okay line 15.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:24:13
14:24:26
98 1
Q. 499
Yeah onwards. "Now I want to emphasise very strongly that I could be
2
inaccurate with the name that I have given you. I am not certain that I am
3
accurate but I could be inaccurate." now --
4 5 6
MS. DILLON: Q. 500
7 8
Sorry I am not certain that I am inaccurate.
Yes, but I could be inaccurate. Yes, thanks Ms. Dillon for that. Now what exactly does that statement mean, given to Mr. Gallagher in July of 2000?
A.
9
It means exactly what it says, in the sense that I am pretty sure that the, that the name I have given the Tribunal and given Mr. Gallagher on that
14:24:53 10
occasion, is the correct name, but having said that, as I say, natural caution
11
is such that I just wanted to be, wanted to just put in that qualification.
12
Q. 501
But that's not a qualification, its a total contradiction, as I read it?
13
A.
Well its not really, it said I am not certain that I am inaccurate, but I could
14 14:25:15 15
be inaccurate, that's a qualification. Q. 502
16
Well now isn't that a 50-50 position, you are trying to have it both ways Mr. O'Herlihy?
17
A.
Listen I am not trying to have it anyway let me tell.
18
Q. 503
You either its true or its false?
19
A.
As far as I am concerned the evidence I have given is true and the name I have
14:25:28 20
given is the name I recollect after 15 years, so it has to be couched in that
21
length of time.
22
Q. 504
And this was, this name was given eight years on?
23
A.
That's right, exactly.
24
Q. 505
And you have already replied this morning that you took no action whatever in
14:25:50 25
relation to that at the time, even though you professed to be shocked by the
26 27
information? A.
Well I certainly was shocked by the information, but I would have been
28
ridiculed I any I had taken any action against an allegation that I couldn't
29
prove one way or the other.
14:26:04 30
Q. 506
Well then if I go down to the following line there, line 21, same page, you are Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:26:11
14:26:31
99 1
referring again to the conversation and you say it was "It was entirely, the
2
conversation was entirely anecdotal in the sense that it could have been a
3
fellow boasting in a bar for all I know" now how vague is that? Whose the
4
fellow?
5
A.
Well you are literally interpreting a figure of speech, the fellow clearly is
6
Richard Lynn, because that's the person I am talking about in that particular
7
thing and the fellow is not somebody who is conjured out of the air, it related
8
to a conversation I had with him.
9 14:26:54 10
Q. 507
And a fellow who boasts in a bar, doesn't he usually have drink on him?
A.
Generally, yeah but I'm not saying he had on this occasion, I can't remember
11 12
one way or the other. Q. 508
Well metaphors are being re translated here. So in terms of your auditors, in
13
terms of three people that were in your company, if that was the entire
14
company, this could have been a sort of a drink sodden episode remembered in
14:27:18 15
16
the tranquility of Dublin Castle eight years later? A.
17 18
Well I have told you already it was not a drink sodden recollection, I think I made that very clear to you.
Q. 509
19
Well you were certainly sober yourself on your own evidence. I want to, I want to go and deal with this though, you then say and I think you answered
14:27:38 20
Mr. Sanfey, you then go ahead to say that of course this didn't relate to the
21
Monarch transaction that was afoot that particular day, is that correct?
22
A.
I don't think so, I don't think that's what I said.
23
Q. 510
Well if I could, if I could go back on some of the replies you gave this
24
morning in cross-examination either to Ms. Dillon or to Mr. Sanfey, when
14:28:07 25
Mr. Sanfey put it to you about material contraventions and planning which
26
wasn't the business afoot in the council offices on that morning, you did say
27
and I'm quoting you here I hope accurately, "There could have been talking
28
about planning an material contraventions in a broader context?"
29 14:28:35 30
A.
Oh yeah that's right I did say that, yes.
Q. 511
So there is two possible contexts now arising on your evidence. One is there Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:28:40
14:29:04
100 1
was a specific context, that this particular motion and vote in which Senator
2
Lydon was involved and 72 other councillors, that a hundred thousand pounds had
3
been spent to secure a positive vote and for some reason this project had
4
failed, isn't that one context? And the other context is that somebody was
5
explaining to you, generally, how the building industry, over the years had
6
bought planning permissions and material contraventions?
7
A.
Yeah correct.
8
Q. 512
Yeah. And you also said in relation to that, you said it twice in your
9
evidence this morning, "I don't know whether they were talking generally or
14:29:24 10
about the particular project" isn't that support the --
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 513
Yeah. So that, as it were, that gives Monarch a clean slate, in relation to
13
the business being transacted in Dublin City Council that morning.
14 14:29:38 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well Mr. O Tuathail I remember Mr. O'Herlihy clearly stating in
16
response to that series of questions, that the -- this conversation with
17
Mr. Lynn arose in the context of him raising the issue specifically in relation
18
to the vote that day and whether, the word or term merit was mentioned, that's
19
the context in which Mr. O'Herlihy explains he raised the issue or at least he
14:30:18 20
raised the issue of vote on that particular day, and then he said Mr. Lynn went
21 22
on to say what he said. Q. 514
23
Well thank you Mr. Chairman, could I then refer the Tribunal and the witness to page 20 internal?
24 14:30:40 25
MS. DILLON:
26
8019 please. Now at line four its coming towards the end of the
conversation with Mr. Gallagher and on line four he says "Now I am not --
27 28 29 14:31:09 30
CHAIRMAN: Q. 515
That should be 8018.
Yes the third line down "Now I am not saying that that was the way it worked for Monarch on this particular project, but what he was explaining to me was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:31:13
14:31:38
101 1
the way it worked as a general principle for the construction industry people
2
looking for planning commissions" that's probably permissions. So therefore
3
Mr. O'Herlihy, this is your statement six years ago, clearly this conversation
4
that you had, if you had it and if you heard it correctly, this was giving a
5
general background from somebody in the company about how planning permissions
6
worked or were obtained in reality by bribery, isn't that correct?
7
A.
Yes, that is an interpretation.
8
Q. 516
Yeah. And that allowed you, with clear conscious then, to present your final
9
bill some few days later, to Monarch for the work you had already done on the
14:32:10 10
project?
11
A.
You are joking I hope are you?
12
Q. 517
No I am asking you the question straight up.
13
A.
They are completely irrelevant, I don't understand why you should ask that
14 14:32:18 15
question. Q. 518
Because you said you were shocked, I'm exploring your state of mind.
16
A.
Listen I have gone through.
17
Q. 519
From the time you heard this and your reaction to it, I am quite entitled to
18 19 14:32:30 20
21
ask the question. A.
Well I have gone through the answer.
Q. 520
Please do it again.
A.
The answer simply is, that there were no facts whatsoever to back up the
22
allegation made. Now it is very easy to be here in the Tribunal be pompous
23
about did you go to the Gardai, did you go to Fine Gael, did you go to the
24
Manager did you do this?
14:32:48 25
26
Q. 521
I didn't ask you any of this?
A.
I know that the questioners were asked what am I going to say? I hear this
27
that and the other. I would be a complete ridiculed idiot. I had no evidence
28
and I made it very clear to John Gallagher. I had no evidence whatsoever, I am
29
simply re telling a conversation, I don't know what weight you put tonne that's
14:33:07 30
for the Chairman of the Tribunal, I can't put any weight because I don't know Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:33:11
14:33:25
102 1
whether its true or not, I said that to John Gallagher and I said it again
2
today.
3
Q. 522
But you were also relating this hundred thousand pounds issue to a general
4
situation in the building industry and not to the specific vote that was taking
5
place in Dublin council offices that morning, is that correct?
6
A.
That is not correct, that's not what I said.
7
Q. 523
Well will I read it -- you can read it there.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
14:33:37 10
I think in fairness to the witness if Mr. O Tuathail is going
select a portion from the transcript that relates to a portion of the answer he
11
should go back to the question that was originally put which he will find on
12
page 8014 and while the answer is quite lengthy it might assist the witness in
13
making any clarification, rather than simply selecting a portion of it?
14 14:33:55 15
A.
Thank you.
Q. 524
Now which page are we talking about?
16 17
MS. DILLON:
18
8016, commences at page 8014 and the question at line 39, was there any other
19
politician mentioned that you can recall? And then the answer commences, it
14:34:12 20
21
Question, the portion of which Mr. O Tuathail selected at page
goes on for another page. Q. 525
Hold on now, can you give me the internal pagination.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
24
continues on the next page and concludes on the third page.
14:34:31 25
Q. 526
Internal page 18. Question commences at question 39, it
Yeah. "Was there any other politician mentioned that you can recall?" and then
26
the witness goes ahead and he says "No, well I don't know. I mean the natural
27
inquisitive question for me would have been to say well who was the person in
28
Fine Gael who was the person in the Labour Party. But I never asked that
29
question, I don't know why I didn't ask the question.
14:34:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:34:58
14:35:17
103 1
In fact if I remember looking back at it, I don't remember any Fianna Fail
2
people coming in and seeing the project, but it wouldn't have followed that
3
that -- that they hadn't because you see my function really would have been to
4
deliver other than the Fianna Fail, I mean it would have been a particular
5
connection with Fine Gael and maybe Labour, because of the coalition, you know,
6
but they would have assumed automatically that I didn't know much about -- I
7
didn't know anything about Fianna Fail.
8 9
Now I think Mr. O'Herlihy, just in passing, you are saying there "I didn't know
14:35:37 10
anything about Fianna Fail" you are being more or less positively asserting
11
that you had no connection with Fianna Fail in this, in this particular
12
campaign, is that correct?
13
A.
14
would have been on Fine Gael and to an extent Labour, but there would have been
14:35:56 15
16
No, that's not, that wouldn't be entirely correct but the greater emphasis
presumably been some Fianna Fail people as well. Q. 527
Now then do you return, sorry I have to go back on this now because I have been
17
pulled up by Counsel for the Tribunal, but on page 19 question 41 and your best
18
recollection.
19 14:36:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 528
Is that the next Page sorry its on this one, number 41.
To your best recollection that was Don Lydon? Answer: Yes to the best of my
22
recollection. My understanding that he didn't get a hundred thousand pound, he
23
got the hundred thousand top distribute. How much he got of it I have no idea,
24
but the idea was that he would actually ensure that the votes, that the Fianna
14:36:38 25
Fail votes would be, although there might have been other votes as well but
26
there he would be able to deliver a certain number of votes on that and we pay
27
them what would be regarded as the appropriate fee for the vote and what was
28
left over he would keep for himself" so we are talking about Senator Lydon at
29
this stage. And then we go ahead to page 20 and you say quite emphatically, at
14:37:00 30
page 4 on page 20, we might as well get that up on screen, line four rather on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:37:06
14:37:09
104 1
page 20.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
What page is this?
4 5 6
MS. DILLON: Q. 529
8018.
Page 20 internal.
7
That was the function of the man who was the point, as it were and the way they
8
explained it to me, they, was that there was usually one from each party and
9
that was the way it normally worked. Now having discussed Senator Lydon,
14:37:34 10
having discussed Fianna Fail, they then, he then adds what I was putting to the
11
witness before I was interrupted "Now I am not saying that that was the way it
12
worked for Monarch on this particular project", so there is no doubt whatever
13
on any interpretation of that, is there Mr. O'Herlihy, that you were
14
exculpating Monarch on this particular project in relation to this rumoured
14:38:01 15
16
hundred thousand pounds? A.
What I am doing there is trying to, obviously in a fairly garbled way, I am
17
trying to be as fair as possible, I didn't know one way or the other whether it
18
was true. So that's why I was saying it is not, I'm not saying that that's the
19
way it worked for Monarch on that particular project, because I have no
14:38:21 20
evidence one way or the other to support that.
21
Q. 530
But you are saying affirmatively.
22
A.
You are putting two, excuse me, you are putting too positive a response on that
23 24 14:38:39 25
spin if you can use a PR expression on that particular line. Q. 531
Well could I just repeat the line to you, it couldn't be my view, but I shouldn't give a view, could it be more emphatic than this Mr. O'Herlihy "Now I
26
am not saying that that was the way it worked for Monarch on this particular
27
project" then you go ahead to give your reasons for denying that, "But what he
28
was explaining to me was the way it worked as a general principle for the
29
construction industry people looking for planning permissions" now isn't
14:39:01 30
that -- you are agreeing with that I take it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:39:03
14:39:25
105 1
A.
Well what I am saying to you is that you can interpret now I am not saying that
2
that was the way it worked for Monarch as a qualification if you want to put it
3
that way. You see I am being asked to be specific on certain points that were
4
raised to me in a conversation, and I have no idea how to interpret these
5
things accurately because I have no idea what the background was.
6
Q. 532
7
What might have been the motive of your informant, would you hazard any guess in this conversation Mr. O'Herlihy?
8 9 14:39:42 10
MS. DILLON: Q. 533
I don't --
Why would somebody point a finger at Senator Lydon.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
I don't want to interrupt.
13 14 14:39:52 15
MR. O'HIGGINS: If I might interrupt that surely is a question for Mr. Lynn if at all? Mr. O'Herlihy has already repeatedly told the witness what was said.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
If he said this to him?
19
I didn't ask him about and I didn't mention Mr. Lynn's name, I don't think it
14:40:10 20
How can Mr. O'Herlihy guess as to what was in the mind of Mr. Lynn?
has been established in evidence that he was talking to Mr. Lynn.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
It says --
23
He was talking to three people in a bar, and he can't recollect the time he
24
spent in the bar.
14:40:21 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
your informant? Which I understand to be Mr. Lynn according to Mr. O'Herlihy,
28
would you hazard any guess in this conversation and that's clearly a question
29
that Mr. O'Herlihy can only have an opinion about, and we don't necessarily
14:40:42 30
Wait now, you said -- you asked, what might have been the motive of
want to know, or need to know his opinion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:40:46
14:41:07
106 1
Yeah but -- what he does say, what he does say in relation to having or not
2
having opinions Mr. Chairman -- hold on now.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
But the question you are asking is, why do you, Mr. O'Herlihy
5
think, Mr. Lynn said this to you? Now I can't see how Mr. O'Herlihy can give
6
that, an answer to that, other than --
7
Well Mr. Chairman I want to correct that, I never mentioned Mr. Lynn's name.
8 9 14:41:27 10
CHAIRMAN:
No you talked about his informant.
His informant yes.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
Yes on Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence, I don't accept that necessarily. I have
14
listened this morning to careful examination of the witness by Mr. Sanfey and I
14:41:41 15
16
Who we have been told repeatedly today, that that was Mr. Lynn.
am not at all convinced, there were three people in the company, one of them was coming and going --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
to who he says the informant of this information was and that was Mr. Lynn. He
14:41:58 20
But the question, the evidence is quite clear from Mr. O'Herlihy as
has never indicated that any snip et of information on this issue came from
21
anyone else who might or might not have been there for all or part of the
22
conversation.
23
Well if I come back to the issue of opinion --
24 14:42:14 25
MR. O'HIGGINS: Mr. Chairman I don't think Mr. O'Herlihy is in the slightest
26
need of protection from me, but at the same time, might I just ask that if
27
Mr. O Tuathail has some case to put, then I have no objection to his putting
28
it, but is he making the proposition now that this was said by somebody to
29
Mr. O'Herlihy but not by Mr. O'Herlihy? Because there is no evidential
14:42:41 30
foundation of any description for the proposition that somebody else said Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:42:45
14:42:56
107 1
something to Mr. O'Herlihy and how therefore can Mr. O Tuathail ask any
2
question about the motivation of some party unknown. I think the Chair has
3
already said --
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think anybody can answer ask that question of
6
Mr. O'Herlihy, unless Mr. Lynn or the or anyone else said the reason I am
7
saying this to you is because I am angry, or whatever. He can't, he shouldn't
8
be asked --
9 14:43:14 10
MR. O'HIGGINS: Obviously Mr. O Tuathail can, but the question is whether he
11
may. In my respectful submission he can't.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
you to ask this witness as to what he thinks was in the mind of the person who
14:43:30 15
I think we made it clear Mr. O Tuathail we don't -- we can't permit
gave him this information.
16 17
MR. O TUATHAIL: Very well Mr. Chairman if that's your ruling in the matter.
18 19
Q. 534
14:43:46 20
The next question I want to ask you Mr. O'Herlihy is the, when this conversation took place, or this portion of the conversation, the allegation
21
that's made, was it before or after the news arrived about the vote and the way
22
the vote had gone in the council chamber?
23
A.
24 14:44:10 25
My recollection is that that was a conversation that took place before the vote was in.
Q. 535
And how does that square with Senator Lydon's actions in the council chamber on
26
the vote, where he withdrew a Monarch proposal and instead proposed the
27
manager's proposal, the official's proposal for the vote, which turned out 35
28
to 33 against?
29 14:44:38 30
A.
I don't know.
Q. 536
Now but, in other words isn't that another -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:44:42
14:44:57
108 1
A.
I think we are getting away from the main point with respect sir, I am simply
2
re telling a conversation that took place, I am not interpreting what anyone
3
did in any other location such as the council, I don't know. I haven't a clue.
4
I am simply telling you what was told to me.
5
Q. 537
Well we are exploring the context or the res jeste if we go to Munster Irish,
6
in relation to what happened in the bar and your recollection of it, because a
7
very serious and poisonous allegation has emerged in relation to my client and
8
its hedged around, with all the caveats you have put in yourself Mr. O'Herlihy,
9
and its very much a question of opinion, whether you ever heard the name of my
14:45:27 10
client in that context or not, that's why I am pursuing this matter, because
11
the context is very important in relation to this, its all we have in a hearsay
12
situation, to grasp and to deal with.
13 14
For instance, if I could advance matters this far Mr. O'Herlihy, what you did
14:45:46 15
say this morning in relation to whoever gave you this information in the bar,
16
you said the person could have been taking the Mickey out of me, do you
17
recollect saying that this morning?
18
A.
I do, I do indeed.
19
Q. 538
Yeah. How does that square with any serious recollection?
A.
The recollection has nothing to do with my interpretation of the recollection.
14:46:04 20
21
The recollection is as I put it, under oath, a fact. Now how you interpret it
22
and how I interpret it is an entirely different matter.
23
Q. 539
24
Yeah and you also said in answer to cross-examination this morning you say the answer could have been generic in the way industry normally operates, that's
14:46:28 25
the industry context rather than the specific context?
26
A.
Yeah, yeah.
27
Q. 540
And do you accept that -- you accept I think that Senator Lydon did propose the
28 29 14:46:46 30
manager's proposal on that occasion in the council chamber? A.
If its a fact its a fact.
Q. 541
Yeah. And -- very well. and towards the end of your conversation then with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:47:21
14:47:53
109 1
Mr. Gallagher I think you expressed some concern about --
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: Q. 542
5
What page number is this?
I will retrieve the page now towards the very end I think. Yeah, page 25 internal at line --
6 7 8
MS. DILLON: Q. 543
9
8028 please.
I think you say there, you are talking to Mr. Gallagher towards the very end of the conversation and you say at line 19 "The one point that I would like for
14:48:18 10
you to bear in mind, from my perspective, is that I have had a number of
11
newspaper journalists from the Sunday Tribune and RTE, a couple of programmes
12
from RTE querying me about this, the concern that I have in surfacing at all is
13
that by association with Frank Dunlop, it damages me and I am very concerned
14
that I am seen to be, even by the people who read the headlines, that because
14:48:39 15
of the fact that I am on television that I have a somewhat higher profile than
16
the average guy" you recollect making that statement to Mr. Gallagher?
17
A.
I don't recollect it, but I'm sure I made it.
18
Q. 544
Yeah and that was in the year 2000?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 545
So any, I think worry about association with Mr. Dunlop would have faded in the
14:48:56 20
21
interval?
22
A.
What do you mean by that?
23
Q. 546
Well you wouldn't be as worried today as you were in the year 2000 when you
24 14:49:15 25
expressed those views to Mr. Gallagher? A.
I can't remember.
26
Q. 547
Yeah.
27
A.
I don't know why I said it.
28
Q. 548
I'm looking at page 22 internally and just to put it to you Mr. O'Herlihy --
29 14:49:41 30
MS. DILLON:
8022.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:49:42
14:50:02
110 1
Q. 549
Sorry yeah, you are operating from memory, its line number 20, its an answer.
2
They are talking about the date, Mr. Gallagher is talking about the date of the
3
vote and he says "Oh it was, I think it would be at the very latest '93, but I
4
don't have any files in the office now, because I would have thrown them out"
5
so you had, by the time you were talking to Mr. Gallagher you had dispersed, or
6
thrown out all your files?
7
A.
Oh I had yeah, yeah.
8
Q. 550
Thank you.
9 14:50:13 10
CHAIRMAN:
All right anyone? Mr. O'Higgins do you want to ask your client?
11 12
THE WITNESS WAS THEN EXAMINED BY MR O'HIGGINS.
13 14
MR. O'HIGGINS: I have really only one composite question with maybe two bits
14:50:26 15
of it. I think Mr. O'Herlihy, that in the course of Mr. Dillon's examination
16
on behalf of the Tribunal your attention was drawn to a bill for, I think
17
January 1992, which included a number of items I think telephone calls,
18
meetings and a meeting with Mr. Frank Dunlop, its page 7771, I wonder if we can
19
have that up? Phone calls, briefing discussions, meeting Frank Dunlop, between
14:50:55 20
the 7th and 18th January. Can you indicate how long is billed for that series
21
of things?
22
A.
Well the series is billed for one hour in total.
23
Q. 551
Yes?
24
A.
So I must have met Frank Dunlop but I have no recollection it have because I
14:51:14 25
wouldn't have put it down unless I had met him, so it would have been, I would
26
have thought, considering briefing discussions would have been with
27
councillors, phone calls presumably to councillors as well and meeting Frank
28
Dunlop would be a very small part that have as well, I couldn't imagine it
29
would be longer than a quarter of an hour or something T, could have been a
14:51:34 30
casual cup of coffee might have a a casual meeting in a hotel, I don't know, I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:51:39
14:51:53
111 1
can't remember. Because he had nothing to do with the campaign as far as I was
2
concerned.
3
Q. 552
This is what I was going ask you, because some pages were put to you by
4
Mr. Sanfey and I don't want to go back to them in detail at present, but I'm
5
suggesting and we'll deal with this if there is evidence to that effect later,
6
that they don't indicate an involvement by Mr. Dunlop in factor no certainty of
7
an involvement by Mr. Dunlop on the 27th of May 1992, now can you say when you
8
were involved up to the 27th of May for which you billed on the 29th, can you
9
remember Mr. Dunlop having to your knowledge, any association with any of the
14:52:21 10
11
affairs of Monarch? A.
No, as far as I am concerned he had nothing whatever to do with the campaign,
12
the campaign was being directed by me in association with Richard Lynn, I think
13
Pembroke PR may have been on a retainer basis I am not quite certain because
14
they are mentioned as well, but Frank Dunlop was never part of any campaign,
14:52:41 15
16
any part of the campaign as far as I was concerned. Q. 553
So can you think of any reason why on the 27th of May 1992, being asked about
17
it several years later, that Mr. Dunlop would know whether Mr. Richard Lynn was
18
in or out of the council chamber at any given time?
19
A.
14:53:04 20
had any role whatever, I don't know why he was in the council chamber, he
21 22
Well not in the context of working on this particular campaign he wouldn't have
certainly wasn't there for this particular campaign anyway. Q. 554
Yes. Thanks very much.
23 24 14:53:19 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Just before Mr. O'Herlihy goes, and this is really
directed at Mr. Sanfey, is it your client's case, because if it is I think it
26
should be put to Mr. O'Herlihy before he leaves the witness box, is it his case
27
that he did not not meet Mr. O'Herlihy on that day, on the day of the vote, the
28
day Monarch lost the vote at all? I know he disputes saying what Mr. O'Herlihy
29
says he said to him and when it might have been said, but is it his case that
14:53:48 30
he didn't meet him at all that day? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:53:50
14:54:03
112 1 2
MR. SANFEY: I don't understand that to be his case. I understand he met
3
Mr. O'Herlihy early in the morning. But I would like an opportunity to take
4
instructions on that, Chair, if you just give me a couple of moments, it
5
certainly is his case that from the time he went into the chamber, he didn't
6
see Mr. O'Herlihy again, but -- I wonder if I could just take instructions on
7
that.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Yes certainly.
14:55:20 10
11
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, Mr. Abrahamson has taken instructions and Mr. Lynn will
12
say that he can not recall with certainty whether he met Mr. O'Herlihy on the
13
morning before the meeting, but that once he went into the meeting he didn't
14
see Mr. O'Herlihy again, didn't have contact with him.
14:55:47 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right. That's fine. Thank you. Thank you Mr. O'Herlihy.
17
Thank you very much.
18 19
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
14:55:56 20
21
MR. QUINN: Mr. William Dockrell please.
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:56:03
14:56:40
113 1
WILLIAM DOCKRELL, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: Q. 555
Good afternoon Mr. Dockrell.
Good afternoon Mr. Dockrell, Mr. Dockrell I think you are a member of the Fine
6
Gael party and on the 13th of July 1995 you were co-opted on to Dun
7
Laoghaire/Rathdown as County Council as a councillor, is that correct?
8
A.
That's correct yes.
9
Q. 556
And I think you were re-elected in the 1999 local elections, is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 557
You were asked for a statement by the Tribunal by letter of the 9th March 2006
14:56:59 10
11 12
at pages 389 and 390 and at 391 to 392 you provided a statement on the 9th of
13
March 2006, isn't that correct?
14 14:57:19 15
A.
That's correct.
Q. 558
I think in that statement you say that you had no contacts with any of the
16
companies or agents in the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
17
A.
To the best of my knowledge and belief, yes.
18
Q. 559
You say that on reflection you did meet, albeit briefly, as you recall on an
19 14:57:38 20
21
informal basis, Messrs Lynn, Sweeney and Reilly? A.
That's correct.
Q. 560
You say you understand that they attended a number of Council or special
22
meetings in the months proceeding the 1999 local elections, and you recall
23
being introduced to them either within the confines of the County Hall building
24
in Dun Laoghaire, or possibly at an informal reception, you say that as far as
14:57:56 25
you recollect you never meet either formally, or otherwise, Messrs Monahan,
26
Gilane or indeed Mr. Dunlop, although you will instantly recognise Mr. Dunlop
27
from his numerous appearances on TV, is that correct?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 561
You say that having examined your files you recall receiving a payment of 500
14:58:14 30
pounds, you think the figure is correct, by cheque from Mr. Richard Lynn, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
14:58:20
14:58:34
114 1
Dunloe Ewart PLC by letter dated 13 of March 1999 is that correct?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 562
You say the donation was as you understand it given to you in good faith and
4
received by you in good faith as a donation towards your election expenses.
5
You say it was not a favourable payment for voting, as an elected
6
representative on any issue or issues affecting lands at Cherrywood or any
7
other lands in or around the Dublin area, is that correct?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 563
I think in fact you go on at page 392 to say that as you have already stated
14:58:57 10
any donations you received were given to you solely for your election expenses
11
and were accepted by you as such. And you say, you also say I might also
12
mention that I made a statement to the gardai to that effect, is that correct?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 564
In what circumstances did you come to make a statement to the gardai in
14:59:15 15
16
relation to this matter? A.
Well the, I was approached by them, not the local gardai I think these
17
particular gardai were attached to Dublin Castle, if I remember it correctly.
18
And they asked me to make a statement. Now I have searched my files and I
19
don't actually have a copy of that statement but this was a number of years
14:59:39 20
ago.
21
Q. 565
How many years ago?
22
A.
I think it was about three or four years ago now actually.
23
Q. 566
Now just in relation to the 500 pounds you say you received from Mr. Lynn, did
24 14:59:55 25
26
you know Mr. Lynn when you received that money? A.
I would have met him previously, yes.
Q. 567
You have I think in your statement, as I have read it, said that Messrs Lynn,
27
Sweeney and Reilly attended a number of council and special meetings in the
28
months preceding the 1999 local elections is that right?
29 15:00:12 30
A.
That's correct.
Q. 568
And you say you recall being introduced to them within the confines of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:00:16
15:00:27
115 1
council buildings is that right?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 569
From that I take it that prior to months preceding the 1999 local elections you
4
had never met Mr. Lynn?
5
A.
That's correct, yeah, yes.
6
Q. 570
So you had been a councillor from 1995 until shortly and you had remained a
7
councillor, but you had not met Mr. Lynn until shortly prior to the 1999 local
8
elections?
9 15:00:45 10
A.
That is correct sir and that's to the best of my knowledge.
Q. 571
Yes. And then somebody introduced you to Mr. Lynn shortly prior to those
11
elections and you say you received subsequently an unsolicited 500 pound
12
contribution to your election campaign?
13
A.
14 15:01:03 15
I brought it in. Q. 572
16 17
That that's correct yes, that was sent to me. I actually have the letter here,
And do you know why Mr. Lynn would have given you a contribution in those circumstances?
A.
I think it was just in relation to donation for my election expenses, I
18
wasn't -- you know it was my first election and at that stage I hadn't a clue
19
what it was going to cost, but as, you know as I say, as I accepted it in good
15:01:32 20
21
faith and it was understandably given to me in good faith. Q. 573
22
Can I ask you did you receive many unsolicited 5007 pounds donations towards that 1999 campaign?
23
A.
I received a number of donations.
24
Q. 574
No but did you receive many unsolicited 500 pounds or greater donations?
A.
No.
26
Q. 575
This stood out?
27
A.
This particular one I do remember because on reflection and on examining my
15:01:50 25
28 29 15:02:11 30
1999 file I came across the letter. Q. 576
Would you say it was an unusual donation first of all you barely knew Mr. Lynn at that stage isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:02:11
15:02:13
116 1
A.
I wouldn't have known him that well no.
2
Q. 577
It was unsolicited that is correct?
3
A.
That's correct.
4
Q. 578
It was for 500 pounds?
5
A.
500 punt.
6
Q. 579
How would 500 pounds compare to other donations you would receive at that time?
7
A.
It would be a lot bigger certainly.
8
Q. 580
Do you know if anybody else received similar unsolicited donations in or about
9 15:02:27 10
11
1999? A.
I couldn't recall for certain now, you know, on that.
Q. 581
Did Mr. Lynn, Mr. Murray, sorry Mr. Lynn, Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Reilly ever ask
12
you to vote on any of their proposals be it Dunloe Ewart or indeed Monarch
13
proposals?
14
A.
15:02:53 15
of them in the years, well months preceding the '99 election as part of the
16 17
Development Plan. Q. 582
18 19
No these were discussed at our group meetings, I mean they were quite a number
Yes. These were the, would have come up in the normal way in the review of the 1993 plan as varied, isn't that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 583
There had been a variation when you came to the Council in '95?
21
A.
That's correct yes.
22
Q. 584
But there was a review I think which commenced in May or June 96 and I think
15:03:07 20
23 24 15:03:23 25
throughout '97 and in the early part of '98? A.
98, I think you are correct there.
Q. 585
In January '98 I think, if we could have 2617, there were at least 3 or 4
26
proposals or motions which would have benefited the Monarch lands, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 586
Did you support those proposals at that time?
A.
We would have discussed it at group meeting, the Fine Gael group and I think
15:03:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:03:47
15:04:02
117 1
most Fine Gael councillors anyway would have, including myself, would have
2
supported them and I am just speaking on memory now although the evidence would
3
be there on record.
4
Q. 587
Yes. There appears to have been a practice within the council certainly by
5
1998 of not recording the vote on all occasions, in other words those voting
6
for and against motions don't appear to have been listed.
7
A.
Well I would have thought that certainly the main motion, now you are going
8
back to 1997 sir and '98 that's a while back, I would have thought that they
9
would have been certainly in the minutes of the meeting.
15:04:25 10
Q. 588
11
Not in all cases, but in fact in relation to some of the Monarch proposals they were passed by unanimously in some cases, isn't that right?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 589
When they came up for confirmation in June 1998 I think apart from a motion by
14
Councillor Fitzgerald and Smith, which is recorded, if I could have 2647, which
15:04:47 15
is a motion to rescind map 10, changes 4, which would have restricted the
16
extension of the Science and Technology Park, that motion is recorded and I
17
think you voted against the proposal which would have, had it been successful,
18
would have restricted the extension of the park, isn't that right?
19 15:05:09 20
A.
That's correct.
Q. 590
And is it your evidence to the Tribunal that you were never lobbied by anybody
21
on behalf of Monarch and never lobbied by Mr. Lynn in relation to any matter?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 591
Thank you very much?
24
A.
Thank you.
15:05:23 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much Mr. Dockrell.
27 28
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
29 15:05:28 30
MR. QUINN: Mr. Trevor Matthews please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:05:36
15:05:51
118 1 2
TREVOR MATTHEWS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED.
3
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 592
Good afternoon Mr. Matthews.
Thank you Mr. Matthews, I think you first came to be a member of Dublin County
7
Council in March 1992 in succession to a colleague who was promoted to Junior
8
Minister, is that correct?
9
A.
That's correct, Tom Kitt.
Q. 593
Yes. You are a member of the Fianna Fail party?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 594
And I think you continued to be a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
15:06:18 10
13 14 15:06:29 15
Council, after it was formed, in January '94 is that correct? A.
That is correct.
Q. 595
Can I just ask you in the first instance about a series of motions which
16
carried your name and which appear to be dated the 17th November 1997, if I
17
could have 7286 please? This is a motion which was put in on the review of the
18
1993 plan as varied, its signed by a number of councillors but the second
19
councillor who has signed the motion would appear to have been you?
15:06:56 20
21
A.
That's correct yeah.
Q. 596
That's a motion to extend the area of the Science and Technology Park, isn't
22
that correct?
23
A.
Yes that is correct.
24
Q. 597
And I think there is a map accompanying that motion which also bears your
15:07:08 25
signature and then there is a further motion at 7288, its a motion extending
26
the district centre into an area which had previously been zoned for
27
residential purposes isn't that right?
28
A.
That is correct.
29
Q. 598
And that contains your signature also is that correct?
A.
It does, yes.
15:07:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:07:25
15:07:46
119 1
Q. 599
And that was accompanied by a map and we can see that map at 7289 and then
2
finally, there is a motion if I could have 2587, its a motion seeking to delete
3
from a draft written statement a restriction on the redevelopment?
4
A.
On the redevelopment that's correct.
5
Q. 600
Of a district centre is that correct?
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 601
I think in the 93 plan the district centre which had the C zoning had been
8 9
limited to retail elements the size of a neighbourhood centre? A.
Neighbourhood centre, that is correct.
Q. 602
You will, as I have demonstrated there, you have signed those three motions?
11
A.
I did.
12
Q. 603
And the three maps isn't that right?
13
A.
I did, that's right.
14
Q. 604
You were asked I think for a statement earlier this year in relation to your
15:08:00 10
15:08:16 15
contacts with Monarch and their representatives, if I could have 1530 please, a
16
letter of the 10th March 2006 and amongst the matters that were required of you
17
to provide details to the Tribunal, were your contacts with the late
18
Mr. Phillip Monahan, Richard Lynn, Eddie Sweeney, Dominic Glennane, Phillip
19
Reilly Frank Dunlop and others and then you were asked for any payments or
15:08:44 20
benefits you might have received from either the Monarch Group or any of those
21
people is that correct?
22
A.
That is correct.
23
Q. 605
I think you replied if I could have 1532, on 14 March of 1996, I just propose
24 15:08:59 25
to read that statement to you if I may, you refer to the letter of the 10th March which I have just had on screen, you say "I had had no real involvement
26
with the lands in question and the only person that I can recall contacting me
27
was Richard Lynn and I think it was sometime in the mid 1990s, I have no
28
recollection of being contacted, or meeting any of the other people listed in
29
your letter, concerning these lands.
15:09:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:09:18
15:09:32
120 1
I was not a councillor in 1989 as I was only co opted to replace Tom Kitt early
2
in 1992.
3 4
Do I recall making a contribution in the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Council chamber
5
sometime during the process saying it was wrong to limit the retail element of
6
the lands at Cherrywood and this in addition we needed retail warehousing. I
7
think we were talking about one thousand or so new homes, as well as the
8
Science and Technology joint venture project, where around three thousand new
9
jobs were to be created. It was an ideal location for retail, warehousing,
15:09:56 10
leisure and hotel and apartment accommodation just off the motorway with free
11
parking available. I would have discussed this and my ideas with Richard Lynn.
12 13
Concerning the Monarch Group, do I not know what companies or associates or
14
member of the group, or if there are more companies involved other than those
15:10:14 15
listed in your letter.
16 17
With regard to those listed in your letter I did not receive any payments from
18
them concerning, or with regard to, the rezoning of land at Cherrywood" in fact
19
you hadn't been asked if you had received payments concerning or with regard to
15:10:28 20
21
the rezoning of lands, do you accept that, I can open the letter? A.
22
No the letter on my interpretation of the letter as far as that, it did refer to your reference was lands at Cherrywood so I took it to mean that.
23
Q. 606
We'll open the letter its at 1530, I don't want to waste time now?
24
A.
No, no I mean -- I am only saying that was my interpretation of.
Q. 607
Do you accept that your interpretation was wrong, you hadn't been asked if you
15:10:50 25
26
had received money in connection with rezoning or sorry with regard to the
27
rezoning of the land at Cherrywood. You were asked to provide a statement?
28
A.
Of any involvement with regard to the lands at Cherrywood.
29
Q. 608
Yes. Your statement should including but not be limited to and Roman numeral
15:11:13 30
three, any payments or benefit you may have received from or on behalf of those Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:11:17
15:11:35
121 1
listed at Roman numerals one and two, together with details of the manner of
2
such payments or benefit, when such payments or benefits were made, by whom
3
they were made and the reasons therefore, the bank accounts or accounts into
4
which the said payments or funds were lodged, how you treated such funds on
5
receipt.
6
A.
7 8
those listed. Q. 609
9
and two and at two? A.
12 13
No, you weren't asked about payments from Monarch you were asked about payments or benefits received from or on behalf of those listed at Roman numerals one
15:11:52 10
11
With regard to that section I didn't receive any payments from Monarch or
Then I must have misinterpreted the letter I took it to mean Monarch and I took it to mean Cherrywood.
Q. 610
14
You agree with me that when you did reply on the 14 March 2006, you made no reference to a sear east of payments that you had received I think from
15:12:14 15
Mr. Lynn, isn't that right, which I will detail in a moment?
16
A.
I didn't receive a series of payments from Mr. Lynn.
17
Q. 611
I see?
18
A.
I received a 500 --
19
Q. 612
Perhaps I will open your letter on the 16th April 2006. If I could have 8537.
A.
As I said I received a legitimate contribution from Dunloe Ewart, of 500 pounds
15:12:22 20
21
in provision leisure complex 450 euro and this was in 1999 and it was towards
22
the election campaign, but it had nothing to do with, as I would see it,
23
nothing to do with Cherrywood lands.
24
Q. 613
15:12:50 25
The letter that we have now on the screen or the 16th of April 2006 is a letter you wrote after you had received the brief?
26
A.
As I --
27
Q. 614
On the 12th April?
28
A.
As I had received all the boxes of documentation when I had gone through those
29 15:13:01 30
documents. Q. 615
Which show a series of payments, isn't that right? Which I will detail now and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:13:04
15:13:17
122 1
in fairness I should open that letter, the 16 of April.
2 3
"Further to my letter of the 14 March concerning the lands at Cherrywood I,
4
note from the documentation that you sent to me, that Dunloe Ewart PLC and the
5
Pavilion Group were mentioned in connection with the Monarch Group.
6 7
As outlined in my letter concerning the Monarch Group and those listed in your
8
letter I did not receive any payments concerning or with regard to the rezoning
9
of land at Cherrywood.
15:13:29 10
11
I did receive legitimate political contributions towards my campaign in the
12
1999 local election from Dunloe Ewart PLC 500 and Pavilion Leisure Centre
13
Limited, 450 pounds. You have already been advised that Mr. Frank Dunlop made
14
a legitimate contribution of 250 pounds towards this campaign, see attachment.
15:13:50 15
I note that Dunloe Ewart contributed 250 and 150 pounds to the Fianna Fail
16
Dublin South CDC golf classic held on 18 of April 1999 saying that I made the
17
request on their behalf.
18 19 15:14:04 20
With regard to the motions and the correspondence I had completely forgotten that I signed them but as outlined in my letter I would have had discussions
21
with Richard Lynn about the Science and Technology Park and the necessity for
22
a major retail development at this location.
23 24 15:14:19 25
Having viewed the documentation my best recollection of the event is that Richard Lynn made an appointment to see me in my business office on the Naas
26
Road to discuss the motions and see if I would sign them. I have no idea of
27
the date of this meeting.
28 29 15:14:31 30
We had a detailed discussion about each motion and as I agreed that the content of the motions was the right thing to do for the development of Cherrywood I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:14:35
15:14:40
123 1
signed them.
2 3
Richard Lynn took the signed motions with him for submission to the Council.
4 5
The documentation shows that the motions were listed for the 21st of January
6
1998 and that they were not controversial as motions 10.14 was passed bay show
7
of hands, motion 10.13 was passed by amendment, without prejudice to the
8
advancement of the golf club and the Manager's report was accepted with regard
9
to motion 10.15 A" And then enclosed with that letter, if I could have 8539
15:15:05 10
please, are photocopies of two cheques, the first is a cheque of the 18th of
11
May 1999 from Mr. Dunlop and the second is a cheque of the 6th May 1999 from
12
Pavilion Leisure Complex and the third is a cheque at 8540 of 500 pounds dated
13
29th of March 1999, do you see that?
14 15:15:31 15
A.
Yes that's the, for the election.
Q. 616
Yes if I could have 8541 please, we have the letter enclosing the contributions
16
to the election campaign?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 617
Am I correct in understanding Mr. Matthews that the contributions from Dunloe
19 15:15:48 20
Ewart and the pavilion were from Mr. Lynn? A.
No, they are not. Dunloe Management Services, Dunloe Management Services but
21
it was Mr. Lynn that sent the covering letter, but it's not a personal cheque
22
from Mr. Lynn.
23
Q. 618
I accept that. But did you ask for that contribution?
24
A.
I would have sent out a standard letter and I think you have a copy of that
15:16:06 25
letter because there was one as it general election for the election campaign,
26
I don't know whether you have it dated 15 of April 1999, you should have it.
27
Q. 619
We can add it to the brief if necessary.
28
A.
I said there as you know the local elections will be held on the 11th June this
29 15:16:30 30
year and I am preparing my campaign. You will appreciate that running a campaign is very expensive and in order to be elected I need assistance and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:16:34
15:16:53
124 1
would be obliged if you could make whatever donation you deem appropriate, you
2
will be aware that Government regulation provide donations in excess of 500
3
have to be declared, its essential that the work carried out in the new county
4
of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown continues by electing councillors who contain the
5
aggressive the approach has been instrumental in obtaining significant
6
infrastructural developments throughout the country. A significant number of
7
candidates from a diversion range of parties will be running this makes the
8
task of being elected very difficult. If the county is to develop and prosper
9
it is necessary that the work carried out to date be continued to ensure that
15:17:11 10
this county is a better place to live in, for my part I'm a senior manager with
11
a major multinational company and bring to the Council a business and
12
developmental approach. I would like to continue this work and with your help
13
will launch a comprehensive campaign through secure, successive forthcoming
14
elections.
15:17:27 15
16
That was a general letter that I sent out.
17
Q. 620
Did Mr. Lynn get a copy that have letter can I ask?
18
A.
Mr. Lynn or, would have got a copy, would have got that letter.
19
Q. 621
And Mr. Lynn I think forwarded the payment to you in April 1999, as we see
15:17:42 20
there, isn't that right?
21
A.
The 7th April 1999.
22
Q. 622
Yes, now when you responded initially to the Tribunal in March you made no
23
mention at that time of the three motions which I opened a moment ago and which
24
you had signed?
15:17:54 25
A.
No as I said I totally forgot them.
26
Q. 623
Even though those motions were signed in November 1997?
27
A.
Well I had forgotten about them, that's all I can tell.
28
Q. 624
You will you tell the Tribunal how you came to sign those three motions?
29
A.
Well basically what happened was that I would have had a phone call from
15:18:15 30
Richard Lynn, asking me, asking to see me and he came to my office as I have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:18:19
15:18:36
125 1
explained in the letter.
2
Q. 625
How well did you know Mr. Lynn in 1997?
3
A.
I would have known him, I would have known him reasonably well because he'd
4
been promoting the Monarch scheme for quite some years, I suppose the first
5
time really he saw me was about 1994, as I said when I was on the Council in
6
'93, '92 and '93 I would have been new and I don't think there was any real
7
contact with him until the new council started in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown. I
8
think its probably fair to say that I would have had a lot of correspondence
9
and brochures or whatever was going with the Monarch proposal, I think they
15:19:08 10
were flying around to nearly all councillors and to the local people generally.
11
Q. 626
You were a member of the council I think in May 1992 isn't that right?
12
A.
That's when I would have been, in May 92 yeah.
13
Q. 627
If we could have 7207 I think you voted in favour of Messrs Lydon and McGrath's
14
proposal that the manager's proposal the map 92/44 be accepted isn't that
15:19:31 15
right?
16
A.
Just a second to see what are we talking about here.
17
Q. 628
This is a map which would have suggested I think an extension and development
18
of these land at four houses to the acre on an Action Area Plan of piped
19
sewerage?
15:19:44 20
A.
I voted for.
21
Q. 629
You voted for that isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 630
You voted also for Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan's proposal in relation to
24 15:20:01 25
26
the town centre is that correct, if I could have 7214 we can get that vote up. A.
That is correct.
Q. 631
Both of those proposals would have been proposals which would have been
27 28
acceptable to Monarch interests isn't that right? A.
29 15:20:17 30
Yeah and I mean just with regard to the Monarch Development and all that, it seemed to be a very very good plan and seemed to be good for the area.
Q. 632
Did Mr. Lynn approach you and seek your support for either of those proposals Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:20:22
15:20:37
126 1 2
at that time? A.
I don't know whether he did or he didn't but I can just say generally that
3
Mr. Lynn N, all the time, never asked me for my vote or to vote, now I was in
4
favour of the proposals, so -- but he.
5
Q. 633
He never asked you for your support for Monarch proposals?
6
A.
No what he did was he would put the proposal in front of me and explain what
7
they were trying to achieve, but I actually agreed with what they were trying
8
to achieve, but he never asked me to go in and vote for a motion.
9
Q. 634
15:20:56 10
11
were trying to achieve? A.
12 13
Q. 635
Yes. But he surely would have known from the first contact with you that you were a supporter of the Monarch proposals?
A.
16 17
I honestly don't know, but I mean I would have been contacted on a number of occasions.
14 15:21:09 15
How often would you come to you and put before you the proposal of what they
I don't think any doubt about that, I have been a supporter of development of the county I think from the very beginning.
Q. 636
And I think you voted in favour of the Councillor Marren Coffey proposal on the
18
11th of November 1993 isn't that right, if we could have 7263, this was what
19
went on public -- sorry which, the were pose all, that was acceptable an put on
15:21:33 20
display in the 1993 Development Plan isn't that right?
21
A.
Just a second please, this was the County Manager's recommendation.
22
Q. 637
No this was a proposal by councillors Marren and Coffey, which effectively
23
reversed a motion by Councillor Barrett which had reduced the density on the
24
site, from four to one house per acre?
15:21:59 25
26
A.
I wouldn't have agreed one house to the acre, so I would have voted for that.
Q. 638
Yes. If we could have 2359 please? The area, the entire area coloured yellow
27
on that map is an area which the Manager had recommended be zoned at four
28
houses to the acre?
29 15:22:22 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 639
The Barrett motion had reduced it to one house to the acre and the proposal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:22:29
15:22:57
127 1
which you supported by councillors Marren and Coffey were that that portion
2
surrounded by the read line and coloured yellow be zoned at four houses to the
3
acre, that vote took place on the 11th November 1993. Can I ask you did
4
Mr. Lynn or anybody from Monarch ask you to support that proposal?
5
A.
I can't recall whether they did, but I mean I would have supported. I wouldn't
6
have supported one to the acre and I mean, I even think four to the acre is too
7
low.
8
Q. 640
9
is capable of carrying four to the acre as opposed to one to the acre that area
15:23:18 10
11
So your view would have been that at least, if there is an area of land which
ought to be zoned one four to the acre? A.
I put it to you where I am living myself is either 10 or 12 houses to the acre,
12
I think that's proper development of land, four to the acre is a very limited
13
development and even if you take it forward nowadays, they are filling in all
14
the corner sites where I am living so its going to be more than 10 or 12 to the
15:23:37 15
acre this is the way its gone, land is too scarce just to even -- I think four
16
to the acre is far too low.
17
Q. 641
Well can I --
18
A.
That's my opinion.
19
Q. 642
Yes okay, can I put it in the negative to you Mr. Matthews, do you see the area
15:23:50 20
coloured yellow outside the red line north of the red line?
21
A.
At the top.
22
Q. 643
Yes well all of the area top and bottom, but outside the red line, you were
23 24 15:24:04 25
voting -A.
Its coloured blue isn't it.
Q. 644
No no the area coloured blue was an agricultural zoning, the area coloured
26
yellow which has, which is outside the red line which is -- slightly there is
27
very little to the bottom?
28
A.
You are talking about that land.
29
Q. 645
Yes?
A.
Yes okay.
15:24:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:24:23
15:24:42
128 1
Q. 646
In supporting the Councillor Marren Coffey motion in November 93 you were
2
effectively zoning that land at one house to the acre and can I ask you having
3
regard to what you have said about density how you came to vote that that land
4
be zoned at one house to the acre in November 93?
5
A.
In 93.
6
Q. 647
Yes?
7
A.
I can't really. I mean as I said I was very knew at that stage and -- I don't
8 9
know but I would -- my whole thing would be to vote for higher densities. Q. 648
15:25:04 10
Now Mr. Lynn has discovered to the Tribunal a number of expenses claim forms for week endings and there are two which I just want to put to you for the
11
moment, one is for the week ending the 28th of January of 1994 at 4956 and the
12
other is for the week ending 13th May 1994 which is at 5119 and they appear to
13
show a claim by Mr. Lynn for expenses in connection with the Cherrywood
14
Properties Limited, Cherrywood rezoning, T Matthews, do you see that? Could
15:25:32 15
Mr. Lynn have spoken with you in relation to the Cherrywood rezoning in May, in
16 17
January and May '94? A.
He could, as I said that was Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council time, so it
18
is quite possible. As I said to you at the beginning I think that was the time
19
that I was probably first had contact with Mr. Lynn.
15:25:50 20
Q. 649
Yes and I think in fact Later in May 1994 during this period the Council were
21
preparing a, an Action Area Plan based on the vote which we saw previously
22
isn't that right for the Cherrywood lands and I think that came before the
23
Council together with a motion from Councillor Gilmore, in relation to the
24
Science and Technology Park, I think you referred to the Science and Technology
15:26:14 25
Park?
26
A.
Which I would have within in favour of.
27
Q. 650
You were very much in favour of that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 651
And did you know that from a strategy point of view that Monarch recorded your
15:26:25 30
support as something that should be obtained, as appears from a document Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:26:29
15:26:45
129 1
discovered to the Tribunal which probably was created sometime prior to June
2
1994, if I could have 5202?
3
A.
Yeah I saw that in the documents.
4
Q. 652
You saw at 5203, the support of the following members must be obtained and you
5
are there?
6
A.
I saw that in the documents.
7
Q. 653
There are a number of follow On expenses claim forms, supplied by Mr. Lynn,
8
which appear to suggest that he was meeting with you for '94, '96 and you will
9
have seen these in the --
15:27:09 10
A.
Yeah I did yeah.
11
Q. 654
Yes. You will have seen those?
12
A.
I honestly believe they can all be attributed to me.
13
Q. 655
You don't believe those --
14
A.
I met Mr. Lynn, but I don't see how they can all be attributed to me.
Q. 656
For example the week ending 3rd of November 1994 at 5433, Development Plan
15:27:22 15
16
review, T Matthews, then there is one at 5435 for the week ending 11th November
17
94, I think there was a --
18
A.
Its just those amounts --
19
Q. 657
There was a crucial vote --
A.
The point is I was working in industry, I had to limit the time I took off to
15:27:40 20
21
go to the Council meetings, or anything, I had to work through lunchtime, I had
22
to work late at night, I took homework, I was trying to build up my base in
23
Dundrum, so I mean there wouldn't have been time for those sort of meetings
24
that's why I just question this.
15:28:02 25
Q. 658
Okay.
26
A.
For example if you take the 26th of the 1st '96.
27
Q. 659
Yes that's the week ending.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 660
If we can have 5746 please.
A.
I was in Malta from 20 of January 96 to 3rd of the 2nd 96.
15:28:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:28:21
15:28:43
130 1
Q. 661
So you think you were away?
2
A.
And if you take 11th of the 7th or 4th of the 4th I was in Sydney on the 27 of
3
the 3rd and flying back, via Japan, on 8th of the 4th.
4
Q. 662
If we can have 6300 please?
5
A.
So I don't see how they can all be attributed to me to be honest with you, but
6
that's not to say I didn't meet Richard Lynn, I did meet him he was very
7
professional, showed me the plans and kept me abreast of what's going on,
8
that's not in dispute.
9
Q. 663
Yes. You dealt with the 5th of the 1st '96, if I could have --
A.
No 26th of the 1st '96.
11
Q. 664
He has a schedule in for the 5th of January '96 which is 5735.
12
A.
He has yes.
13
Q. 665
Your query is on the one for 26 of January?
14
A.
No I am querying generally the amount of things, I don't remember anything like
15:29:05 10
15:29:26 15
16
that. Q. 666
17
There is one for the 24 of May '96 which is at 5951, he has one for the 21st June 96?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 667
At 6022, he has one for the 23 of August '96 at 6067, he has another for the
15:29:42 20
4th of April '97 at 6300, the 6th June '97 at 7360, the 11th July '97 at 6365
21
the 8th August '97 at 6375. You say whilst you had meetings with him you
22
dispute you may have had meetings on all those occasions that he seems to
23
suggest?
24 15:30:10 25
A.
I can't see that I would have had the time to have -- I mean a cup of coffee yes, but I can't see I would have had the time they appear to be lunches or
26
something, as I explained to you. I used to work through my lunch hour because
27
I was working full time, that's really what I am saying, but I am not saying
28
that Richard Lynn didn't keep me fully abreast of the development and what they
29
wanted to do with Monarch, as I told you already I agreed what they wanted to
15:30:31 30
do with the Monarch developments. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:30:33
15:30:39
131 1
Q. 668
Thank you very much Mr. Matthews.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Okay, thank you.
5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
7 8
MR. QUINN: We have one witness left.
9 15:30:48 10
CHAIRMAN:
How long will this witness be approximately?
11 12
MR. QUINN: I think a half hour. Unless the stenographer wants a break?
13 14
MR. QUINN: Mr. Marren please.
15:31:01 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:31:01
15:31:37
132 1
DONAL MARREN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MR. QUINN:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Marren?
5
A.
Good afternoon.
6
Q. 669
Thank you Mr. Marren. Mr. Marren I think you are a member of Fine Gael and you
7
were first elected to the local authority in 1978 is that correct?
8
A.
January '78, yes.
9
Q. 670
Yes. I think that you were a member in its time of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
15:31:55 10
11
County Council, is that correct? A.
12 13
and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in 1994. Q. 671
14 15:32:13 15
First of all Dun Laoghaire Corporation and then Dublin County Council in 1985
I think for a time I think you were in fact Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council is that right 1998?
A.
On two occasions, 2001 and 97/98.
16
Q. 672
Would it be from June or July of '97 to...
17
A.
The election of Cathaoirleach was on second Monday of July traditionally.
18
Q. 673
You have supplied a statement to the Tribunal which is to be found at brief
19
pages 8007 to 8309. I think one of the questions asked of you was details of
15:32:40 20
any payments you might have received from Monarch interests, or the series of
21
named individuals, and I think in that statement at 8309 you say you may have
22
received a political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties Limited
23
around the time of the local election in 1991 but you couldn't state this with
24
certainly and you had been unable to find any records to verify it isn't that
15:33:04 25
26
right? A.
Yes I would just like, Mr. Quinn -- first notice I got really of being
27
requested to make a statement on this, was a letter of the 16th of May, which
28
was delivered in error to another address, no fault of the Tribunal, but then
29
the occupiers were away from home and it left me with about three days in fact
15:33:30 30
to draft a statement, I did that under pressure. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:33:32
15:33:42
133 1
Q. 674
Yes.
2
A.
I realise subsequently that I did not receive a donation at that time.
3
Q. 675
At all?
4
A.
From Monarch, at that time, 1991 as I stated there had.
5
Q. 676
Okay. So contrary to what we see here you got no payment at all from Monarch
6
in 1991, is that what you are saying?
7
A.
That's what I believe to be the case.
8
Q. 677
Can I ask you what caused you to say you might have received 500 pounds from
9 15:33:57 10
them? A.
Because I think I did in 1999 and I think that may have been in my mind.
11
Q. 678
You were confusing 1999 with 1991?
12
A.
I did, if you understand the circumstances -- I had to draft that under a lot
13 14
of pressure and inevitably, I think I made that mistake. Q. 679
15:34:22 15
Yes. I think you had been lobbied by a series of people on behalf of Monarch isn't that right? You had received representations from a number of people as
16
we see from your statement at 8308. You say you received many representations
17
during the period of the consideration of the Development Plan on the lands at
18
Cherrywood in the ownership of Monarch Properties from servants or agents of
19
Monarch Property Limited. You say you cannot recall having any contact or
15:34:45 20
meeting with the late Mr. Phil Monahan, other than exchanges a few words with
21
him at the official opening of the Bloomfield shopping centre in Dun Laoghaire.
22
You said did you not receive any payments or benefits from Mr. Monahan in his
23
capacity as servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
24 15:35:00 25
You said I think Mr. Noel Murray whom you understood to be a director or Senior
26
manager of Monarch Properties, made representations concerning the lands at
27
Cherrywood. You said did you not receive any payments or benefit from
28
Mr. Murray in his capacity as a servant or agent of Monarch?
29 15:35:15 30
A.
Correct.
Q. 680
I think you said Mr. Eddie Sweeney, whom you understood to be a director of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:35:19
15:35:33
134 1
Monarch Properties, made representations concerning the land at Cherrywood
2
particularly with regard to the proposed Science and Technology Park. You
3
outlined the benefits such a development could have for the county. And you
4
visited the Science and Technology Park in Montpelier, France along with
5
Mr. Michael Ryan a consultant associated with Plessey Park Limerick and
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney, on invitation of Mr. Sweeney. Can I ask you were there
7
other councillors on that visit?
8
A.
No, just those three persons.
9
Q. 681
No other representatives from the local authority?
A.
No just the three named persons.
Q. 682
You said you did not receive any payments from Mr. Sweeney in his capacity as
15:35:49 10
11 12
servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
13 14
You say did you not receive any representation from Frank Dunlop concerning the
15:36:02 15
land at Cherrywood and you did not receive any benefits or payments from Mr.
16
Dunlop in his capacity as a servant or agent of Monarch Properties Limited.
17
You met with Mr. Dominic Glennane, whom you understood to be the financial
18
controller of Monarch Properties Limited, on a few occasions, you could you not
19
recall him making explicit representations concerning the land at Cherrywood
15:36:19 20
and did you not receive any benefits or payments from Mr. Glennane in his
21
capacity as a servant or agents of Monarch Properties.
22 23
You said Mr. Phillip Reilly, whom you understood to be a Senior manager with
24
Monarch Properties made representations concerning the lands at Cherrywood.
15:36:38 25
You did not receive any benefits or payments from Mr. Reilly in his capacity as
26
servant or agent of Monarch Properties, you say Mr. Richard Lynn whom you
27
understood to be a servant of Monarch Properties Limited made several
28
representations concerning the lands at Cherrywood in his capacity as a servant
29
or agent of Monarch Properties, isn't that correct?
15:36:52 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:36:52
15:37:07
135 1
Q. 683
2
All in all therefore a quite a number of representations had been made to you by different representatives of Monarch, in relation to the Cherrywood lands?
3
A.
Yes, very many.
4
Q. 684
Now I think the first real vote in relation to these lands came about on the
5
6th of December 1990, when a motion by Councillor Betty Coffey and councillor
6
McDonald, was proposed, isn't that right, if we -- you will have seen that?
7
A.
Well what actually, I didn't get a brief either, I got no documentation and I
8
asked Mr. King on Tuesday, the 30th to supply me with some, he did that
9
promptly, I got a CD ROM the following day, I have gone through up to page
15:37:34 10
2775. But I really haven't had an opportunity, I devoted as many hours as
11
could I, but I haven't had an opportunity to really to get a real...
12
Q. 685
Feel for it?
13
A.
Recall, that's right.
14
Q. 686
Would you prefer Mr. Marren if your evidence were taken on another day?
A.
No I will go through with it now, but I may have to ask for help occasionally.
16
Q. 687
As far as we understand the voting pattern we'll certainly help you?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 688
Do you recall the meeting of the 6th of December 1990, at 6952. When DP90/123
15:37:49 15
19
which was the Manager's proposals had been discussed on two previous occasions
15:38:10 20
in the months of October and November of 1990?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 689
And I think Councillor Coffey had tabled a motion, but she didn't proceed with,
23
but both herself and councillor McDonald put forward a motion on the day which
24
would have effectively restricted and considerably reduced the effect of
15:38:29 25
DP90/123, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes, yes.
27
Q. 690
When their motion was put forward Councillor Fitzgerald proposed an amendment
28 29 15:38:40 30
to that motion, isn't that right? A.
You will have to help me here.
Q. 691
If I could have 6954 please? Councillor Coffey motion, sorry councillor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:38:49
15:39:05
136 1
McDonald Coffey motion is 6953, I will just read to you, the Draft Development
2
Plan for 1990, for Carrickmines Valley area be prepared on the basis of
3
limiting zoning development to the eastern side of the South Eastern Motorway
4
proposed line and taking cognisance of the developments approved in the area
5
since the adoption of the 1983 plan and in doing this significantly reduce the
6
number of areas being proposed for industrial zoning and indicate where public
7
open spaces/parks will be provided and indicate the nature of residential
8
zoning for proposed residential lands.
9 15:39:20 10
By way of amendment to the motion in the names of councillors McDonald Coffey
11
and Murphy, it was proposed by Councillor Fitzgerald and seconded by Councillor
12
Buckley to amend the motion to broadly confine development zoning to the east
13
of the motorway and north of the Glenamuck Road?
14 15:39:39 15
A.
Yes, I voted for that didn't I.
Q. 692
You did, yes. You voted for the amendment, but you don't appear, and the
16
amendment was unsuccessful -- and then the motion itself was, went on to be
17
voted upon and you don't appear to have voted on the motion at all?
18
A.
19 15:40:03 20
Well I probably not there, was I, I wasn't in attendance was I? You see like a lot of us I had a 9 to 5 job.
Q. 693
Sorry, apologies you actually did vote on the motion itself. At this stage we
21
are confusing our councillors. You voted for that amendment as appears at
22
6954?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 694
And that motion was unsuccessful. On the casting vote of the Chairman and then
15:40:26 25
the motion itself was proposed, as you see at the bottom of 6954 and if we go
26
to 6955 we see that amongst those voting against it was yourself, Councillor
27
Marren.
28
A.
29 15:40:52 30
Yes, I can see I voted against it, but I am really finding it difficult to recall.
Q. 695
Yes. You voted in favour of an amendment to it and that was unsuccessful and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:40:59
15:41:19
137 1 2
then you voted against the motion itself. A.
I would -- well I really would love to be able to read through that and try to
3
recall it, but I cannot I'm really struggling at the moment, try to recall the
4
circumstances of that motion.
5
Q. 696
6
In fact I think you had contributed to the debate on the day, if we look at 6953 please? You see?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 697
The discussion resumed with contributions from Councillors Marren, Muldoon,
9 15:41:38 10
Cass, Shatter, McMahon and Laing. A.
That the proposed rezoning be abandoned? That's the motion isn't it?
11
Q. 698
Yes.
12
A.
I recall now re coiling, with a certain amount of shock, at the proposal of
13
the Manager on that occasion, that all that valley be built on, it seemed to
14
me just on initial presentation, that it was the wrong thing to do.
15:41:58 15
Q. 699
Yes. And that's why you proposed an amendment to councillor McDonald and
16
Coffey's motion, which was to the effect that the development would take place
17
east of the motorway line, only?
18
A.
Yes, yeah.
19
Q. 700
You see by voting against Councillor Coffey and McDonald's motion you were
15:42:29 20
21
effectively reverting to the Manager's proposal, isn't that right? A.
22
I'm sorry Mr. Quinn but, whether it's the lateness of the day, or what, but I really am finding it very difficult to comprehend.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Well perhaps --
15:42:51 25
26
MR. QUINN: Maybe if I took it in stages, you had the Manager's proposal which
27
was DP90/123, which you say was a proposal that you felt you couldn't support?
28
A.
Mm-hmm.
29
Q. 701
Then you had Councillor Coffey and McDonald's proposal, leaving aside the
15:43:06 30
proposed amendment to it, which you supported, but councillor McDonald Coffey Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:43:11
15:43:22
138 1
proposal, which was effectively limiting zoning to the motorway line or
2
proposed motorway line and you --
3
A.
I think I would support, I think.
4
Q. 702
But you, the record shows that you voted against it.
5
A.
Did I, well I'm sorry.
6
Q. 703
If we could have 6955 please, again?
7
A.
I appear to have acted in a contradictory manner.
8
Q. 704
I am not -- its just I am just looking for --
9
A.
Well.
Q. 705
An explanation in relation to it if there is one or if you can recall one?
A.
No I cannot, but I often recall occasions like that, when debate developed
15:43:55 10
11 12
and -- I mean inconsistency, I hold my hand up, I have frequently if you want
13
to trace a line through that whole Development Plan from start to finish, I
14
think I could count many inconsistencies, but I did eventually come around to a
15:44:22 15
16
clear vision of what I felt was the right thing to do. Q. 706
Okay. I think by the 24 of May 1991 the Manager the manager had put forward
17
three options in relation to what might form the 1991 Draft Development Plan
18
and there was a vote in relation to those options and, at that meeting on the
19
24 of May '91 and we see the vote at 7006 and you voted in favour of the first
15:44:50 20
option, which in fact was the successful option, namely that the plan would be
21
on the basis of DP 90 A/129 A.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 707
Which effectively limited development, at four houses to the acre to the east
24 15:45:08 25
26
of the motorway line, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 708
And then, I think, there were a series of motions and the matter came become
27
before the Council with a Manager's recommendation contained in the map 92/44
28
if we could have 7203, which is effectively extending the residential zoning to
29
one of the proposed lines of the South Eastern Motorway on an Action Area Plan
15:45:32 30
on piped sewage at four houses to the acre and I think Councillors Lydon and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:45:38
15:45:59
139 1
McGrath, had proposed that that map be adopted, and that vote took place as I
2
say on the 27 of May 1992, if we could have 7207 and I think you voted in
3
favour of that proposal at that time, isn't that right?
4
A.
I voted in favour of that, yes.
5
Q. 709
That was unsuccessful, but you were in favour of that proposal, isn't that
6
right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 710
Then I think that the meeting continued and there was a vote on the order in
9
which matters would be taken, if we can have 7208 and a proposal by councillors
15:46:21 10
Gilmore and O'Callaghan, as to the order in which motions would be taken was
11
unsuccessful and you voted against their proposed order, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 711
And then I think there had been a motion in the names of Councillors Lydon and
14 15:46:38 15
16
Hand, which at that stage was withdrawn, isn't that right? It wasn't -A.
Yes, I recall that.
Q. 712
It was indicated they didn't wish to proceed with that you indicated you recall
17
that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 713
Then there were a series of motions which would have effectively zoned the area
15:46:49 20
at one house to the acre, there was a motion for example you see at the very
21
bottom of 7209 and more particularly at 7210, a motion by councillors Gordon
22
and Reeves, that the land be zoned on septic tank, at one house to the acre and
23
a motion by councillor Breathnach and Smith, at one house to the acre?
24 15:47:09 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 714
That motion I think had been unsuccessful and you voted against that?
A.
Yes, I had come around at that stage, I had been very convinced by the
27
arguments put forward by the planners I recall it now, they argued for
28
something which they termed a buffer zone, that would be east of the N11 where
29
the housing in Dun Laoghaire Corporation on the -- which side am I now, the
15:47:31 30
eastern side of the N11 was of course, had been constructed in the 70s and 80s Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:47:37
15:47:59
140 1
at a high density, high for that time it was 16 or 17 to the hectare. And the
2
argument then between the N11 and whatever the proposed new line of the motor
3
would be four to the acre and would give way to agricultural land, that seemed
4
an appealing proposition and one that I more and more favoured.
5
Q. 715
Yes and I think that having voted against that then there was a motion by
6
councillors Fitzgerald and Dillon-Byrne, again at a density not exceeding one
7
house to the acre and you again voted against that, as we see at 7211?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 716
There was a motion by Councillors Lohan and Keogh, that the lands be proposed
15:48:17 10
at AS 2, that is septic tank, one house to the acre. And you voted against
11
that?
12
A.
That's right, yeah.
13
Q. 717
Then there was a proposal for high amenity zoning, and I think you voted
14
against that, that was a motion by councillors Smith and Breathnach, then there
15:48:33 15
was a further motion for special amenity area order in the names of councillors
16
Gilmore and O'Callaghan and you voted against that, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 718
Then Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan had a proposal that portion of the land
19 15:48:51 20
be zoned C, for district centre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 719
And you voted in favour of that isn't that right?
22
A.
A district centre, is it?
23
Q. 720
C, yes, district centre.
24
A.
District centre. I thought I voted against that.
Q. 721
If we could just have 7214 please, we are now in May 1992 and the proposal by
15:49:01 25
26
councillors O'Callaghan, Gilmore and O'Callaghan is that Dublin County Council
27
hereby resolves that the lands on map 27 outlined in red which had been signed
28
for identification purposes by the proposers of the motion be zoned C in the
29
review of the Development Plan?
15:49:25 30
A.
For district centre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:49:27
15:49:40
141 1
Q. 722
Yes?
2
A.
I did change my mind on that subsequently because I felt and there were very
3
telling arguments for traders in Dun Laoghaire, that they were being squeezed
4
out of the business by excessive provision of shopping, already had been in
5
place, Cornelscourt Dunnes, Stillorgan shopping centre, Frascati centre in
6
Blackrock and one more they said, I took on board their arguments that a
7
district centre there, not at that stage but later, wasn't the correct thing to
8
do.
9
Q. 723
15:49:58 10
Then I think there was a motion by councillors Gilmore and O'Callaghan in relation to seeking agreement with the landowner and the developer, in relation
11
to the lands, I don't think you voted on that proposal, nor did you vote in
12
relation to proposal by councillors Barrett and Dockrell, which was a
13
successful proposal, that the lands be zoned at a density, not exceeding one
14
house to the acre, isn't that right?
15:50:18 15
A.
Yeah, probably wasn't there was I, if I were there I expect I would have voted.
16
Q. 724
Yes. What way would you have voted on that proposal?
17
A.
Well I had come around now to accept four -- ten to the hectare or four to the
18 19 15:50:36 20
21
acre. Q. 725
You would have voted against that?
A.
I expect so, yes.
Q. 726
That's at 7216. Now I think you then, the 91 map was amended, went on public
22
display and the matter came back before the council on the 11th November '93,
23
isn't that correct?
24 15:50:56 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 727
There is a motion, there are two motions which I wish to bring to your
26
attention, you will have seen these I am sure, at 7226 there is a motion to
27
accept the Manager's recommendation and delete the amendment, that is the
28
amendment which would have been inserted by that last vote which you don't
29
appear to have voted upon.
15:51:15 30
A.
No, well I have a clear recollection of that because I actually spoke on it and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:51:20
15:51:39
142 1
proposed it.
2
Q. 728
Okay. Can I ask you when was that motion lodged?
3
A.
I think it may have been on the day, I think I was acceptable at that second --
4
Q. 729
Yes. The motion as signed who would have typed the motion?
5
A.
Oh I think I got assistance with that, but that wasn't unusual.
6
Q. 730
Who gave you assistance?
7
A.
I think may have been Mr. Lynn.
8
Q. 731
Yes you think Mr. Lynn may have typed the motion for you?
9
A.
Let's be clear on this, provide the secretarial services, it was to my
15:51:54 10
prescription, I knew exactly what I wanted, that is not I think what Mr. Lynn
11
wanted I think Mr. Lynn wanted, I think Monarch were pressing 16 if I recall to
12
the hectare and pressing for restoration of the district centre I wasn't taking
13
either of those, and I also added in my own hand that the remainder of the land
14
be two to the hectare.
15:52:14 15
16
Q. 732
Can I ask you you say Mr. Lynn would have typed the motion for you?
A.
Well -- I think so, but not absolutely certain, but I mean if -- I got, we get
17
a secretarial assistance, either through the County Council, or some other
18
place.
19 15:52:33 20
Q. 733
I was going to ask you that, what secretarial assistance was available to you?
A.
If you went in to the general purposes office and asked or the planning office
21
asked to have a map, could I have a map, in fact these maps were fairly freely
22
available through the executive officers, and you could get a, I wasn't
23
computer literate at the time, but I have rectified that in the meantime.
24
Q. 734
15:53:02 25
Okay. Just in dealing specifically, rather than in the generality of the situation, if we deal with the specifics of this motion, are you saying
26
Mr. Lynn typed this motion, insofar as a portion of it is typed, at your
27
behest?
28
A.
Yes, yes.
29
Q. 735
Was that typed on the day?
A.
You have asked me -- I can't recall whether it was submitted that day or
15:53:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:53:21
15:53:39
143 1 2
earlier, I really cannot recall that. Q. 736
3 4 5
Can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you a councillor asked Mr. Lynn to type a motion in relation to lands that he was concerned with?
A.
Well I will. I will and I hope I will tell them fairly and as accurately as I can.
6 7
I had very clearly come to the view that ten houses to the hectare was
8
appropriate at that land. I know the question will be asked, why not the whole
9
area? Because the Manager was recommending 178 hectares be zoned at ten to the
15:53:57 10
hectare, but we had come through a very bruising debate, we come through a
11
fairly torrid time in the Council and some of my closest political associates,
12
councillors Barrett and Dockrell and indeed very close friend in the Labour
13
Party councillor Frank Smith, were resolutely opposed to that ten to the
14
hectare and you know, I felt that it was academic in a way the lands to the
15:54:29 15
north of it have, because they had no access by road, so the lands that
16
mattered was the land in the ownership of Monarch Properties, which could be
17
developed and was developed in the short-term, because the access lead onto the
18
Wyattville Road, that was one reason.
19 15:54:50 20
The other reason I felt was I mean the idea of a Science and Technology Park
21
was talked about much later in '94, late '94 and early '95, but it was a
22
concept that we had discussed frequently prior to that and I had been Chairman
23
of the third level education committee, an ad hoc committee for Dun Laoghaire
24
VEC with a task to recommend to the VEC, how the second level College of Art
15:55:19 25
and Design in Eblana Avenue, might have its status increased to a regional
26
technical college. And I recall recommending to the VEC, well they to meet
27
certain criteria, you had to get land of 70 hectares you had to have three
28
colleges, one of the colleges we recommended to be in the new school, would be
29
a business school and to supplement, or support that, we fought, I'm not sure
15:55:44 30
if we used the word Science and Technology Park, but incubator or units that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:55:50
15:56:01
144 1
would assist the graduates from the academic into the commercial world, in art
2
and design and so on.
3 4
Now that was very much in my mind and Mr. Sweeney it was in '92, I think, came
5
to me and talked enthusiastically about the location of a Science and
6
Technology Park in this land down here. He met a very receptive mind because I
7
had already developed my thoughts on it even though it was only theorising, he
8
was a practitioner, he was a businessman and had already contacts with business
9
people abroad, so I was very enthused by that idea and I felt that the rezoning
15:56:30 10
of that land, I say rezoning I mean maintaining the Manager's recommendation of
11
a density of ten to the hectare, would supplement and expedite the provision of
12
a Science and Technology Park.
13 14 15:56:52 15
And thirdly, I think I have to really stress this point, that I mean on a local elected representative, I represent people and try to represent their views as
16
best I can. Now there were two groups of people, there was the upper
17
Carrickmines and the lower end you have Loughlinstown. There is a very big
18
difference in quality of life, residences, there is a very articulate affluent
19
and well organised group of people at the north, who didn't want any
15:57:22 20
development whatsoever and I had to recognise to a certain degree their
21
sensitivities and the sensitivities of my colleagues, but quite an opposition
22
was the case south, at Loughlinstown and they were the people that I was
23
closest to. They were the people that I represented on the Council and they
24
were fully supportive of the Monarch proposals. They saw it as something that
15:57:45 25
would lift their area, an area that had been subject to unemployment and a
26
certain amount of social problems and they felt that this creation of a new
27
dynamic centre, might provide opportunities, but more importantly would lift
28
the area and its image.
29 15:58:02 30
And they were their hopes and aspirations, they were the aspirations, I wasn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:58:07
15:58:30
145 1
going to trample on, in fact I saw it as my duty, to help realise those hopes
2
and aspirations. And that's why I put that motion and I remember speaking in
3
the council, as I tell it to you Mr. Quinn, I tell it in a matter of fact way,
4
but I can tell you I spoke with passion and enthusiasm on that day, as to what
5
that meant to the people that I represented.
6 7
And there were a number of councillors coming out of the Council who thanked
8
me, said I didn't know how I was going vote, you made up my mind for me on that
9
occasion.
15:58:44 10
Q. 737
11
My question to you Mr. Marren was how did you, a councillor, come to have Mr. Lynn type a motion for you on the day?
12
A.
You mean.
13
Q. 738
Physically?
14
A.
Physically.
Q. 739
Yes. How did it come about that you had to rely on the promoter of this
15:58:56 15
16
development to sign the motion that you were proposing on the day?
17
A.
Well I mean, it was a secretarial service, it wasn't that --
18
Q. 740
That would have been available to you within the Council to provide a
19 15:59:13 20
secretarial service to you? A.
If it was available from somewhere else I'd take it.
21
Q. 741
Who provided you with the map?
22
A.
Don't -- I wouldn't like to be represented as some sort of a stodge who was
23
told here do this, go and do that. I wouldn't -- I hope you are not implying
24
that.
15:59:27 25
Q. 742
No just, this is an inquiry Mr. Marren and we are really enquiring into the
26
circumstances on the day and the circumstances surrounding this particular
27
motion and how it came to be typed up and how the map came to be provided and
28
typed up and signed by you. And at this stage I am really concerned about the
29
circumstances under which the motion came to be physically typed up, did you
15:59:51 30
ask Mr. Lynn to type up the motion or did Mr. Lynn have a typed motion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
15:59:56
16:00:16
146 1
A.
2 3
Well I think it may be in discussion, I'm not sure who initiated it, but I am the responsible person. They are my thoughts and that is my wish.
Q. 743
I appreciate that the motion obviously reflects your wish because you signed
4
it, but just getting the mechanics into place so to speak, how did -- who
5
produced this typed motion and map?
6
A.
I think Mr. Lynn did, I really do.
7
Q. 744
Okay. Did you ask him to type it or did he produce a typed motion and map for
8 9
you? A.
16:00:32 10
I told him what I wanted, I believe that to be the case, this is what I am doing and this is as far as I am going and then on reflection I said I better
11
be some palliative, some consolation for the people at the upper end who are
12
advocating.
13
Q. 745
14
tell Mr. Lynn, that this was what you were proposing, so that he would have a
16:00:54 15
16
How long before the debate on the 11th November 1993 did you ask Mr. Lynn or
map and motion ready for signature? A.
I think, if you go distribute the earlier motions we went through, I think my
17
ideas were crystalising, what I wanted. What I wanted was the Manager's
18
recommendation of ten to the hectare, I was supporting that now. What I was
19
supporting was a neighbourhood centre, rather than a district centre and what I
16:01:13 20
was most anxious was to secure was some Science and Technology Park, so those
21
thoughts were formulated and I think Mr. Lynn either sitting in the public
22
gallery, or where ever quickly picked up what I was doing.
23
Q. 746
24
And knowing your mind or your attitude to the matter you say that he had a motion prepared which reflected that without having discussed it with you, is
16:01:33 25
that correct?
26
A.
No he would have discussed it with me, he knew exactly where I stood.
27
Q. 747
Did you have a discussion with Mr. Lynn sometime in advance of the meeting on
28
the 11th November where you discussed the context or the content of a motion
29
that you would be prepared to support?
16:01:49 30
A.
I had frequent meetings. I mean it was very difficult and I -- I told them yes Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:01:57
16:02:10
147 1
this is what I am doing.
2
Q. 748
And he produced a motion for you is that correct?
3
A.
To my prescription.
4
Q. 749
Yes. And what you were proposing, was that, was a rezoning at four houses to
5
the acre of the Monarch only lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 750
And one of the reasons you put forward for selecting the Monarch only lands was
8
the accessibility to all of the lands. If I could have 2359 please, this is
9
the map which I think shows all of the lands zoned at one house to the acre, we
16:02:32 10
see the Monarch lands outlined in red, as I understand it, Mr. Marren and you
11
would have a better knowledge of the area than me at this stage, that there was
12
no road built on any of the lands at this stage?
13
A.
Oh that's right, yes.
14
Q. 751
So there was no greater accessible to the Monarch lands at this stage than
16:02:48 15
there was no any of the other lands isn't that right?
16
A.
At that stage.
17
Q. 752
Yes?
18
A.
But it was planned in the immediate term to enter from the Wyattville Road, a
19
link road which would and has now of course, linked up with the South Eastern
16:03:03 20
Motorway, at that time the line of the motorway wasn't determined, but it,
21
whatever it would be the link road to was to come in here from the Wyattville
22
junction and it was the plans were well advanced for provision of that which
23
would allow for the development of those lands, wouldn't allow for the
24
development of the upper lands.
16:03:21 25
Q. 753
26 27
If I could have 7226, presumably the distinction between these lands and the upper lands was just the length of the roadway, isn't that right?
A.
Well they would be accessed by the spine road that's planned from the Glenamuck
28
interchange down to the Wyattville interchange and that hasn't as yet been
29
produced and I don't think those lands will be accessible until that spine road
16:03:43 30
is constructed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:03:44
16:04:00
148 1
Q. 754
Not alone were you supporting a proposal which would have given four houses to
2
the acre on the Monarch lands, but you were also suggesting that the balance of
3
the lands which the Manager was recommending be zoned at four houses to the
4
acre, that they be zoned at one house to the acre isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 755
So you were going against the Manager's recommendations and you were singling
7 8
out for support only the Monarch lands? A.
9
Well its what you might call an example of real politic. Sometimes you have to balance your realities with your ideals. On this occasion there were
16:04:26 10
sensitivities at work, which had to be catered for and the motion was not
11
intended to confer benefit absolute or, on Monarch, vis-a-vis the other
12
developers, nor the corollary did it intend to disadvantage the other
13
landowners vis-a-vis Monarch.
14 16:04:48 15
Q. 756
But isn't that the effect of the motion?
A.
I would contend that is academic, because it really didn't matter, that land
16
couldn't be developed then, nor has it been developed since, nor can it be
17
developed until the spine road is constructed, whereas their land could be
18
developed, that really on the day met most people's, well the vote was there to
19
show it, it met with the majority vote.
16:05:09 20
Q. 757
Now can I ask you, did Mr. Lynn also have insight into the mind of councillors
21
Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and Ormonde on the day they seem to also have signed
22
the motion?
23
A.
I couldn't answer that.
24
Q. 758
Did you discuss your motion or this motion with any of the other co
16:05:28 25
26
signatories? A.
I am certain that that would have been the case, I'd hardly put their names,
27
we'd hardly put our names tots one motion without having discussed it and
28
coming to agreement about it, but I have no recollection of those discussions.
29 16:05:47 30
Q. 759
The impression I am getting from what you are saying to me Mr. Marren is that you had detailed discussions with Monarch in the lead up to this vote on the 11 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:05:52
16:06:05
149 1
of November 1993 as a result of which Mr. Lynn produced a typed motion and a
2
map, which you signed and you subject to the amendment as we see it in your
3
handwriting on the motion?
4
A.
Mm-hmm.
5
Q. 760
Isn't that correct?
6
A.
Well the main part of it is my thoughts as well. They emanate from me.
7
Q. 761
Yes?
8
A.
That I am sure would not be what Monarch would have wished, they would probably
9
have framed a motion 16 to the hectare, district centre, but -- that's mine. I
16:06:22 10
take responsibility.
11
Q. 762
This is what the Monarch, the market would hold on the day?
12
A.
The market.
13
Q. 763
Yes, in other words this is what the councillors would --
14
A.
That was my judgement, it was a political judgement and one that proved to be
16:06:34 15
correct.
16
Q. 764
Which coincidentally favoured Monarch, isn't that right?
17
A.
That wasn't the intention. And I have outline that had. My intention was not
18
to give a, confer an advantage on any landowner nor to deny for that matter any
19
landowner an advantage. I was working for the, what I thought was the best
16:06:52 20
interests of the people and I can -- I have taken sworn testimony today and I
21
take that very very seriously as a practising Christian, I am what I did was,
22
in the best interests of the people I represent, nothing else.
23
Q. 765
Had Mr. Reilly approached you in relation to the matter at this stage?
24
A.
Mr. Phil Reilly, I would meet periodically, perhaps at some of those, perhaps
16:07:22 25
in some social occasions or where ever, but I can't recall him immediately
26
prior to that, meeting with him.
27
Q. 766
Was it Mr. Lynn you dealt with?
28
A.
Mr. Lynn I would have met, I also met Mr. Sweeney regularly and Mr. Sweeney who
29 16:07:40 30
particularly promoted the idea of Science and Technology Park and I think it was the instrument that really enthused me about this area. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:07:46
16:08:00
150 1
Q. 767
2
Were there any other councillors present when you were discussing this matter with Mr. Lynn in the lead up to the vote on the 11th November?
3
A.
Not that I recall.
4
Q. 768
Now there was a second motion I think if I could have 7228 which was also
5
proposed and was successful on the occasion, isn't that right, in relation to
6
the limiting the size of the neighbourhood centre isn't that correct?
7
A.
Yes yes yes.
8
Q. 769
Could I take it Mr. Lynn would also have that motion typed?
9
A.
That was clearly not in his interest, but he may very well have. Monarch were
16:08:19 10
seeking a district centre, my attitude was and it changed incidentally as you
11
saw on the screen there, initially I thought a district centre was a good idea,
12
gradually came to the belief that a neighbourhood centre was accurate.
13
Q. 770
14
If I could have motion 7228 and 7226 side by side please, would you agree with me Mr. Marren that these motions would appear to have been typed, by the and
16:08:51 15
produced from the same source?
16
A.
Oh I do yes, oh I do.
17
Q. 771
And if Mr. Lynn produced the motion in relation to the residential zoning
18
doesn't it follow as of course, that he must also have produced the other
19
motion?
16:09:06 20
A.
Provided I would prefer to say the secretarial services, he could in the in his
21
interests for the company he worked for advocate a neighbourhood centre, nor
22
indeed could he have advocated ten houses to the hectare, that's what I had
23
settled on and agreed, and if I was facilitated in producing the motion that's
24
fine.
16:09:28 25
Q. 772
And I think then that both motions were successful, but that in time the
26
restriction in relation to the neighbourhood centre was lifted subject to a
27
wording from the Manager, isn't that right?
28
A.
In Dun Laoghaire in the first variation.
29
Q. 773
Yes?
A.
Oh, yes. I mean the opposition seemed to dissipate very rapidly, when we
16:09:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:09:52
16:10:13
151 1
settled down with Dun Laoghaire, people who were very much opposed to
2
residential development in this area seemed now to be quite favourably disposed
3
to it, people who cast doubt on the feasibility of a Science and Technology
4
Park, were now advocating it as a recipe for the cure of the economic ills of
5
the area, I didn't participate very actively in those debates, I often listened
6
in silent astonishment, because there was quite a change in people's attitudes
7
and I am never quite sure what caused it, but it was much easier for me in the
8
new Council.
9
Thank you very much Mr. Marren.
16:10:39 10
11
Q. 774
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Can I ask you Mr. Marren, you said you didn't believe that
Mr. Lynn would have wanted just ten houses to the hectare? A.
I think their submission, Judge Faherty, was for 16.
Q. 775
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 16:10:54 15
Yes because that's one of the responses you gave, but there
16
was a letter written by Mr. McCabe to the Council in July, and this was
17
obviously in response to the second public display, as a result of
18
Mr. Barrett's motion, the second map showed two houses to the hectare, isn't
19
that right, for all the lands?
16:11:15 20
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 776
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22 23 24
And Mr. McCabe I think he was a planner, on behalf of Monarch
wrote to the Council seeking -- he was objecting to change number 3? A.
Yes, yeah that would --
Q. 777
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:11:36 25
26 27
Yes, now I was reading the beginning of his letter he is
asking that -- if I just as I understand it, its page 7221.
28 29 16:11:46 30
MS. DILLON:
Yes just in relation to this document sorry to cut across
Mr. Quinn, there are two versions of this letter, we have inquired from Dun Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:11:50
16:12:00
152 1
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council to confirm which, if either were received by
2
them, we still don't have that confirmation.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
appear --
Maybe I should leave the question Ms. Dillon, it would
6 7
MS. DILLON:
What is common to both is that they were unhappy with the
8
density gone out in second display there is no issue about that.
9 16:12:08 10
Q. 778
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Exactly. That is my question Mr. Marren Monarch were clearly
11
unhappy about the density as is evidenced from this letter, and they were
12
objecting to that change and they seem to want it removed. If the change were
13
removed simplicitor change 3 goes off the map, the second public display as I
14
understand it it, would revert to what went out on the first display that's ten
16:12:32 15
16
houses to the hectare? A.
17
Yes, that's my understanding, yes that would have been the case. But there were -- sorry.
18 19
Q. 779
16:12:45 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I am just saying that if that letter is there and now assuming
that is the letter that was sent to the Dun Laoghaire, to the County Council,
21
back in 1993 and we don't know yet obviously, this may be subject to
22
clarification later, it will be seen, it would suggest that Monarch were
23
looking for two things really, a reversion to the first display, ten houses to
24
the hectare and perhaps an extension of the boundary, further down southwest,
16:13:10 25
do you understand?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 780
But there didn't seem from that letter again this may be subject to
28
clarification at a later stage, I am cautious in my question to you, that
29
Monarch would appear, that they wanted would, have been happy enough with ten
16:13:24 30
houses to the hectare, they wanted change 3 gone? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:13:26
16:13:38
153 1
A.
Yes I understand.
Q. 781
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2 3
I am just wondering, if that is the case, where do you say
4
between July '93, because this was obviously a representation that went in
5
after the second display, and November '93, did Monarch make a formal case for
6
a larger residential density? I know they did previously.
7
A.
Yes.
Q. 782
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
I think their original was 16. I think they were shocked when it was reduced
8 9 16:13:51 10
11
I am just asking you --
to one to the acre.
12 13
Q. 783
14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But do you see my point? I am just putting, it would appear
that Monarch were just looking for a deletion of change 3, I think in fairness
16:14:06 15
to yourself, a further extension of the boundary of the residential boundary I
16
think they were still looking for that. Why do you say then that the motion,
17
which I understand was typed, it appeared to have been typed at some point by
18
Mr. Lynn as I understand it?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 784
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:14:26 20
21 22 23
Was that before the day, its dated the 11th November? Did it
come to the Council chamber with the motion? A.
24
You know Mr. Quinn posed those questions and I really couldn't answer with certainty, whether it was that day, or the day before, I really couldn't, but
16:14:43 25
it was around that time, certainly.
26 27
Q. 785
28 29 16:14:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Because that's what the motion says, to delete the -- to
accept the Manager's recommendations? A.
Yes. Yes but I had reached that position myself independently, much earlier on and I recall the planner in question, Mr. Conway, and I -- I almost recall the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:15:03
16:15:19
154 1
day on which he convinced me it was the right thing to do, in retrospect of
2
course it probably wasn't, but we can only make our judgements at a particular
3
time.
4
Q. 786
JUDGE FAHERTY: Can I ask you, back in -- when was it, May 1992, the manager
5
had put forward his, this is before the second display, his more ambitious
6
project that it would be, I think, still low level residential density, at four
7
houses to the acre, on an Action Area Plan?
8
A.
Yes.
Q. 787
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9 16:15:35 10
And I think he also wanted to extend the actual residential
11
zoning further south, that was his -- this was the DP 92/44, this was the
12
Manager's map?
13
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 788
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 789
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14 16:15:49 15
16
And you supported that?
17 18 19
counsel says, was in relation to the whole of the area that had been already
16:16:01 20
21
An that map when it went up and I understand subject to what
zoned residential in this area? A.
Yes approximately 178 acres.
Q. 790
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22 23 24
now that motion was unsuccessful, but it was a motion that was voted on, the
16:16:11 25
26
Yes and you had supported that, you voted in favour of that,
first matter that was voted on back in May 1992. A.
Yes.
Q. 791
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27 28 29 16:16:34 30
I am just -- why then, this is the question that you probably
anticipate, since you had voted in favour of that back in 1992, why limit it -A.
Oh I know. Well I think we were all on a sort of odyssey, a journey of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:16:38
16:16:59
155 1
discovery if you like and we had to adapt ourselves to situations, I -- I mean
2
some of my very close colleagues, close associates were resolutely set against
3
it and it was really an effort to, I suppose to, help them some of the way, at
4
the same time achieve what we in the south end and Loughlinstown people really
5
wanted.
6 7
Q. 792
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just can I ask you Mr. Marren, the very first vote on the 11th
8
of November, it was a motion to confirm change 3. I think there was some
9
amendment made to that it was lost, but that was the first vote that was taken
16:17:15 10
on the 11th November, I have forgotten now whose names it was, but it was a
11 12
motion to confirm change 3? A.
Yes Councillor Barrett and Dockrell was it.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Smith and Buckley.
16:17:42 15
16
Q. 793
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes 7261 and that motion is lost isn't that correct?
17
A.
For 27, against, 43, yes.
18 19
MR. QUINN: No the vote is at 7262.
16:17:57 20
21
Q. 794
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
A.
Yes.
Q. 795
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Yes.
Q. 796
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7262 actually.
23 24 16:18:07 25
You vote against that obviously because you don't --
26 27
And that would appear, just want to - that vote in itself
28
would you voting against that would appear consistent with more or less the
29
approach you you took back in 1992, in support of The manager's map?
16:18:26 30
A.
Yes yes, I think so yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:18:29
16:18:48
156 1 2
Q. 797
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But I am just asking you why not then leave it at that Mr --
3
because that vote having lost, what was the effect of, on the map, can I ask
4
you that as a councillor -- this change 3 had gone out in 1992, this
5
confirmation vote, this is a confirmation vote and its lost?
6
A.
This is a confirmation, it was lost.
8
Q. 798
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
A.
Yes on my understanding then is that it would be all, ten to the hectare, the
7
16:19:06 10
Therefore doesn't the support change 3 had was now lost?
whole lot.
11 12
Q. 799
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
A.
Well there was conciliation if you like, consolation for whatever for a lot of
14
Yes?
my close colleagues and the upper land couldn't be developed -- it was academic
16:19:21 15
and it was going to happen fairly soon anyway, those people --
16 17
Q. 800
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I don't know if you can answer this question Mr. Marren, on
18
the minute that is we have now, they may not be the entire minutes of the 11th
19
of November and I can't say, but in a lot of meetings we would have minutes of
16:19:37 20
meetings from the County Council, we would have seen, in various Modules there
21
would be reports given and objections and representations would be referred to
22
by the Manager and indeed by -- and itemised, isn't that correct?
23
A.
Yes yes.
Q. 801
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24 16:19:56 25
26 27
Can you recall whether objections and representations by
residents of the northern part of the lands -A.
Oh, yes, very strong representations.
Q. 802
JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
I'd say to summarise in a sentence, they were opposed to any development, I'd
28 29 16:20:06 30
And just to get back to --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:20:10
16:20:23
157 1
say that was their position.
2 3
Q. 803
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Right. And get back to the question of the road Mr. Marren,
Mr. Quinn has suggested that there was no road as of the November '93? A.
6
No that's right but it was planned and we knew it was planned an we knew it was coming on stream fairly soon, which it did.
7 8
Q. 804
9 16:20:36 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Were you aware that there was, the pipe running through the
Monarch lands? A.
Oh, yes, it was bisecting it I think.
Q. 805
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12 13 14
But the -- that pipe obviously wouldn't begin and end with the
Monarch lands, did you know where it continued on to? A.
16:20:50 15
I thought it went from Glenamuck cottages, down to Shanganagh outfall, I think that was the line of it.
16 17
Q. 806
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see. And can I just ask you, when you, you seem to be the
first signature on the motion on the 11th of November Mr. Marren. A.
Yes.
Q. 807
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16:20:59 20
21 22 23
Mr. Marren, do you have a recollection of actually signing it
for Mr. Lynn? Or when it was produced? A.
24
Oh I remember -- I couldn't say the exact location, but I remember putting my name to that motion, yes.
16:21:14 25
26
Q. 808
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And were there others with you when you signed it?
27
A.
No I can't recall that, I really cannot, but I would -- I'm sure I would have
28
discussed that with councillors that are from my general area, that is
29
councillors Coffey and Lohan.
16:21:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
16:21:33
16:21:47
158 1
Q. 809
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
A.
But I could say I definitely didn't discuss it with councillor Ormonde,
3
But you don't know when this discussion --
definitely not.
4 5
Q. 810
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Did you discuss it further with the Manager or Council
officials, Mr. Marren, when this motion was put? A.
Usually if you put forward a motion in the Council if there is a planning
8
officer or Manager there who disagrees with the content or feels that it is an
9
unproductive type of motion they are very prompt to say so, no such expression
16:22:08 10
was made when I moved that motion.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
13 14 16:22:15 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Right thank you very much?
Thanks.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten tomorrow, all right?
16:22:36 20
21
MS. DILLON:
May it please you sir.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
24
THURSDAY 8TH JUNE 2006, AT 10.30 AM.
25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 649
09:38:38
10:05:40
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
9TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.00 A.M:
3 4
MR. QUINN:
Good morning, sir. Mr. McCabe please.
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Quinn.
5 6 7 8
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF FERGAL McCABE
9
BY MR. QUINN
10:05:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. McCabe.
MR. QUINN:
Good morning, Mr. McCabe, I am sorry that you had to come back but
12 13
Q
1
14
I don't think we will be very much longer. I think we had been dealing with
10:06:04 15
your involvement with Monarch interests in the lead up to the crucial vote on
16
the 11th November 1993 and if I could have 7026. This is a motion which was
17
proposed by Councillor Marren and others which had direct relevance to the
18
Monarch lands, isn't that right, you may or may not have been here yesterday
19
when this motion was being dealt with by Councillor Barrett?
10:06:29 20
A
I generally heard Councillor Barrett's evidence, I didn't follow the thread of
21 22
it. Q
2
23
Yes. Did you know that this vote, this motion was being tabled for the 11th November?
24
A
10:06:39 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
No, I didn't. 3
Did you have any input into this motion? No none whatsoever.
4
28
There is an accompanying map 7227, did you have any input into the preparation of that map?
29
A
10:07:00 30
Q
This is the map attached to the motion? 5
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:07:00
10:07:08
2 1
A
2
Q
No, I didn't. 6
3
But you would agree with me that the motion and the map clearly identified the Monarch lands?
4
A
5
Q
Yes, they are the Monarch ownerships. 7
And I don't think it's in dispute but it's obvious from the wording of the
6
motion, it was intended that the Monarch lands and only the Monarch lands would
7
be zoned at four house to the acre, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
That seems to be the intention of the map you are showing me. 8
10:07:27 10
Now, I think you provided, following on that vote, you provided to Mr. Sweeney a report on the outcome of the vote, if I could have 4703.
11
Can I ask you, you had, I think you told the Tribunal yesterday that you
12
weren't present at any council meeting?
13
A
Yes, I should clarify I was looking at the evidence last night, I have
14
obviously been at council meetings in my career, usually as a consultant to
10:07:51 15
councils but I have never been at meetings to deal with lands, clients' lands
16 17
which were the subject of the Development Plan process. Q
9
Yes. Now, accompanying that letter is a map, if I could have 4706. If I could
18
have 7229, which is the map accompanying the motion and if it could be put
19
beside 4706. If they could be put side by side please.
10:08:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
What's the other page?
23
MR. QUINN:
7229 sorry, 7227, either way, that's the map that accompanied the
24
motion in relation to the C zoning, the one on the left and the one on the
22
10:08:57 25
right is the map which accompanied your letter, you would agree with me they
26 27
look almost identical? A
They do in the sense that the map on the left shows the body of lands and an
28
area designated for a neighbourhood centre and the other lands, the other map
29
shows what appears to be agriculture.
10:09:16 30
Q
10
Where did you get the map which accompanied your letter? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:09:19
10:09:50
3 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Could I see my letter again please? 11
Yes, if I could have 4703 please. Obviously I am referring there to the outcome of the zoning motions.
12
Yes. Did somebody provide you with the zoning motions and accompanying maps? I must have been made aware of them but I can't say from what source.
13
7
But in any event, you didn't prepare or provide the map which accompanied the zoning motions?
8
A
9
Q
No. 14
10:10:09 10
Now, I think it was your view that the lands had been zoned at 10 houses to the hectare, isn't that right, which would be about four house to the acre?
11
A
12
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 15
Yes. Were you familiar with the various lettering that was being applied by
13
the council in the different zoning types, for example, I think AP was
14
residential on piped sewerage, isn't that right, E was industry, B was
10:10:39 15
agriculture?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
10:10:48 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 16
Communities, I think -17
18
There was no question of an action area plan in relation to these lands as a result of that motion, isn't that right?
A
Not in relation to that motion, that's simply to relate to specific land
24 10:11:02 25
On an action area plan? Yes.
22 23
A1 I think was a zoning for residential?
parcels. Q
19
Yes. But an action area plan was actually undertaken, isn't that right,
26
because if we look at 4923, this is a meeting on the 6th January 1994 with
27
Mr. Murray and two representatives of the Monarch interests and Mr. Murray has
28
advised, as you will see under heading "zoning/action plan" that he would
29
expect to have an action plan completed in approximately two months. Do you
10:11:30 30
see that? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:11:30
10:11:44
4 1
A
2
Q
I do, I wonder is Mr. Murray, you know, using the word action plan loosely. 20
3
area?
4
A
5
Q
I couldn't say I knew. 21
6 7
Did you have any discussions with Mr. Murray or anybody within the newly created Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in relation to an action plan?
A
I don't recollect but I would say they would have been prudent to have an
8 9
Did you know that the council were proposing to have an action plan for the
action plan for such a large area of land. Q
22
10:12:04 10
Yes. But if that were the case, presumably the councillors would have deemed an action plan as being the appropriate zoning for the lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That would have been the correct thing to have done, yes. 23
Yes. And I think following on those discussions at 4975 on the 15th February
13
1994, Monarch wrote to you in relation to the possibility of you heading up a
14
team dealing with an Environmental Impact Statement own on the lands, isn't
10:12:31 15
that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 24
And I think at this stage, it had been accepted or acknowledged that there
18
would have to be some sort of access to the lands, isn't that right, so that
19
they could be opened up for development?
10:12:41 20
A
21
Q
That would seem to be the thrust of the second paragraph. 25
Yes and that appears to have been accepted by the planners and the council.
22
And it was in that context, I think you were coming on board as providing
23
planning advice, isn't that right?
24
A
10:13:00 25
Q
Yes. 26
Just in relation to the lands generally, would you agree with me that this was
26
a green field site in '89, it had a very low density zoning on septic tank
27
which was unrealistic but had a residential designation so to speak, isn't that
28
right?
29
A
10:13:17 30
Q
Yes. 27
It had no services, it had no access, it was still uncertain exactly what area www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:13:22
10:13:36
5 1
of land could be developed having regard to the movement on the line of the
2
Southeastern Motorway?
3
A
4
Q
That would have been the position in early '89. 28
5
But it was almost certain it was land that it was land that at some stage going to be developed?
6
A
7
Q
If one took into account the ERDO study and the council's own working papers. 29
Yes. It was going to be developed so really what Monarch, the developer are
8
seeking to achieve here, is they are seeking to accelerate the development of
9
the land, is that right?
10:13:52 10
A
11
Q
I think that's a very good way of putting it. 30
Now, I think the issue then arose in relation to the science and technology
12
park, isn't that right? It had been mooted and had been in the air but I think
13
at this stage the science and technology park becomes more centrally involved
14
in relation to the lands, is that right?
10:14:19 15
A
It does but as I say I am not terribly familiar with where the idea came from
16 17
or how it -Q
31
But as a strategy, would you agree with me that it was obvious that in the
18
absence -- that the science and technology park was the key to opening up the
19
development of these lands.
10:14:36 20
A
Not necessarily, there was demand for housing also but there was an identified
21 22
shortfall for employment uses and -Q
32
If I could have 5211, this is a strategy report prepared in June of 1994 within
23
Monarch and under the heading "science and technology park" it says "The
24
rezoning of the agricultural lands and the increase of the residential density
10:14:58 25
rests on the premises that a science and technology park will be brought to
26
fruition, without this potential job creation concept, the agricultural lands
27
will not be rezoned and no increase in density will occur."
28
A
29
Q
10:15:18 30
A
What's the genesis of that? 33
That's a report compiled by I think perhaps Mr. Lynn for Monarch in June 1994. I am not too sure I would concur with the, with his conclusion. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:15:24
10:15:39
6 1
Q
34
2
It was created I think maybe, if we look at 5215, on the 15th June 1994, you wouldn't agree with 5212?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
No. 35
You wouldn't agree with Mr. Lynn's assessment? No, it would seem to me that the lands by their very nature should have been
6
comprehensively developed which required a range of necessary uses,
7
residential, commercial, employment.
8
Q
36
9
But we are talking about accelerating the development prospect for these lands, and you are talking about bringing on board the manager and his planners and
10:16:03 10
perhaps councillors, isn't is that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 37
And the council has just voted on the lands in November of 1993, we are now in
13
early '94 and I suggest to you it's being envisaged by Monarch that the key to
14
increasing densities and opening up additional agricultural land for
10:16:30 15
16
residential development was the prospect of a science and technology park? A
I can't respond to that, I haven't seen the memo, it wouldn't be the conclusion
17 18
I would come to myself. Q
38
19
Okay. I want to put yourself in the frame of mind you were in back in June of '94, or January to June '94, when you were advising Monarch and you presumably
10:16:42 20
attended a series of meetings and would have advised different representatives
21
within Monarch, isn't that right, at that time?
22
A
23
Q
I am sure I must have. 39
24
And what I'm suggesting to you is that as far as Monarch were concerned, whether it was a good or bad strategy, as far as Monarch were concerned, the
10:16:56 25
strategy now was to promote the science and technology park and try and trade
26
that off against an increasing density and an extension of the residentially
27
zoned land with the manager/councillors.
28
A
29
Q
10:17:20 30
That's what the memo suggests but I don't recollect it being put to me. 40
Yes. You would agree with me that at different stages were different strategies being devised in relation to these lands, isn't that right, both in www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:17:23
10:17:40
7 1
relation to accelerating the Carrickmines sewer, accelerating the line of the
2
roadway, proposals in relation to what might be comfortably rezoned on the
3
lands, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
It was an evolving situation. 41
But from your point of view and within Monarch, you were devising strategies on
6
how you might get these lands rezoned at different stages, I am not saying
7
there's anything particularly wrong in that approach but as a planner, that's
8
your --
9
A
I think my concern throughout the entire exercise was ownership neutral, this
10:18:04 10
was a strategic area of land and I was of the view that whatever consequences
11
there were for Monarch, the correct approach was that the development of the
12
largest area of land possible should be pursued in a comprehensive fashion so
13
that at some later date in the future a properly planned development would
14
arise, environment would be provided.
10:18:27 15
Q
42
Under normal circumstances, had these lands been rezoned as they were, they
16
would just lie there and either be developed at four houses to the acre or
17
alternatively, they would have been either a variation of the plan or
18
alternatively, there would have been an opportunity on the review of the plan,
19
which occurred I think in this case in 1997/1998. The choices were simple, you
10:18:52 20
either developed on the existing zoning, you brought a material contravention,
21
you varied the existing zoning or you reviewed, you varied it on review.
22
A
23
Q
Yes. They are the practical options. 43
24
But that did not happen here, isn't that right? Within months of the November 1993 decision, you were into an action area plan and an attempt to increase the
10:19:14 25
zoning and the area of zoning on the lands, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 44
And the key, the strategy key to that as appears from this memo is the science
28
and technology park which for obvious reasons was very attractive to the
29
planners, isn't is that right?
10:19:29 30
A
It would have appear to be but that wasn't my strategy. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:19:33
10:19:49
8 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
45
So the document would appear to suggest. 46
Did you not know that it was Monarch's strategy at this time? I don't recollect that there was a direct link between the provision of science
5 6
But it was Monarch's strategy I suggest to you?
and technology and increased densities. Q
47
7
But a science and technology park would have itself have necessitated a variation of the plan for starters, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes, it was, it was different use. 48
10:20:04 10
Different use and you are now into a variation of the plan which gave you an opportunity to deal with other aspects of the plan that you have may have been
11
uncomfortable with as a developer, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Well not necessarily. 49
14
Under normal circumstances it was unlikely you would get a variation of the plan in the absence of the five year review, isn't that right?
10:20:20 15
A
16
Q
I don't think there's a rule there, you know. 50
But it's not on the table, unless obviously you have a large number of
17
councillors who support you, in which case it would be difficult to justify a
18
review so soon after a confirmation of the existing plan.
19
A
I think I know where you are going, all I can say is that I don't see a direct
10:20:42 20
correlation between the provision of science and technology and the need to
21 22
change other elements. Q
51
23
But as it happened, there was a review undertaken and the review did increase density on the lands, isn't that right?
24
A
10:21:04 25
Q
If you -52
First of all, there was a variation necessitated by the science and technology
26
review, isn't that right? And that resulted in an increased density on the
27
lands.
28
A
29
Q
10:21:28 30
If you could show me the text of the variation or the -53
Well I think there was, if we could have 7284 please. This is a draft variation and I think it had been identified in the earlier meeting in early www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:21:36
10:21:50
9 1
January 1994 with Mr. Murray that he was of the view that there was an anomaly
2
in relation to agriculturally zoned lands; in other words the residential
3
zoning had been to a notional prior line of the motorway.
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 54
However that line had now moved westward. Yes.
55
And there was an area of Monarch lands which had been or were zoned
8
agricultural zoning and it was felt that they now could be zoned for
9
residential purposes, isn't that right?
10:22:05 10
A
That seemed appropriate, an appropriate planning decision to make. I could
11
observe on that map for the first time the QBC or quality bus corridors
12
appearing and that's a very significant factor which would of itself increase
13
densities. It would be more relevant in increasing densities than a science
14
and technology park.
10:22:31 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
56
I don't know but I see it on this map. 57
18 19
You say that would have, the creation of a quality bus corridor would have increased the density on the lands?
A
There's a direct correlation between, provision of public transport and
10:22:51 20
densities.
21
Q
22
A
58
I understand that that was an objective of the '93 plan, quality bus corridor? I see. But I would have thought the quality bus corridor would have been
23 24
When was the quality bus corridor put in?
determined of density more than the science and technology park. Q
59
Do you, you presumably knew that there were a series of meetings between
10:23:11 25
Monarch representatives and the manager and the planners in relation to the
26
science and technology park which led to an agreement, whereby the council
27
became a joint venture partner in the science and technology park, isn't that
28
right?
29
A
10:23:26 30
Q
I am aware of that. 60
And there was a trade off in relation to density and there was a variation www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:23:29
10:23:38
10 1
which was confirmed in April '95, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
I am not aware of that. 61
4
right?
5
A
6
Q
I accept that. 62
7
However I think there were difficulties experienced in development, in the development of the science and technology park, isn't is that right?
8
A
9
Q
10:23:56 10
Yes. But it had the support of the councillors and the planners, isn't is that
It it didn't materialise. 63
A
At all? Is there a science and technology park in Carrickmines at the moment? The first building that was, that arrived I think was Lucent Technologies.
11
Now, whether that would be considered the kind of use that wouldn't have
12
arrived in some other zone and would have been attracted purely to a science
13
and technology zoning, I am not too clear.
14
Q
64
10:24:23 15
If we -- sorry just in relation to the, before I leave it Ms. Dillon reminds me in relation to the bus corridor, if we could have 7280. This is a specific
16
local objective on map 27. Do you see there number 4, extend bus way/LRT
17
proposal to Wyattville Road?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 65
10:24:48 20
21
that right? A
Well, possibly the consequences of it hadn't been said but to put a bus way
22 23
So it's unlikely that would have sparked the review or the variation, isn't
through lands zoned at 10 to the acre wouldn't make very much sense. Q
66
24
That bus corridor, was that to be through the lands or was it on the adjoining Bray Road?
10:25:03 25
A
26
Q
27
A
It was on the general line of the old Harcout Street railway. 67
Has been that been constructed? The railway procurement agency is in the process of, I think the EIS has been
28
published. And the railway order has been published.
29
Q
10:25:20 30
A
68
What we are talking about is the extension of the Luas, isn't that right? It's now upgraded to LUAS. Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:25:22
10:25:44
11 1
Q
69
But even at this stage it would have necessitated, and I am talking about
2
'93/'94, the creation of a roadway which would have been along the lines of the
3
existing LUAS, isn't that right? Through a field site which hadn't been
4
developed and which had been an objective in the 1993 plan?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:25:53 10
Q
Sorry, could you repeat that point? 70
In 1993 -Yes.
71
-- in the Development Plan, that was an objective going forward. Yes.
72
Which provided that at some stage in the future, where the old Harcout Street
11
line, that there might be some sort of rapid transport system put in place,
12
isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
10:26:08 15
A
Yes. 73
And even now, the LUAS hasn't been brought to Cherrywood? It's imminent and contributions are being levied to make it happen but I would
16
make the point that at the time in early '90s in particular, the public
17
transport debate was beginning to be, was more -- there was much more
18
discussion of it and it would seem to me that the implications of the provision
19
of a quality bus corridor or subsequently a LUAS, through development lands
10:26:37 20
21
would require increased densities in any event. Q
74
22
1993 plan, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
10:26:51 25
A
It doesn't seem to have been. 75
Yes. Well it's a specific local objective of the '93 plan. The provision of the bus way was the consequent -- density doesn't seem to be
26 27
Yes, and it was debated and discussed and was dealt with in the context of the
realised. Q
76
It's certainly not realised in relation to the balance of the lands through
28
which this bus corridor was to travel and which were to remain zoned at one
29
house to the acre.
10:27:09 30
A
Well that's an absurdity. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:27:12
10:27:41
12 1
Q
77
2
At 6054 I think, sorry just before I get to that, if I could have 7050, this is an extract from your submission in 1991.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 78
To the Draft Development Plan. Do you see 4.1.2, "The basis of physical
5
planning is the relationship between land use and transport. The creation of a
6
high capacity transport system is presumably intended to make the city centre
7
and the city regions as accessible as possible to the maximum number of
8
people."
9 10:27:54 10
A Q
That's correct. 79
11
So you were making submissions on the basis of a transport, increased transport system as far back as 1991, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:28:06 15
Q
Yes. 80
And that was on behalf of Monarch? Yes.
81
And Monarch were briefing councillors at that time and subsequently, isn't that
16
right? And presumably they were briefing them based on submissions and advice
17
being given to them by others, other professionals, including yourself, isn't
18
that right?
19
A
10:28:20 20
Q
Presumably. 82
21
on the lands, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
24 10:28:50 25
And this was available to them as a possible inducement to increase the density
Possibly. 83
If I could come to 6054. This is a memo of July 1996, the review necessitated by the science and technology park has taken place in April 1995 and now we are a year on and we are also into the review of the 1993 plan. And you see there
26
on the second part of the first paragraph, where they are dealing with how they
27
might approach the manager in relation to existing zonings, they say:
28 29 10:29:10 30
"The matters need to be addressed if zoning is to be enhanced. It is necessary to re-establish a good working relationship with the county manager to overcome www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:29:15
10:29:28
13 1
his embarrassment of having piloted changes in the Development Plan to achieve
2
a science and technology park and then find the parties are reluctant to
3
proceed with the venture. The manager will not be cooperative until and unless
4
the science and technology park moves ahead."
5 6
You see what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. McCabe and whether it was intended or
7
otherwise, that the Monarch devised a strategy of putting or placing a science
8
and technology park on these lands and that on the back of that they got the
9
cooperation of the manager and presumably the councillors, to increase density
10:29:47 10
on the lands: The science and technology park never materialised and now in
11
July 1996 as you go into the review of the 1993 plan, they find themselves in a
12
situation where they have lost favour with the manager.
13
A
14
Q
But I'm unaware of that debate. 84
10:30:10 15
16
actually happened, isn't is that right? A
Well if an objective is put into a Development Plan a zoning objective, then
17 18
You are unaware of that debate but you agree with me that is exactly what
the planning authority is bound to pursue it. Q
85
The manager had gone out own a limb presumably to try and create employment
19
within his district and he had promoted this science and technology park. He
10:30:27 20
had become a joint venture holder in the park, there had been consequences
21 22
which had benefited Monarch but the park had never been created, is that right? A
As said, I think one or two of the buildings that arrived would be of science
23
and technology nature but -- and I have never seen a science and technology
24
park but I don't know what it looks like but I think I generally agree with you
10:30:55 25
the science and technology park didn't arrive.
26
Q
27
A
86
I would again suggest that was for a different reason. More to do with public
28 29 10:31:10 30
But the increased zoning had arrived?
transport. Q
87
Yes. You think that the increased zoning and the variation of the 1993 plan, which occurred in '95 occurred as a result of increased transport? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:31:19
10:31:40
14 1
A
I would think that as the debate went on, that the penny dropped more regarding
2 3
the implications of provision of public transport for residential densities. Q
88
Yes. Now, I think that there was a review of the '98 plan, sorry the '93 plan
4
and there were again the Monarch lands had the density restrictions removed,
5
isn't that right? The science and technology park was increased and there was
6
effectively an increase in density brought about in the 1998 plan, isn't that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
10:31:57 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
The density caps were removed. 89
Yes. And you were involved and you made submissions in relation to that. I believe I did.
90
On behalf of Monarch. Yes.
91
Thank you very much, Mr. McCabe.
14 10:32:03 15
CHAIRMAN:
I think Mr. Sanfey wants to ask you a few questions.
16 17
MR. SANFUI: Chairman, in fact I don't intend asking any questions, Mr. McCabe
18
dealt with everything in evidence.
19 10:32:15 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
Thank you very much, sorry to bring you back.
Not at all, thank you, sir.
22 23
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
24 10:32:22 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. William Murray please.
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:32:25
10:32:56
15 1
MR. WILLIAM MURRAY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A
Good morning, Mr. Murray
Good morning, chairman.
6 7
Q
92
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Murray, thank you very much for attending the
8
Tribunal. I think Mr. Murray, you have previously given evidence to the
9
Tribunal in connection with the O'Halloran Darragh Kilcoyne lands and the
10:33:08 10
Paisley Park rezoning, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 93
And in the area of land that was concerned in that module or those two pieces
13
of land were fairly close to the Monarch lands which were the subject of this
14
Module, isn't that right?
10:33:22 15
A
16
Q
Correct. 94
17
And can I take it and account Tribunal take it, that you affirm the evidence you have already given in relation to the Carrickmines I Module?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 95
10:33:34 20
And in the course of that evidence, you will recollect, Mr. Murray, that there was some discussion about the origin of a map called DP90/123?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 96
23
And it was your view I think and correct me if I am wrong, that was a map that was prepared by the planners, is that right?
24
A
10:33:47 25
Q
That's correct. 97
And did you accept that any particular submission or any particular matter
26
would have had a bearing or a significant bearing on that map, can you
27
remember?
28 29 10:34:10 30
A
Would I accept that it had, I don't know whether to yes or no or to that. It wouldn't have had a bearing, any submissions wouldn't have had a bearing, that's the answer. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:34:11
10:34:32
16 1
Q
98
If I can just show you the map at 6937, Mr. Murray, and it will come up on
2
screen beside you. Now it's a slightly feint copy of DP90/123 but I think you
3
will be reasonably familiar with DP90/123?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 99
6
lands at Carrickmines.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:34:40 10
And outlined and hatched in red on that map are the outline of the Monarch
Q
Right. 100
Do you see that? Yes.
101
Now, the map DP90/123 was a fairly radical proposal from the planners in
11
relation to increasing the amount of residentially zoned land and increasing
12
the amount of industrially zoned land, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's correct. 102
10:35:04 15
Now, if we just take a few items off that map, Mr. Murray, the first thing that has happened is the line of the motorway, is that blue line on that which is
16
the line of the motorway, is that now in the same position as it was in the
17
1983 plan?
18
A
19
Q
I couldn't tell you, you would have to put the two up. 103
All right. I will give you the 1983 plan, page 6875. Or perhaps a better map
10:35:31 20
would be 6876. Now, you see outlined in the red to the right of the screen
21
there's an outline of the Monarch lands, do you see that? To the left of the
22
screen, I beg your pardon, do you see that where the cursor is?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 104
10:36:07 25
And do you see the line of the motorway plotted through the Monarch lands if we could have page 6877 please, it might assist Mr. Murray. This is an enlarged
26
extract from the 1983 plan, Mr. Murray.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:36:18 30
Q
That's better. 105
Is that clearer? Yes.
106
Now, you will see there the proposed line of the motorway bisects the Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:36:23
10:36:39
17 1
lands, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 107
And if you go to DP90/123 at page 6937, you will see that the blue line which
4
is the motorway line is beneath or south of the Monarch lands, isn't that
5
right?
6
A
7
Q
That's right. 108
8 9 10:36:45 10
that right? A Q
That's correct. 109
11 12
It would follow from that then that the line of the motorway has moved, isn't
All right. Now, can you outline to the Tribunal the reasons as to why the line of the motorway was moved on the map at DP90/123?
A
The line of the motorway didn't become fixed until quite some number of years
13
after that and various studies and various reports would have been prepared and
14
various lines drawn by the engineers for the road over the period as the lands
10:37:15 15
were being examined. What you see on the map there was the then current best
16 17
thinking in relation to the road line in the county council. Q
110
And certainly you had received a detailed submission in November 1989 from
18
Monarch Properties Limited, isn't that right? The planning department had
19
received that. You will have seen that in the documentation and it's in
10:37:38 20
Ms. Collins' statement which you refer in your own statement, Mr. Murray, is
21
that right?
22
A
23
Q
24
Yes. 111
In that it was suggested one of the matters that was suggested was a change in the density, the residential density, an introduction of retail, an
10:37:52 25
introduction of a business or industrial park, and in order to facilitate all
26
of that, the moving of the line of the motorway off the Monarch lands. Would
27
you agree Mr. Murray, that from Monarch's point of view, it would have served
28
their interests better to get the line of the motorway moved beneath their
29
lands? Doesn't that follow?
10:38:12 30
A
Oh it would, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:38:15
10:38:28
18 1
Q
112
2
Because it had been agreed by the council that the development would stop at the line of the motorway, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
I am not so sure that's correct. 113
Up to the line of the 1983 motorway as it then was, was it not agreed by the
5
council that the residential development would stop at the line of the
6
motorway?
7
A
I don't think that's correct. Now, in terms of the whole motorway certainly,
8 9
maybe some particular stretches. Q
114
10:38:47 10
And certainly in December of 1990, the effect of the motion before the council was to leave zoning at the 1983 line, isn't that right? Certainly the
11
document --
12
A
13
Q
That was a motion in the course of the consideration of the review, yes. 115
14
But certainly it appears to be the position on the understanding of the councillors who have given evidence that even prior to that, that the decision
10:39:08 15
had been made that development would only take place up to the line of the
16
motorway?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
10:39:23 20
Q
In parts of the Carrickmines area, that's true, yes. 116
And that would have covered the Monarch lands, isn't that right? In this, in the case of this map, yes.
117
And indeed if one looks at the residential zoning maps, the residential map, if
21
one looks at the map I think prepared in May of 1991, at 7018, if that can be
22
turned the correct way please.
23 24 10:40:00 25
Now, this is a map DP90/129A which I will come back to but what I want to draw your attention to, Mr. Murray, in relation to -- if you just look at that map
26
and I will give you an increased, a closer, blown up version of that map is at
27
7019. If you just have the map on screen normal size will do fine please.
28
Thank you very much.
29
What I want to draw to your attention, Mr. Murray, just in relation to the
10:40:54 30
development to the line of the motorway because the Tribunal has been told by a www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:40:56
10:41:14
19 1
number of councillors that it was their understanding following the making of
2
the 1983 Development Plan, that residential development as permitted under the
3
1983 Development Plan went as far as the line of the motorway as it then was in
4
the '83 plan. And do you see on that map the black line that cuts through the
5
old 1983 line cutting through the Monarch Properties lands?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 118
8 9 10:41:27 10
And you will see that the residential zoning from the 1983 plan is confined to the west, to the east of that line, isn't that right?
A Q
Yes. 119
And that would appear to support the information that has been provided to the
11
Tribunal that development under the 1983 plan was confined to the east of the
12
1983 line, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
10:41:44 15
A
16
Q
In the Cherrywood area. 120
In the Cherrywood area which is what we are concerned about? Right.
121
Would you agree then, Mr. Murray, insofar as these lands are concerned or the
17
Monarch lands are concerned, that the position on the ground from 1983 before
18
the review of the plan took place was that the importance of the Southeastern
19
Motorway line in that location was that it determined the level of development.
10:42:05 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 122
22
So that any person who owned land, the further west they could move the line, the more land was available for development?
23
A
24
Q
Well that follows. 123
10:42:21 25
Yes. And indeed on that map, it can be seen that there is, there are two lines, the 1983 line and then a revised line.
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 124
Do you see that? But if we go back to the original question Mr. Murray which
28
related to DP90/123 and I think you have agreed that the line of the motorway
29
has been moved, isn't that right?
10:42:45 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:42:47
10:43:10
20 1
Q
125
Isn't that right? At 6937. Now, according to what had been established in the
2
19 -- stated in the 1983 plan, if DP90/123 had been adopted by the council,
3
Mr. Murray, the effect of that, on the Cherrywood lands and on the Monarch
4
Properties lands would have been the following, there would have been a town
5
centre zoning. Coloured red on the map, is that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 126
8 9 10:43:25 10
immediately adjacent to the town centre zoning. A Q
Yes. 127
11 A
13
Q
Yes. 128
14
And the balance of the lands within the Monarch take would have been zoned residential at normal densities.
10:43:38 15
A
16
Q
Either residential or amenity, recreation. 129
17
The only -- yes, that's the green area, the small green area, isn't that right, near Tully Church?
18
A
19
Q
It looks blue to me. 130
10:43:57 20
If you look at the outline of the Monarch lands, do you see that there's a kind of a dotted green area immediately south of the interchange between the
21
motorway and the Monarch lands, where the cursor is?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
10:44:18 25
Q
Yes. 131
That is in the vicinity of Tully Church, isn't that right? It's hard to read the map, it probably is.
132
26
A small portion of that green area abuts into the Monarch property lands on that map, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
10:44:34 30
There would have been a distributor road that was feeding into the Southeastern Motorway.
12
29
There would have been an area of industrial zoning on the Monarch lands
Yes. 133
So that what was being proposed by the planners in connection with the Carrickmines Valley but particularly for the Monarch property lands, was the following, a neighbourhood centre, an industrial area, increased residential www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:44:39
10:44:51
21 1
density to normal levels, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 134
And a small area of high amenity adjoining Tully Church, isn't that right? Yes.
135
Now, what had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission to the
6
council was summarised in a portion of the document at 6912, a detailed
7
document was provided to the planning officials of the council and set out at
8
paragraph 7.1, 7.12 and 7.13 were matters that were being sought by Monarch
9
consisted of 1, a neighbourhood structure of 5 to 6,000 persons stretching from
10:45:32 10
Cherrywood to Lehaunstown to Carrickmines Great with a local centre, shops
11
school and church, so that was seeking residential, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:45:44 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
What's the date on that please? 136
It's November 1989. Yes.
137
Isn't that right? Yes.
138
The second matter that was sought was a substantial commercial centre of ten
18
hectares to serve the southeast area of the site with direct access on to the
19
Wyattville Road extension?
10:45:58 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 139
22
hectares, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 140
10:46:13 25
Monarch had sought?
27
A
28
Q
10:46:32 30
Would it be fair to and correct me if I am wrong, Mr. Murray, that in DP90/123 that substantially, the council were giving Monarch or agreeing with what
26
29
And the third thing was a business or industrial park of 11 and a half
That's how it looks. 141
Isn't that right? And I want to draw to your attention what Mr. Eddie Sweeney said in statement to the Tribunal and Mr. Richard Lynn because Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney have stated in their statements and will tell the Tribunal that www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:46:37
10:46:54
22 1
they believed that the planners had accepted their submission and had adopted
2
it and produced a map which they brought to the council, do you agree with
3
that? That DP90/123 was partly as a result of a submission made by Monarch
4
Properties?
5
A
Well as I said at the beginning, I don't have any specific recollection of
6
taking their submission and implementing it in terms of bringing it into the
7
plan.
8
Q
142
9 10:47:16 10
Well Mr. Eddie Sweeney will tell the Tribunal apparently at page 2186 that the Monarch proposal --
A
Can I just say that my role in this particular part of the plan was of a
11
supervisory sort of a role and I didn't directly draw up in the draft of the
12
plan.
13
Q
143
14
explain it a moment Mr. Murray?
10:47:36 15
A
16
Q
17
A
Absolutely but it was drawn up by others and brought forward. 144
But you were the person who brought it to the council? If there was a link or connection between some submission that may have come in
18 19
Indeed, yes, but we will see how you come to speak to it to the councillors and
which and the plan itself, it's not a link that I was aware of. Q
145
10:48:06 20
Be that as it may, Mr. Murray, I mean you were the deputy planning officer at the time, isn't that correct?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 146
And when the map and the manager's report was brought to the councillors, you
23
were the person who was called upon by the manager to explain the contents of
24
the map and answer any queries arising from the councillors' considerations,
10:48:12 25
isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 147
Right. So that whoever might have prepared the map is really irrelevant
28
because you are the person who stood over the map before the councillors, isn't
29
that right?
10:48:22 30
A
It's not irrelevant if you are looking for a link between a submission and what www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:48:24
10:48:40
23 1 2
went on to the map. Q
148
I am not, I think you misunderstand me, Mr. Murray, I am not looking for any
3
link in relation to anything, I am trying to see whether or not when you have
4
considered the documents and you have looked at the map, whether you now at
5
this point in time accept that it would appear that the planners, for whatever
6
reason, accepted the submission that was made by Monarch and replicated that in
7
DP90/123?
8
A
You could take that, it would appear, yes. It would. I mean that's one
9 10:48:59 10
explanation of it, yes. Q
149
11 12
Is there another explanation you would like to offer to the Tribunal, Mr. Murray?
A
I don't know, as I say, I mean it's a question of fact whether there was a link
13
or not and I am saying to you is that I can't make that link, I didn't do that
14
part of the work.
10:49:12 15
Q
16
A
150
Yes. I stood over the final plan because I was a deputy planning officer and agreed
17
with it. But I mean the submissions, the likes of submissions that come in
18
from anybody, in those days there was piles of them, they just got buried and
19
if they were read once, that was it.
10:49:29 20
Q
151
But certainly insofar as Monarch were concerned at 2186, Mr. Murray, sorry not
21
Mr. Murray, Mr. Sweeney will tell the Tribunal in the second paragraph that the
22
Monarch proposals generally were accepted by the planners and were therefore
23
officially recommended by them to the county manager to be subsequently
24
reflected in his report to the council and I understand that Mr. Sweeney there
10:49:51 25
is talking about the submission that was made in 1989 which was subsequently
26 27
reflected in DP90/123? A
That's his view but as I said to you, I can't confirm to you whether or not
28 29 10:50:10 30
there was a direct link between the submission and the draft. Q
152
And indeed at 1384, Mr. Richard Lynn, whom I believe you would have met on a number of occasions, Mr. Murray, you would have met Mr. Lynn on a number of www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:50:15
10:50:27
24 1
occasions, is that right?
2
A
3
Q
That is right. 153
And Mr. Lynn will tell the Tribunal in the centre of that page, "A submission
4
was made to Dublin County Council proposed Draft Development Plan based on the
5
work of the above team and that submission was accepted by the county manager
6
and formed part of the manager's report to the council of October 1990, titled
7
the Carrickmines Valley action plan." Now, I suggest to you that the only
8
matter that Mr. Lynn could be discussing there is DP90/123 because that's the
9
only map and the report that goes with it that was brought to the council in
10:50:48 10
October 1990, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
I am confused now about Carrickmines Valley action plan. 154
1990. 155
10:51:03 15
Well the only matter that was brought to the council in 1990 in connection with the Cherrywood area was DP90/123 and the report that went with it, Mr. Murray,
16 17
Well leaving that --
isn't that right? A
That was part of the whole Development Plan review process, there was numerous
18
reports and numerous -- well maybe went on to -- I don't know the dates but
19
there were a lot of reports, it was an ongoing process, it wasn't the only
10:51:25 20
21
thing that was brought up. Q
156
Just in relation to the point that you made about the submission that was made
22
by Monarch Properties to Dublin County Council at 2952, Mr. Richard Lynn is
23
told by Mr. Fergal McCabe of Mr. McCabe's belief that the submission was being
24
considered seriously by the council. And I think indeed that there's
10:52:02 25
correspondence from the council saying that they had received the submission
26
and that it was being examined critically. Would you have seen the submission
27
at all, Mr. Murray?
28
A
29
Q
10:52:22 30
I must have I suppose but I have no specific recollection of it. 157
I think when the matter came before the council on the 16th November 1990, at 6949 and this was the second meeting to consider the Carrickmines Valley, the www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:52:35
10:52:56
25 1
proposals, the third paragraph, sorry the second paragraph under the heading
2
"Chairman", says "The proposals shown on DP90/123 were further explained by
3
Mr. Willie Murray and overhead slides illustrating the zoning of the area were
4
shown." Isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 158
7
So it would follow from that that you were explaining DP90/123 to the councillors?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 159
10:53:07 10
And I think at the earlier meeting, which had considered first considered the Carrickmines Valley was the meeting of the 18th October at 6930 and at 6934 of
11
that, in dealing with -- this is the report that explains DP90/123, you will
12
see there under the heading residential "development" that the lands zoned for
13
residential development would accommodate a population of 30,000 and it
14
represents an additional population and it talks about two shopping centres,
10:53:46 15
one at Ballyogan and a new one at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 160
And then at 6935 in the second last paragraph, it was recommended that the
18
approach be adopted and in the final paragraph "The manager indicated the
19
planning officer would prepare a supplementary report" and you provided that
10:54:06 20
report to the meeting of, we have already dealt with it, on the 16th November.
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 161
Would you agree, Mr. Murray, that it's likely that one of the factors that was
23
taken into account in formulating the proposals in connection with the
24
Carrickmines Valley were the submission made by Monarch Properties?
10:54:27 25
A
26
Q
It certainly looks like that. 162
27
development on all of the Monarch lands, is that right?
28
A
29
Q
10:54:44 30
The moving of the line of the motorway even on DP90/123 would have facilitated
Yes. 163
Because once they were to the east of the motorway line, according to what had been agreed in 1983, they were open for development, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:54:50
10:55:08
26 1
A
Well you know it would have to be agreed again, I mean that was, '83 was '83
2
and there was a line there and that was the line. A different line might cause
3
a different view to be taken by the council. Depending on other
4
considerations, it's not just simply a matter of where the line is.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
164
Yes but as people understood matters. If the same policy were to continue through, yes but it mightn't have.
165
But as matters stood at the time, in October 1990, the stated council position
8
following the making of the '83 plan until the '83 plan was actually changed,
9
was that development would stop at the line of the Southeastern Motorway?
10:55:30 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:55:40 15
Q
Yes, as shown on the '83 plan. 166
As shown on the '83 plan. It didn't say anything about moving it.
167
Correct. Or where the development would stop if it were moved, it's a different point.
168
Yes. But insofar as the Carrickmines Valley area was concerned and where the
16
Monarch lands are situate in particular, the position as far as those lands are
17
concerned, is that development would stop at the line of the motorway, at that
18
point in time?
19
A
The 1983 development was to stop at the line of the motorway which was in the
10:56:00 20
centre of the Monarch lands. If the motorway were to move, it's a different
21
planning story.
22
Q
23
A
169
Yes. There's no reasons to that development would move with it or not move with it.
24
Everything has to be considered at the time of making a plan. So the movement
10:56:15 25
of the motorway would give rise to consideration of what was the appropriate
26
land use in the vicinity. You can't say a policy was adopted in 1983 that
27
would automatically apply later on.
28
Q
29 10:56:36 30
170
No but what I am saying if the motorway wasn't moved, it was going to cut the Monarch lands in two, isn't that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:56:37
10:56:50
27 1
Q
171
It wasn't moved and whatever decision might be taken if that position were to
2
pertain, the existing position, if there was no change in the line of the
3
motorway, was that development would stop at the line of the motorway.
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 172
Right. So one or two things would have to happen, there would either have to
6
be a change of the policy in of the council in relation to the development west
7
of the motorway or there would have to be a move in the line of the motorway?
8
A
9
Q
10:57:07 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 173
And in DP90/123, the line of the motorway was moved? Yes.
174
And that would, if it had been implemented, if DP90/123 had been adopted by the
12
council and accepted as an appropriate draft plan to put on display, that map
13
would have benefited land owners, including Monarch, isn't that right?
14
A
That's right, not only did the motorway move on that map but the policy of
10:57:27 15
stopping development at the motorway was abandoned.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
10:57:39 20
Q
175
But that wasn't accepted by the council, isn't that right? That's correct, that's correct.
176
And it was rejected in December of 1990. That's correct.
177
And the decision that was made by the council was recorded at 6953 and at the
21
bottom of that, the motion that was successful which was that the draft
22
development for 1990 be prepared on the basis of limiting zoning development
23
east to the Southeastern Motorway proposed line and then it sets out certain
24
other matters that are taken into account, but effectively but would you agree,
10:58:10 25
Mr. Murray, that was a rejection of DP90/123?
26
A
27
Q
Oh yes. 178
And the council having come up with DP90/123 is now being instructed to prepare
28
a map based on the 1983 plan and take account of developments that have
29
actually occurred?
10:58:25 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
10:58:25
10:58:41
28 1
Q
179
2
noted by the council, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 180
5 A
7
Q
Yes. 181
8
10:58:59 10
A Q
Yes. 182
A
13
Q
Yes. 183
14
And again, can I just draw to your attention that on this map which is entitled "adjustments to the 1983 plan to form basis of 1991 draft" do you see that?
10:59:23 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 184
17
And that would have been in accordance with the instruction that was given in December 1990, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
With the motion, yes. 185
10:59:34 20
Now, what adjustment is being taken account of there, can you explain, Mr. Murray, that moves the line of the motorway off the Monarch lands?
A
Well, there's a revised line for motorway shown which moves the motorway off
22
the Monarch lands. Q
186
24
Yes. Just looking at that map, the motorway line that bisects the Monarch lands is the 1983 line, isn't that right?
10:59:58 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 187
27
And there is then a broken black line which is described as revised line for motorway.
28
A
29
Q
11:00:09 30
And I will show you an extract of that which relates to the subject lands at 7019. And the lands outlined in red are the Monarch lands.
12
23
Which is at 7018. And this again covers the Carrickmines Valley, isn't that right?
11
21
Yes. However in May of 1991, another planning map was prepared for the area DP90/129A, isn't that right?
6
9
And that map I think was presented to the council in January of 1991 and was
Yes. 188
And it commences outside the Monarch lands at a junction further back, isn't that right, at the top of the map? www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:00:16
11:00:26
29 1
A
2
Q
It, it -189
3
It leaves the '83 line and rejoins the '83 line at a point beneath the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 190
6
Would it be fair to and correct me if I am wrong, that what that line appears to be doing is moving the motorway off the Monarch lands?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
It does move the motorway off the Monarch lands. 191
Yes. Why was that suggested as a line, can you remember, Mr. Murray? No, I can't, I can remember that there were a lot of studies being done by the
11:00:48 10
roads department in relation to the appropriate line for the motorway based on
11
all of the transportation objectives that they wanted to achieve with the
12
motorway and based on how it might link back to Dun Laoghaire and based on the
13
sort of landscape it was going through and the effect it would have on that
14
landscape.
11:01:06 15
So I don't know precisely where the dotted line came from in or who it came
16
from but it would have been generated internally in the county council by the
17
roads department.
18
Q
192
19
planning officer for this area at that time.
11:01:23 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 193
22 A
24
Q
Yes. 194
11:01:35 25
And you would have known, I assume, that the owner of the adjoining lands was Mr. Galvin, who -- the lands subsequently became known as the golf course
26
lands, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
11:01:50 30
You would have known at this stage that the owner of the lands outlined in red were Monarch Properties.
23
29
Well you would have known the area, isn't that right, you were the deputy
Yes. 195
And correct me if I am wrong but what has occurred on this map which emanated from the planning department of Dublin County Council was to move the line of the motorway or the revised line of the motorway off Monarch Properties's lands www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:01:56
11:02:14
30 1
and put it on to the Galvin's lands?
2
A
3
Q
That's is the result of the revision that was made to the motorway line, yes. 196
4
Monarch Properties on the one hand and Mr. Galvin on the other hand?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
And others, yes. 197
But the two largest landowners were affected, isn't that right? Yes.
198
9
And it follows does it not, that what would have a beneficial effect on one mighty equally have a detrimental effect on the other?
11:02:29 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 199
12
Because if the line of the motorway was going to cut through Mr. Galvin's lands it was going to have an effect on his plans for the government course?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 200
11:02:40 15
But what this map is suggesting is a revised line for the motorway which has the effect of moving the motorway, be it a notional line or otherwise off the
16
Monarch Properties lands and into Mr. Galvin's lands?
17
A
18
Q
That's the effect of it. Yes. 201
19 11:02:57 20
So that the two landowners who were directly affected by this change are
And can you give any reason to the Tribunal why that decision would have been made by the planning department in May of 1991?
A
The decision arose out of a revised road line as being the appropriate road
21
line at that particular time reflecting the current thinking in the roads
22
department. It's not even how it ended up. It moved further up and it's
23
constructed now further out. It was a very movable feast at that time and
24
could have gone anywhere. It at one stage it went down right down parallel to
11:03:20 25
the N11 and very close to. There were numerous lines throughout those years
26
and that was just the current one at that time which we were asked to
27
incorporate.
28
Q
29
A
11:03:33 30
Q
202
Who asked you to incorporate it? Well that line would have come from the roads department.
203
But certainly looking at the map in its simplest form, it really only affects www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:03:37
11:03:46
31 1
two landowners?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
It has the effect you describe definitely but that's not the cause. 204
The cause is considerations of road design. 205
206
I am not suggesting that they do but this is a map that comes from the planning department, isn't that right?
A
The map but it's made up of inputs from others and the revised line of the
11:04:00 10
11
Well what consideration? The planners don't draw motorways.
8 9
What is the cause?
motorway could have come from nobody except the county engineer. Q
207
The second thing that's happening there and this is a planning matter and you
12
might be able to assist in in relation to that, Mr. Murray, there's a change
13
proposed there of a change in zoning density effectively, it's not a change,
14
it's only from AS/1 to AP?
11:04:19 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 208
And the AS/1 is residential septic tank one house to the acre. Yes, is there a key?
209
19
Not on this map unfortunately, but I can get you a key off the '83 plan but S/1 was septic tank one house to the acre.
11:04:37 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 210
22
And then the change that is proposed is AP which is residential, pipe on piped, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 211
11:04:49 25
And the density on the legend and I will goat you the legend is four houses to the acre or ten houses to the hectare which I understand was regarded as low
26
density?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:05:00 30
Q
Yes. 212
If you go north on that map, you see a second AS/1 to AP, do you see that? Yes.
213
And these lands are all of the lands that were zoned residential in the '83 www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:05:04
11:05:16
32 1
plan, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 214
4
tank to piped sewerage for the Carrickmines Valley?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 215
7
And that arose I suggest as a result of the decision to bring the, the upgrade of the Shanganagh sewer and the advent of the Carrickmines sewer scheme.
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 216
11:05:30 10
11
So what was being proposed by the planning department was a change from septic
Can you indicate on that map, if you could Mr. Murray, where across the Monarch lands the sewer pipe was going to go.
A
From recollection, I think it goes up the valley which is the dotted line on
12
the right hand side, close to it there, a bit to the left. I think that's
13
roughly the line of the -- roughly, you go north from there through the peak, a
14
dotted line going northwards.
11:05:54 15
Q
16
A
217
The motorway line. No, inside it, it goes through the top corner, that one yes, I think that's the
17
valley, the Carrickmines Valley, it's hard to read the map but it ran I think
18
up the Carrickmines Valley.
19
Q
11:06:12 20
A
21
Q
218
And it was to go all the way, would it also served the northern lands? Yes.
219
So that if one takes the cursor and goes the whole way up the north, would it
22
have continued in a somewhat straight line and served the northern portion of
23
the lands?
24
A
11:06:25 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Up as far as about there and it swings off to the west. 220
Swings off -- From where? Somewhere around where the cursor is there.
221
28
But was it designed to serve the northern lands which were also being changed from AS/1 to AP?
29
A
11:06:39 30
Q
Oh yes. 222
So that it was intended that all of those lands be serviced by the Carrickmines www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:06:43
11:06:50
33 1
sewer?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes and a great deal of other land also. 223
That's right. 224
6
And was the genesis of this entire pipeline the decision to rezone the Ballyogan lands?
7
A
8
Q
Was the genesis of -225
9
The introduction of the Carrickmines sewer, Mr. Murray, and the opening up of this land for development arose as a result of a decision to develop the
11:07:08 10
11
And the sewer was to swing west to serve the Ballyogan lands, is that right?
Ballyogan lands, is that right, a commitment to develop the Ballyogan lands? A
In part, there were other lands that were zoned which were not serviced, there
12
were a lot of land serviced by way of pumped systems, this is my recollection
13
of it and that was undesirable. And the strategic decision was made to provide
14
a new mains sewer and a new main treatment works.
11:07:32 15
Q
226
16 17
And just in relation to the sewer and the treatment works, was that a capital cost, that was going to be a capital cost, is that right? To the council?
A
Well no, I don't think entirely to the council. I wouldn't be clear on how
18
those things were financed but there was certainly an element of finance from
19
the department.
11:07:51 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
227
Whatever it was called then, Environment and Local Government. 228
23 24
A
That's my recollection of it, I wouldn't be the expert now in relation to that, they would be matters for the county engineer.
Q
229
27
But you, this map would have been changed in the planning department because of the imminence of the development of the Carrickmines sewer.
28
A
29
Q
11:08:29 30
And for large scale infrastructural developments at that time, the department would have had an input in the provision of money, is that right?
11:08:11 25
26
What department was that?
Oh, yes. 230
That's what led to the change to piped sewerage, even though the pipe wasn't in place. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:08:29
11:08:39
34 1
A
2
Q
Oh yes, yes. 231
And the effect of that, would it be fair to, it would have been accepted and
3
understood once the sewer went in, all of the lands were going to be opened up
4
for development?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
All of -232
The Carrickmines Valley lands that were zoned residential. Yes.
233
9
And if the 1983, if the line had been changed for the Southeastern Motorway in accordance with the broken line that's outlined on DP90/129A, that would have
11:08:55 10
meant that all of Monarch's lands could have been zoned residential up as far
11
as that line.
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 234
14
Now, I think that that was approved by the council in May of 1991, Mr. Murray, isn't that right?
11:09:07 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 235
And it went out on the first public display as the map at 7021. Now, the
17
yellow lands were all of the residentially zoned lands up to the 1983 line and
18
they have now been changed, you will see, to AP, isn't that right?
19
A
11:09:40 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I will just get to grips with it. 236
Mr. Kavanagh will increase and you will see that it's AP. Yes.
237
And that was piped, residential on piped sewerage, isn't that right? AP, yes.
238
11:10:01 25
And the balance of the Monarch lands which are west of the motorway line are zoned agriculture.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:10:15 30
A
Yes. 239
Now, I think a submission was made by Monarch Properties to the plan -That's west of the '83 motorway line.
240
That's correct. But not the then current one. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:10:17
11:10:32
35 1
Q
241
Not the then, no, because you will see again on that map as you point out on
2
that map that the line of the motorway has moved again even slightly further
3
west, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 242
6 7
will become the golf course lands? A
Well, it hasn't become the golf course lands. It's zoned B at the moment,
8 9
Now, it's completely traversing the golf course lands, isn't that right? What
there was a proposal for a golf course at that time. Q
243
11:10:52 10
Yes and it became on objective of the council in the making of the 1993 plan that those lands would be used for public golf course, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
That's right. 244
And I think that was passed unanimously by the council but what has happened to
13
the proposed line of the motorway, is that it has moved further away from the
14
Monarch lands, if I can put it in its simplest terms?
11:11:09 15
A
16
Q
Perhaps, marginally, yes. 245
17
Again there's also provision, again it's a notional line for the Wyattville link, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 246
11:11:22 20
Cutting through the Monarch lands and that would have provided a link from the N11 down to the motorway.
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 247
23
And that again would have provided access, isn't that right, on to the motorway from the Monarch lands?
24
A
11:11:31 25
Q
If they were getting an access to it, yes, very likely. 248
Now, I think a submission was made by Monarch Properties to the Development
26
Plan and in summary what was sought is set out at 7039 and what Monarch sought
27
was that the designation of AP be altered to A1/PS, in other words to ordinary
28
development densities.
29
A
11:11:59 30
Q
Yes. 249
And because AP was low density as it then was, isn't that right, Mr. Murray, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:12:07
11:12:26
36 1
the second, the zoning zonal boundary between the present residentially lands
2
to the east and the agricultural zoned lands to the west be altered to the line
3
shown on the attached map and then that a new objective to put in a town centre
4
facility or district centre facility be included in the location shown on the
5
attached map and I think that location ultimately became the location of the
6
town centre, 7042. You will see the area marked C in the centre of that map
7
was the area that ultimately became the town centre and that was what was
8
sought.
9 11:12:47 10
A Q
Oh yes. 250
11
Now, I think that the matter effectively came back in before the council in May of 1992, isn't that right, Mr. Murray?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 251
14
And there were a number of motions but the first matter that was dealt with was a modification or changes that were proposed by the manager and that is the map
11:13:07 15
at DP92/44 which is page 7203. I am going to show you the original copy of
16
7203, Ms. O' Raw please. (map handed to witness)
17
This map, Mr. Murray, was the map that was produced by the manager, isn't that
18
right? And this map is described as proposed zoning and motorway changes on
19
maps 26 and 27, 1991 Draft Development Plan.
11:14:00 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 252
Now, can I suggest to you, Mr. Murray, looking at the map and if we could just
22
have the map back on screen please, looking at the map that the main changes
23
that are suggested by this map affect in the main, only the lands owned by
24
Monarch Properties.
11:14:29 25
A
Can I take a step backwards, I'm just not quite sure, are you saying this map
26
was presented to the council?
27
Q
28
A
253
I don't know, I can't confirm that, it doesn't look like it's in a finished
29 11:14:40 30
Yes.
state such as would be presented to the council, it may well have been. Q
254
Yes, if you look at 7207 which will come up on screen beside you now, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:14:46
11:15:08
37 1
Mr. Murray. And you will see there proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded
2
by Councillor McGrath that "The manager's report and the proposed amendments to
3
the draft plan recommended therein and shown on DP92/44" and it sets out what
4
those changes are and "was put to the council" and as happens lost, and if you
5
go back to the map the original of which is in front of you and a copy of which
6
is on screen at 7203, you will note you are looking at DP92/44, isn't that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. It didn't look finished to me. 255
11:15:28 10
The report did say if they were prepared to accept it, proper maps would be drawn on foot of it. But looking at it now, Mr. Murray, is it fair to say that
11
the substantial portions of the changes on this map are directed towards the
12
lands of Monarch Properties.
13
A
14
Q
11:15:42 15
A
16
Q
The substantial changes? 256
Yes. Occur on those lands, yes.
257
Well we know from the earlier map that we looked at that there were northern
17
lands that are also zoned residential which are not apparently subject to any
18
change by the manager on this map, isn't that right?
19
A
That's right.
11:15:58 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon, would it be possible for Mr. Murray, if you put up
22
7039, the 1991 plan, the one that went out on the first public display, if they
23
could go up side by side if possible.
24 11:16:12 25
26
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Murray could work off the original he has in front of him and
he has that and we will work off the 7039 on screen please.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
now.
Just in fairness to himself, the point you are making to him
11:16:35 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:16:35
11:17:04
38 1
Q
258
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, 7021. You see on screen beside you, Mr. Murray, at 7021,
2
these are the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley that were
3
residentially zoned in 1983 and which as a result of DP90/129A are now zoned AP
4
and they went out on the first public display.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 259
The manager bring before the council through the planning department changes
7
that he proposes to the 1991 map and they are contained on map 92/44 which you
8
have in front of you?
9 11:17:13 10
A Q
Yes. 260
Now, what I had asked you was this, would you agree that the main change, the
11
substantial thrust of DP92/44 is directed towards the Monarch Properties'
12
lands?
13
A
14
Q
Just can I clarify what changes you are talking about? 261
11:17:41 15
Well the suggestion that the zoning density would be changed from AP to A1P encompasses in the main the Monarch property lands and not the balance of the
16
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley, isn't that correct?
17
A
18
Q
That's correct, yes. 262
19
In fact if you look at the map that's on screen to your left, which is 7021 I think, you will see that all of the lands coloured yellow is zoned residential
11:17:59 20
and if you go back to look at DP92/44 you will see that the changes proposed by
21
the manager to changing the density from AP to A1P relate substantially only to
22
the Monarch lands?
23
A
Perhaps I will clarify, I am not sure what you mean when you say change in the
24
density. AP was to be four to the acre on piped services. A1P is the same
11:18:28 25
density as far as I recollect, four to the acre but that the lands must be
26
subject to action area plan. That's the implication of the one.
27
Q
28
A
263
So all -- to the extent that the Monarch lands are affected, it means that the
29 11:18:54 30
And that action area plan --
lands within the Cherrywood area are to be the subject of an action area plan. Q
264
And the action area plan will make provision for retail, neighbourhood www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:18:58
11:19:07
39 1
facilities, shopping, schools, houses, matters such as that sort?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
That's correct. 265
Yes. 266
6
It will be prepared by the planners and it will come back into the council to be approved, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 267
9 11:19:19 10
And it will come back into the council for approval?
There's no provision in this map for the northern lands to be subject to an area action plan?
A
No, the view is taken at that point that the area between the valley to the
11
north and the N11 and the Brides Glen and the motorway was a reasonably
12
discrete area and should be subject to its own local area plan and that was the
13
view at that point.
14
Q
268
11:19:44 15
On DP92/44 the small area to the west of the map, the change that's being proposed there is from B to AP, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:19:54 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 269
That's not a change for action area plan, is that right? That's right.
270
And that's again outside the Monarch take. Yes.
271
And again, if I can ask you just to confirm that what the manager is also
22
proposing is to move again the notional 1983 line somewhat further west and to
23
rezone the lands that were agriculture to A1P again.
24
A
11:20:16 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
That's the, yes, yes. 272
And -It's the first line that you come across to the left of the old line, yes.
273
And the effect of that would have been to leave Monarch with a reduced amount
28
of agriculturally zoned land and an increased amount of residentially zoned
29
land, is that right?
11:20:32 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:20:32
11:20:43
40 1
Q
274
2
subject to an action area plan?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 275
5
And the action area plan would have -- the planners would have created a plan which would have had to come back into the councillors for their approval.
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 276
8 9
All of which residentially zoned land was going to be, if this was passed,
And the councillors when the action area plan came back into them could have made any changes they liked?
A
11:20:53 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 277
Isn't that the position? Yes.
278
So that effectively, if this had been passed and it's adopted and accepted by
13
the council, the Monarch lands would have been opted out, as it were, of the
14
1993 review.
11:21:08 15
A
Well the zoning would have been fixed at A1 and the detail of the further
16
development of the detail of the lands use for the area wouldn't take place in
17
that plan.
18
Q
19
A
11:21:23 20
Q
279
That's right. Would have been done afterwards.
280
Yes and it would have allowed for the council or it would have allowed for the
21
council after the 1993 plan was made, everybody would have known that there was
22
going to be a reconsideration or an immediate reconsideration of the Monarch
23
lands.
24
A
If that had been passed, there would have been local area plan, or action area
11:21:43 25
26
plan prepared, yes. Q
281
27
was lost?
28
A
29
Q
11:21:59 30
That in the event was unsuccessful, isn't that correct, Mr. Murray, the vote
Right. 282
And the council did not accept the manager's changes, isn't that right? You will have seen that in the documentation but they did approve a motion by www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:22:03
11:22:21
41 1
Councillor Barrett at 7175 please. And Councillor Barrett's motion encompassed
2
all of the residentially zoned lands in the Cherrywood area on map 27, isn't
3
that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 283
6
And Councillor Barrett's motion which was passed was a motion to confine the density of those lands at one house to the acre?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 284
9
Now, can I ask you this, Mr. Murray, as a professional planner: That went out on the second public display and representations were made about it and it came
11:22:44 10
back in for final consideration by the councillors in November of 1993. If
11
that motion, when a vote was brought in November 1993 seeking to confirm that
12
change and that motion was lost, what was the effect of losing the motion from
13
your point of view, what would the map have been, do you understand the point
14
I'm making?
11:23:12 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
This map shows one to the acre. 285
As per the motion. 286
19 A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:23:34 25
Q
Can we see that one? 287
The motion? Yes.
288
It's November 1993. And the map.
289
26
Yes. The 7174 no, you are looking for the motion seeking to confirm the change in November 1993.
27
A
28
Q
11:24:08 30
It went out on public display, the second display at one to the acre. A motion was brought seeking to confirm the change.
11:23:27 20
29
One to the acre. And --
The one you are asking me about and the map. 290
Yes. The motion is at 7224. Now, the first part of that is the motion, "Dublin County Council resolves that the lands referred to as change 3 on map 27 be confirmed as low density housing" and change 3 on map 27 can be seen on www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:24:15
11:24:41
42 1
7218. Sorry, 7217. Now, you will see in the centre of the yellow lands there,
2
3.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 291
5
successful passing of Mr. Barrett's motion.
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 292
8 9
A Q
11
A
12
Q
Right. 293
294
A
If the motion to change what went on display was lost, well then it would have been what went on display which was one to the acre.
Q
295
17
It went on display on the first public display, the second -- this is the second public display.
18
A
19
Q
It would be the second public display has it at one to the acre, is that right. 296
11:25:32 20
Has it as one to the acre and that is lost and not confirmed, what takes its place?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:25:41 25
A
26
Q
It would revert. 297
So what had gone on display in 1991, the first public display? Yes.
298
Which would have been four to the acre. Yes.
299
27
It wouldn't have reverted as I think Mr. Barrett suggested yesterday to what had been on the map in 1983?
A
No, no, what went on display first was the draft plan which if it was not to be
29 11:25:56 30
Now, if no other motion had been brought, Mr. Murray, what would the status of those lands have been in the '93 plan?
11:25:12 15
28
And that was lost? Right.
13
16
And that went on public display and there was then a motion brought by Councillors Buckley and Misteil to confirm change 3.
11:24:53 10
14
And change 3 was the change in density brought about as a result of the
changed would become the plan. Q
300
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:25:57
11:26:09
43 1
A
2
Q
So if it's not changed by this process, well then it would become the plan. 301
3
The sequence here was that the 1991 draft plan had it at four to the acre in the first public display.
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 302
6
As a result of Councillor Barrett's motion, the second public display it's one to the acre, the confirming motion is lost.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 303
9
And if there had been no other motion, you say it would have reverted to the 1991 draft of four to the acre.
11:26:23 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 304
And it would not have reverted to the 1983 plan. That's correct.
305
14
Can I just show you very briefly, Mr. Murray, the motion that was brought in November 1993 at 7227 please. This is the map attached to a motion and I will
11:26:46 15
she you the text in a minute, would you agree the outline of those lands are
16
the Monarch lands?
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 306
19
And the motion is at 7226. And this motion seeks to accept the county manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands
11:27:03 20
outlined in red on at attached map and the attached map are the Monarch lands
21
only, is that right, you have just seen it?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:27:16 25
Q
Yes. 307
And that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare. Yes.
308
The effect of that motion and what that motion was seeking, Mr. Murray, was to
26
rezone the Monarch lands at four to the acre and the balance of the
27
residentially zoned lands at one to the acre?
28
A
29
Q
11:27:31 30
Yes. 309
Isn't that right? Looking at the plan from your knowledge and experience of the location, what are the reasons that would justify making such a distinction www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:27:36
11:27:57
44 1 2
in the residentially zoned lands? A
I couldn't, I wouldn't come up with any reasons to make a distinction like
3 4
that. Q
310
If you look at the map at 7217 and these are the residentially zoned lands in
5
the Carrickmines Valley and from your knowledge of the area, are there any
6
reasons that would justify a zoning of four to the acre for the Monarch lands
7
and that the balance of those lands at one to the acre?
8
A
9
Q
No. 311
11:28:19 10
I think you would agree, I think what happened and you have seen it from the documents and you would know this, that these lands were zoned at the Monarch
11
lands were zoned at four to the acre and the balance of the lands were zoned at
12
one to the acre in the 1983 plan, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 312
11:28:35 15
And I think also as a result of a motion brought by Councillor Gilmore A district centre zoning was achieved an a portion of the lands.
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 313
18
And I think that the manager was not in favour of the district centre zoning, is that right?
19
A
11:28:49 20
Q
I don't know that, I don't know the answer to that. 314
I think in May I think the manager had said in May -- sorry, when they came
21
into the confirming meeting, the manager I think had recommended that the
22
amendment be deleted at 7265.
23
A
24
Q
11:29:26 25
That's the Gilmore's motion? 315
Yes, this is when it came back in for the confirming meeting and the manager is giving his report in relation to the rezoning, he recommends the amendment be
26
deleted and the amendment of course is the amendment putting the town centre on
27
the lands, isn't that right?
28
A
I think what was proposed there was a town centre, what the manager was saying
29
only retail of a neighbourhood centre scale should be allowed so to put a bald
11:29:49 30
town centre zoning on would be inappropriate. Without any kind of limitation www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:29:55
11:30:05
45 1 2
on the retail. Q
316
3 4
isn't that right? A
There was an amendment there then and the manager would have withdrawn an
5
objection at that point.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:30:15 10
And that amendment was in fact I think adopted by the councillors and accepted,
Q
317
And the effect of that was to cap the retail element at neighbourhood size. Yes.
318
And that became an objective in fact in the written statement. Yes.
319
Now, would it be fair to, Mr. Murray, arising out of what happened in the
11
course of the review of the Development Plan that the best chance that Monarch
12
had of maximising their potential in relation to the lands was DP90/123 had it
13
been accepted?
14
A
11:30:40 15
Q
The best chance? 320
16 17
Yes. In other words the most benefit would have accrued to the Monarch lands if DP90/123 had been accepted?
A
You can't just say that. I mean DP90 had the motorway thing going through,
18
just south, off their lands. From a strategic point of view, that whole area
19
was always an area which proper planning and development would require to be
11:31:06 20
zoned and developed at normal densities and for a range of uses. And that's
21
why DP90/123 came along. And their best bet, Monarch's best bet I suppose in
22
terms of what happened subsequently, would have been if that had gone through,
23
yes, if that's what you are asking me.
24
Q
321
11:31:37 25
That was the question. I mean the most advantageous plan that was put forward from Monarch's point of view in the review of the 1938 plan was DP90/123, the
26
zoning was normal zoning density, it had industrial zoning, it had town centre
27
zoning and it had no Southeastern Motorway, isn't that right?
28
A
29
Q
11:31:59 30
That's right. 322
And when that was unsuccessful, in other words when the councillors did not accept that, it followed that there had to be a second approach by Monarch, www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:32:04
11:32:17
46 1
isn't that right? They then had to make a submission to the Development Plan.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
They did, yes. 323
Yes, that's the process. 324
And that's what happened. Yes.
325
Isn't that right? Well, you said to have motions prepared, I don't know if they had them prepared
9 11:32:27 10
And then it became necessary to have motions prepared by councillors.
but they were certainly prepared. Q
326
11
Motions that affected the Monarch lands both for and against were brought before the council in May of 1992, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 327
14
And had the motion that, let's say the pro Monarch motion been successful, it would have had a certain effect but it wasn't successful, isn't that right?
11:32:44 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 328
And would it be fair to that the last chance of salvaging anything for Monarch
17
Properties arose when the matter came back in before the council to be
18
confirmed in November 1993?
19
A
11:32:58 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 329
Isn't that right? Yes.
330
23
At that stage, they had to get whatever they could, they had to claw back whatever they could, isn't that right?
24
A
11:33:09 25
Q
I imagine so, yes. 331
26
Because if they didn't, they were going to be left with one house to the acre on the 1993 plan.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:33:19 30
Q
Yes. 332
And any change in connection with that would require a material contravention? Or a variation.
333
Or a variation but a material contravention would require a 75 percent majority www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:33:25
11:33:33
47 1
of the council, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 334
4
And whereas a vote on a Development Plan is a simple majority vote, a vote of one will do you, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 335
So that it became essential for Monarch to ensure insofar as they could that
7
what had happened in May of 1992 with Mr. Barrett's motion was not replicated
8
in November 1993 when the matter came back in before the council.
9 11:33:50 10
A Q
Yes. 336
Can I ask you finally, Mr. Murray, about what you know about the making of the
11
area action plan, you will have heard Mr. Quinn talking about with Mr. McCabe
12
earlier this morning about the action area plan in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
13
County Council in early 1994. And can you tell the Tribunal what you recollect
14
of the making of that action area plan?
11:34:28 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Of the making of it, how the lines were drawn on the map? 337
I think there was an objective in the Development Plan to prepare one. 338
19
to map 27. And if we have 7280 please. These are the special objectives in
21
relation to map 27, isn't that right? A
I must have been mistaken in relation to that then. I don't, then the answer
23 24
is I don't recall how work was commenced or why work was commenced. Q
339
11:35:27 25
Yes. Did you have any discussions with anybody from Monarch Properties as to the making of an action area plan or how an action area plan might arise in the
26
new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
27
A
28
Q
29 11:35:49 30
Just one second. To be fair to yourself, Mr. Murray, I am not at all sure that that in fact is correct, I will just get you the written statement in relation
11:34:53 20
22
No, no. How it came to be that there was an action area plan in early 1994?
I can't, I don't recall. 340
The 1993 Development Plan was made or confirmed on the 10th December 1993, is that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:35:50
11:36:02
48 1
Q
341
2
And in January of 1994, old Dublin County Council split into three local authority areas, is that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 342
There was Fingal, South Dublin and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council? Yes.
343
7
And you became at that stage the planning officer for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 344
11:36:12 10
And Mr. O' Sullivan became the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 345
13
And you had both previously within the planning officer designate and the manager designate, isn't that right?
14
A
11:36:21 15
Q
Yes. 346
And would it be fair to that this land in the Carrickmines Valley was one of
16
the last undeveloped pieces of land within Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
17
Council?
18
A
Well one of the last undeveloped and with access to new sewerage facilities,
19 11:36:41 20
yes. Q
347
And there were a number of matters that were going to be important in relation
21
to developing any of that land, one was the introduction and actual
22
implementation of the Carrickmines sewer?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 348
11:36:59 25
And that would require an input from the department of the environment in relation to the provision of money?
26
A
27
Q
That's my recollection. Yeah. 349
28
In determining the speed of the matter could be implemented, the quicker you got the money, the quicker the sewer was going to built?
29
A
11:37:12 30
Q
I would imagine so, it wasn't my area. 350
And The other item that was going to be important was determine the line of the www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:37:16
11:37:27
49 1
motorway?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 351
In the making of the 1993 plan, the council had unanimously adopted a
4
resolution and indeed it became part of the statement that, it became an
5
objective of the council to develop a golf course on the lands at Lehaunstown?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:37:38 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 352
And they were the Sean Galvin lands, isn't that right? Yes.
353
And those lands joined immediately the Monarch property lands. Yes.
354
12
And a movement of the motorway line off Monarch Properties lands was going to bring it into Mr. Galvin's lands?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 355
11:37:53 15
And vice versa, if you were take it go off Mr. Galvin's lands, it was either going into the Monarch Properties --
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:38:07 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 356
-- was a westerly line, it was even further west than Mr. Galvin's lands. Well the bit we are talk being, it may still have been on his lands.
357
Yes but not cutting it in two? Cut can it in some fraction.
358
Yes, so there would have been certain competing interests that would have to be
22
balanced, is that right? By the planners in approaching this, you have a
23
stated objectivity of the public golf course and you have the residential
24
development with the town centre of on it, both of them brought in under the
11:38:29 25
1993 plan, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 359
28
And the line of the south eastern motorway was going to be an important determinant in deciding how things were going to progress in the area?
29
A
11:38:41 30
Q
Yes. 360
Right. And at that stage was is still the position that development would stop www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:38:43
11:38:46
50 1
at the line of the motorway, Mr. Murray?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
In that particular location? 361
Yes. Yes.
362
6
So that it was still the council position that once the line was fixed and built, there would be no development to the west of that line?
7
A
8
Q
I don't know was it explicit but it was a fact, yes. 363
9
And that was the understanding of the planning department, isn't that right, in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
11:39:05 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 364
And in a way when one looks at it and looking back at it, is that the more land
12
available for actual development would have had a knock-on effect for revenue
13
for the council, is that right?
14
A
11:39:23 15
Q
Revenue in terms of levies? 365
Yes. So the more houses you build, the more industry you brought in, the more
16
development there was, then the more revenue stream would be created for the
17
council?
18
A
That's right but there were also costs involved. If the revenue was to meet
19 11:39:41 20
costs, it's not just pure revenue. Q
366
No, no. I mean accepting all of that, but I mean it's a cause and effect, you
21
ever going to have to put a very expensive sewer through the Carrickmines
22
Valley, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 367
11:39:54 25
Zoning at one house to the acre was unlikely to pay for that by way of development levies?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct. 368
28
Therefore the increase in density that would follow would have assisted in paying for the sewer, if I can put it at its simplest?
29
A
11:40:04 30
Q
Yes. 369
There were certain infrastructural matters that had been set out as five year www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:40:09
11:40:22
51 1
proposals such as the Wyattville Road and the Southeastern Motorway in the 1993
2
plan, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 370
And they were going to have to be paid for, isn't that right? Yes.
371
One of the sources of revenue for the council would have been development. Yes.
372
9
So the council itself would have had some interest in the line of the motorway as being the end line for development, isn't that right?
11:40:32 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 373
Because the more development you got to the east of the line, the better you
12
were in a position to balance your books by way of paying for the
13
infrastructural developments.
14
A
11:40:45 15
Q
Well, yes I suppose so. 374
It's simple, isn't it. Now, I think that in January of 1994, in fact the 6th
16
January 1994 at 4923, you are recorded here, Mr. Murray, as informing
17
Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lafferty of Monarch Properties Limited under the heading 2,
18
where it says "zoning action plan" and I wrote "Willie Murray stated he would
19
expect to have the action plan complete in approximately two months time and it
11:41:16 20
would draw attention to the anomaly of the B zonings, the recommendation would
21
be that this be changed to AP zoning."
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 375
24
Well first of all, would you agree you must have had a meeting on the 6th of January 1994 with Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lafferty?
11:41:36 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 376
27
And that you appear there to be telling them there's going to be an action plan and you will have it ready in two months?
28
A
29
Q
11:41:46 30
You see that?
Yes. 377
Isn't that right? And that you are going to draw the attention to the anomaly of the B zoning. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:41:47
11:42:11
52 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 378
And an action plan was prepared, isn't that right, by April of 1994? Yes.
379
And I think that is at 2722 and I just want to draw to your attention in the
5
report that speaks to that map, Mr. Murray, at 7473, just on the last paragraph
6
there, the report notes "Two areas of land located between the proposed
7
motorway and residentially zoned land and totalling 26.4 hectares are presently
8
zoned partly B agriculture and partly G high amenity. It is considered this
9
zoning is now somewhat anomalous and these lands should be further examined and
11:42:37 10
they are shown for future consideration on the action plan."
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 380
Now, I am drawing to your attention there the use of the words anomalous
13
together with the earlier record of you informing Mr. Lafferty and Mr. Sweeney
14
at 4923, that the report would draw attention to the anomaly of the B zoning
11:43:00 15
and the recommendation would be that these would be changed to AP.
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 381
And then if you look at the map at 2722 please, and can I ask you, were the
18
lands that you were talking about, the lands within the take of Monarch
19
Properties which are zoned agriculture immediately adjoining the residentially
11:43:24 20
zoned lands to the south of the picture and then the agricultural lands
21
adjoining the residentially zoned lands in the centre of the picture?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 382
24
So what you were acknowledging in January of 1994 to Monarch Properties was that you felt or it was your opinion that that zoning was anomalous and that
11:43:47 25
the zoning should be changed?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 383
28
Notwithstanding the decision in December of 1993 by the councillors that the zoning should be agriculture.
29
A
11:43:59 30
Q
Not withstanding it? 384
Yes, I mean the decision had been made in December 1993 by the councillors that www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:44:03
11:44:14
53 1
the zoning on that land would be a portion of it residential and a portion of
2
it agriculture, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
That's right. 385
5
that the agricultural zoning should be changed to residential?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
That's right. 386
387
And you had explained that to Monarch Properties and you told them that you were having an action area plan prepared?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 388
13
Now, the action area plan with respect to you, Mr. Murray, seems to deal only with the Monarch Properties lands, is that right, would that be fair to say?
A
No. That's not fair to at all. The red line encloses the Monarch lands but
11:44:42 15
16
Right. And was that, and that was your view obviously, is that right? Yes.
11:44:26 10
14
And in January of 1994, you are expressing your view that that's anomalous and
the action plan goes much further than the Monarch lands. Q
389
17
If we have the full action area plan on screen please, Mr. Kavanagh, this is the full extent of the action plan.
18
A
19
Q
11:44:57 20
A
Yes. 390
Now, and you say it doesn't focus on the Monarch Properties lands. No, I am saying it doesn't relate exclusively to the Monarch lands. It relates
21
to the entire land segment between Cabinteely and the new motorway line and
22
Carrickmines and the N11.
23
Q
24
A
11:45:12 25
Q
391
Right. And Brides Glen.
392
I must show you our own report of the Cherrywood action plan, 7472 and I want
26
to drawer to your attention under the heading "location" the note presumably by
27
yourself, "The plan centres on 236 acres of land presently owned by Monarch
28
Properties Limited." Now which is correct, Mr. Murray, the evidence you have
29
just given to Tribunal or the report that you prepared at the time the draft
11:45:39 30
action plan was prepared? www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:45:40
11:46:00
54 1
A
2
Q
Both are correct. It does centre on Monarch lands are in the centre of it. 393
I had asked you did you agree with me that the plan centred on the Monarch
3
lands and you had said no, that you had said the plan was dealing with other
4
lands in the area and I am just drawing to your attention what you yourself
5
said in the report that went to the Planning Development and Tourism Committee
6
on the 25th May 1994?
7
A
It it's a descriptive term that the Monarch lands are in the centre of the
8
local area, local action area plan. I am not disagreeing with you in that
9
sense but it's not exclusively about the Monarch lands, that's what I was
11:46:21 10
11
trying to say. Q
394
And certainly in the body of the report in dealing with the main element of the
12
plan, you deal with the anomalies, is that right, that the 7473, you deal with
13
a number of houses, you deal with the district centre and neighbourhood shops
14
and the park and ride, isn't that right? Now the district centre is dealing
11:46:58 15
only with the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
The district centre is located in the Monarch lands, yes. 395
18
identified, isn't that right?
19
A
11:47:08 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 396
And that's the anomaly on the Monarch Properties lands. Well there's two, two areas of land in the anomaly as it were.
397
23
If you just leave it on screen, Mr. Kavanagh, increase it Mr. Kavanagh, the bottom part of the page. Thank you.
24
A
11:47:44 25
Q
26 27
The anomaly to which you refer is dealing with the anomaly you had earlier
The last paragraph refers to two areas of land. 398
Would you agree that in the main, the action plan is dealing primarily if not exclusively with the Monarch Properties lands?
A
The action plan relates to all of the lands, the Monarch lands are central to
28
it, they contain as it happens the town centre, district centre, they don't
29
contain the golf course, they don't contain the river valleys, they don't
11:48:07 30
contain the land which is up near Cabinteely. They are central. www.pcr.ie Day 651
11:48:11
11:48:28
55 1
Q
399
2 3
Mr. Murray, is it? A
No, it's for the Cherrywood to Carrickmines section, the valley would proceed
4 5
then up towards Ballyogan and Stepaside. Q
400
6
And did you do an action area plan for the balance of the Carrickmines Valley, that part not covered by the action plan?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:48:40 10
But it's not an action area plan for the entire of the Carrickmines Valley,
Q
We did ultimately. 401
At this time, in January 1994? Not at this time.
402
11
Would you agree, Mr. Murray, that you and your department had extensive contacts with the personnel from Monarch Properties over the years?
12
A
13
Q
I would say so, yes. 403
14
And that your diaries record a very significant number of meetings with various individuals, including but not limited to Mr. Eddie Sweeney?
11:48:57 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:49:06 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 404
Mr, I think Richard Lynn. Not so many with him but some, yes.
405
Mr. Noel Murray? Yes.
406
Mr. Phillip Reilly? Yes.
407
And I think Mr. Phillip Monahan on one occasion at least? Perhaps, yes.
408
Can you remember the circumstances under which you came to meet Mr. Monahan.
11:49:18 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon, could I stop you there, we will break for a few
27
minutes. We will break for ten minutes.
28 29 11:49:33 30
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS: www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:05:54
12:06:00
56 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Murray please.
3 4
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF MR. WILLIAM MURRAY
5
BY MS. DILLON:
6 7
Q
409
8 9
you had met Mr. Phillip Monahan prior to the break, is that right? A
Yes, if it's on record that I met him, I know I met him but I am not quite sure
12:06:28 10
11
Good afternoon, Mr. Murray. I think I had just asked you about whether or not
where. Q
410
I think there's an entry in your diary but there is also a record of a meeting
12
with Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan in fairness you were not present at on the 13th May
13
1996 at 5936. And this is a meeting involving Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan, Mr. Dermot
14
Drumgoole, Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mr. Noel Murray and I want to drawer to your
12:06:52 15
attention at 5937, the following page, under the heading "Galvin's golf course
16
lands. "PM advised he had bought the lands with Manor Park Home Builders with
17
a view to jointly developing these lands. PM -- that's Mr. Monahan -- stated
18
that he would like to move the Dun Laoghaire golf club from its present
19
position over the Cherrywood lands. KOS -- that's Mr. O' Sullivan -- stated he
12:07:15 20
did not think it would be as easy as Mr. Monahan thought. He stated that a
21
number of public representatives had preliminary discussions with him in this
22
regard and they were still sitting on the fence. Mr. Monahan stated he was of
23
the view at least 60 to 70 percent of the committee of Dun Laoghaire golf club
24
were in favour of them moving.
12:07:30 25
26
Mr. Monahan gave a brief outline of how he would like to see the road moved to
27
enable the golf course be developed on the mountain side of the new road, Mr.
28
O' Sullivan advise the EIS on the Southeastern Motorway was at an advanced
29
stage."
12:07:46 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:07:46
12:07:59
57 1
Did you know anything about a proposal, Mr. Murray, to swap or exchange lands
2
with either the Dun Laoghaire golf course or any golf course with lands at
3
Cherrywood?
4
A
I know about those sort of considerations, those sort of ideas at some point in
5
time, but as to when, I don't know. I mean it was always a possibility that
6
someone would come up with a suggestion like that. But I don't know when or
7
when I became aware that it might be a possibility, I just don't know.
8
Q
411
9
But certainly if this is an accurate note of what happened in May of 1996, Mr. Monahan appeared to be suggesting that there would be a change or an
12:08:20 10
exchange of lands between Dun Laoghaire golf club and the Cherrywood lands?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 412
Were you aware of any such suggestion? I couldn't say that I was or not, I don't think I was but I don't know.
413
12:08:38 15
Thank you very much, Mr. Murray, if you answer any questions anybody else may have.
16 17
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, just one or two questions.
18 19
THE WITNESS WAS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. SANFEY:
12:08:44 20
21 22
Q
414
Mr. Murray, my name is Mark Sanfey, I represent Monarch Properties, just one or two questions arising out of your evidence.
23 24
Ms. Dillon asked you in relation to the December 1993 meeting as to whether
12:09:00 25
there was any reason justifying as a differentiation between a zoning balance
26
of four to the acre for Monarch Properties and one to the acre for everyone
27
else and you gave a one word answer to that question and you said no. Can I
28
take it that your answering that question in your capacity as a planning person
29
and that you are not aware of any valid planning reason as to why that should
12:09:30 30
be so? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:09:31
12:09:48
58 1
A
That's what I'm saying. I don't see any difference between the land within or
2 3
outside the Monarch lands in relation to planning or in relation to density. Q
415
4
In fact in December 1993, the manager was recommending the deletion of change 3 for the whole of the valley, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 416
7
And in fact Councillors Marren and Coffey proposed motion to delete change 3 but limited that change to the Monarch lands?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 417
12:10:04 10
With the result that it would remain one per acre for the balance of the lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 418
I take it you would accept as a general proposition, Mr. Murray, that
13
councillors take a number of factors into account, not just pure planning
14
factors and they have a number of matters to deal with interests of their
12:10:20 15
constituents, political matters and so on?
16
A
17
Q
Well I don't know what councillors take into account. 419
Right. Well suppose what I'm really is you to confirm your one word answer no
18
was really wearing your planning hat, that you couldn't see any valid planning
19
reason?
12:10:38 20
A
21
Q
Oh yes, absolutely. 420
Because last Wednesday we had Councillor Marren here who spoke at length about
22
the various reasons that he had for limiting it to the Monarch lands and they
23
were mainly political reasons what he saw to be the interests of his
24
constituents and so on but you have no reason to --
12:10:57 25
A
That's as may be, I mean I thought the question was directed to me as planning
26 27
witness and planning expert and that's the context in which I answered it. Q
421
28
And you have certainly no reason to doubt Councillor Marren's bona fides in relation to the reasons he advanced?
29
A
12:11:15 30
Q
I have no idea what he said. 422
Thank you. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:11:15
12:11:38
59 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
would primarily decide the route of the motorway which moved as the whole plan
4
for the valley progressed. It moved from one location to another and what I
5
understand your evidence, it is to the effect that the engineers to the council
6
would have primarily driven the ideas which would give rise to the movement of
7
the line from time to time and not the planners.
8
A
9
Mr. Murray, could I just ask you, you have explained how engineers
I don't think, Chairman, that would be entirely true. The engineers would be responsible for the alignment and functionality of the road line. Clearly, you
12:12:13 10
know, strategic planning considerations come in also. We have a situation
11
where there was limited amount of zoned or serviceable serviced land, it was a
12
scarce resource, that the motorway was likely to remain as the barrier in that
13
location to development.
14
And therefore there is a planning desire to increase the amount of land
12:12:39 15
available for development because it's obviously scarce. So there is a
16
planning input into a decision but the actual final line must be, must meet the
17
functionality requirements and the technical design requirements of the
18
engineers.
19 12:12:53 20
CHAIRMAN:
Exactly but that's as I would have assumed it, that the, if you
21
like, the main driving force behind the location of the motorway line would be
22
from the planners and then obviously the engineers would have to then take into
23
account the sort of lie of the land and so on.
24
A
Mmm.
12:13:19 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
particular location would be, that would be coming from the planners.
28 29 12:13:41 30
A
But that the main driving force behind the line going into a
Well there were numerous studies done and all sorts of environmental and ecological and landscape considerations and obviously the planning considerations to maximise the amount of available development land. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:13:45
12:13:59
60 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
be going through the Monarch lands.
4
A
We see in the earlier maps, the proposed route of the motorway to
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
blessing, so to speak, of that time of the engineers.
8
A
And presumably when that line was drawn, that would have had the
That would have been very early on. It didn't firm up until --
9 12:14:12 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A
12
Yes but that line --
Oh it would have, it would have. Well, I can't say if it actually, it must have. It must have. They wouldn't have gone with it.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:14:35 15
16
And then we see the line moving significantly west of that
position. A
Yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
what would be the approximate distance between the line as it originally went
12:14:49 20
through the Monarch lands and the line as we subsequently see it west of the
21 22
In terms of distance, as a matter of interest, what would it be,
Monarch -- are we talking about a half a mile or -A
23
Well it would be a matter of the fact of whatever line you choose, you have to measure it.
24 12:15:10 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
But it's a significant distance.
To where it ended up, it is, yes. But to the first shift, it's not hugely significant -- a couple of hundred metres.
28 29 12:15:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
I know you can't be certain as to how the lines were shifted and
the reasons for them, but is it likely that the suggestion for the line being www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:15:40
12:16:02
61 1
moved to the extent that it was off the Monarch lands, that that suggestion is
2
unlikely to have come from the engineers but more likely to have come from the
3
planner or at least the planning side of the council?
4
A
Well the planning input would have been to maximise the amount of land.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A
Yes.
But as regards impetus and stuff, it's hards to, you know --
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
12:16:14 10
To put it another way, isn't it unlikely that the engineers, having
picked the or having at some stage been satisfied with the earlier line going
11
through the Monarch lands would have themselves said we want to move it a
12
significant distance away?
13
A
14
I wouldn't agree necessarily with you. We are looking at the line as it affects the Monarch lands but the line is influenced by things that are
12:16:44 15
happening further up and further down the line in terms of its geometrics and
16
as the studies develop and the alignment is firmed up in terms of landscape and
17
so on. You could well get an engineering inspired change but the two may very
18
well have come together on this, both the planning and engineering.
19 12:17:07 20
CHAIRMAN:
The preparation of the maps, DP90/123 and DP90/129A and indeed any
21
of the other maps we looked at, presumably somebody had to coordinate the
22
preparation of that map because as you have suggested there, the motorway line
23
is moving as I presume the other considerations are developing as these things
24
are being discussed at official level but somebody finally has to sit down and
12:17:38 25
draw the map, which is then produced to the council. And presumably somebody
26 27
has to coordinate that. A
Yes.
28 29 12:17:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
In that the engineers don't just draw their line of the motorway
and somebody else puts in different areas of zoning, presumably somebody at the www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:17:59
12:18:19
62 1
end of the day has to say this is what we will do, this is the map that we will
2
produce, who would do that?
3
A
Well the ultimate sign off will be by the manager on recommendation from the
4
technical officers and the technical officer on the roadside would be the
5
county engineer and I would be the technical officer on the planning side.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
which culminates in this map, is that coordinated in some way? Somebody
9
presumably has to at the end of the day, produce for the manager a map saying
12:18:44 10
11
Well is there, is that -- is that effort from different people
this is our combined view as to what the map should show? A
Well I couldn't tell you now at this point in time whether we had sign off on
12
that map, you know, precisely in relation to the final line of the road from
13
the county engineer. I don't know if we had or if we hadn't. But it was, we
14
did say that the map wasn't to be a final map. It was an indication of a
12:19:10 15
structure that would work and then the final map would then, you know, if it
16
was adopted, the motorway may well have changed when it was brought as a
17
Development Plan map to the council.
18 19 12:19:23 20
CHAIRMAN: A
But somebody had to, in the council, had to prepare that map.
That was prepared in the planning department.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
24
Yes. And by whom, who would actually physically prepare the map?
Well there were quite a number of studies done that led to the map, you know, differing versions of it, would probably still available.
12:19:40 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
Is there --
It was a Development Plan team which Enda Conway was in charge of and the
28
actual drawing of the map would be done by the drawing office.
29
CHAIRMAN:
12:19:58 30
And would there be somebody coordinating or chairing those meetings
and who would eventually say right, this is what we have agreed? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:20:02
12:20:17
63 1
A
2
Well yeah, it would have come as a draft and I would have been involved in approving it and bringing it to the manager.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
would appear on that version, that final version that would go to the manager,
6
would that be based on, I mean would the engineers have been involved in that,
7
making that final decision?
8
A
9
Yes. And the line on the motorway, the line of the motorway as
They would certainly have been shown it, you know, and it may well have gone to the development coordination meeting, I am not quite sure about that. But we
12:20:43 10
were in a situation where everybody was, for all those years, extremely busy
11
dealing with all these things and it wasn't always possible to get sign off
12
from everybody on everything.
13 14 12:21:00 15
CHAIRMAN: A
All right.
So that's why it was left that, if the structure is, the basic structure is
16
adopted and the principles, the lines weren't as important as the principles,
17
the principle was that the motorway interchanges would be the focus of the
18
industrial development and that certain areas were landscape areas, certain
19
were residential. If that 123 had been adopted, more detailed plans would have
12:21:27 20
been brought for the statutory process of the Development Plan. And they would
21
have had sign off by the county engineer in relation to the road. So that road
22
line was a planning road line if that's what you are really trying to get at,
23
essentially it was a planning road line.
24 12:21:50 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Thank you.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
Mr. Murray? If there's going to be an action area plan.
29 12:22:14 30
A
I just want to ask you, who decides on an action area plan,
Well, some times it's actually an objective of a Development Plan. Sometimes it is a zone which requires an action area plan to be prepared and other times www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:22:25
12:22:45
64 1
it may arise out of consideration of people want to make planning applications,
2
you have a general zoning, a blanket zoning so where do the schools go, where
3
do the shops go, where do the internal roads go and where do the open spaces
4
go. You need a plan to show that so the planning department would generally
5
produce such a plan:
6 7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
9
At that at the instigation of the council or --
It could be at the instigation of the council, it could be generated internally or it could be due to indications from developers that they want to lodge
12:22:58 10
planning applications.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
14
I see. And --
Sorry to interrupt you but the plan, the local area planner as they are now called, the action area plan would go through a process of approval with the
12:23:11 15
council.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
discussion with some of the Monarch representatives in early January.
19
A
Yes. The reason I ask you that, you obviously were in
Yes.
12:23:23 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
pretty shortly I think and you raise the anomaly of the, what you saw as the B
23
zoning on the Monarch lands, isn't that correct?
24
A
And you mentioned that you would have an action plan ready
Yes.
12:23:37 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
into being on the 1st January, isn't that correct?
28
A
29 12:23:52 30
Yes. JUDGE FAHERTY:
A
But I'm just wondering, obviously the new council only came
So the council hadn't met before the 6th January, had it?
I doubt it. I doubt it. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:23:54
12:23:56
65 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Unlikely, probably.
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
by Ms. Dillon in 1992, when the manager came back, that was the May 1992, this
7
was after the first public display, and the manager had proposals and he was
8
proposing changes, indeed to what had gone out on the first public display and
9
it was largely going from four houses to the acre on piped sewerage to A1P
12:24:30 10
Very well, can I just ask you, earlier I think you were asked
which you said involved an area action plan. And he wanted to further extend
11
the zoning, the residential zoning I think further south which would have
12
incorporated some of the Monarch lands.
13
A
To the motorway line, yes.
14 12:24:51 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes. And that map was put up and Ms. Dillon asked you a
16
question or sort of it put it to you that for the lands north of Monarch, if
17
you like north of the Brides Glen divide, there was no provision for an action
18
area plan on those lands and I think your answer was that that was a discrete
19
area and could have its own action area plan and I am just wondering why wasn't
12:25:27 20
that considered by the council at the time? That map you put out, it was
21
DP92/44. That was produced at the meeting, it didn't get anywhere because it
22
was voted down by the council but there was only provision for an action area
23
plan on lands which were largely Monarch lands, it wasn't exactly Monarch in
24
fairness but it didn't include the lands north of Monarch which were zoned
12:25:52 25
residential, the densities, certainly on the draft plan that had gone out four
26
to the acre. And I am just saying why would it not, why would it not be A1P,
27
you see there on the screen actually to your right, Mr. Murray, why would that
28
not have had, that type of zoning be put on the lands north of the Monarch
29
lands?
12:26:20 30
A
I don't know why but I mean I could make post hoc arguments as to why because I www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:26:26
12:26:45
66 1
said it's a relatively discrete piece of land separated from the valley by
2
another land, by a non-development zone which is G and there's a G zone
3
separating it from the bit over at the Carrickmines end as well. It does, it
4
can stand on its own and needn't necessarily --
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
that in fact all of the lands were zoned residential four to the acre.
8
A
Yes. I'm just saying in the light of your earlier answers
Yes.
9 12:26:57 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
In the first plan in 1991, isn't that right? And that was
11
indeed the map that had gone out in 1991. The sewer, the proposed sewer line
12
obviously would presumably I think you said earlier would run up north of the
13
Monarch lands, isn't that correct?
14
A
Yes.
12:27:14 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
envisaged that all these lands would be developed because they were zoned
18
residential as far as back as 1983 and I am just wondering why was the idea for
19
an area action plan just confined to that area and not for this other, albeit a
12:27:41 20
21
And would be serving the other of lands and it was always
discrete area, north of the Monarch lands? A
I don't really know the answer but it could have been because Monarch were the
22
people who were pushing to make things happen there. And it couldn't really
23
happen without a local area plan or an action area plan. It could have
24
influenced the extent of that particular study but I don't know the answer.
12:28:09 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.
29
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
12:28:19 30
www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:28:20
12:28:53
67 1
MR. QUINN:
Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan please.
2 3
MR. KEVIN O'SULLIVAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
4
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A
Good afternoon, Mr. O'Sullivan.
Good afternoon.
8 9
Q
423
12:29:03 10
MR. QUINN:
Good afternoon, Mr. O' Sullivan. You were asked on the 7th April
2006 to provide a statement to the Tribunal in relation to the lands at
11
Cherrywood and I think at brief pages 7597 to 7613 is your statement, dated the
12
24th April 2006 and I think you have already given evidence to the Tribunal and
13
I don't propose unless you insist I do so to go through that statement in any
14
detail at this stage.
12:29:22 15
A
I think in preparing that statement on the previous occasion, I think you
16
yourself had asked me to include the Monarch lands so in reality I reproduced
17
the previous statement.
18
Q
424
19
matter, you I think started out at a finance officer in Cork in 1976 and moved
12:29:48 20
to Dublin I think at a finance officer in 1987?
21
A
22
Q
City treasury In 1988, yes. 425
23 24
And in relation to just to refresh the Tribunal's memory in relation to this
By 1983 I think you were in Dun Laoghaire corporation with responsibility for Deansgrange?
A
In 1983, I was appointed an assistant city and an assistant county manager and
12:30:06 25
I was delegated functions at that time by Frank Feeley, the city and county
26
manager as assistant county manager for Dun Laoghaire corporation and
27
Deansgrange joint Burial Board.
28
Q
29 12:30:24 30
426
I think by September 1989 you had taken over from Mr. Morrissey who in turn had taken over from Mr. Redmond?
A
No, I took over from Mr. Prendergast, I was asked by Mr. Feeley at some stage www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:30:31
12:30:45
68 1
in August or September 1989 to move into the county, county and city. I am
2
sorry.
3
Q
4
A
427
I had responsibility for planning in the city and planning in the county with
5 6
the exception of Dun Laoghaire Borough. Q
428
7 8
I think the big issue vis-a-vis planning in September 1989 was the review of the Development Plan.
A
There was a review of the Development Plan in the country which was ongoing and
9 12:31:03 10
You had a planning responsibility overall planning responsibility?
there was about to be a review of the Development Plan in the city. Q
429
I think by September 1991, you moved, you changed your responsibilities and now
11
you became responsible for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown as assistant manager, is that
12
right, assistant county manager with responsibility for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown?
13
A
What happened in 1991 was that the government made a decision to proceed with
14
the split of the county, which had in fact been put on the long finger after
12:31:31 15
1985 and one of the decisions they made at the time was to appoint three
16
embryonic managers in effect. They were interviewed I think in July of that
17
year and I was one of the three who was offered appointment and I accepted
18
appointment in September.
19
Q
430
12:31:55 20
21
Yes. I think the idea at the time was that you would in time become the manager of the newly formed Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
A
That was enshrined in law and the -- enshrined in law and I think the idea was
22
that the three managers I suppose would take an interest in ensuring that the
23
break up took place?
24
Q
12:32:12 25
A
26
Q
27 28 29 12:32:30 30
431
In an orderly fashion. As orderly as possible, yes.
432
And I think the break up did take place on the 1st January 1994 and you became the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
A
The first thing we had to do was prepare what was called a reorganisation report. Memory is that that had to be prepared six months after the first meeting of the area committee and I think we prepared the reorganisation www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:32:35
12:32:58
69 1
report, publish the reorganisation report sometime during the summer of 1992
2
and in that reorganisation report, we targeted the 1st January 1994 as being
3
the date for the creation of the new authorities.
4
Q
433
Now, we know from evidence given by Mr. McCabe that the first submission made
5
by the Monarch Group was made in November 1989. I think you had been appointed
6
planning manager in September of 1989.
7
A
8
Q
I can't remember the date but it was some time in September 1989. 434
9
that submission at 6911 by Mr. McCabe on behalf of Monarch dealt with the
12:33:22 10
movement of the line of the motorway. Were you aware that that submission had
11 12
gone in at that time? A
I think the first time I saw was that submission was when I read some of the
13 14
And indeed just arising out of what the Tribunal dealt with, with Mr. Murray,
documentation that you would have circulated. Q
435
12:33:41 15
Now, you have given evidence previously in relation to DP90/123 and the various working papers, particularly working paper number 4 and I don't, unless you
16
wants to something addition to what you have already said, ask you any further
17
additional questions in relation to that.
18 19
Can I take you to 1993, Mr. O' Sullivan. You were the manager designate at
12:33:58 20
21
that stage, isn't that right? A
That's correct. In strict legal terms, the delegation as assistant county
22
manager was done by the -- still the city and county manager but it wasn't an
23
optional delegation in that he was obliged to make the delegation at that
24
stage.
12:34:16 25
Q
436
26
Laoghaire/Rathdown?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:34:33 30
Yes. But for all intents and purposes, you were going to be in charge of Dun
There was absolutely no doubt about that. 437
And any issue that might have arisen prior to January 1994 in relation to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown was an issue that, if it were important enough was to be brought to your attention, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:34:34
12:34:53
70 1
A
At that stage I was the area management was the technical term and my
2
responsibility at the time would have been Dun Laoghaire corporation which
3
still remained in place, Deansgrange Joint Burial Board which still remained in
4
place and what was called the Rathdown area of Dublin County Council.
5
Q
438
And there is equally no doubt but that and you have admitted to it in your
6
statement, you had a series of meetings with Monarch representatives throughout
7
your period, that is say to from --
8
A
9
Q
12:35:17 10
There were various meetings with representatives of Monarch, yes. 439
Now in June of 1994, Mr. Lynn prepared an action report for the Cherrywood lands and the Monarch interests and I just want to put in context.
11 12
We have now as of November 1994, a vote on the Cherrywood lands which provides
13
that the Monarch lands an the Monarch lands only will be zoned at a density of
14
four houses to the acre. Sorry, November 1993. For some reason in January
12:35:40 15
1994, it would appear that an action area plan had been undertaken and you have
16
heard Mr. Murray's evidence in that regard.
17 18
And now in June, there having been, that action plan having come before I think
19
it's the Planning and Tourism Committee in May 1994 of the council. It has
12:36:01 20
been adjourned to a June meeting, a June 1994 meeting as has a motion by
21
Councillor Gilmore in relation to the provision of a science and technology
22
park and if I could have 5206, this is a progress report from Mr. Lynn and
23
before I open that report, can I ask you, was there an understanding between
24
you and representatives of Monarch, you in your capacity as county manager,
12:36:28 25
that there would be a science and technology park within the Monarch lands and
26
that there would be some level of understanding or agreement between you as a
27
result of the siting of the science and technology park, that there would be a
28
review of the zoning of their lands in early 1994?
29 12:36:50 30
A
I think on the science and technology park, and certainly at the time that I did that narrative statement, my memory would have been that the first www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:36:55
12:37:22
71 1
initiative on the science and technology park was in 1994. Having seen the
2
statement of Richard Cremmins, that's brought back to me the question of the
3
Sprint programme and at that point I remembered that prior to 1994, discussions
4
were ongoing or there were discussions about the concept of a science and
5
technology park.
6
Q
7
A
440
Yes. And -Now in terms of the specific question you ask me, I don't believe there was any
8
understanding at that stage that in the variation for the science and
9
technology park, there was any question of any other variation being done as
12:37:39 10
11
well. Q
441
If I just refer you to Monarch's understanding as Mr. Lynn appears to have
12
noted it in 1994, June 1994. Under the heading variation to the Development
13
Plan, he provides "In September 1993, Monarch/Guardian agreed to give a letter
14
to Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan committing the landowner to reserving a significant
12:38:02 15
portion of land which could be considered by the incoming council for possible
16
industrial use to accommodate a science and technology park.
17 18
Any residentially zoned land thus taken up for industrial purposes was to be
19
compensated by bringing in the agriculturally zoned land for residential
12:38:18 20
purposes. There were a number of meetings at which personnel from Monarch and
21
Guardian were present. This proposal was hardened up and an understanding in
22
principle was reached with the county manager regarding it's format and the
23
timing and likely success with elected members although the timescale initially
24
envisaged has not been adhered to, the county manager has taken forward a draft
12:38:38 25
action area plan to the council at the meeting on the 23rd May 1994" and then
26 27
he refers to a copy of that? A
I don't remember there being anything as firm as that in 1993. In fact my
28
memory, I haves to say, my memory is that the question of the other Monarch
29
lands would have been on the table when firm discussions took place with them
12:39:04 30
about the joint venture in fact. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:39:07
12:39:28
72 1
Q
2
A
442
Joint venture I think comes in around June 1994, isn't that right? I can't remember how the joint venture came on the table, Mr. Quinn. I thought
3
it had come from some where within the council and I would have understood it
4
coming from within the council because in the first act of the new council in
5
January 1994 would have been to prepare a budget. And that proved to be an
6
extremely traumatic exercise and the lack of resources which the county had
7
became very apparent and led soon in fact to charges having to be introduced
8
which for some councillors would have been the first. So I think there would
9
have been an enthusiasm among many of the councillors for sort of getting
12:39:52 10
involved in some commercial activity which would generate income for the
11 12
council. Q
443
Can I put forward to you what Mr. Lynn's understanding was as of 16th June 1994
13
if we could have 5204, this is the same document but at a different section and
14
it's an addendum and it might be of assistance in dealing with the joint
12:40:14 15
venture:
16 17
It says "In speakings with Dermot Drumgoole, development officer Dun Laoghaire
18
County Council on the 16th inst", that's the 16th June 1994 "He indicated that
19
the government apparently favours that the science and technology park be
12:40:27 20
located on public lands, Fonthill and Abbotstown being mentioned as two likely
21
locations. He is preparing a draft submission for council approval for the
22
meeting on the 29th June recommending Cherrywood. He asked that we consider
23
the possibilities of the council taking an interest in the Cherrywood lands to
24
satisfy the public involvement stance of the government.
12:40:46 25
26
This appears to be very acceptable and it is recommended that serious
27
consideration be given to this matter and it be followed up. He has not had
28
the opportunity of discussing it with Kevin O'Sullivan, county manager, as of
29
yet."
12:41:00 30
That would appear to be, as far as Mr. Lynn is concerned, in any event, in June www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:41:04
12:41:20
73 1 2
1994, the genesis of the -A
I read that, Mr. Quinn, which is I can't I said to you that I had thought that
3
the initiative had come from the council itself. But at the end of the day, if
4
that happened, it happened. I don't remember it. I don't remember it being
5
raised with me by Mr. Drumgoole.
6
Q
7
A
444
Yes. But in any event, somebody must have raised it with you? It was raised, I know from my own point of view, initially I was uncomfortable
8
with it, but I got more enthusiastic as time went on and we finally agreed a
9
joint venture.
12:41:42 10
Q
445
11
cited in Cabinteely, is that right?
12
A
13
Q
In the context of that minute, that does seem to be the rationale of it, yes. 446
14
Now, the science and technology, would you agree with me that the science and technology park was being viewed by Monarch as an opportunity to vary the plan
12:42:04 15
16
It seems to have been raised so as to improve the chances of the park being
to their advantage? A
Well I suppose I never thought that the reason for the suggestion of a science
17
and technology park was altruistic. I have read some of the internal documents
18
that were produced and it's certainly a lot more calculating than I would have
19
thought at the time. And I think that it would appear anyway, that the Monarch
12:42:35 20
saw the science and technology park as a means of ensuring that zoning would
21 22
take place in the land, yes. Q
447
And I think it is the case that, and I put it to Mr. McCabe at 5211, that they
23
saw that the rezoning of the agricultural lands an the increase of residential
24
density resting on the premises that a science and technology park would be
12:42:57 25
brought to fruition.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29 12:43:15 30
I am not sure whether I would necessarily, Monarch may have seen that -448
That's what I mean? But I am I am not sure I would necessarily agree with that because certainly there was nothing zoned there which we would not have felt should have been zoned at the end of the day. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:43:16
12:43:37
74 1
Q
449
Yes and your recommendation was four houses to the acre in the 1993 report. I
2
take it there was some confusion expressed by Mr. Barrett in relation to your
3
report. I take it you will accept that you are recommending that all of the
4
lands there, not just the Monarch lands, would have zoning on four houses to
5
the acre?
6
A
7
Q
Well, that's my recollection, Mr. Quinn, yes. 450
Would it be fair to say that having decided that there would be a science and
8
technology park sited in the Cherrywood lands, that and when I say you, you the
9
officials within the council, you were anxious to see that come to fruition and
12:43:59 10
11
you were prepared to facilitate it as best you could? A
Once we were part of the science and technology park and once there was a
12
science and technology park proposed, naturally we wanted the development to
13
take place.
14
Q
451
12:44:19 15
Now at 5207 again dealing with the strategy, Mr. Lynn says "It would be noted however that serious reservations were expressed at the meeting of the 23rd May
16
1994 regarding the rezoning proposals by some of the members." And he
17
describes it, "It is expected that the county manager will continue to promote
18
the zoning and density changes providing he perceives that the majority of the
19
elected members are in favour of such changes."
12:44:41 20
21
And then he goes on to say "That at this point, it is essential that serious
22
discussions take place with leading members of the council to ensure their
23
support."
24
A
I think my memory of that stage was that when this was being developed, I asked
12:44:58 25
the council to set up a small group which could act as a sounding board so that
26 27
at no stage was I finding myself going completely off side with the council. Q
28 29 12:45:24 30
452
You weren't going to go out on a limb, while you were lukewarm with the concept of a join venture, you were happy with a science and technology park?
A
Oh yes. I think that's very true, I was very enthused about a science and technology park, my lukewarmness was in relation to a joint venture. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:45:28
12:45:42
75 1
Q
453
2 3
to have the approval of the council members? A
It did but I didn't want to go down the road of discussing this unless the
4 5
But in any event you couldn't create a science and technology zoning, you had
members were being brought along at the same time and knew what was happening. Q
454
Now, it would appear also from that document which I am opening to you, that
6
other departments within the council were very amenable to assisting Monarch in
7
developing their lands at that time, you have heard the evidence of Mr. Murray
8
and his reference to the action plan in January of 1994.
9 12:45:59 10
But if you look for example under the heading "services and access", you see
11
"That by letter of the 23rd May 1994, Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council
12
confirmed that they expect that the scheme -- that is the Carrickmines Valley
13
sewerage scheme -- will commence in early 1995 and that a clause will be
14
inserted into the contract to allow the early connection for the development of
12:46:20 15
Cherrywood. This was achieved through direct negotiating with the county
16
engineer. The county engineer has also undertaken to examine if it becomes
17
necessary, a temporary service connection should the mains scheme be delayed
18
beyond an acceptable timeframe."
19 12:46:35 20
You will also see at the next page at 5208 under the heading main access, "This
21
matter was discussed with the county engineer at meetings on the 19th May and
22
2nd June, at which his proposals to be submitted to the council were tabled.
23
They provided for a flyover together with a slip road north and south of the
24
Wyattville junction. He also indicated how temporary access could be gained to
12:46:57 25
the site complimentary to his proposals."
26 27
Then the next one dealing with and I won't read it, central roundabout, at the
28
bottom you see access to the lands adjacent to the N11, agreement was reached
29
with the county engineer to allow access from the N1 to service circa 20 acres
12:47:12 30
of residentially zoned lands subject to an existing access of the an adjoining www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:47:17
12:47:27
76 1
landowner being permanently closed and that agreement appears to be over the
2
head of an named engineer. Isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
It is, yeah. 455
5
And then again at 5209 under the heading "water". "Agreement was reached that the site would be serviced from the Rathmichael area on existing services."
6 7
So it would appear from reading those reviews of the situation as of June 1994,
8
that the various departments of the council were very anxious to facilitate a
9
development of the lands, isn't t right?
12:47:55 10
A
11
Q
There was an enthusiasm about developing the science and technology park. Yes. 456
12
Well not just the science and technology park wasn't starting at that stage, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 457
12:48:09 15
Now, we know that I think Councillor Gilmore tabled a motion in relation to the science and technology park and the go ahead for that was given at a meeting on
16
the 29th June 1994, is that correct? And that led to further meetings between
17
yourself and Monarch which resulted I think in agreement being reached in
18
November 1994 whereby you would become a joint venture, a joint venture partner
19
with Monarch and GRE, is that right?
12:48:35 20
A
21
Q
22
A
That's right. 458
And you had several contacts with Monarch, is that right? Well, there were lots of meetings at that time, I think the meetings were
23
mainly with Eddie Sweeney and Richard Blackwood from GRE. And also I also
24
remember at some stage a conversation with somebody else from GRE but it may
12:48:53 25
26
have been a telephone conversation. Q
459
Would it be fair to say there was, like all negotiations, an element of hard
27
balling going on between yourself and your new partners as to what you might
28
concede or be prepared to support in the event of a joint partnership with
29
Monarch and GRE?
12:49:11 30
A
There was but I mean certainly we would have had a bottom line and we didn't www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:49:17
12:49:30
77 1 2
get to the bottom line if I remember rightly. Q
460
3
When you say, you would have had been prepared to concede more than you actually did?
4
A
5
Q
I think we might have been, yes, but we played it as hard as we could, yes. 461
Now, in that regard, would it be fair to say and I am going to open a letter in
6
a moment and I will ask you to comment on it, that Monarch were approaching you
7
on the basis that they had the councillor majority for what they were
8
proposing; in other words, that they did not necessarily need your agreement
9
for what they were seeking to achieve.
12:49:50 10
A
Yeah, I read that, Mr. Quinn, and I don't remember it. But at the end of the
11
day, they didn't go that route. And I would guess that at that stage, despite
12
all that's happened before, at that stage I was pretty confident that the
13
council would go with whatever recommendation emerged and was recommended by
14
the manager and senior officials.
12:50:21 15
Q
462
If we could have 5393, this is a letter from Monarch on the 20th October 1994
16
to GRE, this is at a crucial stage of the negotiations, isn't that right,
17
because the vote I think is on the 14th November when agreement is concluded.
18
If we just look at the very last paragraph there, this is where Monarch are
19
trying to convince GRE to go with your proposals for the joint venture
12:50:43 20
agreement. It says: "Richard and Anthony are confident that the motion will
21
succeed which is the opposite view held by the county manager and his officials
22
who were saying even it it did succeed on the first vote on a marginal basis
23
that it would fall at the further vote after the end of the three month display
24
period due to public pressure and the lack of support from the manager and his
12:51:01 25
officials."
26
Now I think the vote in question was a motion which would have
increased density, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:51:15 30
Q
There was a motion which I think was withdrawn after -463
After agreement. After the --
464
Just to put in context, am I right in thinking you are seeking to negotiate a www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:51:20
12:51:39
78 1
one third interest in this science and technology park and in consideration of
2
that and for a preferential purchase contract, you are prepared to recommend to
3
the councillors increasing density which would obviously be of benefit to
4
Monarch. On the other hand Monarch are telling you they have a motion in place
5
which will increase the density in any event.
6
A
7
Q
Which I certainly wouldn't have welcomed at the time. 465
I appreciate that so effectively they were seeking to call your bluff so to
8
speak and say they could get sufficient councillor support to increase the
9
density even against your recommendations?
12:51:58 10
A
That's what that seems to be saying. I don't remember it but that's what it
11 12
seems to be saying. Q
466
I accept that's what it's saying but I am just slightly surprised that you
13
couldn't remember that level of debate going on in the lead up to the agreement
14
concluded?
12:52:12 15
A
16
Q
I don't remember it. 467
Now I think as it happened, you did come to the council, as I say, on the 14th
17
November 1994, at 5486. We see where you produced a report including the
18
agreement which you had recommended, which you had concluded, the heads of
19
agreement which you had concluded but which obviously had to be signed off by
12:52:41 20
the members and there was a full debate on that and on the proposed variation
21
and I think by a substantial majority, something like 17 to 2, the agreement
22
was accepted and your recommendations were accepted for the variation, isn't
23
that right, and the variation went through and was put on public display and
24
was confirmed at a meeting in April 1995, is that right?
12:53:01 25
A
26
Q
That's correct, yes. 468
Now, by July 1996, however, if we could have 6054, the science and technology
27
park hadn't taken place, you were about to or you had just commenced a review
28
of the 1993 plan and you had a meeting with Monarch and you will see there from
29
the second paragraph under paragraph 1, that they were anxious to re-establish
12:53:28 30
good relations with you. Can you recall that taking place, Mr. O' Sullivan? www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:53:33
12:54:03
79 1
A
I can recall being angry that we were unable to obtain the transfer of the
2
lands. I think the question of establishing good relations with me objectively
3
is really irrelevant because I couldn't, in considering a new Development Plan
4
and making recommendations, I couldn't take any grudge against anyone else but
5
I suppose human nature being human nature, something like that was going to
6
happen.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
12:54:17 10
A
11
Q
12
A
469
Were you disappointed is what I really want to know, by 1996? I was angry I think, Mr. Quinn, at that stage, that it hadn't moved forward.
470
Yes. And did it ever take place? The transfer of land took place.
471
What you had envisaged back in 1993, did that ever come to from fruition? I don't think, Mr. Quinn, what I was about to say the transfer of land took
13
place. Noel Smyth through Dunloe became involved and I think for the first
14
time there seemed to be an urgency to get the thing up and moving and that was
12:54:44 15
happening when I left. I left in September 1998 and I have absolutely no idea
16
what the position is on the ground now.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
472
But that was five years on from when you had originally -It was, yes.
473
12:55:05 20
Now, can I just finally deal with one matter just to get a view on it, on the review of the 1993 plan which took place, the position paper in June 1996 and
21
on the consideration of a series of draft maps and written statements in the
22
January to April 1997 period, on the 2nd April 1997 and more particularly on
23
the 4th February 1997, there was a motion in relation to the densities, you had
24
produced as a draft plan a plan which did not contain any densities, isn't that
12:55:34 25
right?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct, yes. 474
And at 254 -- sorry, 2550, there is a motion by Councillor Dillon-Byrne, Smyth
28
and Buckley that the density zoning of all the maps of the Draft Development
29
Plan be restored to that density which was designated and in the same manner
12:55:55 30
the Development Plan presently in being. Now, that motion was debated in www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:56:00
12:56:24
80 1
February and wasn't completed and was reviewed in April 1997 and I think was
2
voted, was unsuccessful but I think you undertook as we will see at 6299 in
3
the -- to make arrangements for and you agreed to make available to the members
4
a written list together with the relevant maps showing the changes proposed in
5
the draft plan which had been presented at previous meetings. Now, can I ask
6
you, why did you decide to suggest that there would be a publication of a draft
7
plan which did not show any densities in early 1997?
8
A
Because the planning advice that I was getting at the time was that the
9
numerical presentation of densities wasn't good planning practice. Now, the
12:56:52 10
memory of what happened at the time would be that and perhaps I should go back
11
to the previous borough plan, in that borough plan an attempt was made at that
12
stage to change the density situation in the borough plan. Changing -- would
13
not have been in favour of that and there was a sort of compromise reached in
14
the council which was a mixed use development zoning, which in fact ended up
12:57:23 15
with very high densities and very good quality developments.
16 17
So when we came to do, when the drafts came to be done for the 19 -- what was
18
ultimately the 1998 plan, the recommendation was that there be no densities in
19
it, that densities would be controlled by development control and not by sort
12:57:42 20
21
of numbers on a map and I went along with that view and supported that view. Q
475
Now in the report which you provided to the council in February, if I could
22
have 2550 and I just want to put two matters to you, if I may, up see there
23
about half ways down, your report, which was read to the council and commences
24
"In the Dublin County Development Plan 1983, there are no specific density
12:58:11 25
controls on the bulk of the lands zoned residential."
26 27 28
Now that report is repeated at the adjourned meeting of the council. A
Sorry, Mr. Quinn, first of all that makes no sense at all. Why would we be
29 12:58:24 30
referring -Q
476
That's exactly the point I am going to ask you in a moment. www.pcr.ie Day 651
12:58:27
12:58:58
81 1
A
I would think that should be 1993, I can't swear to it but I would think, it
2 3
doesn't make any sense to referring to a 1983 plan when it wasn't there. Q
477
Because if you look at the adjourned debate on the 2nd April 1997 at 6295, you
4
say the following report of the manager was read. At the special meeting of
5
the council held on the 4th, the February the following motion was moved. The
6
report of the motion was as follows and it omits the first paragraph of the
7
report which you seem to have presented.
8
A
9
Q
It does. 478
12:59:15 10
And I am just wondering if you can help the Tribunal in any way as to -- how that came about?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
I have no memory at all of it, is it material, I am not sure is it material? 479
It's an unusual? It is unusual. You would have expected that what was reproduced as being the
14
last report would be the last report.
12:59:33 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
480
And that would make sense and that it wouldn't be referring to a 1983 -I think I can understand if it was a typographical error, that that can happen.
481
Just going back to the variation, the possibility of the variation, I had
18
referred to the meeting in September 1993 but in fact could that have gone back
19
further, I wonder if we look at 4312, this is a Monarch note of a meeting held
13:00:11 20
on the 14th July 1993, where Mr. Sweeney appears to have tabled two draft
21
submissions, the second of which would have supported a science and technology
22
industry and a C zoning and if we look at the last page of that at 4313, it
23
concludes, "K O S -- who is presumably you -- suggested we that we proceed with
24
the two submissions and that the science and technology submission could be
13:00:40 25
26
withdrawn within a fortnight from the 4th August 1993 and that he should have word from his legal adviser which if appropriate he would pass on.
27 28
If it were not possible to accommodate the industrial proposal, he would
29
seriously look at the as a variation to the plan in the new year when the new
13:00:58 30
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came into being." www.pcr.ie Day 651
13:00:58
13:01:07
82 1
In other words, I think you were concerned as to whether or not you could so
2
alter the plan, it having been published, it should include an industrial
3
zoning?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
It couldn't be at that point. 482
But as early a as July '93, a science and technology was being discussed? I think I said to you at the beginning here that when I started seeing the
7
Sprint programme, I suspected this discussion on science and technology went
8
back into early 1993, if not in late 1992.
9 13:01:29 10
Q A
483
Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. O' Sullivan. Thank you.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask?
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
13 14 13:01:36 15
A
Thank you. Judge.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW:
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
That completes today's.
13:01:42 20
21
MS. DILLON:
Yes, sir, there are no further witnesses listed for today and I
22
think we have three witnesses lists for Tuesday, including Mr. Dunlop but it
23
might be as well to alert people there's no sittings next Friday, this day
24
week.
13:01:55 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, there are no sittings on this day week.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
The 16th.
29 13:01:59 30
CHAIRMAN:
And we are sitting next week, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. www.pcr.ie Day 651
13:02:03
13:02:08
83 1 2
MS. DILLON:
That is correct.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
And I think we are sitting on Tuesday at 11 o'clock. And the other
5
two days at half ten.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
May it please you sir.
8 9 13:02:29 10
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY, 13TH JUNE 2006 AT 11.00 A.M.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 651
09:06:15
10:07:57
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
14TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Quinn.
6 7
MR. QUINN: Mr. Eamonn Gilmore, please.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:08:06
10:08:29
2 1
MR. GILMORE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr Gilmore.
4 5
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr Gilmore.
6 7
Mr Gilmore, the Tribunal recently wrote to you and requested a statement in
8
relation it your involvement with the lands at Cherrywood.
9 10:08:38 10
11
On the 12th of June you provided a statement.
It's at 8587 and 8593 of the
brief.
12 13
Whilst I don't intend to go through the statement in detail, it would be fair
14
to say that if we could have 8593, dealing with a query in relation to any
10:08:57 15
payments or benefits you may have received.
You said the following.
16 17
"During the 1992 General Election, Mr. Richard Lynn telephoned me to state that
18
Monarch Properties wish to make a financial contribution to my election
19
campaign.
10:09:13 20
I declined the offer.
During a subsequent election, either the
1997 General Election or the 1999 local elections, Mr. Lynn telephoned me again
21
to offer a contribution to my election campaign.
22
indicated that he had expected me to decline and that it was made in the
23
context of a general offer to parties and candidates generally.
24
these occasions did Mr. Lynn make the offer conditional for supporting on a
10:09:34 25
When I declined the offer he
On neither of
planning matter nor indeed did he refer to any planning matter during these
26
conversations.
27
Democratic Left, the end of 1998 beginning of 1999, I was informed by
28
constituency officers of the Labour Party that Mr Eddie Sweeney or his company
29
had made a donation of 1,000 pounds to the Dun Laoghaire constituency of the
10:09:54 30
Labour Party.
Around the time of the merger of the Labour Party and
The contribution was returned to Mr. Sweeney."
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:09:58
10:10:11
3 1 2
Is that your evidence in relation to payments you may have been offered or
3
received from Mr. Lynn, Monarch Properties or their associated companies?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 2
Now, can I ask you why did you decline the offer from Mr. Lynn for the General
6 7
Election 1992, which I think was held in November 1992? A.
It was probably instinct.
8
rezoning of land.
9
controversial.
10:10:44 10
It was
I didn't think it was appropriate to accept a contribution to
decisions on matters that effected their company. Q. 3
13 14
I was a member of the County Council at the time.
my election campaign at a time when I was a member of the County Council making
11 12
At the time Monarch Properties were proposing
I should have asked you at the outset.
In 1992 you were a member of the
Dublin County Council, isn't that right? When were you first elected? A.
10:11:09 15
I was elected in 1985 re-elected in '91.
Served until the end of '94 when I
was appointed Minister of State and then was co-opted back on again in --
16
Q. 4
September, I think?
17
A.
1997 and then served until the end of the dual mandate in 2003.
18
Q. 5
Did you get the impression from Mr. Lynn that he was making similar calls to
19 10:11:29 20
other politicians during the course of that election? A.
21
Yes, my impression was that this was a ring around of some kind to offer election contributions, it wasn't a terribly long conversation.
22
Q. 6
Did he indicate to you the amount that they had proposed offering you?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 7
And again, I think in either '97 or 1999 you received a similar call?
A.
Yes, and it was the same, you know, type of ringing around, you know, would
10:11:47 25
26
you -- you know, can we make a contribution to your election campaign and I
27
declined and he said something to the effect 'well that's what I expected you
28
to say' and went on to wish me well in the election.
29 10:12:11 30
Q. 8
Were those the reasons why you returned the 1,000 pounds from Mr. Sweeney's companies in '98/'99? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:12:13
10:12:32
4 1
A.
Well that came through the party rather than to me and it came up in
2
discussions. Around the time of the merger we had a kind of a joint committee
3
of the old constituency executive of the Labour Party and the old constituency
4
executive of the Democratic Left.
It came up at one of those meetings that
5
this contribution had been made.
There was a brief discussion on it.
6
was returned.
7
Q. 9
And it
Now, I think you have told the Tribunal, if we look at 8592, that you knew Mr.
8
Dunlop and you knew that Mr. Dunlop was lobbying in the early 1990's on behalf
9
of developers.
10:12:58 10
11
He lobbied you in relation to two developments at least.
at least was in the Carrickmines area, the Paisley Park? A.
12
That's correct, that was my first contact with Mr. Dunlop.
He approached me
about Paisley Park.
13
Q. 10
And another development?
14
A.
I remember he sending me stuff or giving me material about Quarryvale.
Q. 11
Yes.
10:13:14 15
16
Just in relation to Mr. Dunlop.
You would have seen Mr. Dunlop, I take
it on your visits to the council chamber?
17
A.
Oh, yes, he was regularly around the council chamber.
18
Q. 12
And Mr. Lynn equally and Mr. Reilly and possibly Mr. Sweeney?
19
A.
Yes, I would have seen them regularly.
10:13:34 20
chamber.
21 22
One
They were both around the council
Also, over that period of time they were a regular feature at
various community activities and various events around the constituency. Q. 13
Now, just dealing with the Cherrywood lands themselves.
I think the Manager
23
brought proposal to the council in late 1990, which was effectively DP90/123.
24
And there were two meetings one in October and the other in November, which
10:14:01 25
culminated I think in a motion being debated on 6th of December 1990. Do you
26 27
recall the Manager's proposals and that debate on 6th of December 1990? A.
Yes, I do.
I recall that there was a recommendation from the Manager that
28
there should be, I suppose, a strategic approach taken to future development of
29
what became known as the Carrickmines Valley, the area of -- the area really
10:14:27 30
from Leopardstown Road out to Loughlinstown, Shankill and back up to Stepaside, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:14:34
10:15:00
5 1
Kiltiernan and the Manager was recommending a mixture of housing, industrial
2
and commercial development right across that whole stretch of area.
3
Q. 14
Did you know by December '90 that Monarch had acquired these lands in
4
Cherrywood and had made submissions to the Manager and to the planners in
5
relation to their possible development?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 15
I don't think you were present at that meeting on the 6th of December but you
8
were present I think at a meeting on the 24th of May '91 when there was
9
discussion on the map for public display; isn't that right?
10:15:16 10
11
A.
That's right.
Q. 16
You supported the first proposal there I think, which was the '83 map subject
12 13
to amendments; isn't that right? A.
14
That's right.
The Manager, first of all it has to be said, was anxious to get
something out on public display because we were coming up towards the Local
10:15:36 15
Elections and we'd been at it for about four years.
And there was this -- he
16
presented a set of I think it was three alternatives, one of which was to put
17
out this varied version of the '83 Plan and I supported that, yes.
18
Q. 17
19
Now, I think then that that map went on display between September and December '91 and submissions were received.
10:16:02 20
There were some oral hearings I think in
early '92 and the Manager came back then in early '92, around May '92, with his
21
proposals DP92/44 namely.
If we could have 7203, please.
22 23
This is the Manager's proposals. They are effectively to extend the
24
residential zoning and to extend it on an action area plan; isn't that right?
10:16:34 25
26
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 18
Now, I think you yourself at that stage had, together with some of your
27
colleagues, tabled some motions; isn't that correct?
28
A.
That's correct, we had.
29
Q. 19
If we could have 7162.
10:16:48 30
This is a motion signed by yourself, Councillor
O'Ceallaigh and Councillor Colm Breathnach? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:16:52
10:17:02
6 1
A.
O'Callaghan.
2
Q. 20
Apologies, for a special amenity area order to be made for the
3
Loughlinstown/Shanganagh Valley; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right.
5
Q. 21
I think there was a further motion. If we could have
7165, please. This was
6
a proposal that the lands be zoned AS 1, which is, I think, is residential on
7
septic tank.
One house to the acre
8
A.
One to the acre, yes.
9
Q. 22
And then if I could have finally 7168, which is a proposal that an identified
10:17:25 10
area of land be set aside for C zoning; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 23
Now, can I just ask you in relation to that C zoning.
13 14
How did you come to
table that motion? A.
10:17:41 15
Well, in the lead up to the tabling of those motions there was a lot of debate in the community.
There were I suppose two differing views emerging; one was
16
that there should be no development at all on the lands and the second was a
17
view, mainly, centred in the Loughlinstown/Ballybrack area, mainly among
18
community leaders, that the proposals that were made by Monarch Properties
19
would generate employment.
10:18:08 20
Now, bearing in mind that the Manager in his
original recommendation in 1990 had proposed that there should be some
21
commercial zoning on that land, we decided to table a motion which would, we
22
felt, generate some employment in that area.
23 24
Q. 24
You had attended I think a meeting of the Carrickmines Valley Preservation Association held on 5th of November '91. We see that at 3368.
10:18:32 25
26
And we see your contribution as noted, I think, by a representative of Monarch
27
at 3369.
28
motorway and why land shouldn't be zoned for industry.
29
difference in density between four houses to the acre and ten to the acre.
10:18:52 30
Namely, you had queried why there should be no junctions on the
Was that reasonable? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And you queried the
10:18:53
10:19:11
7 1
A.
Yes, there were a number of issues.
One was the Carrickmines Valley
2
Association were suggesting that there should be no junction on the motorway
3
between Shankill and Sandyford.
4
that would concentrate all of the traffic coming on and off the motorway in
5
both the Shankill and Sandyford areas and I expressed that.
I didn't agree with that because I felt that
6 7
I had indeed at meetings with the council argued that the effect of what we had
8
done in what had gone out on public display, in my opinion, had left the Dun
9
Laoghaire/Rathdown end of the county short in terms of the industrial and
10:19:35 10
commercially zoned land.
There was no land zoned for industry -- there was no
11
remaining land effectively in the old Dun Laoghaire borough which was zoned for
12
industry or commercial activity.
13
end of the old County Council was very low and the effect of the motions that
14
had been passed in May of 1991 had been to cut that down even further.
And the amount in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
10:19:59 15
16
And given that there was very substantial unemployment, we'd about 8,000 I
17
think in the Dun Laoghaire Labour Exchange, there was I think about 13,000 I
18
think altogether unemployed in the county, there was -- it was having huge
19
effects in communities like Loughlinstown and Ballybrack in particular.
10:20:18 20
felt that there was a need to redress that in the amendment stage of the County
21
Development Plan.
22
that were held around that time as well
23
Q. 25
24 10:20:36 25
I
I expressed that at that meeting and indeed other meetings
I think on 18th of March '92 you wrote to Mr. Lynn.
I think at that stage you
were suggesting an independent? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 26
Economic assessment of the development; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right.
When Monarch mounted this big public relations campaign to
28
support their proposal and as part of that they said that they were going to
29
create 1,000 jobs in the construction stage and 1,000 jobs would be generated
10:20:59 30
when it would be all built.
Now, I reckoned that yes, there was jobs
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:21:05
10:21:22
8 1
potential in what they were proposing but I felt that they were exaggerating
2
the amount and I suggested that there should be an independent evaluation
3
carried out of the jobs potential of what they were proposing and I recommended
4
that that should be carried out by the Irish Productivity Centre.
5
Q. 27
I think they acceded to that request?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 28
I think the 1,000 jobs during the initial construction phase became 500 and 600
8 9
jobs; is that correct? A.
10:21:38 10
Yes, it didn't -- I mean, they didn't come to the conclusion that it was going to be 1,000 at construction and 1,000 afterwards.
11
entire construction stage and 600 when completed.
12
significant I felt.
13
Q. 29
14
Which of course was still
Would it be fair to say during this period there would have been contact between you and representatives of Monarch, possibly Mr. Lynn in relation to
10:21:55 15
the strategy and your proposals in relation to the district centre?
16
A.
Oh, yes.
17
Q. 30
Can I ask you.
18 19
I think it was 500 over the
How did you settle on the precise location for the centre as
appears in the map accompanying your motion? A.
10:22:14 20
Um, well, I was conscious of the road connection from the old Wyattville Road to the new motorway was going to go up there and there was also the Harcourt
21
Street line.
22
be preserved for public transport. At that time the idea was a bus way now
23
it's obviously the LUAS and the location was around where the connecting road
24
and the bus way would intersect.
10:22:37 25
Q. 31
26
Yes.
And I had a separate motion that the Harcourt Street line should
Was that the subject of any negotiation with the Monarch representatives
or discussion at that time or was it solely your --?
27
A.
No, no, it was our own -- it was our own um -- it was our own ideas.
28
Q. 32
Well then I think on 27th of May the Manager produced his report and if we
29
could have 7207.
10:23:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:23:08
10:23:13
9 1
Councillors Lydon and McGrath proposed that the Manager's draft be accepted;
2
isn't that right? I think you voted against that?
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 33
At the time.
Can I ask you were there particular councillors who were -- who
5
were easily identifiable with the Monarch proposals at this time? In other
6
words, were there councillors whose views in relation to this were well known?
7
A.
I mean, there were a lot of councillors who had motions down on it.
8
Q. 34
Yes?
9
A.
And it was obviously very -- there was a lot of controversy about it.
10:23:39 10
I -- no, I wouldn't -- I mean, that wasn't, I mean that wasn't my view that
11
there were particular councillors that you could say were identifiably --
12
Q. 35
Supportive?
13
A.
Supportive of Monarch.
14
Q. 36
In any event you voted against that proposal. If we look at 7208.
10:23:58 15
I mean, different people had different motions on it.
that proposal or motion was unsuccessful; isn't that right? A.
That's right.
What we were trying to do, we felt that the motions we had
18
submitted were kind of a package.
19
as a package.
10:24:20 20
We were anxious to have had them voted on
The standing orders required each motion to be voted on
separately and to relate only to a specific thing.
21
separately.
22
get to voting on it as a package.
23
I think
you then had a proposal that the motion would be taken in a certain order and
16 17
I --
Q. 37
24
Yes.
So we suggested that order.
It was as close as we were going to
Councillor Lydon, I think, and Hand advised the members that they wished
to withdraw a motion that they had tabled.
10:24:44 25
They had to be voted on
That's at 7209.
And then you got
into the first of a series of motions?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 38
In relation to the density effectively?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 39
We see at the bottom of 7209 a motion by Councillor Gordon and Reeves which is
10:24:54 30
to be found at 7210, that the lands be zoned effectively at one house to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:24:59
10:25:13
10 1
acre on septic tank.
I think that was taken together with a motion in the
2
name of Councillor Breathnach and Smith that there would be -- that the Monarch
3
lands would be at one house to the acre.
4
density; isn't that right?
That would have been very low
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 40
That was about as low as you could go at that time vis-a-vis housing?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 41
I think you voted against that?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 42
You were to subsequently vote on the same day in favour of an almost similar
10:25:20 10
11
motion brought by Councillor Barrett.
12
that motion and in favour of the Councillor Barrett motion subsequently?
13
A.
14
Well first of all, that motion came before the motions that we had tabled ourselves.
10:25:41 15
And we were anxious, to if you like, support the motions that we
had tabled ourselves.
16
Can I ask you why you voted against
end.
The Councillor Barrett motion if you like was at the
And that was the fall-back position.
17
Q. 43
You would never have got to your motions had these motions been successful?
18
A.
That's right. Those motions, they would have cut across the proposals that we
19
had had in our motions and then obviously as the proposals which were in our
10:25:57 20
motions began to fall, if you like the fall back position then became
21 22
Councillor Barrett's motion. Q. 44
23 24 10:26:12 25
I think we see your motion at 7214 and I think you were successful in relation to that motion.
That's the C zoning; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 45
And then we see the Councillor Barrett motion.
26
I think the matter then went
out on publish display for a second time; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right.
28
Q. 46
Now, sometime in 1993 it appears that the idea of a Business and Science and
29 10:26:35 30
Technology Park being sited on the left-hand side became a reality. you first hear about the science and technology suggestion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
When did
10:26:38
10:26:58
11 1
A.
I think it was sometime around the middle of 1993.
There was an invitation to
2
visit Montpelier in France to look at a science and technology park there.
3
And I remember that was around the time in fact our third child was born, which
4
was in August.
5
Q. 47
6
So it was sometime around then.
We see in correspondence between Monarch and GRE on 13th of July '93.
At
4825, if we look at 4826.
7 8
There is a dispute in relation to fees incurred in relation to that trip.
9
Mr. Sweeney, as we see there, says outcome of the conference has been used to
10:27:18 10
good effect with Councillor Donal Marren and Deputy Eamonn Gilmore in
11
particular and may yet provide us with a mechanism of obtaining an acceptable
12
zoning on Cherrywood.
13 14
You would accept that at this stage Monarch were anxious to increase their
10:27:32 15
density both in relation to housing and in relation to industry on the site;
16 17
isn't that right? A.
18 19
Q. 48
Yes.
Councillor Marren has given evidence that he was the only person who
travelled on that.? A.
22 23
Could I say that I didn't actually go on that visit to
Montpelier.
10:27:48 20
21
That's right.
Oh, yes.
I mean, there was no -- you know, they were looking for the maximum
amount of zoning that they could get on it. Q. 49
24
I think at a meeting with the manager on the 14th July 1993 at 4312, they are putting forward the concept of the Science and Technology Park, but they are I
10:28:09 25
think asking for an increase in density for any lands that would be lost as a
26
result of the park being sited there; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 50
You weren't aware of that?
29
A.
No.
Q. 51
Were you aware of any discussions with the management as opposed to the
10:28:21 30
I wasn't aware of that at the time.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:28:25
10:28:41
12 1
councillors in relation to the science and technology or indeed industry on the
2
land in this period that is 1993?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 52
Now, we do know that there was a -- that the matter came back before the
5
council, I think, on 11th of November 1993, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 53
And two motions in the names of Councillor -- If I could have 7226, please.
8 9
This is a motion in the name of Councillor Marren, Lohan, Coffey, Cosgrave and
10:28:59 10
Ormonde, effectively zoning an area of land with four houses to the acre with
11
the balance being zoned at two houses to the hectare, which is effectively one
12
to the acre, came before the council; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 54
If I could have 2720. This is the map which would have shown, the blue area as
10:29:18 15
you will see on the map is an area zoned for agricultural purposes.
16
The red
area is your town centre.
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 55
The area surrounded by the red verge line is the Monarch lands?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 56
And all of the area coloured yellow including that surrounded by the red line
10:29:32 20
21
is an area where the Manager was suggesting ought to be zoned at four houses
22
to the acre?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 57
And the motion that came for debate was a motion that only those lands, that is
10:29:49 25
to say the Monarch lands, be zoned at four houses to the acre.
26
You voted
against that motion I think at that time?
27
A.
I did, yes.
28
Q. 58
The motion was successful.
29 10:29:58 30
Can I ask you, was there any good reason why only the Monarch lands should at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:30:02
10:30:16
13 1 2
that time be zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
I don't recall any discussion of that at the time.
3
you know, in the debate that took place about it.
4
an issue in the argument.
I don't recall that being, I don't recall that being
5
Q. 59
In the council?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 60
It would appear, would you agree with me, that that motion would appear to have
8 9 10:30:25 10
benefited only the Monarch lands? A.
Well it applied only to the Monarch lands.
Q. 61
And Mr. Murray, the planning officer, said that there was no good planning
11
reason why only the Monarch lands.
12
in principle.
13
lands should be zoned at four to the acre?
14
A.
10:30:46 15
16
I appreciate that you were opposed to it
But that there was no good planning reason why only the Monarch
Well I don't -- I mean, if that's Mr. Murray's view obviously he was the county planner at the time.
Q. 62
Now, the zoning was not an area Action Plan zoning it was just four houses to
17
the acre on piped sewage.
18
early '94.
19
4293 on 6th of January '94 that he was hoping to have an Action Plan ready
10:31:09 20
We know from the notes of the meeting with Mr. Murray indeed at
within two months.
21
I think an area Action Plan was commence in the
And he was also suggesting that the plan might highlight
the anomaly of that area coloured blue on the map.
22 23
If we could have 2720 again, please, which was zoned agricultural.
24
that the line of the motorway was likely to move further west, that that area
10:31:27 25
be zoned for residential purposes also.
That now
Did you know that those debates and
26
those discussions were taking place at that time with the planners or the
27
Manager?
28
A.
I did not, no.
29
Q. 63
It would appear that in early '94, that is to say in I think in May '94 you
10:31:48 30
tabled a motion in relation to the science and technology park; isn't that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:31:52
10:32:02
14 1
right?
2
A.
Yes, for the planning committee of the council.
3
Q. 64
For the planning committee of the council.
Did you have any discussions with
4
either the management in the first instance.
5
Manager or the planners, in relation to the tabling of that motion in advance
6
of it being tabled?
7
A.
When I say management I mean the
I didn't have any discussions specifically about the motion.
But I would have
8
had I think at the time that the science and technology park idea was floated,
9
probably some brief informal discussions with the Manager about, you know,
10:32:30 10
whether he thought it was a good idea or did he thing there was anything in it
11 12
or merit in it or was it a runner. Q. 65
13 14 10:32:37 15
Yes.
That type of discussion.
Would it be fair to say that he was supportive of anything that would
create jobs within his county? A.
Yes, he was positive about it.
Q. 66
Yes.
If we look at.
There was a meeting then I think on the 19th of May.
16
Your motion is tabled for the Planning and Tourism Committee on 23rd of May.
17
On 19th of May '94 at 5107 there is a meeting between the representatives of
18
the council and representatives of Monarch and indeed, GRE. If we look at 5108
19
under the heading Action Area Plan.
10:33:07 20
The plan is produced to the Monarch
representatives.
21 22
And AP I think is the Deputy County Manager.
23
had had with Kevin O'Sullivan, County Manager, in relation to changing 56 acres
24
and 11 of agriculture to facilitate job creating zoning science and technology
10:33:24 25
park.
Outlined previous discussions he
The Deputy Manager indicated GRE were prepared to consider -- sorry.
26
I should say that is Mr. Pat Field, who is a representative of GRE, were
27
prepared to consider this subject to being compensated for loss of residential
28
land.
He also raised a point of the density of residential on service land.
29 10:33:46 30
Did you know at this time when you were tabling your motion that it was likely Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:33:50
10:34:08
15 1
to result in GRE and Monarch asking that there be additional lands zoned for
2
residential or indeed other lands zoned for industrial purposes?
3
A.
No.
In fact, my thinking was that it would have done the reverse, because I
4
was quite unhappy at the four to the acre zoning that had been put on the land
5
and felt that, you know, given a choice, you know, that if you had -- the one
6
thing we weren't short of in Dun Laoghaire at that time were large houses and
7
large sites.
8
And I felt that the -- the purpose of my motion was to -- was to if you like,
9
substitute the science and technology park for some of the housing zoning.
10:34:33 10
Q. 67
We were short of opportunities for people to get some work.
Now, I think that if we continue on at 5109.
Just you see RML, I think that's
11
Mr. Lynn, advised that the members would be receptive to a proposal from
12
management to change the 66 acres to industrial to facilitate a science and
13
technology park, to retain 17 acres of commercial and for the residue of the
14
lands to be zoned residential with an A1 density.
10:34:57 15
16
DT, who I understand is the Deputy Manager, indicated that it was his
17
impression that the change of the industrial lands was a fait accompli.
18 19
Did you understand the change to industrial lands or the science and technology
10:35:11 20
21
lands at this stage, that is to say May 1994, to be a fait accompli? A.
22 23 24 10:35:32 25
No, I did not.
The motion that I had tabled wasn't considered by the
committee until after that. Q. 68
That's right.
We do know, for example, on 14th of June.
8617, that Monarch were writing to GRE. between Monarch and GRE.
If I could have
This is in relation to the agreement
And we see from that letter, "we discussed amongst
26
other things a fee payable to Monarch Property Services for work in connection
27
with the change of zoning to industrial on certain of the Cherrywood lands.
28
The fee suggested for this was 50,000 payable immediately and a further 100,000
29
on success, half being payable by guardian".
10:35:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:35:53
10:36:04
16 1
Did you know that there were those sort of discussions and correspondence
2
between Monarch and GRE at this time in relation to the possibility of getting
3
industrial zoning on the lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 69
Now, there was a report I think published or produced by Mr. Lynn in June of
6
1994 and you will have seen that in the brief circulated but included in that
7
was a projection for fees that might become payable.
8
please, sorry, the report itself is at 5167 but if I could have 5175. There's
9
a heading Budget for Social Events.
10:36:43 10
it refers to an appendix A.
If we could have,
You will see there at item No. 11.
And
And at appendix A, to be found at 5178 under the
11
heading Cherrywood General Promotions.
That's 5178.
They set out a budget,
12
as I understand it, we'll hear evidence I'm sure in time from the
13
representatives of Monarch in relation to it.
14 10:37:03 15
You will see that there is a proposed budget in relation to a general election
16
and a Senate election.
17
parties including I think your own at that time.
18
were proposing a budget for at that time, that is June '94, in relation to
19
upcoming political events?
10:37:24 20
21
There is a budget for all of the various political Did you know that Monarch
A.
No, I did not.
Q. 70
Now, Monarch identified a number of key people in relation to the matter.
22
think you were identified as one of those.
23
I presume it wouldn't surprise you that you would have been identified as
24
somebody whose support ought to be solicited at this time?
10:37:50 25
26
They were all local councillors.
A.
Well, I was a member of the council at the time and ...
Q. 71
You step out the of the picture I think by late '94 because you're appointed
27
a Minister; isn't that right?
28
A.
That's correct, yes.
29
Q. 72
I think there was a policy of the Government's to designate as an area a
10:38:05 30
I
science and technology park and Cherrywood -- the Carrickmines lands was one of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:38:10
10:38:26
17 1 2
the areas that was in contention for that; isn't that right? A.
Yes, the designation idea I think had come back actually too early -- I knew it
3
was in the air this idea of designating at the time that I tabled the motion
4
for the planning committee.
5
universities and that there were a number of sites in consideration.
6
which was the Cherrywood site.
7
Q. 73
And I knew that there were discussions involving One of
If we could have 7464.
8 9
The science -- the possibility of a science and technology park and the review
10:38:41 10
of the plan and the negotiations with the Manager.
11
Did you know that the
Manager negotiated on behalf of the council to become a joint partner?
12
A.
Yes, I did.
13
Q. 74
Yes?
14
A.
Before I went off the council at the end of '94.
Q. 75
That was reported, I think, at a meeting on 14th of November '94.
10:39:00 15
In fact, that had been reported to the council.
16 17
If we could have 2390.
18
at 2391, and subsequently the agreement itself is I think at 2392.
19
was that the council would purchase one-third of the lands.
10:39:30 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 76
Yes.
22 23
We see that meeting.
We can see the Manager's Report The idea
Now, you knew -- you were present for that, that was shortly before you
left the council; isn't that right? A.
24
That's right.
My recollection of it was that the Manager came back with a
recommendation that the council would become a partner in the whole science and
10:39:50 25
technology park project idea.
That it would acquire part of the lands.
And
26
I think there was also the idea that if the council acquired additional lands
27
adjacent to it, that it could -- that the council could increase its share of
28
the project and there were some arrangements made for setting up of some kind
29
of a joint company and so on to manage it.
10:40:14 30
Q. 77
And I think that that found unanimous agreement amongst the councillors; isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:40:20
10:40:33
18 1 2
that right? A.
Yes, the whole idea of the science and technology park was unanimously
3
supported by the council at the time.
There may have been some, some
4
individuals may have some difficulties -- I think probably some individual
5
aspects of it but the overall idea was a general consensus on the council that
6
this was a good idea, this was something we should be looking for and we were
7
also aware that there was sites in each of the other three local authorities.
8
Q. 78
Yes?
9
A.
Who were bidding to get this designation as a national science and technology
10:40:52 10
park.
11
Q. 79
I think that designation was given in 1996 but not to Cherrywood?
12
A.
That's right.
13
Q. 80
I think it went to City West?
14
A.
City West, yes.
Q. 81
There is no doubt but that the science and technology park allowed for increase
10:41:00 15
16
in density on the site in Carrickmines; isn't that right? That whole scheme
17
brought about by the review of the plan, the action area plan, the variation of
18
the plan necessitated, I suggest, by the science and technology park allowed
19
for an increase in density and increased area for residential zoning?
10:41:31 20
A.
Well it was a consequence of it.
21
Q. 82
Yes?
22
A.
That there was an increase in density.
23 24 10:41:40 25
26
I wouldn't agree that it necessarily
had to be like that. Q. 83
Yes?
A.
But that was the way it turned out.
Q. 84
That appears to have been -- as far as Monarch and GRE were concerned, they
27
were anxious that if there were to be a science and technology park at this
28
location, in particular if the council were to be involved, then the gain to
29
them was an increase in density; isn't that right?
10:41:57 30
A.
Yeah, the agreement or if you like the framework that was agreed, was that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:42:03
10:42:23
19 1
council would acquire part of the land, would become a partner in it.
2
was this knock on effect in terms of the -- I think there was some knock on
3
effect in terms of the district centre and also a knock on effect in terms of
4
the land which was zoned residential and I suppose that emerged as a kind of a
5
package.
6
Q. 85
There
Now, I think that there was -- it took some time for there to be any
7
development in the area; isn't that right? And certainly I'm not sure if there
8
is even still a science and technology park in the area or do you know?
9
A.
Well, Dell and Lucent have been located there.
Q. 86
We're back in '94/'95?
11
A.
No, it was a number of years after that before ....
12
Q. 87
I think the Manager when he was giving evidence expressed annoyance that it
10:42:44 10
That also developed.
13
took so long for there to be development there.
14
on the delay in getting the development, employment development on the lands?
10:43:04 15
A.
Do you recall any discussions
Oh, yes, there was annoyance that it was taking so long for it to emerge.
16
know that it got caught up.
17
court cases and they had all kinds of internal problems and so on.
18
it wasn't designated as a science and technology park.
19
Q. 88
Yes.
I
There was Monarch Properties, I think there were Of course
Now, I think the review of the '93 plan came about in '97.
10:43:28 20
21
And you were back in in late '97.
22
the January '98, which again result in an extension of the science and
23
technology area and the effectively increase in density and a review of the
24
restriction on the town centre; isn't that right?
10:43:46 25
26
I think a series of motions were debate in
A.
That's right, yes, yes, I remember that.
Q. 89
Thank you very much, Mr Gilmore.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
any rumours or stories of payments to councillors which were circulating in the
10:44:04 30
All right.
Mr Gilmore, could I just ask you.
Were you aware of
early 1990s and were the subject I think of some newspaper reports, some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:44:09
10:44:19
20 1
witnesses have said they have recalled hearing rumours and stories to that
2
effect.
3
A.
Do you recall anything of that nature?
Well I remember the newspaper articles.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
I mean, there had been newspaper articles about what was happening in planning
7
in County Dublin going probably back to the 1970s.
8
Garda investigation into the Dublin County Council Bord Pleanala or perhaps
9
both around 1989.
10:44:43 10
11
There was, I recall, a
It was around the time I was elected to the Dail.
And I
remember at the time feeling that the Garda investigation was not going to get to the bottom of it.
And I called in the Dail for an inquiry.
12 13
I also published in the lead up to the 1991 Local Elections, a kind of a
14
summary of what had been happening on the County Council by way of material
10:45:05 15
contraventions and Section 4 motions and that type of thing.
I never -- I
16
didn't hear of specific, you know, A paid B money but I suppose my general
17
impression was that -- was that there were payments going to political parties
18
and that there was a kind of a general disposition to be pro, probuilding or
19
pro, you know, proconstruction.
10:45:36 20
But I didn't hear.
I didn't hear of any
specific, somebody paying somebody money, that type of thing.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr Gilmore.
23 24 10:45:46 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN:
We'll rise until eleven o'clock so that ...
10:46:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
10:46:13
11:12:00
21 1 2
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
3
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
Continuation of questioning of Mr. Frank Dunlop as follows:
9 11:12:11 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
Good morning, Chairman, Judges.
14 11:12:24 15
MR. MURPHY:
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop
16
A.
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
17
Q. 90
Mr. Dunlop, could I just ask you, to begin with, if having overnight perhaps
18
reflected on your evidence yesterday and considered your evidence, anticipated
19
your evidence today, have you anything, have you any comment to make about your
11:12:42 20
evidence yesterday? Would you like to add anything, is there any correction
21
you want to make in it or are you happy with it?
22
A.
No.
I'll proceed as normal.
23
Q. 91
Right.
Mr. Dunlop, can I ask you -- yes.
Could I have 8705, please.
24 11:13:27 25
The Tribunal has received recently a narrative statement from Cathal Boland.
26
A.
Uh-huh.
27
Q. 92
And on page 8705, under your name, the first paragraph he says "on two separate
28
occasions Mr. Frank Dunlop extended invitations to me to attend, which I did,
29
the official openings in both the Tallaght and UCI Malahide Road, Coolock
11:14:02 30
cinema complexes.
The date of the Tallaght event eludes me while the Malahide
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:14:10
11:14:21
22 1
Road was in the late Summer, early Autumn of 1991.
Mr. Dunlop's company were
2
the public relations firm engaged to handle the events.
3
promoters were keen to have a cross-section of the community in attendance at
4
these high profile events.
5
the above, their servants or agents"
As I understand the
No other benefits were received by me from any of
6 7 8
Have you any comment to make on that, please? A.
9
Yes.
We did act for, I beg your pardon, we did act for the company that
Mr. Boland refers to and we were responsible for the publicity surrounding the
11:14:40 10
openings of -- advising the companies and surrounding the openings of -- of
11
various openings that they had throughout the city.
12
Q. 93
Right.
13
A.
UCI, United Cinemas International.
14
Q. 94
Right.
11:14:55 15
What is the company you're talking about?
Has that anything to do with what I was asking you yesterday about,
namely about the opening of the Tallaght Centre?
16
A.
No, no, absolutely not.
17
Q. 95
It's a different one?
18
A.
No, the Tallaght Town Centre as an entity as such, nothing to do with me.
19 11:15:11 20
UCI, was a client. Q. 96
21 22
All right.
A normal regular client.
And they didn't open -- did they open their cinema complex at the
same time as the Tallaght opening? A.
That I can't tell you whether or not they were open at the same time as the
23
actual opening of the complex.
24
certainly we advised the company and we did the promotions in relation to the
11:15:33 25
26
I couldn't absolutely say that.
But
openings. Q. 97
But I imagine that in relation to, for example, if the Tallaght Centre opening,
27
that we talked yesterday that you went to with Mr. Lawlor and the other people
28
whose names you wrote down?
29 11:15:49 30
A.
Correct.
Q. 98
And the opening that you went to with Mr. Boland. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
If they were the same
11:15:54
11:16:05
23 1
opening on the same day you'd recall?
2
A.
Yes, I would.
3
Q. 99
Yes?
4
A.
In fairness.
5
And I don't think they were.
I -- I just looked at it on the screen and I've seen it.
this statement five minutes ago.
6
Q. 100
Yes?
7
A.
In relation to, the usual.
8
Q. 101
Yes?
9
A.
Certainly members of my staff were responsible.
Q. 102
Yes?
11
A.
For the publicity surrounding these openings.
12
Q. 103
Yes.
11:16:15 10
I saw
But certainly we acted for UCI.
But can I just -- you see, Mr. Dunlop, one of the things I'm finding
13
difficulty with you is that you don't seem to be able to give a definitive
14
answer on anything and you always leave the door a little bit open for
11:16:30 15
something, for a different answer if some more, what you call "evidence" comes
16
to light.
17
really couldn't be any doubt, the opening of the Tallaght Centre that I
18
discussed with you yesterday and the one you I'm talking about now, the opening
19
of the UCI that you acted for with Mr. Boland.
11:16:51 20
I don't think there could be
any doubt in your mind as to whether they are two separate occasions or one
21 22
I'm just suggesting to you, perhaps I'm wrong in this, there
occasion? A.
I can absolutely assure you that UCI Cinemas, United Cinemas International was
23
in no way in the forefront of my mind at the time we went to the opening of the
24
Tallaght Town Centre with the people that I mentioned to you yesterday.
11:17:08 25
Q. 104
Mr. Dunlop, I think Mr. Dunlop, you have said previously?
26
A.
Uh-huh.
27
Q. 105
That you never paid money to Mr. Cathal Boland?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 106
And have you just a few moments ago you've been given the statement?
A.
Yes.
11:17:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:17:40
11:17:52
24 1
Q. 107
If you can go to 8706, please.
2 3
And if -- I'll just read out that paragraph.
4 5
"Frank Dunlop phoned me and arranged to meet me in the council after lunch.
6
am unclear as to what the date was.
7
We had a chat about the election, what might happen.
8
contribution in a sealed envelope and told me it was provided by four or five
9
individuals.
11:18:10 10
I
I was in the FG room and Frank came in. He gave me a
When I asked him for their names he told me they were happy to
make the contribution and that it was not necessary that they be acknowledged.
11
I was then and still am unaware of the identity of these subscribers.
12
gave me to believe -- he gave me to believe that he was not one of these
13
people.
14
and left.
11:18:33 15
But he
He indicated he was in a hurry, wished me luck regarding the election Subsequently when I opened the envelope which contained 4,000
pounds in cash.
There is no documentation in my possession other than my
16
record of receipt of this amount.
17
Dunlop is not recorded as making any other contribution or subscription to me
18
at any time nor do I recall him as so doing."
19
I understand this was November 1992, I think that comes from the previous page.
11:18:58 20
21
Have you anything to say about that? A.
22
No. Sorry, I do have something to say about it.
Q. 108
Right.
24
A.
No.
Q. 109
All right.
26 27
11:19:36 30
You didn't make that?
So Mr. Cathal Boland is inventing that, making it up, not telling
the truth, making an allegation against you that is without foundation? A.
28 29
The answer is no, I did not
make that contribution.
23
11:19:15 25
From records to hand it is clear that Mr
Well, he may have well got 4,000 pounds but he certainly didn't get 4,000 pounds from me.
Q. 110
I'm not interested in if he got it from anybody else, Mr. Dunlop. talking about 4,000 pounds in cash from you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
We're
11:19:38
11:19:48
25 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 111
Did he get any sum in cash from you?
3
A.
He got a contribution that he requested from me for some political function, a
4
fundraising function that he was organising.
5
Q. 112
How much?
6
A.
I think it was something in the order of 250 pounds or something.
7
Q. 113
I take it 250 is right?
8
A.
Yes, you can.
9
Q. 114
Okay.
11:19:57 10
11
that. A.
All right.
Okay.
That's fine.
We're aware, we're on notice of
This he just -- he didn't get this from you, you are flabbergasted?
Well I am -- well the answer is no, I did not make that contribution to him.
12
And secondly, the background is why would I make such a contribution to Cathal
13
Boland? Cathal Boland never appeared on the radar screen, as far as I'm
14
concerned, in relation to matters we're dealing with in this Tribunal.
11:20:23 15
fairness to him, he never asked for and I never gave him any money in relation
16 17
In
to anything relating to the Development Plan in Dublin County Council. Q. 115
Now, Mr. Dunlop, in we could just have -- I want to just touch on something.
18
Page 571, please. I was asking you yesterday about that first meeting with Mr.
19
Sweeney?
11:20:57 20
21
A.
Yeah.
Q. 116
And I was -- your evidence is that that meeting just took place just with
22
Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes
24
Q. 117
You are very clear about that and I was putting to you about your private
11:21:12 25
interview in May 2000 when you said it was Mr. Sweeney and Mr Lawlor.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 118
I can't remember how you answered me.
28 29 11:21:29 30
Anyway, you said what you are saying
now is correct and what you said then was not correct? A.
What I did say to you yesterday and the transcript may well show it to be correct.
Yes, I did meet Mr. Sweeney on his own. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Yes, I did meet
11:21:35
11:21:49
26 1
Mr. Sweeney with Mr. Lawlor on other occasions with Monarch.
2
summarises what I said.
3
Q. 119
Can you tell me this.
I think that
That first meeting with Mr. Sweeney in Harcourt Street.
4
How could you describe your recollection, have you a good recollection of it or
5
a vague recollection of it?
6
A.
I would say I have a reasonable recollection of it, yes.
7
Q. 120
A reasonable recollection of it?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 121
Is it a recollection, the reasonableness of the recollection one that maybe you
11:22:04 10
11
wouldn't remember precisely who was there? A.
12
No.
Let me assure you in relation to who was precisely there.
I met
Mr. Sweeney on his own on that occasion.
13
Q. 122
All right.?
14
A.
I met Mr. Sweeney obviously many more times, either alone or in the presence of
11:22:20 15
16
other people. Q. 123
17
571 and I put this to you yesterday.
Your answer is -- do you see this? The
introduction was facilitated by Liam Lawlor with Eddie Sweeney?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 124
At Monarch's offices in Harcourt Street.
11:22:37 20
I met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam
Lawlor at that office?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 125
And then you go on to say how Mr. Sweeney explained certain things to you.
23 24
Now, I put that to you yesterday, all right, as to what you had said to the
11:22:47 25
Tribunal in an interview in May 2000 about who was at the meeting?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 126
And Mr. Lawlor was there?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 127
Could we move on in that interview, please, to page 589.
11:22:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:22:59
11:23:19
27 1
Now, and Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Dunlop, I remind you that you have sworn today and
2
yesterday that Mr. Lawlor was not at this first meeting
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 128
Page 589.
5
Mr. Hanratty at line 50, while we are waiting on that can I just
flash back to the first meeting that you had with Eddie Sweeney.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 129
You said that Liam Lawlor was there?
8
A.
9
Q. 130
11:23:32 10
Yes. Can you just recall again what was said at that by Mr. Sweeney and or Mr. Lawlor
11
A:
12
are making a blip of the whole thing.
13
Q:
To who?
14
A:
To Sweeney.
11:23:47 15
I will tell you what was said by Mr. Lawlor.
To Sweeney.
Mr. Lawlor said that you
And Sweeney said there is very little I can do
about it because we cannot control Phil.
We do not know what Phil is at and
16
according to Richard, Phil is causing most of the problems for us by virtue of
17
his running an independent. I'll come black to all of this later.
18 19
Thinks he can do it himself and by running an independent campaign and talking
11:24:03 20
to people individually on his own initiative which was the first indication
21
that I had, obviously I had not been involved before.
22
scenario to discover.
23
a client.
24
or independently and to pick up the pieces
11:24:20 25
Which was a disastrous
To find yourself of running on something on behalf of
You discover the client is doing something completely differently
Q: This was a briefing meeting was it.
26
A:
Yes.
I remember it vividly"
27
A.
Uh-huh.
28
Q. 131
Now, do you disagree that you remember that first meeting vividly as opposed to
29 11:24:32 30
reasonably? A.
No, I disagree, sorry.
I disagree that that account in contrast with the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:24:40
11:24:55
28 1
account that I have given now.
2
you.
3
Q. 132
This account, the latest account I've given
Mr. Liam Lawlor was not present at the first meeting.
Mr Dunlop, would you please stick to my simple question.
Do you have a vivid
4
recollection of the meeting or what you said a moment ago, a reasonable
5
recollection which I would have thought are two different things.?
6
A.
I have a reasonable recollection of the meeting.
7
Q. 133
You said in 2000 to the Tribunal you had a vivid recollection.
8
A.
I have a reasonable recollection of the meeting and what was said by
9 11:25:09 10
Which is it?
Mr. Sweeney. Q. 134
11
I take this as an inconsistency then on your part that you don't have a vivid recollection, Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
No, I don't agree.
13
Q. 135
Now, I remember it vividly because it was in Eddie Sweeney's own office which
14 11:25:26 15
was a very cluttered affair in the Harcourt Station.
Q: was this meeting
arranged by Liam Lawlor ?
16
A:
Yes.
17
Q:
In what day I suppose it's on -- did he phone you and ask you to come
18
along?
19
A:
Exactly.
11:25:38 20
Q:
Or did he set up the meeting?
21
A:
He set up the meeting.
22
Q:
In what capacity was he acting here, was he an advisor or something?
23
A:
I think I said there, when I was talking to Mr. Gallagher I, said I
24
believe that certainly there was a very strong relationship between Liam Lawlor
11:25:55 25
and Phil Monahan in the first instance and obviously between Liam Lawlor and
26
the Monarch organisation.
27
Q:
28
Eddie Sweeney kind of apprise you or update you of what had happened up to that
29
point
11:26:11 30
A:
They told you that somebody was making a monumental whatever of it.
He said that Richard and Phil but Richard in particular had done an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Did
11:26:14
11:26:28
29 1
enormous amount of work with all of the councillors.
2
bending the wind to every wind that blew out in Cherrywood in relation to the
3
opposition. Notwithstanding the fact that a lot of them were already on board.
4
Q: yes.
5
A:
6
Q: Was there any discussion in Mr Lawlor's presence by Mr Sweeney in connection
7
with what you were going to do, why you were being brought on board.
8
Presumably Mr Lawlor knew because it was he who arranged the meeting?
9
A:
Yes.
Q:
The discussion ran along the lines that look there is a scenario here
11:26:39 10
They seemed to be
In sense of having been given money
Yes.
11
where a decision has to be made, what is going to be run with.
You know,
12
Frank here knows all of the councillors, knows all of the people.
He can.
13
do not mean to be sort of but this..
14
bit immodest my saying he knows them all and they will believe him.
11:27:00 15
I
this was actually said and it sounds a If Frank
says look this is the best thing to do on a compromise basis. I'll get the
16
thing sorted.
17
directions and drawings if we did this and that and and altered this and
18
altered that, we have facility to do it but there was absolutely no doubt in my
19
mind then, or now, that I was brought in by Lawlor, recommended to Eddie
11:27:19 20
At that same meeting, as per usual, maps were flying in all
Sweeney and others on the basis that I had capacity, persuasiveness or
21
otherwise to ensure that whatever was acceptable to Monarch would run.
22
that meeting was there any discussion of how much your fee would be or was that
23
a different occasion.
24
participate in that conversation at all?
11:27:37 25
A:
No, you raised the fee.
Lawlor would have been there during it.
26
Sorry, perhaps I shouldn't have skipped.
27
I was leaving something out, question 76:
28
Q:
29
different occasion?
11:27:51 30
A:
Question 77.
At
Did Lawlor
He did not participate in it."
Maybe just in case, you might think
Was there any discussion of how much your fee would be or was that on a
No, no, I raised the issue of the fees and at the end of a period of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:28:03
11:28:10
30 1
time, ten minutes or fifteen minutes, Sweeney said a lot of money has been
2
spent on this already and got that much money available, you know what Phil is
3
like.
4
ain't doing it for nothing was the bottom line.
5
Q: Did Lawlor participate in that conversation at all?
6
A:
7
and I did not see why he should participate in it because he was probably.
8
Again, I have no proof of this but he was probably on a separate arrangement
9
and he would probably regard, I think what's left out there is 'me', as
11:28:28 10
Phil likes to look after the money things himself.
I said look I
Lawlor would have been there during it but he did not participate in it
something of an idiot for allowing myself to be envaigled into a position where
11
it's only 25 grand.
12
Q: Part of which had to be at least dispensed?
13
A:
Yes.
14 11:28:43 15
Now, the rest I'll come to later.
16 17
Mr. Dunlop, I'm only putting that long extract to you for two reasons.
18
can be no doubt from that interview where you said you had a vivid
19
recollection -- from that interview with Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty.
11:29:01 20
Where you said that you had a vivid recollection of the first meeting.
There
There
21
is no doubt there on a number of occasions you are clear that Mr. Lawlor was at
22
the meeting.
You are even quoting Mr. Lawlor.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 136
Secondly, it was clear from what you said yesterday that Mr. Sweeney rang you,
11:29:19 25
I didn't think for a moment that the phone call was out of the blue.
But you
26
were saying -- I think you agreed it wasn't right out of the blue, you had
27
maybe a notion that it might be coming.
28
spoke to you you realised that he was there and you would have inferred that
29
Mr. Lawlor set it up.
But it was afterwards when Mr. Lawlor
11:29:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:29:36
11:29:57
31 1
Somewhere along the line you have either told two blatant lies to the Tribunal.
2
Either in that interview to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty or today and
3
yesterday to the judges in the Tribunal on sworn evidence.
4
A.
Elect? Choose you mean.
What I told you yesterday and what I'm telling you
5
this morning is I went to the meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
6
person present.
7
others and Mr. Lawlor.
8
Mr. Gallagher, conversations along those lines.
9 11:30:19 10
11
Please, elect.
There was no other
I did attend other meetings in Monarch with Mr. Sweeney and Along the lines of what I told Mr. Hanratty and
Q. 137
Don't go into that, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Sorry.
Q. 138
I don't mean to interrupt you if you're saying something important --
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Mr Chairman, on behalf of Mr Dunlop, in so far as Mr. Murphy is
14
purporting to make allegations of deliberate falsehoods.
11:30:30 15
I think it is
entirely irresponsible of him to interrupt Mr. Dunlop when he is attempting to
16
defend himself.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
now whether the clear impression one has from the private interviews with
11:30:51 20
I don't quite agree.
Mr. Dunlop is being asked simply to indicate
Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty, to the effect that the first meeting involved
21
Mr. Lawlor.
That that clearly is in conflict with the evidence he has given
22
us yesterday and today to the effect that Mr. Lawlor was not there.
23 24
And Mr. Murphy asked Mr. Dunlop to now decide which version was correct.
11:31:17 25
So that's what Mr. Murphy was asking Mr. Dunlop to do.
26 27
So perhaps, Mr. Dunlop, if you could first of all, say which is correct.
28
the version in the private interview correct.
29
given us yesterday and today correct?
11:31:32 30
A.
Is
Or is the version that you've
Yesterday and today inconsistency with my statement that I made to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:31:37
11:31:40
32 1
Tribunal.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Can you explain then to us?
Yes?
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
was given some years ago but closer to the date when the meeting took place.
8
Why that account was given and given in such detail if it didn't take place?
9
A.
11:32:04 10
Why this very clear account of a first meeting involving Mr. Lawlor
It's six years ago.
Yeah, these were wide discussive discussions with the
Tribunal, with the representatives of the Tribunal in -- am I on mike?
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Yes.
With the Tribunal in private session in relation to my relations with various developers and politicians.
11:32:21 15
Certainly there is absolutely no doubt.
And
there can be no doubt and as far as I'm concerned there is no doubt, that
16
Mr. Liam Lawlor was involved.
As I said, in my statement, was responsible
17
for, I suspect, the recommendation to Monarch that I be brought on board.
18 19 11:32:39 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
Yes we --
Discussions along the lines that I say in private session did take place.
But
the first meeting that I had with Mr. Sweeney was with Mr. Sweeney alone.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
you stating that at the first meeting it was A, set up by Mr. Lawlor.
11:32:59 25
discussion at that first meeting A.
Yes, I know it says that.
28 29 11:33:11 30
And B,
that Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Sweeney and yourself were in attendance and conducted a
26 27
But do you accept that the transcript clearly states -- clearly has
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well can you explain --
I accept it says that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:33:12
11:33:24
33 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
give a different version now?
4
A.
Can you explain why you said that quite clearly at that time and
Well, in answer to your previous question, Chairman.
These were wide
5
discussions with the Tribunal trying to put the pieces together as to what
6
relationship I had with various developers, various companies and various
7
politicians.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
11:33:42 10
11
But does that mean then that you -- that what you said at the time
at the first meeting is incorrect? A.
It's incorrect.
What I'm saying is that the first meeting that took place
12
with Mr. Sweeney was as a result of a phone call from Mr. Sweeney.
13
with Mr. Sweeney alone.
14
and others from Monarch, in the Monarch properties offices.
11:34:03 15
I attended at various other meetings with Mr. Sweeney
Mr. Lawlor, on occasion, not on all.
16
I attended
In the company of
Yes, conversations and discussions along
the lines that I outlined in the private session did take place but --
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
11:34:18 20
Sorry
Sorry, the difference Chairman is in the private session I said this took place at the first meeting.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
place at the first meeting at a time six years ago, much closer to the event
24
than now?
11:34:30 25
A.
Can you explain why you clearly stated all of this to have taken
Uh-huh.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
be incorrect at the time? Is that your explanation or is it that you are
29
mixing up the first meeting and subsequent meetings?
11:34:51 30
A.
I mean, is it that you -- that you gave a version which you knew to
Well, I don't mean to be disingenuous, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But I would suggest to you
11:34:56
11:35:10
34 1
at the meeting in the private session that I -- that I mixed up certain
2
elements of the many conversations that took place between Mr. Sweeney,
3
Mr. Lawlor, myself and other representatives of Monarch.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7 8
Q. 139
9
MR. MURPHY:
11:35:19 10
just by way of a question to you.
11 12
Mr. Dunlop, I want to just go a little bit further with that, I want to suggest to you that throughout
that interview, you lied to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher? A.
No.
All of the details that I gave Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in relation
13
to my relationship with Mr. Sweeney, and Mr. Lawlor, and other representatives
14
of Monarch, is absolutely correct.
11:35:43 15
this took place at the first meeting.
Other than, in that instance, I said that That is not correct.
16
Q. 140
Okay.
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 141
That is not correct.
19
A.
No, there was no deliberate intention --
Q. 142
All right?
A.
On my part on that occasion to mislead Mr. Gallagher or Mr. Hanratty.
11:35:55 20
21 22
There is no other --
These
were --
23
Q. 143
Well --
24
A.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
11:36:09 25
That is a lie.?
These conversations with Mr. Murphy, or with Mr. Hanratty,
and Mr. Gallagher, were conducted in particular circumstances in as relaxed an
26
atmosphere as possible to enable both sides to come to a conclusion as to what
27
occurred in general terms.
28
what had happened in Dublin County Council in relation to particular
29
developments.
11:36:37 30
To enable people to put the jigsaw together as to
And I was of the disposition then, as I am now, to assist as
best I can in relation to what exactly happened. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:36:41
11:36:54
35 1
Q. 144
So this is an error about putting Mr. Lawlor at the first meeting?
2
A.
Well you suggested and I'm attempting to correct the suggestion that you made
3
in relation that it was a deliberate lie.
4
Q. 145
Yes.
5
A.
You're not suggest it.
6
Q. 146
I know --
7
A.
I know you said it and I am disputing that.
8
Q. 147
Yeah?
9
A.
In the circumstances that I have outlined to you --
Q. 148
You have explained that.?
11
A.
Thank you.
12
Q. 149
It's a mistake when you told --
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 150
I take it there are no other mistakes?
A.
There may well be, there may well be.
Q. 151
There may well be more mistakes in this relaxed atmosphere that were made that
11:37:02 10
11:37:08 15
16 17
I'm suggesting that.? You did say it.
are not deliberate?
18
A.
Well --
19
Q. 152
All right.
11:37:33 20
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
all of that was.
Because the twin -- the second part of what
One was in Mr. Lawlor's presence but the other was
21
Mr. Lawlor clearly organising it, setting it up, phoning you, asking you to
22
come to the meeting.
23
another thing you said it in that interview?
24
A.
11:37:50 25
26
That's another thing you don't agree with but that's
I said it became clear to me subsequent to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor had a role in it because Mr. Lawlor said to me --
Q. 153
I know that.
What we just read out what you said at that meeting and it was
27
that it was set up -- yes.
28
and what capacity was he acting.
29
told Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty that Mr. Lawlor actually phoned you to set
11:38:16 30
up the meeting.
That Mr. Lawlor phoned you and set up the meeting I mean, you are also saying that when you
That that's not right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:38:18
11:38:45
36 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 154
Okay.
Now, before going back to the detail of your first meeting, Mr. Dunlop.
3
I want to suggest to you in September 2003 you submitted the second narrative
4
statement to the Tribunal. If we could have that, please, 422.
5 6
Could you just tell me.
7
mean, it's pretty, this is three years later, pretty important request from the
8
Tribunal, pretty important narrative statement.
9
that statement?
11:38:58 10
Did you have everything you required before -- I
I take it you are happy with
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 155
And that it told the truth?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 156
And that you did whatever research was necessary to formulate that statement to
14 11:39:06 15
16
provide it to the Tribunal? A.
Well, I don't know what you mean by "research", but I made the statement.
Q. 157
All right.
Well did you rely just on your own memory or for example, did you
17
go to your accountants, have discussion with anybody that might be necessary.
18
Are you satisfied that's your document and that it's accurate?
19 11:39:23 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 158
I want to suggest, to you, Mr. Dunlop, that it's riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies.
22 23
Now, if you remember yesterday morning, you agreed with me that your statements
24
and interviews taken together were confusing and difficult to follow and
11:39:39 25
contradictory.
And you agreed with that.
26 27
In the same way, I want to now put to you that this statement.
28
go through them very briefly just to touch on them to show what I'm talking
29
about but I just want your general reaction to that statement.
11:39:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I'm going to
11:39:50
11:40:05
37 1
You have read that statement and you've read your interviews.
2
to you that statement is riddled with what I've just said
3
A.
4 5
You've just said that it's riddled with inconsistencies and are going to go through them.
Q. 159
6
I am but before I do that I want you to know, do you think having read it that it's riddled with inconsistencies?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 160
You think it's accurate?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 161
All right.
11:40:09 10
I am suggesting
Before I just embark on that, can I ask you what, when you
11
prepared this statement in 2003, how would you have described your expertise in
12
planning matters?
13
A.
14 11:40:27 15
My expertise in planning matters.
I've never claimed to be an expert in
planning matters. Q. 162
How would you describe, you know, if somebody asked you what do you know about
16
the planning process.
If they had asked you in August 2003 what would you
17
have said, what you have would you have answered them?
18
A.
About the planning process per se or the Development Plan per se.
19
Q. 163
The whole thing.
A.
There was a Development Plan, various mechanisms that you had to follow --
21
Q. 164
You wouldn't describe yourself as an expert on it?
22
A.
Definitely not.
23
Q. 165
Would you have described yourself as familiar with it?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 166
With the '83 Plan, the '91 draft, applications, motions to rezone, all of that
11:40:46 20
11:40:56 25
26 27
kind of stuff? A.
28 29 11:41:14 30
Everything that happened in '93?
Not necessarily with the '83 Plan or what was the other one you mentioned the '90 plan, no, not necessarily.
Q. 167
Okay.
But the procedure whereby you go for zoning and so on?
A.
I've described that on a number of occasions here in the building, in the room. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:41:19
11:41:41
38 1
Q. 168
Okay.
Can we take page 422, line -- well Monarch was known to -- Monarch was
2
known to me as a company which developed the Tallaght Town Centre, was owned by
3
Mr. Phil Monahan and engaged in attempts to have the lands at Cherrywood,
4
Loughlinstown in Carrickmines in South County Dublin rezoned from agricultural
5
use to other purposes mainly housing and retail.
6 7 8
Do you want too say anything about that? A.
9
No, let me go through it.
If this is the way that you want to proceed.
Was
known to me as a company that developed the Tallaght Town Centre, correct.
11:41:54 10
Was owned by Mr. Philip Monahan, correct.
There may well have been other
11
shareholders, I don't know.
12
Cherrywood rezoned from agricultural use to other purposes mainly housing and
13
retail, yes.
14
Q. 169
11:42:17 15
Engaged in attempts to have their lands at
Now, I suggest to you that Monarch were not engaged in attempts to rezone from agricultural to other purposes.?
16
A.
Well, fine.
17
Q. 170
Who is right, are you right that it was engaged in that or am I right in saying
18 19
You are suggesting it.
that it wasn't? A.
11:42:41 20
Monarch Properties were engaged in having lands at Carrickmines -- at Cherrywood, Loughlinstown, known as Cherrywood in Carrickmines zoned for
21
residential purposes and, and I don't know at what stage this entered into the
22
frame or into the picture, a district centre.
23
Q. 171
24 11:43:06 25
Mr. Dunlop, don't you know that Monarch were not trying to rezone from agricultural to residential?
A.
Well, that does not appear on my horizon in relation to my relationship with
26
Monarch.
What Monarch were trying to do during the course of the Development
27
Plan was to get lands in Cherrywood rezoned.
28
Q. 172
They weren't.
29
A.
What?
Q. 173
They weren't?
11:43:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:43:22
11:43:33
39 1
A.
Well that's the general orientation and understanding that I had of it.
2
Q. 174
I suggest you didn't.?
3
A.
I --
4
Q. 175
I suggest you knew jolly well it had nothing to do with rezoning from
5
agricultural to residential?
6
A.
Well you may suggest it.
7
Q. 176
It's wrong?
8
A.
Fine.
9
Q. 177
You say it's wrong?
A.
No, I'm not saying it's wrong.
11:43:38 10
11
You said it's wrong.
You're the one who said
it's wrong.
12
Q. 178
Well you are saying I'm wrong; aren't you?
13
A.
No, I'm saying --
14
Q. 179
Can we both be right?
A.
What I'm saying is, my understanding in relation to what was occurring during
11:43:50 15
16
the course of the Development Plan, this is the Development Plan.
17
planning application.
18
applications being made on the basis of submissions for lands to be rezoned
19
from one usage to another.
11:44:11 20
Q. 180
It's the Development Plan.
It is not a
Where you have lands,
This was not happening in this case, Mr. Dunlop.
I suggest you know and knew
21
that what was happening was Monarch, when you came in in March '93 what they
22
wanted to do was to change the density of the land and get a better density
23
than one house per acre?
24
A.
Yes, certainly.
Q. 181
Is that right?
26
A.
No, certainly the density issue was a major factor.
27
Q. 182
It was the only factor?
28
A.
Well, as I explained in my statement, yes.
29
Q. 183
Sorry.
11:44:28 25
11:44:43 30
Yes.
And the town centre.
Of course.
I'm not talking about that.
You are saying in the first paragraph of your narrative statement to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:44:47
11:45:04
40 1
Tribunal coming from where you were, with all you knew of what you did with
2
Monarch and the plan, etc and the zoning and so on.
3
fundamentally wrong in suggesting that they were trying to get a change of
4
zoning from agricultural to residential.?
5
A.
You are getting it
Well I've said to you five minutes ago and I'm saying it to you again.
My
6
relationship with Monarch was on the basis of the problem that they had during
7
the course of the Development Plan vis-a-vis their lands in Cherrywood,
8
Lahaunstown vis-a-vis their application for residential and/or town
9
centre/district centre.
11:45:26 10
Q. 184
Yes.?
11
A.
That was the reason I was brought in.
12
Q. 185
Yes?
13
A.
That had developed as a result of bad communication.
14
Q. 186
But they told you, I presume, in briefing you.
11:45:43 15
And you knew, that in fact
these lands had been zoned residential from 1983 or maybe before.
16
And what
was required was a change not of zoning but of density?
17
A.
They may well have done.
18
Q. 187
Yeah.
19
A.
Perceptionally, yes.
11:46:04 20
Now, all right.
Anyway, you agree that's wrong what you say there?
But my understanding in relation to the difficulties
with Monarch was to solve their problem and their problem was -
21
Q. 188
I understand that?
22
A.
Density.
23
Q. 189
I understand that, Mr. Dunlop.
24 11:46:16 25
It was to unscramble the problem.
We'll come to that.
Anyway, perceptionally
this is an inconsistency? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 190
Sorry, whatever that means.
27
A.
Very good.
28
Q. 191
Now, just going on from there.
Because I don't understand it?
29 11:46:28 30
I had met Mr. Philip Monahan once or twice socially but had never acted for him Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:46:35
11:46:45
41 1
or his company Monarch.
2 3
I opened to you yesterday where you talked about Mr. Lynn, you know, having
4
worked for him and being paid by I can't remember now, being paid by Monarch
5
prior to this involvement?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 192
That's a second inconsistency.?
8
A.
Being paid by Monarch? When?
9
Q. 193
Well do you want me to get the up the thing again? All right.
11:47:29 10
This is the
one that I couldn't find yesterday and I've lost it again.
11 12
It was where it was -- you had said that you had done something for Monarch
13
previously or Mr. Lynn.
14
payments.
11:47:51 15
And you had received, I think you'd received
But anyway, it was to the effect that you had had a business
dealing with Monarch or somebody in Monarch before March '93.
16
was that you had no recollection of it.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 194
Do you recall what I'm talking about?
19
A.
Yes, I do I remember it now.
You put it on the screen subsequently.
11:48:04 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Were you referring to a private interview?
Yes.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Page 572 I think it was.
11:48:09 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you, Judge.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think that might be it.
29 11:48:13 30
And your answer
MR. MURPHY:
It is, thank you.
572.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:48:17
11:48:29
42 1 2 3
Q. 195
Down at the bottom "I had got other monies from Monarch previously but that was
4
purely from public relations work.
It had nothing whatsoever.
It was purely
5
the publication aspects of various things and I then kept in touch with Mr
6
Richard Lynn".
7 8 9
Isn't that an inconsistency with what you say here? A.
Well yes it is.
Q. 196
That's fine?
11
A.
I never did any work.
12
Q. 197
That's the second inconsistency.
11:48:37 10
Because I never got.
And then paragraph two.
Taking into
13
account the diary references to him in November 1992.
14
the other executive of Monarch personally prior to my becoming involved with
11:48:55 15
I did not know any of
the company in early '93.
16 17 18
That's wrong? A.
19 11:49:07 20
Did not know the other executives in Monarch personally prior to my becoming involved with the company in 1993.
Q. 198
21
I'm not saying whether you did or not.
I'm just saying it's inconsistent with
what you said in private interview?
22
A.
Fine.
23
Q. 199
Did you think in the last sentence of that paragraph "I recall that
24
Messrs. Lynn and Reilly were conducting their lobbying of councillors
11:49:20 25
contemporaneously with my lobbying in relation to Quarryvale and other matters
26
in the latter parts of '92 and the early parts of '93"
27
Quarryvale could actually be a mistake for Paisley Park?
28
A.
No, I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
29
Q. 200
All right.
11:49:41 30
Do you think
Because Quarryvale was an ongoing issue.
We'll ignore that one. The next paragraph then
"I had not met
either Messrs. Lynn or Reilly prior to encountering them casually in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:49:46
11:49:55
43 1
environs of Dublin County Council's offices.
2 3
That's an inconsistency again, isn't it? It's along the same lines of not
4
having known Mr. Lynn prior to March 1993?
5
A.
Which I didn't.
6
Q. 201
Just the inconsistencies?
7
A.
I did not know him before March 1993.
8
Q. 202
All right.
To go on to the next page, 423.
9 11:50:07 10
Half way down the second paragraph.
"Monarch would not achieve the level of
11
rezoning it either wanted or considered economically viable".
12
the second paragraph on the right margin you have the name Monarch and then
13
would not achieve the level of rezoning
14 11:50:33 15
Half way down
A.
Yes, I have it, yes.
Q. 203
That's a bit like the first point I'm making that it wasn't rezoning it was
16
density?
17
A.
Density, yes.
18
Q. 204
All right.
19
And -- all right.
And then at the bottom of that page "I do not
know who recommended to Mr. Sweeney that he contact me.
11:50:53 20
He being Mr. Lawlor.
And I never discussed the genesis of the contact with any other third party".
21 22
That's inconsistent with your private interviews?
23
A.
With the private interview, yes.
24
Q. 205
Next page.
524.
11:51:05 25
26
Top.
"However, having met Mr. Sweeney following his contact with me
27
Mr. Lawlor told me a short time afterwards that he knew that I had met with
28
Mr. Sweeney".
29 11:51:14 30
That's also inconsistent. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
11:51:16
11:51:28
44 1 2
"I subsequently attended a large number of meetings in Monarch's offices in
3
Harcourt Street requesting ".
4
you had said in private interview two.
I think yesterday we dealt with the fact that It's another inconsistency
5
A.
I think I had said that I met Mr. Sweeney twice.
6
Q. 206
Two meetings in Monarch offices in Harcourt Street?
7
A.
That's what I said in the private meeting.
8
Q. 207
That's an inconsistency.?
9
A.
Yes.
11:51:40 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Mr. Murphy, we have to rise just for a few minutes to attend
12
to something.
It will be probably less than ten minutes.
MR. MURPHY:
.
13 14
All right.
Certainly.
11:51:48 15
16 17
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
18 19 11:55:01 20
21
Q. 208
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you, Chairman.
22 23
Mr. Dunlop, Chairman, just before, I'll continue.
24
out to me that the point I was making at the beginning of this narrative
12:15:14 25
Mr. Redmond just pointed
statement by way of an inconsistency in relation to the question of zoning.
26
That it wasn't a question of rezoning from agricultural to residential.
27
makes the point and I accept it that in fact part of the motion in May '92,
28
which was I think Mr. Don Lydon proposing the Manager's recommendations.
29
did include for a change from agricultural to residential in respect of part of
12:15:46 30
the lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
He
It
12:15:47
12:16:02
45 1 2
Where I was coming from is in fact that really when Mr. Dunlop was brought into
3
the Monarch team, it was really to deal with increasing the density from one
4
house per acre. So I accept what Mr. Redmond points out.
5
drop that as an inconsistency.
And I think I'll
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
witnesses will mix-up terms planning and rezoning and words.
9
deal I think turns on how one expresses what was in fact going on in the
12:16:26 10
Well also, and I think it's fair to point out too, that a lot of So not a great
council.
11 12
But anyway, that's fine.
I can understand.
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
12:16:33 15
16
saying. Q. 209
It wasn't a good point anyway, Chairman, I think is what you're
(laughter)
Mr. Dunlop, sorry, to keep coming back to this first meeting with Mr. Lawlor.
17 18
You said in your statement., page 423, please.
19 12:16:46 20
I am just trying to skip through what I see as inconsistencies in your
21 22
narrative statement. A.
Before you go any further, Mr. Murphy.
May I, without appearing pedantic.
23
When you talk about inconsistencies in my statement.
24
between the statement that you have and the private sessions, not internal
12:17:08 25
You mean inconsistencies
inherent consistencies in the statement.
26
Q. 210
That's correct.
27
A.
I don't want to appear pedantic.
28
Q. 211
Yes.
I think it's an important point.
Could we just go to the bottom of that.
Last paragraph.
29 12:17:18 30
"My direct involvement occurred in early 1993 after I was contacted by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:17:22
12:17:35
46 1
Mr. Eddie Sweeney of Monarch.
My diary, I believe that meeting may have
2
occurred on the 9th of March '93". I think that should be the 8th?
3
A.
It is the 8th, Mr. Murphy, yeah.
4
Q. 212
Anyway --
5
A.
There was a meeting on the 9th as well but it didn't involve Mr. Sweeney.
6
Q. 213
As you've said, you were contacted by Mr. Sweeney.
That's what you say here
7
in October, September 2003.
8
I was pointing out to you that in fact you had said in private interview?
9 12:17:53 10
And that's what you are saying in evidence.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 214
That you were contacted by Mr. Lawlor and that Mr. Lawlor was present.
11
you don't agree with that.
And
And
That's fine. 4041, please.
12 13 14
This is your telephone messages, Mr. Dunlop. A.
No, it's not.
12:18:13 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's 4014.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
I may have called the wrong number.
19 12:18:20 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
No, I think you called the correct number, Mr. Murphy.
21 22 23
Q. 215
24 12:18:33 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
Telephone messages Monday 8th of March 1993.
That's your
document I think, isn't that right, Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 216
9:55.
27
Ann - Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch house at
five o'clock today?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 217
That seems to be in the teeth of what you've been telling us?
A.
Well he has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch house at five o'clock
12:18:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:18:53
12:19:05
47 1
today.
2
secretary.
3
Q. 218
4
Yes, obviously Liam Lawlor.
Ann rang.
That's Liam Lawlor's
That puts you on notice before going to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor has arranged that meeting?
5
A.
Yes, it does.
6
Q. 219
I think your sworn evidence on a number of occasions was that you didn't learn
7
of Mr. Liam Lawlor's involvement until afterwards when he informed you that he
8
was aware a meeting had taken place?
9
A.
12:19:22 10
He told me a short time afterwards that he knew I met Mr. Sweeney.
I have
said consistently, over yesterday and today, that Mr. Lawlor was not at the
11
first meeting.
12
Mr. Lawlor said to me, I don't know 'how did you get on with Ed?'or 'I know you
13
met Ed'.
14 12:19:37 15
It was subsequent to my meeting with Mr Sweeney that
Q. 220
And what was the last part?
A.
Mr. Lawlor told me a short time afterwards that he knew that I had met with
16
Mr. Sweeney.
17
Q. 221
Ed?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 222
But, Mr. Dunlop, you have said categorically now that it's Mr. Sweeney who
12:19:50 20
phoned you to set up a meeting?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 223
You didn't know of Mr. Lawlor until afterwards?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 224
This is your phone message saying that Ann has phoned and left a message saying
12:20:01 25
that Mr. Lawlor has arranged a meeting with Mr. Sweeney in Monarch house
26
today?
27
A.
Yes, they would appear to be inconsistent.
28
Q. 225
I presume your telephone message is accurate?
29
A.
These were not kept by me but my secretary.
Q. 226
Who was your secretary?
12:20:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:20:27
12:20:29
48 1
A.
I can't remember her name now, she has long since gone, Norma, I think.
2
Q. 227
Do you think she made a mistake about that?
3
A.
No, I wouldn't suggest she made a mistake.
4
This message was recorded by her
for my benefit.
5
Q. 228
You are not distancing yourself?
6
A.
No, no, these messages have come up on previous occasions and used in evidence
7
by other people.
8
Q. 229
Doesn't it mean what you told the three Judges a few moments ago is wrong?
9
A.
No.
12:20:48 10
What I have said yesterday and what I have said today and what I said a
few moments is that Mr. Sweeney rang me in relation to -- I spoke to
11
Mr. Sweeney.
12
at the meeting.
13
Q. 230
14
Don't mind that. Mr. Sweeney.
12:21:13 15
We agreed to meet.
We did meet.
Please don't go on to that.
Mr. Lawlor was not present
sorry. Your evidence was
I think you said yesterday a few days earlier rang you.
This
is on Monday?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 231
I think you said a few days earlier rang you to set up the meeting?
18
A.
I said I wasn't quite sure.
19
Q. 232
All right.
12:21:26 20
I said it could have been a few days earlier.
This appears from this that you are being phoned on Monday morning
to be told for the first time that Mr. Lawlor has arranged a meeting with
21
Mr. Sweeney for five o'clock?
22
A.
Yes, it would appear so, yes.
23
Q. 233
Doesn't that mean that what you said earlier and yesterday just was not true?
24
A.
No.
12:21:43 25
What I've said to you yesterday and what I'm saying to you today again,
messages or telephone messages, that I spoke to Mr. Sweeney and went and met
26
Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request.
27
Q. 234
Did you say you phoned Mr. Sweeney?
28
A.
No, no, Mr. Sweeney rang.
29 12:22:09 30
Mr. Liam Lawlor's secretary could --
Asked me to go and see him.
I went and saw him.
Mr. Liam Lawlor's secretary, Ann, I do not dispute this, obviously left a message for me for my benefit to say that Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:22:14
12:22:32
49 1
Sweeney in Monarch at five o'clock today.
2
what I'm saying today.
3
saw him.
4
that he knew that I had met with Ed.
5
Q. 235
6
Mr. Sweeney rang me to go and see him.
I went and
Subsequent to the meeting with Mr. Sweeney Mr. Lawlor told me, said
Well it's totally inconsistent with your in-house document recorded by your secretary?
7
A.
Well -- I don't -- I'm not going to dis--
8
Q. 236
I suggest to you.
9
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I'd like you to deal with this
conclusively because it's terribly difficult to pin you down.
12:22:49 10
pin you down on this.
11 12
What I've said to you yesterday and
I'm trying to
And I want to know if what you told a few times today
and yesterday is wrong? A.
No.
What I've said to you yesterday and what I'm saying to you today is that
13
I went to see Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request.
14
inconsistency in Ann, Liam Lawlor's secretary saying that he has arranged a
12:23:15 15
meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
16 17
12:23:28 20
I went and I saw Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's
request. Q. 237
18 19
I do not see any
Well you told us Mr. Dunlop, that you didn't know anything about Mr. Lawlor being involved until you met him after the meeting?
A.
Correct, yes, following --
Q. 238
That is a lie.
Because this says, your secretary says that Ann has phoned
21
that Liam has -- so you knew before the meeting that Liam had set it up.
22
Whatever about him going to be there.
23
You knew all about Mr. Lawlor's involvement before going to Mr. Sweeney?
24
A.
12:23:53 25
Leave that.
That he had set it up.
No, what I have said is Mr. Lawlor contacting -- met me afterwards and said, 'you met Ed, how did the meeting go?'.
26
Q. 239
'How did the meeting go, I wasn't there?'
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 240
But you said that -- that was the first you knew about Mr. Lawlor.
29 12:24:08 30
It's from
that you tell the Tribunal that you inferred and I think you say really this is what happened.
That Mr. Lawlor is responsible for suggesting your name to
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:24:14
12:24:22
50 1
Mr.--
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 241
And what you said on sworn evidence is that's where you found out about
4
Mr. Lawlor recommending?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 242
And thanking Mr. Lawlor?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 243
But you knew before you went to the meeting that Mr. Lawlor had set it up?
9
A.
No.
12:24:32 10
If you look at the list of telephone calls on that day.
calls are virtually within ten minutes of each other.
The telephone
Five -- ten fifteen
11
minutes of each other.
That means that I either was not in my office or could
12
not accept those calls.
And I may well have got that information subsequently
13
later in the day.
14
yesterday and what I'm saying today, is that that is how the arrangement was
12:24:58 15
16
I cannot attest to that.
What I have said to you
put in place. Q. 244
It's an ingenious, Mr. Dunlop, explanation for why you are suggesting now that
17
why that happened.
18
what you are saying about knowing Liam set it up.
19
is that maybe you didn't get the message before the meeting?
12:25:14 20
21
I think you must be accepting that it's inconsistent with
A.
Well what I'm saying to you.
Q. 245
Don't repeat yourself.
22
I think what you're saying
Again, to repeat myself again.
Are you saying you didn't get the message before you
went to the meeting?
23
A.
Let's not get testy.
24
Q. 246
Are you telling the truth, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I'm telling you the truth about the meeting with a man called Ed Sweeney at his
12:25:28 25
We've enough testiness.
26
request in his office, subsequent to which Liam Lawlor, a short time
27
afterwards, said that he knew that I had met with Ed Sweeney --
28
Q. 247
29 12:25:46 30
Why we're taking so long is because you will not answer the question. to ask every question half a dozen times?
A.
No you don't. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I have
12:25:47
12:26:01
51 1
Q. 248
I do.?
2
A.
No, no, that's an exaggeration.
3
Q. 249
Well perhaps it's five times.
Mr. Dunlop, it is quite simple.
Are you now
4
saying that that message, I have no idea what you did on 8th of March 1993 or
5
where you were except I know that you went to the meeting in the afternoon.
6
Is it your case now that you wouldn't have got that message?
7
A.
I'm not saying it is my case.
8
Q. 250
Right.?
9
A.
I am saying that it is a possibility.
12:26:17 10
your grey hairs.
Sorry, Mr.-- I don't want to add to
But it is a possibility as --
11
Q. 251
Okay?
12
A.
As I have given evidence here before in relation to the receipt of messages.
13
I did not sit behind a desk from nine o'clock in the morning until one o'clock,
14
go for lunch, come back at two and sit behind a desk until five.
12:26:35 15
the way I operated.
I was out of my office for considerable --
16
Q. 252
At your desk and not taking your messages.
17
A.
That's a possibility too.
18
Q. 253
You would then have been told about the message?
19
A.
That's a possibility.
12:26:51 20
21
That is not
You told your secretary perhaps --
What I'm saying to you is this meeting was set up as I
have outlined to you. Q. 254
I'm not interested in it, Mr. Dunlop.
I want to know, Mr. Dunlop, can the
22
Tribunal take it that before you met Mr. Sweeney on your own, late afternoon
23
Monday, this Monday?
24 12:27:03 25
26
A.
Yes?
Q. 255
That you did not know about this message.
A.
Well what I -- the only answer I can give to you to that is yes.
Can the Tribunal take that? Because
27
given the consistent evidence that I have given to you today, yesterday and
28
today --
29 12:27:16 30
Q. 256
Yes?
A.
Yesterday and today. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:27:18
12:27:32
52 1
Q. 257
All right.?
2
A.
Is that Mr. Lawlor was not at the meeting.
Mr. Lawlor made contact with me
3
shortly afterwards or I linked up with Mr. Lawlor shortly afterwards.
4
said he knew that I had met Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 258
No.
6
A.
Yeah and he knew that I had met Mr. Sweeney.
7
Q. 259
So why did Mr. Lawlor make contact with you after the meeting?
8
A.
Sure Mr. Lawlor was in contact with me virtually on an hourly basis.
9
Q. 260
You were very close businesswise.
A.
Not businesswise.
12:27:50 10
And he
What you said was Mr. Lawlor made contact with you shortly afterwards?
We were very close.
11
clients and who recommended clients.
12
in my office quite frequently.
He was a -- an operator who suggested As I said to you yesterday.
And he was
13
Q. 261
That does not mean that he was very close businesswise?
14
A.
Well I gave him money, if that's businesswise, yes.
Q. 262
What did you give him money for?
16
A.
On various occasions.
17
Q. 263
For introducing you?
18
A.
He asked for money and I gave it to him, as I've given evidence heretofore.
19
Q. 264
Yes.
A.
Liam was always looking for money.
21
Q. 265
Why from you?
22
A.
Well, because he would claim that he had introduced me to a particular client.
23
Q. 266
Yeah?
24
A.
And he would look for an introductory fee.
Q. 267
And did you pay him in every Module -- in every development where he introduced
12:28:10 15
12:28:23 20
12:28:34 25
26
What was he asking for money for?
you did you pay him?
27
A.
No, I don't think I paid him in all.
28
Q. 268
All right?
29
A.
Certainly he did not ask me and he was not offered in this Module.
Q. 269
Okay. Yes. That's close business dealings; isn't it? Or is it?
12:28:49 30
I think there was some disputes in some.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:28:57
12:29:06
53 1
A.
We're into definitional terms.
2
Q. 270
We are.
3
A.
Well, I mean, I had a close relationship with Liam Lawlor.
4
What do you think?
business with Liam Lawlor.
5
Q. 271
All right?
6
A.
I wasn't involved in Liam Lawlor's business.
7 8
my business. Q. 272
9 12:29:21 10
I didn't run a
Liam Lawlor wasn't involved in
He wasn't a shareholder in my business.
And how much would you have paid him overall, over the years, over the Development Plan, say?
A.
11
Well certainly over a period.
I've given documentary evidence to the Tribunal
in various stages of the order of -- over 100,000 pounds.
12
Q. 273
Pretty close.
13
A.
Oh, yes.
14
Q. 274
All right.
A.
Well it's recorded in my diary at five o'clock.
Q. 275
Have you any recollection of the time of the meeting which you remember
12:29:39 15
16 17
Pretty serious business dealings; isn't it?
Do you know what time the meeting took place at?
vividly?
18
A.
Have I any recollection of the time.
19
Q. 276
What time did you go to the office, what time did you start at?
A.
Start out at?
Q. 277
Why do you suddenly go into this extraordinary position of disbelief and
12:29:55 20
21 22
suspicion and not understanding the simplest of questions that a child of two
23
would answer?
24
A.
12:30:10 25
You don't put them simply, Mr. Murphy.
answer to you the diary reference is to meet Mr. Ed Sweeney at five o'clock.
26
I am a reasonably punctual person.
27
I could have been there at five to five.
28 29 12:30:33 30
If you put the question simply I
Q. 278
All right. five.
Okay.
I could have been there at five past five.
You could have been there at five to five or five past
My simple question.
did that meeting start at.
And I can't put it any simpler.
Is what time
You have a vivid recollection of it?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:30:36
12:30:51
54 1
A.
Five o'clock it says.
2
Q. 279
That's what it says.
The evidence, according to yourself, is a document
saying five o'clock.
Did it start at five o'clock?
3 4
A.
5 6
there at five o'clock. Q. 280
7 8
And the chances are, you'd no message.
You didn't get a message -- you didn't
get this message from your secretary about Liam? A.
9 12:31:05 10
All I can say to you is my documentary reference is my diary. I was to be
The chances are that is as I have said to you two minutes ago, that is a distinct possibility.
Q. 281
11
Page 4042, please. Mr. Dunlop, would you go down to 4:45, please. that out.
12
A.
"Ann, Liam won't be able to make meeting until 5:30."
13
Q. 282
You are looking at me, Mr. Dunlop.
14
A.
You asked me to read it out.
Q. 283
Thank you.
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 284
Mr. Dunlop, everything you are saying in the witness box is untrue.?
18
A.
I absolutely reject that.
19
Q. 285
This is untrue.
12:31:49 15
And read
12:32:04 20
Do you have anything to say?
I've read it out.
Do you have anything to comment to make on it?
What you are saying in this small point that we're making now
about this first meeting, who set it up, who was at it, the time of it, whether
21
or not you got the messages.
Is a tissue of lies.
Now --
22
A.
Let me --
23
Q. 286
Please explain, let's concentrate on this entry that you have read it out.
24 12:32:22 25
Explain it to the three Judges? A.
26 27
You have asked me to read it out and I have read it out, "Ann, Liam won't be able to make meeting until 5:30".
Q. 287
That's the second time you've read it out.
Explain total fundamental
28
inconsistency between the entry in your book here and all you've said about
29
getting the earlier message and whether or not Liam was involved etc..
12:32:42 30
explain to everybody in the room? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Please
12:32:43
12:32:55
55 1
A.
Well I've explained it, I don't know how many times.
2
Q. 288
Once.
3
A.
Let's go again and you'll get the truth as I've told it to you. I don't know
4
I want it once, Mr. Dunlop and I want the truth.?
how many times already.
5
Q. 289
Let's have it.?
6
A.
I went to a meeting in Monarch Properties.
7
Q. 290
Don't give us that, Mr. Dunlop.
Give us the truth on this, don't give us all
8
of this ranting and this rubbish.
Repeating when I ask a question you repeat
9
the question or you repeat the answer you gave. Please answer.
12:33:13 10
Explain these
two entries and your sworn testimony, on oath, to three Judges, to the
11
Oireachtas.
Explain your evidence, today, that Mr. Dunlop -- that you did not
12
know Mr. Dunlop set up the meeting.
That he wasn't at the meeting?
13
A.
Mr. Lawlor.
14
Q. 291
Mr. Lawlor.
That's a wonderful point Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Lawlor.
That you did not know Mr. Lawlor set up the meeting.
12:33:36 15
I beg your pardon.
That
That he
16
was not at it.
17
them or did get them whatever.
Please, once and more all.
18
there, bored out of their minds.
Would you please tell them the truth for the
19
first time this morning?
12:33:54 20
A.
And that everything about these messages that you didn't get Three judges up
First of all, I reject that statement that you have just made latterly.
21 22
I went to a meeting in Monarch with Mr. Ed Sweeney at his request.
23
subsequently told by Mr. Lawlor.
24
said that he knew that I had met Eddie Sweeney.
12:34:14 25
26
I was
I met Mr. Lawlor sometime afterwards.
He
Ann saying Liam won't be able
to make the meeting until five O'clock. You prefaced all of this by saying five o'clock.
The meeting is in my diary for five o'clock.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
were in the office, whether you got it or were en route to the meeting.
12:34:31 30
Mr Dunlop, can I just ask you.
Irrespective of whether you At
the very least that statement which is, as I understand it, and then you have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:34:37
12:34:50
56 1
given evidence previously.
2
accounts of messages, calls to your office taken largely in your absence or
3
when you were otherwise engaged by your secretary
4
A.
You will say that these are contemporaneous
Yes.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That I think is taken on the 8th of March 1993?
Yes.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:35:00 10
And that -- what Mr. Murphy is putting to you, I would
suggest, is at the very least, that that would appear corroborative of what you
11
told the Tribunal in May 2000; that Mr. Lawlor was in attendance at the very
12
first meeting.
13
A.
Well, I --.
14 12:35:15 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
If you look at the gist.
Now, assuming that the Liam.
and
16
you've said I think on many occasions here that the Liam in this -- largely in
17
these messages referred to the late Mr. Lawlor.
18
A.
There's no doubt about that, yes.
19 12:35:28 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that that would suggest to anybody reading it.
That
21
Liam's, unfortunately for some reason, there is a meeting scheduled for five.
22
You've agreed that, it is in your diary.
23
meeting until 5:30.
24
A.
He for some reason can't make this
Yes.
12:35:42 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
examined you on yesterday and this morning and earlier.
28
some seven years after the event when you were in discussions with Mr. Hanratty
29
and Mr. Gallagher, you were telling them about your meeting, your first meeting
12:36:07 30
I am saying to you, Mr. Dunlop, that given to what Mr. Murphy That in May 2000,
with Mr. Sweeney and how it was set up and who was there. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:36:10
12:36:21
57 1
A.
Yes.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
like, corroborative of, if you like, or vice versa really with your private
5
interview.
6
A.
And I don't want to repeat it.
But that would appear, if you
Yes.
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That's a contemporaneous record
Yes, it is.
12:36:26 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
by many people here about those records.
13
from and I think that's really what he wants you to address to the Tribunal.
14
I may be wrong.
12:36:40 15
A.
And you have stood over that in evidence and cross-examination That's where Mr. Murphy is coming
It is certainly some aspect of it.
I accept fully that that is an accurate representation of what Mr. Murphy asked
16
me.
17
effect that I said -- that I said in the private sessions or those messages.
18
Mr. Lawlor was not at the first meeting.
19
other meetings with Eddie Sweeney.
12:37:11 20
21
Certainly.
And what I've said is that notwithstanding anything to the
He just wasn't there.
He was at
And I certainly would not be discussing
anything in relation to my fees in front of Mr. Lawlor. Q. 292
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
24
certainly would not discuss your fees in front of Mr. Lawlor?
12:37:29 25
Wait now.
We'll just take that point Mr. Dunlop.
You
A.
No.
26
Q. 293
Which I completely understand.?
27
A.
You do?
28
Q. 294
But you've given evidence in that private interview that you did discuss the
29 12:37:43 30
fees in front of -- with Mr. Sweeney in front of Mr. Lawlor.? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:37:43
12:37:53
58 1
Q. 295
Now, your point is it wasn't the first meeting?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 296
Let's leave that for a second.
4
The point you now introduce is that you
wouldn't have that discussion about fees in front of Mr. Lawlor.?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 297
How do you make up to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 the fiction
7
that Mr. Lawlor would have been laughing at you because you were agreeing to do
8
all ever this for 25 thousand?
9
A.
12:38:17 10
Well Mr. Lawlor would, often said to me, not to under sell myself, these people have plenty of money and I hope you're getting plenty of money for this, with
11
an ulterior motive, I hasten to add, from his own point of view.
12
got the possibility is the more he would get.
13
place with Eddie Sweeney was for, at his request, because of the difficulties
14
that they had in Monarch.
12:38:42 15
The more I
No, the reason the meeting took
The fee was discussed with Mr. Sweeney at the first
meeting, as is evidenced by the remittance advice notices from Monarch to the
16
payments.
17
Q. 298
I think you must know that you've completely failed to answer the question.?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 299
Why did Mr. Lawlor not get a payment from you in the Cherrywood case?
A.
Well he certainly didn't ask me.
21
Q. 300
Why didn't he?
22
A.
Well I can't answer why he didn't ask me.
23
Q. 301
Hold on, Mr. Dunlop.
12:39:02 20
24
impression.
12:39:17 25
You've given us the impression.
Not just an
You've told us he's there. he's around the place in a very
substantial way looking for his, what did you call it, an introductory fee?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 302
And you did say maybe in one or two that you didn't -- you didn't get them in
28
every case.
29
Mr. Lawlor would have no hesitation in looking for money?
12:39:33 30
A.
What was the explanation for -- I get the impression that
None. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:39:33
12:39:45
59 1
Q. 303
Why didn't he come to you in this case?
2
A.
Well I think that is, to be fair to you and to everybody, I think that's a
3
futile question.
I cannot answer why he didn't come to me.
4
you is that he didn't.
All I can tell
5
Q. 304
It's very strange.
6
A.
Yes, I would say, yes, a bit odd.
7
Q. 305
Now, 4045 please. For completeness on this thing about the meeting.
8 9
I want
to -- your diary entry, this is your diary entry for Monday March 8th A.
Yes.
Q. 306
Shows five o'clock: E Sweeney?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 307
And there's no mention of Mr. Lawlor there?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 308
And do you know how many days after that meeting with Mr. Sweeney on his own
12:40:03 10
12:40:14 15
16
you met Mr. Lawlor and he told you all about the meeting? A.
17
Well, what I've said a short time afterwards.
It could have been the same day
or the following morning.
18
Q. 309
Well, would you like --
19
A.
Mr. Lawlor was in constant contact with me both at my office and at home.
Q. 310
Because you had so many deals going?
A.
Well, yes.
12:40:30 20
21
The relationship was such that he was giving.
He was
22
transmitting information to me.
23
longer a member of Dublin County Council.
24
information to me or suggesting to me various things that might possibly be
12:40:51 25
But that he was transmitting
done or ought be done in particular circumstances in relation to a particular
26 27
Notwithstanding the fact that he was no
client in Dublin County Council. Q. 311
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I suggest, like, you get this phone call and
28
whatever.
29
out of which you have got 85,000 that we're aware of.
12:41:12 30
The meeting is set up for the 8th of March.
higher sums from this Development Plan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It's a development Have you received
12:41:13
12:41:27
60 1
A.
Have I received higher sums? Um, oh, yes I have, yes.
2
Q. 312
How much?
3
A.
Um.
4
Q. 313
And where? Which one, which development and how much?
5
A.
Well it hasn't been opened here.
6
Q. 314
Has it not?
7
A.
Well.
8
Q. 315
Don't say which it is.
Just give me the amount?
9
A.
I know the protocols.
No, it hasn't been opened here.
12:41:37 10
11
one. Q. 316
12
You will be talking of hundreds of thousands.
Okay.
So there's hundreds of those.
That's enormous.
A.
Well not miserable.
14
Q. 317
In 1983.
A.
Oh, um, I wouldn't -- I'd hesitate to do a priority list.
Q. 318
Well don't.
16 17 18
Well is it the second highest?
Just in rough terms.
Take your time, Mr. Dunlop.
I don't want
to ....? A.
19 12:42:11 20
This was only a
miserable 85,000 in 1983?
13
12:41:51 15
But in relation to
It would be relatively.
It would be relatively near the top.
I'm not
suggesting that it is the second highest. Q. 319
There might be another one above it?
21
A.
There might be one or two above it.
22
Q. 320
I get the impression you know exactly what the other one or two are?
23
A.
Let's not be disingenuous here, Mr. Murphy.
24
Yesterday you were talking about
various clients and who introduced who to whom.
12:42:33 25
answer to you.
I'm just being careful what I
As soon as I say it was the second highest you come along and
26
say it wasn't the second highest.
27
the top.
Yes, I'm just saying it could be here near
28
Q. 321
Between 85,000 and the other one which is hundreds of thousands you said?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 322
There's a huge gap, can you just tell me have you one or two others in the
12:42:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:42:49
12:42:54
61 1
middle somewhere?
2
A.
Possibly one or two others.
3
Q. 323
Would they be 100,000 or 150?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 324
It's a pretty substantial -- it's a pretty good brief this particular one,
6
isn't it?
7
A.
The Monarch one?
8
Q. 325
Monarch, yes.?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 326
Just tell me exactly when you met Mr. Lawlor after your meeting with
12:43:02 10
11
Mr. Sweeney and you had this discussion you're telling us about.
12
evening, was it the next morning --
13
A.
14
No, it could have been that evening or it could have been the following day. I can't absolutely say to you definitively how soon afterwards.
12:43:22 15
Was it that
But I have
already said to you that Mr. Lawlor was a regular caller on the phone and a
16
regular caller to my offices uninvited.
Both invited and uninvited.
17
Q. 327
And I think did you meet subsequently with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
18
A.
I met -- I think the diary will show that's on the screen I met Mr. Lynn and
19 12:43:51 20
Mr. Reilly the following day, March the 9th.
At 5:15.
Q. 328
And you had a chat with Mr. Lawlor before that?
21
A.
It is quite possible, yes.
22
Q. 329
All right.
Mr. Dunlop, the meeting with Mr. Sweeney, 5.00 or 5:30 Monday the
23
8th of March, just you and Mr. Sweeney.
24
introduced it -- sorry.
12:44:32 25
You told us yesterday Mr. Sweeney
He explained the background of Cherrywood to you.?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 330
About which you knew something yourself anyway?
27
A.
Anecdotally, yes.
28
Q. 331
Would it be fair to say that you were brought into this? Would it be fair to
29 12:45:04 30
say that you were brought into Monarch invited you on to their team for a cocktail of reasons? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:45:10
12:45:43
62 1
A.
I'd say that's possible, yes.
2
Q. 332
Yeah.
There were various issues.
And could I have, please, 544.
3 4
Was one of those reasons, Mr. Dunlop, because it was well known that you gave
5
money to councillors for their vote?
6
A.
My answer to that is yes.
7
Q. 333
And was another reason to undo Mr. Lydon's mistakes?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 334
And was another reason that Mr. Phil Monahan was running his own show and
12:46:31 10
looking for too much -- looking for too much by way of density?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 335
You see, Mr. Dunlop, I had a lot of difficulty in reading your statements and
13
reading your interviews and trying to understand why you were suddenly
14
introduced to this particular project.
12:47:08 15
16
And they were some of the reasons that I was picking up.
And it seems to me,
17
and I wonder.
18
If I put it to you anyway and if it's wrong well then you can correct me.
Because this would short circuit things if I have it right.
19 12:47:21 20
If we put all of those things together.
If, would I be right to say that --
21
sorry.
22
getting what they wanted in their development when you came in in March 2003?
23
March 1993.
24 12:47:45 25
Yes.
Q. 336
And they were in trouble because Mr. Lydon's proposal -- Mr. Lydon was -- where was he in all of this, in relation to Monarch?
A.
28 29 12:48:06 30
Cherrywood were in trouble?
A.
26 27
Am I right in saying that Cherrywood had a problem in relation to
Well, I think I've said in my statement that it was indicated to me by Mr. Lynn.
Q. 337
Uh-huh?
A.
That Mr. Lydon was -- they were relying on Mr. Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Mr. Lydon was Monarch's
12:48:12
12:48:28
63 1
man, as it were.
2
Q. 338
Yes.
3
A.
In the sense of anything that was proposed, and I don't mean to suggest
4
anything other than this.
That Mr. Lydon, Councillor, Senator Lydon was the
5
man who stood up on his feet and made various proposals or speeches, or
6
whatever, in relation to the Monarch proposal.
7
completeness, Mr. Murphy.
8
for too much.
Now, sorry.
Just for
You did ask me whether or not Monarch were looking
9 12:48:46 10
This is, this goes to the core of the issue where the confusion arose.
And
11
that is that it was obvious that there was an internal disagreement, let's not
12
put it any stronger than this, as to what could or could not be achieved.
13
there was a fear that from an economic point of view or viability point of
14
view, or whatever.
12:49:17 15
satisfactory.
That what was being proposed or suggested would not be
And that any attempt to compromise or accept a compromise would
16
not be acceptable to Mr. Monahan.
17
terms.
18
please do.
19
Q. 339
12:49:45 20
And
I fully understand that.
Now, that's -- that's in very broad general
And if you wish to pursue it further, yes,
But in general, broad terms that was the orientation.
That's very helpful.
So, I mean, Mr. Lynn was kind of Monarch's face on the
ground and on the floor of the chamber; isn't that right?
21
A.
Oh, yes.
22
Q. 340
And Mr. Lydon was Mr. Lynn's -- was the Councillor with whom Mr. Lynn -- sorry.
23 24
He was kind of -- was he sort of putting up the Cherrywood, the Monarch case? A.
Yes.
Q. 341
Yes?
26
A.
He had done so much prior to, a year previous almost.
27
Q. 342
In May?
28
A.
May I think it was, 1992.
29
Q. 343
The big meeting was May '92?
A.
And the irony of the, as I understood it then and as I think I still understand
12:50:00 25
12:50:10 30
Well he had done so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:50:23
12:50:36
64 1
it.
The irony of that position was that instead of ending up with the
2
Councillors agreeing to what the Manager was proposing, they actually voted
3
against what the Manager was proposing and the vote was lost.
4
Q. 344
Yes?
5
A.
Whereas, what the Manager was proposing, while it may not have been acceptable
6
to Mr. Philip Monahan, was certainly a -- half a loaf.
7
Q. 345
Yes.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 346
The Manager's motion was defeated 35 - 33; isn't that right?
A.
Yes, I think I have -- I accept what you're saying, yes.
11
Q. 347
I'm relying on Ms. Dillon to correct me.
12
A.
Well if Ms. Dillon says it is, it's correct.
13
Q. 348
Well ....
14
A.
Sorry, what was the figure you gave me?
Q. 349
The Manager's motion.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 350
That was defeated 35 - 33?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 351
Did Mr. Lydon propose that?
A.
My understanding is that he did.
12:51:14 10
12:51:31 15
12:51:38 20
21
So just that meeting in May 1992, Mr. Dunlop.
My understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke on
the floor.
22
Q. 352
Yeah.
23
A.
And there was dreadful confusion.
24
Q. 353
Yes.
A.
Now, it so happens, Mr. Murphy, for clarity.
26
Q. 354
Yeah.
27
A.
And for ease of progress.
28
Q. 355
Yeah.
29
A.
That because of my role in other developments I happened to be in the -- not in
12:51:48 25
12:51:59 30
the chamber, nearby at the time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:52:01
12:52:15
65 1
Q. 356
Yes.
2
A.
And I have not direct, because I wasn't in the chamber.
But I have an
3
immediacy in relation to the reaction that took place at that particular time,
4
as a result of what happened on the floor.
5
Q. 357
You'd have a vivid recollection of that day then?
6
A.
I have a recollection.
7
Q. 358
Even though you had no personal or financial involvement?
8
A.
Yeah, well it was an issue that everybody was talking about.
9
Q. 359
All right.
12:52:38 10
But if that motion that was defeated had been passed.
Monarch -- I know that you weren't involved.
I think
What I'm thinking of is you were
11
presumably told by Mr. Sweeney on the 8th of March, a year later.
12
that vote been passed, motion been passed, Monarch would have been reasonably
13
happy with that even if it wasn't enough for Mr. Monahan?
14
A.
12:53:00 15
I'm glad you made that qualification.
Some elements of Monarch would have
been happy.
16
Q. 360
All right.
17
A.
Maybe I'm ....
18
Q. 361
What houses per acre would that have represented?
19
A.
Was it four?
Q. 362
If that motion had been passed.
A.
Let me just check.
12:53:10 20
21
That had
22
Now, --
I don't know if this is ... yes, I don't -- I don't have
it -- I don't.
23
Q. 363
All right.
24
A.
I know that -- I know that the position was that they ended up with one house
12:53:37 25
per acre.
26
Q. 364
That's correct.
27
A.
So, um, it may well have been that had that motion been passed they would have
28 29 12:53:49 30
I'm coming to that.
Anyway --
got four houses to the acre. Q. 365
Fine.
A.
I'm not being absolute about that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:53:51
12:54:03
66 1
Q. 366
That's fine.
But that motion was defeated and it would have partially
2
satisfied Monarch, or maybe it would have made some people in Monarch happy.
3
It wouldn't have made Mr. Monahan happy?
4
A.
I don't think so.
5
Q. 367
That's defeated.
A result of that was Mr. Lydon, I think on Mr. Lynn's
6
instructions, withdrew his motion for what was exactly what Monarch wanted.
7
Mr. Monahan wanted.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 368
Is that right?
A.
Yes, motion 31 A 1 withdrawn.
Q. 369
Just -- sorry just for a moment don't go on to that.
12:54:15 10
11
There was a vote on another motion.
12 13
Do you think am I right when I say that Mr. Lydon withdrew a motion which would
14
in fact have given Mr. Monahan what he was looking for?
12:54:35 15
16
A.
Yes, I think you're right.
Q. 370
And he withdrew it because it wouldn't make sense to bring it on after the
17
other motion was defeated?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 371
All right. We go down the list and get the town centre passed?
A.
Correct.
21
Q. 372
Then we come to Mr. Barrett's motion?
22
A.
Which ends up with one house per acre -- hectare.
23
Q. 373
That's correct, one house per acre.
24
A.
One house per acre -- or hectare.
Q. 374
One house per acre.
12:54:47 20
12:55:00 25
I understand that if Barrett hadn't introduced that
26
motion, it would all have reverted to the Draft 1991 Plan and it would have
27
been four houses per acre?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 375
So that Mr. Barrett's was really messing things up for Monarch.
12:55:17 30
I'm not
saying intentionally but the success of his motion gave Monarch a worse Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:55:22
12:55:42
67 1
situation than they'd have got if he hadn't brought it in?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 376
Yes.
4
A.
The perception at the time.
5
But the perception, if I may use that word.
And sort of a continuing perception was that had
Barrett not done what he did.
6
Q. 377
Yeah.
7
A.
That the day would not have been saved for Monarch.
8
Q. 378
Yes.?
9
A.
Now, I accept the logic.
Q. 379
Yes.?
A.
I accept the logic of what you outline, that had Barrett not put in that motion
12:55:47 10
11 12
or proposed that motion.
13
Q. 380
Yes?
14
A.
And I don't know what the genesis of that motion was or I wasn't involved.
12:56:03 15
As
I say, most of this is from an observer's point of view, most of the comment
16
did not concern Barrett.
17
Q. 381
Uh-huh?
18
A.
It concerned Mr. Lydon.
19
Q. 382
Uh-huh?
A.
As a result of what had happened.
21
Q. 383
Uh-huh.?
22
A.
But I accept that what you're saying is that had Barrett not have done what he
12:56:13 20
23
did the logic would appear to be that they would have reverted back to the
24
previous council proposal itself; that it would have been four houses to the
12:56:32 25
acre.
26
Q. 384
Uh-huh.
27
A.
Sorry?
28
Q. 385
What you've just said.
29
A.
Yes.
12:56:45 30
Most of the comment was Mr. Lydon?
I'm trying to repeat what you've just said.
Most of the comment on the fringes of the meeting outside of the chamber
as a result of what happened was about Mr. Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
12:56:47
12:57:02
68 1
Q. 386
In a word, to what effect?
2
A.
You know, he's after making a balls of it.
3
Q. 387
Right.
4
Now, and Mr.-- all right.
to Barrett.
Now, and you've anticipated me in relation
Because you've said in your private interview?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 388
Mr. Barrett's motion saved the day and I couldn't and can't understand that.
7 8
You say that was the feeling. A.
9
Yes.
That was the perception?
I completely understand Mr. Murphy.
even personally I can't get my head around.
12:57:20 10
But I have to say to you, that
that was a perception at the time.
11
Q. 389
All right.?
12
A.
That Barrett had actually saved the day.
13 14
And it is something that I just
Whereas the reality is, if you look
at it logically, what would have happened is as you outlined. Q. 390
12:57:38 15
All right. 1993.
That's perfect.
Mr. Dunlop, if we come on to the 8th of March
And months have passed now at this stage.
16
probably no urgency because nothing can happen.
17
for the second time in July '93.
18
of the year, isn't that right?
19 12:57:55 20
A.
Yeah.
Q. 391
All right.
But I think up to then The plan has to go on display
There will be another meeting before the end
Now, what I just want to -- am I right in thinking that in March
21
'93.
22
May '92 Monarch had really ended up with a bit of a disaster.
23
mean by that is that they hadn't got the Manager's proposal which I think might
24
have been four houses per acre.
12:58:23 25
I'm not particularly on that date or anything.
Since the meeting in Sorry.
Mr. Lydon's motion, which would have given
Mr. Monahan, would have made him pretty happy was withdrawn.
26
What I
And they end up
with one house per acre.?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 392
A bit of an uneconomic, unviable disaster from Monarch's point of view.
29 12:58:37 30
that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Is
12:58:38
12:58:57
69 1
Q. 393
Who made 10 million for these lands in 1989.
2
A.
Well I don't know.
3 4
Anecdotally I'll agree with you.
as to how much they paid for the lands. Q. 394
All right.
Way over the odds? I heard various figures
I don't know.
So do you know that between May '92 and March '93 when you come on
5
to the team, that Monarch must have been pretty cross with the outcome of that
6
meeting in May '92?
7
A.
8 9 12:59:13 10
Well I think I've said, Mr. Sweeney did say to me. Mr. Sweeney.
And others, not only
Like, you know, you cannot rely on these politicians.
Q. 395
Yeah?
A.
They won't do you know, what -- not what we tell them to do.
11
But they won't
do what we want them to do.
12
Q. 396
Yeah?
13
A.
But the fundamental point. I'm sorry if this is repetitive.
14
The fundamental
point in relation to this is that internally in Monarch it was perfectly
12:59:34 15
obvious to me from day one that there was confused communication lines.
16
Q. 397
Uh-huh.?
17
A.
Mr. Lynn was unhappy.
18
Q. 398
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Certainly about the alleged, unspecified activities of Mr. Monahan.
12:59:54 20
knew what Mr. Monahan was doing.
21 Q. 399
Mr. Who?
23
A.
Mr. Monahan.
24
Mr. Phil Monahan.
Mr. Philip Reilly was completely frustrated.
He just could not come to terms with the fact of what was happening. Q. 400
Uh-huh?
26
A.
So the internal.
27
Q. 401
Yes.?
28
A.
Confusion manifested itself externally.
29
Q. 402
Yes?
A.
In the communications to councillors.
13:00:22 30
Whether he was
making deals.
22
13:00:20 25
Who he was talking to.
Nobody
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
13:00:24
13:00:30
70 1
Q. 403
Yes?
2
A.
What exactly is it that Monarch wants.
3
Q. 404
Yes.?
4
A.
And.
5
Q. 405
Like in relation to density for example?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 406
Do they want 50 houses to the acre or would they be happy with ten or eight or
8 9
four. A.
13:00:50 10
That kind of thing; would that be right?
Correct.
And politicians, by their very nature, and in the cocooned
atmosphere in which they operate, are people who sometimes give more credence
11
to rumour or suspicion and don't accept assurances.
12
Q. 407
Uh-huh?
13
A.
As easily as we'll say somebody like yourself.
14
Q. 408
Uh-huh?
A.
Or myself.
16
Q. 409
Uh-huh?
17
A.
Would in normal business circumstances.
18
Q. 410
Uh-huh?
19
A.
In Dublin County Council among all the parties.
Q. 411
Uh-huh?
A.
Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and otherwise.
13:01:07 15
13:01:16 20
21 22
And there was total confusion.
Nobody knew exactly what Monarch
wanted.
23
Q. 412
All right.?
24
A.
Notwithstanding the excellent lobbying PR work.
Q. 413
Yeah?
26
A.
That had been done.
27
Q. 414
Yeah?
28
A.
By Monarch's representatives up to the point when the vote took place.
29
Q. 415
And that would have been done by Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly; is that right?
A.
Certainly I would say Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
13:01:29 25
13:01:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But Mr. Lynn was more -- as
13:01:46
13:01:58
71 1
far as I'm concerned, at my estimation, was there more often than Mr. Reilly.
2
But certainly I met and spoke to Mr. Reilly on a number of occasions while he
3
was there because he had a specific role.
4
Q. 416
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Mr. Murphy, it's just gone one o'clock.
7
adjourn until two o'clock.
8 9
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you.
13:02:06 10
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
So we'll
13:02:25
14:07:08
72 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M..
2 3 4
Q. 417
5 6
MR. MURPHY:
7
just finishing up with the May 1992 motion.
8
Barrett, Mr. Barrett's motion was passed and in short form the effect of that
9
was one house per acre for Monarch?
14:07:31 10
Chairman.
Mr. Dunlop, I think just before the break we were
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 418
Not a happy position for Monarch?
12
A.
No.
And the position there was that
But a positive, a positive decision in relation to the Development Plan.
13
I mean, they now have, as distinct from a defeat and a withdrawal, they now
14
have a motion that has passed.
14:07:51 15
Q. 419
16
Well, except you agreed with me earlier if that motion hadn't been introduced it would have gone back to the 1991 draft plan, which was four houses per acre?
17
A.
Subject to the technicalities I agreed with that.
18
Q. 420
One house per acre would be no advance on 1983?
19
A.
No.
Q. 421
All right.
21
A.
1983?
22
Q. 422
Yeah.?
23
A.
Oh, yes, sorry I beg your pardon.
24
Q. 423
In any event, it's a serious situation from a business, financial point of view
14:08:09 20
14:08:22 25
But anyway --
I know where you're coming from.
for Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn and everybody connected with Monarch.
26
Isn't that the long and short of it?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 424
That gathers some urgency then as we get into 1993 because of what's ahead -
29 14:08:43 30
the second display and a further confirmation meeting and then the final plan? A.
Correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:08:44
14:09:05
73 1
Q. 425
And you have said that you were told that that -- you understood that Mr. Lynn
2
and Mr. Reilly had worked very hard to get those motions passed.
3
motions passed and so on?
4
A.
5
Yes.
Anecdotally.
Mr. Sweeney complemented them.
The right
And I knew from my own
personal experience as an observer that they had been fairly active.
6
Q. 426
Mr. O'Herlihy was your predecessor there?
7
A.
That I understood.
8
Q. 427
I think his contract wasn't renewed after the vote.
9
A.
No, I don't know any of the technicalities about Mr. O'Herlihy's being hired or
14:09:22 10
11
what his contract was or was not. Q. 428
12 13
Do you know?
All right.
Presumably Mr. Sweeney told you what Mr. O'Herlihy had done and
contributed? A.
14
Not in any great detail.
I knew -- two things I want to say about that.
is, I never met Bill O'Herlihy in relation to the Monarch proposal.
14:09:41 15
One
I never
saw him in Dublin County Council ever during the course of the Development
16
Plan, and I was told in particular by councillor Tom Hand.
17
Q. 429
Yes?
18
A.
Whom I think I have indicated previously was a man who, you know, was a --
19 14:10:03 20
provided information.
He said that a video had been distributed.
Q. 430
Yes?
21
A.
To all of the councillors.
22
Q. 431
All right.
23 24 14:10:16 25
And he wasn't too impressed by, he thought the video was a bit too
much? A.
It was over the top.
Q. 432
Okay.
All right.
Do I take it, just again in short form, Mr. Dunlop, that
26
in fact while Mr. O'Herlihy was a PR person working for Monarch and then you
27
came on.
28
person?
29 14:10:33 30
A.
He finished and the then the following March you come in as a PR
That would appear to be the sequence.
From my point of view it's not I'm
brought in because Bill O'Herlihy has failed or I am brought in because Bill Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:10:36
14:10:51
74 1
O'Herlihy hasn't done X, Y, or Z. I'm brought in in the circumstances that I
2
outlined to.
3
Q. 433
Do I gather that maybe his PR role was different.
4
whatever.
5
be right?
It was to produce videos or
He was not involved with the lobbying of councillors.
Would, that
6
A.
I absolutely agree.
7
Q. 434
Yeah?
8
A.
Was that Mr. O'Herlihy's role would appear to be a straight forward
9
communication process with identified audiences, including the local community
14:11:06 10
11
and the politicians. Q. 435
12 13
Perfect.
And the lobbying of councillors was left -- that was a job that Mr.
Lynn and Mr. Reilly took on and did? A.
14
Yes.
As I said to you earlier, I never saw Mr. O'Herlihy in Dublin County
Council talking to a councillor lobbying.
14:11:25 15
16
Any understanding that I had of it, then and now --
The only people I saw on behalf of
Monarch were Richard and Phil. Q. 436
Perfect.
Mr. Dunlop, what I want to say to you then.
Come March '93 when
17
the thing is gathering urgency for Monarch people in relation to what's going
18
to happen at the final meeting.
19
position from May '92.
14:11:48 20
Mr. O'Herlihy's role has not continued after May '92.
And they are -- they have to be -- essentially what they have to do is to
21 22
The position is that they have an unhappy
change the mind of the councillors; isn't that right? Before November 1993? A.
Yes.
No.
With respect, I think Mr. Murphy, for ease of progress.
It would
23
be better to say that they first of all have to make up their minds what they
24
want.
14:12:10 25
26
Q. 437
That's a good point.?
A.
Because there's no point in them -- in the councillors or anybody else, indeed
27
but as we are dealing with Dublin County Council and this issue, it is the
28
communications with the councillors that count.
29 14:12:26 30
Q. 438
Yes?
A.
So if there is confusion internally in the organisation of Monarch as to what Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:12:31
14:12:41
75 1
is or is not wanted --
2
Q. 439
Yes?
3
A.
Therefore there is going to be inevitable confusion at the other end.
4
Q. 440
I understand.
You are explaining that to me now, Mr. Dunlop, I understand
5
that.
Now, so when you come in in March '93 to this meeting with Mr. Sweeney.
6
He is explaining all of this to you, I presume?
7
A.
Yes, in broad terms.
8
Q. 441
Broad terms.
9
to be a consultant to Monarch, you are hearing for the first time formally
14:13:02 10
11
You are hearing for the first time, formally, and now as about
about this internal wrangling or whatever the internal dissatisfaction is? A.
Yes were aware of it maybe anecdotally etc. It would be completely
12
disingenuous of me to suggest that I was not aware anecdotally that Mr. Phil
13
Monahan --
14 14:13:24 15
Q. 442
Yes?
A.
Was operating either in parallel with Richard and Philip or was operating in
16
such a way that he was causing difficulties for them.
17
Q. 443
Yes.
18
A.
Now, Mr. Monahan is no longer with us and I don't want to attribute anything to
19
him that would .... that was my understanding then and continues to be my
14:13:48 20
21
I understand.?
position. Q. 444
The position was that he had a very high expectation from a density point of
22
view and a very high hope.
23
high a hope and perhaps they were being more realistic is that it broadly?
24
A.
14:14:06 25
Whereas Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn didn't have as
Broadly, I think the orientation was that Mr. Sweeney would appear -- as it appeared to me, accepted the role of Richard and Phil, that what they were
26
recommending should be -- they should run with that.
27
that.
Monarch should run with
And that --
28
Q. 445
And what was that, how many houses per acre?
29
A.
But you see, this was the point.
And one of the points that I did make to
Mr. Sweeney at an early stage.
make up your minds what you want.
14:14:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:14:33
14:14:45
76 1
Q. 446
Just tell me what the extremes are. Are they four per acre?
2
A.
There was a proposal for a higher residential initially in parts of the initial
3
proposal that went in in 1991 I think.
4
Q. 447
Uh-huh?
5
A.
And they would have sort of reflected Mr. Philip Monaghan's views.
6
Q. 448
Uh-huh.?
7
A.
But realism as to what the officials would agree to --
8
Q. 449
Yes?
9
A.
Or recommend.
Q. 450
Yes?
11
A.
And this was the core problem.
12
Q. 451
Yes?
13
A.
That as a result of what happened in May 1992 --
14
Q. 452
Yes?
A.
The official's recommendation was defeated.
16
Q. 453
Yes?
17
A.
So if they could get back to that original position, which was four per acre,
14:14:58 10
14:15:05 15
18 19
then that would be a starting point. Q. 454
14:15:22 20
Does that mean, Mr. Dunlop, that in fact you had when you came in, and now you are hearing, you are getting all of this information on that Monday afternoon
21
and the position, as you are receiving it, is that Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Reilly
22
and Mr. Lynn would be kind of happy with -- they'd compromise at the four.
23
Whereas on the other hand Mr. Monahan was out there looking for ten plus maybe?
24
A.
14:15:46 25
I don't know what Mr. Monahan was looking for or what he was saying to people. But what the presentation to me was such --
26
Q. 455
Yes?
27
A.
That if they didn't get their act together and get something on the -- accepted
28 29 14:15:58 30
that they might end up with nothing. Q. 456
All right.?
A.
And -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:15:59
14:16:20
77 1
Q. 457
All right.?
2
A.
It would be disingenuous for me also not to suggest, even though I wasn't aware
3
of the details, I was aware anecdotally that there was some relationship with
4
some other company, investment company, that may well have been looking for --
5
had high expectations in relation to the viability of the land.
6
Q. 458
I'm lost on that.
7
A.
I don't know the name but, I mean, my impression was that there was some other
8 9
What are you talking about there?
company. Q. 459
Yes?
A.
That Monarch was either associated with or going to go into joint venture with.
11
Q. 460
Would that be GRE?
12
A.
I don't know.
13
Q. 461
Okay.
14
A.
I do know that GRE were involved with them in Tallaght.
Q. 462
All right.?
16
A.
Whether they were involved with them here ....
17
Q. 463
They were involved here, yes.?
18
A.
There was some company that obviously people were dictating, look we need X to
14:16:34 10
14:16:46 15
19 14:16:57 20
Yeah.?
get a return on our investment. Q. 464
Mr. Dunlop, then, the reason -- the reason why you are brought in and the
21
instruction that you were given then.
22
combination and maybe twofold.
23
interviews or your statement.
24
has to get its act together?
14:17:18 25
Would it be kind of a sort of a
And you say twofold in fact in one of your
There are two things.
First of all, Monarch
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 465
And that seems to mean that Mr. Monahan has to be brought back on side?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 466
Bring into line with a compromise position at around four houses per acre;
29 14:17:30 30
would that be right? A.
In broad terms, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:17:32
14:17:37
78 1
Q. 467
Broad terms?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 468
And if that was done then Monarch has its united front?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 469
It knows what it wants.
Let's say it's four houses per acre for the moment.
6
And then the job is then to convince the councillors that they should vote for
7
this?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 470
And this would be where your speciality would come in as a person who knew the
14:17:54 10
councillors and would lobby them.
Would that be right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 471
And am I right in thinking that go an integral part of what they knew about you
13
and your relationship with councillors was, they knew that you would pay money
14
to councillors in return for their vote?
14:18:12 15
A.
Well you say that's an integral part.
I mean, that is, with respect, a
16
supposition on your part and it is a supposition on my part as it applies to
17
the generality of Monarch.
I don't know what everybody in Monarch thought.
18
Q. 472
No?
19
A.
All I can say to you is what the culture of the meeting that I had with
14:18:35 20
Mr. Sweeney.
21
Where he indicated to me that I would have to do things with
councillors and it was the only way to get things done.
22
Q. 473
Yes?
23
A.
But I cannot attribute those same sentiments to anybody else.
24
And I have
specifically said to you, not yesterday or today but I am specifically saying
14:18:52 25
to you now, that in any contact or discussion or debate or strategy that I had
26
with either Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly separately or both of them together, that
27
was never ever alluded to.
28 29 14:19:21 30
Q. 474
All right. is twofold.
Okay.
But sorry.
I mean, all I'm getting at here is, your job
I mean, Mr. Monahan has to be, has to be, some sense has to be
spoken to Mr. Monahan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:19:23
14:19:28
79 1
A.
But not by me.
2
Q. 475
Very good.
3
A.
Not by me.
4
Q. 476
Don't worry about that?
5
A.
Okay.
6
Q. 477
He is going to have to be reigned in a bit?
7
A.
Yes, yes.
8
Q. 478
That's right?
9
A.
He is going to have to be controlled.
Q. 479
Okay.
11
A.
On the basis of an agreed strategy.
12
Q. 480
Now, you weren't brought in to talk to Mr. Monahan?
13
A.
No, no.
14
Q. 481
So you are saying now, you were saying to Mr. Sweeney.
14:19:37 10
14:19:52 15
16
I was going to ask you that.?
And then the councillors are going to be have to be lobbied?
You, Mr. Sweeney, and
you Monarch get your act together and tell me what you're happy with? A.
Yes.
As I go on to say and I don't mean to be pushing things forward,
17
Mr. Murphy, as I go on to say, it was obvious -- it was obvious that Mr. Lawlor
18
was advising Mr. Monahan.
19
Q. 482
Yes?
A.
At the same time trying to advise Mr. Sweeney.
21
Q. 483
Yes?
22
A.
And the rest of the company.
23
Q. 484
Yes?
24
A.
Let's use the phrase "honest broker" in the circumstances.
14:20:11 20
14:20:22 25
He is trying to
get people to come to realise --
26
Q. 485
Yes?
27
A.
That unless there is a straight forward line of communication, things are going
28
to go disastrously wrong.
29
expressed, not dissatisfaction but expressed deep concern as to what Phil
14:20:43 30
Mr. Lynn, in particular, on a number of occasions
Monahan was doing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:20:45
14:21:07
80 1
Q. 486
Yes.?
2
A.
He did not know.
Other people did not know.
And I think it is fair and
3
legitimate to say that he was, as I would be, or indeed anybody else in those
4
circumstances would be, upset.
5
conducted, in a very professional way.
6
person who in fact was his employer.
7
Q. 487
That if a programme of lobbying was being That this was being undermined by the
Now, and what this means is that Mr. Monahan was out there telling councillors
8
that he wanted this larger -- no, but I'm sorry.
9
understanding of it right in relation to what your task was and the context in
14:21:28 10
which you were coming in.
Just to see is my
Mr. Monahan is out there.
Did you understand,
11
saying that he wanted this greater density, greater number of houses per acre.
12
And you had Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney with a more realistic, more
13
compromised position?
14 14:21:47 15
A.
Yeah.
Q. 488
And then as well as that, is there a suggestion, which I think you made in your
16
interviews, that Mr. Monahan may have been offering money to the councillors or
17
offering higher figures than ultimately were going to come right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 489
Yes?
A.
And if I am going on a little bit longer just stop me.
21
Q. 490
Yes.?
22
A.
Nobody knew exactly what Mr. Monahan was doing.
23
Q. 491
Uh-huh?
24
A.
We did know and his employees did know, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Sweeney, did
14:22:09 20
14:22:27 25
Well that is -- can I deal with that compositely for a minute.
Just stop me.
know, even though Mr. Sweeney was a member of the Board.
They did know that
26
Phil had, on an historic basis, very, very good political contacts.
27
have been a but hypocritical. They may have been Mr. Monahan, you know,
28
exaggerating the contacts or whatever.
29
were contacts.
14:22:55 30
They may
Nonetheless, we did know that there
And we certainly did know that there was a relationship
between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor.
Phil -- Richard Lynn had over a long
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:23:06
14:23:17
81 1
period of time obviously developed a very close working relationship with a
2
number of politicians, with specific reference to this particular project.
3
Q. 492
Mr. Lynn?
4
A.
Mr. Lynn.
5
Q. 493
Oh, yes, yes.?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 494
Uh-huh.?
8
A.
Particularly in Mr. Reilly's case, as I understood it then and understand it
9 14:23:29 10
11
Assisted by Mr. Reilly.
now, on the Fine Gael side. Q. 495
Are we talking about the councillors now?
A.
Yes, we are.
In relation to Mr. Sweeney, I have no evidence -- I have no
12
knowledge or evidence to suggest that Mr. Sweeney had any relationship with any
13
politician.
14 14:23:43 15
Q. 496
Uh-huh?
A.
Other than a comment that he passed to me to say that they couldn't be relied
16
on.
17
Q. 497
Uh-huh.?
18
A.
So, in all of that mix where you had a very successful campaign, ending up in a
19
motion in May 1992, which would have ended up with Monarch getting four houses
14:24:03 20
to the acre in Cherrywood.
That being defeated.
Another motion withdrawn.
21
And a Sean Barrett motion getting one house to the acre.
22
cause of deep dissatisfaction to Mr. Monahan.
That obviously was a
23
Q. 498
Uh-huh.?
24
A.
That is the broad brush picture of what was happening.
Q. 499
That -- that's --
A.
Now, as it transpired, thereafter, in -- after my first meeting with
14:24:27 25
26 27
Mr. Sweeney when Mr. Lawlor was present at other meetings, it transpired that
28
Mr. Lawlor was attempting to advise Mr. Monahan in some fashion or other.
29
Mr. Lawlor was not slow to understand densities, acreages, zonings, or
14:25:00 30
whatever.
Neither was Mr. Monahan.
I was only to -- certainly Mr. Monahan
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:25:10
14:25:30
82 1
attended one meeting in Monarch.
2
Q. 500
Yes?
3
A.
And to the best of my belief, put his head around the door at another meeting.
4
At all times, I believe that Richard Lynn and I can't say the same about Philip
5
Reilly, but I do believe that Richard Lynn resented the involvement of Lawlor,
6
or whatever role Lawlor was playing.
7
didn't know what was happening.
8
while he was conducting his operation on behalf of Monarch, here were two
9
people, his own employer, Mr. Monahan, and another, Mr. Lawlor, a politician
Because again it was a blind spot.
He
He didn't know what Lawlor was doing.
14:25:59 10
but no longer a member of the council, operating, allegedly, on behalf of the
11
company, while he was out there, as the face of the company, lobbying with
12
councillors.
13
Q. 501
Yes.
14
A.
No, no, Mr. Reilly.
14:26:22 15
Now, and Mr. Lynn had Fine Gael -Mr. Reilly had a Fine Gael -- either directly or through
a family connection, knew a -- certainly one Fine Gael councillor.
16
Q. 502
Yes?
17
A.
Councillor Therese Ridge.
18
Q. 503
Sorry.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 504
Mr. Monahan you said contacted politicians.
21
A.
We didn't know. We had no idea.
22
Q. 505
Fine?
23
A.
We did not know.
14:26:33 20
And
24
That's Mr. Reilly?
We did know that as a result of -- sorry.
by saying we did know.
14:26:57 25
Did he know councillors?
Let me preface
Anecdotally we knew, at least I did, that Mr. Monahan
had a relationship or knew Senior Government ministers.
26
Q. 506
Uh-huh?
27
A.
And there was a -- let me put it stronger than this.
There was a rumour
28
circulating that Philip Monahan had gone to the Government or a Minister in the
29
Government and said that, you know, the only way that this can be done in
14:27:22 30
Tallaght is by tax designation. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:27:24
14:27:40
83 1
Q. 507
Uh-huh?
2
A.
Now, that may be anecdotal. I don't know.
It may be a rumour.
I was not involved.
It may have substance in
3
it.
But in those circumstances, given
4
the success that Tallaght was.
5
face of it, was the person who had succeeded in bringing Tallaght to fruition.
And given that Philip Monahan, at least on the
6
Q. 508
Uh-huh?
7
A.
That this man did have strong political connections.
8
Q. 509
I see.
9
Thank you.
connections.
14:27:58 10
Now, so that's Mr. Monahan's connections, Mr. Reilly's
Who was dealing with the Fianna Fail councillors before you came
on board?
11
A.
Mr. Lynn.
12
Q. 510
Had he close?
13
A.
Well as I understood it from Richard, that he had.
14
Q. 511
Yes?
A.
Good contacts with Fianna Fail.
16
Q. 512
All right.
17
A.
It was a twin pronged operation before I came on board.
18
Q. 513
Yes?
19
A.
There was Philip and there was Richard.
Q. 514
Yes.
A.
And obviously, in fairness to them, notwithstanding anything that might have
14:28:05 15
14:28:17 20
21
So --
Okay --
22
been said up to this point or may be said subsequently.
23
to a situation where in May '92 they had a motion which obviously was being put
24
forward by Councillor Lydon with the agreement of the company and it fell.
14:28:41 25
Obviously, they got
Q. 515
Yes.?
26
A.
Notwithstanding the fact that it was being recommended by the Manager.
27
Q. 516
Okay.
I want to move on just back to the March' of '93 when you come in, Mr.
28
Dunlop.
As you say, there was a twin approach by Monarch which had failed up
29
to then.
There's now a sort of twin problem.
14:29:00 30
to make up its mind as to what it's looking for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
One is to get Monarch to agree
14:29:04
14:29:10
84 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 517
And that had nothing to do with you?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 518
Was that Mr. Lawlor to talk to, to reign in Mr. Monahan?
5
A.
Putting it bluntly, yes.
6
Q. 519
So you were brought on then for the second purpose, which was your normal
7 8
purpose in these matters; to do the lobbying? A.
9
I was brought on for the specific purpose to add, again, to use a phrase for the descriptive purposes, to add value to what Richard and Philip were doing.
14:29:30 10
I wasn't directly brought on to lobby every councillor, which I did not do.
11
But I was brought on to add, to supplement what Richard and Philip were doing.
12
Q. 520
And they had done very well?
13
A.
In my estimation, yes.
14
Q. 521
Sorry, when you were brought on, it isn't to deal with Mr. Monahan.
14:29:51 15
It is to
do your normal lobbying of councillors?
16
A.
Yes, correct.
17
Q. 522
And it is well known in March '93 to councillors and to people in Monarch that
18 19
you at that time were paying councillors money to councillors for their vote? A.
14:30:09 20
Well that is something -- that's a supposition that you are making. know.
Again, as I have said five minutes ago, I don't know what the extent of
21
that information was with people.
22
allude to relates to Mr. Sweeney.
23
Q. 523
24 14:30:29 25
I don't
No -- yes, okay.
Yes.
Certainly, the only comment that I can
But what I want to say, can I come to 544 please.
It's not me making the supposition. A.
You're all right.
26
Q. 524
Do you see there line 6?
27
A.
Line 6.
28
Q. 525
Top of the page.
One.
Half a loaf being better than no bread.
As I said
29
to you the other day, it is important to get some recognition at some stage
14:30:54 30
which would allow for further motions between the first and second display Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:30:58
14:31:15
85 1
prior to the final vote.
2
was a lot of to go and froing.
3
an IQ of more than one to know that not only was I dispensing but other people
4
were dispensing as well, what amounts or how or to whom or distributor wise it
5
was happening.
6
Lynn of Monarch to try and organise the situation with Cherrywood which had
7
been zoned per house per acre or two houses.
8
A.
9
The final vote being in December of '93.
It was obvious it to me that one wouldn't need
Concluding in an approach to me by Eddie Sweeney and Richard
Well, let me deal with that, if I may.
I have said that I had the meeting
with Mr. Sweeney and the comment that was made.
14:31:35 10
So there
I have also said that I have
never had a conversation with Richard Lynn about specific payments to specific
11
politicians.
12
Q. 526
Okay.?
13
A.
I did have a comment made to me by Mr. Lynn.
14
Q. 527
Uh-huh?
A.
In relation to 'you think these idiots would get their act together there's so
14:31:44 15
16
much money being spent on them.'
Now, that was the phrase that was used.
17
Mr. Lynn may have an explanation for that.
18
Q. 528
Yes?
19
A.
I took that to mean, in the circumstances, that he was aware that money needed
14:32:04 20
21
to be paid to politicians. Q. 529
Yes.
Okay.
Just I'm.
That's fine.
But Mr. Dunlop, it would have been
22
widely known -- just leave it at that for a second, within councillors, that
23
you were paying money to councillors?
24 14:32:20 25
A.
If you are going to specify councillors, yes.
Q. 530
Councillors, yes.
26
had already acted for, and you were paying councillors in those cases?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 531
Yes.
29 14:32:39 30
And outside of that, there were other developers that you
And it's clear from what you've said that Mr. Sweeney said to you on
that day, that he was aware of the necessity to pay councillors? A.
Well, he was aware that there were certain things that I had to do with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:32:43
14:32:57
86 1
councillors and that other -- that was the only way that things could be done.
2
Q. 532
Done?
3
A.
I am not saying that Mr. Sweeney said specifically I know that you, Frank
4
Dunlop, are paying councillors and that you have to pay councillors.
5
explained to you yesterday, the culture of the meeting, two reasonably
6
intelligent people having a conversation.
7
Q. 533
Yes.
But -- yes.
I'm sorry.
Sorry, Chairman.
Yes.
And as I
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
8 9
What I'm saying is that all right.
14:33:52 10
You had a significant relationship with
councillors or certainly with a number of councillors; isn't that right
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 534
That would have been widely known?
13
A.
Yes, I think I would accept that, yes.
14
Q. 535
Yes.
14:34:10 15
And you had a special sort of expertise -- sorry.
lobby councillors and you were good at it.
Your role was to
Would that be fair now?
16
A.
That's fair, yes.
17
Q. 536
And you were recognised to be good at it?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 537
Yes?
A.
Yes, I would say that.
21
Q. 538
And you were recognised to have been successful?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 539
At lobbying councillors?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 540
And an integral part of that lobbying would be paying them money.
14:34:18 20
14:34:24 25
26
be but was paying them money?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 541
Isn't that right?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 542
All right.
14:34:35 30
Not would
And you were brought on to the Monarch team for the purpose of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:34:41
14:34:52
87 1
lobbying councillors?
2
A.
And I don't mean to be, to quibble with you, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q. 543
Yes?
4
A.
Because I am as anxious as you to move on.
5
Q. 544
Yes?
6
A.
But not specifically -- to add support to what Philip and to Richard and Philip
7
were doing.
8
Q. 545
Yes?
9
A.
Now, I knew.
14:35:05 10
Because I had a meeting.
I met Philip and Richard.
And they
outlined to me --
11
Q. 546
Yes?
12
A.
In some detail what their concerns were and who they were talking to and who
13 14
they weren't talking to. Q. 547
14:35:17 15
16
Yes.
But what would adding support to their work mean if it wasn't meaning
you talking to councillors and paying councillors? A.
17
Well, that is a matter for, in the first instance, for them to answer. far as I understood it and took it --
18
Q. 548
Yeah?
19
A.
For my conversations with Mr. Sweeney at subsequent meetings.
14:35:35 20
That once it
was agreed what was required, and that was agreed within the company, that I
21
would go to other -- key councillors.
22
Q. 549
Yes?
23
A.
And.
24
Q. 550
Yes?
A.
Just to focus this for a moment.
26
Q. 551
Yes?
27
A.
Not that they were going to go totally negative or whatever.
14:35:47 25
But as
People were beginning to go off side.
But people were
28
going off side in the sense that some councillors were saying that we should go
29
for as much as we can get.
14:36:05 30
less.
And other people were saying well we should go for
But we don't know what Monarch wants. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:36:08
14:36:41
88 1
Q. 552
Were Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath two councillors continuing to go for the higher?
2
A.
Certainly Mr. McGrath.
3
Q. 553
All right.
4
A.
There were others I think.
5
Lydon.
I would say almost to the same extent Mr. Fox, yes.
Are they the two you have in mind?
Sorry.
I think councillor .... sorry.
Sorry.
Don
I beg your pardon.
6
Q. 554
Uh-huh.?
7
A.
Don Lydon appeared to be.
I don't know what happened between Don Lydon and
8
Richard Lynn subsequent to the May 1992 vote.
9
look, whatever the majority of councillors would go for, he would be willing to
14:36:58 10
But Don Lydon appeared to say
go for that obviously on the basis that if there was support, if there was a
11
majority support for something he would go with that.
12
Betty Coffey -- Betty was -- she was from Dun Laoghaire.
She represented one
13
of the wards in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown constituency.
So she was in the
14
middle of it.
14:37:33 15
She was in the thick of it.
I think I said that
And I think Betty was advising
caution, which would have been her normal.
16
Q. 555
Yes?
17
A.
In fairness to her, her normal disposition anyway.
18
Q. 556
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Which would be contingent on not upsetting the officials.
14:37:46 20
If the officials
were upset --
21
Q. 557
Yes?
22
A.
Betty would be upset.
23
Q. 558
Yes.
24
Mr. Dunlop, when you leave that meeting that afternoon, you know that
your job now is to add support to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly and that means go to
14:38:03 25
councillors, persuade councillors who might be going to change their mind or
26
might be going off side to come back on side and persuade other councillors to
27
come on side.
28 29 14:38:29 30
A.
I didn't.
Would that be right?
Well, first of all -- the first objective was having agreed what I
agreed with Mr. Sweeney, then to meet Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly. then to agree with them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And
14:38:31
14:38:47
89 1
Q. 559
Yes, yes, yes.?
2
A.
Now, again, and this is subject to other people.
Not subject but obviously
3
other people will give evidence to this effect and I don't mean to offend
4
anybody unnecessarily.
5
the fact that somebody like me was brought in.
But I do think that certainly Richard Lynn resented
6
Q. 560
Oh, I see, yes, yes.?
7
A.
Well you can understand his position.
8
Q. 561
Of course, yes.?
9
A.
Here he is in a position where he knows that his boss may well be doing
14:39:00 10
something that he does not know about.
11
involved with his boss and here now is a third person being brought in.
12
Q. 562
Yes?
13
A.
Out of the blue.
14 14:39:18 15
16
With the implication, expressed or otherwise, implicit or
otherwise, that he may not have been doing his job. Q. 563
Yes?
A.
Mr. Reilly didn't seem to be unduly unhappy.
17 18
He know that Mr. Lawlor is in some way
He seemed to be happy that there
was at least some further support. Q. 564
19
All right.
Okay.
And what we have to do between May -- between this March
'93 and November '93 is we have to persuade some councillors to vote
14:39:40 20
differently?
21
A.
Well you have to persuade people having agreed as to what we want --
22
Q. 565
Yeah?
23
A.
We have to persuade people that that's what they should vote for.
24
Q. 566
Can we just leave the Monarch side of it getting their act together away.
14:39:54 25
It's nothing to do with you now isn't it?
26
A.
Exactly.
That's agreed.
27
Q. 567
They have to get their act together.
28
Mr. Reilly.
29
are going to add your efforts to it?
14:40:09 30
A.
You are going to talk to Mr. Lynn and
Presumably, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly continue their efforts.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
You
14:40:10
14:40:24
90 1
Q. 568
2
Yeah, all right.
In simple terms -- all right.
Mr. Sweeney at that meeting who you would talk to?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 569
Which of the councillors you would talk to?
5
A.
No, I didn't.
6
Q. 570
All right.
7 8
11
Were you told by Mr. Sweeney which councillors had been spoken to
already by Monarch? A.
9 14:40:37 10
Now, did you discuss with
No.
Because Mr. Sweeney made it clear in the presentation that he made to me
that he relied on. Q. 571
Mr. Lynn?
A.
No, Richard and Philip, both of them. As I said, complemented them on what
12
they were doing or trying to do, to get done.
13
Q. 572
All right, in the course of the meeting which lasted for how long?
14
A.
I think I said to you earlier or maybe it was yesterday, I cannot absolutely
14:40:54 15
say how long the meeting was.
16
hour.
I cannot say definitively.
It was, you know, half an hour, 45 minutes, an Sorry, maybe I can.
17
Q. 573
And in the course of --
18
A.
No, I can't sorry.
19
Q. 574
In the course of this meeting he said what you've said to us already.
14:41:10 20
Which
led you to understand that he understood that councillors would have to be paid
21
or might have to be paid?
22
A.
The tenure of his remarks to me --
23
Q. 575
Yeah?
24
A.
And we've had this before.
Q. 576
Yeah?
A.
In other Modules, the tenure of his remarks to me were such that he indicated
14:41:23 25
26 27
that he knew that I had to do certain things with councillors and that that was
28
the only way that things could get done and he did get on to speak about the
29
unreliability of politicians.
14:41:44 30
You can't rely on them.
You know, you don't
know what they're going to get up to one day after the next. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:41:47
14:41:54
91 1
Q. 577
Yes?
2
A.
And you have to keep your eye on them.
3
Q. 578
Now, whatever about the precise words, because you don't remember the precise
4 5
words, you said? A.
6
I will not attribute the words 'I know that you, Frank Dunlop, have to pay councillors to get this done'.
7
Q. 579
But?
8
A.
To him.
9
Q. 580
Was it clear to you after this meeting that he had said to you, whatever words
14:42:14 10
he used, that they amounted to communicating to you that he knew that monies
11
would have to be paid to councillors?
12
A.
That's as I took it.
13
Q. 581
And could there be any room for doubt from his conversation with you?
14
A.
As far as I'm concerned, no.
Q. 582
All right.
14:42:31 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
a note of it.
19
A.
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I think you told us yesterday, because I have
Yep.
14:42:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
do".
23
him to say? I understood you to say that -- or to be quoting him fairly
24
accurate. Well which?
14:42:58 25
A.
It doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate.
"Do what you have to
Is that something that you -- is that a summary of what you understood
You have to do what I know you have to do.
Something along those lines.
But
26
the point I really want to make, Mr. Chairman, is that I will not attribute
27
comments to him saying that he specifically said to me "I know that you have to
28
give money to politicians".
He did not say that.
29 14:43:13 30
CHAIRMAN:
But -- well.
I mean, if he said words such as you've suggested he
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:43:18
14:43:38
92 1
said.
2
That comment is perfect capable of a perfectly innocent.
3
A.
What did you understand that to be? Because that's quite capable.
I readily accept that.
That's why I made the point to Mr. Murphy yesterday in
4
the culture of the meeting and the circumstances of the conversation.
5
in no doubt.
6
doubt when I left the meeting that Mr. Sweeney knew a number of things in
7
relation to my operation with Dublin County Council and councillors and
8
payments might necessarily have to be made.
Mr. Murphy just asked me and I said it to him.
I was
I was in no
9 14:43:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
No, no, no.
Well is that because that issue was discussed? First of all, it wasn't an agendad meeting and this was an item
12
on the agenda.
13
circumstances to me.
14
indicated to me in the type of language that he used without specifically
14:44:19 15
This was a conversation where Mr. Sweeney was explaining the He wanted me to become involved.
saying that I know you have to pay politicians.
We agreed a fee.
He
He indicated to me in such a
16
way that I left the meeting in the full knowledge.
And I have said this
17
before in relation to other matters in other modules.
18
an asterisk on this particular Module.
19
monies would have to be paid or might have to be paid to politicians.
And that is why I have
Is that Mr. Sweeney was aware that
14:44:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
to be of the view that money would have to be paid.
23
to do this work.
24
A.
But if you were in a room with Mr. Sweeney and you understood him
Why wasn't there a more open discussion about it?
Well I think we -- we've had this discussion before here in this room.
14:45:06 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
About what?
About people not openly saying --
28 29 14:45:14 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
And that you would have
But this is in relation to another Module.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:45:14
14:45:19
93 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well at the moment we are he only interested in this Module.
Yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
other was thinking on this subject.
7
wouldn't have been a more open discussion?
8
A.
9
So why, if the two of you were in a room, and each knew what the I mean, is there any reason why there
Well, let's take it from my point of view, for a start.
I was not going to
say to Mr. Sweeney, whom I had never met before, I was not going to say to
14:45:44 10
Mr. Sweeney, 'you know that I have to do X, Y and Z'.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
meeting.
14
A.
That I could understand would be your view at the start of the
Correct.
14:45:55 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
But your evidence is that you were fully of the view yourself
Yes.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:46:04 20
advanced.
21 22
towards the end of the meeting or when the meeting was well That you felt he knew that you were going to have to pay the
politicians? A.
Correct.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
14:46:17 25
26
So I'm just wondering at that stage why wouldn't there have been
some open discussion? A.
Well, I certainly wasn't going to raise it.
And he didn't, in the
27
circumstances that I've outlined, he did not specifically say A, B, C, I know
28
what you have to do X with anybody in particular or anybody or anybody in
29
general.
14:46:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:46:33
14:46:44
94 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
3
Exactly.
But you said he was indicating that in a different way.
That's why I left the meeting satisfied that he knew what I had to
do.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Q. 583
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
9
Cherrywood project for some considerable time before March '93; is that right?
14:47:01 10
A.
11
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Lawlor was involved with Mr. Monahan and this
Well. That I don't know. I cannot specifically say that to you.
The logic
is that he was.
12
Q. 584
Yes?
13
A.
But he never discussed that with me.
14
Q. 585
Would you have any idea would he have been around, would he have been involved
14:47:18 15
16
He never told me that.
in May '92? A.
17
Well he certainly wasn't a member of the council because he lost his seat in the June 1991 Local Elections.
18
Q. 586
Yes?
19
A.
He could well have been advising.
Q. 587
But, Mr. Lawlor --
21
A.
Mr. Dunlop.
22
Q. 588
From what you told me this morning, you were in very frequent contact with
14:47:28 20
23 24 14:47:37 25
Mr. Lawlor? A.
Yes.
Q. 589
Would you not have known then and you knew an awful lot back in May '92 what
26
was going on in Cherrywood that you've told us, not that you were involved?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 590
So you would have known whether Mr Lawlor, in May '92, you are in a position
29 14:47:53 30
today to tell us whether Mr. Lawlor was involved in May '92 on behalf of Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:47:53
14:48:12
95 1
A.
No, I'm not and even, on any reflection, given the personality of the late
2
Mr. Lawlor.
3
involved in.
4
Q. 591
No, but you'd have known.
5
people.
6
there?
7
A.
Mr. Lawlor wouldn't necessarily tell you everything he was
Yes, he might tell you or you'd know from other
You'd have known from Mr. Reilly or Mr. Lynn or seen Mr. Lawlor
No, in fairness to both of them, I do not recall them ever mentioning that to
8
me in any discussion that we had with them on the margins of the council
9
meetings.
14:48:34 10
Q. 592
11 12
What would be wrong if they said it to
you that he was involved? A.
13 14
Why do you say in fairness to them.
They can say they knew if they want to.
I'm just saying I don't know, I can't
attribute a view to them. That's what I mean by that. Q. 593
14:48:53 15
So by March '93 we've got a bit of a crisis looming for Monarch in relation to Cherrywood?
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 594
And Mr. Lawlor is there at that point; yes?
18
A.
Mr. Lawlor is now in the frame.
19
Q. 595
Yeah.
14:49:04 20
Certainly as far as I'm concerned.
In fact you say, you've told the Tribunal I think in the interviews,
that you regarded him as an advisor or strategy advisor or something like that;
21
is that right.
22
A.
Well that was the way Mr. Lawlor would present himself.
23
Q. 596
All right.
24
A.
Well he was at meetings.
Q. 597
Yes?
26
A.
That I attended.
27
Q. 598
Yes?
28
A.
And I had discussions with him from time to time.
14:49:18 25
29 14:49:29 30
So he was very heavily involved when you came in?
but I had discussions with him.
Not on a very regular basis
He might just say to me what's going on in
relation to Monarch down in the council. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:49:31
14:49:46
96 1
Q. 599
2 3
Did he have -- he had a close relationship with Mr. Monahan I think you said; or did you?
A.
I don't know what the nature of the relationship was between himself and Mr.
4
Monahan but certainly they had a relationship.
5
it was a business like relationship, whatever.
But certainly he had a --
6
what's the word I'm looking for? A quizzical.
A sort of quizzical attitude
7
as far as Phil Monahan was concerned.
8
know what Phil would get up to or, you know, I'm sure Phil is involved in
9
something that I can't put my finger on or whatever.
14:50:23 10
Whether it was close, whether
Like, to such an extent you'd never
He had that sort of.
Q. 600
All right?
11
A.
Attitude to Phil.
12
Q. 601
And Mr. Lawlor, was he -- did he -- was he close to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly or
13 14
Mr. Sweeney? A.
No, no, no.
Q. 602
All right?
16
A.
I think he may well have been close to Mr. Sweeney.
17
Q. 603
Anyway, Mr.-- yes.
14:50:30 15
I don't think Mr. Lawlor was close to Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly.
So in March '93 the crisis situation for Monarch in
18
relation to Cherrywood.
19
this point suggests to Mr. Sweeney that the answer to your problems is bring in
14:50:51 20
Mr. Lawlor has been involved for some time and at
Mr. Dunlop because of his familiarity with councillors?
21
A.
In broad brush terms, yes.
22
Q. 604
In broad brush.
Right.
That's the sort of thing he would have said to you
23
in many other developments? Do you remember yesterday we were talking about
24
where he introduced you.
14:51:20 25
26
It would have been the same.
It's very similar to
the other situations where Mr. Lawlor introduces you to the developer? A.
Yes.
And Mr. Lawlor, again, for ease, Mr. Lawlor was a very active
27
participant.
28
fax on your machine from Mr. Lawlor that he had dictated the night before for
29
suggestions or recommendations as to what ought to be done.
14:51:47 30
You could go into your office in the morning and find a 20 page
-Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Or proposals for
14:51:47
14:52:04
97 1
Q. 605
I think the Tribunal knows that, Mr. Dunlop.?
2
A.
I'm glad the Tribunal.
That is the very active participation that Mr. Lawlor
3
took.
4
in the council, to be active.
5
Q. 606
6
Yes.
So it would not be unusual for Mr. Lawlor, albeit not directly involved
Like, when he wasn't a member of the council.
How can he have any
influence with councillors?
7
A.
It's very difficult to explain that.
8
Q. 607
Or is there a simple explanation.
9
A.
Well there may be a simple explanation.
14:52:32 10
I think one councillor, and I think
I'm sure I've given evidence to this effect before.
One councillor expressed
11
to me that he admired Liam Lawlor because he stood up to the officials and
12
would not accept anything that the officials said no matter what they proposed
13
he was able to.
14 14:52:47 15
Q. 608
All right?
A.
Bore holes in it.
And people admired that.
Whereas other councillors, by
16
virtue of their professions or day jobs or whatever, didn't have the time to do
17
that kind of ...
18
Q. 609
19
All right.
At this stage in the meeting, Mr. Dunlop, you know what your job
is and you know the things that have to be done first like Monarch getting
14:53:24 20
their act together etc.?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 610
What about money?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 611
What discussion did you have with Mr. Sweeney about your remuneration?
A.
We had a discussion about money and remuneration, as you call it.
14:53:34 25
26
agreed 25,000.
27
Q. 612
All right.
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 613
Did he say to you I'll pay you 25.
A.
It didn't happen like that is the answer to your question.
14:53:51 30
Did that just simply happen like that?
Did you say I'll look for 25; what?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And we
14:53:54
14:54:11
98 1
Q. 614
How did it happen?
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 615
What did you open at?
4
A.
Well, I don't absolutely categorically recollect what I opened at.
5
There was obviously some negotiation about it.
It
certainly would not have been 25.
6
Q. 616
No?
7
A.
But.
8
Q. 617
100?
9
A.
No.
Q. 618
50?
A.
I would have -- I would, and it's only -- I'm not trying to in any way be
14:54:19 10
11
I don't think I would have.
12
disingenuous.
13
surprising for me that if I didn't ask for 50.
14 14:54:42 15
On reflection, it would be very
Q. 619
Okay.
A.
He thought about it and said something to the effect, that you know, that's a
16
Okay.
I don't absolutely recollect.
Did he open at less than the 25? Did he work his way --
bit high or a bit much or whatever.
17
Q. 620
Did he say 25 and you said okay?
18
A.
Whether he said 25 or I said 25.
19
Q. 621
Much haggling?
A.
Not a great deal, no.
21
Q. 622
25.
22
A.
Um, I don't think VAT was mentioned.
23
Q. 623
And what would the consequence of that mean, that you'd have to pay the VAT;
14:54:55 20
24 14:55:08 25
We ended up at 25.
Is that plus VAT?
wouldn't it? A.
I would have to issue an invoice plus VAT or issue an invoice without VAT.
26
Q. 624
What was the intention?
27
A.
I would have to pay VAT ultimately.
28
Q. 625
Was the intention that you would issue an invoice and then you'd pay the VAT?
29 14:55:21 30
You've -A.
That I can't tell you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:55:24
14:55:49
99 1
Q. 626
But you must know, Mr. Dunlop.
You looked for 50.
You agreed 25.
Is that
2
Mr. Dunlop now knowing I've agreed my fee of 25,000 which will be into my
3
pocket or does it mean that I've to take the VAT out of it, and it's what, five
4
grand?
5
A.
21%.
6
Q. 627
Yeah.?
7
A.
In fairness to your question, I don't think the VAT entered into it.
8 9
it was just a straight forward agreement that there would be 25. Q. 628
Okay.
A.
I did not say plus VAT.
11
Q. 629
No?
12
A.
He did not say does that include VAT.
13
Q. 630
Did you talk about invoices?
14
A.
No, I don't think we did.
Q. 631
All right.
14:55:55 10
14:56:07 15
I think
That's that.?
At least that is as I recall it.
Can I take it then that the idea was that you would be paid 25,000
16
which would go into -- which you would either cash or go into your accounts
17
which weren't available?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 632
So VAT didn't come into it?
A.
No.
21
Q. 633
And tax didn't come into it?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 634
Thank you.
14:56:22 20
24
All right.
And the other calculation that I would imagine would
have been important in your own mind would be how much of that was going to go
14:56:37 25
into your pocket having dispersed.
So you were there at this meeting for
26
three quarters of an hour having discussed a lot of things.
27
your mind is what will the agreed fee be.
28
before you offer the 50 you are saying to yourself how much am I going to have
29
to pay out?
14:56:57 30
A.
At the back of
To work-out that out for yourself
I would accept that that was part of. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:57:00
14:57:05
100 1
Q. 635
It has to be?
2
A.
Feeling.
3
Q. 636
It's an expense?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 637
It might be 1,000 or 10 or whatever?
6
A.
Correct, yeah.
7
Q. 638
Can you tell the Tribunal during that meeting before offering your 50, saying
8
50 or before agreeing your 25, what was can in your mind as to what you'd have
9
to pay out?
14:57:21 10
A.
That I did not know.
Because, first of all, I knew again anecdotally and from
11
what Mr. Sweeney told me, that Richard and Philip had strong contacts with the
12
politicians in the two main parties.
13
to talk to.
14
approached them to stick with it or vote for what Monarch wanted.
14:57:50 15
16
I did not know who I was going to have
And I certainly did not know who was going to ask me when I So, I
suppose, the simple answer to you, Mr. Murphy, as little as possible. Q. 639
Yes.
Now, one thing you've touched on there, Mr. Dunlop.
I'm not sure that
17
we touched on it earlier.
18
that councillors -- that a substantial sum of money or any sum of money had
19
already been paid by Messrs. Lynn and Reilly to councillors?
14:58:14 20
Did Mr. Sweeney say to you or lead you to believe
A.
No, there was no reference whatsoever to that.
21
Q. 640
Simply that they had contacts?
22
A.
Absolutely, yes.
23
Q. 641
All right.
24
Did you understand at that stage -- would you have known yourself
at this meeting from all you knew about the whole thing, and the way these
14:58:28 25
things work and the way Monarch and Cherrywood worked, would you have known
26
that money had been paid out?
27
A.
Known is a very strong word.
28
Q. 642
It is.?
29
A.
So therefore the answer is I would not have known.
Q. 643
All right.?
14:58:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
14:58:39
14:58:50
101 1
A.
2
But it would be again.
Sorry to use this word again.
It would be
disingenuous of me to suggest to you that I did not have -- knowing the system.
3
Q. 644
Yes?
4
A.
Knowing the nexus.
5
Q. 645
Yes?
6
A.
I would -- I would not have been surprised.
But the only surprise that I can
7
express to you is what was said in the opening statement as to the level of
8
contributions that were made to politicians.
9 14:59:14 10
Q. 646
Oh, yes.?
A.
But as to the detail or the reality, it would be completely disingenuous of me
11
to suggest that I would not have had a suspicion.
12
Q. 647
Yes.
And -- right.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 648
All right.
You suspected that Monarch had already paid councillors?
14:59:34 15
16
Chairman, would it be possible just to rise for five minutes please?
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
19 14:59:39 20
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you.
21 22 23 24
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
14:59:55 25
26 27 28 29 15:11:38 30
Q. 649
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, just in relation to agreeing that 25.
You've said
so it wouldn't have been -- VAT and tax wouldn't have come into it. into your pocket.
Just one thing about invoices.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It was 25
Would it have been your --
15:11:42
15:11:59
102 1
does it follow from that, that it wouldn't have been your intention to issue an
2
invoice? I mean, obviously, when -- what you've just said?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 650
Why would you issue an invoice if you're not going to pay VAT and the Revenue
5
aren't going to know about the payment?
6
A.
Well there's no invoice extant.
7
Q. 651
Yes.?
8
A.
And the remittance advice notes or notices from Monarch are to the global
9 15:12:13 10
Let me just say that first.
amounts, 15 and 10. Q. 652
Yes?
11
A.
Without any attribution of VAT.
12
Q. 653
Yes?
13
A.
And they are.
14
Q. 654
All right?
A.
If my memory serves me correctly, within days of the first meeting.
16
Q. 655
Yes.
17
A.
It would appear not, yes.
18
Q. 656
And I think yesterday we spent some time on this when you were saying there
15:12:28 15
So that means -- so it was never in your intention to issue invoices?
19
were invoices.
And you did issue invoices and I took you through them and
15:12:41 20
there weren't.
Can you just reconcile that?
21
A.
As I said, my normal practice would be to issue invoices.
22
Q. 657
Would that be except in the cases where you wouldn't issue them?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 658
Yes?
A.
If you didn't issue invoices, obviously the intention would be that you didn't
15:12:56 25
26
Well if -- sorry for laughing.
want -- you weren't going to issue them.
27
Q. 659
Yes.?
28
A.
But I -- there are no invoices extant.
29 15:13:18 30
Therefore, I am saying that no
invoices were issued taken in conjunction with the remittance notices that did not contain VAT elements on them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:13:20
15:13:32
103 1
Q. 660
2
It's just that I remember yesterday Mr. Dunlop, you were saying that you didn't really think Monarch would make payments to you without invoice?
3
A.
I don't think they would.
4
Q. 661
It doesn't really add up the whole thing; does it?
5
A.
Well insofar as I'm concerned it does.
6 7
agreed. Q. 662
In the context that that's what we
I was paid within a very short time, in two tranches.
Now, can I just ask you about that.
The agreement was 25,000 and you were
8
paid in a very short time, 11th, 12th March '93 is that right? The two letters
9
... the 11th and 12th '93?
15:13:57 10
A.
Yes, the 11th, 15th and 12th 10.
11
Q. 663
And this meeting was on the 8th?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 664
You were paid really very quickly?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 665
As was your custom I think.
15:14:11 15
16 17
right? A.
18 19 15:14:24 20
21
You tended to get paid very quickly; isn't that
Well if people were in a bind and they were looking for my services, there was one way to concentrate attention.
Q. 666
Yes?
A.
And that was to say pay up.
Q. 667
Right.
And why then in the private interviews on a number of occasions did
22
you say that you -- you got the money from Monarch with difficulty and it took
23
a long time to get paid and so on?
24
A.
15:14:45 25
Oh, yes I did.
There were, subsequently there were difficulties in relation
to payments that we subsequently agreed with Mr. Sweeney.
26
least one --
27
Q. 668
Yeah?
28
A.
If not two.
29
Q. 669
Yep?
A.
Had to go to Dominic Glenane to seek his help to get payment.
15:14:54 30
But certainly one.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
And I had on at
15:15:01
15:15:16
104 1
Q. 670
2
The thing is in May 2000 when you were talking to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty.
The only figure you were talking of was 25,000?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 671
So you knew in May 2000 when you were talking to the two Tribunal counsel that
5
you had been paid in a matter of four days the 25,000 that you had agreed.
6
When you were talking to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher where is the delay and
7
serious delay, as you referred to in your interview.
8
you talked to?
9
A.
15:15:37 10
The only answer that I can give you to that, and that is that one has an appreciation of some difficulties in getting paid by somebody and that was in
11
my mind.
12
difficulties with what --
13
Q. 672
14
And it was in my mind.
And it was definitely in my mind that I had
When you spoke to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty you were aware that there had been delays in getting paid by Monarch in respect of payments which came after
15:15:56 15
16
Where is that delay that
the payment of 25,000 which was paid promptly? A.
No, I didn't actually say that in fairness, Mr. Murphy.
I did say that it was
17
in my mind when I was talking to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty in the private
18
interviews that there were difficulties with Monarch in getting paid.
That
19
there is some illusions between the 25 and a delay in getting paid.
That
15:16:18 20
obviously does not apply because I got paid relatively quickly.
21
Q. 673
Yes?
22
A.
But I'm not saying that at that stage I knew or had come to the conclusion that
23 24 15:16:35 25
I was paid more. Q. 674
I'm sorry?
A.
When I was talking to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher, I told them in, private
26
session, I told them that I had got 25,000.
27
Q. 675
Yes?
28
A.
Okay.
29 15:16:53 30
Subsequently, as we discussed yesterday, on the basis of an audit, we
recognised payments of 60. Q. 676
Yes.
So you don't recall the extra 60 that you were paid, at this meeting Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:17:06
15:17:22
105 1
with Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 677
You don't recall the 60 extra that you were paid.
4
But you do recall the delay
in it being paid?
5
A.
In general I recall in my relationship with Monarch delays in getting payments.
6
Q. 678
Mr. Dunlop, can you just see what I'm saying to you?
7
A.
I can't really.
8
Q. 679
In May 2000, you tell the Tribunal that it's 25,000.
9 15:17:32 10
So on that day you
didn't recall the 60,000? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 680
Now, just one second.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 681
But yet you are able to tell the Tribunal that you got a delay in being -- that
14 15:17:42 15
Sorry.
You didn't recall that?
there was a delay in being paid? A.
Equally, I didn't tell Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 in the
16
private session that I got 25,000 within four days.
17
either.
I didn't tell them that
18
Q. 682
No.
19
A.
Yes, I told them I got 25.
Q. 683
And in May 2000 you knew that you had got that 25 immediately.
15:17:59 20
21
You told them you got 25? Because that was the agreement with Mr. Gallagher. And you also
knew that you were paid another 60,000 but you didn't tell the Tribunal?
22
A.
No, that's not what I said.
23
Q. 684
I'm suggesting it to you.?
24
A.
I would refute the suggestion.
15:18:19 25
The agreement was for 25.
Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher that.
I told
And in fact, in fact, I think I put that
26
in one of the lists that I made in the box in 2000.
27
Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher that I had experienced delays in payment from
28
Monarch.
29 15:18:48 30
Q. 685
But I did say to
And that is the truth.
Now, just before I forget that.
What were the delays you experienced in
payment by Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:18:49
15:19:22
106 1
A.
2
Well, subsequently, after the first two payments on the 11th and 12th of March 1993 for 15 and 10.
3
Q. 686
Yeah.
4
A.
I'll tell -- there is an -- sorry, I beg your pardon, Mr. Murphy.
5
When is the next one?
invoice for -- there is an invoice from my office.
6
Q. 687
Could we have page 491, please.?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 688
Have you got that up on your screen, Mr. Dunlop?
9
A.
Yep, yes.
Q. 689
The lower schedule.?
11
A.
The lower schedule.
12
Q. 690
It says 12th of March.
15:19:54 10
13 14 15:20:06 15
There is an
and 10, 25,000.
One of them is the 11th.
Yes.
Q. 691
The next one is per Tribunal 10,000. May.
17
isn't that right? A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 692
All right. May.
21
And the position is that was the 26th of
That's the controversial cheque we were talking about yesterday I think;
18
15:20:28 20
15
You are paid within four days?
A.
16
That doesn't matter.
Just leave that for a second.
There was an invoice for 15,000 in
That was the invoice on the 19th of May paid in 7,500 on 2nd of July.
And 7,500 on the 17th September, is that the delay you are talking about?
22
A.
19th of May invoice No. 834, 12,396.69 plus VAT at 21%, 15,000.00
23
Q. 693
That's an invoice?
24
A.
It's an invoice. It is marked not in my handwriting, but by an officer in the
15:20:56 25
office.
26
Q. 694
Yes?
27
A.
Paid 19/5 and either 17 or 19, 9 '93.
28
Q. 695
17.9.93 I understand because that's when 7,500 was paid?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 696
What's that other date there.
15:21:10 30
That suggests it was paid on the date of the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:21:14
15:21:22
107 1 2
invoice? A.
3
Yes.
That I cannot answer you.
Because that would -- if the invoice was
sent --
4
Q. 697
Yes?
5
A.
I can't understand why, unless ...
6
Q. 698
I mean, on page 491 there, the date for the 7,500 is the 2nd July but on the
7
invoice you have you are saying in manuscript is a May date for the first
8
7,500?
9 15:21:38 10
11
A.
Correct.
Q. 699
Did you write it? Did anybody in your office write it?
A.
What's written in handwriting is not my handwriting.
12
handwriting that is.
13
Q. 700
In your office?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 701
Sorry.
15:21:52 15
ignore that.
17
other date? A.
19 15:22:12 20
it is the person who dealt with the cash receipts book.
Doesn't it say -- it gives you the 17th of September date.
16
18
I'm not worried about that.
Q. 702
All right.
Now, the first one there, that says it's paid in May.
Now, your
Coyle & Coyle? A.
Yes.
23
Q. 703
Document, schedule says 2nd of July.
24
A.
You're looking at the lower.
Q. 704
Yes?
26
A.
You are looking at the lower matrix.
27
Q. 705
Yes.
28
15:22:51 30
What's the
Well it says paid 19/5 and it looks look an & not AND but whatever you call it.
22
29
It's the other date.
Let's
Either the 17.9.93 or 19.9.93.
21
15:22:28 25
I know the person whose
I don't know?
Mr. Dunlop, I'm just suggesting to you that isn't a huge delay, is it,
to be paid your May 15,000 in two tranches in July and September? A.
Well, well it depends on your appreciation of what a delay is, Mr. Murphy. You may well be used to that type of delay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:22:54
15:23:12
108 1
Q. 706
I assure you that if you regard that as a serious delay don't come to the bar.
2
A.
Mr. Murphy, can I absolutely assure you, that it is not my intention to come to
3
the bar, yet.
4
Q. 707
Now, are you saying to us that that's a serious delay?
5
A.
No, what I'm saying to you is --
6
Q. 708
That you mentioned to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty?
7
A.
Yes, that there were delays in getting payment. Like, it's a question of
8
approach. What you consider to be a delay or not.
9
people at the bar are not paid up front.
15:23:32 10
Q. 709
Okay.
I'm happy to accept that
There is another payment then that we only agreed to yesterday 2nd of
11
November '93 of 15,000 and 22 December of 15,000.
12
Sorry, you got more.
13
on the 8th of March.
14
Mr. Hanratty, that there was serious delay in getting paid by Monarch?
15:23:59 15
A.
Sorry.
So, in all you got 60,000.
You got 80,000 in the year '93 having started
Is that the basis of a whinge to Mr. Gallagher and
Well I don't think I used the word "whinge".
There were difficulties in
16
getting payment from Monarch.
17
not twice, to Dominic Glenane, seeking his assistance in getting payment on
18
invoices sent.
19
Q. 710
15:24:26 20
It did eventuate in my going at least once, if
Did you go to him -- first of all, tell me the invoice that you went to him about.
Secondly, any other payment that there may not have been an invoice.
21
In respect of those eight payments coming to 80,000 in 1993.
22
payments that you had to go to Mr. Glennane about?
Identify the
23
A.
I can't do that.
24
Q. 711
Of course you can, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I can't.
Q. 712
If you had serious delay about this you couldn't possibly not remember.
15:24:43 25
26 27
We'll
rule out the first two because they were paid in four days?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 713
So, take the others now. There is one 10, two 7,500's and two 15,000's. Which
15:24:58 30
of those did you go to Mr. Glennane, your employer in Monarch, and say there's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:25:03
15:25:21
109 1 2
a delay? A.
Mr. Glennane may well be able to help you in relation to my coming him.
3
sit here before you I can't help you.
I would like to but I can't.
4
just making a quick reference to see if there is anything in the diaries.
5
my recollection is correct, there is one but I can't find it now.
6
Q. 714
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, were you saying something to me?
7
A.
No, I may -- I'm -- yes.
8 9
No, I can't.
As I
And I'm If
Sorry.
Much as I would like to help you I
can't. Q. 715
15:25:58 10
All right.
You see Mr. Dunlop, can I suggest to you that the reason that you
said that to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty was because, as appears from the
11
private interviews, in May 2000 there was a confusion in your mind.
12
weren't sure did you come into Monarch in the end of '92 or early/March '93 or
13
were you in fact there in May '92 for this particular vote?
14 15:26:25 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 716
And the cheques, you getting your payments in March, if you came in in May '92,
16
meant there was a serious delay of a year?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 717
Well, now --
19
A.
Sorry?
Q. 718
What isn't as I outlined it?
A.
You have outlined it.
15:26:40 20
21 22
Certainly not as you outline it.
You said that there was a serious confusion in my mind
as to when I became involved in Monarch.
23
Q. 719
Well was there not?
24
A.
No, there wasn't.
15:26:56 25
What I did say, that I came in to Monarch sometime in late
'92 or early '93.
26
Q. 720
Yes.?
27
A.
Correct me if I'm wrong, that is not what I said.
28
Q. 721
598, please.
29 15:27:15 30
And you
Now, this is just, Mr. Dunlop.
now it's 8th of March '93.
I mean, you've told us clearly
I understand that.
I understand you could have
had a confusion between the end of '92 and the beginning of '93. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
The
15:27:19
15:27:28
110 1
significant thing would be the meeting in May '92?
2
A.
The meeting with whom?
3
Q. 722
The meeting --
4
A.
Sorry, the council meeting you're referring to.
5
Q. 723
Is there some other meeting?
6
A.
No, no, you said the meeting in '92.
7 8
I'm just wondering which one are you
referring to. Q. 724
9
Yes.
Sorry.
Page 598.
Is that what we have there?
A: The motion on that day Mr. Gallagher, from Sean Barrett or was that
15:27:55 10
subsequent.
11
Q:
Councillor Barrett.
12
A:
I have suspicions that was a subsequent date
13
Q: Councillor Barrett had a motion and it was seconded by Councillor Dockrell
14
that land and map attached to the motion in relation to lands stretching from
15:28:07 15
Glenamuck Road to Cherrywood road be zoned for residential development not
16
exceeding one house her acre
17
A:
18 19 15:28:19 20
Q. 725
That is Sean Barrett's
Q: That was done at the same meeting.
Later at the same meeting, on the 22nd
of May 1992. A:
Then my involvement would have been earlier than I indicated to you
21
earlier because that was one of the crucial meetings that took place and that I
22
told you was the incident where a motion was withdrawn. It was a compromised
23
motion brought forward by Sean Barrett.
24
just Sean.
15:28:33 25
26
As it turns out there now or was it
Q: that was passed? A:
That was passed and that was one house per acre.
27 28
Now, all I'm putting to you is, because I have accepted your statements and
29
interviews were utterly confused as to when you came in.
15:28:47 30
towards the '93 date. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
They went more
15:28:50
15:29:04
111 1 2
But there was a significant confusion about whether, how involved you were in
3
May '92.
4
suggesting to you that maybe you were saying to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
5
that there was a delay in payment because you were so confused maybe you felt
6
you were there for Mr. Barrett's motion in May' 92.
7
cheques in March '93 and that was a delay
8
A.
9
No.
I accept completely that it's the 8th of March '93.
Let me just say to you.
But I'm just
You've got your first
I accept fully the basis on which you make the
suggestion and that there may have been confusion in relation to the date,
15:29:26 10
which I said late '92 or early '93.
I accept that.
What is absolutely clear
11
in my mind is that I was not involved with Monarch at that time.
12
of the May '92.
13
Q. 726
I accept that.?
14
A.
Thank you.
Q. 727
But is this the reason there was confusion.
15:29:41 15
16 17
At the time
Really there was never any delay
about payment? A.
No, no, there is not confusion, because why would I have gone to Dominic
18
Glennane otherwise? Dominic Glennane did not appear on the horizon at all in
19
relation to lobbying, zoning, strategy, or whatever.
15:30:02 20
Q. 728
All right.?
21
A.
So there would be no other reason for me.
22
Q. 729
Could it have been some other payment than the 1993 payments that you went to
23 24
Mr. Glennane about? A.
Yes, it could be.
Q. 730
For example?
26
A.
Well, what other payments that we got.
27
Q. 731
For example?
28
A.
That I cannot tell you.
29
Q. 732
Well, what are the other payments that you got from Monarch?
A.
No.
15:30:13 25
15:30:24 30
Other payments that we got.
The only payments that I got from Monarch are what we have outlined. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:30:29
15:30:44
112 1
Q. 733
85?
2
A.
85, that we accepted yesterday, the dispute about the ten.
3
that dispute.
Not re-entering
They are the only payments that I got from Monarch.
4
Q. 734
Yes?
5
A.
The only other issue that is out -- that is outstanding is an invoice for a
6
success fee.
7
Q. 735
All right.?
8
A.
Which was -- sorry.
9
Q. 736
We'll come to that in a second.?
A.
All right.
Q. 737
All right.
15:30:57 10
11 12 13
cheques as far as you were concerned. A.
14 15:31:18 15
16
There was delay about one of those cheques anyway or two of those
The basis of that remark to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty was that I went to Mr. Glennane at some stage to seek his assistance in getting payment.
Q. 738
Mr. Dunlop, that first -- why were you paid in two cheques of 15 and 10?
A.
Yes.
I think that was more to do with Monarch's approach to doing it than
17
anything to do with me.
18
Sweeney wanted it done.
19
Q. 739
Why?
A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 740
Did he explain to you?
22
A.
No.
15:31:43 20
But that's -- you will note that the payments are within a day of each
23
other.
24
same date.
15:31:55 25
That that is the way that they wanted, that Eddie
One is on the 11th and one is on the 12th.
So it's virtually the
Q. 741
Mr. Dunlop, you agreed the 25 at this meeting on the 8th?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 742
You didn't invoice?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 743
You probably said you wanted it by the end of the week?
A.
Something along those lines.
15:32:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:32:06
15:32:15
113 1
Q. 744
And you got two cheques?
2
A.
The meeting was on the 8th and we got the first payment is dated 11th, which is
3
Thursday.
4
Q. 745
All right.
5
A.
Thursday and Friday.
6
Q. 746
Okay.
7
Thursday and Friday?
And you've agreed this fee of 25 without making up your mind or having
much thought about how much you'd have to pay out to councillors?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 747
Did you often do it that way?
A.
As I said to you earlier on before the break, it was a calculation that you had
15:32:36 10
11
to make.
It entered into the calculation in relation to any negotiation --
12
Q. 748
Mr. Dunlop, everything you're saying there is obvious?
13
A.
All right.
14
Q. 749
Could you please tell me.
15:32:53 15
Is it usual for you when you do these serious
negotiations about substantial fees?
16
A.
You would think about what -- yes.
17
Q. 750
Why didn't you here?
18
A.
In relation to?
19
Q. 751
Yes.?
A.
I said to you before the break, that yes, it was in my mind.
21
Q. 752
And what conclusion -- Mr. Dunlop --
22
A.
But I did not --
23
Q. 753
Nobody in their right mind in this meeting on the 8th of March '93, if the
15:33:09 20
24
negotiation of the fee comes up would agree that fee without having some idea
15:33:21 25
of the ballpark of the disbursements.
26
day.
Now, please, what? How much on that
You didn't discuss it with Mr. Sweeney, you've said that umpteen times?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 754
But Mr. Dunlop had to have in his mind this is going to cost me a grand or
29 15:33:43 30
5,000 or 10. Therefor I'll look for 50 and settle for 25? A.
As I said to you before the break, as little as possible. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:33:45
15:33:57
114 1
Q. 755
Yes?
2
A.
Yes, it was in my mind, I said that to you before the break.
3
little as possible.
4
this proposal.
5
Q. 756
I also said as
Bearing in mind I had no discussions with anybody about
What you would then do, any normal business will do, is I will agree the fee
6
with you after I've had a discussion with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly as to what
7
councillors they've spoken to and then I'll know who I have to pay?
8
A.
No. Certainly, no such discussion took place.
9
Q. 757
Now, how come if you agree a fee of 25,000 on the 8th of March do Monarch pay
15:34:21 10
you 80, 000 by the end of the year and 5,000 a year later?
11
A.
Because I went back to Mr. Sweeney to look for more.
12
Q. 758
Well tell us about the arrangement you had with Mr. Sweeney on the 8th of March
13 14
that allowed to you go back? A.
15:34:39 15
We agreed a fee of 25,000.
As you have pointed out and I have agreed, the
25,000 was paid in two tranches within four days.
Subsequently, I went back
16
to Mr. Sweeney in relation to the project and the advice that I was giving and
17
the support that I was giving and the lobbying that I did.
18
wanted more.
19
And I said I
Q. 759
Well, now, tell us about that meeting with Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Well I can't --
21
Q. 760
Show me the date of it in your diary?
22
A.
Well, I can't tell you exactly which one it was.
23
Q. 761
Mr. Dunlop, how is it that when it comes to something important you can
15:35:06 20
24 15:35:20 25
But there are --
remember nothing? A.
26
That is untrue, as you well know! There are a number of meetings with Eddie Sweeney in his office throughout and up until the end of 1993.
27
Q. 762
Mr. Dunlop --
28
A.
So at one of those meetings or some of those meetings.
29
Q. 763
Mr. Dunlop, when did you decide 25,000 isn't enough? Date?
A.
Can't give you a date.
15:35:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:35:48
15:35:57
115 1
Q. 764
Pardon?
2
A.
Can't give you a date.
3
Q. 765
Month?
4
A.
Within maybe a month afterwards.
5
Q. 766
Within a month?
6
A.
Could be.
7
Q. 767
Is that what you're saying?
8
A.
It could be.
9
Q. 768
Or it could be within six months?
A.
Certainly within the period that we looked at for the payments in 1993.
Q. 769
You'd say it was sometime in 1993 that you went to Mr. Glennane and said you'd
15:36:05 10
11 12 13
I can't give you an exact date.
I'm not saying definitively.
want more; would you? A.
14
In the schedule that we have looked at between the 8th of March 1993 and the end of March of 1993 I was paid a specific amount of money.
15:36:27 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could we have that again Mr. Murphy.
It's 491 I think.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
491, please.
Yes, 491, yes.
19 15:36:44 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
evidence.
It's here.
I just wanted it up while the witness is giving
Thanks.
Q. 770
23 24 15:36:53 25
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, I'm not sure what you're saying now?
A.
With the exception of one.
26
Q. 771
Yeah.?
27
A.
Which is the last one.
28
Q. 772
Yeah?
29
A.
Which was paid in 1995.
Q. 773
Forget about that.?
15:36:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:37:00
15:37:10
116 1
A.
Right.
Well I'm just making the point.
2
Q. 774
Sorry.?
3
A.
A specific sum of money was paid to me in 1993.
4
Q. 775
80, 000?
5
A.
Um, depending on how you add it up.
6
Q. 776
Hold on, Mr. Dunlop.
We've had all of this.
How you add it up is a question
7
of the cheque with the forged signature for ten whether it's included or not.
8
70 or 80, 000 was received by you as a matter of definite in '93?
9
A.
15:37:36 10
11
Q. 777
And if you take off the cheque that you're not sure.
I don't know.
You've
told us you paid 10,000 you get 70; is that right? A.
14
Well it depends on the attitude that you adopt in relation to the ten. cheque was made out to me.
15:38:01 15
16
So you are subtracting the five in August of 1995 and you get 80.
Are you with me?
12 13
Right.
The
It was negotiated by somebody other than me and my
signature was on the back. Q. 778
Mr. Dunlop, it most certainly does not depend on what attitude the Tribunal.
17
adopts. It depends on what your attitude is which is A, you got it and B, you
18
didn't.
19
question?
15:38:11 20
A.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, will you please proceed with the answer to my
Let's proceed.
Let's take five off 85 so we have 80.
We agreed originally 25.
In the period 1993 I
21
got 80.
22
from the payments that were made within the four days.
23
Q. 779
Try and avoid the repetition.?
24
A.
The rest of the money.
Mr. Sweeney and myself.
That is obvious
The rest of --
I could make the same point.
15:38:32 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
simple answer.
28
of May you get more money.
29
In September you get more money.
15:38:53 30
A.
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop. You are paid 10, 15.
It seems to me.
It has to be a fairly
And then at some stage before the 26th
And then again before July you get more money.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:38:54
15:39:02
117 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
and May.
4
A.
So you must have gone back to Mr. Sweeney sometime between March
Correct.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
8
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And that's what I said to Mr. Murphy earlier on before we
started this --.
9 15:39:08 10
CHAIRMAN:
Could you tell us then how that arose?
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
to you.
14
A.
I just want to add an addendum of what the Chairman is putting
The first invoice is 19th of May, Mr. Dunlop.
Yes.
15:39:20 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
25 you say you didn't invoice
18
A.
We know that's not an invoice regarding the 25.
Because the
Yes.
19 15:39:26 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You have already received that by March?
Yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
extra monies?
15:39:34 25
A.
The first recorded document, as I understand it, referring to
Yes.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
understand.
29
A.
Emanates from yourself.
Namely, an invoice which I
I don't know what number it is.
Correct.
15:39:43 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Is it dated the 19th of May.
15:39:43
15:39:54
118 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Which you say you were paid in two tranches in July and some
2
other date that's yet -- some confusion about.
3
no confusion as to the date.
But they are invoiced, there's
4 5
As I understand it the first recorded invoice is not referring to the 25,000,
6
which is already paid in the two tranches, is the 19th of May
7
A.
Correct.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
15:40:08 10
Really what Mr. Murphy is asking you is how did it come about
that you sent an invoice to Mr. Sweeney, or whomever you sent it to on the 19th
11
of May?
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Just before Mr. Dunlop answers Judge Faherty's question.
14
would just like to draw the Tribunal's attention to one matter. To suggest
15:40:19 15
I
that the fee note of the 19th of May in the sum of 15,000 is in fact the first
16
fee note I don't think is correct.
17 18
There is a fee note for 12, 100 dated 10th of April 1993.
19 15:40:31 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21
That's fair enough, Mr. .
there's one on the 12th of April.
Well then perhaps Mr. Redmond, if
We don't know when that was paid.
22 23
If we go with your first.
I'll take Mr. Redmond's point on that.
24 15:40:44 25
26
If we deal with the invoice of the 12th of April then. A.
Yes.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
As opposed to the 19th of May chronologically
Yes.
15:40:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:40:51
15:40:57
119 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
25,000 was paid?
3
A.
That seem's the first recorded document from you after the
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
arrived at a situation but you were in a position having negotiated a fee, you
7
say, back in March to invoice Monarch for further monies.
8
A.
9
Yes.
I think that's where Mr. Murphy is coming from.
How you
Sorry. that's why I said to Mr. Murphy perhaps within a month.
But I
went back to Eddie Sweeney having thought about it, having attempted to get
15:41:22 10
more out of him in the first instance and negotiated 25 and said this will take
11
more.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
I want more.
And did you -I need more for what I'm doing.
15:41:32 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
meeting arose and what was said and what arguments you put forward to support
18
the additional money? Yes.
19
that having spoken to Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly, having seen what the
15:41:59 20
Did you give an explanation? Can you tell us about how that
Well, not in specific detail other than to say
situation was in relation to Monarch's position, I went back.
And as I recall
21
matters, there was very little difficulty with Mr. Sweeney in relation to the
22
matter which allowed me to issue invoices.
23 24 15:42:20 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
But what prompted you to go back?
Because I was dissatisfied with the 25.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Why?
I didn't think it was enough.
29 15:42:26 30
CHAIRMAN:
But your disbursements were small.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:42:29
15:42:46
120 1
A.
Yes, they were.
But a lot of money was going to be made on this development
2
and my role, given the history of it, up to that point, was going to be
3
crucial.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
to give you more money?
7
A.
But did Mr. Sweeney not say to you we have a deal and I'm not going
As I've said to you, as I recall matters, there wasn't a great deal of
8
difficulty with Mr. Sweeney in relation to it.
9
invoices.
He agreed to it and I sent
15:42:59 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Q. 780
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
15:43:08 15
And what influenced you in looking for more money was this means
an awful lot to Monarch, it's a big job, it's big profits; is that right?
16
A.
That certainly.
17
Q. 781
And what else?
18
A.
Well there was a mess.
19 15:43:21 20
There was a right proper mess that needed to be
resolved. Q. 782
But, Mr. Dunlop, Monarch were going to put their act together, come back to you
21
and say we'll go with the four acres compromise.
And now you'll talk to your
22
councillors and do your usual job and get 25,000 for it?
23
A.
Who is going to get the blame if this doesn't succeed.
24
Q. 783
And did you -- you knew all of that on the evening of the 8th of March.
15:43:43 25
Everything.
You knew how much the importance of this to Monarch, the size of
26
Monarch, the fact that there was a mess.
You knew everything.
There's
27
nothing knew there unless Mr. Dunlop, you made other disbursements.?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 784
Or you knew you were going to have to make other disbursements.
15:44:00 30
only rationale explanation for it. Notwithstanding any imputation and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Which is the
15:44:04
15:44:21
121 1
rationality in relation to development, the Development Plans in Dublin County
2
Council.
3
A.
That is not the case.
The case is as I have already said to you.
I tried to get more money from
4
Eddie Sweeney on the first occasion.
5
was paid very rapidly.
6
Judge Faherty, that I went back to him perhaps within a month.
7
Q. 785
8 9
All right.
I didn't.
So anyway, the idea on the 8th of March was there was no -- the
door wasn't left open.
It was 25,000 full stop isn't that right?
That is correct.
Q. 786
That was the intention?
11
A.
That is correct.
12
Q. 787
And so you come back to Mr. Sweeney.
13 14
The 25
As I already said to you before the intervention of
A.
15:44:41 10
We agreed the 25.
Do you think you come back to him on the
19th of May, the day of your invoice and then hand it to him? A.
That I cannot say to you.
Q. 788
Just think about it a little bit.
16
A.
No, I wouldn't have gone to a meeting with an invoice in my hand, no.
17
Q. 789
No.
18
A.
I'd have spoke to him, met him or spoke to him on telephone or met him.
19
Q. 790
Okay.
A.
Yes.
Q. 791
Right.
15:44:52 15
15:45:13 20
21 22 23
Did you have a --
So you'd have -- would you have?
So that's the -- that's another 15,000 for you?
Now, I'm going to leave Mr. Redmond's just for a moment if you don't
mind? A.
Sorry, which is Mr. Redmond's?
24 15:45:21 25
CHAIRMAN:
What?
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
28
invoice for April.
29 15:45:30 30
Mr. Redmond's invoice.
Mr. Redmond was talking about the
I'm going to come back to that.
A.
Yes.
Q. 792
But looking at the schedule.
We've dealt with the 15 and 10.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Now we're
15:45:35
15:45:53
122 1
dealing with this invoice.
2
for a moment.
And we'll ignore the 10,000 for the 26th of May
And this invoice is paid in 7,500 twice.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 793
So we'll drop down to the 2nd of November '93.
5
Okay?
There's a 15,000 there and a
15,000 on the 22nd of December.?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 794
Now, can you explain what happened that you had to turn around in November, at
8
this stage, with the thing coming up that month, the meeting, and look for
9
more?
15:46:06 10
A.
No.
Not specifically other than that I, my only contact in relation to money
11
with Monarch was with Eddie Sweeney, and that I went back to Eddie on a number
12
of occasions in relation to payments.
13
Q. 795
14 15:46:26 15
16
Okay.
We have -- I'm sorry for labouring this, Mr. Dunlop.
But it's very,
very difficult to get the information from you.? A.
You're quite welcome.
Q. 796
We've dealt with the 15 and 10, the first 25,000.
And we've dealt with the
17
invoice of the 19th of May for 15,000.
18
when you went back to Mr. Glennane but you can't really fix dates or anything
19
like that.
15:46:44 20
And that represented another occasion
A.
No, hopefully Mr. Glennane can elucidate that.
21
Q. 797
A document and maybe an attendance on you; is that right?
22
A.
He may well be.
23
Q. 798
Sorry.
24
I don't know.
I have no evidence -- no knowledge.
Before we come to the payment on the 2nd of November of 15,000.
Tell
us what was going on in your mind from a financial point of view for your
15:47:16 25
business from the September on.
26
You now had how much, 15? You now had 40,000
and you'd paid out four?
27
A.
What do you mean what was going on in my mind?
28
Q. 799
Well what was your thinking? You're going to get another 30,000 before the end
29 15:47:25 30
of the year? A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:47:25
15:47:38
123 1
Q. 800
So you must be saying to yourself I still haven't enough.
That?
2
A.
Would appear logical, yes.
3
Q. 801
Tell us all about that, Mr. Dunlop.?
4
A.
All I can say to you is that it was obvious that I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 802
Mr. Dunlop, you are a businessman.
Mr. Sweeney is a businessman.
You have
6
already said that Mr. Sweeney had said something to about Phil kind of liking
7
to look after the money etc. Now, how is it that having agreed 25,000 in that
8
full knowledge of everything except what the disbursements will be, you go back
9
for another 15 when you do know what the disbursements will be because you've
15:48:01 10
11
now met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. A.
12
No, no, no sorry.
And that's 40,000?
Please, let the record show.
It is wrong to suggest that
I knew what the disbursements would be having met Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn.
13
Q. 803
Of course you did?
14
A.
Sorry.
Q. 804
You said what was outstanding in that equation was you had to talk to Mr. Lynn
15:48:15 15
16
and Mr. Reilly as to whom they had spoken to.
17
councillors you had to bribe.
18
A.
19 15:48:31 20
21
Correct.
You would then know what
The imputation there is that Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and I spoke
about disbursements. Q. 805
No.
A.
Well then let me make it clear that that is not the case.
22
I'm not saying that? Unless the record
shows that it's the case.
23
Q. 806
You made it clear earlier?
24
A.
Good.
Q. 807
That you didn't talk of disbursements to these gentlemen.
15:48:41 25
26
They had political
connections?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 808
You would find out who they had spoken to and then Mr Dunlop can go home and
29 15:48:50 30
sit at his desk and make out his list at his desk and make out his team that he has to talk to and pay.
And the meeting with Lynn and Reilly was the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:48:54
15:49:07
124 1
following day, the 9th of March?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 809
So you now -- and the invoice we were looking at is the 19th of May.
So
4
sometime in the next two months you talk to Mr. Glennane and you say that you
5
are unhappy.
6
that comes in two seven and a halves.
7
payments.
8
You know what it's costing you.
9
So could you please tell me when you made up your mind that the 40 wasn't
15:49:32 10
11
And he says that's great.
We'll pay you another 15,000.
And
So now you've probably made all of your
We'll look at that in a moment.
You've made your disbursements.
And you're going back for another 30,000.
enough and why? A.
Sorry to correct you, Mr. Murphy you said I went back to Mr. Glennane.
12
Presumably you mean that I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
13
conscious of the attitude and approach that you take.
14
something I need to make it correct.
15:49:51 15
Sorry.
But again, very
Therefore, if you say
You said I went back to Dominic Glennane
and spoke to him and I need more money.
16
Glennane.
17
I went back to Mr. Sweeney.
18
Do you accept that, that you said that?
I did not go back to Dominic
I only when to Dominic Glenane when there was a delay in payment. Let the record show that you said Mr. Glennane.
19 15:50:06 20
CHAIRMAN:
No, no, it doesn't matter.
21 22 23
MR. MURPHY: A.
24 15:50:19 25
Well I do.
I don't care, Mr. Dunlop
Because you are the very person who will come along subsequently
and say X, Y or Z that I said. Q. 810
Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
There you go again.
27
Q. 811
Mr. Dunlop, you went back to Mr. Sweeney.
28
This is manufacturing distractions,
Mr. Dunlop.
29 15:50:28 30
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:50:29
15:50:38
125 1 2
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
Give us some idea about how you broached the subject.
6
of arguments you used for more money.
7
whenever they took place, were very small.
8
A.
Mr. Dunlop, can you tell us how many times you went back in 1993? Explain to us what sort
Given the fact that your disbursements,
Yeah.
9 15:50:53 10
CHAIRMAN:
Did you discuss those disbursements with Mr. Sweeney or anyone
11
else.
12
to extract more money from Monarch.
13
information was exchanged between you in support of further payment.
14 15:51:23 15
A.
We just want to know how more money was paid, what arguments you used
Yes, Chairman. Mr. Sweeney.
That's very clear.
What their attitude was and what
My diary records that I went back to
I had a number -- including a meeting I had with Mr. Sweeney on
16
the 8th of March.
17
with Mr. Sweeney during the period 8th of March 1993 to the end of December
18
1993.
19
doing a quick flick.
15:51:57 20
If my counting is correct here, I had 13 diaried meetings
So that is, I'll count them again just to make doubly sure but I'm just I went back to Mr. Sweeney on a number of occasions in
relation to more money.
And I said to him that, in general terms, said to him
21
it's bigger than I thought it was going to be.
22
thought it was going to be.
23
more councillors.
24
back to him.
15:52:16 25
agreed.
It's more difficult than I
I never said to him that I need more money to pay
He never suggested that that was the reason why I was going
Each occasion that I asked and subsequently issued invoices, he
On the basis that he apparently was happy with what I was doing or
26
the progress that was being made.
27
Lily a little bit in saying that this was an enormous project.
28
as I have said to Mr. Murphy, one of the factors that did come into my mind was
29
that the agreed fee of 25 having been paid, the recognition of the benefit that
15:52:52 30
I'm not suggesting that I was gilding the But certainly
would accrue to Monarch and also the difficulties that might result if it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:53:01
15:53:11
126 1
didn't succeed.
2 3
I made various arguments along those lines with Mr. Sweeney.
I have to say
4
that I never had a difficulty, other than a short negotiation with Mr. Sweeney,
5
in relation to money.
6
to explain to Mr. Murphy, on a number of occasions, at least one, I had to go
7
to Mr. Glennane to get payment on foot of an invoice.
It was, as I said in my private interviews, as I tried
8 9 15:53:32 10
That is as simple an outline of the scenario as I can give it to you. Q. 812
11
MR. MURPHY:
12
50,000.
Mr. Dunlop, 8th of March.
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 813
That's the end of the matter.
In May you have decided it's a much bigger,
much more value to Monarch, it's a bigger job, I need more.
16
You look for
Mr. Sweeney negotiates you down to 25?
13
15:53:50 15
Your first meeting.
You go to
Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 814
Without difficulty.
19
another 15,000.
15:54:06 20
Without any difficulty. We're at 40.
Without any negotiation it's
The same thing happens again and we're leaving
out the 10 now that we're not -- that particular cheque.
The same thing then
21
happens in November for another 30,000 when the job is done -- I mean, you must
22
have done your work at that stage.
23
calculation that you'd have to take into account.
24
Mr. Sweeney.
15:54:29 25
A.
Yes.
There couldn't conceivably be another But you're back to
And once again without any difficulty there's 30,000?
And to further give something of a flip to the point that you're making.
26
I get another five in August of 1995 and I issue an invoice for a success fee
27
on foot of Mr. Sweeney saying to me send it in and let's see how far you can
28
get.
29 15:54:59 30
Q. 815
Mr. Dunlop, the extra five was a different matter. other? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
It was a balance off the
15:54:59
15:55:04
127 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 816
So that's not a very good point.?
3
A.
Well --
4
Q. 817
Mr. Dunlop --
5
A.
The payment was made.
6
Q. 818
I exclude the Judges from this.
7
I suggest to you that there isn't a person in
this room who believes what you are saying.?
8
A.
Well that's a difficulty for them.
9
Q. 819
Because it doesn't make sense.?
A.
Well that is the amount of money that I got.
15:55:16 10
11
it.
12
with it.
And the only person who can attest to it is the man that I negotiated
13
Q. 820
Mr. Sweeney.
14
A.
Correct.
15:55:38 15
16
That is the basis on which I got
Who if my reading of his submission to date is such that he has a
very hazy idea of how I was even employed. Q. 821
17
Mr. Dunlop, you are saying that Mr. Sweeney as, what was his position in Monarch?
18
A.
I don't know what his exact title was.
19
Q. 822
He was a high up person there, a senior person?
A.
He was a member of the Board, an executive director of Monarch Properties.
Q. 823
You are saying that for this crucial thing for Monarch, which has failed in
15:55:53 20
21 22
May' 92.
23
no problem with you coming back to him a few times during the year to increase
24
that to 85?
15:56:13 25
You come in in March '93.
He negotiates you for 25.
And he has
A.
That is obvious from the level of meetings that I had with him.
26
Q. 824
Yeah?
27
A.
And from the invoices that were sent out.
28
Q. 825
It wasn't because you are needing money to pay somebody or anything like that,
29 15:56:45 30
Mr. Dunlop, was it? A.
By "somebody" who do you mean? No is the answer, sorry. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
15:56:49
15:57:25
128 1
Q. 826
Okay.?
2
A.
But I don't know what you mean by "somebody".
3
Q. 827
Now, page 4839, please.
Mr. Dunlop, you agreed with me yesterday that in --
4
you accepted that in private interview you told Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
5
that you did not - - that there was no success fee?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 828
Now, can you please explain the invoice dated 14th of December '93.
8 9
Invoice
No. 1251 for a success fee for 50,000 and VAT? A.
15:57:51 10
Yes.
I obviously had a discussion with Eddie in relation to a success, which
it was, as the end result.
And this was sent on foot of a conversation with
11
him and my recollection is, as I recall matters, was that he said send it in
12
and see how far you get.
It's an invoice for 50,000 plus VAT.
13
Q. 829
Why is VAT included?
14
A.
Well VAT is included on some of the invoices.
Q. 830
Why?
16
A.
Well, I can't explain the rationale of that.
17
Q. 831
You didn't pay it sure you didn't?
18
A.
Well I didn't get it.
19
Q. 832
Well, in the other ones, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well if they went through the company, yes, it was paid.
21
Q. 833
I see.
22
A.
But I wasn't paid this 50,000.
23
Q. 834
Now, could you tell me again, let's have it, the meeting.
15:58:19 15
15:58:30 20
24
The detail of the
meeting that you went to. You've had a success now I'd say. You're in good
15:58:46 25
form and Monarch are in good form.
You now, do you ring up Mr. Sweeney and
26
say I'd like to talk to you about a success fee which we never agreed.
27
going to be 50,000 plus 10 and a half.
28
I'm going to talk to you about it?
29 15:59:12 30
A.
I'll tell you all about it in this way.
It's
In fact it's going to be 60,500 and
That it could not have been sent to
Monarch Properties without a prior agreement. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
Sorry.
Prior discussion with
15:59:17
15:59:29
129 1
somebody.
It wouldn't have been sent out of the blue.
2
Q. 835
Who was the discussion with?
3
A.
I believe on this occasion.
4
Q. 836
Mr. Monahan?
5
A.
No, no, no, Mr. Monahan wasn't involved.
6
Q. 837
Who was it?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 838
Everything else was Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
On this occasion I cannot absolutely categorically say to you that I discussed
15:59:42 10
this with Mr. Glennane.
11
But the comment was made to me either by Mr. Sweeney
or Mr. Glennane 'send it in and see how far you'll get'
12
Q. 839
You don't know which it was?
13
A.
I'm not 100 percent certain.
14
Q. 840
Why would it be Mr. Glennane.
16:00:03 15
But certainly it was one or other of them. A moment ago you fought with me because I
suggested you went to him for a bit more money.
16 17
Who was it?
Now apparently you might have
gone to him? A.
No, there is no disparity.
What I'm saying to you is that I cannot absolutely
18
categorically say to you that this conversation took place with Mr. Sweeney.
19
There were discussions with Mr. Glennane about payments, delayed payments.
16:00:23 20
Q. 841
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop -- we don't need those.
As a matter of sworn
21
evidence, Mr. Dunlop, you discussed a success fee in the sum of 60,500 with
22
either Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes, and I sent in the invoice.
24
Q. 842
All right.
A.
I can't specifically say to you whether it was on the phone or at a meeting.
16:00:40 25
26
On the phone did you discuss it?
Sorry, I can't say.
27
Q. 843
Have a look at your diary.
28
A.
What date would you like me to look at.
29
Q. 844
What time do you think?
A.
I would say sometime in the beginning of December.
16:01:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:01:03
16:01:34
130 1
Q. 845
Uh-huh.?
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 846
Do you have --
4
A.
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
In December, we have October.
December the 10th.
December the 10th.
No, sorry.
There is a
5
reference to Monarch on December 10th but it relates to somebody else.
6
says Monarch receipt.
7
was their Christmas party or their drinks party, sorry.
8
with Eddie Sweeney on --
9 16:02:04 10
It's actually a shortened for Monarch reception.
Q. 847
Were Monarch very pleased with you, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I think they were.
11
I think they were very satisfied.
I certainly didn't get
any complaints from them. Q. 848
Did they take you out to dinner or anything like that?
13
A.
No, I never had -- other than ad hoc occasional sandwich with ...
14
Q. 849
Would it be fair --
A.
Richard Lynn or Philip Reilly.
16
Q. 850
Would it be fair to say that their success was due to you?
17
A.
Partly.
18
Q. 851
Largely?
19
A.
Well there were other people involved.
Q. 852
Who?
21
A.
Phil -- Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly.
22
Q. 853
Their efforts had failed in May '92?
23
A.
Not through any efforts -- not through any difficulty in relation to their
16:02:32 20
24 16:02:43 25
efforts. Q. 854
The success in November '93 largely due to you?
26
A.
I would say it was to a large part, yes.
27
Q. 855
They would have been very pleased with you?
28
A.
I think so.
29 16:02:57 30
It
There is a meeting
12
16:02:22 15
It
They never expressed any dissatisfaction either verbally or in
writing. Q. 856
Did they express satisfaction? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:03:09
16:03:14
131 1
A.
I don't recall anybody sort of coming along and clapping me on the back and
2
saying well done Frank or without you we wouldn't have -- it wouldn't have
3
happened.
I don't recollect any of that.
4
Q. 857
Are you serious?
5
A.
I am.
6
Q. 858
Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lynn.
7 8
None of those gentlemen said
'brilliant job, Frank, great job, you did it'? A.
9
Never had any contact with Mr. Monahan other than the meetings I alluded to his being at one meeting and coming into the room at the other.
16:03:38 10
dealt with in relation to Monarch were Eddie Sweeney, on occasion Dominic
11
Glennane for non-payment, Richard Lynn --
12
Q. 859
Why are you listing these people?
13
A.
And Philip, these are the only people.
14
Q. 860
None of those people congratulated?
A.
There was general -- there was general satisfaction all around.
Q. 861
All right.
16:03:57 15
16 17
Your diary is saying, excuse me, Mr. Dunlop.
there is a witness for four o'clock.
18 19
Will I continue or?
16:04:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
I don't know if the witness is here.
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
Maybe not here yet.
24 16:04:17 25
CHAIRMAN:
But we'll just finish this.
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
28 29
The only people I
CHAIRMAN:
Topic and then we'll rise.
16:04:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
I understand that
16:04:23
16:04:41
132 1 2
Q. 862
3 4
MR MURPHY: Mr. Dunlop, just back to your diary there for a second. before the 14th of December.
A.
5
Yes, there is.
Is there a note of?
There is a meeting listed in my diary for Tuesday November 9th
at 11 o'clock Monarch - Eddie.
6
Q. 863
Could we have that page, please?
7
A.
The page in my diary.
8
Q. 864
The page number in the top right hand corner?
9
A.
I'm not dealing with the Tribunal documentation.
Q. 865
Oh, right.?
11
A.
My own diary.
12
Q. 866
What's the date?
13
A.
Tuesday the 9th of November.
14
Q. 867
Tuesday what?
A.
The 9th of November.
16
Q. 868
What's the relevance of that?
17
A.
You asked me.
16:04:56 10
16:05:06 15
Sometime
I'm dealing with my diary.
You have it there somewhere if you can work-out.
18 19 16:05:17 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr.
Are you with me at all?
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop is trying to identify a possible date when there was a
23
discussion about the fees.
24 16:05:26 25
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman, I know that.
We're talking about December '93.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN:
He has gone back to now to -- he has picked out a date.
Q. 869
29 16:05:32 30
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, why on earth would you go back to a date before the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:05:37
16:05:41
133 1
motion.
2
A.
Sorry.
3
Q. 870
Mr. Dunlop, would you please point, take your diary.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
of November?
7
A.
Wait now.
Wait now.
What's the purpose of referring to the 9th
Because Mr. Murphy asked me was there any reference in my diary to a meeting
8
with Mr. Sweeney or any representative of Monarch prior to the issuing of the
9
invoice of the 14th of December 1993.
16:06:05 10
and I said let's look at it from the beginning of December.
11
Isn't that what I
said?
12
Q. 871
Yes.?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 872
What are you looking at?
A.
Sorry.
16:06:13 15
And he asked me then when did I think
Would you just wait for one minute.
16
December.
17
already alluded to for Monarch on the 10th of December.
18
because it was a reception party.
19
next meeting.
16:06:38 20
There is nothing in December.
I went back and I looked at There is a reference, which I have I've ruled that out
I then went back and I had a meeting.
The next reference to anybody of any substance in Monarch is
Mr. Sweeney on the 9th, Tuesday the 9th of November 1993.
21
Q. 873
Mr.--
22
A.
At eleven o'clock.
23
Q. 874
So, Mr. Dunlop, after the day of the motion, which is the big success and
24
nobody knows what's going to happen until then.
16:06:52 25
On the 11th of November
there's nothing in your diary before this invoice on whatever date it is?
26
A.
The 14th.
27
Q. 875
The 14th of December.
28
A.
Other than a reference to Richard Lynn on the 16th of November.
29
Q. 876
A reference to Mr. Lynn.
A.
Never discussed money with Mr. Lynn.
16:07:11 30
The
Nothing apart from the reception?
You didn't deal with him?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:07:12
16:07:29
134 1
Q. 877
No.
Are you sure you didn't discuss it at the party? Are you being fair to
2
yourself.
3
Christmas party that you would like a success fee?
4
A.
5 6
Maybe you'd have said to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney at the
That would be well nigh impossible because I wasn't there.
Didn't go to the
party. Q. 878
7
So you didn't meet Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney with a view to discussing a success fee if your diary is correct?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 879
Does that mean you discussed it on the phone?
A.
It probably is, correct.
11
Q. 880
And which of them was it?
12
A.
That I've already said I cannot absolutely definitively say to you which of
16:07:42 10
13
them it was.
14
Monarch.
16:08:06 15
16
The normal.
The normal, because of my relationship with
And because of the fact that I discussed fees with Mr. Sweeney,
would have been Mr. Sweeney. Q. 881
17
And all previous applications for an increase in the fee, which were much smaller amounts, you went physically to Mr. Sweeney and discussed it with him?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 882
But for 60,500 you ring one or other of them and discuss it?
A.
Yes, yes.
21
Q. 883
And tell us about the telephone conversation.?
22
A.
I've already given you -- because of the success and because of what had
16:08:23 20
23
happened, issue -- I was going to issue an invoice for 50,000.
24
Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane said 'well send it in and we'll see how far you'll
16:08:44 25
And either
get'.
26
Q. 884
And previously no difficulty at all?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 885
Suddenly a success fee of 65,000, send it in and see how far you get?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 886
No promise, no hope, no encouragement or ...?
16:08:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:08:57
16:09:06
135 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 887
All right.
3
A.
The invoice was sent.
4
Q. 888
It was sent.
5
A.
Sorry?
6
Q. 889
Could we have 4839, please.
A.
That's not my handwriting.
Q. 890
Well I would have assumed that would be a Monarch handwriting.
So you went back and you sent it in; did you?
What's okay on it?
7 8 9 16:09:17 10
11
think so, Mr. Dunlop? Why would you say "okay"?
12
A.
Exactly.
13
Q. 891
What does it suggest to you?
14
A.
It suggests that it is okay E.
Q. 892
Okay what?
16
A.
The signature or at the back is E.
17
Q. 893
By any chance would that be Eddie Sweeney?
18
A.
It could well be.
19
Q. 894
Is it, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I don't know.
21
Q. 895
Have you never seen his initial?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 896
Never once have you seen his initial?
24
A.
Don't know how he writes.
Q. 897
You what?
A.
I don't know how he writes.
16:09:33 15
16:09:43 20
16:09:49 25
26 27
I don't know whose handwriting it is.
It's not mine.
How would I know how he writes? For goodness
sake.
28 29
Would you not
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
I think we'll leave it there this afternoon.
16:09:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:09:59
16:10:11
136 1
We'll sit tomorrow at .... have we another witness tomorrow?
2 3
MS. DILLON:
There's one witness at two o'clock.
4
tomorrow afternoon, Ms. Mary Harney.
Who was confirmed for
5 6
Other than that it will be Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Well, we'll sit at 10:15.
10:15 tomorrow.
9
we're going to rise now briefly to await another witness.
I know
16:10:28 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
All right?
I beg your pardon.
Sorry.
All right.
Friday is the difficulty.
16:10:41 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
10:15 tomorrow.
17
other witness comes.
And we'll sit again in a few minutes when this
18 19 16:10:55 20
21 22
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
23 24 16:10:59 25
26
MR. AHERN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
27 28 29
MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Ahern.
16:20:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:20:50
16:21:06
137 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
Dermot Ahern
Q. 898
3 4
MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Ahern.
Mr. Ahern, you were written to through your
5
solicitors by the Tribunal in April of this year.
6
statement which is to be found at pages 8117 and 8118 of the brief.
7
If I could have 8117, please.
And you supplied a
8 9 16:21:25 10
You say you set out the circumstances surrounding the receipt by Fianna Fail of 3,000 from Monarch Properties Limited and locally referred to as Wilton House
11
in June 1989.
12
You say this was a keenly fought election.
13
Ceantair made a determined effort to engage in a fund-raising campaign to
14
ensure the best possible campaign for its' three candidates, all members of the
16:21:47 15
You say in a General Election was held on 15th of June' 89. Fianna Fail Comhairle Dail
Oireachtas, and you then name the three candidates.
You say following the
16
normal practice the director of elections, former TD and Senator Joe Farrell,
17
assembled three candidates to draft and jointly sign a letter which was then
18
sent to known party supporters and previous donors in County Louth seeking
19
contribution to the General Election campaign.
16:22:05 20
21
You say you do not have a copy of this letter but you attach a copy of a
22
similar letter which is impressed the stamp of one of the candidates.
23
believe such a letter was sent to Mr Philip Monahan or Monarch Properties,
24
Wilton house on behalf of all three candidates.
You
16:22:20 25
26
And I think we can see that letter, that copy letter.
If we look at 8584 and
27
it was subsequently supplied to the Tribunal by your solicitor on 7th of June,
28
2006.
29 16:22:32 30
I think what you are saying is that a letter similar to the one now on screen Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:22:35
16:22:49
138 1
would have been sent to Mr. Monahan; is that correct?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 899
Now, you said that such a letter would have gone either to a previous donor or
4 5
a known party supporter. A.
6 7
Well both.
Can I ask you into which category Mr. Monahan fell?
He was a previous donor and he was also a known party supporter in
that he attended party functions. Q. 900
You say that the practice was that these letters would be followed up by a
8
phone call and calls by the director of elections in the area or a member of
9
the organisation on his behalf.
16:23:14 10
Normally the director of elections made as
many calls as he could himself and if possible when making calls was
11
accompanied by the election candidate in the relevant area.
12
requested me to accompany him to Mr. Monahan's office.
Accordingly, he
13 14
Is that because you were the election candidate in the area, Mr. Monahan's
16:23:28 15
16
area? A.
That's right.
If you recall that election was called very suddenly by the
17
then Taoiseach, Mr. Haughey.
18
he came back from Japan.
19
some time in order to prepare, and normally, the candidates would meet and
16:23:46 20
It's 17 years ago.
But he called it just after
Normally, when you run into an election you have
discuss with the Director of Elections the issue of division of the
21
constituency from the voting point of view during the election.
22
election literature, posters, how many to buy, how many to get, what to put on
23
them.
24
issue of sending out a letter to known party supporters signed by the election
16:24:13 25
Also,
And one of the issues that normally would be looked at also is the
candidates.
And as I said in the narrative, it was always the way that the
26
director of elections would ask the candidates to call on a number, as many as
27
possible of those people that had been written to.
28
the teeth of the election we weren't able to call to everybody.
29 16:24:40 30
Q. 901
I think if we look at 2116.
Obviously, as this was in
We see that the election was called on 25th of
May of that year; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:24:43
16:25:00
139 1
A.
Yes, in and around that.
It's normally three weeks before the election.
2
Q. 902
The election itself took place I think on 15th of June?
3
A.
That letter that you put up being a copy we think of the type of letter that
4
was sent.
5
though the letter is undated.
6
particular election.
7
Q. 903
It refers to the fact that the election was on 15th of June.
Even
I'm nearly sure that's a letter from that
If I could go back then to your statement at 8117.
You say we discussed the
8
election, the economic climate in Dundalk and desire to make a big effort in
9
terms of posters and bill boards during the campaign.
16:25:19 10
Although I was the
sitting TD, Mr Farrell was a long-term friend of Mr Monahan and in general
11
conducted the meeting.
12 13
You say, Mr. Monahan agreed that he would make a donation.
14
sent to me as TD and addressed to my constituency office at Dublin street,
16:25:33 15
Dundalk.
The donation was
I think we have a copy of that letter enclosing the cheque.
16 17
If we could have 8119.
18
constituency office at 6 Dublin Street, Dundalk
19
I think it's addressed to you care of your
A.
That's correct.
Q. 904
It refers to the meeting on the 6th of June?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 905
The letter the 30th of May.
16:25:44 20
23 24 16:25:54 25
That letter would have gone out five days after
the election being called? A.
That's right.
Q. 906
If I go back to 8117.
You say that Mr. Monahan agreed he would make a
26
donation.
27
fixed practice in relation to political donations you sent both the original
28
letter and cheque to the joint treasurers of Fianna Fail Comhairle Dail
29
Ceantair with instructions to lodge the monies to the appropriate Fianna Fail
16:26:16 30
The donation as I say was sent to you.
In accordance with your
account and to issue receipt to the donor directly in due course. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
You
16:26:20
16:26:39
140 1
exhibited a receipt dated 29th of July 1989 of 3,000 pounds by Seamus Kirk.
2 3
If we could have 8121.
I think that's the received stamped by Allied Irish
4
Banks and it is for Louth CDC FF
5
A.
What you put up there is the lodgement docket.
6
Q. 907
Sorry.
7
A.
Yeah, I have the original here if the judges wish to see.
8
Q. 908
I think it is signed by the joint honorary treasurer?
9
A.
It is signed by Seamus Keelan and Jimmy McShane, who is now deceased. Seamus
16:26:51 10
The receipt is at 8120.?
Keelan is an accountant by profession and it is in the name of Wilton House
11
Limited.
12
Q. 909
Do you believe that the cheque was in the name of Wilton House limited?
13
A.
Absolutely.
14
Seamus Keelan being an accountant, he was meticulous.
As you
can see, the documentation that I provided is meticulous from the point of view
16:27:17 15
of the lodgement docket.
I have the lodgement docket here if anybody wants to
16
see it.
17
dated 6th of June 1989 that you sent to me originally.
18
say "we", Fianna Fail Dail Ceantair had a record also when I checked with the
19
treasurers when you originally wrote to me in April.
16:27:45 20
Q. 910
21 22
And also I have a copy of a letter, which is same copy of a letter We actually, when I
If I could have 2866 please. I think this is the copy letter that you are referring to?
A.
Yes, I have a copy here which indicates quite clearly that in the handwriting
23
of Seamus Keelan how that 4,020 lodgement is made up.
24
to Wilton House, 3,000.
16:28:02 25
It includes reference
Q. 911
If I could have 8119?
26
A.
I don't know if you have a copy of that.
27
Q. 912
I have the letter?
28
A.
That's it there.
29
Q. 913
And are you saying that the manuscript writing on the bottom right hand corner
16:28:12 30
Yes, that's it there.
of that letter is in Mr. Keelan's writing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:28:15
16:28:28
141 1
A.
I believe it to be.
2
Q. 914
That makes up the 4,020 which I put up at 8121 which appears to have been
3 4
lodged to the bank account? A.
5
That's right.
I also have with me but I didn't produce it.
I didn't have it
when I made the statement, a copy of the actual account six days after.
6
Q. 915
That's a lodgement of 4,020 pounds?
7
A.
I have it here if you want to see it.
8
Q. 916
You go on to say that I also exhibit the lodgement docket and we've seen the
9
lodgement docket.
16:28:48 10
You say the 3,000 pounds was received from Monarch
Properties/Wilton House, formally formed part of this lodgement.
I exhibit a
11
copy of the original letter to me dated 6th of June with a list of other donors
12
in the handwriting of one of the local officials, totalling the aforementioned
13
amount of 4,020 pounds.
14
Monahan have a discussion in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, Cabinteely or
16:29:07 15
You say at no time did Mr. Farrell or myself or Mr.
indeed for that matter any other developments that day.
I did not have any
16
contact or conversations or otherwise with Mr. Monahan or persons related to
17
lands at Cherrywood, Cabinteely, County Dublin at that time or at all.
18 19
Just in relation to your meeting.
16:29:24 20
21
It took place on the 6th of June 1989,
isn't that right ? A.
22
The letter was dated 6th of June '89. It would have been in and around that time.
23
Q. 917
I think the letter talks about the meeting that day; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 918
Did you know when you met Mr. Monahan on that date, that he had had a meeting
16:29:33 25
26
with Mr. Flynn on the 24th of May, '89? If I could have 7661.
27
A.
No, I didn't.
28
Q. 919
He didn't make any mention to you of having met anybody else on a previous
29 16:29:48 30
occasion? A.
Not that I recall.
I mean, the meeting was a follow-up from the letter.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
But
16:29:53
16:30:18
142 1
also I do recall that headquarters had issued an instruction to TDs in every
2
constituency because they were going to produce what are called 8 by 4 posters.
3
This was a new way of postering the county.
4
think, in the constituency, 12 sites where these 8 by 4 foot large posters
5
could be put.
6
was in effect derelict.
And there were one or two sites which myself or Joe
7
Farrell had identified.
The reason we went, apart from the follow-up of the
8
letter, was to discuss the possibility of putting up posters.
9
context, as I say, that we met.
16:30:43 10
my knowledge.
They asked us to try and get, I
Mr. Monahan had quite a lot of property around Dundalk which
It was in that
There was no other discussion, to the best of
To be fair to Mr. Monahan, over the two years from '87, I was
11
first elected in '87.
12
huge queues going into Newry every day of the week, not only from Dundalk but
13
also from further afield.
14
socially -- refer to the fact that Dundalk needed something.
16:31:10 15
'89 was what was known as a for sale town.
Phil Monahan any time I met him used to refer to
literally overnight the queues stopped.
17
of the shopping centre.
18
be done to stem the tide across the border.
19
the fact that Fianna Fail had taken in the 48 hour rule. Q. 920
21 22
Mr. Monahan was the owner at the time
He was always very conscious that something needed to So he was very complimentary of
Did not speak to you on that occasion concerning his lands at Cherrywood. Did he ever speak to you concerning the lands in Cherrywood?
A.
23 24
Fianna Fail
brought in the 48 hour rule. Ray Mc Sharry was the Minister for Finance and
16
16:31:32 20
No.
In fact until you wrote to you me on the 28th of April I had never heard
of lands at Cherrywood and I don't even know where they are. Q. 921
16:31:51 25
Mr. Monahan had as part of his team Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
Now, Mr. Sweeney has
included you, if I could have 2191, amongst people he says that he would have
26
contacts with.
27
included.
28
should ask you in the first instance did you know Mr. Sweeney?
29 16:32:21 30
There were
A.
He gives a whole series of politicians there.
You are
Do you recall ever speaking to Mr. Eddie Sweeney? I suppose I
I knew Mr. Sweeney vaguely.
I would have had -- I mean, he was a personal
friend of my brother's from drama circles.
I didn't really know him.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
To the
16:32:21
16:32:30
143 1
best of my recollection, the only involvement I had with Mr. Sweeney was from a
2
legal point of view when I would have been acting for clients in Dundalk who
3
would have had perhaps disputes with Monarch Properties.
4
Q. 922
Yes.?
5
A.
But I see from this list.
6
I haven't seen it before.
He has more or less
spoken to every major politician in County Louth.
7
Q. 923
Mr. Richard Lynn.
8
A.
I, did, yes.
9
Dundalk.
16:32:50 10
Did you know Mr. Lynn?
Mr. Richard Lynn was the town clerk for a number of years in I had dealings with him when he was town clerk.
But I had no
dealings with him once he left the employment of Dundalk Urban District
11
Council.
12
member of Louth County Council. Obviously as TD I would have had dealings with
13
Mr. Lynn obviously in relation to constituency matters.
14
Q. 924
16:33:14 15
I wasn't a member of Dundalk Urban District Council.
If I could have 2864 just for completeness.
I was a
I think Mr. Monahan did write to
Mr. Frank Wall who would have been the Fianna Fail, would he have been the
16
Director of Elections or Treasurer?
17
A.
He was the General Secretary.
18
Q. 925
General secretary.
19
later.
16:33:30 20
On the 9th of June, which would have been three days
And I think he advised Mr. Wall whilst enclosing a cheque for 16,000
pounds towards the election campaign, that he had paid you 3,000 pounds; isn't
21
that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 926
And enclosed the correspondence?
24
A.
I didn't know anything about that letter until it was sent to me by the
16:33:42 25
Tribunal recently.
I didn't know anything about the circumstances of that.
26
Q. 927
Thank you very much, Mr. Ahern.?
27
A.
Thank you.
28 29 16:33:49 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
16:33:50
16:34:17
144 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
A quarter past ten.
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
6
THURSDAY, 15TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:15 A.M..
7 8 9 16:34:32 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 653
09:30:12
10:36:09
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY,
2
THE 20TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning.
9 10:36:13 10
11
Before the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop commences if I could just update you on some housekeeping matters.
12 13
Counsel for Mr. Tony Fox is unable to be here today and Mr. Fox is listed to
14
give his own evidence on Friday and it -- the Tribunal has been requested to
10:36:29 15
16
adjourn the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop by Mr. Gordon until after Mr. Fox gives evidence.
17 18
I think that the Tribunal has similarly acceded to a request I think from
19
Mr. Lydon in relation to Mr. Lynn and in those circumstances, it might be
10:36:46 20
appropriate to defer the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop by Mr. Gordon to the
21
same date as the cross-examination by Mr. Shipsey on behalf of Mr. Sweeney.
22 23
CHAIRMAN: All right.
That's granted.
24 10:37:00 25
MS. DILLON:
Now, in relation to that cross-examination or the resumption of
26
that cross-examination, we had understood on Thursday that Mr. Sweeney's legal
27
team would indicate to the Tribunal this morning the date upon which
28
Mr. Shipsey would be available to commence his cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop
29
but unfortunately it appears to be the position that that information is not
10:37:19 30
yet available. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:37:20
10:37:32
2 1 2
It wouldn't really be fair to ask Mr. Dunlop to hold himself in readiness over
3
the next four or five weeks until such date as it's indicated to the Tribunal
4
that Mr. Shipsey will be available to cross-examine.
5 6
So, perhaps, the Tribunal might be minded to request the legal team for
7
Mr. Sweeney to, say, by tomorrow evening indicate a date or series of dates
8
when they will be available to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop so that Mr. Dunlop can
9
make whatever plans he wants to make for the next four or five weeks
10:37:50 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Well, even better again, perhaps it could be done today.
12
a member here from?
Is there
13 14
SOLICITOR:
Yes, I appear.
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps you might talk to Mr. Shipsey today.
SOLICITOR:
He should have a better idea this evening.
CHAIRMAN:
Because we would be keen to organise that today before we finish at
10:37:57 15
16 17 18 19 10:38:04 20
21
four or thereabouts.
22 23
SOLICITOR:
Okay.
24 10:38:15 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I think that Mr -- counsel for Mr. Lydon is going first I
understand.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
29 10:38:24 30
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Dunlop.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:38:26
10:38:40
3 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop.
3 4
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP AS FOLLOWS:
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
Good morning, Judges.
8 9
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Good morning, Members of the Tribunal.
10:38:47 10
11
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
12
A.
Good morning, Mr. Humphreys.
13
Q. 1
I appear for Senator Lydon. I just have some questions arising out of the
14
examination that has taken place to date.
10:39:01 15
16
I want to deal firstly with the Manager's motion which was defeated 35 to 33.
17
And that was referred to on Wednesday, the 14th of June last, at page 63.
18 19
If I could have page 63.
10:39:14 20
21 22
A.
Yep.
23
Q. 2
Can it come up on the screen?
24 10:39:31 25
CHAIRMAN:
It will come up now.
26 27
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Page 63. Question 338.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
What's the page number?
10:39:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:39:56
10:40:36
4 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think it's day 353.
Is it last Wednesday's evidence you're
2
looking for Mr. Humphreys?
3
MR HUMPHREYS: That's correct, Judge, I am looking for Wednesday, 14th of June,
4
2006 page 63 of my transcript. Question 346 is what I'm looking for.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
What's the question again?
7 8
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Question 346.
9 10:40:44 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Q. 3
All right.
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And that says that the Manager's motion was defeated 35 to 33.
12
And if you could just move down to question 351.
It states there "did
13
Mr. Lydon propose that?" and your answer, Mr. Dunlop, was "my understanding is
14
that he did, my understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke on the floor".
10:41:10 15
16
Can I take it, Mr. Dunlop, that if it's your understanding, that you didn't
17
actually see him on the floor on that day?
18
A.
19 10:41:27 20
Yes, I did see him on the floor on that day but I cannot absolutely attest to say that he actually spoke on the floor.
Q. 4
All right.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 5
And your answer is "it is my understanding is that he did".
23 24
Sorry.
Question 351. Did Mr. Lydon propose that?
that "I was there, I saw him, I heard him?" A.
10:41:45 25
No, my answer is -- my understanding is that he did, my understanding is that Mr. Lydon spoke from the floor.
26
Q. 6
It's only an understanding?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 7
All right.
29 10:42:05 30
Your answer is
That's fine.
Now, if we could just move on but just can I take
it from it that it's only an understanding, that you weren't actually physically present in the chamber when that proposal was made? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:42:05
10:42:15
5 1
A.
I was in and out of the chamber on that particular day.
2
Q. 8
Just answer the question.
3 4
was made. A.
5 6
The answer is yes or no?
I was there when the matter was being discussed and I was there when the confusion occurred.
Q. 9
7
All right.
The question that you were asked at 351 was "did Mr. Lydon propose
that?" and your answer is "it is only an understanding."
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 10
Now.
10:42:41 10
Thank you. If I could just move on to question 356 and if you would
just go to question 355 and if you could just read your answer, please?
11
A.
Sorry.
12
Q. 11
Question 355?
13
A.
Sorry.
14 10:43:03 15
16
Were you there in the chamber when that proposal
I beg your pardon.
355.
Yes, yeah.
That's because -- they
happened to be not in the chamber, nearby at the time. Q. 12
And if you just continue on question 356?
A.
Yes and I have not direct -- because I wasn't in the chamber. I have a an
17
immediacy in relation to the re-action that took place at that particular time
18
as a result of what happened on the floor.
19
Q. 13
10:43:19 20
If you just go back to the first part of that question.
The answer at 355 is
that you were nearby, not in the chamber?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 14
All right.
"I have not direct" now what were you going to say there before
23
you changed to "because I wasn't in the chamber". I suggest to you that you
24
were going to say because I have not direct evidence or not knowledge.
10:43:35 25
26
that be correct? A.
27
Well, I can't say to you what I was going to say in relation to that particular question, Mr. Humphreys.
28
Q. 15
Well it's your answer.?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 16
And "I have not direct" and then "because I wasn't in the chamber?"
10:43:47 30
Would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:43:52
10:44:05
6 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 17
Well, I suggest to you that you were going to say I have no direct evidence or
3 4
no direct knowledge because I wasn't in the chamber? A.
5 6
have said to you. Q. 18
7 8
I was in the council at the time.
That's precisely the point I'm getting to. not in the chamber.
A.
9 10:44:23 10
No, I'm not going to say yes or no to that because what I have said is what I
Is that you were nearby, you were
Isn't that your evidence?
No, what I said to you.
I was in and out of the chamber.
I said to you
earlier on. Q. 19
Well, I have to suggest to you, because evidence that is stated later that it
11
was very difficult to get in and out of the chamber and that it wouldn't be
12
possible to get in and out of the chamber, is that your evidence that you gave
13
last Thursday?
14 10:44:39 15
A.
Not only the evidence that I gave last Thursday but on many other occasions.
Q. 20
I am not interested in many other occasions, Mr Dunlop, this is difficult
16
enough. I just want to zero in on this particular point and on this particular
17
day?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 21
I asked you about the proposal and you said it was your understanding that he
10:44:49 20
made the proposal.
You then say that because of your role in other
21
developments you happened to be in there.
22
chamber.
And then you say "not in the
Nearby at the time" isn't that your answer?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 22
And then you were going to go on and say "And I have not direct, because I
10:45:06 25
wasn't in the chamber?"
26
A.
No, that's your interpretation, Mr. Humphreys.
27
Q. 23
All right.
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 24
"I have not direct, because I wasn't in the chamber".
10:45:17 30
That's what you said?
Read the answer again.
That's what you said.
The first line of it at question 356?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:45:21
10:45:31
7 1
A.
Yeah, well I don't think it needs replication.
2
Q. 25
Please read it.?
3
A.
"I have not direct because I wasn't in the chamber but I have an immediacy in
4 5
relation ..." Q. 26
That's fine.
You weren't in the chamber.
Now, Mr. Lydon's evidence will be
6
that, in respect of this particular time, that he nodded to Mr. Lynn and not
7
Mr. Lynn to him.
Is that possible?
8
A.
Well, anything is possible.
9
Q. 27
Well, your evidence was that it was Mr. Lynn who nodded to Mr. Lydon to come
10:45:55 10
outside the chamber.
11 12
Now, I'm putting it to you that Mr. Lydon's evidence
will be that he nodded to Mr. Lynn to come outside the chamber.? A.
13 14
Yes, it's possible.
Well, all I can say is if that's what Mr. Lydon is going to say about nodding to Mr. Lynn or Mr. Lynn nodding to him, I can't say anything against that.
Q. 28
Well did you see Mr. Lydon nod?
A.
I saw the communication between the two of them.
16
Q. 29
Well which was it? If you saw it who nodded first?
17
A.
Um, there was a communication between Mr. Lydon.
18
Q. 30
That's not the question that I asked you.
10:46:18 15
19 10:46:38 20
I asked you who nodded first and
you said you saw it.? A.
21 22
I can't attest to it.
I'm telling you that there was a communication between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon. And ...
Q. 31
That was a non-responsive answer.
You are not answering the question.
23
question is specific.
24
You're talking about a communication.
10:47:06 25
Mr. Lydon is saying that he nodded first to Mr. Lynn. You said you saw it.
Now, you either
saw it or you didn't see it?
26
A.
I saw communication between the two of them and they both left.
27
Q. 32
All right.
28
No useful purposes is served by this answer.
non-responsive.
29 10:47:11 30
The
Now, if I could move on.
We might revert to it.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
The answer is
10:47:18
10:47:31
8 1 2
If I could have the transcript of the 11th of May, 2000.
3
reference 544545.
It's Tribunal
Pages 544 and 545.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
What's the day number?
7 8
MR. HUMPHREYS:
9
It's page No. 544.
It's Book Two of the brief.
The reference is Cherrywood.
10:47:48 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
That's the important part.
12 13
MR. HUMPHREYS:
14
2000.
And that would be -- it's the transcript of the 11th of May
10:47:57 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
It's brief No. 544.
17 18 19
Q. 33
10:48:36 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Thank you, Chairman.
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
If you could go to the bottom of that page.
is the private sessions on the 11th of May, 2000.
21
This, I think,
It's the transcript. Can
you see that at the bottom of the page?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 34
And just it was suggested it might be eight and it was settled at four.
24 10:48:53 25
you could just read that paragraph to the bottom of the page, please? A.
Beginning with my answer?
26
Q. 35
Yes.?
27
A.
Yeah.
Right.
"I think it was Sean Barrett who put the ultimate motion which
28
actually was the one that popped the thing through.
29
quite a deal of toing and froing.
10:49:09 30
If
But there would have been
To go back to the point -- to go back to
the point, I was called in by Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn because people Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:49:13
10:49:30
9 1
were going off side.
2
intelligent ones and the stupid ones.
3
is a psychiatrist or psychologist".
4
Q. 36
Because, like all groupings in society there are the
If you could stop there.
5
necessary.
6
Lydon, isn't that correct?
Unfortunately they used Don Lydon who
I don't want to go onto the next page unless
You go on to make remarks that are prejudicial about Senator
7
A.
If you want to interpret them as prejudicial, yes.
8
Q. 37
Well you go on.
9
Well let's go to another.
Let's go to another piece if
that's the approach.
10:49:46 10
11
If you could go to page 564, please.
12
page 564.
That would be the Tribunal reference No.
13 14
All right.
10:50:10 15
Now, if you could just begin there.
You see at the second half
of the page after Mr. Alan, it comes to Mr. Hanratty?
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 38
And again, if you could read there to the bottom of the page.?
18
A.
Mr. Hanratty: "and when you were being brought in to kind of clear up the mess
19
it was pretty well towards the end.
10:50:28 20
It was very much towards the end.
A: Yes.
21
Q: And what information or instructions were you given with regard to what
22
Lydon had already done?
23
A:
24
Fail in the first instance, which he had because I suppose this very very
10:50:45 25
To unscramble as much of the damage as he had possibly done within Fianna
unfair -- because I suppose this very, very unfair and personal and maybe
26
wouldn't say it.
27
professional capacities and degrees and whatever everybody considered him to be
28
totally mad
29 10:51:04 30
Q. 39
Maybe we wouldn't say it. I mean notwithstanding his
If you just to stop there. you go on to make remarks in that vein thereafter. You say there that it was very unfair and personal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
Now I will come back to
10:51:09
10:51:18
10 1
the question that I asked you one minute ago. They are remarks that are
2
prejudicial to my client; isn't that right?
3
A.
I don't accept that.
4
Q. 40
You don't accept that. You don't accept that referring to somebody as being
5
totally mad and in the context of the stupid ones.
6
remarks to be prejudicial?
7
A.
In the circumstances we are outlining, no.
8
Q. 41
All right.
9
You don't consider those
Mr. You Dunlop, you suffered a financial loss as a result of the
vote that was taken in respect of the Baldoyle Lands by my client amongst
10:51:37 10
others; isn't that right?
11
A.
I suffer a financial loss, yes.
12
Q. 42
I'm putting it to you that you had a certain attitude towards my client which
13 14 10:51:47 15
is evident by these remarks here; isn't that correct? A.
No.
Q. 43
Alright you are saying -- your evidence to this Tribunal are that the
16
derogatory remarks that you make about my client are neither prejudicial to my
17
client nor reveal any kind of bias or animosity towards my client?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 44
Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlop.
10:52:01 20
21
Now, if we could move on.
22
425.
If I could move on to Tribunal reference No. page
23 24
Now, if you could just move to the last paragraph at that page.
10:52:29 25
with "I spoke".
26
And beginning
Now, if you could just read the line down as far as the
remarks that are made about Senator Lydon
27
A.
Beginning of the paragraph?
28
Q. 45
Yes, please?
29
A.
"I spoke with both councillors Colm McGrath and Tony Fox regarding Monarch's
10:52:42 30
Cherrywood proposal. Internally in Fianna Fail there appeared to be disparate Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:52:53
10:52:58
11 1
views as to what could be achieved.
2
strong line for as much rezoning as possible while others such as Councillor
3
Betty Coffey expressed caution.
4
do whatever the majority of councillors recommended."
5 6
Q. 46
Thank you.
Councillors McGrath and Fox maintained a
Senator Don Lydon appeared to be willing to
Now, if I could just -- next I want to go to -- I think it's the
transcript of the 13th of June.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Is there a day No.?
9 10:53:19 10
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Sorry, Chairman.
I just want to get that for myself.
11
It's the transcript of the 13th of June.
And it's page 13 on my book.
12
it's question 100.
If I could have question 100.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Day 562.
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Thank you very much.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Day 652.
Yes.
And
13 14 10:53:42 15
16 17 18 19 10:54:26 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Is it a short extract because if it's short you can ...
22 23
MR. HUMPHREYS:
24
I'll move to another area if that's okay and I'll come become to that at the
10:54:38 25
Well, actually I want to move back to the question again.
end.
26 27
If I could just go back to what I began my questioning with and that is, I
28
think it's Wednesday the 14th.
I'll just get the reference.
All right.
29 10:55:16 30
If I could -- the extract what I want to go to approach -- I want to approach Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:55:22
10:55:32
12 1
it from a different angle.
If I could go to Thursday the 15th of June, 2006.
2
That's the last day of the Tribunal.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
654.
5 6
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And if I could go to page 8.
If that could come up.
7 8 9 10:55:46 10
And it's before question 32 is what I'm looking for. A.
Question what, Mr. Humphreys?
Q. 47
Just before question 32.
11
machine.
Yeah.
I am trying to assist the person operating the
Okay.
12 13
Now, if that could just move up to the intervention by the Chairman, I don't
14
think it has a reference number.
It would be line one I think.
Yes.
10:56:04 15
16
Now, I just want you to read three short paragraphs, Mr. Dunlop.
17 18
If you begin with "Chairman" there:
19
the screen
10:56:16 20
A.
21 22
On line one.
On the top of the page on
"Chairman, we were only interested in what you saw happen that particular day, not what you assume happen or think should have happened, I accept that ..."
Q. 48
Sorry, just to put it in context. We're talking about the day of the motion of
23
the manager's motion and the question that I began with in respect of the
24
proposal made by ...
10:56:32 25
A.
Right.
26
Q. 49
Senator Lydon and you say your understanding was that he made a proposal?
27
A.
Yes.
Okay.
"Chairman we're only interested in what you saw happen on that
28
particular day not what you assume happen or think should have happened.
29
accept that.
10:56:49 30
Chairman, now can you clarify the position did you see Mr. Lynn
calling out Mr. Lydon or did you not see -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
I
10:56:52
10:57:06
13 1
Q. 50
Just a little bit slower.
2
A.
Right.
Yeah.
Thanks.?
"Did you see Mr. Lynn calling out Mr. Lydon or did you not see or can
3
you remember one way or the other?
4
A:
5
Chairman: Yes.
6
A: I did see Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon to come out.
7
Chairman: All right.
8
Q. 51
Well the simple answer to that is yes.
All right.
We can deal with it in cross-examination."
Very good.
9 10:57:16 10
Now, if I could go back to page three of that same day.
11
A.
Question?
12
Q. 52
Question 12.
13 14
If you just read out question 12 and question 13 and the answers
thereto for me, please? A.
10:57:43 15
Right.
"And what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
A: Yes I would see there was contact.
16
Q: Did you see it.
17
A: No, I can't say I definitely saw it, no."
18
Q. 53
19
Sorry, you were asked there and "what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
10:57:57 20
A: Yes, I would say there was contact".
You were asked did you
see it and you said "no I can't" ".
21 22
Now, do you accept there's a contradiction in your evidence on foot of that?
23
A.
There would appear to be, yes.
24
Q. 54
Well, I have to put it to you that there is a contradiction and you are telling
10:58:18 25
the Chairman at one stage that you did see it and you're saying there that you
26
didn't see it.
Isn't that correct?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 55
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
29 10:58:27 30
Now, is it possible to go back to the 13th of June, 2006? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
10:58:34
10:58:44
14 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
652.
Day 652.
13th?
4 5
MR. HUMPHREYS:
.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 56
And it is question 100.
8
And if I could go to question 100.
I just want to put it in context, Mr. Dunlop, so that
you know the context in which the question is being asked.
9 10:59:07 10
Question 100.
Mr. Dunlop, I think you have provided the Tribunal with two
11
statements to date in the Monarch Module.
12
the second being September 2003.
13
A:
14
And then you are asked at question 103,
10:59:26 15
The first being October 2000 and
Is that right?
That's correct, yes.
Q: Did you read them or whatever? And you said
16
A: thank you.
17
Q: Did you read the private interviews that you had with the Tribunal in May
18
2000? And you said
19
A: Yes.
10:59:34 20
21
Now, I want you now to move on to question 100.
22 23
And I just want you to read from question 110 to question 114 with the answers
24
and then I'll ask you a question.
10:59:49 25
A.
From question 110 to?
26
Q. 57
114 and the answers there to?
27
A.
All right.
28
Q. 58
Slowly now, yeah.?
29
A.
Q: 110, would you, do you agree, Mr. Dunlop that you have grossly under stated
11:00:06 30
Question.
to the Tribunal the amount of money that you received from Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:00:10
11:00:30
15 1
A:
Yes.
2
Q:
Do you agree that you told in private, the Tribunal, in private interview,
3
that the agreement in relation to a fee did not include a success fee and that
4
you subsequently, you invoiced Monarch in the sum of in for a success fee in
5
the sum of 50,000 plus VAT?
6
A:
Correct, yes.
7
Q:
Do you agree that in private interview you named two councillors as
8
councillors to whom, as councillors whom you bribed?
9
A:
Correct.
Q:
And that when it came to your -- in the two statements I have referred to,
11:00:47 10
11
you dropped those two councillors and replaced them with a different two?
12
A:
Correct.
13
Q:
114.
14
gross misleading of the Tribunal?
11:01:06 15
A:
Would you agree with me, Mr. Dunlop, that all of that amounts to a
No."
16 17 18
Q. 59
19
All right.
And we're talking about the situation I think where the statement
you made in private interview to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher in May 2000;
11:01:20 20
isn't that correct ?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 60
And the statement that you then made the following October?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 61
Isn't that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 62
Now, if I could just go and listen carefully to my question now.
11:01:25 25
26
At question
27
113.
28
statement as opposed to the one in private interview.
29
councillors and replaced them with a different two and you said correct.
11:01:44 30
And that when it came to your, obviously that refers to the public
Isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
You dropped those two
11:01:45
11:02:01
16 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 63
Now, my question is this.
When you told Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher and
3
gave two different names, that they say hold on, Mr. Dunlop, you're after
4
dropping two councillors and naming another two.
5
they say that to you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 64
Did they confront you --
We've a problem here.
Did
8 9 11:02:10 10
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
This makes no sense.
The replacement occurred in the statement when Mr. Hanratty was not involved.
11 12
There was no change on the day in front of Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty
13 14 11:02:22 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
The subsequent statements came in, where different people were
named were sent in by Mr. Dunlop or sent in by his solicitors.
They did not
arise in a face-to-face interview with Counsel for the Tribunal.
17 18
MR. HUMPHREYS:
19
question that's been properly put to Mr. Dunlop.
11:02:42 20
But, Chairman, it is a matter for the Tribunal and it is a I'm asking him what action,
what action that the Members of the Tribunal legal team took in respect of what
21
was two contradictory statements naming two individuals.
22
session and one in public session.
One in private
23 24 11:03:00 25
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah, well what do you mean what action? He named two people in
private and that remained the position until he changed the names in subsequent
26
statements which were made outside the Tribunal and furnished to the Tribunal.
27
And then he was subjected to cross-examination in relation to those by
28
Mr. Murphy last week.
29 11:03:24 30
MR. HUMPHREYS:
That's precisely the point.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
And the point is this.
It
11:03:27
11:03:39
17 1
wasn't on foot of Mr. Dunlop's reply there now until last week, some six years
2
later, after the statement was made that the opportunity arises in respect of
3
the contradictory evidence.
4 5
But we've been here for three years at this Tribunal.
6
to his credibility and in the submission or the evidence that went before in
7
the Callaghan case that went before the Supreme Court, there's reference made
8
to what the then Chairman said which was and I'm quoting from page 19 of that
9
judgement "the Tribunal wouldn't concede from interested parties information
11:04:01 10
And this evidence goes
which would suggest that there is a glaringly inconsistency between an account
11
given on a previous occasion privately to the Tribunal and one given publicly
12
because that would clearly be wrong".
13 14 11:04:18 15
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
But that was in relation -- that wasn't in relation to
Monarch.
16 17
Those submissions to the Supreme Court were in relation to what happened in a
18
different Module.
19 11:04:22 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
But, Mr. Chairman, it goes to credibility.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
23 24 11:04:29 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
And it's the credibility of this witness.
We should be in a
position to be able to confront the witness because there is a credibility problem.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
it was and it was always the position of the Tribunal that we were dealing with
11:04:40 30
If you reed read the details of the case before the Supreme Court
it on a Module by Module basis and we would deal with inconsistencies in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:04:46
11:04:56
18 1
relation to evidence given on a Module by Module basis.
2 3
So, at the time that the case went to the Supreme Court the Monarch Module
4
hadn't happened.
5 6
So even by applying our own procedures, as they existed before the O'Callaghan
7
case, we would never have considered cross-examining Mr. Dunlop in relation to
8
statements made in a Module that hadn't yet been heard in public.
9 11:05:19 10
I mean, that is the position if you read it.
But that's more, if you want to
11
make it a criticism, you are entitled to it, that's a criticism of the
12
Tribunal.
It's not a criticism of Mr. Dunlop.
13 14 11:05:35 15
MR. HUMPHREYS:
That's correct.
I'm not criticising Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Dunlop
gave the answer that I in fact sought.
16 17
But the point about it is this.
It's my respectful submission that the
18
credibility of a witness cannot be divided into a Module.
19
either credible or not credible.
Now, a witness is
11:05:47 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
basis.
But Mr.-- wait now.
It was never divided into a Module by Module
23 24 11:05:56 25
We said that we would deal with the credibility of Mr. Dunlop and other witnesses who were common to a number of modules over the entire of the public
26
hearings relating to those modules.
But that we would only deal with them on
27
a Module by Module basis.
28
credibility until all of the evidence was heard in relation to those modules.
But that there would be no decisions as to
29 11:06:14 30
MR. HUMPHREYS:
I accept that.
And I hear what you're saying.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
It still
11:06:19
11:06:27
19 1
remains a matter as to how the Tribunal and the legal team actually conduct the
2
actual inquiry.
3 4
I say that that, I respectfully submit is fundamentally flawed. That is my
5
submission.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
is that you are cross-examining Mr. Dunlop.
9
submissions to the Tribunal as to the way it has conducted its affairs, you are
11:06:42 10
11
That's perfectly -- these are submissions.
certainly entitled to do so.
But your position now
I mean, if you want to make
But not as part of a cross-examination of a
witness.
12 13
MR. HUMPHREYS:
14
for Mr. Dunlop and I say it was a question I am entitled to put to him which is
11:06:55 15
16
Well, my reply is in response to the interjection by counsel
that this was only corrected some six years later, last week.
I put the
question, I got the answer required.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
decision from the court's point of view was to correct a procedural flaw that
11:07:11 20
But wait now.
It was the whole purpose behind the O'Callaghan
it identified in the work of the Tribunal.
But it was never the position
21
prior to O'Callaghan, prior to the O'Callaghan case that evidence in relation
22
to the future modules, including evidence relating to the credibility of
23
witnesses, would be dealt with in those modules until they actually came on for
24
public hearing.
11:07:31 25
26
That was the admitted position of the Tribunal at all times.
27
decision effectively took a different view and the position is now all the
28
parties have been furnished with all of the relevant statements, including the
29
private interviews and people like Mr. Dunlop are here to deal with issues
11:07:57 30
relating to inconsistencies. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
The O'Callaghan
11:07:59
11:08:14
20 1 2
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Yeah.
And my submission -- and my question was in respect of
3
what action the legal team for the Tribunal took in respect of an inconsistency
4
that emerged, unknown to us, some six years ago.
5
Anyway --
I've made my submission.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
inconsistencies in the way that they would do now post O'Callaghan.
9
never the practice of the Tribunal to raise inconsistencies in relation to
11:08:29 10
I want to make it clear.
I mean, the Tribunal did not deal with It was
Tribunals -- or in relation to modules that hadn't yet come on for public
11
hearing.
12
Court.
That was the stated position that was argued before the Supreme
13 14
MR. HUMPHREYS:
11:08:46 15
I accept what you're saying in respect of that but it still
comes back to the issue that this witness, some six years ago, named two
16
councillors and then changed that.
And that matter wasn't pursued.
17
wasn't in effect corrected until some six years later, today.
And it
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
11:09:02 20
But it was never the practice or the intention of the Tribunal that
it would be corrected until Mr. Dunlop was giving evidence in relation to the
21
issue.
22 23
That's why he's here.
That's why he's here to be cross-examined.
24
clearly an inconsistency, very serious inconsistency here.
There is
11:09:18 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
27
to the credibility of the witness. I have no further question.
28
Mr. Chairman.
29
submissions.
11:09:30 30
A.
That is so and the purpose of my cross-examination has been as Thank you,
I will make any further comments in respect by way of Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
Thank you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:09:30
11:09:45
21 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Now, who would like to? Who is next in the queue to cross-examine?
3
Connor Creegan, Chairman, for Cathal Boland.
4
simple matter of clarification, for Mr. Dunlop.
I have one question.
Just a
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
something?
8
MS DILLON: In relation to the submission that was made by Mr. Humphreys?
9
CHAIRMAN: Yes.
11:09:55 10
Sorry, just before you go, Ms. Dillon, did you want to say
MS DILLON: No, Sir, other than that as Mr. Humphreys well knows what the prior
11
procedure of the Tribunal had been and indeed in relation to his own client's
12
inconsistencies.
13
familiar with his client's position in the Ballycullen Beechill modules and
14
dealing with inconsistencies there.
The same position has been adopted in the past. He will be
11:10:15 15
16
Nothing further.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Now, sorry ...
19 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. CREEGAN AS FOLLOWS:
11:10:18 20
21 22
Q. 65
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop
23
A.
Good morning, Mr. Creegan.
24
Q. 66
I just have one question, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 67
I wonder if I could have day 653.
11:10:25 25
26 27
June just?
28
A.
14th the 14th of June.
29
Q. 68
Last Wednesday.?
A.
What, yes?
11:10:53 30
Page 22, question 98:
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
That's the 14th
11:10:54
11:11:10
22 1
Q. 69
Question 98.?
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 70
I think we're on the screen, we're on the 13th of June, Chairman.?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 71
Question 98?
6
A.
Yes, Mr. Creegan, got it, yeah.
7
Q. 72
I'm just waiting for it myself?
8
A.
I beg your pardon.
9
Q. 73
I've got it now.
Yeah.
Got it, yeah.
I have it in my own.
11:11:26 10
11
Mr. Murphy said to you "and the opening that you went to with Mr. Boland" just
12
hold it there.
13
Mr. Boland's evidence or statement, I should say, that he was invited to two
14
cinema openings.
11:11:47 15
I just want to clarify with you.
That's in relation to
He said by you but by your PR company who were acting for
UCI; am I correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 74
I just want to clarify.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 75
But he was merely an attendee like many others that you invited?
A.
That's language.
Q. 76
Much obliged, Mr. Dunlop.
11:11:57 20
21
He didn't go with you?
You're absolutely correct, yes.
22 23
Thank you Chairman
24 11:12:04 25
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
Who is next?
26 27
MR SANFEY: I think that means I'm up, Mr. Chairman.
28 29
Mr. Dunlop, my name is Mr. Sanfey.
11:12:16 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:12:16
11:12:24
23 1
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. SANFEY AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
Q. 77
Just so as you are clear.
I represent Monarch Properties Limited and all of
4
the various Monarch companies.
Richard Lynn, Paul Monahan, Dominic Glennane,
5
Noel Murray, Phil Reilly and the Estate of Mr. Philip Monahan.
6
A.
Grand.
7
Q. 78
Chairman, before I begin my cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop.
8
Can I just say
one thing.
9 11:12:35 10
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
11
MR SANFEY: Much of Dunlop's evidence concerned Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
I think,
12
in fact it would be fair to say that many of the remarks, of which we would be
13
most concerned, concerned Mr. Sweeney rather than other Monarch people.
14 11:12:50 15
Mr. Sweeney is a director of Monarch.
But as you are aware, Mr. Chairman, he
16
is separately represented by Messrs. William Fry and Mr. Bill Shipsey in
17
particular.
18 19 11:13:07 20
Because of that, I obviously have had no opportunity to speak to Mr. Sweeney, nor would it be proper for me to do so.
He has his own representation.
21 22
I just wanted to say two things really.
23
matters which in Mr. Dunlop's evidence which pertain solely to Mr. Sweeney.
24
would just like to point out that no adverse inference should be drawn by
11:13:29 25
26
Monarch by my failure to do that.
To the extent that I do not deal with I
Mr. Shipsey, obviously, is going to take up
anything that deals with Mr. Sweeney.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
course of cross-examination or on behalf of Mr. Sweeney by his own counsel that
11:13:47 30
Yes.
That's a fair enough point.
If something arises in the
you feel you, as, insofar as it might effect the interests of your clients, who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:13:52
11:14:11
24 1
do not include Mr. Sweeney, then you will have an opportunity to further
2
cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
4
Uh-huh.
Hopefully, briefly.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
That was my second point.
I would just
like to reserve my position in the event that anything came up.
5 6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: Q. 79
9
MR SANFEY: Mr. Dunlop, can I also start with the meeting of the 27th of May at the council.
11:14:22 10
All right.
This was the motion to approve the County Manager's proposals.
The one that was defeated by 35 votes to 33.
11 12
And I think Mr. Humphreys has also referred to some of the evidence that you
13
gave the last day and I think you'll agree that was it was somewhat
14
contradictory?
11:14:34 15
16
A.
In what way?
Q. 80
Well, I'll take you through it now.
I think you did accept when Mr. Humphreys
17
put it to you that was there was a contradiction and you weren't sure whether
18
you had --
19 11:14:48 20
A.
I beg your pardon, Mr. Sanfey, yes.
Q. 81
Perhaps could we just look at a portion of the transcript.
21
It's day 654.
It's last Thursday and I'm looking for page 3 of that.
22 23 24
Now, at question 14. A.
Question 14? Yeah.
Q. 82
Perhaps I'll read it out just for ease of reference, Mr. Dunlop?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 83
Mr. Murphy asked you was "Mr. Lynn in the chambers all of the day or in the
11:15:14 25
28
environs all of the day or in and out?" And the answer was.
29
A: That I can't attest to because for one simple reason and I'm subject to
11:15:29 30
correction on this, I think the public gallery on that particular chamber Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:15:33
11:15:51
25 1
format, as it existed then, I think at maximum held ten people and the press
2
gallery which is right beside it inside the door can facilitate at a maximum 6
3
or 7 people.
4
my experience, on occasion, it was necessary to be the chamber.
5
Q: Yes
6
A:
7
place, you sat there and you didn't come out because if you came out you
8
couldn't get back in.
9
Q:
11:16:04 10
So if you wanted to be in the chamber, and I can only give you
And if you wanted to be in the chamber You got in there.
I see.
You took your
You would know if he was stuck in the chamber for the whole day
or stuck in and around the chamber for the whole day or whether he was ...
11
A:
The only way I can answer that, Mr. Murphy, is that if I had a motion of
12
enormous importance going through council, that I was controlling or attempting
13
to control, I would be in the chamber."
14 11:16:18 15
Could I ask you few questions about that, Mr. Dunlop.
16
Your engagement by
Monarch didn't come until the following March; isn't that correct?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 84
And your general experience as you relate there is that -- just stop me if I'm
19
not paraphrasing this correctly.
11:16:42 20
chamber.
21
There was very little space in the council
You had to get in early.
And by and large if you lost your seat
you did so at peril of not being able to get back in?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 85
And when Mr. Murphy was asking you whether Mr. Lynn was stuck in the chamber.
24
I take it that you couldn't answer that because the answer that you gave was to
11:16:59 25
say the only way I can answer that is that if I had a motion of enormous
26
importance going through the council that I was controlling or attempting to
27
control I would be in the chamber?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 86
Do I infer that that you certainly can't say that you saw Mr Lynn in the
11:17:14 30
chamber all day but your estimation is that he certainly would be there because Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:17:17
11:17:30
26 1
it was of enormous importance to you?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 87
Now, in cross examining Mr. O'Herlihy I put Mr. Lynn's position to
4
Mr. O'Herlihy, which was that for that very reason he was in the chamber all
5
day and he gave the very reasons that you instance there in relation to the
6
restricted space and the desirability of not leaving the chamber, the
7
importance of it and so on.
8
A.
No, it doesn't.
9
Q. 88
All right.
11:17:52 10
I take it that comes as no surprise to you?
Now, can I just move on two pages in that transcript.
At
number -- page No. 6.
11 12
The Chairman intervened in view of what appeared to be a somewhat contradictory
13
position you'd taken, Mr. Dunlop.
14
Chairman, sorry just before because this is important.
11:18:12 15
And once again I'll just read it out. Are you saying, Mr.
Dunlop, that you recollect this occurring on this occasion, the occasion of
16
this particular motion?
17
A:
18
the melee that took place in the chamber and outside
In the circumstances that obtained that day, yes, with the confusion in
19 11:18:32 20
CHAIRMAN:
21 22
Are you saying that on that you did of that occasion see Mr. Lydon
being signaled to by Mr. Lynn to come out? A.
Yes.
23 24 11:18:36 25
CHAIRMAN: A:
So you do recollect it?
I do recollect it, yes".
26 27
Now, Mr. Humphreys has already examined you in relation to who beckoned who and
28
so on.
29
way the chamber was configured Senator Lydon was facing front so it would have
11:18:54 30
Mr. Lynn concurs with Mr. Senator Lydon's version.
Because of the
had to have been him who turned around and beckoned to Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
In any
11:18:59
11:19:17
27 1
event, Mr. Lynn will say that he was motioned out by Mr. Lydon who told Mr.
2
Lynn that in fact there was no point in going ahead with Mr. Lydon's own motion
3
because it wouldn't you succeed given the way the Manager's motion had gone on.
4
Can I put it to you Mr Dunlop, that you did see them conferring as such?
5
A.
Communicating, yes.
6
Q. 89
And you do have that recollection?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 90
You are clear about that.
9 11:19:27 10
11
evidence initially. A.
Yes.
Q. 91
All right.
Whatever contradiction there may have been in your
That's your firm position now?
12 13
Could we have a look at page 589 of the brief.
14 11:19:48 15
You are being asked about various occasions in the council chamber I think.
16
And just at the end of page 588 you're asked "were you present on those
17
occasions?" and the answer is "I would have been present, yes"
18
A.
Sorry, Mr. Sanfey.
19
Q. 92
I'm just looking at the last line?
A.
Yes, I have you yes.
Q. 93
An introduction.
11:20:08 20
21
Where are you? What question are you on?
22
A:
23
Q: Was Mr. Lynn present?
24
A:
11:20:21 25
I would have been present, yes
Always.
Always present.
Not Phil Reilly but not always but Richard
Lynn always."
26 27 28 29 11:20:40 30
Can I ask you what you meant by that? Mr. Lynn always being present? A.
Always being present.
In relation to the Monarch proposals, in relation to
the Cherrywood development, Mr. Lynn was the lead man on behalf of the company. And was in evidence in the -- in the environs of the council, the council lobby Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:20:46
11:21:08
28 1
and the chamber as often as I was in the context of any time I was there
2
because I had other matters to deal with in relation to lobbying councillors.
3
But that's what I meant.
4
proposal was coming forward on any given day, as per an agenda, the -- it would
5
be surprising if Richard wasn't there.
6
Q. 94
He would have been present -- if the Monarch
Can I take it from the evidence that you gave the other day, that you would
7
also find it surprising if Mr. Lynn absented himself from any portion of such a
8
meeting dealing with the Cherrywood proposals?
9
A.
11:21:27 10
11
Yes, I would.
And in the context of the -- the configuration of the room, in
which the meeting was taking place and the configuration of the council itself. Q. 95
Yes.
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
12 13
Now, can I have a look at page 425 of the brief, please.
14 11:21:38 15
Now, do you have that, Mr. Dunlop?
16
A.
Yes, yep.
17
Q. 96
In the second paragraph thereabouts, five or six lines from the end "neither
18
Messrs Lynn nor Reilly ever discussed with me any payments to any specific
19
councillor nor party with regard to Monarch's proposal.
11:22:12 20
21
You've said something similar in your private interviews and evidence in the
22
last few days.
I take it that you stand over that now?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 97
Can I have a look at page 561 of the brief, please.
11:22:23 25
26
Just once again I'd like to give you an opportunity to comment on this, Mr.
27
Dunlop?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 98
There is a reference to Mr. Lynn taking a call in John of God's about a motion.
11:22:50 30
And then Mr. Gallagher said "sorry did you believe that or did you have any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:22:54
11:23:07
29 1
knowledge of whether or not Richard Lynn was paying any monies."
2
A:
3
present and I never saw any transactions taking place".
I had no knowledge.
I definitely have no knowledge because I was never
4 5
I take it that you stand over that?
6
A.
Yes, I do.
7
Q. 99
If we could have a look at the last day's evidence.
It's day 654.
Page 157.
8 9
Question 1028.
11:23:39 10
11
In fact, I can read it out.
I don't intend to refer to this at length.
12 13 14 11:23:56 15
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
A.
Yes, I have it, Mr. Sanfey, yeah.
Q. 100
You were talking about councillors being facilitated and Mr. Murphy asked you
16
who is an alleged facilitator?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 101
I think this may be in fact from ...?
19
A.
This is the private interview.
Q. 102
Private interview, yes.
11:24:10 20
At 1027 it says "isn't that right.
21
A:
He is the facilitator to Monarch and councillors
22
Q:
Facilitator means paying money doesn't it?
23
A:
I have, well I have no and I don't think I'm saying there, I have no
24
evidence ever or that Mr. Lynn gave money to councillors"
11:24:30 25
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 103
And you stand over that as well?
27
A.
Yes.
When I say "yes" I mean I'm agreeing with what I said previously, in
28
case there is any misunderstanding, Mr. Sanfey.
29
evidence.
11:24:58 30
Q. 104
At page 582 of the brief.
I have no such knowledge or
There is a question in relation to Mr. Lynn.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
"Do
11:25:07
11:25:20
30 1
you believe or did he tell you that he had actually given money to Don Lydon?
2
A:
No.
He never said that he had actually given money to Don Lydon."
.
3 4
And that would appear to be consistent with your evidence in the last few days
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 105
Richard Lynn, as far as you are aware, never gave money to Don Lydon?
7
A.
Richard Lynn -- never told me that he had received money from Richard Lynn.
8
Q. 106
All right.
9
Now, once again, if I could look at the transcript for day 654.
Towards the end.
It's page 158.
11:25:41 10
11 12
A.
13 14 11:26:10 15
16
What's the question? What number question and I might be able to get it I quicker, Mr. Sanfey.
Q. 107
It's question 1031?
A.
Yes, I have it.
Q. 108
Just the three questions there.
Now just "you're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn
17
facilitated Mr. Lydon:
18
A: With money is that what you're asking me, is that what the core of this
19
question is, is that what you're asking me?
11:26:23 20
Q:
Is that your answer.
You're not suggesting Mr. Lynn facilitated
21
Mr. Lydon with money.
22
A:
23
Q: so what did you mean when you said you had no doubt that Richard Lynn was
24
facilitating both certainly Lydon, certainly no doubt about this?
11:26:40 25
A:
I have no evidence that Mr. Lynn ever gave money to Mr. Lydon
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon had a close relationship as is obvious if you look
26
at the record of Dublin County Council and what Senator Lydon did or tried to
27
do.
28
the last three days,
29
Q: Has it been three days, yes?
11:26:55 30
To infer further from that, as I have said on a variety of occasions on
A: During the course of the last three days that was a close relationship Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:26:59
11:27:10
31 1
between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
After the meeting with Mr. Lynn and
2
Mr. Lydon, it was agreed that it would continue to have that close
3
relationship.
What went on between them, I don't know."
4 5
Q. 109
Am I right in inferring, Mr. Dunlop, that what you were saying was that as a
6
result of the initial strategy meeting it was agreed that because Mr. Lynn was
7
the one who had been dealing with Mr. Lydon, that he should continue to do so
8
but you say what went on between them I don't know
9 11:27:28 10
A.
Correct.
Q. 110
And there's certainly no suggestion in your evidence that money changed hands
11
between them?
12
A.
And I never made any such imputation, directly or otherwise.
13
Q. 111
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
14 11:27:39 15
Now, as I understand your evidence, Mr. Dunlop.
You are fairly clear that
16
nobody on the Monarch side ever said to you or made a specific reference to you
17
paying money to councillors or that money had been paid by Monarch people to
18
councillors.
19
A.
11:28:12 20
I'm talking about a specific reference?
When you say specific reference.
Do you mean the word "payment, money and
councillors" all in the one sentence?
21
Q. 112
Yes.
22
A.
No is the answer.
23
Q. 113
Could we have a look at page 565, please.
26
A.
Day, Mr. Sanfey? Which day? Oh, yes.
27
Q. 114
Private interview, Mr. Dunlop?
28
A.
Oh, yes.
29
Q. 115
Now, yes.
24 11:28:21 25
11:28:47 30
You do, however, attribute a number of remarks to Mr. Lynn from
which you drew certain inferences? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:28:50
11:28:57
32 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 116
I'd like to deal with those now, if I may.
3 4
At question 82 on page 565.
5 6
The question was and this is Mr. Hanratty.
7
Richard Lynn when you were being brought in to clean-up the mess as to what he
8
had done with regard to looking after the councillors up to that point in time?
9
A:
11:29:16 10
"Well, what were you told by
In relation to specific people, nothing."
And that's consistent with
everything you've said to date
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 117
" in general, that a phrase "when you think of the amount of money that is
13
being spent you think that these idiots would get their act together"
14
Q: well were you given any information as to how much money they had spent up
11:29:34 15
to that point.
16
A:
17
understand that to mean that Monarch or somebody on behalf of Monarch had paid
18
substantial monies to councillors to achieve whatever rezoning Monarch was
19
seeking to achieve?
11:29:45 20
A:
None at all" And then Mr. Gallagher intervened and said "did you
My interpretation of the phrase that was used, that I have just used, was
21
my personal interpretation of it.
22
Monahan, notwithstanding the widespread anecdotal about Phil carrying large
23
bundles of cash in the boot of his Mercedes for distribution".
24
talk to Mr. Monahan in that regard.
11:30:12 25
sentence.
26 27
I never saw Lynn, Sweeney, Murray, Phil
You go on to
If I may say so, you never finished that
Notwithstanding the widespread anecdotal stories etc..
You never
saw Lynn, Sweeney, Phil Murphy doing what A.
You were present at those private meetings.
You wouldn't be surprised at some
28
of the sentences not being concluded either, Mr. Sanfey. Sorry, that's just a
29
passing remark.
11:30:31 30
In the context of the question that is being asked of me and
in the answer that I am giving is that I never saw any of those named Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:30:34
11:30:46
33 1 2
individuals giving money to councillors for politicians. Q. 118
All right.
Thank you.
3 4
Now, when Mr. Gallagher presses you about the remark that you allege that Mr.
5
Lynn made ....
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 119
You say "my interpretation of the phrase that was used that I just used was my
8 9
personal interpretation of it"? A.
Correct.
Q. 120
So that's the inference that you drew from that remark?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 121
All right.
11:30:55 10
13 14
Mr. Lynn will say that he did not say this.
11:31:11 15
And with the greatest of respect Mr. Dunlop, he most certainly wouldn't have
16 17
That he wouldn't have said it.
said it to you. A.
I have to put that to you.
What do you have to say to that?
Why wouldn't he say it to me above anybody -- over and above anybody else? If
18
Mr. Lynn -- there are certain phrases -- there are certain thing that people
19
say to you from time to time that stick in your mind.
11:31:37 20
I can understand Mr.
Lynn saying, using the remark in the context of the amounts of money that
21
Monarch, as we now know, spent in relation to the whole project, the whole --
22
the process, the buying of the land and giving contributions to political
23
parties and politicians.
24
it and I do not, by any means, mean to impute anything of a derogatory nature
11:32:08 25
to Mr. Lynn.
26 27
But I have given you my personal interpretation of
I was being asked what I recollected about my relationship with
various people from Monarch. Q. 122
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
That's most helpful.
28 29
In general in relation to Mr. Lynn.
He will say that he really didn't have
11:32:27 30
very much contact with you at all.
And I'll tell you what he will say about
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:32:31
11:32:44
34 1
his contacts with you.
2 3
You implied, I think, in your evidence that there had been contact between
4
yourself on the one hand and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly prior to your engagement
5
in March '93 when you would bump into each other at the council meetings.
6
you seemed to imply that you would perhaps swap war stories or swap ideas on
7
strategy about your respective motions.
Did I understand that correctly?
8
A.
Yes, in broad brush terms, in general terms, yes, that is correct, yes.
9
Q. 123
Yes.
Well just two points about that.
And
Mr. Lynn will say that certainly as
11:33:09 10
anybody who had been around the council offices at that time would have done,
11
he certainly would have bumped into you from time to time and had words with
12
you?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 124
But he has no recollection of any chats about strategy or anything substantial
11:33:20 15
in that regard?
16
A.
Prior to my being engaged?
17
Q. 125
Prior to your being engaged.
18
A.
So that we're not misunderstanding one another.
19 11:33:37 20
Would you agree with his recollection of that? What I said it Mr. Murphy,
and the record can, the transcript can show it if necessary.
Is that because
we both had contact with councillors during the course of the Development Plan,
21
and the coincidence of those contacts, motions and lobby exercises, yes, I
22
would have met Richard and Phil Reilly and yes, we would have sat down over a
23
cup of coffee or a drink in one of the local hotels or pubs, because that's
24
where most of the councillors relaxed, and, but to suggest that we would have
11:34:07 25
had detailed strategy conversations in relation to what Monarch was doing, no,
26
we would have conversations about the course of the Development Plan, what was
27
happening, how difficult it was to get things moving or to keep things going.
28
All of those in general broad brush terms.
29
never specifically sat me down and said Frank, we seek your advice in relation
11:34:34 30
to the strategy we're following.
But not -- Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly
On the other side of the coin, I never
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:34:45
11:35:00
35 1
contacted Richard or Phil and said listen, boys, I want to contact you and
2
advise you about your strategy, it's good, bad are or otherwise.
3
have been interaction between you us and others who would have been there at
4
the time.
5
Q. 126
There would
Mr. Dunlop, one thing that's slightly puzzled the person whom I represent about
6
your evidence.
7
Lynn in together.
8
involved than Mr. Lynn.
9
meeting you, certainly in the council offices, or discussing the matter with
11:35:25 10
Is that you appeared to more or less lump Mr. Reilly and Mr. Although you did expressly concede that Mr. Reilly was less Mr. Reilly will say that he has no recollection of
you prior to March 1993 at all.
And he will say that his involvement in the
11
project was limited to involvement in some of the road shows and in particular
12
bringing people to see the Tallaght development, because, as I think you are
13
aware, Tallaght was his particular ...
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 127
As it were?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 128
So certainly Mr. Reilly is a bit perplexed at the notion that he would have met
11:35:43 15
18 19
you or discussed the thing at all prior to March 1993? A.
11:36:00 20
Let me put it the other way in answer to that and without implying or imputing anything other than what I recollect.
And that is the first time I ever met
21
Mr. Reilly was in Dublin County Council.
22
Phil Reilly prior to that time but in Dublin County Council.
23
first met him.
24
Q. 129
11:36:25 25
Yes.
I don't ever recollect having met That's where I
You would accept I think that Mr. Reilly was at the time the centre
Manager for The Square in Tallaght.
And that you he had no involvement with
26
the Cherrywood project other than to do some ad hoc campaign work on it, as it
27
were?
28 29 11:36:46 30
A.
Well I can tell you what I know now as distinct from what I knew then.
What
I'm saying to you is I first met him in those particular environs in the context of Monarch's proposals.
What he then was or and what his role was I
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:36:52
11:37:09
36 1
subsequently -- I know from a variety of comments, statements that have been
2
made for the brief.
3
Q. 130
4 5
Would you at least agree with me to this extent, Mr. Dunlop, that Mr. Reilly was somebody who was very much less involved than Mr. Lynn?
A.
Oh, I accept that, yes.
And I think I have indicated that on a number of
6
occasions, including in the private interviews. I think in the one that you've
7
just shown I just said to a lesser extent Mr. Reilly.
8
Q. 131
9
One might have inferred
from your evidence that it was Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly as a sort of double act
11:37:31 10
11
I'm glad to have you acknowledge that, Mr. Dunlop.
almost? A.
Well, certainly -- let's not back ourselves into a cul-de-sac here.
Certainly
12
in the course of my direct involvement with Monarch, as per March, from March
13
1993.
14
not always.
11:37:51 15
Q. 132
16
Yes.
Certainly Mr. Reilly was present with Mr. Lynn.
But as I keep saying,
Mr. Lynn recalls one meeting in Harcourt Street where he met you.
And
two meetings in your office?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 133
And as far as Mr. Lynn can recall, they are the only actual meetings that he
19 11:38:04 20
had with you? A.
Yes.
I think Mr. Lynn is right in the context of one meeting in Harcourt
21
Street.
22
diaried by me with either Richard or Richard and Philip together.
23
ease of progress, I would say that Richard is right in the context of the one
24
meeting in Harcourt Street.
11:38:34 25
Q. 134
I um, I -- I believe he's right in that.
There were other meetings But for
But I think Mr. Lynn's point would be that to a large extent he had very little
26
to do with you.
27
It wasn't a question that you were conferring weekly or fortnightly or evening
28
monthly in relation to the matter.?
29 11:38:55 30
A.
That you were doing your thing.
He was doing his thing.
No, I think that would be a wrong inference Mr. Sanfey. there was a lot of contact between us.
I think they were --
After all, we were on the same ship.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:39:01
11:39:22
37 1
We were um, as the famous phrase in the Godfather films as you know 'all our
2
ships must sail in the one direction'. And we were all going in the one
3
direction.
4
for anybody to suggest that we weren't having contact with one another.
5
would we know that we weren't countermanding what other people were doing?
6
Q. 135
We all had the same objective.
And it would have been ludicrous
Well that brings us back to a point that I think the Chairman alluded to at one
7
point.
8
openly about making contributions to anyone?
9 11:39:46 10
How
You are steadfast in saying that none of the Monarch people ever spoke
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 136
And yet you say that you were working together and effectively strategising
11
together to make sure that presumably the division of labour was appropriate
12
and so on?
13
A.
Yes.
I think we, maybe strategise is a grandiose word.
But certainly we
14
were consulting with one another and telling one another, you know, on a
11:40:02 15
regular basis as to what was happening or not happening in our particular
16 17
sphere. Q. 137
Well, if Monarch were aware that you were paying money to councillors, would
18
they not have referred to that fact in the numerous strategy meetings, whatever
19
it is, whatever you wanted to call it, meetings that you had?
11:40:17 20
A.
21
Well certainly I wouldn't have expected them to refer to it or allude to it and they never did.
22
Q. 138
But why not?
23
A.
Well why would they? Sorry, I don't mean to be asking you a question,
24 11:40:35 25
Mr. Sanfey. Q. 139
26
But the fact of the matter is that they didn't.
You were brought in.
Your sense of it is that Monarch, if I could use the
term for the entity, the collective term?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 140
Knew that you were paying money to councillors but it was never preferred to in
29 11:40:53 30
all of the meetings that you had with them? A.
No, no.
Sorry, Mr. Sanfey.
What I said in relation to -- and I bear in mind
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:40:58
11:41:16
38 1
the remarks that you made to the Chairman at the outset.
2
want to be careful. I made a remark.
3
specific remark or a specific conversation that took place between myself and
4
another representative of Monarch that you are not representing.
5
Q. 141
Mr. Sweeney?
6
A.
Yes.
And therefore I just
I made a statement in relation to a
No other representative of Monarch either directly or indirectly,
7
referred to or alluded to payments to politicians of any sort other than the
8
comment that I attribute to Mr. Lynn about you think the amount of money that's
9
being spent, you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
11:41:41 10
absolute clarity.
For
Any of the people that I dealt with, Richard Lynn, Phil
11
Reilly, and to a far lesser extent on the odd occasion that I met other people
12
in representing Monarch that you represent, no such references or illusions
13
were made, either by them or me.
14
Q. 142
Very good.
Thank you.
11:41:59 15
16
Could we have a look at page 575 of the brief, please.
17 18
Yes.
In fact, the top of page 576.
19 11:42:25 20
21
Q. 143
Now, you say there "Eddie Sweeney told me that disbursements had already been
22
made and you asked me specifically about Richard Lynn.
And Richard Lynn did
23
tell me that disbursements had already been made, did not specific but lots of
24
money had been spread around".
11:42:49 25
26
Can I take it from the evidence that you have given once again this morning,
27
that was not said specifically
28
A.
29 11:43:01 30
No, no, it was not said specifically in relation to disbursements or payments to politicians for their vote.
Q. 144
Yes.
Well did he say it or not say it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:43:06
11:43:20
39 1
A.
Mr. Lynn?
2
Q. 145
Yes.?
3
A.
Yeah, Mr. Lynn in the context of the -- of the whatever, what I'm saying to the
4
Tribunal in that private session that -- in the comment that I made to you
5
already.
6
you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
7
Q. 146
8 9
So when you say Richard Lynn did tell me that disbursements had already been made.
A.
11:43:43 10
When you think of the amount of money that's being spread around
Yeah.
You're referring to the inference that you drew from the idiots remark? I'm not -- I'm not -- and I accept that it seems -- it's likely
infelicitous language.
I'm not suggesting, I am not saying that Mr. Lynn told
11
me ever in specific terms or in general terms or ever, that any individual or
12
collective group of politicians were paid monies before -- for the purposes of
13
their vote.
14
Q. 147
Right.
Now, if --
11:44:01 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
there was a period at which, for example, I remember a conversation in which he
18
said, presumably that's Mr. Lynn, he said "people have just got too greedy and
19
we cannot meet it any more".
11:44:20 20
A.
Well if you look, Mr. Dunlop, at the next paragraph.
You say
What was that a reference to?
Well I think that was a reference in -- along the lines of the comment that Mr.
21
Lynn had already made in relation to the amount of money that's being spent
22
that you'd think these idiots would get their act together.
23 24
I mean, it's my interpretation of the comments.
11:44:42 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
reference to being "too greedy"?
28
A.
But, I mean, that's -- but is that not saying -- I mean.
The
Yeah.
29 11:44:58 30
CHAIRMAN:
Would suggest that the money being spread around was not by way of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:44:58
11:45:09
40 1 2
political donation. A.
Well, I .... it may well be capable of interpretation.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
I mean, it was -- you were saying there that Mr. Lynn had commented or made
6
comments to you to the effect that these people were having to be paid and that
7
they were looking for too much money and that they were too greedy.
8
A.
Isn't that what -- but isn't that obvious from what you say there?
Yeah.
9 11:45:23 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Well, now are you saying now that that was only a reference to him
making political donations? A.
I'm saying -- I cannot say specifically to you that it is directly in relation
13
to political donations or in relation to disbursements.
14
you that it is a comment along the lines of various conversations that I have
11:45:43 15
I am just saying to
had and given evidence in relation to with Mr. Lynn vis-a-vis politicians.
I
16
did not know then whether -- I did have my suspicion, whether Monarch had given
17
monies to politicians legitimately or otherwise.
18
statement, the statement in the brief, in the context of what was paid by
19
Monarch to politicians.
I now know from the brief
11:46:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
he said people have just got too greedy and cannot -- and we cannot meet it any
23
more".
24
A.
What did you mean when you say "I remember a conversation in which
You were attributing this comment to Mr. Lynn?
Yes.
11:46:26 25
26
MR. HUMPHREYS:
27
representing Mr. Dunlop insisted that Mr. Dunlop specify exactly what was said,
28
not just the essence of what was said.
29
Dunlop said exactly what was said was "people are getting very greedy".
11:46:45 30
Chairman, in fairness, if you read on.
Mr. Colm Alan who was
Being put on the spot like that Mr.
think there is a difference between that and what comes in the previous Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
I
11:46:49
11:46:58
41 1 2
paragraph. A.
Uh-huh.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well "too greedy" and" very greedy" is the difference.
Q. 148
6 7
MR. HUMPHREYS:
8
I assume he is plumping for people are getting very greedy.
9
proffered as a possible inference, as an alternative to his own inference, the
11:47:11 10
Well, I'd like Mr. Dunlop to address what he actually said. And he has
possibility that that referred to political donations as opposed to bribes as
11
such.
I take it I understand that correctly, Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 149
All right.
Mr. Lynn will deny that that remark was made anyway.
14 11:47:26 15
In fact, in relation to that.
He -- you referred to there being regular
16
meetings in the Royal Dublin or Conways.
17
the Royal Dublin or Conways.
18
Just the one I referred you to in Harcourt Street and the two in your office
19
A.
11:47:51 20
21
Just Mr. Lynn has no recollection in
Just the meetings that I have referred you to.
By that am I to infer that myself and Mr. Lynn never met each other in the Royal Dublin or Conways, even casually?
Q. 150
22
No. What he is saying is that there were not not regular meetings in the Royal Dublin or Conways.?
23
A.
I see.
24
Q. 151
You disagree with that?
A.
I'm just saying to you that whether you call them regular, irregular, frequent,
11:48:02 25
26
or whatever, the -- apart from the meeting in Harcourt Street, of which I agree
27
with Mr. Lynn, and apart from the meeting that were either in my office, or
28
elsewhere, that the only other place that I ever met Richard Lynn was in the
29
environs of Dublin County Council, which I've always loosely described as being
11:48:28 30
in the lobby of the chamber -- the lobby of the building or the Royal Dublin or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:48:32
11:48:43
42 1 2
Conways. Q. 152
All right.
Perhaps nothing turns on it.
3 4
Can I direct you to the transcript of day 645.
5
Thursday.
Page 71.
That's last
6 7 8
A.
That's the private session.
9
Q. 153
No you have it on your screen there, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 154
Question 474?
12
A.
Yep.
13
Q. 155
You were being asked about -- in fact.
11:49:15 10
14
Do you see it?
Which question?
If you go back to question 470 it says
did Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever tell you directly or indirectly that expressly
11:49:33 15
or implicitly that they paid money to councillors and you said no.
16
Once
again, that's in line with your evidence to date.
17 18
Now, if you move on at question 474.
19
comment that was made to me by Mr. Lynn was, "you know, these are costing so
11:49:50 20
Your answer to a question is another
much"
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 156
Now, is this a new comment separate to the idiots comment or the greedy
23
comment, if I could term them that or are you sort of rolling your
24
recollection into one?
11:50:11 25
A.
No, I'm just looking at the lead up to that question, Mr. Sanfey.
26
Q. 157
Take your time, Mr. Dunlop.?
27
A.
No, I -- what I -- what I am trying to do in reply to Mr. Murphy is to give a
28
sense of the conversation.
29
Mr. Lynn in which remarks, such as this, were made.
11:50:45 30
Sorry.
A number of the conversations that I've had with I cannot absolutely say
to you that it is the same comment or at the same day or at the same time in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:50:51
11:51:07
43 1
relation to when you consider how much money is being spent you'd think these
2
idiots would consider getting their act together.
3
Q. 158
Do you have a recollection?
4
A.
I'm -- I'm -- I'm virtually certain that these were separate occasions.
5
They
were separate comments.
6
Q. 159
Three separate comments?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 160
So there was the idiots remark, the people are getting very greedy remark?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 161
And then there was these people are costing us so much?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 162
Now, you gave a private interview in May 2000, Mr. Dunlop.
11:51:16 10
13
statement in October 2000.
14
2003.
11:51:33 15
here?
And you made a
And then you made a statement again in September
And I assume you have prepared very carefully for giving your evidence
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 163
Would that be fair enough? Now, what I'm wondering is why there is now a third
18
remark added to the two remarks which we knew about from September 2003
19
onwards.
11:51:50 20
21
last Thursday? A.
22 23
26 27
Um, I just can't answer that question, to be honest with you, Mr. Sanfey. Other than to say that is as I recall matters.
Q. 164
24 11:52:08 25
Why has this "these are costing so much" remark only surfaced now,
In your private interview you were repeatedly questioned by Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty about Mr. Lynn and the payment of councillors?
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 165
In fact, if we go through the private interview.
They led you back to that
topic again and again, I think it's fair to say.
28 29 11:52:23 30
Now, why did that -- this remark, not occur to you then? Why did you not reproduce it then eight years after the events, well seven years after the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:52:26
11:52:40
44 1
events you describe, as opposed to 13 years, at which point we are at now
2
A.
That I can't account for.
3
Q. 166
Are you making it up as you go along?
4
A.
I don't think so.
5 6
I think I'm being very helpful to your client, as you
indicated. Q. 167
7
There certainly are measures of agreement between yourself and my clients and Mr. Dunlop.?
8
A.
A lot of agreement between your client and myself.
9
Q. 168
They are perturbed to hear a remark being made for the first time last Thursday
11:52:54 10
which they utterly deny making.
11
Or Mr. Lynn utterly denies making and which
emerged for the first time 13 years after the events described?
12
A.
I see.
13
Q. 169
Do you have any recollection of the circumstances in which this was made?
14
A.
No.
11:53:13 15
Other than in the context that I have outlined to you earlier on in
relation to the meetings with Mr. Lynn in the context of Dublin County Council.
16
And comments in relation to what was and was not happening in relation to the
17
particular project.
18
Q. 170
Is it possible that you are confusing it with the other two remarks?
19
A.
Yes --
Q. 171
Or is it a general remark --
A.
I wouldn't for one second Mr. Sanfey, deny that.
11:53:28 20
21
It is -- it is possible.
22
And as we know, lots of things are possible, as we proceeded through this
23
Tribunal in this room over the years.
24
possible.
11:53:46 25
Q. 172
All right.
Yes, it is quite conceivable and
Thank you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
28
MR SANFEY: Yes.
Mr. Sanfey, I'm going to break for ten minutes.
29 11:53:51 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
11:54:03
12:11:01
45 1 2
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5 6 7
MR. HUMPHREYS: Q. 173
8
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
Before I go on with this.
I would just like to address
something that was said just before the break.
9 12:11:08 10
I think there may have been an unfortunate reference to, on my part, to a
11
measure of agreement between my client and yours.
12
Tribunal and everybody understands that, that that is a reference purely to
13
matters that I've put to you in evidence.
14
with what I've been putting to you.
12:11:36 15
16
I'm sure the members of the
And with which, where you've agreed
I take it that you accept that.
There
is no suggestion of and agreement between yourselves. A.
No, I fully understand what you are saying, Mr. Sanfey.
That I think I've
17
already given evidence to the fact that I have not met Richard Lynn for many
18
years.
19 12:11:57 20
Q. 174
You've had no contact?
A.
The first time I saw him in a long time was when I walked in here last Tuesday
21 22
morning. Q. 175
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
23 24
I wonder could I have day 654.
At page 71.
12:12:00 25
26
Oh, I'm terribly sorry.
It's question 480.
It's page 71.
27 28
You were talking about, um, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Murphy asked you, at question 480,
29
he said,
12:12:31 30
"Q: And so you took that understanding from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:12:35
12:12:44
46 1
A:
Mr. Lynn is the only person's name I've mentioned so far.
2
Q:
I beg your pardon.
3
A:
Yes.
4
Q:
You didn't get that understanding from Mr. Reilly?
5
A: No I did not.
6
Q:
How is he different?
7
A:
I don't -- he never a comment like that to me.
8
Q:
All right.
9
A:
But I have --
12:12:54 10
From Mr. Lynn?
Q: Would Mr. Lynn have made the comment in Mr. Reilly's presence?
11
And your answer to that I think is "no".
12 13 14 12:13:08 15
This is the alleged comment about -A.
Oh, yes, sorry.
Q. 176
Can I infer from that, that Mr. Reilly certainly never said anything about
16
Agreed, yes.
payments to Councillors whatsoever?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 177
Or --
19
A.
Sorry, you can infer.
Q. 178
I can infer?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 179
Or that there was nothing that could be construed by you as to referring to
12:13:21 20
23 24 12:13:30 25
I beg your pardon.
that? A.
Yes, correct.
Q. 180
I think I've already said to you, Mr. Dunlop, but I'll say it again.
26
Mr. Reilly will say that he is the head person in The Square in Tallaght, he is
27
the Centre Manager?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 181
And his involvement with this project, Mr. Reilly, would term as fairly
12:13:46 30
minimal, limited to participation in the various road shows in Mr. O'Herlihy's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:13:50
12:14:05
47 1
campaign and canvassing some of the Councillors he knew personally coming up to
2
the November '93 vote.
3
A.
Would you accept that?
Yes. Certainly I don't know anything about the road show.
But certainly I
4
would agree in relation to his personal relationship with a small number of
5
Councillors.
6
Q. 182
Yes.
7
A.
Correct, yes.
8
Q. 183
Who is Fine Gael?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 184
And through Councillor Ridge he knows some of the colleagues that Ms. Ridge
12:14:12 10
11
In particular, he is friends with Councillor Therese Ridge?
associates with and so on?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 185
Mr. Reilly will say that that was all he undertook to do.
14
connections.
12:14:29 15
He has no Fine Gael
He's never been a member of the Fine Gael Party.
And that all
he undertook to do was to speak to the Fine Gael Councillors that he knew
16
through Ms. Ridge.
17
A.
Fine.
18
Q. 186
Could I have a look at Day 653, please.
Page 84.
19 12:14:46 20
You see question 519, Mr. Dunlop?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 187
Perhaps to just read that.
23 24 12:15:18 25
"Q: So you were brought on then for the second purpose.
The first purpose I
think relates to some difficulty with Mr. Monahan, or something like that.
26
You were brought on then for the second purpose, which is your normal purpose
27
in these matters, to do the lobbying?
28
A:
29
from the descriptive purposes, to add value to what Richard and Philip were
12:15:36 30
I was brought on for the specific purpose to add again, to use a phrase
doing.
I wasn't directly brought on to lobby every councillor, which I did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:15:37
12:15:46
48 1
not do.
2
were doing.
3
Q:
And they had done very well.
4
A:
In my estimation, yes
5
Q: Sorry. When you were brought on.
6
to do with your normal lobbying of councillors.
7
A:
8
Q: And it is well known in March '93 to Councillors and to people in Monarch,
9
that you at that time were paying money to Councillors for their vote" which I
12:16:02 10
But I was brought on to add, to supplement what Richard and Philip
It's not to do with Mr. Monahan, it's
Yes, correct.
think is what is known in our business as a leading question.
11
"A:
Well that is a supposition that you are making.
I don't know. Again,
12
as I have said five minutes ago, I don't know what the extent of that
13
information was of people.
14
relates to Mr. Sweeney".
Certainly the only comment that I can allude to
12:16:22 15
16
Now, can I infer from that, that leaving Mr. Sweeney aside.
17
with Sweeney, as you know.
18
whether Monarch people, other than Mr. Sweeney, were aware that your modus
19
operandi was to pay Councillors?
12:16:40 20
A.
21 22
Can I infer from that, that you simply don't know
First of all, I never knew what a lead question was, and thank you for explaining that to me, Mr. Sanfey.
Q. 188
I'm not dealing
And the answer to your question is yes.
Very good.
23 24
Just bear with me a moment please, Mr. Dunlop.
12:17:21 25
26
A.
No problem.
27
Q. 189
Yes.
Sorry.
28 29
If you could just go on then to question 525, following on from that.
12:17:34 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:17:34
12:17:44
49 1
A.
525.
2
Q. 190
I think once again in your -- your answer to that.
You reiterate that you
3
never had a conversation with Richard Lynn about specific payments to specific
4
politicians?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 191
533.
7 8
Can I just ask you about this.
9 12:17:47 10
11
Mr. Murphy asked you: "You had a significant relationship with councillors, or certainly with a
12
number of councillors; isn't that right?
13
A:
14
Q: That would have been widely known?
12:18:03 15
Yes.
A: Yes, I think I would accept that, yes
16
Q:
Yes.
And you had a special sort of expertise.
17
lobby councillors and you were good at it.
18
A:
19
Q: And you were recognised to be good at it?
Sorry. Your role was to
Would that be fair now?
That's fair, yes.
12:18:16 20
A:
Uh-huh
21
Q:
Yes
22
A: Yes, I would say that.
23
Q: And you were recognised to have been successful?
24
A:
Yes.
12:18:23 25
Q:
At lobbying councillors?
26
A: Yes.
27
Q: And an integral part of that would be paying money.
28
paying the money; isn't that right?
29
A: Yes.
12:18:33 30
Q:
All right.
Not would be but was
And you were brought onto the Monarch team for the purpose of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:18:36
12:18:45
50 1
lobbying councillors?
2
A:
And I don't mean to quibble with you, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q:
Yes.
4
A:
Because I'm as anxious as you to move on.
5
Q:
Yes.
6
A:
But not specifically to add support to what Philip and to Richard and
7
Philip were doing.
8
Q:
Yes?
9
A:
Now, I knew because I had a meeting.
12:19:02 10
I met Philip and Richard and they
outlined to me.
11
Q: Yes?
12
A: In some detail what their concerns were and who were they were talking to
13
and who they weren't talking to.
14
Q:
12:19:13 15
Yes.
But what would adding support to their work mean if it wasn't
meaning you talking to councillors and paying councillors?
16
A:
Well that's a matter for, in the first instance, for them to answer"
17 18
And then you go on to deal with Mr. Sweeney and so on.
19 12:19:23 20
Can I infer that what you are saying here is I was hired to add support, to add
21
value, to use your own phrase, to what Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were doing.
22
And whether they knew that involved paying councillors is something you have to
23
ask them, you don't know?
24 12:19:42 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 192
All right.
Um, for what it's worth, and you may not have a value -- you may
26
not have a view on this.
27
idea that you were paying councillors.
28
lobbiest in local politics, a man with a great reputation for getting things
29
done.
12:20:07 30
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly will say that they had no They will say that you were the top
As far as they were concerned, you coming on board was simply Monarch
getting the heaviest gun available.
But they will say that they didn't know
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:20:12
12:20:23
51 1
that you were paying money to councillors.
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 193
That's probably not something that you'd --
4
A.
Yeah, well that is an expression of an opinion by them.
5 6
examination and cross-examination to say what they believed to be the case. Q. 194
7
Yes.
In the event of the 85,000 pounds you got, only 4,000 pounds, according
to your evidence, was paid to councillors.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 195
Who did you lobby as such, can you recall?
A.
Yes.
12:20:41 10
It's up to them in
11
Is that right?
Well we went down through that with Mr. Murphy on, um, what day was it,
Thursday?
12
Q. 196
Yes.
13
A.
Thursday or Friday.
14
There was some confusion as to what the question was, if
I remember correctly.
12:21:00 15
But I, various lists were put up on the screen and I
identified various people that I made contact with and who -- and with whom I
16
didn't have contact, if my memory serves me right, as to what happened on
17
Thursday.
18
answer to a question from Mr. Murphy and with the intervention of Mr.-- the
19
Chairman, that I identified people in Fianna Fail whom I did not have contact
12:21:32 20
with.
21
I think I said, at question, um -- well certainly I said at, in
And then I was asked by the Chairman of the non-fianna Fail members
whom did I actually lobby or speak to.
22
Q. 197
All right.
23
A.
Thank you very much.
And I identified those.
Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlop.
24 12:21:56 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Are there other parties here who want to take up the
battle with Mr. Dunlop?
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I had understood from Mr. Murphy that Mr. O Dulachain wanted to
29
ask some questions.
12:22:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:22:15
12:22:36
52 1
MR. REDMOND: If I can be of assistance, Mr. Chairman, on behalf, well not on
2
behalf of Mr. O Dulachain.
3
today.
4
convey it to the Tribunal but I know that he won't be here.
I am aware of the fact that he is not available
That's just from person knowledge.
I was not asked particularly to
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry.
Is his solicitor here?
8
SOLICITOR:
Yes, indeed Mr. Chairman, that's my understanding.
9
Mr. O'Dulachain couldn't be here today.
7
12:22:42 10
11
And I understood that that had been,
that information had been given to the Tribunal.
But I didn't realise until
now it hadn't, Mr. Chairman.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Well does he want to cross-examine?
SOLICITOR:
I understand he does, Mr. Chairman.
14 12:22:50 15
16 17
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
Just to clarify.
18
conveyed to you, which was my fault.
It may not have been
19 12:22:58 20
Mr. O'Dulachain rang me yesterday afternoon.
21
He was hoping to get here by lunch hour.
22
if not the Tribunal would accommodate him.
And he had other commitments.
I told him if he could, great. And
23 24 12:23:14 25
CHAIRMAN: Well we won't be accommodating him today.
I think there are no
other witnesses today, Ms. Dillon; isn't that right?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
today.
Yes, Sir, that's the position.
There are no other witnesses
29 12:23:20 30
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We'll adjourn then until half ten tomorrow.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:23:24
12:23:42
53 1 2
The legal team for Mr. Sweeney might indicate, contact the Tribunal in the
3
afternoon and organise a date for Mr. Dunlop's return, which can be done in --
4
between the Tribunal and Mr. Dunlop's solicitor.
5 6
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Redmond, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
I would be grateful if in reporting to the Tribunal as to the date for
9
cross-examination, that they give a selection of dates which would be of
12:23:52 10
assistance.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
consent.
Hopefully.
These things usually can be arranged by mutual
So hopefully that can be arranged.
14 12:23:59 15
I'm just making the case that the parties who still have to cross-examine Mr.
16
Dunlop should try and approach the Tribunal today rather than after today and
17
make some arrangements so that Mr. Dunlop, and his legal team will know what
18
awaits them in the weeks ahead.
19 12:24:19 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
21 22
And Mr. Fox, in the meantime, his evidence which was scheduled to take place on
23
Friday ...
24 12:24:24 25
CHAIRMAN:
That can go back.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
So half ten tomorrow morning?
12:24:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
12:24:30
12:27:46
54 1
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
5
WEDNESDAY, 21ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M..
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 655
09:22:51
14:04:41
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY 6TH JUNE 2006
2
AT 2 PM:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Padraig Flynn please.
5 6
MR. MORAN: Before the witness is sworn, is it appropriate to seek
7
representation at this stage in relation to this Module?
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Yes certainly, granted.
14:04:58 10
11
MR. MORAN: Thank you.
12 13
MR. PADRAIG FLYNN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS
14
BY MR. QUINN:
14:05:26 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Flynn.
17
A.
Good afternoon Chairman.
18
Q. 1
Good afternoon Mr. Flynn. Mr. Flynn, in April of this year the Tribunal wrote
19
to you, I think through your solicitors, and gave you an enclosed extracts from
14:05:41 20
your ministerial diary which appeared to show or highlight a series of meetings
21
you may have had with Mr. Phillip Monahan. And you were asked to provide a
22
detailed narrative statement describing the circumstances which caused these
23
meetings to be arranged and the reasons therefore. And you were also asked to
24
identify the individuals present and whether or not any minutes or notes were
14:06:02 25
26
taken and you were asked to elaborate on the topics discussed and whether they referred to the Shanganagh Sewage System.
27 28
On the 16th May 2006, if I could have page 8129 please? You signed a narrative
29
statement which was received by the Tribunal on the following day, that is the
14:06:21 30
17th May, wherein you set out your replies to the queries raised and I propose Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:06:28
14:06:36
2 1
to read that statement to you and ask you one or two questions arising from it
2
if I may.
3 4
And you refer to the correspondence which I have just referred to in your first
5
paragraph and then you went on to say that you have been provided with the copy
6
diary extracts etcetera, enclosed with the letter of the 27th. You confirmed
7
that the diary entries highlighted, did appear to you to refer to the late
8
Mr. Phillip Monahan. You said that the diary entries concerned are confirmed
9
to indicate the attendance of the late Mr. Monahan at the Department of the
14:06:57 10
11
Environment on the 24th of May 1989, 22nd of November '89 and 12th of February '91.
12 13
You say that, "you do not have in your possession or power of procurement any
14
notes or records created during the course of the attendance referred to and
14:07:10 15
16
you didn't believe any such notes or records were created by you at the time of the attendances."
17 18
You go on to say that, "you did not remember whether Mr. Monahan was
19
accompanied at any such attendances and to the best of your recollection
14:07:22 20
Mr. Monahan was not accompanied by any other person." You say, "you did not
21
know whether any department official was present during the attendances nor did
22
you know whether your private secretary attended and therefore did not know
23
whether any formal departmental notes or minutes were created."
24 14:07:37 25
You say, "you did not remember any dealings that the department may have had
26
were concerning relative to the Shanganagh Sewer System and you had no personal
27
recollection of the Shanganagh Sewer System."
28 29 14:07:50 30
You say, "you had no recollection of receiving an invitation -- sorry, you did have a recollection of receiving an invitation from the late Mr. Monahan to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:07:54
14:08:06
3 1
view the Tallaght Town Centre, which invitation you accepted, but you could not
2
recollect when you viewed the Tallaght Town Centre pursuant to that
3
invitation."
4 5
You say, "You do further remember receiving an invitation from Mr. Monahan to
6
attend the official opening of the centre. And you confirm that you attended
7
the official opening."
8 9
Now Mr. Flynn, I think you were in fact the Minister for the Environment from a
14:08:21 10
period stretching from March 1987 right through to November 1991, is that
11
correct?
12
A.
That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
13
Q. 2
And I think that there was an election called on the 25th of May 1989, isn't
14 14:08:37 15
16
that correct? A.
In July.
Q. 3
25th of -- sorry 25th of May 1989, if I could have 2661 please? Do you see in
17
the first paragraph there for 1987, sorry for 1989, 25th of May 1989, being the
18
date of the order for the 1989 election?
19
A.
That was the day of the order.
Q. 4
Yes and the election itself took place on the 15th June?
21
A.
Quite so.
22
Q. 5
So the election was called on the 25th of May, isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right yes.
24
Q. 6
And on the day prior to that election being called, which I think was the 24th
14:09:02 20
14:09:15 25
of May, one of the diaries furnished to you discloses a meeting, a 5 pm
26
meeting, if I could have document 7661, with Mr. P Monaghan: I think in a
27
previous Module you have given evidence of a meeting which you had on the 23rd
28
of May with Mr. Gilmartin, isn't that right?
29 14:09:44 30
A.
I don't know about that but I, I see here this is not my diary.
Q. 7
You say this is not your diary? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:09:46
14:10:05
4 1
A.
2 3
This is some other diary I don't know where it is. But you did submit to me a copy of my own diary, my own personal diary.
Q. 8
Yes for a later date, in other words where we had both your diary and the
4
department diary, if I could have 7662, this is the diary entry for the 22nd of
5
November 1989.
6
A.
Yes that's, that is my diary.
7
Q. 9
That's your diary, that's for a later meeting which I will deal with in a
8
moment, but if I go back to the, 7661, this diary was supplied to the Tribunal
9
by the, as a ministerial diary for you during your period as Minister for
14:10:27 10
Environment.
11
A.
Yes, obviously that's so, I have no reason to doubt it.
12
Q. 10
Okay, do you recall having a meeting with Mr. Monahan on the eve of the calling
13 14
of the 1989 General Election? A.
14:10:44 15
No, I can't recall the exact date of the meeting, any meeting with Mr. Monahan. But if it's in the diary and I have no reason to doubt it.
16
Q. 11
Just on that point, you knew Mr. Monahan?
17
A.
I met Mr. Monahan on a few occasions, not very often, I met him a few
18 19 14:11:01 20
21
occasions, yes. Q. 12
Mr. Monahan, I think, had been involved in Tallaght, is that right?
A.
Yes he was the developer for Tallaght Town Centre.
Q. 13
And I think you have, in your statement, referred to being in attendance at the
22
opening of the Tallaght Town Centre, which I think was on the 23rd of October
23
1990?
24 14:11:18 25
A.
Yes it was, the end of 1990 and did I attend.
Q. 14
Yes. Can you recall any of the various meetings which you think you had with
26
Mr. Monahan, can you recall any of those meetings?
27
A.
No I have no recollection of what we discussed at any of the meetings.
28
Q. 15
Or what the subject matter of the various meetings?
29
A.
No I have no recollection of what conversations I had with Mr. Monahan on those
14:11:40 30
occasions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:11:42
14:11:58
5 1
Q. 16
Did you know that Mr. Monahan, for example, was involved with Monarch
2
Properties and that Monarch Properties was involved in the development of lands
3
in and around the country?
4
A.
I knew that Mr. Monahan was a developer and had been involved in developing
5
certain projects, I knew particularly that he was involved in the Tallaght Town
6
Centre development.
7
Q. 17
8 9 14:12:13 10
Did you know that by 1989, for example, that he was involved or that his company was involved in the acquisition of lands in Cherrywood?
A.
No.
Q. 18
Your department I think, it was a matter of public knowledge, if I could have
11
8510, your department have discovered to the Tribunal from within their
12
records, an extract from the Irish Times of the 12th of May 1989, which
13
appeared to give some publicity to the acquisition by Monarch of the lands in
14
Cherrywood?
14:12:39 15
16
A.
That may be so, but I have no knowledge of same.
Q. 19
This would have been approximately 12 days before your meeting with
17
Mr. Monahan.
18
A.
That may be so, but I have no recollection.
19
Q. 20
And you have no recollection of what you might have discussed with Mr. Monahan?
A.
No, the only thing I could offer would be that we would have discussed
14:12:53 20
21 22
Tallaght. Q. 21
Yes. He had just acquired or his company had just acquired the Cherrywood
23
lands some 12 days prior to his meeting with you, do you think its probable
24
that he might have discussed with you the newly acquired lands in Cherrywood?
14:13:12 25
26
A.
I have no recollection of that being discussed.
Q. 22
Yes. Would it be usual for people within your department to brief you on
27 28 29 14:13:34 30
upcoming meetings with visiting developers or -A.
If the individual involved had sent in a, requesting a particular matter to be discussed then they may very well have provided a brief, but I have no recollection of any brief or any agenda with Mr. Monahan, they were courtesy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:13:39
14:13:48
6 1
visits.
2
Q. 23
You think that this was a courtesy visit by Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Well I have no recollection otherwise.
4
Q. 24
Could Mr. Monahan, for example, have visited you in your capacity as the
5
Minister for the Environment in circumstances where his lands were being
6
considered in the review of the Development Plan?
7
A.
I have no idea, but certainly I have no recollection of discussing this or any
8
other matter concerning these particular lands with Mr. Monahan. I would have
9
had no involvement there anyway.
14:14:08 10
Q. 25
It would appear that on the 1st of May, the Council had been advised by your
11
department that the Shanganagh sewer was approved for preliminary report, if we
12
could have 8509 please? That is on the 1st of May 1989, did you know that your
13
department had appeared to have approved a preliminary report and preparation
14
of contract documents for Carrickmines Valley Sewer Scheme?
14:14:36 15
16
A.
No.
Q. 26
This is obviously something you would accept that would have been of importance
17
to Mr. Monahan because he had acquired lands which was going to be affected by
18
the construction of this sewer?
19
A.
14:14:55 20
business and they would have been carrying on their ordinary correspondence
21 22
about that matter with the department. Q. 27
23 24
And you say that, can you recall if Mr. Monahan raised the issue with you at all at that meeting on the 24th?
A.
14:15:09 25
26
It may have been important to him, but it would have been County Council
No I have already told that you I have no recollection of that being discussed with Mr. Monahan.
Q. 28
27
Are you saying that Mr. Monahan never discussed his rezoning proposals with you at any of the meetings?
28
A.
I have no recollection of him doing so.
29
Q. 29
You think this was just a courtesy meeting that he had with you shortly after
14:15:25 30
he acquired the Carrickmines site? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:15:26
14:15:46
7 1
A.
2 3
I don't know that, but I know that Mr. Monahan was very much involved with the Tallaght project and it was a very large development.
Q. 30
Did you know that the Council had viewed the approval by your department of the
4
preparation of those contract documents with surprise, if I could have 2850
5
please?
6 7
This is a minute of a meeting held on the 6th of June 1989, attended by
8
Mr. McDaid, Mr. Morris, Mr. Farrell and Mr. McEvoy, the last two
9
representatives were independent contractors to the Monarch Group who had met
14:16:06 10
with engineers with Dublin County Council, and if you see the fourth last
11
paragraph, "DCC -- which is Dublin County Council -- engineers have been
12
instructed to prepare tender documents for approval by the Department of the
13
Environment. J McDaid and Barry Morris stated that they had been surprised by
14
the instruction, as it was not on the priority list. They expect to be
14:16:26 15
complete in four to five months from now."
16 17
Did you know that the council engineers were surprised that the Carrickmines
18
scheme had been given a priority?
19 14:16:39 20
A.
I have no knowledge of that Mr. Chairman.
Q. 31
Now, I think that Mr. Monahan also met with other members of your party and
21
contributed to the party in or around the same time he met you, I don't know if
22
you have seen in the documents supplied to you at 2864, a letter addressed to
23
Mr. Wall from Fianna Fail of the 9th of June 1989, where Mr. Monahan
24
contributed a sum of 16,000 pounds towards the election campaign and he had
14:17:05 25
also advised Mr. Wall of two other contributions he had made to other
26
contestants in that election, Mr. Ahern and Mr. Haughey, do you see that?
27
A.
Yes I see it. Yes.
28
Q. 32
Did you know that it was Mr. Monahan's intention to contribute to the party in
29 14:17:27 30
the upcoming election when you met with him in May 1989? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:17:28
14:17:45
8 1
Q. 33
2
Did he, did you seek any funds on behalf of the party from Mr. Monahan when you met with him in May 1989?
3
A.
No Mr. Chairman.
4
Q. 34
Did you have any role within the party in May 1989, in relation to fundraising?
5
A.
I was the Honorary Treasurer for a period in the party.
6
Q. 35
Were you the Honorary Treasurer in May 1989?
7
A.
I think I may have been. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
8
Q. 36
And as Honorary Treasurer, were you concerned with raising funds for the party?
9
A.
I had nothing to do with the raising of funds other than attending certain
14:18:15 10
11
meetings that were arranged by headquarters. Q. 37
12
Was funding an issue that will arise at those meetings attended by you as Honorary Treasurer?
13
A.
On occasions, yes.
14
Q. 38
Now, it would appear that two issues which were of concern to the Monarch
14:18:32 15
interests in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, were the location of the
16
Southern Cross route and the development of this Carrickmines sewer, you will
17
have seen that from the documents supplied to you, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes, there was reference in the documents to those two projects.
19
Q. 39
Now you had a further meeting, I think, with Mr. Monahan on the 22nd of
14:18:54 20
November 1989, if I could have 7663 please? And both your private diary and
21
the departmental diary has been furnished to you. Your private diary is I
22
think at 7662. Do you recall receiving this?
23
A.
Yes I did.
24
Q. 40
Do you accept that you had a meeting with Mr. Monahan on the 22nd of November
14:19:24 25
26
1989? A.
27
I believe because it's recorded in my personal diary that it probably did take place, yes.
28
Q. 41
Can you tell the Tribunal what was discussed at that meeting?
29
A.
I have no recollection Mr. Chairman.
Q. 42
Could it have anything to do with either the line of the motorway or indeed the
14:19:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:19:42
14:19:55
9 1 2
Carrickmines Valley Sewer? A.
3 4
I have no recollection that either of those projects were discussed with Mr. Monahan at any meeting.
Q. 43
We know that working with Mr. Monahan at this time was a Mr. Eddie Sweeney and
5
Mr. Richard Lynn. Now, Mr. Sweeney has told the Tribunal that he, amongst the
6
people that he met in relation to the Carrickmines and Monarch interest, was
7
yourself. Again you will have seen that in the, if I could have 2191? He has
8
identified a whole series of politicians and councillors that he says he met
9
and he had contact with.
14:20:22 10
11
A.
I can't recall this document having been submitted to me.
Q. 44
It is at page 2191 of the brief, but in any event, can you tell the Tribunal
12
whether or not Mr. Sweeney had any contact with you or indeed anybody else
13
other than Mr. Monahan from the Monarch interest?
14 14:20:42 15
16
A.
No, I have no recollection of that.
Q. 45
Okay.
A.
I didn't receive this document, at least Mr. Chairman --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
of documents or certainly should have been that went to possibly your
14:20:56 20
21
Well I think what Mr. Quinn is saying is that it was in the brief
solicitor, but so I assume it did go unless there was some error. Q. 46
With a letter of the 12th May 2006 --
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry Mr. Madden.
24 14:21:12 25
26
MR. MORAN: If there is an issue in relation to this it would certainly be my immediate reaction that this document was not briefed.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
29 14:21:21 30
MR. QUINN: I understand from Mr. King that there is a letter of the 12th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:21:25
14:21:39
10 1
May 2006 forwarding both a CD ROM and hard copy brief to Mr. Moran, in any
2
event you say --
3
A.
4 5
I can't recall if it's of any particular interest, I can't recall seeing this particular document.
Q. 47
Did you know that Monarch had concerns about the construction of the motorway,
6
the South Eastern Motorway, and had a problem in relation to the construction
7
of the Carrickmines Valley Sewer in relation to the lands in Carrickmines?
8
A.
No, I have no knowledge of that.
9
Q. 48
Its just that, if I could have 2956? This is a meeting at Monarch Properties
14:22:05 10
on the 24th of January 1990, where there is discussion in relation to which
11
particular route of the sewer, sorry of the South Eastern Motorway would be
12
constructed, at paragraph four it says.
13 14
"It was stated by ES," whom I understand was, may have been Mr. Sweeney,
14:22:24 15
although he is described in the top as GS but it is Eddie Sweeney, "that the
16
political decision has been made to align the motorway on the western edge of
17
the site. Although the forward planners in roads and the planners were
18
continuing meetings/discussing options."
19 14:22:42 20
Did you have any involvement, first of all, in aligning the motorway on the
21 22
western edge of the Carrickmines Valley? A.
None. And I can't recall either receiving this particular document
23
Mr. Chairman, but however, be it as it may, I still can't recall the matter
24
that you have referred to.
14:22:58 25
26
Q. 49
All of these documents, Mr. Flynn, would have been contained in the brief of documents which the Tribunal understands were forwarded.
27 28
MR. MORAN: Forgive me for interrupting, Mr. Chairman, I must clarify this
29
point. The CD ROM was certainly sent, Mr. Chairman, it was immediately
14:23:12 30
followed by a request for a hard copy of the documents and they were never Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:23:16
14:23:26
11 1
delivered.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Well if -- I don't know whether there is any real point in doing
4
so, but certainly if Mr. Flynn needs to see any of these documents before they
5
are put to him, he should have that opportunity.
6 7
MR. QUINN: I certainly don't want to take advantage of Mr. Flynn in anyway in
8
relation to these matters. I understood he had both CD ROM and the hard copy,
9
and indeed I don't know if there was any follow up, if the hard copy hadn't
14:23:41 10
been received, seeking copies. I don't know if Mr. Moran had sought additional
11
copies or not, if Mr. Flynn would like, I have no objection to --
12 13
MR. MORAN: If the witness is comfortable to deal with matters as they come
14
before him, so be it, but just to clarify the point, Mr. King will no doubt
14:24:01 15
confirm the request for the hard copy, Mr. King will no doubt confirm that that
16
request has not been satisfied. If Mr. Flynn is comfortable to deal with the
17
issues as they are raised before him, obviously I have no difficulty with that.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Assuming Mr. Flynn continues for the time being, if afterwards he,
14:24:19 20
having consulted with you, he wants to clarify or raise any of these issues
21
again, an opportunity will be afforded to him to return to the witness box.
22 23 24
MR. MORAN: Obliged Mr. Chairman. A.
Thank you Mr. Chairman, I am quite happy to continue.
14:24:33 25
26
MR. QUINN: I understand just for completeness Mr. Flynn, it may be a break
27
down in communication, but from the Tribunal's point of view, on the 12th of
28
May 2006, a CD ROM was forwarded to your solicitors and on the 19th of May a
29
hard copy of the brief was forwarded. Now I can't say it was received as I
14:24:51 30
speak with you but as far as -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:24:53
14:25:06
12 1
A.
2 3
Okay, I am quite happy to continue, Mr. Chairman, and the answer is the same insofar as that paragraph four is concerned.
Q. 50
4
And certainly no reminder has been received after the 19th May that the matter not been received.
5
A.
Okay.
6
Q. 51
Do you know how Mr. Sweeney might have been able to tell a meeting on the 24th
7
of January 1990, that a political decision had been made which, it would
8
appear, wasn't known to the Council officials?
9 14:25:21 10
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 52
Any political decision in relation to environmental matters presumably would
11 12
have been made by you as Minister for Environment in 1990? A.
Certain political decisions would be made, but not on mundane day to day
13
arrangements for re alignments of roads or that kind of thing. That would be
14
done departmentally.
14:25:41 15
Q. 53
Yes, do you know why Monarch or the Monarch interest would approach you in
16
relation to matters, would feel that they were entitled to approach you, as
17
Minister, in relation to matters?
18
A.
I have no recollection of Monarch approaching me on any matters of that nature.
19
Q. 54
On the 3rd of May 1990, if I could have 2980 please? There is a meeting held
14:26:05 20
in Tallaght in relation to Cherrywood, which is attended by the late Dr. Brian
21
Meehan, who was a planning consultant, Mr. Fergal McCabe, Mr. Edward Sweeney
22
and Richard M Lynn, both of whom worked for Monarch at this stage. And if you
23
look at the fourth paragraph under the heading "Carrickmines Valley Sewerage
24
Scheme." It says:
14:26:28 25
26
"It was agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the
27
Carrickmines Valley Sewerage Scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F MacC,"
28
which is Fergal McCabe," indicated that an individual," there named, "would
29
accompany ES," who was Eddie Sweeney, "to see Minister Flynn to indicate an
14:26:45 30
overall need in the area." Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:26:47
14:26:57
13 1 2
Now first of all, would you accept that it was being discussed in May 1990,
3
within Monarch, that there was a necessity to see you in relation to a matter
4
which affected Monarch?
5
A.
It would appear so from that document.
6
Q. 55
And which Monarch believed required a political input?
7
A.
It would appear so from that document, yes.
8
Q. 56
Did you sometime, after the 3rd of May 1990, meet with representatives of
9 14:27:15 10
Monarch in relation to the Carrickmines Valley Sewage Scheme? A.
11 12
personal or otherwise to suggest that. Q. 57
13 14 14:27:34 15
No, I cannot produce a diary for 1990, which shows a meeting with Monarch, although we'll in a moment come to a meeting in 1991.
A.
In another diary though, not in my personal diary.
Q. 58
Yes, but you are not denying the entries in the ministerial diary, are you
16 17
I can't recall that I did and I don't think there is anything in my diary,
Mr. Flynn? A.
I'm not denying that they are recorded in the diary, but I didn't have copy of
18
my own diary, Mr. Chairman, to counter check it because it's here with the
19
Tribunal. I figure that if the Tribunal just sent me the one diary entry in my
14:28:00 20
own diary, then that is the only one that is recorded accordingly, that's what
21
I figured.
22 23 24 14:28:14 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who would keep the ministerial diary?
There would -- I think there might have been two, Mr. Chairman, from recollection. There would have been the ministerial office, that would be kept
26
by my private secretary, the internal ministerial -- which would be the day to
27
day business that would be needed to be attended to by the private secretary,
28
his staff and myself. Sometimes people turned up sometimes they didn't. Then
29
there might have been another diary, a ministerial diary separate to that, now
14:28:35 30
I don't know which we are talking about you see. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:28:37
14:28:50
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
matter which one it is, is it reasonable to assume that it was put there for a
4
purpose?
5
A.
But if there is a note of anything in the ministerial diary, no
Oh, yes of course. But it doesn't necessarily mean that the meeting took
6
place. I would be more happy to rely on my own personal diary because that
7
would mean that I would -- my private secretary, Mr. Chairman, and I, had a
8
meeting once every week, Friday, to check out what was on the agenda for the
9
following week and I always put in in my own personal diary what was necessary,
14:29:14 10
sometimes people didn't turn up and they weren't stroked out, so I can't be --
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
to the extent that at some stage somebody had penned in a meeting --
14
A.
But if it was in the ministerial diary, presumably it was accurate
That is true, quite so.
14:29:29 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: -- with whoever. A.
Yes quite so.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:29:41 20
21
And you are saying that without your personal diary, you don't know
whether that meeting actually went ahead? A.
Well I would be in a much stronger position to say to you, Mr. Chairman, if I
22
had the two diaries, do you understand? And they both recorded the meeting as
23
having taken place, then I would be able positively to say it was my opinion
24
that that meeting did take place, but when it doesn't I'm sorry. Now maybe it
14:29:52 25
is that my personal diary wasn't submitted to me and that you can let me see it
26
now for the dates involved.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
simply indicate that a meeting was intended to take place on a certain date?
14:30:07 30
A.
Well presumably just to clarify this, your personal diary would
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:30:08
14:30:27
15 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
That wouldn't in itself confirm if the meeting had taken place?
Correct. But I certainly, just to repeat for you, Mr. Chairman, to help you
4
insofar as there was, as I say, a diary in the private secretary's office and
5
that one -- I don't think the one that you have submitted to me with the dates
6
aforementioned, is that diary.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
But whose -- how come there was another diary?
I don't know. I don't know.
14:30:42 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Do you recognise the handwriting?
No, except that I feel that its not Gerry Rice's, that's all I'm saying, my
13
private secretary. But then there were several people in the office. But
14
certainly there was a ministerial diary in the private secretary's
14:31:00 15
responsibility and I don't think it's that one. But anyway it's just a moot
16
point.
17 18
MR QUINN: Just on that point, if I may Mr. Flynn, if I could go back please to
19
7662? This is the diary entry for the 22nd of November 1989.
14:31:15 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 59
Now that's your private diary, isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct. Yes it is.
23
Q. 60
Is the writing for the 22nd in your handwriting?
24
A.
It is certainly.
Q. 61
And you are saying that because the entries, as we see them there, appear in
14:31:24 25
26
your handwriting, you can confirm that you had those meetings?
27
A.
Yes, I feel that those meetings took place.
28
Q. 62
But would you agree with me that you might have had meetings which appear in
29 14:31:43 30
the official diary but don't appear in your personal diary? A.
That is a possibility. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:31:44
14:32:03
16 1
Q. 63
Because if we look at 7663, and we look at an entry for 21st, which is the
2
previous day, I think you have already given evidence of a meeting with the
3
person referred to there on the 21st, although if we look at 7662 again, he
4
doesn't appear in your private diary, isn't that right?
5
A.
Listen, they don't correspond, I understand all of that. All I am saying, I am
6
make nothing issue about it Mr. Chairman, except to say I did know Mr. Monahan
7
and I did meet him on a few occasions.
8
Q. 64
9
We understand that there is no ministerial diary for 1989 and 1991 -- sorry we only have ministerial diaries, I understand, for 1989 and 1991, we have no
14:32:29 10
ministerial diaries for 1990?
11
A.
Oh I see.
12
Q. 65
And no personal diaries for 1990?
13
A.
Yes, well I gave you all the diaries I had relevant to the time.
14
Q. 66
So when I say I can't produce a diary entry for a meeting in 1990, I am
14:32:43 15
effectively telling you, Mr. Flynn, that I don't have a diary for 1990?
16
A.
Ministerial diary.
17
Q. 67
Ministerial or personal?
18
A.
Oh I see, okay.
19
Q. 68
Do you think you might have met representatives of Monarch throughout 1990 or
14:32:57 20
at some stage in 1990?
21
A.
No, I have no recollection of having done so Mr. Chairman.
22
Q. 69
But it certainly, you would agree with me, if we go back to 2980, that at that
23
meeting on the 3rd of May 1990, it was the intention of representatives of
24
Monarch to have a meeting with you, isn't that right?
14:33:12 25
26
A.
That's what that document says, yes.
Q. 70
Not alone that, but if we go to the next page at 2981, there was to be a
27
meeting with the planners by representatives of the planners retained by
28
Monarch and that that meeting was to take place after the meeting with you, do
29
you see under the last paragraph, under the heading, "meeting with planners."
14:33:34 30
"It was agreed that F McCabe and Dr. Brian Meehan would meet with the planners Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:33:40
14:33:59
17 1
on the documents already submitted, after the meeting with the Minister had
2
taken place." Do you see that?
3
A.
4
I see that, yes. But I am not aware of any of this at all, of course. I see it here, but I have no -- there is no note in my private, or personal diary.
5
Q. 71
We don't have them Mr. Flynn.
6
A.
Sorry, of course. At the time you are talking about, well if you don't have
7
them, have you the ministerial ones for that time?
8
Q. 72
No, we don't have the ministerial --
9
A.
I see. Then I can't be of any help to you. I have no recollection of meeting
14:34:15 10
11
these people. Q. 73
But you agree with me that it was certainly the intention of representatives of
12
Monarch to meet with you and having met with you, to meet with the planners,
13
isn't that right?
14
A.
14:34:28 15
see Ministers about a lot of things, sometimes it happens and it sometimes
16 17
doesn't happen. Q. 74
18 19 14:34:38 20
Well I tell from you my experience Mr. Chairman, a lot of people would like to
Well by this stage we have at least two documented meetings between you and Mr. Monahan, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 75
We have had the meeting on the 24th of May and we've had the meeting in
21
November, isn't that correct?
22
A.
Quite so.
23
Q. 76
Now, on the 5th July 1990, we have a further memorandum of a meeting held in
24
Tallaght concerning the Cherrywood lands, if I could have 2985 please? Present
14:34:54 25
26
at this meeting is Mr. Edward Sweeney and Mr. Lynn, did you know Mr. Sweeney? A.
27
Mr. Chairman I knew Mr. Monahan. On the occasion that I visited Tallaght there were others with Mr. Monahan, I think a Mr. Murray --
28
Q. 77
Yes, a Mr. Noel Murray.
29
A.
Well yes Mr. Murray. And I think Mr. Phil Reilly.
Q. 78
Yes.
14:35:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:35:26
14:35:36
18 1
A.
2 3
I can't recall the names that you have mentioned to me now, but that's not to say that I didn't meet them at one of those official functions.
Q. 79
4
But unless you met them at an official function you wouldn't have met them separately?
5
A.
I cannot recall.
6
Q. 80
You have no recollection of meeting them in your office in relation to Monarch
7
or Cherrywood?
8
A.
I have no recollection of that matter.
9
Q. 81
Well if I deal with this meeting on the 5th of July 1990, again the Cherrywood
14:35:49 10
lands are being discussed, but if we go to the second page at 2986, under the
11
heading "Access to Site," if I tell you that RML is Mr. Lynn, it says,
12
"Mr. Lynn indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the
13
motorway established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the
14
development and recommended that contact be made at the highest level, i.e.
14:36:12 15
ministerial level to ascertain the position".
16 17
Now the construction of a highway, I would I suggest to you, would have fallen
18
into one of the issues which would be taken care of by the Department of the
19
Environment, isn't that right?
14:36:25 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 82
And therefore checking out the situation in relation to the construction of a
22
motorway would be something that would be brought to the attention of the
23
department, isn't that right?
24
A.
In the normal circumstances, yes.
Q. 83
And you would have been the Minister, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 84
So would you agree with me that it's a fair interpretation of what's contained
14:36:40 25
28
there, that it was the intention of representatives of Monarch to check with
29
you, the Minister, what the position was in relation to the construction of
14:36:54 30
this motorway? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:36:55
14:37:13
19 1
A.
I cannot recollect any meeting dealing with that matter but it would obviously
2
be normal for developers and others to seek clarification about motorway lines
3
and road lines and all that kind of thing, without necessarily having the
4
matter dealt with by the Minister. In fact the Minister would have no
5
involvement in that kind of thing.
6
Q. 85
But you would agree with me that it was the intention of Monarch to check with
7
you what the position was in relation to the line of the motorway, isn't that
8
right?
9 14:37:26 10
A.
What their intention was I cannot speculate on.
Q. 86
Yes, it wasn't a question of writing to the department to find out what the
11
situation was, they were going to raise it at ministerial level, presumably
12
raise it with you?
13
A.
14
Well I would put it to you, Mr. Chairman, that if that was the case and if the Tribunal has sought documentation or correspondence from the department, then
14:37:44 15
in the normal circumstance, people would seek by letter to have, they would
16
seek a meeting either at official level or whatever to discuss the matter and
17
I, I have no recollection of ever seeing any brief whereby a letter asking for
18
a deputation to be received or otherwise in this matter. So in those
19
circumstances I can only surmise that it did not take place. I have no
14:38:11 20
21
recollection of it anyway. Q. 87
We have nothing in the brief in relation to the other meetings as to what the
22
agenda was and you haven't been able to tell us what the agenda was for the
23
other meetings, isn't that right?
24
A.
14:38:27 25
That's so. But I just want to repeat to you, people don't come in off the street to seek a meeting with the higher officers of the department and
26
particularly with the Minister or the Minister's of State, there would always
27
be correspondence.
28
Q. 88
So you are --
29
A.
Excuse me until I finish.
Q. 89
Yes.
14:38:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:38:39
14:38:54
20 1
A.
It would always be recorded that a meeting was sought and if a meeting was
2
sought, it would be brought to the notice of the private secretary and either
3
he or through the individual Minister an agreement would be reached as to
4
whether a meeting should take place or not. I don't see any evidence of that
5
here.
6
Q. 90
Okay. Are you surprised that that evidence isn't been found in the
7
departmental files, in relation to the meetings which I have dealt with
8
already?
9
A.
I suggest that's a matter for you and the Tribunal.
Q. 91
No, but you seem to suggest that such material ought to be available?
11
A.
No, what I said was, the normal practice --
12
Q. 92
Yes, but was it --
13
A.
-- for somebody seeking a meeting with the Minister, would be to request it in
14:39:05 10
14 14:39:18 15
writing. Q. 93
16 17
or alternatively there was a departure from the normal practice? A.
18 19
So either such a request did come in in writing and it's no longer on the files
I am not aware of any departure from normal practice in dealing with these matters.
Q. 94
14:39:36 20
I just want to clarify one issue, just to be fair to you Mr. Flynn, I suggested to you that we didn't have your 1990 diary, I understand that I was, that we do
21
not have your -- we don't have your personal 1990 diary, but we do have a
22
ministerial 1990 diary, sorry about that.
23
A.
I see, that's all right, no problem.
24
Q. 95
There was a meeting I think on the 12th of February 1991, which is at 7664 and
14:40:04 25
again this is the ministerial diary.
26
A.
Okay.
27
Q. 96
Do you accept that you might have met Mr. Phil Monahan at 3 pm on the 12th of
28 29 14:40:17 30
February 1991? A.
On the understanding that it's in this diary, but that I have no corresponding reference to my own personal diary in the matter. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:40:21
14:40:31
21 1
Q. 97
Do you have any recollection of what that meeting was about?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 98
Could it have been about rezoning?
4
A.
I have no recollection of the meeting, so I can have no recollection of what
5 6
transpired at it. Q. 99
What has been discovered to the Tribunal is a document, if I could have 8511
7
please? It's an internal department document, which appears to have been
8
created on the 6th of December 1990, and I will just read the document to you.
9 14:40:47 10
"Further to our telephone conversation in relation to Mr. P Monahan and Monarch
11
Property. I enclose previous material requesting a PQ," which I presume is a
12
Parliamentary Question, "in relation to industrial lands at Ballyogan Road and
13
a press cutting regarding the purchase of the lands in Cabinteely. We are
14
awaiting the submission of contract documents CD by Dublin County Council for
14:41:09 15
the Carrickmines Valley Sewerage Scheme. The work on these is substantially
16
complete and the CD," which is the contract documents, "should be received at
17
the latest by January 1991. A branch sewer to service the Cabinteely area will
18
service the lands acquired by Monarch Properties. This will link with the
19
Shanganagh Treatment Works, which is currently working at 50 per cent
14:41:31 20
capacity."
21 22
That appears to be information being compiled within the department in relation
23
to an upcoming meeting with you.
24 14:41:41 25
A.
I am not aware of that.
Q. 100
Okay. What I really want to direct your attention to is the final post script
26
to that letter it says, "Material required in relation to the meeting of P
27
Monahan and Minister in relation to rezoning of lands". Would you agree with
28
me that that gives the impression that, within the department, it was viewed
29
that the upcoming meeting was a meeting in relation to the rezoning of lands?
14:42:03 30
A.
I have never -- I have had no sight of this document until just now, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:42:08
14:42:15
22 1
Mr. Chairman.
2
Q. 101
Yes?
3
A.
But from the reading of that I don't know what Mr. Monahan was seeking the
4 5
material for, this is -Q. 102
No, no, sorry Mr. Flynn, just to be absolutely fair to you, this document was,
6
is just now being added to the brief and was given to you just before you gave
7
evidence, you may or may not have had an opportunity to consider it, but it is
8
not a document that was given to Mr. Monahan, it was an internal department
9
note as I understand it, to brief you in relation to an upcoming meeting?
14:42:37 10
A.
11 12
Well I am not aware of the contents of that and I have no recollection of the contents of that matter, that is referred to there, being discussed with me.
Q. 103
Okay. But can I suggest to you that it would appear from that internal
13
documentation or that internal document created on the 6th of December, that
14
the subject matter of the upcoming meeting, as far as your staff within the
14:42:59 15
16
department was concerned, was in relation to the rezoning of lands? A.
The only difficulty which have that Mr. Chairman is that the Minister, and
17
that's myself at the time, had nothing to do whatsoever with the rezoning of
18
land anywhere.
19
Q. 104
14:43:17 20
That's exactly the point I am coming to Mr. Flynn, that as far as your departmental staff were concerned, there was a meeting to take place between
21
you and Mr. Monahan in relation to land rezoning, isn't that right, isn't that
22
what appears from that document?
23
A.
24
Wait a moment now. I had nothing to do with rezoning of land either for Mr. Monahan or for anybody else, and I have no recollection of having discussed
14:43:35 25
rezoning of land with Mr. Monahan or anybody else at any time. It's not a
26
matter for the Minister. Zoning of land is confined to other elected
27
representatives.
28
Q. 105
29 14:43:57 30
Did Mr. Monahan ever ask you to exercise any influence over the other elected representatives in relation to the rezoning of lands?
A.
I have no recollection of Mr. Monahan ever asking me to intervene with anybody Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:44:01
14:44:13
23 1
concerning the rezoning or any other business that he was involved in, and I
2
don't see any evidence and there has been no evidence submitted to support such
3
a view.
4
Q. 106
Can you give any reason or indication to the Tribunal as to why your staff
5
would have been of the view that the upcoming meeting between you and
6
Mr. Monahan was in relation to the rezoning of land?
7
A.
8 9
If my staff had meetings with Mr. Monahan about any matter, I was not aware of them.
Q. 107
14:44:32 10
No I am not saying they meetings, the final post script to that letter refers to material required in relation to the meeting of P Monaghan and Minister in
11
relation to the rezoning of lands, it was a meeting between you and Mr. Monahan
12
had a had the subject title of land rezoning?
13
A.
14 14:44:50 15
16
But this is a correspondence between individuals that I don't know anything about.
Q. 108
But they were your staff within the department in 198 -- 1990?
A.
There were hundreds of staff in the department, some of them in Planning
17
Administration and some of them in the Water and Sanitary Services Division and
18
some of them I never met at all. The practice, as far as the Minister would be
19
concerned, is that he would be dealing with the senior staff.
14:45:10 20
Q. 109
21 22
But for some reason these members of staff were of the of the view that the upcoming meeting between you and Mr. Monahan had to do with rezoning of land?
A.
I am not aware what was in the mind of any of my staff concerning those
23
matters. All I am saying to you is, I have no recollection Mr. Chairman, of
24
that matter being discussed between myself and Mr. Monahan, because for obvious
14:45:30 25
reasons, which I have to reiterate for you is, the Minister has no
26
responsibility, and I have also answered the question, did I make
27
representations to anybody who had responsibility for dealing with rezoning
28
matters and the answer is, no I did not.
29 14:45:47 30
Q. 110
Did you ever make representations to any officials with responsibility --
A.
I did not. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:45:50
14:46:09
24 1
Q. 111
2
Did you know when you met Mr. Monahan on the 12th of February 1991, that he had been given a contribution towards Mr. Haughey for the party leader's fund?
3
A.
I was not aware of that matter either.
4
Q. 112
3100 please? You weren't aware of that matter?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 113
Did you know that Mr. Monahan and Monarch Properties had given contributions to
7
individual members of Fianna Fail in various elections in 1989, 1991 and 1992?
8
A.
No, Mr. Chairman.
9
Q. 114
Did you ever seek a contribution towards your, either your own or the party's
14:46:31 10
finances at any of those courtesy meetings that you have referred to with
11
Mr. Monahan?
12
A.
No Mr. Chairman.
13
Q. 115
You can't remember, you say, any of the matters discussed at any of those
14 14:46:48 15
meetings, isn't that right? A.
I have no recollection of the subject matter of discussions that took place
16
between myself and Mr. Monahan at those meetings and I cannot recall if there
17
was anybody else present Mr. Chairman. If there was departmental presence,
18
then there would be a minute of that.
19
Q. 116
14:47:07 20
21
What was the protocol within the department for having people present at meetings between you and visitors, including developers like Mr. Monahan?
A.
If somebody came to see the Minister privately, then the Minister saw that
22
person privately, if there was other matters to be discussed that required
23
technical advice or administrative advice, then others might have been present,
24
and would have been present, if they were present then notes would be taken and
14:47:33 25
there would be a recorded note or minute of the particular subject matters
26
discussed.
27
Q. 117
Thank you very much Mr. Flynn.
28
A.
Thank you.
29 14:47:44 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Madden do you want to ask Mr. Flynn anything, sorry Mr. Moran.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:47:51
14:47:57
25 1 2
MR. MORAN: No Chairman.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
was discussed at these meetings?
6
A.
Mr. Flynn just before you go, you say you have no idea about what
That's right, sorry Mr. Chairman, sorry now. Maybe I should clarify that, I
7
was invited to -- and I stated that in my narrative statement to the Tribunal,
8
just so that you, nobody is under any misunderstanding, I was invited to view
9
the Tallaght project and I was also invited to go to the --
14:48:20 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
according to the diaries, took place or probably took place with you and
13
assuming they did take place --
14
A.
14:48:36 15
Right, well I am more interested in the two or three meetings that,
I cannot, on oath, swear that they did take place, unless I had my diaries to confirm.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Exactly. But if they did take place --
Yes.
19 14:48:39 20
CHAIRMAN: -- presumably they took place for a purpose, either some purpose of
21
yours or some purpose of Mr. Monahan's, you or somebody described them as
22
possibly courtesy visits?
23
A.
24
I did not initiate any of these meetings, Mr. Chairman, that's the first thing to say there. I never asked Mr. Monahan to come to see me about anything. And
14:49:06 25
if he requested a meeting with me, I would have been happy to see him.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
take place if somebody was visiting from another government or --
29 14:49:26 30
A.
And a courtesy visit, presumably, would be a meeting such as might
Oh no, yes that would be the case, but also I had, during my time in politics at senior level, I had courtesy visits from lots of people. Oh, yes, and in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:49:30
14:49:49
26 1
particular now, insofar as the Tallaght centre, which was a huge development,
2
the first of its kind in the developing towns around Dublin. Everybody was
3
interested and Mr. Monahan was the man in charge and he certainly would have
4
been very happy to tell me what was going on and to invite me out to view it,
5
oh yeah.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
Mr. Monarch would be simply attending at your office to --
9
A.
14:50:03 10
But if there were courtesy visits, you are suggesting that
To brief me on what the current state of play was with his Tallaght Town Centre development.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
request?
14
A.
14:50:17 15
And that would be at his behest you think, rather than at your
Oh, yes. I never requested Mr. Monahan to attend and visit on me in my department, to discuss any matter.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Would you be surprised if he did attend, I know you can't think
18
back with any certainty, but would you be surprised if he did attend even for
19
the purposes of a courtesy visit, would you be surprised that he wouldn't have
14:50:37 20
raised some of the issues that would appear to have been exercising his mind
21
and that of his company colleagues at that time with you, given your position
22
as Minister for the Environment?
23 24 14:50:59 25
A.
Well I can't recollect him talking about anything in particular, but even looking through the brief that was sent to me Mr. Chairman, by the Tribunal, a lot of these decisions concerning, in particular the rezoning, took place long
26
after I had left, was working as commissioner and I was just noting that in the
27
brief.
28 29 14:51:19 30
CHAIRMAN:
But I am just wondering while you have said, understandably, that
you as Minister wouldn't be in a position to partake in any shape or form in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:51:26
14:51:34
27 1 2
rezoning decisions -A.
That's right.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: -- but to an outsider, a developer or builder or an ordinary member
5
of the public that mightn't be clear, that mightn't necessarily be clear to
6
them that you wouldn't be in a position to influence, until such time as they
7
would raise it with you and be told by you?
8
A.
9
Oh no, Mr. Chairman, sorry to cut across you there, but any developer the size of Monarch Properties with their executive directors dealing with these
14:51:57 10
matters, they would be fully au fait with the practices of County Councils and
11
the whole question about rezoning and how it took place and why it took place.
12
I mean, no, no, no, Mr. Chairman. Those people would fully understand. Now as
13
you say there would be people in the general public that mightn't understand
14
that, but insofar as the Chief Executives and chief people involved in
14:52:22 15
properties such as Tallaght and things like that, they would know the full
16
understanding of legislation on planning and zoning.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
In your role as Honorary Treasurer of the party around this time --
Yes?
14:52:37 20
21
CHAIRMAN: -- would you have been furnished with lists from time to time of
22
major donations to the party?
23
A.
24
No Mr. Chairman, specifically no. The role of the treasurer was to produce and provide for the Ard Fheiseanna, a Statement of Affairs. I was not acquainted
14:52:58 25
with how matters were dealt with insofar as headquarters and money collection
26
was concerned.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Is there a difference between position of honorary Treasurer and
29
Treasurer?
14:53:10 30
A.
There is. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:53:10
14:53:20
28 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
And you were?
An Honorary Treasurer yes, is a nominated person on behalf of the party who
4
reports annually to the Ard Fheis at the time, as to what the state of play
5
with the finances are, but they would not be involved in any of the day to day
6
business.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right. Thank you very much Mr. Flynn.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
14:53:32 10
11
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Fleming please.
14 MR. SEAN FLEMING, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS.
14:53:45 15
16
BY MS. DILLON:
17 18 19 14:54:12 20
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon Mr. Fleming?
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 118
Good afternoon Mr. Fleming, in particular I want you to deal with a particular
21
payment that was made by Monarch Properties indirectly to Fianna Fail through a
22
system known as the pick me up system, but in advance of that if we could, the
23
Tribunal could hear some evidence from you in relation to your involvement with
24
Fianna Fail. I understand that you were employed with Fianna Fail party as
14:54:32 25
financial controller in August 1982.
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 119
And that at that stage you had recently qualified as a chartered accountant?
28
A.
True.
29
Q. 120
So your relationship with Fianna Fail was as a professional employee if I can
14:54:44 30
put it like that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:54:45
14:54:54
29 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 121
And part of your duties involved liaising with the fundraising committee and
3
various people involved in fundraising, is that correct?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 122
You would also have been involved in dealing with monies that were to be
6
received by the party through an indirect route, if we can call it that, by way
7
of operation of what became known as pick me up system, is that right?
8
A.
Just say that again.
9
Q. 123
You would also have been involved on occasion with the reconciliations --
A.
Oh yeah.
11
Q. 124
-- let's say, that arose as a result of the operation of the pick me up system?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 125
And please correct me if I am wrong in relation to this, but the way a pick me
14:55:08 10
14
up system operated was that instead of making a direct political donation to
14:55:23 15
Fianna Fail, which would have been a receipt in the hands of Fianna Fail, a
16
party could elect to pay a creditor of Fianna Fail?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 126
That would require the creditor of Fianna Fail to issue an invoice.
19
A.
Normally, yeah.
Q. 127
And that invoice would then be paid by the person who wished to make the
14:55:37 20
21
donation indirectly to Fianna Fail, is that correct?
22
A.
Yeah, by way of paying a bill.
23
Q. 128
By way of paying a bill. And in the particular case of any party who wanted to
24
do this, would it have involved somebody in the party knowing that a person
14:55:55 25
wanted to make a donation by way of a pick me up?
26
A.
It would.
27
Q. 129
Because what would have to happen at the end of whatever fundraising was going
28
on, there would have to be a reconciliation between the creditor and Fianna
29
Fail, isn't that right?
14:56:08 30
A.
Certainly, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:56:10
14:56:28
30 1
Q. 130
So say, for example, if it was a printer who was printing for Fianna Fail, and
2
the printer had a bill of 250,000, let's just say with Fianna Fail, but a
3
100,000 of that had been paid by various people who wanted to make indirect
4
contributions to Fianna Fail, somebody in Fianna Fail would have to sit down
5
with the printer, is that right? And work-out what was owed or what was
6
outstanding on the account?
7
A.
Of course.
8
Q. 131
And was that person normally you?
9
A.
Well I was involved in the carrying out of the reconciliation, not in arranging
14:56:40 10
the PMU or with the actual donor, I wasn't involved in the fundraising, I was
11 12
more involved in the record keeping after the fundraising was done. Q. 132
13 14
Right. Does it follow from that, that at the time that you were employed first by Fianna Fail in 1982, that the pick me up system was already in operation?
A.
14:57:05 15
It was established, that practice, I think, had been ongoing in all voluntary organisations and you know, and it was there before I arrived in Fianna Fail.
16
Q. 133
But it was, and was it a system of fundraising in effect?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 134
What was it?
19
A.
It was the method where the fundraising was done, a person would -- various
14:57:21 20
types of fundraising, whether there was direct appeal to donors to make a
21
contribution to our fundraising efforts or there might have been a fundraising
22
lunch or golf classic or whatever the event might have been. And if somebody
23
had agreed to make a donation, that was the fundraising effort, but the method
24
by which they made the payment was what we called the PMU, we didn't go out
14:57:44 25
ever seeking PMU, people to pay bills directly, because most, over 95 per cent
26
of all our income would have been directly into Fianna Fail Head Office, so we
27
were not ever pursuing companies to make a payment through an indirect method.
28
Q. 135
29 14:58:04 30
But for the 95 per cent of people who made payments directly, Fianna Fail would issue a receipt directly?
A.
Absolutely because the cheque would have been received in Fianna Fail Head Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:58:07
14:58:17
31 1 2
Office. Q. 136
3 4
And would that be a receipt that would be signed by the Honorary Treasurer, for example?
A.
Like all big organisations, there would be preprinted receipts, they wouldn't
5
personally sign them, they would be printed by the printer and a receipt number
6
allocated to the receipt before it would be issued. But they wouldn't be
7
signed -- the name of the Treasurer would be on the receipt.
8
Q. 137
And records would be kept?
9
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 138
Then in relation to the five per cent income or political fundraising that came
14:58:29 10
11
in by way of pick me ups, it required a slightly different form of accounting,
12
is that right?
13
A.
14 14:58:48 15
creditor and then we reconciled the figures with our creditor. Q. 139
16 17
Yeah, because the receipt wasn't directly into Head Office, it went to our
So, what would happen is that, a creditor of Fianna Fail would issue an invoice to, let us say, for example, X company.
A.
Well really it would be a pro forma invoice or you know a pro forma document,
18
they may issue, the practice would have varied depending on the printer and how
19
they dealt with the actual donor, the practice could vary.
14:59:08 20
Q. 140
21
But in general terms the creditor, who is a creditor of Fianna Fail, would issue an invoice --
22
A.
Issue a document.
23
Q. 141
-- a document. That document would record a liability, isn't that right?
24
A.
That document would be to the company for provision of service.
Q. 142
So that would you have somebody like a printing company or a PR company --
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 143
-- who would issue an invoice, that on its face said X company owed them money,
14:59:24 25
28 29 14:59:41 30
in its simplest terms? A.
Well they would issue a document because sometimes the documents would say pro forma invoice, it mightn't be an actual invoice. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
14:59:44
14:59:54
32 1
Q. 144
If we just have --
2
A.
On some occasions.
3
Q. 145
If we just look at the Monarch Properties one it might help us, at 5350 please?
4
A.
Okay.
5
Q. 146
Now this is an invoice that issued to Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising Limited
6
on the 24th of February 1994, it issues by Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising
7
Limited, who I assume were creditors of Fianna Fail?
8
A.
They were indeed.
9
Q. 147
They were providing services to Fianna Fail.
A.
They would have had at the previous election.
Q. 148
And they are issuing an invoice to Monarch Properties at Monarch House in the
15:00:10 10
11 12
sum of 25,000 plus VAT, total 30,250 pounds.
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 149
Now before that could happen Mr. Fleming, somebody had to, in Saatchi and
15:00:27 15
Saatchi, had to issue the invoice?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 150
And they, I assume, could only issue an invoice if they received an instruction
18
from somebody that an invoice if that amount should be issued to Monarch
19
Properties.
15:00:38 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 151
And that instruction, I assume, could only have come into Saatchi and Saatchi
22
from somebody in Fianna Fail.
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 152
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 153
And that would mean that somebody in Fianna Fail would have to have been told
15:00:46 25
26 27
that Monarch Properties were prepared to pay 30,250 pounds to Saatchi and
28
Saatchi?
29 15:01:01 30
A.
Well they may not have had to be told, they may have been the person who made that arrangement with the donor. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:01:04
15:01:19
33 1
Q. 154
So that the person in Fianna Fail who had made, went to Monarch Property
2
looking for a political support and made this arrangement or an arrangement
3
equivalent to this with Monarch Properties, is that right?
4
A.
5 6
Yeah because somebody in fundraising side of Fianna Fail would have had to make that arrangement as opposed to direct cheque coming into head office.
Q. 155
Right so the issue of this invoice, in February 1994, would indicate that
7
somebody in Fianna Fail believed that Monarch Properties were going to pay
8
Saatchi and Saatchi 30,250 pounds inclusive of VAT?
9 15:01:36 10
11
A.
Yeah.
Q. 156
Right. Who was the person --
A.
Well no, not inclusive of VAT, 30,250 would be the value to Fianna Fail, the
12
VAT was not an issue. Fianna Fail is not registered for VAT, is not a trading
13
company. So the understanding would have been they would have paid 30,250.
14 15:01:57 15
Q. 157
Would be coming off the full bill, as it were?
A.
Yeah. The VAT would be of zero consequence to Fianna Fail because we received
16
the benefit of whatever the payment was, that's what we received.
17
Q. 158
30,250 pounds?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 159
But nonetheless you would also have received a copy of this invoice, is that
15:02:11 20
correct?
21
A.
Absolutely. Sure came from, Fianna Fail Head Office provided that.
22
Q. 160
That's right. But leaving aside you provided it to the Tribunal, in order for
23
to you deal well your own book keeping exercise, in order to keep your books
24
straight with Saatchi and Saatchi, you had to know how much had been paid by
15:02:29 25
26
people who wanted to make donations in this manner, isn't that right? A.
Absolutely. You need to know your outstanding liability to the company and
27
they would inform you if they had received a payment from somebody else other
28
than ourselves on our behalf.
29 15:02:47 30
Q. 161
So you would have seen, for example, that the invoice had issued in the sum of 25,000 pounds plus VAT? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:02:48
15:03:02
34 1
A.
I would have got a copy of that somewhere along the line, yes.
2
Q. 162
But you would have been looking at the bottom figure 30,250 pounds, that would
3
be coming off the full bill as it were to Fianna Fail from Saatchi and Saatchi?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 163
Because Fianna Fail wasn't registered for VAT?
6
A.
Absolutely.
7
Q. 164
Insofar as Saatchi and Saatchi were dealing with the VAT element of that, that
8 9 15:03:12 10
11
was a matter for Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
It was, yeah.
Q. 165
Not a matter for Fianna Fail?
A.
Fianna Fail wasn't involved in that particular transaction. We were the third
12
party -- that transaction was between Saatchi and Saatchi and Monarch, and the
13
VAT element you talked about would be between those two companies not Fianna
14
Fail.
15:03:25 15
Q. 166
Yes, but the benefit of the transaction was for Fianna Fail?
16
A.
Absolutely.
17
Q. 167
So to say they weren't involved in the transaction would not be quite correct,
18
Mr Fleming, because they were involved in the transaction insofar as the
19
benefit of the transaction was for you?
15:03:38 20
21
A.
Yes, but not any VAT aspect of it.
Q. 168
It would also mean, would it not, as of February 1994 the understanding in
22
Fianna Fail and the understanding in Monarch was that the amount of the
23
donation was to be 30,250 pounds?
24 15:03:51 25
A.
That's right.
Q. 169
But in the event the records would suggest that that in fact was not paid,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah, only 15,000 thousand was paid.
28
Q. 170
In fact that wasn't paid -- did this arise as a result of the election in, in
29 15:04:05 30
1993? A.
No, I think there was an election at the end of 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:04:10
15:04:23
35 1
Q. 171
Yes, and this is an invoice in February of 1994?
2
A.
Correct. So we still owed Saatchi and Saatchi money at that point in time.
3
Q. 172
Does that mean that somebody had approached Monarch in or around the time of
4 5
the issuing of this invoice in February of '94 looking for money? A.
Looking for a donation. Like after the '92 general election the Fianna Fail
6
party had serious debts and it took us a couple of years to clear those debts.
7
We would have been fund raising in '93 and '94 onwards and into '95 to clear
8
the debts that had arisen in the three general elections in the previous five
9
years.
15:04:42 10
Q. 173
11
That would mean, would it not, that Monarch Properties were on some list in Fianna Fail as somebody who ought to be approached?
12
A.
Absolutely. All major companies in Ireland would be written to by the party.
13
Q. 174
I think in September of 1994 at 5353 a cheque in the sum of 15,000 pounds
14 15:05:02 15
issued to Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 175
And according --
17
A.
From Monarch.
18
Q. 176
From Monarch Properties Services Limited, and according to the earlier document
19 15:05:14 20
the total amount expected had been 30,250 but 15,000 was paid? A.
That was all that was paid.
21
Q. 177
And that's all that was paid on foot of the original invoice?
22
A.
On foot of that, yes.
23
Q. 178
That would mean then that Fianna Fail themselves would have had to have made an
24 15:05:27 25
adjustment with Saatchi and Saatchi? A.
No.
26
Q. 179
No?
27
A.
No, because we would have only dealt with the transaction when the payment was
28
received. So up to the point in time that 15,000 was received we would have
29
owed Saatchi and Saatchi the full amount. When that 15,000 was received,
15:05:41 30
15,000 would have come off the balance owed by Fianna Fail. There would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:05:44
15:06:00
36 1
been no adjustment prior to the receipt of the money, because when you are in
2
the fundraising business you don't, to use a phrase, count your chickens before
3
they are hatched, only -- often you expect more money from a donor than you
4
actually receive. We would have only dealt with the transaction on the point
5
of receipt, and the Fianna Fail records nationally are written on income
6
received basis not a projected or expected income received basis.
7
Q. 180
Indeed the records with in Fianna Fail, again I think you are familiar with
8
this document at 5355, which record the pick-me-ups I think in 1994, insofar as
9
it deals with the one from Monarch Property Services Limited, it records that
15:06:24 10
in the third column it records that the invoice from the creditor, that's
11
Saatchi and Saatchi, to the donor company, that's Monarch, was for 30,250.
12
There was a copy cheque from the donor and a letter dated 19 of September from
13
the donor company to the creditor, but the amount paid is recorded in the third
14
column, fourth across and that's 15,000 pounds?
15:06:42 15
A.
Yeah. I ever only actually seen the original of that document last Friday for
16
my first time after, that document was not produced when I worked in Fianna
17
Fail, it was produced sometime later. I have only seen that document in recent
18
days for the first time, but it's accurate. The document is accurate.
19
Q. 181
15:07:10 20
And at 5356 there is a copy letter of the 19 of September 1994 enclosing a copy of the cheque and it's the letter from Monarch Property Services Limited and it
21
encloses a copy of the cheque for 15,000 in full and final settlement of the
22
invoice of 30,250. Now that is also supplied to the Tribunal by Fianna Fail?
23
A.
24 15:07:28 25
That was. And I would have seen that, the previous document was a document only generated in 1998.
Q. 182
That would mean, would it not Mr. Fleming, when the money was received by
26
Saatchi and Saatchi it was copied or the documentation in connection to it was
27
copied to Fianna Fail?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 183
So that you could keep your records.
A.
We would know then 15,000 had been received.
15:07:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:07:46
15:07:59
37 1
Q. 184
2 3
Do you know who it was in Fianna Fail that approached Monarch Properties or who in Monarch Properties was approached?
A.
No I don't, and as I said I personally was never involved in the fundraising, I
4
was more involved in the record keeping of the outcome of the fundraising
5
activities and party financial activities, so I was never involved in
6
approaching any donor and I don't know do we have a record of who on our
7
fundraising committee would have been the contact with Monarch Properties. It
8
could have been a number of people and I don't know who was the contact with
9
Monarch.
15:08:15 10
Q. 185
Certainly a document that I think was generated in or around the time that the
11
money was received, or not long afterwards, at 5349 which records the receipts
12
received in September 1994?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 186
There is a reference of Monarch Properties, Phil Monahan?
A.
Yeah, that's right.
Q. 187
Now there are other figures mentioned there and donors have been blanked out in
15:08:33 15
16 17
relation to it. But that would suggest that certainly in so far as Fianna Fail
18
were concerned, that the contact person was Mr. Phillip Monahan, is that right?
19
A.
15:08:52 20
Yeah, he was the proprietor I think of the company, I didn't know the man myself.
21
Q. 188
Yes?
22
A.
But he was the managing director. But that, I would just say that might have
23
been just written, the name of the gentleman involved may or may not have been
24
the point of contact. It would have been the name Monarch Properties mightn't
15:09:08 25
have been known to people at the time, so the name Phil Monahan was just put in
26
as a way of identifying the company, and he may or may not have been the point
27
of contact. It would be an over statement to draw that conclusion from that.
28 29 15:09:30 30
Q. 189
It would be an over statement to draw the conclusion that Fianna Fail recorded Phillip Monahan as the point of contact in dealing with receipts in September of 1994? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:09:31
15:09:42
38 1
A.
2 3
No, it would be an over statement to say from that document that Phil Monahan was the point of contact.
Q. 190
4
In the absence of any other information Mr. Fleming I suggest it's more than likely he was the point of contact?
5
A.
He may well be, I just don't know.
6
Q. 191
Certainly insofar as the documentation has been provided to the Tribunal by
7 8
Fianna Fail? A.
9
Well the letter you showed me a minute ago wasn't signed by Mr. Monahan at all. The previous document you had on the screen, the cheque from Monarch Properties
15:09:55 10
wasn't signed by Mr. Monahan, there was a marketing director, some other
11
director.
12
Q. 192
Mr. Noel Murray, at 5356?
13
A.
So there is two names. The letter from Monarch refers to -- I don't have the
14 15:10:07 15
16
document in front of me. Q. 193
There is the document.
A.
Yeah, so he may have been the point of contact or it could have been
17
Mr. Monahan or somebody else, I personally wouldn't know. Not only do I not
18
know, I wouldn't have known at the time either.
19
Q. 194
15:10:24 20
It wouldn't have been a matter that was of any interest to you because your function was a different function, it was nothing to do with the actual fund
21
raising, your job was the accounting?
22
A.
For the transactions.
23
Q. 195
Yes. And insofar as these pick-me-ups operated, Mr. Fleming, they operated to
24
the benefit of Fianna Fail insofar as they defrayed substantial expenses
15:10:43 25
26
incurred by Fianna Fail with creditors, isn't that right? A.
27 28
to a third party or sponsorship. Q. 196
29 15:10:59 30
Yeah, like any organisation receiving sponsorship or a donation, or a donation
Insofar as the companies were concerned, what was the advantage to the company who was making the payment in operating this system?
A.
The principle advantage, and one that I would have been aware of in general, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:11:03
15:11:22
39 1
would have been it gave confidentiality to the donor that people maybe, may not
2
have wanted staff in their own organisation to know they were making a payment
3
to any political parties and they might have routed their payment directly to
4
one of the suppliers of the party, that would be the principle reason and the
5
only real reason that I would see it gave them confidence. It was of no
6
benefit to the Fianna Fail party to receive the money this way, it would have
7
been far simpler for us to receive the cheque of 15,000 directly and lodge it
8
to our own bank account and use it for our own purposes, so there was no
9
benefit to us, but it was obviously a benefit to the donor because they were
15:11:43 10
11
able to have confidentiality within their own organisation. Q. 197
12
And do you know who it was in Fianna Fail who dealt with this particular item of fundraising, I think I have asked that you already?
13
A.
No, and I don't and I wouldn't have even known at the time, as such.
14
Q. 198
Can I show you 8513 please? This is a letter to the Senior Inspector of Taxes,
15:12:04 15
the Office of the Revenue Commissioners Investigation Branch, arising out of,
16
including an inquiry in connection with Monarch Properties, including the
17
particular payment of 15,000 pounds. I think this arose as a result of certain
18
disclosures made to the Revenue arising out of the operation of the pick-me-up
19
scheme and a number of companies were asked for information. But what I want
15:12:25 20
to draw to your attention there is the third paragraph?
21
A.
Can I just read -- I have never seen it before.
22
Q. 199
Yes, absolutely.
23
A.
I see Secretary, who is the letter from?
24
Q. 200
From Monarch Properties Limited to Mr. Brendan O'Brien, Senior Inspector of
15:12:38 25
Taxes.
26
A.
Okay, just give me a moment to read it because I haven't seen it.
27
Q. 201
Of course.
28
A.
Right. I have read the letter.
29
Q. 202
Now what I want to draw to your attention, I mean any tax computation or tax
15:13:15 30
matters arising from this is a matter for Monarch Properties and it's not a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:13:17
15:13:32
40 1
matter for you and I don't intend to deal with those with you, but what I want
2
to draw to your attention is the third paragraph in which the author of this
3
letter says they have now established from Mr. Des Richardson that they made a
4
payment of 15,000 pound to Saatchi and Saatchi Advertising Limited in September
5
1994 against a VAT invoice of 30,250 pounds?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q. 203
That would suggest that what is being talked about here is the payment you and
8 9 15:13:42 10
I have been talking about? A.
Yeah, definitely.
Q. 204
That would suggest, Mr. Fleming, that the person who was dealing with Monarch
11
Properties in Fianna Fail was Mr. Des Richardson?
12
A.
Could probably well have been, but I can't be absolutely sure that have.
13
Q. 205
Yes, was Mr. Richardson a fundraiser for Fianna Fail?
14
A.
He was, he was.
Q. 206
Was he involved in the compilation and preparation of lists in Fianna Fail in
15:13:56 15
16
relation to people who made donations to the party?
17
A.
With the members of the fundraising committee.
18
Q. 207
Yes. Did Mr. Richardson keep separate information and documentation,
19
independent of the party books and records, lists of the people he had on his
15:14:14 20
21
own lists? A.
22
Well the lists he had were the lists for Fianna Fail, I don't know who they would have been --
23
Q. 208
Did he operate a separate recording system?
24
A.
No.
Q. 209
Or keeping records separate to the records kept by Fianna Fail?
A.
All the receipts through fundraising committee and by Mr. Richardson were
15:14:25 25
26 27
lodged to the Fianna Fail Head Office account. They no separate bank account
28
at all.
29 15:14:42 30
Q. 210
Did Mr. Richardson have an office separate to Fianna Fail?
A.
He did. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:14:43
15:14:56
41 1
Q. 211
Where did he have that office?
2
A.
It was in the, I think it was in the Berkley Court.
3
Q. 212
Did Mr. Richardson keep his own records within that office, within that system?
4
A.
I am sure he kept a record of what he was doing, yes.
5
Q. 213
But you would say that his record should mirror the records of Fianna Fail?
6
A.
Well if he had -- I don't know that because I don't know what records you are
7
referring to, I don't know that. Like, what I would believe to be the case,
8
everything all the money he received would have been lodged to the bank account
9
of Fianna Fail and we would have a record of that.
15:15:15 10
Q. 214
11 12
Yes, leaving aside the money, but what we are talking about now are lists of subscribers or all of that type of information.
A.
Oh no, there was no parallel duty, he was the fundraiser, I was keeping a
13
record of, you know, of whatever was received and paid out. I wouldn't have
14
had a parallel copy of everything he was working on on a day to day basis.
15:15:35 15
Q. 215
So Mr. Richardson would have had his own lists of subscribers to Fianna Fail
16
and he would have made the returns to you, is that correct, in relation to the
17
monies that he received?
18
A.
19
Yeah, well the lists -- when he came to work for Fianna Fail the previous year he would have started with the list of subscribers that Fianna Fail had at that
15:15:52 20
point in time and his records would have been built from the Fianna Fail
21
records.
22
Q. 216
But would --
23
A.
-- and he would have added more to it and the members of the committee would
24 15:16:03 25
have added more to it. Q. 217
26
Yes, but it would be fair to describe Mr. Richardson's operation as somewhat independent of the Fianna Fail fundraising operation?
27
A.
Was Mr. Richardson's operation independent of the?
28
Q. 218
Of the mainstream Fianna Fail fundraising?
29
A.
No, he was the mainstream Fianna Fail fundraising.
Q. 219
But he operated a separate office?
15:16:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:16:20
15:16:28
42 1
A.
No, he didn't operate from 13 Upper Mount Street, no.
2
Q. 220
He operated a separate office?
3
A.
Yeah, in the Berkley Court.
4
Q. 221
And within that office he kept his own records?
5
A.
Yeah, I am sure he did.
6
Q. 222
All right. Thank you very much Mr. Fleming, if you answer any questions
7
anybody else might have.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much Mr. Fleming.
15:16:36 10
11
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Brian Lenihan please.
14 15:16:44 15
BRIAN LENIHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
16
AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: Q. 223
15:17:18 20
Good afternoon Mr. Lenihan.
Good afternoon Mr. Lenihan, I think the position is that you have never been a member of any local authority in Dublin, is that the position?
21
A.
Or anywhere else, yes, that's the position.
22
Q. 224
So that in so far as the lands in Carrickmines are concerned you have never
23 24
been in a position whereby you had any vote in connection with those lands? A.
15:17:35 25
26
That's correct. And I have never had any involvement with the lands at Cherrywood in Carrickmines at any time.
Q. 225
But you have been, I think, you have provided a statement to the Tribunal which
27
I will go through with you, but you have received two payments from Monarch
28
Properties or their connected companies, and possibly a third payment, is that
29
right?
15:17:52 30
A.
Well in fact when you wrote to me you notified me of two payments, but on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:17:57
15:18:08
43 1
examining my own records I identified a third payment which I notified to you.
2
Q. 226
Yes?
3
A.
That's correct.
4
Q. 227
And when you looked at your own records, Mr. Lenihan, in relation to the first
5
payment which I believe to be a sum of a thousand pounds in 1996, is that
6
right?
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 228
Were you, from your records were you able to identify how you had received
9 15:18:18 10
that? A.
No, I will explain the position. I purchased my present residence at Somerton
11
Road in the Strawberry Beds in 1991 and the late Phil Monahan was a very near
12
neighbour. His residence at Somerton had a common boundary wall with my
13
property. Soon after I settled in the area we became acquainted, he walked
14
past my house most days, and I talked to him at the weekend. My father died on
15:18:44 15
first of November 1995. A few days later Phil Monahan called to my house
16
during the morning time to express his sympathies. I remember it very well
17
because it was in fact the only occasion upon which he visited my house, though
18
I can say that as he often passed our front gate he often stopped and talked to
19
me and I met him at other social occasions within the parish. He stated to me
15:19:04 20
21
if I was going forward as a candidate for the vacancy in the constituency he would like to support me.
22 23
Now I was nominated as a candidate in March of 1996 and at that stage the -- I
24
do recall that, you know, various subscriptions were received and lodged. At
15:19:27 25
the conclusion of that by-election I compiled, in a simple copy book, a record
26
of every subscription received by me, and I acknowledged them by hand. I would
27
have written to Mr. Monahan and acknowledged the subscription.
28 29 15:19:44 30
When you wrote your letter to me, I examined my records and discovered that there was a subscription in the name of a company described as Monarch Property Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:19:50
15:20:06
44 1
Services Limited and that it was in the sum of a thousand pounds. Now I looked
2
at my bank statements but I wasn't able to ascertain from the bank statements
3
exactly the date on which the lodgement was made, but I am satisfied that I
4
made a comprehensive record of all subscriptions received during that
5
by-election and it's on that basis I volunteered the information to you about
6
that particular subscription.
7
Q. 229
8 9
people involved in your constituency at that time was Mr. Ned Ryan? A.
15:20:26 10
11
And I think your Director of Elections in that election was Mr, one of the
That's correct. He wasn't the Director of Elections but he was county councillor in the constituency, one of a number at the time.
Q. 230
I think Mr. Ryan is recorded in the books of Monarch as having received a
12
cheque for 1,000 pounds in March of 1996, and could I have 5776 please? And
13
just to draw to your attention this document which is dated 14 of March 1996,
14
you will see at the top "Brian Lenihan" and in brackets "Councillor Ned Ryan FF
15:20:57 15
and I think a cheque in that sum did issue to Mr. Ryan, at 5780 please, and was
16 17
endorsed on the back, at 5781, by Mr. Ryan. A.
Yes. I haven't seen this documentation before, but I mean I have no reason to
18
dispute it. I mean I am simply, what I have told you is that I recorded the
19
fact in my own records that I received a subscription from this company and my
15:21:28 20
form -- I would have assumed from the identification of the company that it was
21
intended as a subscription to my campaign by Mr. Monahan, who was a near
22
neighbour. I didn't solicit any contribution but it did arrive and I
23
acknowledged it and I know I acknowledged various contributions made to the
24
particular donor by handwritten letter.
15:21:49 25
Q. 231
26
I think Mr. Ryan has told the Tribunal he was not a candidate in that election at that time?
27
A.
No he wasn't. He was a local Fianna Fail County Councillor.
28
Q. 232
But that he was involved in fundraising in the constituency at that time?
29
A.
He was, but I have to say that he didn't, you know my campaign was not funded
15:22:09 30
in that way substantially, in fact when looking through the list of donors I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:22:13
15:22:32
45 1
have to say this to Members of the Tribunal, the most generous donors I had
2
were members of the legal profession.
3
Q. 233
I think insofar as the, you received --
4
A.
-- I am not disputing the fact that he may well have handed the cheque over to
5
me and it was lodged in an account on my behalf. I haven't been able to
6
ascertain that as a matter of evidence. I quite accept it's a reasonable
7
inference to draw that the cheque payment was made to me through Mr. Monahan,
8
or through Councillor Ryan. That seems very clear from your records, and I
9
thank you for that.
15:22:48 10
Q. 234
And I think that subsequently in 1997, at 6183, there was a payment of 500
11
pounds for a golf classic, and that's recorded I think about eight or nine from
12
the bottom on the document that's on screen. And I think also in 1999 a sum of
13
300 pounds from Dunloe Ewart, is that the position that accords with your
14
records Mr. Lenihan?
15:23:12 15
A.
Well I accept that golf classics took place on those occasions as I outlined to
16
you in my statement, and I can identify where the sums were lodged, so yes I
17
would accept that it's reasonable to assume those payments were made. I don't
18
have a precise list of all the donors in the golf classics, you will appreciate
19
you can have 35 to 40 teams at a particular classic. The donors are
15:23:36 20
acknowledged afterwards, and since my appointment as a minister I have not
21
organised any golf classic. I think a minister has a different position from a
22
Dail Deputy who has no executive responsibility, so as a result I don't have a
23
list, a current list of golf classic subscribers or assistance.
24
Q. 235
15:24:01 25
I think in fact that at 6306 there is a copy of the cheque in the sum of 500 pounds made out to you?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 236
And that seems to arise from a golf classic?
28
A.
That is correct. And that was made, that was a classic that was organised as
29 15:24:12 30
the sole fundraiser before the 1997 general election, and the proceeds of that golf classic were applied to both party purposes and campaign purposes for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:24:17
15:24:30
46 1 2
myself. Q. 237
Were you ever approached by anybody from Monarch Properties seeking your
3
support or seeking to ask you to seek speak to any of your Fianna Fail
4
colleagues on local authority in connection with any of their lands?
5
A.
No, never. In connection with any of their lands, and I appreciate you are
6
investigating here the lands at Cherrywood, and the lands at Cherrywood I know
7
from what you have said in the letter are located in the Dun Laoghaire county.
8
Dun Laoghaire county was never part of my area, the split of the old Dublin
9
county into three took place before I was elected a member of Dail Eireann, so
15:24:52 10
I would not have been from a position to talk to any councillor in Dun
11
Laoghaire at any stage of my public life, but I can say that I have not
12
discussed the lands at Cherrywood before, during or since my election as a
13
member of Dail Eireann.
14 15:25:04 15
Now you asked then about any other lands that Monarch might have, and of course
16
Monarch had lands at Somerton near my house, and as a private citizen I had
17
opposed the rezoning of those lands for residential use, I think an attempt was
18
made to rezone them for that use in the early '90s. So Mr. Monahan would have
19
made his subscription in the full knowledge of that.
15:25:26 20
Q. 238
I think Ms. Mary Flaherty told the Tribunal she was approached by Monarch
21
Properties, even though she lived outside the area, and I think her
22
constituency is not that far away from your own constituency, that she had been
23
asked to speak on behalf of Monarch with her Fine Gael colleagues on Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council. Did anything similar ever happen to you?
15:25:46 25
A.
No, no. I am not clear, by the way, in relation to the planning history. I
26
have been following the proceedings of the Tribunal in the newspapers, but my
27
understanding is that the most crucial and contentious votes took place in the
28
early 1990s, and I didn't quite see what votes took place in Dun Laoghaire
29
county, but in any event I was not asked by them nor did I make representations
15:26:11 30
to anyone with the lands in Dun Laoghaire. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:26:13
15:26:33
47 1
Q. 239
2 3
I think Mr. Edward Sweeney has told the Tribunal in his statement that he had contact with you at some time. Do you ever recollect meeting Eddie Sweeney?
A.
No, and that surprises me. I didn't peruse the booklet of documentation but I
4
certainly went back over the years. I don't know has Mr. Sweeney fixed a
5
particular year for this particular representation?
6
Q. 240
No, at 2191 he simply says "I specifically recall having had contact at some
7
time or other with the following political representatives" and approximately
8
halfway down that list is Brian Lenihan TD Senior and Junior. Now Mr. Sweeney
9
has not yet given evidence Mr. Lenihan so you will appreciate this is the bet
15:26:53 10
11
information the Tribunal has at this moment in time in relation to the matter? A.
He has given a very long list and I must say I am surprised at him suggesting
12
that, obviously I have to reserve my rights in relation to that. I don't have
13
and I would have, a distinct memory on this particular issue, and I certainly
14
wouldn't, you know I would recall were such a representation made to me. And I
15:27:15 15
am certainly not being made aware of particular plans that they have made. But
16
again -- I do want to assist the Tribunal, but I cannot recall a Mr. Sweeney
17
first of all. The one employee named in your list whom I would know is
18
Mr. Lynn, because Mr. Lynn was constituent of mine and I knew himself and his
19
wife, and he certainly never spoke to me about these matters.
15:27:45 20
21
Q. 241
I think Mr. Lynn lived in Blanchardstown?
A.
He lived in Blanchardstown for a while, I don't think he lives there any
22 23
longer. Q. 242
24
Thank you very much Mr. Lenihan, if you answer any questions anybody else might have.
15:27:56 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much Mr. Lenihan for your assistance?
Just in relation to Mr. Sweeney, I mean -- you know, obviously he intends to
28
raise some issue. It is possible I suppose that Monarch made a general
29
presentation to which they invited people, but I don't recall being at such a
15:28:15 30
presentation I have to say. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
15:28:16
15:28:30
48 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
the need to return you can certainly.
4
A.
But when he gives, comes to give evidence, obviously if you feel
Yes, I am not sure it will be essential. Thank you very much.
5 6
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. All right, that concludes today?
7 8
MS. DILLON: Yes, I think we are sitting at 10 am tomorrow because, due the
9
non-availability of Mr. O'Herlihy for this morning we have had to put in
15:28:39 10
11
Mr. O'Herlihy for tomorrow morning, but I think you are sitting at 10 o'clock to take one councillor witness and to take Mr. Bill O'Herlihy at 10.30.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
All right, 10 o'clock tomorrow. Thank you.
14 15:28:58 15
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 648
10:21:40
10:35:19
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
8TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.30 A.M:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, sir. Mr. Larry Lohan please.
7 8
MR. ABRAHAMSON: Chairman, I wonder just before you start to hear evidence, if I
9
could briefly mention a matter, my name is William Abrahamson and I appear with
10:35:28 10
Mr. Sanfui and Mr. Marray for Monarch and some of the other individuals. It
11
just came to our attention that when limited representation was granted to our
12
clients, the reference was to Monarch Properties Limited and my solicitor was
13
just anxious that I would clarify to the Tribunal that we do also appear for
14
all the companies in the Monarch Group, including L&C Properties and Monarch
10:35:46 15
Services Properties.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Well, we understood that and in so far as the granting of limited
18
representation was made, it applies to all those parties.
19 10:35:55 20
MR. ABRAHAMSON: That's the point I simply wanted to clarify. Thank you,
21
chairman.
22 23
MR. LARRY LOHAN, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
24
BY MS. FOLEY:
10:36:13 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Lohan.
27 28 29 10:36:27 30
Q
1
MS. FOLEY:
If I could take you back to where we left off on the last
occasion, Mr. Lohan, if I could have 7172 please. This is the map that was being considered at the meeting of the 11th November 1993. www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:36:41
10:36:58
2 1
Now, the Development Plan review commenced around October 1987 and at this
2
stage it's November 1993, a month from the end which is about six years into
3
the process. The map that we have here is where all of the yellow lands, both
4
Monarch lands and the surrounding lands are one house to the acre and then we
5
have, I don't know if you can see 4A and 4B, the two squares in the centre of
6
lands there which are zoned for C, town district centre and then the lands
7
beside that in white which are agriculture. I was wondering what you thought
8
of that map?
9
A
Well, I know the area intimately because I live beside it, I am very poor at
10:37:24 10
map reading and my sense of direction is also poor but I know those lands
11 12
intimately. Q
2
But I was wondering what you thought -- there's a large area, I think it's 178
13
hectares at two houses to the hectare which would be about 356 houses that the
14
entire of those yellow lands would take and then you have 4A and 4B which is
10:37:44 15
the town centre and the other two sides of the town centre are fields. So
16 17
from -- what would you think of that as a map for November 1993? A
Well if I take it back to my original motion to the council was to leave the
18
lands as they were until such time as all the infrastructure was in place and
19
that didn't actually happen until 1996. Unfortunately for me, my motion was
10:38:08 20
roundly defeated, so I had to accept that and move on and consider other
21 22
elements. Q
3
23 24
on two sides by fields and the other two sides by 356 houses? A
I was totally against the town centre and I put down a motion to have it
10:38:27 25
26
What would your opinion be of it, that where you have a town centre surrounded
rezoned down to neighbourhood centre. Q
4
And I think the Tribunal has heard that the developers wouldn't have been
27
prepared to develop the lands at one house to the acre, that it wouldn't have
28
been viable and you said yourself on the last occasion that from your own point
29
of view, by the time it had come to November 1993, you didn't think one house
10:38:44 30
to the acre was good development. www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:38:46
10:39:05
3 1
A
I thought it would be very bad development of a very important parcel of land
2
because on the other side of the N11, you have houses at 16 to the acre, up to
3
2/3,000 houses, so I thought would be very elitist to have that type, in other
4
words a two tier society, the very rich on one side of the N11 and the very
5
poor and unemployed on the other side of the N11.
6
Q
5
And would you as well that a town centre, that from the point of view of
7
getting tenants for a town centre where you are surrounded by fields and 356
8
houses, that that would not be commercially viable to develop either?
9
A
Well my interest was the town of Dun Laoghaire which I regarded to be dying on
10:39:23 10
11
its feet. Q
6
But at this point on this particular map, we now have a town centre and the
12
residential as I described to you, would you consider that that was a good
13
planning perspective, would you consider that to be a good and viable map?
14
A
Well history has proven that it wasn't because today the centre that's there is
10:39:42 15
not doing that terribly well.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
7
Yes. 8
19 10:39:54 20
Would you agree it was almost inevitable that change would have to happen?
Would you think that this map was the result of careful consideration of the planning issues and the needs of the Dublin community?
A
Well once we came to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, I took my direction
21
from the manager and the professional planners. I know they had a view of how
22
the lands should be developed. There were times I found it difficult to
23
comprehend but as they were professional planners, I spoke to them and took
24
direction from them because I have no experience of planning, I was a new
10:40:15 25
councillor and I had to read myself in the situation, I felt I owed myself that
26
and I owed my community that and I also I would get, from the community as
27
well, I was getting mixed messages, total opposition to everything in
28
Cherrywood and total support for everything in Cherrywood and in between, you
29
had kind of --
10:40:33 30
Q
9
So would you agree there were two powerful lobby groups? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:40:36
10:40:52
4 1
A
Absolutely. You had the Carrickmines Preservation Association on the one hand
2
who were willing to accept four houses to the acre at one stage, they changed
3
their minds subsequently, and then you had the Monarch proposals.
4
Q
10
5 6
And that -- would you agree this map might be the result of the impact of two powerful lobbying groups rather than careful considered planning?
A
Well the lands were already zoned in 1983, 167 acres was zoned in 1983 and that
7
was the fact I suppose you had to live with.
8
Q
9
A
11
With septic tank. You couldn't rezone it back to agriculture without huge legal cost and legal
10:41:08 10
implications.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
10:41:38 15
Q
12
So it had to remain residential? I would have thought so, yes.
13
Could I have 7226 and 7227 beside each other please. Yes, this is the motion for the last day, yes.
14
11th November. Just to review, we were just pointing out that the area that
16
you have outlined there, you are proposing four to the, four houses to the acre
17
and that the rest remained at one?
18
A
The last day when you brought this up, of course it was 13 years or more since
19
I seen it and I was totally vague, relatively vague about it, I just gave you
10:41:59 20
whatever I could remember. Naturally since then I have been talking about, not
21
talking about it, thinking about it, and I had no documentary evidence of any
22
type except what you provided for me to look back on, which I did.
23 24
I realised at the time that the manager -- this was a compromised motion on the
10:42:19 25
manager's proposal, I know, your honour, you have problems with it or
26
understanding where it came from, there were three ruling parties in the
27
council at the time, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Progressive Democrats, of
28
which we were two, and my name would be attached to that motion because I was
29
part of the ruling group.
10:42:37 30
Q
15
I don't understand what you mean by part of the ruling group? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:42:43
10:42:56
5 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Well the group who elected the Cathaoirleach. 16
Like in the Dail, we were a coalition, if you like. 17
5 6
Oh I see.
Okay. So you are saying this was a compromise between the manager, what the manager was proposing and what else?
A
It was a compromise with what the manager was proposing and what the council as
7
a group were willing to vote for or to accept. And centre to it was the
8
capping of the district centre down to neighbourhood centre, which would of
9
course have negative impact on the development.
10:43:16 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
10:43:52 15
A
18
Sorry, Mr. Lohan, you described your group there as a coalition? That's right.
19
Who would be part of the coalition? Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and Progressive Democrats.
20
And what activities did the coalition discuss? Really I suppose the basic function of any coalition is that they elect the
16
Chair or the Cathaoirleach at any one time. There would be no inter-party
17
discussions on issues, probably each party would come to their own conclusion
18
and then --
19
Q
10:44:16 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
10:44:43 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
10:45:12 30
21
Such as motions or -Yes and would you accept it or would you go with it or might you go with it.
22
Your coalition was formed principally for the election of the Cathaoirleach? That's right, yes.
23
Mr. Lohan, you described yourselves as part of the ruling group. Yes, the group that elect the Cathaoirleach, yes.
24
And would that mean that you would have a majority? Yes, we would have.
25
So that Fine Gael, the Progressive Democrats -And Fianna Fail.
26
And Fianna Fail. If I could have please page 2359, this is a map of the lands following the 11th November 1993 meeting and the success of your motion. If www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:45:22
10:45:41
6 1
you could see the lands outlined in red, the yellow part, sorry the lands
2
outlined in red are Monarch lands, the yellow lands are now ten to the hectare,
3
the blue remained agricultural and the C are still town centre and the yellow
4
around are at one to the acre. I was wondering what you thought of that map,
5
did you feel it was an improvement on the previous map?
6
A
That, I can't recall what I thought at the time. I do remember questioning
7
when the motion was presented whether there was going to be access for the
8
development of the lands and I remember being informed at the Wyattville end,
9
there would be access within a year but at the further end of the lands, there
10:46:07 10
wouldn't be access until maybe 7, 8, 10 years, until the motorway was complete.
11
So the access was the big problem with the developments of the land in total.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
27
The upper end, towards the M50 side; the Southeastern Motorway side. 28
10:46:33 15
If I could have page 3983 please. This is a letter from Phil Reilly dated the 23rd February '94, replying to you and it's a request for support for a T box.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
That's right. 29
For the Alana club? When I was Cathaoirleach in Dun Laoghaire I was very much involved in local
19
community activity and the Alana club are a drug free group who support people
10:46:56 20
who have alcohol or drug problems, so they were short of funds and I said I
21 22
Which end of the lands do you say there was difficulty with access?
would help them in a fund-raising event, that was it. Q
30
I was wondering how well do you know Mr. Reilly, I see there is a handwritten
23
note on it saying "Larry Lohan reckoned Monarch should have first option on the
24
T box and matters like that" and I was wondering how you knew Mr. Reilly?
10:47:24 25
A
I met Mr. Reilly a few times when their road show was first put out because I
26
went along as often as I could to see it and to get to know exactly what they
27
were proposing. Eventually I told them I couldn't support them, but that's
28
when I would have known Phil Reilly but mostly it would have been through
29
Mr. Lynn, Richard Lynn, that I would offer anything like this.
10:47:48 30
Q
31
Can I have page 5084 please, this is around the same time, it's the end of www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:47:55
10:48:11
7 1
April 1994, and it's an expense claim form for Mr. Lynn suggesting that in that
2
week, he met yourself and he is charging expenses of 40 pounds 53 pence
3
attributable to this meeting, do you recall meetings alone between yourself and
4
Mr.--
5
A
I told you the last day, I would have no recall of small items like that,
6
because I would never recall something like that myself.
7
Q
8
A
32
You wouldn't recall having had a meeting? No. I recall having met Richard several times outside council meetings and
9
that but --
10:48:26 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
33
But not on a one to one? I wouldn't, no.
34
If I could have the map at page 2722 please. This is in April 1994 and it's a
13
draft area action plan suggested by the manager. You will see the lands
14
outlined in red there, the Monarch lands.
10:48:57 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 35
But the plan was initiated as I say by the manager and the planners, the
17
residential densities have been increased. There was 65 and a half acres zoned
18
B and G which are considered anomalies. They would be the agricultural lands
19
that you have seen on the previous maps and the residential densities have been
10:49:16 20
increased, there's no mention of a science and technology park here.
21 22
I don't know if you recall in May 1994 Councillor Gilmore proposed a motion
23
"That the committee welcomed the development of a science and technology park
24
in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown area and in order to encourage and facilitate
10:49:36 25
such development, the council agrees to review the zoning of the lands at
26
Cherrywood Loughlinstown which are owned by Monarch Properties."
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:49:52 30
That's correct. 36
Do you recall this proposal of a science and technology park? The science and technology issue arose towards the end of 1993 for the first time, I was Cathaoirleach at the time and I remembered the manager telling me www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:49:55
10:50:10
8 1
about this proposed science and technology development and they asked me what
2
would be my attitude towards them and I said I would totally approve of it
3
because all my life I had been in education and at the time we were
4
endeavouring to get a third level institution into Dun Laoghaire which we
5
subsequently got. Which is now the Institute of Art Design and Technology. So
6
anything that would be favouring employment or for third level students or
7
research and development, that type of thing I would be totally supportive of.
8
Q
37
9 10:50:32 10
And would you have heard this proposal of a science and technology park before the November 1993 motions that finalised the --
A
It was about November 1993 I heard about it for the first time. I knew about
11
the one in Limerick and I had been down there at the University of Limerick and
12
I knew how exciting a project they were, particularly as we had UCD down the
13
road only five kilometres. I felt it would be an ideal location, there was no
14
guarantee we were going to get it.
10:51:00 15
Q
38
16
Was that your understanding, that it was the Monarch lands were only one of the areas proposed as a science and technology park?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
That's right. 39
There were a number of other lands competing as it were? I think there was a special group put together from our council to deal with
10:51:09 20
the minister at the time, enterprise and whatever, Minister for Enterprise, to
21
see if we could get --
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
10:51:22 25
A
26
Q
40
Get it into your area? Into our area.
41
But there were other areas in Dublin, is that right? Yes, it was on open competition really at the time.
42
Later on at this meeting in June 1994, Monarch were anxious for the manager to
27
prepare a draft variation to include the science and technology park and if I
28
could have 5202 please. And one of their goals was to -- point 2 there was "To
29
re-examine the areas noted in the report of the 23rd May 1994 for their present
10:52:05 30
zoning being anomalous" and this would refer to the B and G lands that was saw www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:52:10
10:52:22
9 1
on the previous map which had been zoned for agriculture. At the end of the
2
note of this meeting, "The specific members should be approached on the basis
3
of moving and supporting a motion from the floor, in particular senior members
4
of the Progressive Democrats should be approached and their support obtained."
5
And I think page 5203 please, you see there third at the end of the list there?
6
A
7
Q
I see it. 43
You have been highlighted as a person who's support should be sought and the
8
note is taken by Mr. Lynn on the 16th June 1994. Do you recall at this time
9
for the time of the proposal of the science and technology park being contacted
10:52:45 10
11
by Mr. Lynn seeking your support? A
I can't, but I do -- I can tell you that I was supportive of the development
12
from day one.
13
Q
14
A
10:53:00 15
Q
44
So there would have been no difficulty in gaining your support? Absolutely none.
45
I think on the 14th November 1994, agreement, "the manager informs the council
16
that agreement had been reached between Guardian Royal Properties, Monarch
17
Properties Limited about a potential purchase of one third of the lands which
18
would form the proposed science and technology park."
19
A
10:53:20 20
Q
21
A
I think that was for a joint venture. 46
Joint venture. Because science and technology by their very nature are slow moving things, it
22
takes up to 10, 12 years to bring them to fruition, so it was going to entail
23
ongoing investment so the council would have to get involved to ensure that
24
such ongoing investment would be there.
10:53:37 25
Q
47
On this occasion the manager proposes that "the procedures for Draft Variation
26
Plan be set to place to provide for the rezoning of the lands for the park, the
27
reciting of the existing C zoned lands and the lands currently zoned
28
agriculture to be rezoned at a density of 16 houses to the hectare." And this
29
motion was agreed. Did you find that the zoning of 16 houses to the hectare
10:53:59 30
was preferable to the four houses to the acre which the other lands had? www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:54:04
10:54:25
10 1
A
Well eight to the acre or 16 to the hectare is the zoning on the other side of
2
the road. So I suppose I always felt that if you are going to zone something
3
properly and you are going to maximise open space, leisure activities and
4
activities that benefit the community the large, the higher the density that's
5
zoned, the more opportunity you have for providing these facilities.
6
Q
48
If I could have page 5518 please. This is another one of the expense claims
7
forms, Mr. Lohan, you just see there in December 1994, Mr. Lynn has noted
8
contact with yourself again there, you see the sum there of 78 which you have
9
already told the Tribunal you have no recollection of.
10:54:50 10
A
None. I know -- I never had a meal with Mr. Lynn, I am absolutely sure of
11 12
that. Q
49
And then on the 24th April 1995 the manager informs the council there were a
13
number of submissions, three in favour of the variation, 15 against but he
14
recommends that the variation takes place without amendment and there was a
10:55:10 15
vote in that regard, the vote is 23 for the variation without amendment and you
16
were in favour of that I think, that would be your --
17
A
18
Q
19
Yes. 50
Could I have map 7283 please. This is the final map posed to the variation where we see that the stripy lands there are the science and technology park,
10:55:47 20
the lands that are outlined in red and pale colour are ten to the hectare and
21
then the lands on the other side, the ones we were speaking of are 16 to the
22
hectare. 5619 please. This is a letter from Mr. Michael Riordan to
23
Mr. Richard Lynn from May 1995. Seeking support for the Dun Laoghaire Adult
24
Education Board for the 16th.
10:56:22 25
A
Yes, that's correct, I was chairman of that board for eight years. Our
26
function was to take people who were illiterate, who couldn't read or write
27
over a period of years to give them reading and writing skills and numeracy
28
skills and each year we had a session where we would put on display the works
29
of the groups within the county for three days and on one occasion, our
10:56:47 30
president actually opened so it was quite a big event. And it was very www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:56:50
10:57:09
11 1
important to the people concerned and I remember on one occasion, the year the
2
president opened it, one of our students who four years before couldn't read or
3
write was able to give a recital of his own poetry and for him that was a
4
hugely significant thing and his family. I was very proud of my involvement.
5
Q
51
I think Monarch had been regular supporters, they supported you for 100 pounds
6
in 1993 and this letter indicates that they supported you 200 pounds the
7
previous year?
8
A
There was five or six companies we wrote to and Michael Riordan we wrote to
9 10:57:34 10
every year and generally they were all supportive of it. Q
52
5735 please. Just to show you, Mr. Lohan, another one of these expense claims
11
formed and this one is for January '96, the weekend of 5th January 1986 again
12
indicating that Mr. Lynn had some contact with you that week.
13
A
14
Q
I have no recall of these events. 53
10:58:07 15
The next sign of any contact is in June of 1996 at 6019 please and it's the following year, again the adult education exhibition where you are seeking a
16
donation from Monarch Properties and again they donate 200 pounds to the cost
17
of the exhibition.
18
A
19
Q
That's correct. 54
10:58:33 20
request contribute to tickets.
21
A
22
Q
That's right. The 3rd August 1996. 55
23 24
6070 please. A couple of months later in August of 1996, Monarch at your
8322 please. This is the cheque there, it appears to have been made out directly to yourself. And in such circumstances, what would you then do?
A
We had an accountant in charge of the draws and I'd hand all the cheques over
10:58:58 25
to him and where necessary, he would get me to endorse them but generally they
26
were made out directly to the Progressive Democrats, it would be unusual to
27
make one out to myself.
28 29 10:59:23 30
Q
56
Could I have 7465 please. This is the review of the 1993 Development Plan these are the draft changes proposed by the manager and I think you see the Monarch lands there, you see the yellow lands refer to changes 13 and 14 which www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:59:27
10:59:47
12 1
is changing the zoning from AP10 to A and change 14, AP16 to A and for the
2
purpose of maximising potential of the lands suitable for development and in
3
effect lifting the densities and changes 4 and 5 are the stripy lands, down at
4
the bottom of the lands, are to extend the science and technology park.
5
A
6
Q
7
A
That's correct. 57
As far as I can recall, there was very little opposition, I think there may
8 9
These changes passed through the council and there seems to be no opposition.
have been one or two but very little. Q
58
11:00:06 10
And the extension of the science and technology park, what was your belief with a view to that extension?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
I think we extended by 20 acres or something, I was supportive of that. 59
What was the reasoning behind that? Again, everybody was so supportive of the science and technology and I think it
14
was developing as such a rate at that stage that it justified the zoning more
11:00:25 15
land because it would be filled.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
60
The park was being developed -The park would be filled, yes.
61
19
Could I have 7258 please, this is the first display of the Draft Development Plan of 1987 and a number of representations were received from Monarch
11:00:43 20
Properties there, you see the numbers if we could enlarge that bit there
21
please. You see their representation 360 at the top left representation?
22
A
23
Q
I see that, yes. 62
24
it was to remove the cap on the district centre at 362 and then below that
11:01:07 25
representation 359 was to extend the science and technology parks across the
26 27
And that was to extend the district centre and then the representation beside
road. A
I I recall that is -- we resisted extending the cap, we had a cap and we wanted
28
the cap maintained because we wanted to development Dun Laoghaire and not
29
outside the town and particularly not in Monarch lands.
11:01:24 30
Q
63
I think while the motion to lift the cap was put, there was an amendment put to www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:01:32
11:01:46
13 1
it, it was successful with the addition of the terms accepting the manager's
2
recommendation in his report that "The following specific objective replace the
3
cap, the retail elements on lands zoned DC at Cherrywood should compliment
4
adjoining land uses. As such it shall be of a size which will provide for the
5
local needs of the proposed science and technology park, the proposed business
6
park and the adjoining residential neighbourhoods." That isn't quite as firm
7
as a cap, is that correct?
8
A
9
Q
No it's not. 64
11:02:02 10
successful but the amendment to include without prejudice to the advancement of
11
the objective of a public golf course.
12
A
13
Q
That's correct. 65
14
So I think at this stage the lands are now fully developed and there are no areas remaining that are not suitable for development. So from a developer's
11:02:20 15
16
And also the motion to extend the science and technology park was also
perspective, this was a very happy outcome, would you agree? A
Well I was very very supportive of the pay and play, the golf thing and I was
17
very supportive of the science and technology and the zoning, I suppose that we
18
ultimately arrived at was in keeping with the zoning in the area generally, the
19
density levels, not the zoning, the density levels. They allowed for the
11:02:44 20
21
development of Druid's Glen and they allowed for a lot of open space. Q
66
Could I have page 6321 please. This appears to be an internal memo of Monarch
22
Properties addressed to Mr. Richard Lynn, copied to Noel Murray. I think Noel
23
Murray was the marketing director of Monarch Properties, did you know Noel
24
Murray?
11:03:08 25
A
26
Q
27 28 29 11:03:28 30
No, I think I met him once but I didn't know him. I knew of him. 67
And the note indicates that you telephoned and you wanted to speak with Mr. Lynn about the arts centre in Bloomfields?
A
There was a proposed arts centre in Bloomfields and it looked as if the arts group weren't going to take it up. The adult education centre, we were located in the VEC in Sallynoggin and we needed space in Dun Laoghaire very badly and www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:03:33
11:04:02
14 1
we were just inquiring if it was possible maybe we could maybe rent that space
2
if it become available, it subsequently didn't become available anyway.
3
Q
68
Could I have page 2078 please. This is the statement of Mr. Sweeney and dated
4
June 2000. And at page 2079 please, he indicates a donation to yourself on the
5
12th January 1999 for 450 pounds. Do you recall this?
6
A
I can't recall it but if he did, I would have to check that up for you, it
7
would be in the context of the local elections that were taking place that
8
year. But I definitely cannot recall getting any such payment from him.
9
Q
69
11:04:29 10
I think Mr. Lohan in your statement you told the Tribunal that you never received any political contributions or gifts from anyone associated with the
11
Monarch Group or any of the people outlined?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:04:47 15
Q
That's absolutely true, I made that statement in April 1999. 70
So you are not sure whether this payment took place or not? I have absolutely no recall of but I will check it up for you and see but I --
71
And there's a further payment, a contribution arranged by Mr. Richard Lynn in
16
June of 1999 indicating a payment of 500 pounds to yourself for the local
17
election expenses?
18
A
19
Q
11:05:04 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
That's correct. 72
I made the statement in April 1999. That was in June 1999. 73
Excuse me. Sorry, April -- which was it. No, my original statement.
74
That's 7620 please. This is in replay to the Tribunal's letter of April 2006. Yeah, I took the view that the Monarch lands had ceased in 1998 and that any
11:05:40 25
26
But you didn't in your statement, you didn't refer to this donation?
information you wanted was up to that date. Q
75
Could I have page 1300 please, this is the letter from the Tribunal to
27
yourself, Mr. Lohan, and at item 3 there if we could enlarge that please. "Any
28
payment or benefit you may have received from or on behalf of those listed at i
29
and ii" and I think you see there at ii, the names listed are the late
11:06:08 30
Mr. Phillip Monahan, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeney and Mr. Dominic www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:06:16
11:06:23
15 1
Glennane and Mr. Phillip Reilly. That was the question asked of you, Mr.
2
Lohan.
3
A
I took that being a reference to the period of the development of the Monarch
4 5
lands. Q
76
6
please, Mr. Lohan?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:06:40 10
If I could just enlarge, you see the last line of the second paragraph there
Q
I do indeed. 77
It says, "From the 1st January 1989 to date." Yes, I am sorry, I must have misread that.
78
11
Just to refer you then briefly to 6619 which is a request from yourself to Mr. Sweeney.
12
A
13
Q
Yes. That was for a draw we were running too. 79
14
You indicate that you have recently been appointed to the national executive party and asked to help out some financial problems and Mr. Sweeney notes he
11:07:03 15
purchased seven tickets at 100 pounds each in support of your request.
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 80
And then at page 1375 please, this is from the statement of Mr. Lynn, again you
18
will see items 7 and 8 there, around the same time period. A contribution to
19
the Dun Laoghaire Adult Education Board of 800 pounds.
11:07:29 20
A
21
Q
That would be correct, yes. 81
22 23
please. The last two items on that list. A
Yes, Dun Laoghaire Education Committee, fine, and local election. I accept
24 11:07:49 25
that, yes. Q
26 27
And then the tickets for the grand draw of 100 pounds and then page 1376
82
Thank you, Mr. Lohan, if you would answer any questions anybody else might have for you.
A
Thank you very much.
28 29 11:07:59 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Just one question, Mr. Lohan.
Yes, your honour. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:08:01
11:08:50
16 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could I have 2359, I think it's a map, the Development Plan
2
map of 1993 and 7283 beside it if I could for a second. I just want to ask,
3
Mr. Lohan, the one on the right is the lands after the variation of the 1993
4
plan and I think that was finally, I have forgotten the day, I think it was
5
1995 it was actually adopted.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
April 1995.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:09:00 10
April 1995. If you like I suppose it's about 18 months or so
after the draft development, the 1993 plan. And you were saying earlier that
11
when you came to sign the motion in November of 1993, that that was a
12
compromise. And I just want to ask you, ultimately 18 months later, all of the
13
Monarch lands are zoned otherwise than agriculture, isn't that correct, there's
14
no agriculture lands left?
11:09:28 15
A
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
the hectare. To the right, if you like of the old 1983 line, isn't that
19
correct?
11:09:39 20
A
And in November 1993, Monarch had their lands on ten houses to
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
this, obviously the science and technology park. And the district centre
24
capped.
11:09:50 25
A
And by April 1995, they had retained that and then they had
That's correct.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
old 83 line, is that correct?
29
A
And then they had 16 houses to the hectare, to the left of the
That's correct, yes.
11:10:01 30
www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:10:02
11:10:24
17 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
without, as I understand it, any compromise having to be achieved, is that
3
correct, Mr. Lohan?
4
A
I am just want to ask you, all that seems to have happened
Well as I said before, after '92 onwards, I took my direction from the county
5
manager and the professional planners. What they proposed, I tended to support
6
mostly.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
and you took at the '93 map, that's the, is that the Brides Glen there I think,
11:10:46 10
11
Yes but just if you look at that at that, 1995 variation map
is it? A
The Druid's Glen.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
diverse density zoning pattern there now, isn't that correct by '95?
11:10:58 15
A
I beg your pardon, the Druid's Glen, there seems to be quite a
As far as I can remember, yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
have 16 houses to the hectare and ten houses to the hectare. And in terms of,
19
just asking if anybody is looking at that and within the council, when that
11:11:17 20
came to be proposed, were the lands north of the Druid's Glen still within the
21 22
You have one house to the acre, is that right, and then you
jurisdiction of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown? A
The Druid's Glen runs through Cherrywood.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:11:31 25
As i understand it, the Cherrywood lands are still -- So the
houses, I am just wondering the houses, the lands that were zoned one house to
26
the acre, when you were considering if you like looking at densities and you
27
seem concerned about densities, you have given reasons as to why you voted why
28
you did, Mr. Lohan, that you didn't want an elitist pattern developing, which
29
obviously one can understand.
11:11:57 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:11:58
11:12:27
18 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
1993, how come some 18 months later, there was no great, I haven't heard
3
anyway, discussion about giving 16 houses to the hectare to lands that were
4
zoned agricultural, already zoned lands at one house to the acre, I know it's a
5
very long-winded question but you get my drift.
6
A
7
I am just wondering why, if that was a compromise in November
I understand where you are coming from but I honestly cannot recall as to why, what my reasoning or my thinking was at the time on that.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:12:43 10
11
All right and just one other thing. You said last time you
were here that Mr. Marren asked you to sign the motion, is that correct? A
That would be normal within the group.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
of being actually asked or?
11:13:00 15
A
That was the motion on the 11th, do you have of recollection
I don't have a recollection but I now I that's what would have happened.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: Obviously your signature is on it. I see. All right. Thanks
18
very much.
19 11:13:04 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
All right. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
22 23
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
24 11:13:10 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Gerry Gannon please.
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:13:12
11:13:41
19 1
MR. GERRY GANNON, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
2
FOLLOWS BY MS. O' RAW.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Gannon.
5
A
6
Q
Good morning. 83
MS. O'RAW:
Good morning, Mr. Gannon, my name is Eunice O' Raw, I will be
7
taking you through your evidence this morning. The Tribunal wrote to you in
8
April of this year with a note of a meeting that occurred back in August 1991.
9 11:13:54 10
A Q
That's correct. 84
And asked for you to provide a narrative statement and you did so. Just in
11
relation to that particular minute of a meeting, it appears that you attended
12
at a meeting with two other people or the three of you appear to have come
13
together, Mr. Noel Smyth, and Mr. Louis Scully, is that right?
14
A
11:14:16 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 85
You have given evidence to the Tribunal before. Yes.
86
18
And I think in that evidence, you said that you had a relationship with Mr. Smyth?
19
A
11:14:25 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That's correct. 87
And that was in relation to lands at Airfield, is that correct? That's correct.
88
In relation to those lands out at Airfield, the nature of the relationship that
23
existed there, Mr. Smyth owned the lands, I think you told that to the Tribunal
24
before, and then you were involved in obtaining planning permission in relation
11:14:49 25
26
to those lands, is that correct? A
I also had some of the lands owned myself in my name too, so there was a kind
27
of a both parties came together to get the whole thing sorted out.
28
Q
29
A
11:15:04 30
89
Did you purchase the lands together at the time? No, he purchased the lands, I forget now going back because obviously this was the last, this hasn't been brought to me before. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:15:07
11:15:26
20 1
Q
90
Yes. So when did you come on board with Mr. Smyth in relation to obtaining the
2
planning permission for these lands, the Airfield lands? Was it around about
3
the same time or did Mr. Smyth seek to obtain planning permission first of all?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
No. 91
Yes. 92
93
I see. So you didn't need any rezoning done at the time, it was just the planning permissions?
A
It was just basically a sewerage problem, there was a problem with the sewerage
12 13
Were the lands zoned for residential purposes at the time? Yes.
11:15:38 10
11
So it was he brought you on board to obtain the planning permission?
capacity. Q
94
14
I see, okay. So if we could have a look at a document please at 8549. And this is a letter dated the 19th June 1991, it's a letter from Mr. Smyth to
11:16:02 15
Mr. Louis Scully and it's in relation to the Cherrywood lands and he encloses
16
various different documents there in relation to the location maps, etc. and he
17
said "We anticipate that the 1983 plan is unlikely to be the one that will
18
finally be adopted". I think he is referring there to the 1983 road plan,
19
"However, perhaps you would like into the matter and set up a meeting with
11:16:26 20
Gerry and we can discuss it further." So this is in June 1991, Mr. Smyth
21
writing to Mr. Scully and suggesting that Mr. Scully would look into the matter
22
and set up a meeting with Gerry, do you think you are that Gerry referred to in
23
that letter there?
24
A
11:16:46 25
Q
More than likely. 95
26 27
Mr. Scully involved in the Airfield lands as well? A
No, Mr. Scully was -- he dealt in land, he was an agent, a land agent. An
28 29 11:17:08 30
Can I ask the relationship then between yourself, Mr. Smyth and Mr. Scully, was
auctioneer. Q
96
An estate agent and auctioneer, right. And after this letter was written, were you contacted, do you think, by Mr. Scully? Or by Mr. Smyth in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:17:14
11:17:37
21 1
these lands. We see that the minute of the meeting you were sent by the
2
Tribunal was in August of 1991, this letter is written in June '91. And you
3
attended a meeting in August '91. So presumably, between June and August, you
4
were contacted by Mr. Smyth or Mr. Scully.
5
A
6
Q
I have no recollection of it, I might have been, done. 97
7
1991?
8
A
9
Q
That's correct. 98
11:17:53 10
11
However, you ultimately ended up at a meeting in Monarch on the 27th August
Can you recall what was the intention of you attending this particular meeting, what was the purpose behind it?
A
Well to the best of my knowledge obviously in 1991, it was a long time ago and
12
the meeting wasn't a very long meeting as such.
13
Q
14
A
99
Yes. I do remember going into this big boardroom which was very impressive and I
11:18:08 15
remember we were a bit late, the meetings was a bit late but I think the main
16
thing that was the problem there, I think that in 1991 and correct me if I am
17
wrong because this is only meeting I think I had with about the land, I think
18
there was no sewerage line in Cabinteely at that particular time, there was no
19
sewerage capacity and obviously if you are to build houses, whether it's one to
11:18:35 20
the acre or five to the acre or six to the acre, you need a sewer line and I
21
think the houses at that stage were zoned on septic tanks, if I can remember
22
correctly.
23
Q
24
A
100
Yes. And I suppose why I was brought into the meeting probably was to see if it was
11:18:48 25
possible that a new sewer line which was about three miles away, again I am
26
only going from memory, I have no maps or recollection or no details of it,
27
that the sewer be brought in, I feel it needed a sewer line brought to the
28
site.
29
Q
11:19:08 30
A
101
At the time the lands were zoned for low density residential. I think it was one house to the acre, I am not quite sure but I think it was. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:19:12
11:19:39
22 1
Q
102
2 3
Do you remember a discussion or what was said about the zoning of the lands and the density of the housing?
A
Well not really. I think my view at the time was that septic tanks wouldn't be
4
viable on a large septic tank probably is viable on a house on, in a country
5
area but not in an area like that.
6
Q
7
A
103
Was there intention then to increase the density on the lands? No, it was totally a sewer line, the sewer line was far away and I had -- we
8
had already done a sewer line in Airfield, so I think we were the pain purpose
9
of the thing was to see could a sewer line be brought from Cabinteely to
11:20:00 10
wherever the sewer could be taken through.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
104
Correct. 105
14 11:20:14 15
And out in Airfield, you had to have a sewer line put in?
And was it the intention then that a similar project would be done here to see about how to get the sewer line out?
A
We brought a sewer line I think about two and a half mile in Airfield and this
16
was roughly, now I am going totally from memory, I think roughly it was
17
something similar distance, maybe a bit longer to get into a pipe where there
18
was capacity in the pipe to take houses.
19
Q
106
11:20:34 20
to be Noel Smyth, "introduced Gerry Gannon and Louis Scully and stated that --
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Sorry. 107
Page reference 3314. Sorry it should be appearing before you now. Yes.
108
11:20:56 25
"NS introduced Gerry Gannon and Louis Scully and stated that GG" who I take to be yourself "had obtained a planning permission at Grange Road, Malahide".
26
They would be the Airfield lands, would they?
27
A
28
Q
29 11:21:09 30
If we just have a look at the minute of the meeting, it said "NS" whom I take
Correct. 109
"On which Abbey Homes had had seven or eight refusals previously. He obtained permission within --
A
Sorry, that's a little bit of a exaggeration, I don't think it's seven or www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:21:14
11:21:26
23 1 2
eight. But that's what's there but I think they had one or two. Q
110
3
application that had been put in by Abbey Homes?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
Absolutely. 111
And where Abbey Homes -I would have my own engineers looking at this obviously and my architects to
7 8
You think they had one or two refusals. Did you have a look at the planning
see what was the problems. Q
112
9
And do you recall the difference between your application and the application that had been put in by Abbey Homes?
11:21:40 10
A
11
Q
12
A
A sewer line. 113
The sewer line. That was how it was achieved. Sewer pipe, well capacity, you can't flush a toilet without a sewer pipe. And
13
they were doing something similar that time to what Monarch was doing, they
14
were trying to put in a treatment plant at that stage but I thought wouldn't
11:21:58 15
16
work. It was in a residential area so it's different ways and means, you know. Q
114
"He obtained permission within a 15 month period for 770 houses with an
17
additional 135 houses to come together with restaurant, pub, etc, D was not
18
proceeding with a refurbishment at Donaghmede pending Malahide." Do you recall
19
what that is about?
11:22:21 20
A
21
Q
I think that that was reference to Dunnes Stores. 115
"GG was in contact with Manor Parks Homes in the sum of 6.5 million pounds.
22
(David Daly) prior to planning permission." Can you tell us what that was
23
about?
24
A
Manor Park had actually entered -- again I had -- Manor Park had entered a
11:22:49 25
contract with us to purchase the lands.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 11:23:07 30
116
The purchase the Airfield lands? Airfield lands, yes.
117
And "GG had looked at the Cherrywood site and recognised that there was some difficulties attached." So that would indicate that you had done some work on this beforehand? www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:23:10
11:23:17
24 1
A
2
Q
3
A
Well -118
Before this meeting? I knew there was a service problem, that there was no sewerage in Cabinteely at
4
the time.
5
Q
6
A
119
Right. And what were you proposing to do then? Well my engineers was proposing to put in a new sewer line from where were the
7
capacity was in the existing sewers in, I honestly don't know at the time where
8
it was, I think it was up in Shanganagh or somewhere. That was our proposal at
9
this stage, this was only very brief, it's just one look into a meeting, it
11:23:43 10
11
wasn't as if we done detailed studies on it or anything like that. Q
120
12
Mr. Smyth, and Mr. Scully?
13
A
14
Q
11:24:11 15
A
16
Q
Well I suppose Mr. Scully was a valuer, Noel Smyth was a solicitor. 121
122
And you decided to broach Monarch with this possible assistance, or to provide a service?
A
I don't quite know it was like that. I think they could have approached Noel
19 11:24:37 20
And the three of you had operated previously together? Yes, well he'd be -- Yes.
17 18
How did the three of you come together to present this to Monarch, yourself,
Smyth, I don't know, he might have rang me to see about it. Q
123
Yes and according to this note here. "He was prepared to offer his services to
21
provide as follows, GG to look after residential." Was that in relation to
22
providing the sewerage line?
23
A
24
Q
11:24:55 25
Yes. 124
"Monarch look after retail, GG use own architect for residential, GG will enter contract with Manor Homes. He states he has a good rapport with officials."
26
Can you tell me about that rapport that you had with officials and in obtaining
27
what whatever it was that needed to be obtained to provide this residential
28
development?
29 11:25:21 30
A
Well I suppose that, you are talking about 1991 when the services in Dublin were very bad and the services in Dublin at that stage was, there was usually www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:25:26
11:25:49
25 1
one pipe which also connected to surface water and sewerage into the one pipe
2
rather than nowadays it all goes into the one pipe, at the time there was a
3
certain amount of people connecting surface water mains into the sewer pipe. I
4
suppose what we did up in the last site, we disconnected, our proposals was to
5
disconnect all the existing surface water pipes into a separate surface water
6
main and to keep the sewer pipe separate and this was something similar what we
7
were thinking about here.
8
Q
125
9 11:26:04 10
But can you tell me about the contact you would have had with officials in order to obtain --
A
Personally I had no contact at all myself, my engineers would have, they had no
11
contact at this stage, this was just a proposal we were going to do, it never
12
materialised.
13
Q
126
14 11:26:16 15
But in relation to Airfield, for example, did you have any contact with the officials then?
A
No, not me personally, my engineers would have been in contact with them, I am
16
not an engineering person, so obviously that is an engineering detail that
17
would have to be worked out over many months.
18
Q
127
19
And your role was in relation to the development of the lands but you would have other professionals, architects and engineers?
11:26:38 20
A
21
Q
I am not an architect or an engineer. 128
Yes. So what exactly was your role in relation to it? If you are not the
22
architect or the engineer, just to explain exactly the nature of the service
23
that you would have provided to Monarch?
24
A
Well it happened they didn't want me at all but I suppose we would have looked
11:27:00 25
at bringing the pipe from A to B and seeing, first of all, was it viable to do
26 27
and secondly, could it be done. Q
129
Yes. There was a further meeting that occurred on the 3rd September 1991, this
28
is at 3328. And again, you are present with Mr. Noel Smyth, Mr. Louis Scully,
29
Mr. Edward Sweeney, Mr. Noel Murray and Mr. Richard Lynn, Monarch and it said
11:27:38 30
"NS stated that GG required to know the area of land devoted for residential www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:27:43
11:28:00
26 1
purposes and that to be retained for commercial and retail."
2
any discussions about how the land was going to be used at that time?
3
A
4
Q
Can you recall
I haven't seen this before actually. 130
5
It should have been in the documentation that was furnished to you, I believe a CD Rom of the entire brief was sent to you, so ...
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
I haven't seen it. 131
If you would like a minute to have a look at it. Yes.
132
11:28:49 10
And there's a following page as well, page 3329 please. Just to give you an opportunity to have a look at it. I think this appears to be the package that
11
you are presenting to Monarch of services that you would have provided and in
12
relation to that particular package, "NS then outlined the package required by
13
Mr. Gannon and Louis Scully to be involved in Cherrywood."
14
A
11:29:17 15
Q
I am sorry, can you put up -133
Sorry of course 3328 please. This is on the first page, it was a payment of
16
20,000 pounds for this they would open up discussions with David Daly in
17
relation to the sale of the residential lands to Manor Homes. I think you have
18
already said that you had an involvement with Manor Homes in your Airfield
19
site?
11:29:38 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 134
On signing of a contract for the residential lands, payment of 100,000 pounds
22
on the grant of planning permission, 12 percent of residential contract price
23
within this NS was to receive 2.5 percent of which he would not be taking and
24
then it goes on to outline further amounts there. Who, can you recall,
11:30:00 25
negotiated or who came up with those particular figures?
26
A
27
Q
Who wrote the letter? 135
Well this is a minute of the meeting that occurred and this is the Mr. Smyth
28
outlining the package that was, that he said that was being required by
29
Mr. Gannon and Mr. Scully.
11:30:21 30
A
I don't actually know. I think it was just discussions, just a discussion that www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:30:25
11:30:50
27 1
was brought through the same as the last letter, I don't think there's any
2
actually -- I don't know to be quite honest. It's the first I have seen of it.
3
Q
136
On the following page at 3329, it indicates there "E.S" whom I take to be
4
Mr. Sweeney indicated "that GG should do was to provide a layout which he felt
5
David Daly would like and make a submission advising timing etc, after further
6
discussion, NS submitted that the package as outlined by him should be
7
considered by Monarch and if acceptable, heads of agreement should be entered
8
into. The payment of the 20,000 pounds initial fee would be made and work
9
could then be commenced by both Mr. Gannon and Mr. Scully."
11:31:12 10
ever paid, that initial fee in?
11
A
12
Q
No. 137
13 14
A
No, I have no documentation at all about it, if I had I would have given it to the Tribunal.
Q
138
17
You mightn't have any documentation but do you recall assisting Monarch at all in their endeavours?
18
A
19
Q
No. 139
11:31:42 20
21
Did you do any work in relation to assisting Monarch in providing, in obtaining residential --
11:31:28 15
16
Was that 20,000
Do you recall any discussion about changing of zoning or changing of density at this later meeting?
A
No. I was taking the land basically at one house per acre which was in 1991, I
22
think Monarch was trying to achieve some development on the site at that stage
23
because obviously they had paid a lot of money for the site. So --
24
Q
140
11:32:07 25
Yes. Well at this time the lands were zoned on a very low density residential basis. Now, you have been presented at this earlier meeting as some one who
26
had obtained a large amount or high density planning permission on other lands,
27
was something similar being sought by Monarch here?
28
A
29
Q
11:32:35 30
I would say it probably was. They were trying to maximise their lands. 141
And given that their lands were zoned with low density residential, how did you propose to them you could obtain this? www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:32:38
11:32:57
28 1
A
As I say, I didn't make any proposal to them, it was a general talk to them
2
about what their views were and what they were trying to do on it, I never made
3
no actual submission to them on drawings or anything at that stage. Because
4
the first of all the thing that we had to do was, we had to find out if you
5
could get a sewer pipe to the lands which we didn't follow up on that.
6
Q
142
7 8
a change in the zoning. A
Well, we weren't looking at that, we were looking at the house per acre as was
9
there, what we were trying to do first was see could we get a sewer line into
11:33:17 10
the site and then probably afterwards that would be a different --
11
Q
12
A
143
So to get a sewer line put in first and then to get a change in the zoning -That would be my view to get a sewer line into the place because there was no
13 14
I see. But the zoning at that time was low density, so there would have to be
sewer line. Q
144
Thank you Mr. Gannon if you have any questions.
11:33:33 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A
Thank you very much.
Thank you, your honour.
18 19
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
11:33:37 20
21
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sean Barrett please.
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:33:46
11:33:59
29 1
MR. SEAN BARRETT, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
2
FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Barrett.
5
A
6
Q
Good morning. 145
Good morning, Mr. Barrett, you have previously given evidence to the Tribunal
7
but briefly, you are a member of the Fine Gael political party and between June
8
of 1991 and December of 1993, you were a member of Dublin County Council, and
9
after December of 1993, you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
11:34:33 10
Council?
11
A
12
Q
That is correct. 146
After 1993, insofar as you were a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
13
Council, I think that the documentation shows that in late 1995, your
14
involvement with Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and these lands ceased
11:34:49 15
and you had little or nothing to do with the lands thereafter, isn't that the
16
position?
17
A
18
Q
No, late 1994, I finished because I was appointed to the new government. 147
19
Yes. That's correct and I think in prior to 1991, you had previously been a member of Dublin County Council up to 1982.
11:35:08 20
A
21
Q
That's correct. 148
22
And then you retook your seat or stood in the local elections in June of 1991 and were elected, isn't that the position?
23
A
24
Q
That is correct. 149
11:35:23 25
By the time you were elected in June of 1991, certain things had happened to the Cherrywood lands and I will ask you some questions about that. But can the
26
Tribunal take it, Mr. Barrett, that you would have known this entire area and
27
location very, very well?
28
A
29
Q
11:35:44 30
Well as part of my constituency even though I wasn't a member of council. 150
Yes. And would it be fairs to say and indeed the Tribunal has heard evidence as late as yesterday from Mr. O'Herlihy, that you were opposed to high density www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:35:50
11:36:11
30 1 2
residential development in the Carrickmines Valley? A
Well the position I took was that these lands had been zoned in 1983 at one
3
house to the acre which one would regard as sort of a holding exercise I don't
4
think anybody would ever envisage developing a large area like this at one
5
house to the acre on septic tank.
6 7
When I was elected in 1991, I took a decision that any change was premature
8
pending the overall plan being presented by the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
9
County Council as to the whole area stretching from Cherrywood Road to
11:36:36 10
Glenamuck, so I decided that the best thing to do was to retain what was there
11
in 1983 and to allow the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, through the
12
officials, to present a new action plan for the whole area. I didn't see any
13
sense in changing from one house to the acre to four houses to the acre because
14
it was evident to anybody who knew the area that the whole of that area would
11:37:01 15
16
not be developed purely for housing at four houses to the acre. Q
151
And by that, do you mean that you would have known as your colleagues would
17
have known that portion of the land would have been developed the at a higher
18
density?
19 11:37:19 20
A
All you have to do is look at the report presented, the technical reports presented to the council at that time. They clearly stated that there was a
21
proposal to put a new main sewer, the Carrickmines sewer, into this area and
22
therefore they were indicating that this was in future a development area and
23
therefore anything that was going to be proposed, whether it was one house to
24
the acre or four houses to the acre was going to be totally irrelevant because
11:37:43 25
you had proposal for a new motorway to go through it, the line hadn't been
26
decided, there was a proposal for a new mains sewer, not just to service that
27
land but other lands, right up Glenamuck Road up to Stepaside. So that whole
28
area was going to change. My attitude was that in the 19 -- as it turned out
29
1993 Development Plan, that it was pointless changing from one house to the
11:38:13 30
acre to four houses to the acre, especially with the Monarch proposal which www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:38:18
11:38:42
31 1
also included major retail development when Dun Laoghaire town was dying on its
2
feet, when you had a neighbourhood shopping centre in Loughlinstown, one in
3
Ballybrack, you had shopping facilities being developed in Shankill, you had a
4
major outlet in Cornelscourt and here we were talking about a major retail
5
development in an area that was totally virgin, a virgin area, and Dun
6
Laoghaire town dying on its feet, it didn't make any sense to me. I said to
7
people if you want to develop, go down to Dun Laoghaire and I will support you.
8
That was quite simple.
9
Q
152
11:39:03 10
And at that time, sorry, Mr. Barrett, you had effectively dual membership, you were also a member of Dun Laoghaire Urban District Council, is that correct?
11
A
12
Q
No, I was never a member of. 153
Sorry I beg your pardon. Can I show you the position that pertained when you
13
were elected in 1991, which was the map that went out on first public display
14
at page 7021.
11:39:29 15
16
Now, you will have seen this documentation, Mr. Barrett, in the brief. The
17
yellow lands are the residentially zoned lands and the lands caught within the
18
red boundary are those that were owned by Monarch Properties and in the first
19
public display, the yellow lands were proposed at four houses to the acre or
11:39:50 20
ten house to the hectare on piped sewage as a result of a map that was brought
21
to the council by the manager in May of 1991, just before the elections. And
22
that was the position that was put on the first public display. So when you
23
were reelected to the council, that was the position that pertained?
24
A
11:40:08 25
Q
That's correct. 154
Now, the manager in his report to the members had explained to the members that
26
it was more appropriate that all of these yellow lands be zoned on piped
27
sewerage because of the imminence of the Carrickmines sewer that was going to
28
service the area.
29
A
11:40:26 30
Q
Well that was the report that I saw. 155
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:40:27
11:40:42
32 1
A
2
Q
I didn't necessarily agree with it mind you but -156
That was what the manager had said, that it was more appropriate, that instead
3
of it being on septic tank, it should be on piped sewage but the pipe itself
4
had not been built indeed at this stage, isn't that the position? Now --
5
A
Or the capacity of the pipe hadn't been agreed either. That was an issue
6
following on 1992, 1993 as to the size was pipe that should be installed, as to
7
what level of development should be allowed.
8
Q
157
9
Because the size of the pipe or the diameter of the pipe would determine the density of development, isn't that right?
11:41:04 10
A
11
Q
Correct. 158
And that was a decision indeed I think that came before the council and there
12
was much discussion in the council about the size of the pipe, isn't that
13
right?
14
A
11:41:13 15
Q
Correct. That is correct. 159
16 17
Because that was going to have a knock-on effect on what density, sorry, what the capacity would be would determine the density, isn't that the position?
A
That is correct but it would also determine what level of development should be
18
allowed in that whole area and that's why it was an action plan was needed for
19
this whole area in advance of any change. Which therefore my argument was,
11:41:38 20
which I stated publicly at various meetings and at the council meeting, my
21
argument was that it was premature to make any change when you hadn't decided
22
on the size of the pipe, the pipe hadn't been built, the road line hadn't been
23
decided, and yet we were changing from one house to the acre to four houses to
24
the acre. I couldn't understand it.
11:42:02 25
Q
160
But your position in relation to the lands was that you wanted an action area
26
plan and you wanted the matter left to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
27
Council which was due to take up office in early 1994, isn't that right?
28 29 11:42:25 30
A
Immediately after the Development Plan. What I actually did was I asked the planning officials to supply me with a map outlining the area in that general area which was zoned at one house to the acre. They supplied me with the map www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:42:31
11:42:49
33 1
and I tabled a motion which stated that these lands should be zoned at one
2
house to the acre, the reason why I worded it that way is because technically
3
some of it had gone on public display at four houses to the acre. So I got
4
that map supplied to me by the council and I tabled that motion.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
161
That's the motion that was dealt with by the council on the 27th May 1992. That is correct.
162
But I think that prior to that, in late November 1991, it appears somebody
8
else, the Tribunal heard from Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, you may have had a meeting
9
with Mr. O'Herlihy or some of the Monarch people who wanted to make their
11:43:12 10
proposal to you?
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 163
13
Did you attend a meeting in the offices of Monarch Properties to view the display that they had or their proposals?
14
A
11:43:22 15
Q
16
A
I did. 164
Can you remember first of all who you met at the meeting? I can't remember exactly, but there was a large group of people there. There
17
was Mr. Monahan, who I had met for the first time and there was a large group
18
of officials and a model of who was being proposed. So out of courtesy, I
19
attended and listened to what they had to and then I told them straight up I
11:43:42 20
21
wasn't support it and I gave them all the reasons why. Q
165
And would those reasons have been, Mr. Barrett, the reasons you have outlined
22
to the Tribunal today, that it was premature because the sewer hadn't been
23
built or the size of the pipe hadn't been determined and the matter should be
24
left over to the new council?
11:43:56 25
A
What I said clearly was that this matter should be left to the new council,
26
that an action plan should be drawn up and that I would recommend that if they
27
wanted to have more retail development, that they should move from Cherrywood
28
down to Dun Laoghaire where redevelopment was very badly needed. The town was
29
dying on its feet. It was the main centre of my constituency, I was concerned
11:44:21 30
about it, there was a lot of dereliction in the area and I couldn't see any www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:44:26
11:44:42
34 1
sense of building a new retail centre back in 1991, 1992, in an area that was
2
totally, well for all intents and purposes, agricultural.
3
Q
166
4 5
these lands and were the purchasers of those lands? A
Well it was public knowledge that Monarch and GRE had purchased these lands at
6 7
And prior to this, would you have known, Mr. Barrett, that Monarch had bought
some enormous price. But that was none of my business. Q
167
Yes, I know that but being familiar with the area, the price paid for these
8
lands in 1989 was approximately 10 million pounds, was that regarded as a very
9
high price for land in that area at that time?
11:45:03 10
A
Well I put it to you this way, I wouldn't have paid 10 million pounds for lands
11 12
that was zoned one house to the acre on septic tank. Q
168
I think you mentioned a moment ago that it was regarded as being a high price,
13
was that generally known in the area or in the location that or was it
14
generally considered that a large amount, a bigger than normal amount had been
11:45:24 15
16
paid for these particular lands? A
I suppose I mean we are going back now what, 15, 16 years, you are talking
17
about punts. I suppose given the value of property in the area at that stage,
18
it would have been a large sum of money, yes.
19
Q
11:45:50 20
169
And the line that was used by the council to determine residential development as has been explained to the Tribunal, was what was described as the 1983 line
21
of the Southeastern Motorway and on the map that's on screen, the lands to the
22
east of that line were zoned residential but the lands to the west of that line
23
were zoned agriculture?
24 11:46:11 25
A
Yes, well I mean in 1983, I would imagine that the line that was put in was just an indication that a road was going in, there was never any detailed
26
discussion that, to my knowledge, from '91 to '93 as to the exact line of this
27
road. I mean if you look at back to the minutes of the new Dun
28
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, you will find strangely that a report was
29
presented, to the best of my recollection, by the engineers suggesting three
11:46:40 30
options for that road. The least desirable one, according to that report as I www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:46:47
11:47:04
35 1
recall turned out to be the one that was eventually built on.
2
Q
3
A
170
That's the mountain route, it's called the mountain route? The one through Leopardstown racecourse was the one that the engineers said was
4
least desirable, yet it turned out to be the one that eventually went ahead.
5
Now, that had a significant effect on where development should take place. I
6
was off the council by that stage and in fact the Dail record will show that I
7
questioned why this line was changed and I asked the Minister for Agriculture,
8
who was responsible at the time, for horse racing and I asked why was it
9
allowed that the only remaining race track in Dublin, which was of significant
11:47:31 10
importance to the racing industry, was allowed to lose its six furlong track
11
for a line of a road where the report had previously said it was the least
12
desirable route to take. I could never understand why it was changed. The
13
alternative route was up through Kilgobbin and across through the tip head and
14
I mean all the of this, chairman, is public knowledge. These reports are
11:47:59 15
16
available at the council. Q
171
And I think some of these documents are in the brief, Mr. Barrett, but on the
17
1983 plan, the line of the motorway bisected the Monarch lands, isn't that
18
right?
19
A
11:48:14 20
Q
Yes. 172
21
It's only a notional line because nothing as you say, was built but it did bisect the Monarch lands?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 173
24
And the agreement within the council or the understanding within the council was that residential development would be allowed on the eastern side of that
11:48:28 25
line up to the notional line, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 174
And that beyond that's correct the other side, the western side of that line,
28
would not be available or there wouldn't be residential development, that was
29
the thinking at the time?
11:48:39 30
A
That is so and in fact there was a proposal which I supported, I think it was www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:48:47
11:49:08
36 1
Mr. Galvin, through estate agents called Spain, I think, Paddy Spain.
2
Q
3
A
175
Spain Courtney. He was representing Mr. Galvin and they were anxious to develop a golf course
4
on the line to the west of that notional line. And therefore any movement in
5
that line could affect the viability of a pay and display golf course or pay
6
and play I should say golf course. That if you moved it, if you kept moving
7
it, that it would take up so much land that there wouldn't be sufficient for a
8
golf course and I thought at that stage again we are talking about 1991, 1992,
9
that you know there was a need for pay and play golf facilities because the
11:49:34 10
only other facilities in the area were mainly private golf courses with the
11
exception of a nine hole course in Stepaside which was developed by Dublin
12
County Council.
13 14
And therefore it was important that you were in favour of that golf course on
11:49:52 15
the west side of the line, that to move the notional line more west would
16 17
affect that possibility, so that was a consideration also. Q
176
So at the time, so far as the line of the motorway was concerned, you had two
18
competing interests, Monarch Properties didn't want the line of the motorway on
19
their lands because they would only be allowed develop up to the line of the
11:50:19 20
motorway, that would make sense, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
This would make sense, yes. 177
Mr. Galvin didn't want the motorway going through his lands which adjoined
23
Monarch's lands because he wouldn't be able to build his pay and display golf
24
course?
11:50:33 25
A
26
Q
That's correct. 178
And I think ultimately the manager together with the council officials resolved
27
the matter by saying the line was diagrammatic only and nobody could take it
28
was a fixed and final line?
29 11:50:49 30
A
That was all the more reason, Ms. Dillon, for a proper action plan to be drawn up for this whole area, I can understand Monarch Properties wanting to get www.pcr.ie Day 650
11:50:54
11:51:10
37 1
development on the land they bought, I was talking about the wider area and if
2
you look at the motion I was tabled, it was not confined solely to Monarch
3
Properties land, it was lands zoned at one house to the acre from Cherrywood
4
Road to Glenamuck Road and the map was supplied to me by the officials.
5
Q
179
In fact I think your map, which I am going to show you in a moment,
6
Mr. Barrett, but your map in May of 1992 covered all of the lands that are
7
coloured yellow on that map that's on screen at the moment?
8
A
9
Q
Well that was supplied to me by the council officials. 180
And the map that you prepared for your motion is at 7175 --
11:51:28 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon, could I stop you there, give the stenographer a break,
12
we will break for about ten minutes.
13 14
MS. DILLON: May it please you sir.
11:52:02 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT
17
BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS
18 19
Q
181
12:04:29 20
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Barrett. Just briefly can I ask you before
we look at the motion of the 27th May 1992, and the minutes of the meeting of
21
the 27th May 1992. The lands had been zoned at one house to the acre in the
22
1983 Development Plan, they had gone out on the first public display at four
23
house to the acre, the manager had recommended that the density be changed and
24
that motion was lost on the 27th May, if you hadn't brought your motion,
12:04:55 25
Mr. Barrett, to change the density as it were, on those lands, would they have
26
stayed at four houses to the acre?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:05:05 30
Q
Yes. 182
That would have followed, would it? Yes.
183
So that in even though the manager's map was not accepted by the councillors www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:05:10
12:05:30
38 1
and Councillor Lydon and Councillor -- Councillor Lydon withdrew his motion
2
seeking to the zone the lands to a higher density, if you hadn't brought your
3
motion seeking to rezone them at one to the acre, they would have gone on the
4
1993 plan at four house to the acre?
5
A
6
Q
That's correct. 184
That would have followed. Right. If I show you page 7174, and this is your
7
motion, Mr. Barrett, dated the 11th May 1992, to rezone the lands on the
8
attached map stretching from the Glenamuck Road to the Cherrywood Road
9
Loughlinstown for residential development not exceeding one house to the acre
12:05:54 10
and at map is in question is at 7175. And if we can return this map on its
11
side please. The other way. Yes, and you will see that the outline in red,
12
Mr. Barrett, is the same as the yellow lands we had looked at briefly on the
13
map, isn't that right?
14
A
That's correct, as I said to you earlier, the map was supplied to me by the
12:06:20 15
officials of Dublin County Council. I asked that they give me a map showing
16
what lands between Cherrywood Road and Glenamuck Road had been zoned at one
17
house to the acre in '83. So that's where that map came from.
18
Q
185
19
And you then, your motion then sought effectively to confirm that, to keep them at one house to the acre?
12:06:41 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's correct. 186
They were at this stage proposed for four houses to the acre? That's correct.
187
24
But the manager himself had brought a map before the council seeking to change -- page 7203. Now, this deals with the same lands but in the lands
12:07:02 25
outlined in red are the Monarch lands and what the manager was proposing there
26
was a change from AP to A1P which was an area action plan and again, a change
27
on some of the lands from agriculture to A1P again, do you see that?
28
A
29
Q
12:07:31 30
Yes. 188
And I think at the minutes of the meeting of the 27th, at page 7207, Councillor Lydon proposed and Councillor McGrath seconded that the manager's report be www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:07:37
12:07:57
39 1
adopted and approved. And you voted against that, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
That's correct. 189
Right. Now, if that had been adopted and approved, Mr. Barrett, the effect of
4
that would have been to give, there would have been an action area plan for the
5
Monarch lands, is that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 190
It wouldn't necessarily have dealt with the balance of the lands that were
8
zoned residentially but it would have dealt with the Monarch lands, isn't that
9
right?
12:08:05 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Well it would appear so, yes. 191
According to the manager's map? Yes.
192
14
And it would also have increased the area that was available for residential zoning across the old 1983 line, if you want to see the map again, it's 7203.
12:08:24 15
What the manager was proposing was a change in the notional line of the
16
Southeastern Motorway from the old '83 line to a line that became known as the
17
'91 line and that the lands between those two would be changed from agriculture
18
to action area plan, residential, isn't that right?
19
A
12:08:44 20
Q
That's correct. 193
21 22
give them the benefit of an action area plan, isn't that right? A
Well I wouldn't call it an action area plan, it was just extending the area for
23 24
The effect of that for Monarch Properties if it were passed would have been to
development at four houses to the acre into agricultural zoned land. Q
194
12:09:10 25
That was one effect of it but by putting an area action, an action area plan in place in connection with these lands, when the council came to consider an
26
action area plan, they would also come to consider shopping or retail, isn't
27
that right, in the context of an action area plan.
28
A
29
Q
12:09:29 30
Well that wasn't defined in the motion. 195
No it wasn't defined, it wasn't defined in the motion because all that was proposed by Councillor Lydon was to adopt the manager's report and to adopt www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:09:34
12:09:53
40 1
effectively this map, DP90/244.
2
A
3
Q
Yes, it was increasing the area for development. 196
And it was changing the zoning so far as it was changing it from AP, which was
4
10 houses to the hectare or four houses to the acre on to an action area plan
5
but with still with the same density, it meant the council would consider it
6
again, isn't that right?
7
A
No what would have happened to us the fact that in 1991, when the draft plan
8
went on display, any change that we made subsequent to that would have to go
9
back on display again. So what I -- the effect of my motion, which was passed,
12:10:23 10
that it remain at one house to the acre, the fact that that was different to
11
what went on display in the draft plan in 1991 meant that it had to go back on
12
public display again.
13
Q
197
14
I understand all of, Mr. Barrett, but I am asking you about here, leaving aside your motion or for the moment, if it map had been passed, if this motion had
12:10:46 15
been passed, the effect of that from Monarch Properties' point of view would
16
have been to increase their take of residentially zoned land in the first
17
instance, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
That's correct. Yeah. 198
12:11:00 20
And in the second instance would have been to change the residential zoning from AP to A1P?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes, on piped. 199
On piped sewerage, isn't that right? Yes.
200
12:11:11 25
Now, if that had been passed add you say, that would have had to go out on the second public display and would have to be confirmed by the council?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct. 201
And indeed when your motion was passed it went out on public display and
28
subsequently wasn't confirmed so far as these lands are concerned by the
29
council, isn't that right?
12:11:23 30
A
That's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:11:24
12:11:36
41 1
Q
202
What I was asking you about was, in your view looking at this map, was this
2
something that would inure to the benefit of Monarch Properties if this had
3
been passed?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Well they would have got more land zoned for development, yes. 203
That would have been subsequent, yes. 204
8 9 12:11:53 10
And they would have got an action area plan also?
And within the context of an action area plan, the council would have had to consider retail, isn't that right?
A Q
Well not necessarily. 205
I think the manager when he had given his report in relation to DP92/44 and I
11
will get it up for you in a moment -- sorry I will just show you this, page
12
7197, this had been dealt with at the meeting of the 13th May 1997 and the
13
manager in the third last paragraph in talking about the action area plan had
14
said "This will require the development conform to tan action plan to be
12:12:28 15
adopted by the council. The action plan will provide for the provision of the
16
necessary community facilities, schools, shopping etc and appropriate road
17
system and appropriate open space provision."
18 19
So that within the context of the action plan, the council would have to
12:12:42 20
21
consider, according to the manager in any event, schools and shopping? A
Yes but I mean if that was to, in my opinion if that was to take place, that
22
would be a further variation of that plan of 1993 when they subsequently would
23
have an action plan and if you adopted an action plan, it would have followed
24
that the council then from 1993 onwards would have had to pass a variation of
12:13:09 25
26
the '93 plan. Q
206
27 28
into the new council. A
Well, once the '93 plan was finished by Dublin County Council, Dun
29 12:13:25 30
Or by the time this plan came to be made in December 1993, it would have gone
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council would then have to -Q
207
Vary it? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:13:26
12:13:40
42 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Vary that particular development. 208
As indeed they did with the science and technology zoning, isn't that right? That's correct, yes.
209
Now, on the day itself, the 27th May 1992, that proposal by Councillor Lydon at
5
7307 was unsuccessful. Can I ask you, Mr. Barrett, do you remember this
6
meeting of the 27th May 1992?
7
A
8
Q
9
210
And can you describe to the Members of the Tribunal whether it was a very heated meeting, whether there was a lot of discussion about this entire issue
12:14:01 10
11
I do.
on the Carrickmines Valley? A
Yes, that is correct, I mean people who took the similar view to mine argued
12
that to change the zoning at this stage was premature and that it was, well,
13
the case I was making was that it was quite ridiculous to make any change
14
without having a proper action plan drawn up for the whole area and to consider
12:14:26 15
16
the road network, the sewerage facilities available, the other facilities that would have to be incorporated and the level of open space, the whole area.
17 18
I mean this is a very beautiful area, anybody who knows it. It would -- in my
19
opinion, there should have been a proper action plan outlining what was going
12:14:50 20
to be open space, high amenity, shopping or whatever, science technology,
21
whatever you want, housing. In the whole wide area rather than just
22
concentrate on one area of land which happened to be owned by Monarch
23
Properties. I couldn't understand why there was such an effort to just deal
24
with one piece of this land. When the whole area was going to be affected by
12:15:20 25
the installation of a major sewerage system and a road network and that was the
26
argument and what I used on that occasion was to try and persuade my colleagues
27
to leave it as it is. And not to be seen as anti everything but to do it in an
28
organised fashion when the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was set up
29
and that was only going to be a matter of 12 months or whatever, rather than
12:15:47 30
sort of rush in and just do one piece of it, which never made sense to me. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:15:52
12:16:07
43 1
Q
211
2
Is it your recollection that the focus of the argument on the 27th May 1992 centred on the Monarch Properties lands?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 212
And insofar as Councillor Lydon proposed the map DP92/44 and indeed had a
5
motion that he didn't proceed with on that day, and correct me if I am wrong,
6
would it be fair to say that Councillor Lydon was promoting the pro Monarch
7
viewpoint?
8
A
Well I mean I -- I mean Councillor Lydon would have to answer that for himself.
9
On the particular day, the real -- going into the meeting, the real debate was
12:16:33 10
that the major Monarch proposal which included massive retail and all the other
11
things that were incorporated into the motion that was subsequently withdrawn.
12
Now, in my opinion, once that first motion was defeated, it was evident that
13
there wasn't support in the council for the subsequent motion. That's my
14
feeling. I have no reason to state categorically that was the case but once
12:16:59 15
the first motion was defeated, the next motion was withdrawn because it was
16 17
obvious there wasn't the support there. Q
213
18
And the second motion, which sought the major rezoning, including the retail, was the motion by Councillor Lydon and Councillor Hand, is that right?
19
A
12:17:17 20
Q
That's correct. 214
But the first motion that came to be considered was the manager's proposals in
21
connection with the land which were not as radical, if I can put it like that,
22
in connection with the Monarch lands as Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand's motion, isn't
23
that the position?
24
A
12:17:31 25
Q
That's correct. 215
Now, and it's your view and it seems to be borne out by the sequence of events
26
that when the manager's map failed, in other words when the councillors voted
27
against it, then it would have become apparent to those who were proposing the
28
second Monarch motion, if I can put it like that, that there was insufficient
29
support for what they were proposing in the council chamber?
12:17:52 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:17:52
12:18:00
44 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
216
And -It was a tight vote, it was 33 for and 35 against.
217
And that's a very tight vote, isn't it? Yes.
218
And indeed I think at 7209, the record shows that Councillor Lydon informed the
6
meeting that he wished to withdraw his motion, which had sought residential
7
zoning at 12 houses to the hectare and a retail element and certain other
8
matters that were set out in the motion, isn't that right?
9
A
12:18:24 10
Q
11
A
Yes, including a maximum of 80,000 square feet retail space. 219
Yes and that was quite significant? That was significant, given the state of play in Dun Laoghaire town and areas
12
quite near this location in 1992. It's 14 years ago. Where there wasn't the
13
massive developments that have now taken place.
14
Q
12:18:52 15
220
Thereafter, on that date a number of motions were taken, including a motion that there would be a C zoning on a portion of the lands which was proposed by
16
Councillor Gilmore and Councillor O'Callaghan and you also voted against that,
17
isn't that right?
18 19 12:19:10 20
21
A
Yes, I disagreed with it. I thought that was a pointless exercise but there was a lot of pressure at the time in the locality because of the massive campaign launched by Monarch Properties for extra jobs and so on, facilities in the area, there was a massive pro lobby for that.
22 23
Now, I didn't buy into that argument, to be honest with you, because anybody
24
who knows the area, you would have to cross the main Dublin, Bray Road to get
12:19:37 25
to this retail shopping, where there was no walkways or overhead bridges or
26
anything else. I mean I just didn't buy into this. My argument was the same
27
could be achieved in terms of employment if you went to Dun Laoghaire and
28
redeveloped Dun Laoghaire town. So I didn't buy into the extra jobs syndrome.
29
And despite what has been said and I'd like to turn to that at a later stage in
12:20:08 30
various statements made to this Tribunal, about I was supposed to have been www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:20:13
12:20:34
45 1
lobbying to have other people support for this when I was voting against it, it
2
was completely and utterly untrue. I based my argument solely as I saw it on
3
what was going to be good for the area that I represented.
4
Q
221
And your position, Mr. Barrett, insofar as the retail element was concerned, is
5
you were opposed to that for the same principles that you were opposed to the
6
residential development, it was premature, the facilities weren't in place and
7
also it would have an adverse impact on Dun Laoghaire town centre?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 222
12:20:51 10
You made those known to everybody that that was your position, including the people who represented Monarch Properties.
11
A
12
Q
That's correct. 223
Are you satisfied that every person who was at that meeting of the 27th May
13
1992 knew that what was being discussed by the councillors were Monarch
14
Properties proposals in connection with their lands at Cherrywood.
12:21:08 15
A
Well that was the whole emphasis, the whole emphasis was on the Monarch
16 17
proposal. Q
224
The Tribunal has been told by councillors who were present at that meeting that
18
he they did know Monarch Properties owned those lands or that the subject
19
matter of discussion on the 27th May 1992 were the Monarch Properties land and
12:21:26 20
they were unaware of the ownership or actual owners of the land, do you have
21 22
any comment to make on that, Mr. Barrett? A
The only comment I make is I represented the area, I don't know who made these
23
statements but I represented the area and I knew it because it was very close
24
to me and I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't know. Mind you it's not my
12:21:48 25
business to know who owns the land, that's not a reason for voting one way or
26 27
the other. Q
225
28
No but insofar as the meeting of the 27th May 1992 was concerned, the meeting concerned what was going to happen to the Monarch lands?
29
A
12:22:06 30
Q
Well the lobbying was in favour or against Monarch Properties. 226
And that's what everybody was talking about? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:22:08
12:22:22
46 1
A
In my opinion, that would be the case, yes but I wasn't talking about that as
2
you will see from the map because I asked that the area between Cherrywood Road
3
and Glenamuck be retained as one house to the acre. I was not dealing solely
4
with Monarch Properties lands.
5
Q
227
6
You were dealing with all of the lands that were zoned residential in the 1983 plan which were east of the then Southeastern Motorway line?
7
A
8
Q
That's correct. 228
9
And that's on the map that we have seen. Your motion was taken at 7216, sorry, yes at 7216 and because the previous motion had been successful in relation to
12:22:46 10
the town centre zoning, your motion dealt with all of the lands that were
11
residentially zoned except those that had just been zoned for a town centre, is
12
that right?
13
A
14
Q
12:23:02 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 229
In favour, yes. 230
17
In favour, the effect of that was to change the density on the residentially zoned lands, including Monarch lands from four to the acre to one to the acre?
18
A
19
Q
12:23:14 20
A
21
Q
That's correct. 231
And that change necessitated a second public display. That is correct.
232
22 23
And those lands were voted by 36 to 24 at one house to the acre?
And it would also have then required a second vote by the councillors when they came to confirm or not that motion, isn't that right, that change?
A
Unless somebody tabled a motion to the contrary, it would have been adopted as
24
part of the 1993 plan. There was no need for another motion.
12:23:33 25
Q
26
A
233
So -If it had been accepted what went on public display should form part of the '93
27
Development Plan, there was no need for any more motions unless you wanted to
28
change it again.
29 12:23:50 30
Q
234
At that time, can you tell the Tribunal who was the person within Monarch who was most publicly visible in terms of seeking support from councillors, can you www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:23:55
12:24:00
47 1
remember?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
Mr. Richard Lynn. 235
And did you meet him? I did, yes.
236
And did you make known to him your view? Yes.
237
In relation to the lands? Yes.
238
12:24:11 10
Now, Mr. Dunlop, and I outlined this to the Tribunal when I was opening this module, in his private interviews to the Tribunal, suggested to the Tribunal
11
that your motion in some way, Mr. Barrett, saved the day, if I can summarise
12
what he is saying, for Monarch, is there any truth in that?
13
A
Absolutely none, I read that myself, I was absolutely astonished. I mean how
14
could I be doing anything in favour of Monarch when I had succeeded in having
12:24:36 15
the area of land that they were involved in which was zoned at four house us to
16
the acre, that I had gotten it reduced to one house to the acre, I couldn't
17
possibly be doing any favours for Monarch and I mean this wasn't a pro or anti
18
Monarch thing as far as I was concerned, I was dealing with this as an issue in
19
an area that I represented and, you know, I couldn't understand what Mr. Dunlop
12:24:58 20
21
was saying. Q
239
You will have seen and you have been supplied with the extracts from the
22
transcripts of Mr. Dunlop where he and I am summarising what he is saying when
23
I am saying he says you saved the day for Monarch but looking at the sequence
24
of the documentation and what the record shows up to this point in time,
12:25:14 25
Mr. Barrett, the only way in which you could have saved the day for Monarch, if
26
that was indeed the case, if you proposed a motion and everything else in your
27
party voted in a different way is that right? In other words Mr. Dunlop has
28
previously indicated to the Tribunal that sometimes what happened was a local
29
councillor might take a particular view but would have sorted matters out by
12:25:36 30
ensuring that other members of his or her party voted a particular way. I am www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:25:42
12:26:00
48 1
not suggesting that that happened here today here, but just to cover all
2
eventualities if I show you 7216, it's on the screen and just for the record,
3
Mr. Barrett, if you go through the councillors who voted in favour of your
4
motion and indicate those in your political party who voted in favour of the
5
motion.
6
A
Councillor John Dockrell. Stanley Laing. Joan Maher. Olivia Mitchell. Mary
7 8
Muldoon. That's it. Q
240
9
motion and if you look at the list then of those who voted against your motion
12:26:37 10
and if you would indicate any of your Fine Gael colleagues who voted against
11 12
the motion. A
Councillor Anne Devitt, the late Tom Hand. I am not sure was Michael Keating
13
in Fine Gael at that stage or PDs.
14
Q
12:27:12 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:27:25 20
Q
241
242
So that insofar as the -There are some missing from that, I mean there was only, what, 60 voted.
243
Yes. Some had obviously left from the previous vote.
244
But the only matter that was dealt with by the council on the 27th May 1992 was the Carrickmines valley, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
That's correct. 245
24
And the end result of that, Mr. Barrett, was that as a result of your motion, the map that went out on the second public display at 7217, the effect was that
12:27:48 25
the lands coloured yellow on the map at 7217 were now subject to change 3 and
26
change 3 was changing the density from four to the acre to one to the acre.
27
A
28
Q
12:28:11 30
I believe that he was in Fine Gael at that stage, subject to correction? Therese Ridge, four I think.
21
29
Okay. So three or four other colleagues of yours voted in favour of your
That's correct. 246
There was also a second change 4A and 4B which was the introduction of the town centre on lands that had been previously residential for one portion of them and agriculture for the second portions of them? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:28:13
12:28:22
49 1
A
2
Q
Which I voted against. 247
3
Which you had voted against. And that came back before the council in November of 1993, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
That's correct. 248
6
Now, the manager recommended that the amendment of change 3 be deleted. That was the manager's recommendation.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 249
9
If the manager's recommendation had been accepted, Mr. Barrett, and change 3 had been deleted, what density would the residentially zoned lands have been
12:28:39 10
left at?
11
A
12
Q
Four house houses to the acre. 250
The council came to consider that, including yourself, on the 11th November
13
1993 and there were a number of motions before the council, the first motion of
14
which was at 7224, and this was a motion by Councillors Misteil, Smyth and
12:29:03 15
Buckley and it's item number one that they were seeking that the resolving that
16
the lands referred to as change 3 on map 27 be confirmed as low density housing
17
at two houses per hectare, one house to the acre?
18
A
19
Q
They were confirming what I had succeeded in doing. 251
12:29:29 20
Yes and you proposed an amendment to that motion at 2725 and that was the manager be requested to prepare and submit to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
21
County Council not later than June '94, a draft variation of the new County
22
Development Plan for those lands.
23
A
24
Q
That's correct. 252
12:29:48 25
And that was third motion at 7226, which was a motion by Councillor Marren and Coffey which sought to delete change 3 in respect of the lands outlined in red
26
and that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare and the map is at
27
7277 and the lands outlined there are the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
28
A
29
Q
12:30:14 30
Yes, that was effectively the manager's previous proposal. 253
Well the manager's proposal, with respect, Mr. Barrett, had been to delete change 3 in its entirety, that was all of the residentially zoned lands, isn't www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:30:20
12:30:48
50 1 2
that right? The change 3, if you look at 7217. A
No in the amendment in November 1993, there was an attempt to defeat what I had
3
achieved in terms of bringing it back to what it was in 1983, so bring back
4
what the manager had proposed when it went on display in 1991, as I understand
5
it.
6
Q
254
What went on display as a result of your motion was change 3 and change 3 as a
7
result of your motion dealt with all of the residentially zoned lands in the
8
Carrickmines Valley?
9 12:30:59 10
A Q
That's right, yes. 255
11
The manager recommended to delete change 3 in its entirety, so change the zoning on all of the residential lands to four to the acre, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 256
14
Councillor Smyth and Misteil brought a motion seeking to confirm change 3, in other words leave it at one house to the acre for all the residentially zoned
12:31:21 15
land, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 257
And Councillors Marren and Coffey brought a motion seeking to confirm the
18
change for a portion of the lands but to delete it for other lands at 7227.
19
What Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey's motion sought was to change the
12:31:40 20
density on the lands that are on screen which are the Monarch lands to four to
21
the acre but that the balance of the residentially zoned lands would stay as
22
per your motion at one house to the acre?
23
A
24
Q
Yes. 258
12:31:57 25
Now, this motion, Mr. Barrett, correct me if I am wrong, is particular to the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
It would appear so from this, yes. 259
And the motion is proposing at 7226 that the Monarch lands, it says "Dublin
28
County Council resolves to accept the county manager's recommendation and
29
delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined in red". That is
12:32:20 30
delete change 3 in respect of the Monarch lands, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:32:20
12:32:26
51 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 260
3
And leave the balance of the lands at two per hectare or one per acre, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 261
So the effect of that would be that the Monarch lands would go on the '93 plan
6
at four to the acre and the balance of the residentially zoned lands would stay
7
at one to the acre as a result of your motion?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 262
12:32:43 10
Now, is there anything on the map of the over all residentially zoned lands that for good zoning or planning reasons that one would say that it's a proper
11
planning or zoning decision to make to zone a portion of these lands at four
12
and the balance of them at one to the acre?
13
A
Well I couldn't see it and I voted against that motion. And again, being
14
consistent, I hope, insofar as that we shouldn't do anything until we had the
12:33:07 15
new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown council in situ and have an action plan prepared.
16
That was one of the reasons why I tabled an amendment to Councillor Smyth's
17
motion to retain the one to the acre because what I was trying to do was bring
18
the council with me in my argument and I was afraid I might lose them because
19
it's always a motive when you are going against the manager's proposal but in
12:33:38 20
this instance I didn't agree with the manager's proposal.
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24 12:34:00 25
263
And your amendment was lost I think, Mr. Barrett, at 7261? Yes.
264
And then Mr. Smith's motion was then put, 43 voted against and 27 for and then the substantive motion with no amendment because your amendment was lost to confirm change 3 was put by Councillor Smyth and Buckley and at 7262, you voted
26
for that motion which was seeking to confirm change 3 which would be in
27
accordance with your May 1992 motion and that was also lost, isn't that right?
28
Now, the effect of that, as I understand it, Mr. Barrett, and you correct me if
29
I am wrong is once that vote took place, the change was not confirmed, isn't
12:34:26 30
that right? This is a motion seeking to confirm change 3. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:34:32
12:34:39
52 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
Oh no, no -- yes. 265
That motion is lost, isn't that right? That is correct.
266
So change 3 is not confirmed. Well, technically, unless somebody had tabled a motion, that motion would have
6
been to the contrary, that motion would have been irrelevant. Because what
7
went on public display was one house to the acre. And all we need do in the
8
adoption of the over all plan was to confirm that change from May 1992. Now,
9
unless somebody had put down a motion to change that again, it would have
12:35:16 10
irrespective of this motion, it would have remained at one house to the acre.
11
Q
12
A
267
But there was a motion. That was really a confirmation motion, if you like, of something that was
13
already decided. So it was academic in many respects, but it was an indication
14
as to the way the council was thinking. Do you get my point?
12:35:39 15
Q
268
I do get your point exactly, but what I was wondering was this, Mr. Barret,
16
would the effect of that -- when that motion was brought and when that motion
17
was lost, would the map, if nothing else had happened that day and that was the
18
only vote that was taken and the change was not confirmed, would the map have
19
reverted to the 1991 zoning?
12:35:59 20
A
21
Q
22
A
No. 269
Or would it have gun back to the 1983 zoning? Or would it have gone back to the 1983 zoning because the overall adoption of
23
the plan comes at the final stage when you adopt the whole plan. So in my
24
opinion, that made no change, it was the following motion to confirm the
12:36:20 25
26
manager's recommendation, that changed the whole thing again. Q
270
27
That's the motion at 7263 and you voted against that motion which was to decrease?
28
A
29
Q
12:36:37 30
A
Increase again the density back up to four to the acre effectively. 271
For the Monarch lands only? Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:36:37
12:36:52
53 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
272
No, I didn't, those I didn't voted against it. 273
4 5
Right. And did you see any good reason why that should be done, Mr. Barrett?
Can I put it to you as bluntly as this, do you agree the sole purpose of that motion had to be to benefit the Monarch lands?
A
Of course it was of benefit to the Monarch lands, yes, but again, I mean as I
6
hope I have displayed in all of this, I wasn't just dealing with Monarch lands,
7
I was dealing with an area bigger area and, you know, what the manager was
8
proposing was dealing with Monarch lands. He wasn't dealing with the whole
9
area at all.
12:37:12 10
Q
11 12
274
Well the manager's proposal was delete change 3 in its entirety which was your motion which covered all of the residentially zoned lands?
A
Effectively he was dealing with one section of the over all area. I wasn't, I
13
was dealing with the over all area and of course as a result of that, it did
14
benefit Monarch to answer your question directly.
12:37:36 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
thing, it might be yourself that might have to answer it. When you say that
18
the manager was only dealing with the Monarch lands, we know that the manager
19
was recommending in November, Mr. Barrett, to delete change 3 for the whole of
12:37:56 20
Ms. Dillon, would you mind if I just interject, just one
the map 26, whatever map that is that's gone up.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
27.
23 24 12:38:08 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27, yes. The map. But just could I seek clarification on, if
you go back to May of 1992, when the manager comes in, in May of 1992, this is
26
after the first public display where they have gone out on four houses to the
27
acre or ten to the hectare and it comes back to the council and the manager
28
before your motion is ever brought, there's a map and a report by the manager,
29
it's called DP92/44 we dealt with it earlier in your evidence. That map, when
12:38:35 30
the manager was proposing A1 on piped sewerage for the lands and an extension www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:38:42
12:39:03
54 1
of some of the already residentially zoned lands, further down south of the
2
1983 line, could I have that map for a moment, that's DP92/44, Ms. Dillon. I
3
don't want to confuse either myself or Mr. Barrett.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
7203 please.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
it may well be the planners who have to answer, that map that's on screen, the
9
AP to A1P, was that largely for the Monarch part of lands and not for the rest
12:39:30 10
Maybe you could assist, Ms. Dillon, that map and maybe indeed
of the lands?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
That appears to be the position because if you travel up to the
13
residentially zoned lands that were in the corner, the change there is from B
14
to AP.
12:39:39 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
17 18
MS. DILLON:
And they are not within the Monarch take and they are not A1P.
19
If you take my point.
12:39:47 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
terms of what Ms. Dillon put to you earlier, Mr. Barrett, the manager was
23
proposing for part of the lands on that map would go from AP to A1P. And an
24
extension of residential al zoning.
12:40:10 25
A
That's what I wanted to understand. Back in '92, this map in
Yes, to four houses to the acre.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
that map were in respect of Monarch lands. Was that your understanding in May
29
1992?
12:40:26 30
A
Four houses to the acre exactly, and that those two changes on
I have a copy of the minutes of the meeting. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:40:28
12:40:40
55 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
the report of the manager that was given.
3
A
Because you have said to us a moment ago yes I have looked at
There was never a report which relates solely to Monarch Properties, lands at
4
Cherrywood.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
residential zoning, that was just in relation to Monarch property lands.
8
A
You are saying that DP92/44 the AP to A1P and extension of the
Yes.
9 12:40:53 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
So do we take it the answer you gave to Ms. Dillon a few
11
minutes ago, you said some of the manager's proposals were only dealing with
12
the Monarch lands, were you referring in particular to this map?
13
A
I was referring to the report that was discussed on the 27th May.
14 12:41:08 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, that's what I'm talking about, that's the report that
16
went with DP92/44. Yes I just wanted to understand that. Thanks. Sorry
17
Ms. Dillon about that.
18 19
Q
275
12:41:26 20
MS. DILLON:
You said just a moment ago, Mr. Barrett, that dealing with
November 1993, that the manager was proposal, that the manager was dealing only
21
with the Monarch lands and I just want to show you the manager's report which
22
is on the 3rd November which is at 7256. And it's commencing at 7255. And in
23
fairness to you, it's headed Carrickmines Monarch Properties, isn't that right
24
A
12:41:58 25
Q
Yes. 276
26
result of your motion all of the residentially zoned lands, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:42:12 30
And then it talks about change 3. But change 3 dealt with, as we know, as a
Yes. 277
In the Carrickmines Valley, including the Monarch lands but not limited to the Monarch lands?
A
That's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:42:13
12:42:31
56 1
Q
278
And the manager recommends in relation to change 3 which are all of those lands
2
at 7256 to delete the amendment. So do I take it from that then, Mr. Barrett,
3
that what the manager was saying was change all of the residentially zoned
4
lands from one house to the acre back to four houses to the acre?
5
A
He was actually saying was in relation to the Monarch property lands, leave it
6
at four houses to the acre and leave the rest at one house to the acre. That
7
was the motion proposed I think by Councillor Marren, was it?
8
Q
9
A
12:42:51 10
Q
279
By Councillor Marren and councillor -Which relates to the managers's proposal.
280
Do you interpret the manager's proposal therefore as being confined to Monarch
11
properties only and not the entire of the residentially zoned lands in the
12
Carrickmines Valley?
13
A
Well the way I read was what was being proposed of the Monarch lands and the
14
additional lands that was zoned from agriculture to development should remain
12:43:12 15
at four houses to the acre and the balance of the land in my motion should
16
remain at one house to the acre.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
12:43:28 20
281
But if that -That's the way I read it.
282
If that interpretation was correct, Mr. Barrett, then there would have been no necessity for the handwritten amendment on the Marren Coffey motion at 7226, if
21
your interpretation of the manager's report is correct, then all the Marren
22
Coffey motion needed to record was to accept the manager's recommendation, full
23
stop.
24 12:43:51 25
A
Well I just I don't know why that was. I mean, my understanding was that what was being proposed was that the lands owned by Monarch Properties would go from
26
one house to the acre to four houses to the acre and the balance would remain
27
at one house to the acre. That's in relation to the over all area where I
28
proposed one house to the acre, to remain at one house to the acre. That was
29
the way it was in '83.
12:44:11 30
www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:44:11
12:44:22
57 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon, just in relation to that point, the map that went
2
out after Mr. Barrett's motion that was for the second public display, perhaps
3
if Mr. Barrett saw that.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
That is the map at 7217.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, with the 1993 amendments.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
The 1993 amendment.
12:44:33 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
isn't it?
Because change 3 is written on a number of parts of that map,
13 14
MS. DILLON:
12:44:41 15
black outline.
I think it's written change 3 is covered by lands within the
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: And not just the red out line.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:44:47 20
No, it's all of those yellow lands are covered by change 3
because they were all covered by Mr. Barrett's motion.
21 22 23 24 12:45:05 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Exactly.
What actually happened, the sequence of the notions, the fact that my motion happened to be last, meant that if anything was proposed prior to the taking of my motion and passed by the council, that I couldn't do anything about it in
26
relation to my own motion. So in other words that area that's shown as zoned
27
for a district centre, my motion excluded that area because I couldn't do
28
anything about it, that's why I voted against that district centre because I
29
knew exactly what was going to happen. You would end up with this area here
12:45:30 30
all zoned at one house to the acre and stuck in the middle you would have a www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:45:33
12:45:49
58 1 2
district centre feeding nowhere. Q
283
But insofar as the manager's report in November 1993 is concerned, Mr. Barrett,
3
his report appears to be speaking to the entire of change 3, which as a result
4
of your motion, covered all of the residentially zoned lands in the
5
Carrickmines Valley.
6
A
7
Q
That would appear to be the case, yes. 284
8 9 12:46:03 10
property residentially zoned lands within that area, isn't that right? A Q
Yes. 285
11
And at the end of the day, you having voted against it, their motion was successful, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
That's correct. 286
14
So that at the end of the process in the making of the 1993 plan, some of the lands were zoned at one house to the acre and some of the lands being Monarch's
12:46:20 15
lands were zoned at four houses to the acre.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Yes and a neighbourhood shopping centre. 287
In the centre of the Monarch lands. Yes.
288
12:46:39 20
Right and I think in 1994, after the council split up, one of the first matters that were undertaken by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was an area
21 22
And the motion by Mr. Marren and Mr. Coffey dealt only with the Monarch
action plan in relation to this area, is that right? A
It wasn't what I was looking for. It again concentrated on only part of that
23
overall area. As I said at the outset what I wanted was that whole area there
24
would be subject to an action plan where we would decide on where the line of
12:46:58 25
the motorway would be, what would be high amenity, what would be open space,
26
where would we have shopping where were we to concentrate whatever type of
27
development and all of those things would be discussed and debated by the new
28
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
29 12:47:25 30
Q
289
Yes and the draft action plan that was prepared at 2722 and again the lands outlined in red there are the Monarch lands but I want to draw to your www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:47:28
12:47:49
59 1
attention there what's in the report that speaks to that map which is at 7472
2
and under the heading location, Mr. Barrett, you will see when they are talking
3
about the plan, that plan centres on 95.3 hectares or 236 acres of land
4
presently owned by Monarch Properties Limited.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 290
7
was on the Monarch Properties lands, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:47:58 10
So it would seem the focus of the action plan that was prepared in April 1994
That's correct. 291
A
Did you agree with that? No, not -- I mean at that stage, there were other objectives, you will see
11
there to develop a public golf course, extend the bus way, retain existing
12
right of way and the creation of additional ones and to examine Tully Church
13
with a view to making a special amenity area order.
14
Q
292
12:48:26 15
If fairness to you, they were already local objectives attached to map 1993 in the 1993 plan?
16
A
17
Q
That would be part of an overall action plan. 293
18
But certainly so far as this action plan is concerned at 2722, the focus of the action plan appears to be lands owned by Monarch Properties?
19
A
12:48:38 20
Q
Yes. 294
Now, in fact I think no, while a decision was made to proceed with the action
21
plan, it was overtaken by events which was the development of a science and
22
technology park.
23
A
Well I left the council in 1994, the latter part of 1994 when I was appointed
24 12:49:01 25
to the new government, so I had no more dealings at council level with this. Q
295
Can I ask you, Mr. Barrett, in connection with these lands, were you ever
26
approached by anybody else in connection with these lands? Or in connection
27
with what you understood to be the Monarch Properties' lands?
28
A
29
Q
12:49:21 30
In what respect, Ms. Dillon? 296
For example in connection with, say, a proposed swap of lands with the golf club? www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:49:22
12:49:37
60 1
A
2
Q
I was. 297
3 4
Would you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances of that particular encounter?
A
In the course of carrying out my weekly advice centre, somebody arrived in, I
5
didn't recognise the person, a male, and he asked me, he said as I recall now,
6
I can't be exactly correct with the words I am using because it's so long ago,
7
asked me would I, he said I understand you are opposed to the Monarch proposal
8
and he said would you be interested in taking on a consultancy on a
9
professional basis to see if we could swap lands with Monarch Properties and
12:50:12 10
move either Killiney Golf Club or Dun Laoghaire golf club up to their lands and
11
develop either of Dun Laoghaire or Killiney. So he said I would be prepared to
12
pay a professional fee if you were prepared to take this on, and it would be
13
done on a professional basis. And he outlined a fee and secretarial assistance
14
and possible expenses. I think the whole thing came to about 80,000 or
12:50:44 15
something.
16 17
I was shocked and I said no, I am not interested and I don't accept any payment
18
for any duties I have to perform as an elected public representative and I said
19
also I would oppose you if you tried to have either Dun Laoghaire Golf Club or
12:51:10 20
Killiney Golf Club rezoned for development and that ended the conversation and
21
he left. I have no reason to believe that he was representing anybody, this is
22
what he said to me but that was the end of the conversation. I never saw him
23
before and I haven't seen him since.
24
Q
12:51:29 25
A
26
Q
298
No. 299
27 28
Did he, his introduction to you at this meeting, was an introduction in connection with the lands owned by Monarch Properties?
A
He just walked in and said to me I know you are opposed to the Monarch
29 12:51:49 30
Did he leave you a name?
development but would you be interested taking on this consultancy. Q
300
And insofar as a consultancy is concerned, Mr. Barrett, can I ask you do you www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:51:58
12:52:04
61 1
operate as a consultant in connection with lands in any way?
2
A
3
Q
Never did and never will. 301
And do you have any professional expertise or qualification or do you hold
4
yourself out at having any professional expertise or qualification in relation
5
to negotiation to do with land?
6
A
7
Q
No. 302
8 9
Do you know, may I ask you this: Did you treat this as an underhand approach to you in any way?
A
Well he was at pains to that this would be done on a professional basis, I
12:52:19 10
assume what he meant was that I would be acting in a professional capacity as
11
he saw it and that I would have to presumably disclose any fees to the Revenue
12
if I received them. That was the implication that I took out of it but I mean
13
our conversation lasted about two or three minutes I would say. He got a quick
14
shift from me I can tell you.
12:52:41 15
Q
303
But any such professional engagement by you in 1992, Mr. Barrett, would have
16
brought you into conflict with the job you were doing as a councillor, isn't
17
that right?
18
A
19
Q
12:52:55 20
A
Correct. 304
And did you make that plain to the person who approached you? I told him exactly that I didn't take any reward of any description for any
21
duties I had to perform as a public representative, whether it was on or off
22
the council.
23
Q
305
24
any duties you had to perform?
12:53:15 25
A
26
Q
Correct. 306
27 28
Did you regard this as some or the sorted of an offer of reward for a function that you were going to have to carry out?
A
I don't see how I could carry out duties as a professional consultant and at
29 12:53:30 30
And did you -- sorry, you just said there you wouldn't accept any reward for
the same time be part and parcel of voting on the council. Q
307
At that stage, at the time of this approach, Mr. Barrett, did you know the www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:53:38
12:53:53
62 1
various personnel in Monarch, the various people who were involved in Monarch
2
such as Mr. Lynn?
3
A
The only person I could identify at that stage was Mr. Lynn because he was
4
always around the council and he was lobbying on a regular basis but I mean I,
5
if you ask me who X Y or Z was, I mean I didn't know people involved in Monarch
6
at all until after I was on the council and I met some people at that briefing
7
session that you referred to earlier. And I met subsequently met people in
8
relation to developments that were carried out in Dun Laoghaire, at various
9
functions but --
12:54:19 10
Q
11 12
308
But none of those people that you met subsequently were the gentleman who made the proposal to you?
A
No, no, not that I can recall. I mean as I said, I don't ever recall meeting
13
that gentleman before nor do I recall ever having met him since.
14
Unfortunately, I happened to mention to somebody that I had this approach and
12:54:41 15
then the next thing I read in the newspaper where there was a suspicion that I
16
had taken a large sum of money in connection with this rezoning in Monarch.
17
And that's borne out by some of the papers that were sent to me by this
18
Tribunal. Where various accusations were made by people to this Tribunal in
19
private which are completely and totally untrue.
12:55:07 20
21
I was subjected to newspaper articles which hinted that it was me. I think
22
there was one subsequent article by Mr. Sam Smith where he said it was
23
scurrilous that these people were going around spreading these stories without
24
any evidence and for the last ten years, I have carried this thing where there
12:55:31 25
is a suspicion that I received some large sum of money and there was also
26
suggested that I was going to vote for or against these proposals but at the
27
same time, get my colleagues to vote for them. Which I reject totally out of
28
hand and I dare anybody to come into this Tribunal and suggest that I ever
29
approached them to vote for a proposal that I was voting against. That is not
12:55:59 30
the way I do my business. I made my case quite clear, I made my case through www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:56:05
12:56:25
63 1
argument at the council level, in public, and persuaded people to come to my
2
way of thinking. Unfortunately, I didn't succeed the full way but I succeeded
3
some of the way and I had no objections to ultimately development taking place
4
in this particular area. Anybody with a brain in their head would see that if
5
you are going to put a motorway through this and a main sewer, that there was
6
going to be some development. All I wanted is that it take place at a later
7
stage when there be proper debate and discussion through the local council, ie
8
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
9
Q
309
12:56:50 10
Certainly insofar as the approach was made to you, Mr. Barrett, at the time by this gentleman, this approach was presented to you in the context of your
11
objection to the Monarch Properties' position in connection with their lands at
12
Cherrywood?
13
A
What was said to me was he was thinking of a proposal and would I be interested
14
in taking on this on a professional basis and be paid a consultancy fee.
12:57:08 15
16
That's the way it was put to me. Q
310
Now, in June of 1991, the record of Monarch Properties record a political
17
donation in the sum of 600 pounds to you, Mr. Barrett, and I think you accept
18
you received a donation from Monarch Properties in June of 1991?
19
A
What happened was prior to the local elections in 1991, a cheque arrived to my
12:57:33 20
home from Monarch Properties. I had never met these people. I phoned my
21
director of elections and I said I had received this cheque, I asked him to
22
take it away and to acknowledge it on behalf of the party, which he did. And I
23
supplied the name of the person to the Tribunal who I gave the cheque to.
24
Q
12:57:57 25
A
26
Q
311
And the funds were lodged to the credit of the organisation, is that correct? As I am aware, that's what happened, it certainly wasn't lodged to my account.
312
And the, insofar as there is a suggestion in the documentation that all
27
political donations were paid by Monarch Properties as a result of being
28
solicited, it's your position that you received this money unsolicited, is that
29
correct?
12:58:16 30
A
That's absolutely correct. As I said, I had no dealings whatsoever with these www.pcr.ie Day 650
12:58:21
12:58:43
64 1
people and I also read that in the documentation you supplied to me which was
2
made by a solicitor acting on behalf of Mr. Monahan who was deceased as I
3
understand when this statement was made, I fail to see how any firm of
4
solicitors can say that it's their understanding that all of these donations
5
were solicited. I certainly never wrote to Monarch Properties looking for a
6
donation, not that I can recall. And I'd no reason to, I wouldn't have known
7
where to write to. This was prior to my being elected to the council, prior to
8
any discussions I ever had with Monarch Properties about their proposal one way
9
or the other.
12:59:02 10
11
I also subsequently read and it was only when I received your papers that they
12
also state that I received a cheque for 500 pounds prior to the November 1992
13
general election. I have absolutely no record or recollection of this and as
14
you have already stated in May of the same year, I succeeded in having a motion
12:59:24 15
reducing the density from four houses to the acre to one house to the acre and
16
if anybody thinks I would go look for money off people that I had succeeded in
17
having their density reduced, I mean I don't know, but I certainly have no
18
recollection whatever.
19 12:59:41 20
Now if you accept, if there's a cheque to show that it was there, I have to
21
accept it but I certainly have no recollection, the only thing I can say is
22
that I think from any records I had, I always acknowledged in writing any
23
unsolicited donation I ever received. I have no recollection whatsoever of
24
ever having approached Monarch Properties for any donations.
13:00:06 25
Q
313
At 8376 there is in fact a copy of that cheque dated 19th November 1992 and the
26
reverse of the cheque, 8377 please, do you see there's an account number there,
27
can we turn that upside down there please. I don't know whether that assists
28
you in any way, Mr. Barrett, that's the reverse of the cheque?
29
A
13:00:29 30
Q
Well, that's not my account number. 314
And at 8376, the cheque on its face is made out to Sean Barrett? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:00:37
13:00:49
65 1
A
2
Q
3
A
That's not my account number. 315
On the reverse of the cheque? So the only thing, it may have arrived and I may have passed it over to the
4
organisation. I mean I just have no recollection whatsoever of it but the
5
account number on the back of that cheque, unless it's some account that I
6
never heard of it, I can't recall it. But I mean I had no reason whatsoever
7
not to have disclosed initially to the Tribunal that I would have received that
8
donation.
9
Q
316
13:01:08 10
And I think that the records also show and you will have seen that in 1995, further to a consideration with Mr. Lynn, you sought support for the party at
11
5623 by way of a gala dinner and a cheque of 1,000 pounds was paid to Dun
12
Laoghaire Fine Gael as a result of that. I think the cheque is in fact, is
13
made out to 5633, Fine Gael Dun Laoghaire, it's just slightly above halfway
14
down?
13:01:45 15
A
That was fund-raising for the constituency, certainly it had nothing to do with
16 17
me personally. Q
317
Other than those contacts, Mr. Barrett, have you ever received any funds from
18
Monarch properties or Mr. Phillip Monahan or anybody else acting on the behalf
19
other than those three payments that have just been outlined to the Tribunal?
13:02:00 20
A
Not that I can recall but I noticed also from the documentation supplied to me
21
by the Tribunal, that there was a suggestion made by, I don't know whether I
22
should the person, but an individual who gave evidence in private that he
23
claimed that Mr. Monahan told him that I insured his race horses. I want to
24
state categorically, I never spoke to Mr. Monahan about his race horses and I
13:02:26 25
was also asked by the Tribunal if I had ever insured race horses or anything
26
else on behalf of Mr. Monahan and I checked with my office and they tell me
27
that at no stage they can recall or are there any records of us ever insuring a
28
race horse.
29 13:02:45 30
Now, that was suggested that this was a means of payment to me. At that stage, www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:02:48
13:03:09
66 1
I was a full-time public representatives. I wasn't working on a day to day
2
basis in my business and people would ring up and insure houses and horses and
3
various things. I would not be aware of it. But I went to the trouble of
4
checking, I have no record, nor do my office have any record of having insured
5
in the name of Mr. Monahan, race horses, but it was suggested that this was a
6
means of paying me off. Which is totally and utterly untrue and in fact the
7
same individual had the cheek to leak this, those lies to journalists. And
8
admitted that he couldn't, that they couldn't print the whole lot because it
9
could be libelous.
13:03:33 10
11
Now, I have been subjected for the last ten years to this sort of innuendo
12
based on hearsay evidence or no evidence but hearsay and I have had to try and
13
defend myself. I was on one occasion I was subjected to having, giving an
14
interview as Minister for the Marine about the development of Dublin Port the
13:03:57 15
said journalist asked that he record the interview by way of dictaphone and he
16
came into my office and placed a dictaphone on the table in front of us and
17
when the interview about Dublin Port was finished, I stood up and he stood up.
18
And he said to me by the way, he said what was all that nonsense about you
19
supposed to have got -- received money for rezoning and I said what rezoning
13:04:22 20
are you talking about, he said Cherrywood. I said well that's peculiar, I
21
voted against Cherrywood and that was public knowledge and the next thing I
22
notice that the dictaphone was still on. And I said excuse me, our interview
23
ended ten minutes ago. Two weeks later, there was a banner headline in the
24
Sunday Business Post, Minister denies money for planning. That's the sort of
13:04:47 25
stuff that I have been subjected to by people passing on false information, not
26
accepting that I was genuine in what I was doing out in that whole area of
27
Carrickmines. And it's taken me ten years to get the opportunities to say this
28
in public in front of this Tribunal.
29 13:05:12 30
Q
318
You will understand of course, Mr. Barrett, that the Tribunal must examine any information? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:05:12
13:05:22
67 1
A
2
Q
I accept totally that you have a job to do and I fully accept that. 319
3
And I think you would also accept, Mr. Barrett, that you have been provided with all material and information?
4
A
5
Q
Absolutely. 320
Can I ask you this finally, insofar as Mr. Dunlop has outlined to the Tribunal
6
certain activities that he says he was involved in, in the making of the 1993
7
Development Plan, were you aware or was there any rumour or suggestion of this
8
type of activity on the part of Mr. Dunlop that you can recollect during that
9
period?
13:05:43 10
A
Ms. Dillon, I never knew that Mr. Dunlop was involved in that particular module
11
until I received the documentation from that Tribunal.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
13:06:00 15
321
I just ask you -I never had any contact with him about Monarch Properties at all.
322
I am just asking you generally, Mr. Barrett, about what Mr. Dunlop has described to the Tribunal and what's been fairly widely reported as his
16
conduct, his own conduct which was the bribing of councillors in return for
17
obtaining votes, at the time that this plan was being made and leaving aside
18
Monarch Properties for the moment, were you aware of any concerns or rumour
19
within the council and your colleagues of the way business was being conducted?
13:06:22 20
A
Well as I have just outlined to you, I have been the subject of rumour, I never
21
paid much attention to rumour and nor will I ever pay much attention to rumour.
22
Unless I have concrete evidence that somebody is in receipt of monies
23
illegally, I just ignore it. I mean you know you can't operate on the basis of
24
people whispering falsehoods into your ear every day of the week. If they have
13:06:48 25
something to say. I told the said journalist, by the way, the one I referred
26
to in the Sunday Business Post, you rang me up on another occasion and said
27
well, I believe it's not 80,000 now, it's 27,000, I said is that right. Well I
28
said do you know what you do, if you have all this information, there's a thing
29
called the Tribunal, will you please supply it to them, I don't know whether
13:07:09 30
you ever received any documentation or representations from that said www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:07:13
13:07:27
68 1
gentleman? But that's the sort of stuff that was going on. And people like me
2
and people with a family have to put up with this.
3
Q
323
4 5
Thank you very much, Mr. Barrett, if you would answer any questions that anybody else might have.
A
Thank you.
6 7
MR. SANFUI: Chairman, I have one question.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
13:07:32 10
11
THE WITNESS WAS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. SANFUI:
12 13
Q
14
324
And that's all. I wonder, Mr. Barrett, my name is Mark Sanfui and I represent Monarch Properties, I have one question for you, I wasn't here earlier this
13:07:43 15
morning, but I am assured by colleagues that you agreed with Ms. Dillon that
16
the motion of December 1993, Mr. Marren's motion benefited Monarch by
17
increasing the density from one per acre to four per acre and indeed that's a
18
fact that nobody could dispute.
19 13:08:00 20
We had Mr. Marren here yesterday outlining in detail various planning reasons
21
that he had for proposing the motion and saying that he had become convinced
22
that to increase the density from one to four per acre was the right thing to
23
do and he set out his reasons in that regard. Can I take it that you accept
24
Mr. Marren's bona fides even though you may disagree with the reasons that he
13:08:27 25
advanced and I take it you are not suggesting that the motion was put forward
26
solely for the purpose of benefitting Monarch but for what Mr. Marren saw to be
27
good planning reasons
28 29 13:08:45 30
A
I accept totally that any councillor -- I mean individually, we have a statutory duty and people will differ. Their views will differ on many occasions. I have differed with other people on many occasions and I take in www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:08:50
13:09:08
69 1
good faith what people do the way they believe is the right thing to do. And
2
if Councillor Marren felt that that was the right thing to do, that's a matter
3
for himself. I mean the option open to me is either vote for or against that
4
particular motion. I selected to vote against it because I thought as I have
5
outlined, that we should wait and do an overall action plan. That was the -- I
6
am a realist, I knew that some day there was going to be development of that
7
land. I mean as I said if you are going to have a motorway and a main sewer,
8
of course there's going to be development, there's a question of timing and how
9
you go about it, that's all.
13:09:28 10
Q
325
Yes and in fact Mr. Marren said that he had had disagreements with you I think
11
perhaps disagreements that caused him some distress because he had been close
12
to you but that he put this motion forward and he did so in the best interests
13
of the Development Plan.
14
A
Well of course. I mean it also puts paid to the idea that we met in secret as
13:09:50 15
a group and decided to vote one way or the other. We didn't do that. I can
16
only speak for myself but I mean, I knew that some people in my own group voted
17
and thought differently about different issues. You accepted that. One has to
18
accept it's an individual statutory duty to vote, you cannot in my opinion
19
impose a whip on something like this.
13:10:16 20
Q
326
Yes, thank you Mr. Barrett. Thank you chairman.
21 22
CHAIRMAN: All right Mr. Barrett, can I just ask you one thing and we will, you
23
can stand down then. You mentioned I think in May of 1992, the 27th May the
24
motion that -- this is your motion -- you got a map from an official of Dublin
13:10:33 25
County Council, you went in and you asked them to give you a map and then you
26
used that as a base for your motion. Was that facility there for councillors
27
generally if a councillor who themselves obviously wouldn't have the facility
28
for producing a map or even possibly understanding a map, was there a facility
29
there for councillors to go to the officials, to the engineers and get an
13:11:05 30
explanation for a map or get help in understanding a map? www.pcr.ie Day 650
13:11:08
13:11:23
70 1
A
Oh yes. I went to the planning department, the official in the planning
2
department. The administrative end of it and I just asked could they give me a
3
copy of the map relating to the '83 Development Plan for that particular area.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A
7
And were you aware of other councillors using that facility or --
Not really, I mean I understood it was available to everybody. I mean if you want a map, I mean it was --
8 9 13:11:39 10
CHAIRMAN: It wasn't a special favour to you? A
No, no, it's a matter of public knowledge, the area is zoned and it's zoned,
11
it's just to get, in order to submit your motion and to make sense of the
12
motion, you have to indicate what area you are talking about.
13 14 13:11:53 15
CHAIRMAN: A
All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Barrett.
Thank you.
16 17
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
We will say ten past two.
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, sir.
13:12:04 20
21 22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH
24 13:12:11 25
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:15:06
14:15:12
71 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2.10 P.M.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Richard Conroy please.
4 5
MR. RICHARD CONROY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS
6
FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
Good afternoon Mr. Conroy.
Your honours.
14:15:47 10
11
Q
327
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Conroy. I think you were originally elected
12
to Dublin County Council in 1985 and remained a member of Dublin County Council
13
until January 1994, when you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
14
Council.
14:15:59 15
A
16
Q
Yes. 328
17
I think that you were elected or you were a member of the Fianna Fail political party, is that correct?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 329
14:16:12 20
I think the Tribunal asked you to provide such information as you could in connection with the lands at Cherrywood and asked you a number of questions and
21
you replied by letter dated 20th March 2006 at page 185 please, and at
22
paragraph 1 you state "You had no contacts or meetings with any servants or
23
agents of Monarch Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services or any
24
company in the Monarch Group in relation to the lands at Cherrywood." Is that
14:16:44 25
26
correct? A
I think it is correct but I may well at some stage or another, someone of
27
Monarch Properties mentioned the matter to me but I certainly didn't have any
28
contacts or meetings with any of the persons involved.
29 14:17:04 30
Q
330
And other than the lands at Cherrywood, did you ever meet any of the servants or agents of Monarch Properties or Monarch Properties Services Limited? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:17:11
14:17:33
72 1
A
Not having the list in front of me but Richard Lynn was about the place quite
2
frequently and I am not, Mr. Monahan, to the best of nigh knowledge, the late
3
Mr. Monahan I don't think I have ever met him. I think Mr. Murray I may have
4
met at some stage or other on other business. I can't recollect the other
5
names.
6
Q
331
And at paragraph 2, you state "You had no contacts or meetings with the various
7
names parties in relation to the Monarch Group whether a servant or agent or
8
otherwise with regard to the lands at Cherrywood." And I think the parties
9
that were identified to you in the Tribunal letter, were Mr. Phillip Monahan,
14:17:50 10
the late Mr. Monahan, Mr. Richard Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeney, Mr. Dominic
11 12
Glennane, Mr. Philip Reilly and Mr. Frank Dunlop. A
None other than Mr. Lynn was about the place, as I said, he may have at some
13
stage mentioned it to me or he may have called to the office but I have no
14
recollection of any discussion with him.
14:18:10 15
Q
332
And you say at 3 "You say you have not received any benefit or payment for or
16
on behalf of those listed at 1 or 2." And at 4, "No person made
17
representations to you on behalf of any company in the Monarch Group."
18
A
19
Q
Correct. 333
14:18:25 20
would have met and spoken with all of the members of Dublin County Council,
21
including yourself, you don't dispute that, is that correct?
22
A
23
Q
I don't dispute that and I note in the documentation a tick beside my name. 334
24
Now I think that in 1993, you were a member of Dublin County Council, is that correct?
14:18:44 25
A
26
Q
Yes, I think it was, Ms. Dillon, 1993, yes. 335
27
And in the course of that, you had occasion to come to consider the Carrickmines lands, the Cherrywood lands, isn't that the position?
28
A
29
Q
14:18:59 30
Now, if I can take you, Mr. Lynn in his statement to the Tribunal says that he
Yes. 336
But I think in fact your only involvement as recorded in the minutes of the minutes of the meetings is in connection with the meeting in November 1993, www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:19:02
14:19:11
73 1
isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 337
But you don't appear to have any involvement up to that particular point in
4
time and you were recorded in the minutes of the meeting as voting in favour of
5
a motion that's put before the meeting by Councillor Marren and Coffey. And I
6
will show you a copy of the motion please at 722, 7229 please. These are the
7
lands that were the subject matter of the motion and these are the lands you
8
may take it from me, Mr. Conroy, that these are the lands that were owned by
9
Monarch Properties at Cherrywood. And as a result of the, sorry the motion
14:19:50 10
that was put forward to the meeting was a motion in connection with the
11
rezoning of these lands on behalf of Monarch Properties from one to the acre
12
which they had been since May of 1992 to four to the acre, did you understand
13
that, Mr. Conroy?
14
A
14:20:07 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 338
Yes. 339
18 19
Now, I think that you are recorded at 7263 as voting in favour of the motion.
Can you outline to the Tribunal anything you recollect about that or the circumstances in which you came to support it?
A
In the general terms, which I think I have been consistent about from the
14:20:42 20
beginning, in that I felt that there was a housing shortage, a land shortage
21
and I have consistently supported increased housing per acre or per hectare as
22
it's now known and no other particular reason for voting for it or against it.
23
Q
340
24
Yes. The lands that were the subject matter of this motion were part of the lands, 7217 please, if I just explain to you, Mr. Conroy, on the map that's on
14:21:18 25
screen, all of the yellow lands are zoned residential.
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 341
28
And the Monarch lands are outlined in red and they form part of the yellow lands.
29
A
14:21:28 30
Q
Yes. 342
All of those yellow lands being all of the residentially zoned lands in the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:21:33
14:21:46
74 1
Carrickmines Valley were zoned at one house to the acre in May of 1992 as a
2
result of Councillor Barrett's motion.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 343
When the matter came back before the council in November 1993, the motion that
5
was put before the council by Councillors Marren and Coffey was to rezone a
6
portion of those residentially zoned lands at four to the acre and the balance
7
at one to the acre, you follow that?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. Yes. 344
14:22:03 10
told the Tribunal.
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 345
13 14
A
Well I would absolutely agree that all of the zoning should be four houses or more to the acre, but that was the actual proposition that was before the
16
council at that stage. Q
346
18
And certainly the manager had recommended that that entire change be deleted and that the lands revert to four houses to the acre.
19
A
14:22:35 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 347
And you could have brought a motion to do that, isn't that correct? That is correct, yes.
348
23
But you didn't do that, notwithstanding the fact that you have a pro development view?
24
A
14:22:46 25
Q
That is correct. 349
26 27
In those circumstances, can I ask you, Mr. Conroy, why you didn't take some step to bring all of the zoning to four houses to the acre?
14:22:19 15
17
Now, your position had been pro development as I understand what you have just
So you simply responded, is that correct, Mr. Conroy, to the motion put before the chamber by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey?
A
In that that was a motion which I felt had a possibility of succeeding at that
28
time, yes.
29
Q
14:23:02 30
A
350
Sorry. In that that was a motion which I thought, rightly or wrongly, had the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:23:07
14:23:21
75 1 2
possibility of succeeding at that time. Q
351
Was it your belief at that time that if a motion were put to the chamber
3
concerning all of the lands that were zoned residential in the Carrickmines
4
Valley and to rezone those lands at four to the acre, that motion would not
5
succeed?
6
A
7
Q
It might have been more difficult I am just speculating on that. 352
8 9
Do you have any recollection of there being, of the rezoning of the Carrickmines Valley being a contentious issue before the council?
A
Yes, it was a contentious issue, it's a very beautiful valley and it's very sad
14:23:39 10
that it had to be rezoned but with the demand on housing and later the
11
possibility of a science park, it was, I felt, necessary, but there was a lot
12
of opposition to it, and very understandably.
13
Q
353
14
And was it well known within the council that the lands, the subject matter of that motion, were the Monarch lands?
14:23:59 15
A
16
Q
I am not so sure if that was very well known but it may well have been. 354
And you will have seen in the documentation and records of the minutes of the
17
meeting, Mr. Conroy, that these lands are referred to as Monarch Properties
18
lands throughout the minutes, isn't that right?
19
A
14:24:16 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That is absolutely correct. 355
And they are also so referred in the manager's report, isn't that right? Yes, indeed.
356
So it would follow from that for anybody who was in attendance at those
23
meetings, they would have been aware of the existence of Monarch Properties
24
interests in the lands, isn't that right?
14:24:30 25
A
They would certainly have been aware of it but from time to time you have
26 27
various developers whose interests in the lands are mentioned in the council. Q
357
Certainly if I could move on, Mr. Conroy, to 1994 and the events in 1994. I
28
think would it be fair to that you would have been in favour of the science and
29
technology park?
14:24:49 30
A
Very much so. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:24:50
14:25:30
76 1
Q
358
2
And indeed when matters weren't moving along, I think that you signed a motion at 5396.
3
A
4
Q
I think so. 359
Which is dated October 1994 and by this stage, Mr. Conroy, a decision had
5
already been taken to promote a science and technology park and that decision
6
had been taken by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:25:42 10
Q
Do you mind if I just -360
Not at all. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you.
361
But that decision was taken in June of 1994 and by October of 1994, the council
11
received a motion that's signed by Councillor Lydon, Councillor Liam Cosgrave
12
and yourself, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
I think that's correct, yes. 362
14:26:03 15
lands and details the break down in zoning that was sought.
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 363
And I think you also signed that map, isn't that right? That looks like my signature there, I think yes. Yes, it is my signature, yes.
364
14:26:27 20
21
And I think the map that's attached to that motion at 5397 outlines the Monarch
Now can I ask you, Mr. Conroy, the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion at 5396?
A
Well I would certainly have made my position on a science and technology
22
development as being very very much in favour. It was something which I think
23
at the time, still is urgently needed, a very beneficial development, which we
24
are very fortunate to get and therefore I would have been very happy indeed to
14:26:53 25
sign that motion.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:27:05 30
365
Yes. Who asked you to sign the motion? Sorry.
366
Who asked you to sign the motion? I have no recollection but anyone who asked me to sign that motion, I would happily do so. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:27:06
14:27:17
77 1
Q
367
2 3
the time you signed it? A
I don't really, it likes as though I am the first signature on it but I just
4 5
don't recollect. Q
368
6
Do you remember meeting Mr. Lynn or anybody from Monarch Properties in connection with this motion?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
No, I don't. 369
Do you remember discussing it with either Mr. Lydon or Mr. Cosgrave? They could well have said that they were putting that motion forward and I
14:27:31 10
11
Do you know whether Mr. Lydon or Mr. Cosgrave had already signed the motion by
would have been very happy with that. Q
370
And the motion was an unusual motion, was it not, Mr. Conroy in the sense that
12
the science and technology park was a new development for Dun
13
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
14
A
14:27:43 15
Q
Indeed, yes. 371
And this I suggest to you is probably the only motion in connection with the
16
science and technology park that was ever heard, dealt with or received by Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
18
A
19
Q
I think that's probably correct, I can't just be certain of that. 372
14:28:00 20
your experience as a councillor, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, that would be true. 373
23 24
And it's still your position that you cannot recollect anything about the circumstances in which you came to sign it, Mr. Conroy?
A
I don't think there was anything untoward or out of the way about the signing
14:28:15 25
of it that I can recollect at any rate. It seemed a very proper motion, very
26 27
And therefore the subject matter of the motion is an unusual subject matter in
essential motion and very beneficial one in my view at any rate. Q
374
I am not suggesting that there's anything untoward about it Mr. Conroy, I am
28
simply seeking to establish who was the person who asked you to sign the
29
motion, whether it was somebody from Monarch Properties or whether it was
14:28:36 30
either of the two persons whose names appear beside yours? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:28:41
14:28:53
78 1
A
It certainly wasn't anyone from Monarch Properties, it could have been one of
2
my two colleagues but I would certainly have been happy to initiate that motion
3
myself, i have to say that.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
375
Would you have drafted the motion if you had initiated it? No.
376
7
Does it follow from that, if you were the main proposer of the motion, it would have required somebody else to prepare the motion and present it to you?
8
A
9
Q
14:29:03 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That would be correct. 377
And you yourself did not prepare the motion? Not to my recollection, I don't think so. No.
378
Do you have any idea where the map came from at 5397 please. That would be normal procedure in relation to motions to provide a map, I would
13
take it, it comes from the officials on the council but I have no particular
14
recollection of where it came from.
14:29:24 15
Q
379
In any event, ultimately a variation was made, isn't that right, by Dun
16
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in connection with the science and technology
17
park and that variation was confirmed.
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 380
14:29:39 20
That motion in fact was never proceeded with because the manager brought before the council his own proposals which were accepted, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
That is correct, yes. 381
But other than the fact that this was a unique motion in your experience as a
23
councillor, you can't assist the Tribunal as to the circumstances in which you
24
came to sign it?
14:29:55 25
A
I don't think so, other than that I thought it a very necessary development
26
that should be encouraged in which I was, I didn't sign very many motions when
27
I was on the council, as you will be aware but that was certainly one I was
28
very happy to sign.
29 14:30:15 30
Q
382
Yes, and I think that matters moved on, Mr. Conroy, and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came to consider the Development Plan, the review of the www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:30:16
14:30:30
79 1
Development Plan in 1997 and 1998, isn't that right?
2
A
3
Q
About then, yes. 383
And I think that there were a number of submissions that were made to the
4
council in connection to the Development Plan by Monarch Properties at 2561
5
please. This is a submission 359 and it seeks, Mr. Conroy, rezoning of a
6
certain portion of lands from B agriculture to E1 and the lands are outlined on
7
the map on the following page at 2563. We just need to turn this map. And
8
what was being sought was to extend the science and technology zoning into the
9
area marked 3 on that map, do you see that?
14:31:06 10
A
11
Q
Yes, I do indeed, yes. 384
And I think subsequently, a motion was brought before the council at page 7286,
12
and this motion sought as its objective, the rezoning of 40 acres from B to
13
objective E1 and the map attached to that motion, Mr. Conroy, is at 7287. And
14
you will see that the map seeks the rezoning of the area marked 3 and you will
14:31:45 15
see that the motion at 7286 is signed by Councillors Lowry, Matthews, Cosgrave
16
and yourself, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
That's absolutely correct and the map as well, I've signed. 385
19 14:32:04 20
And the map is signed. Can you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion?
A
I would assume and this is an assumption now, that an extra area was required
21
or had been requested and certainly if it was required to change it to
22
agricultural which is B to E1, science and technology, I would certainly feel
23
that that was something I would support. But I don't recollect if that's the
24
following -- who asked me to sign it but I see names ahead of me.
14:32:39 25
Q
386
26
from Monarch Properties in connection with this motion?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:32:55 30
Yes. Do you remember or do you recollect having being approached by anybody
No, no. 387
Would you agree that what is sought on the face of this motion is exactly what had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission to the council at page 2561. Monarch Properties outline in that letter that they seek a change www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:33:10
14:33:35
80 1
for the lands marked 3 for the provision of a science and development park and
2
you will see and you have seen already that the map that is attached to the
3
Monarch submission at 2563, if we just turn that please, is almost the same as
4
the map that you signed that's attached to the motion, is that correct?
5
A
6
Q
That's absolutely correct. 388
So and it would seem then that the motion that was brought, Mr. Conroy, was on
7
all fours or in agreement with the submission that had been made by Monarch
8
Properties?
9 14:33:48 10
A Q
That would appear to be the case, yes. 389
11 12
And yet you have no recollection of the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion, is that the position?
A
Other than that if it was something in relation to the science park, I would
13
certainly support it. But certainly I wasn't approached by Monarch Properties
14
to the best of my recollection and I don't specifically recollect but somebody
14:34:07 15
16
must obviously have suggested it to me. Q
390
That motion was amended by a motion saying that any such rezoning of the lands
17
marked 3 on the map that's on screen would be without prejudice to the
18
council's stated objective to develop a golf course on those lands. Do you
19
remember that?
14:34:27 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That could well be the case, yes. 391
Yes. 392
24 A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
14:35:01 30
Which it was proposed by your motion would be rezoned were lands that had been zoned for a golf course in the 1993 plan, is that right?
14:34:38 25
29
Because the lands --
That would be correct. 393
So that motion as amended was passed, isn't that the position? To my recollection, yes.
394
And the second submission that was made by Monarch Properties to the council in the review of the Development Plan is at 2564, and this submission seeks an extension of the area zoned DC or district centre and the map shows the area www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:35:06
14:35:24
81 1
marked 2 at 2566. If you just turn this map please. What was sought is an
2
extension of the town centre zoning from the area marked 1 into the area marked
3
2 on that map at 2566, Mr. Conroy, do you see that?
4
A
5
Q
I do indeed, yes. 395
6
So it was an additional piece of land that was sought to be rezoned to include retail and district centre activities.
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 396
9
And if I could show you a motion at 7288, Mr. Conroy, which is signed by yourself, isn't that the position?
14:35:42 10
A
11
Q
That is correct, yes. 397
And this motion seeks a rezoning of lands from objective A residential to DC as
12
an extension of the existing district centre zoning on the adjoining lands,
13
isn't that right?
14
A
14:36:00 15
Q
That's correct, yes. 398
And I think you will accept from the map attached to that motion which is at
16
7289, that what is sought there is an extension of the district centre zoning
17
from the area marked 1 into the area marked 2.
18
A
19
Q
14:36:13 20
A
21
Q
Correct. 399
Yes, absolutely. 400
22
And that is exactly the same matter that had been sought by Monarch Properties in their submission 360 to the council, isn't that the position?
23
A
24
Q
Absolutely correct, yes. 401
14:36:27 25
26
Isn't that the position?
Can you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which you came to sign this motion?
A
Certainly, I assume there that one of my colleagues asked me to sign it, I
27
would have to assume that because I would have no particular interest in the
28
district centre per se in the same way that I would in the science and
29
technology one.
14:36:49 30
Q
402
I think you in fact seconded that motion at 2625, Mr. Conroy? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:36:53
14:37:00
82 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Very likely. Yes. 403
It was proposed by Councillor Lowry and seconded by yourself. Yes.
404
And it was passed on a show of hands, isn't that right? I think so, yes.
405
Can you assist the Tribunal as to whether you would have done that at the
7
instigation of somebody from Monarch or whether you did it at the request of
8
one of your colleagues who also signed the motion?
9
A
I cannot assume that it was at the request of the colleague who proposed the
14:37:17 10
motion but it certainly wasn't at the request of Monarch, so therefore I have
11 12
to assume it was one of my councillor colleagues. Q
406
And insofar as these three motions are concerned, the original motion,
13
Mr. Conroy, seeking to bring on a science and technology park that was dealt
14
with in 1994 and these two motions in the course of the review of the
14:37:39 15
Development Plan, it's your position that you accept that you signed the
16
motions and the maps, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
Yes, absolutely, yes. 407
19 14:37:53 20
And that these latter two motions were ultimately successful but that you have no recollection of the circumstances in which you came to sign them.
A
Of the science and technology park, I am quite clear this was something I was
21
very much advocating and in favour of. The other, the retail centre, not
22
really, no.
23
Q
408
24 14:38:09 25
you to sign the motion, is that right? A
I have no recollection of who asked me, but certainly wasn't Monarch Properties
26 27
But you have no recollection in any of these cases, Mr. Conroy, of who asked
so one has to assume therefore it was one of the my colleagues. Q
409
28
And you do not know who prepared the motion or provided the maps, is that the position?
29
A
14:38:25 30
Q
No, I don't. 410
Ultimately those motions were successful, is that correct? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:38:28
14:38:38
83 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
That's correct, yes. 411
Yes, particularly the first one, yes. 412
5
Were you ever in receipt of any money or payments from Monarch Properties or anybody in connection with Monarch Properties?
6
A
7
Q
None. 413
8 9
And you were in favour of those motions in any event, isn't that the position?
In the course of your career in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council since 1994, would you have had occasion to sign many motions?
A
I would have signed a number but I was not I would say the number of motions
14:38:55 10
that I signed was not a very large number indeed.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
414
And the records of the meetings would show -It's on the record the ones I did propose obviously.
415
14
And the record of attendances at the meeting would tend to show, Mr. Conroy, and I am in no was criticising you for this, that you were a less than frequent
14:39:11 15
attender at the meetings, would that be fair?
16
A
17
Q
Before I came Cathaoirleach, that is correct, I had various other demands. 416
Would it be fair to say without putting words in your mouth, that the signing
18
of these motions would be a not commonplace occurrence in your life as a
19
councillor?
14:39:29 20
A
I signed a number of motions, it certainly wouldn't be a commonplace
21 22
occurrence, I think that's fair to say, yes. Q
417
Thank you very much, if you answer any other questions.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
14:39:45 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28
MR. QUINN:
Mr. Fergal McCabe please.
29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:39:52
14:40:23
84 1
MR. FERGAL MCCABE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED
2
AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
A
6
Q
Good afternoon, Mr. McCabe.
Good afternoon. 418
Thank you Mr. McCabe, good after. Mr. McCabe you were a town planner and you
7
were retained by Monarch in relation to the lands at Cherrywood, isn't that
8
right?
9 14:40:32 10
A Q
That's correct. 419
And you were written to by the Tribunal and you were asked to provide a
11
statement, the letter seeking the statement dated the 7th April 2006 is at
12
pages 1426 and 1427 of the brief an your response is 8202. I think you say in
13
the first paragraph of that letter of response, that you have worked for the
14
Monarch property group since you first commenced practice in 1974. Isn't that
14:40:58 15
right?
16
A
17
Q
That's correct. 420
18
And you work with the group right up until 1997 and probably later, is that correct?
19
A
14:41:07 20
Q
Yes. 421
21
So therefore you would have been involved with all the other various projects that Monarch had been involvement with prior to Cherrywood?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 422
24
So by 1989, you would have in your capacity as a consultant town planner have quite a good deal of experience with the various personnel within Monarch
14:41:24 25
Group?
26
A
27
Q
I would. 423
28
And Monarch I think at that stage had a reputation in relation to the development of supermarkets and shopping centres?
29
A
14:41:33 30
Q
They were principally a shopping centre developer. 424
The departure towards Cherrywood, that was a departure for them? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:41:39
14:41:58
85 1
A
Yes, it was. I suppose in the sense that it was principally residentially or
2
industrially zoned land but I think their initial interest was there might be a
3
shopping centre involved.
4
Q
425
5
residential property prior to that?
6
A
7
Q
No. 426
8 9 14:42:12 10
But by and large, they hadn't been involved to that extent in relation to
I think that Mr. Monahan obviously was the chairman and chief executive of the Monarch Group and you knew the late Mr. Phil Monahan I presume?
A Q
I did. 427
11
Mr. Noel Murray was also involved with the group and presumably you knew him also?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:42:23 15
Q
I do of course. 428
In what capacity did Mr. Murray -I think Mr. Murray was mainly marketing.
429
16
Then there was a Mr. Phillip Reilly I think who had a responsibility in Tallaght, is that correct?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:42:30 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
Yes, I think that was -430
Did you know Mr. Reilly? I did.
431
And then Mr. Lynn, isn't that right? That's correct.
432
23
Had Mr. Lynn been with the company prior to 1989 and had he been involved with the other projects?
24
A
14:42:46 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
I don't think so, I think Mr. Lynn came in around the time of Cherrywood. 433
So Mr. Lynn would have been peculiar to the Cherrywood development? He certainly was the team leader.
434
28
Yes. Now, I think there was a Mr. Lafferty who was an in-house engineer, is that correct?
29
A
14:42:58 30
Q
In-house architect. 435
Did you have a lot of dealing with Mr. Lafferty? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:43:01
14:43:19
86 1
A
2
Q
Yes, I would have. 436
Now, I think in May 1989, you wrote to Mr. Monahan, if I could have 2846
3
please, this is a letter discovered to the Tribunal by you and it's a letter to
4
Mr. Monahan and it's your assessment of the site, isn't that right?
5
A
I think Monarch had just bought the lands at the time. Mr. Monahan asked me
6 7
for an initial reaction in terms of the statutory planning system. Q
437
8 9 14:43:41 10
Yes. Is that unusual, Mr. McCabe, that you would be asked for an assessment after the purchase rather than before the purchase?
A Q
Yes, I suppose it is. 438
Now, I think the property, according to the Irish Times of the 12th May 1989,
11
at 8510 had been recently purchased for a sum of 11 million which would have
12
been a substantial payment at the time, both in relation to size and indeed in
13
relation to price per acre for this green field, well it was effectively a
14
green field site?
14:44:00 15
A
16
Q
I really don't know about values. 439
You in any event did write as we saw on the 16th May 1989 at 2846 to
17
Mr. Monahan and you set out what you thought was the current zoning situation
18
on the land and what might be contained on the land, isn't that right?
19
A
14:44:24 20
Q
Yes. 440
And both you highlighted the prospect of possibility on both residential and
21
shopping centre, isn't that correct, although you felt the inclusion of
22
shopping facilities in the Draft Development Plan at that stage might be
23
controversial?
24
A
14:44:45 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:44:59 30
I was sceptical as to the viability of a shopping centre at that stage. 441
Yes. It's on page 2, I think.
442
Yes. At 2847, you are familiar with this correspondence I take it? Yes, I am.
443
You would have recently updated yourself on it in any event. I think one of the important points being made by you at the very early stage in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:45:05
14:45:18
87 1
the property is that the current development plan was being undertaken, the
2
review of the current Development Plan was in being, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
I think it had commenced. 444
About 1987 and a series of working papers were being prepared? Yes.
445
And maps were being prepared and I think and would it be fair to that your
7
approach to both that review of the plan and the review of the 1993 plan was
8
that you should get in and try and have your views adopted by the management?
9
A
It was not unusual for significant landowners to make their views known to an
14:45:44 10
evolving Development Plan in the early stages, in fact that's provided for
11 12
statutorily in the 2000 act now. Q
446
We are now talk being 1989. I think in 1989, the idea was that there would be
13
a statutory display when submissions would be made to the plan, isn't that
14
right, after the first statutory display.
14:46:05 15
A
16
Q
In the ordinary circumstances, yes. 447
17
And I think the first statutory display in relation to the '83 plan was between September and December 1991 which was two years away, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
I take your word. 448
Yes. Now, I think there were a series of meetings and you will have seen in
14:46:24 20
the brief if we could have 2850 please, one of the meetings occurred between
21
the roads department and, sorry, the sewerage department of the council and
22
representatives of your associates who I think were retained as engineers under
23
the development?
24
A
14:46:45 25
Q
Yes. 449
26
the Carrickmines Valley sewerage scheme, is that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:47:02 30
And you will have seen one of the issues at this early stage was the issue of
That's right. 450
There were two issues in relation to this green field site, one was a question of access complicated by the proposed siting of the Southeastern Motorway and the other was the question of drainage and in particular, sewage drainage and www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:47:07
14:47:14
88 1
that was to be catered for by the Carrickmines Valley sewer, isn't that
2
correct?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 451
Yes. 452
7 A
9
Q
Yes, of that order. 453
A
me in planning terms alone inappropriate. Q
454
13 14
Yes. It's unlikely that you would get a large scale planning, for 243 houses on the 243 acres.
A
At that particular zoning of septic tanks, it would have caused a lot of
14:47:54 15
16
It would be wholly uneconomic to develop this site on that zoning I take it? Again, I am not, I'm unwilling to give evidence on values but it would seem to
11 12
As indeed was the zoning because the zoning at the time I think was one house to the acre on septic tank.
8
14:47:32 10
And both of those were essential to any development of the site?
pollution problems. Q
455
Yes. Now, I think as we see from the document on screen that when they met
17
with the representatives of the council, they were informed that tender
18
documents had recently been approved by the Department of the Environment in
19
relation to the scheme and that is to say that the internal engineers were
14:48:16 20
surprised at the instruction since it wasn't on a priority list. Do you recall
21
any discussion in May, June 1989 in relation to that matter?
22
A
23
Q
No. 456
24
documents were being drawn up within the council, approval having been given I
14:48:38 25
think on the 1st May or shortly prior to the 1st May of that year, that the
26
scheme could go ahead.
27
A
28
Q
29 14:48:57 30
But in any event, you did find out and you discovered I take it that the tender
Yes, I am aware of that. 457
Yes. And I think you then, on the 7th June 1989 provided your first comprehensive report to Mr. Sweeney, if I could have 2852 please, in relation to the matter, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:48:59
14:49:11
89 1
A
2
Q
Yes, that's it. 458
And I think as I indicated in the very first paragraph there, you were
3
highlighting the advantage of securing a rezoning in the initial draft, isn't
4
that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 459
Presumably if it were the manager's proposal, it had a greater possibility of
7
being accepted by the councillors, although as we discover, that wasn't
8
necessarily the case here at a later stage?
9 14:49:28 10
A Q
Well that's what should happen. 460
Yes. Now, you were suggesting a density, current density, isn't that right, in
11
relation to the lands at this stage. I think in fact what you say is "I would
12
suggest that a representation be made to the planning authority to the effect
13
that the lands be considered for development at full residential densities,"
14
isn't that correct?
14:49:47 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:49:59 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
Yes. 461
Probably in the order of 20 to the acre. 462
463
Which would be about ten to the acre? Eight. Eight to the acre.
464
So therefore four to the acre would be considered low density. It would be lowish. It would be verging on the, verging on the level at which it would be difficult to sustain a proper neighbourhood.
Q
465
26
And I think you directed that a series of studies be undertaken which might be of assistance in compiling a report, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:50:40 30
We know, for example, and we have evidence -Sorry 20 to the hectare, I am sorry.
24 14:50:21 25
What were full residential densities at that time?
Yes. 466
You have seen that document and I am sure you have revised your, you have updated your memory in relation to what went on?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:50:40
14:51:01
90 1
Q
467
We see at 2853 under the heading "Housing development" you said that you would
2
recommend that -- this is the suggested application perhaps for a material
3
contravention at that stage that any such application be delayed, isn't that
4
right? You say there that "However the possibility of seeking a material
5
contravention is available at any time, I would recommend that it would be
6
delayed until such time as a favourable draft zoning at least for the lands has
7
emerged."
8
A
9
Q
Isn't that right?
Yes, ideally until the plan had been fully approved. 468
14:51:21 10
Yes. Now, the submissions and the case for housing and density, you suggest I think at 2854 be established on the principles laid down in the studies
11
prepared for the Development Plan submission, were you there talking about the
12
working papers, etc?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 469
14:51:38 15
And then I think you dealt with the retail element and based on that, I think you followed up that letter on the 7th June with a further letter setting out
16
your charges and recommending that I think it was the late Mr. Meehan who was
17
also a planner?
18
A
19
Q
14:51:52 20
A
21
Q
Dr. Meehan, yes. 470
Be employed also, is that correct? Yes.
471
I think on the 26th June 1989, if we see 2874 you were given instructions in
22
relation to the matter. Now, on the 29th June '89, if we could have 2878
23
please, the issue of the route of the Southeastern Motorway was beginning to
24
surface, isn't that right? And you were given a map with a suggested land use
14:52:23 25
structure, isn't that correct?
26
A
27
Q
That's correct, yes. 472
And I think you wrote to the planners on 2879 on the 3rd July 1989 advising of
28
your client's interests in the land and asking that a development -- not
29
exceeding 10 thousand house to the acre in the forthcoming review of the plan?
14:52:46 30
A
That's right, that's a preliminary letter. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:52:48
14:53:03
91 1
Q
473
2
That's a preliminary letter written to the planners at the time when they were considering the papers for publication to the councillors?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 474
Now, I think that letter was acknowledged as we see on the 10th July '89 at
5
2883 and I think that strategy meetings were beginning to develop within the
6
Monarch Group attended by you and others in relation to how you might proceed,
7
is that correct?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 475
14:53:23 10
11
proceed? A
I was outlining, if I remember right, the form of submission that might be
12 13
Were you providing a strategy control option to Monarch on how they might
successful. Q
476
14
For example if we look at 2894, on the 11th August 1989, I think you were referring to the ERDO report, is that correct?
14:53:44 15
A
16
Q
Yes, it seemed to me it was the bedrock of the whole exercise. 477
Yes. ERDO I think had compiled a report in May of 1988 or revised a report in
17
1988 which suggested that there might be an additional 30,000 houses required
18
in this location, is that correct?
19
A
14:54:03 20
Q
An additional 20,000 population if I recollect. 478
Yes. If we look at 2894, we just look at the second paragraph there, you say
21
that "The revised ERDO strategy for the Dublin sub region of May 1988 which is
22
the basic research document informing the forthcoming review of the Development
23
Plan recommends an additional population of 20,000 persons for the Shanganagh
24
area by the year 2001. In addition to a committed population capacity based on
14:54:30 25
current permissions and land use zoning objectives of 30,000 in the south and
26
south eastern suburbs."
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:54:47 30
Q
I think that might be 2011. 479
20 and 11 as opposed to 30? Sorry an additional 20,000 persons by 2011 rather than 2001.
480
I understand. And I think you were suggesting then that there was a scarcity www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:54:50
14:55:00
92 1
of industrially zoned lands and again these lands might be considered for that
2
purpose?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 481
And I think your suggestion was more or less to the effect that based on the
5
existing zoning, that you would not have a capacity on these lands for that
6
projected population growth.
7
A
I made a study of the southeast area generally and looked at committed lands or
8
permissions and undevelopable of lands and it seemed to me one of the few
9
places in which the 20,000 population could be located was the Lehaunstown,
14:55:24 10
11
Cherrywood lands. Q
482
12
That's 30 years on from when this commission is being undertaken or 20 years on?
13
A
14
Q
14:55:36 15
A
16
Q
By 2011. 483
And it's now 1989, 1990. Yes.
484
17
I think additional population then would give rise to the necessity for shopping and other activities, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
There would be ancillary retail and schools and open space necessary. 485
14:56:00 20
Now, I think that as you go forward, you eventually have a meeting with the planners, isn't that right? And that meeting took place on the 29th August
21
1989 and at 2902 we have a report of that meeting and I think that report may
22
have been in fact compiled by yourself for Mr. Lynn?
23
A
24
Q
14:56:15 25
A
That's correct. 486
I sought the meeting and the members of the Development Plan team agreed to
26 27
meet me. Q
28 29 14:56:39 30
How did that meeting take place?
487
Had you sought similar meetings on behalf of other clients in relation to the review of that Development Plan?
A
In relation to the 199 -- that Development Plan, that was the only submission, I don't think I made any other submissions in relation to that plan other than www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:56:43
14:56:49
93 1 2
Cherrywood. Q
488
3
in the country, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
I was an established planning consultant. 489
6 7
And yet this is the very first and only occasion that you have had to meet with the planners during their review of the plan in advance of its publication.
A
It is but I wouldn't really have made any large scale submissions to the
8 9
Yes. You would have been one of the leading planning consultants at that time
development plans other than Cherrywood. Q
490
14:57:13 10
Yes. Well did you make any submissions during the public display between September and December 1991 other than Cherrywood?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
No. 491
On behalf of any clients? I don't believe so.
492
14:57:25 15
In any event, you discussed your views in relation to the valley and in relation to these lands with the planners, isn't that right, at that, as
16
appears from that and it was obvious that the Shanganagh, or sorry, the
17
Carrickmines sewerage system and the proposed Southeastern Motorway were going
18
to be huge factors in relation to the matter, isn't that right?
19
A
14:57:43 20
Q
Yes. 493
21 22
The motorway was particularly important from the point of view of the line of the motorway, isn't that correct?
A
Well it would because if you were to put residential, new residential
23
population on the lands, in the ordinary course of events, correct planning
24
principles would suggest that the motorway would go on the edge of the lands
14:58:09 25
and the public transport up the middle. It would be unusual to have the
26
motorway running through the middle of a residential area.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:58:30 30
A
494
Presumably the motorway doesn't take account of the ownership of the lands? I -- no, but it would take account of planning principles.
495
For sure but this is a green field site. Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
14:58:31
14:58:45
94 1
Q
496
2
And the motorway was unlikely at this stage to take account of the ownership or the owners' objectives or views or --
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
No, presumably it wouldn't. 497
For these lands, isn't that right? Yes.
498
7
Yet I think that you discussed two options with the planners at this meeting, isn't that right, in relation to the lands?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 499
14:59:00 10
They had a view, I think there were two, an option A and an option B or C, option A being as we see it at 8554, a suggestion that the motorway would join
11
with the existing road, that is to say the existing Dublin, Bray Road which had
12
been upgraded, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 500
14:59:23 15
16
Option C as we see it there would be to go through the lands to the west of the lands, isn't that right?
A
Well on the map I'm looking at here, there are two options, the blue line is
17
picking up the existing Bray Road and the brown line is where the motorway acts
18
as an edge to the development area.
19
Q
501
14:59:46 20
Yes. I think the '83 plan had envisaged a line going straight through these lands, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 502
And I think it was your view and I think it would have been the councillors'
23
view and possibly the planners' view at that stage, that any development would
24
only be permissible to the line of the motorway.
15:00:06 25
A
26
Q
I am not too sure, if you could repeat that question. 503
27 28
likely to end wherever the motorway line -A
Yes, in general the motorway was considered to be the stop line between the
29 15:00:24 30
Any development, any rezoning of these lands for residential development was
city and the mountain zone. Q
504
So for example if the blue line as we see it there were to be the motorway www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:00:29
15:00:45
95 1
line, it would effectively mean these lands were going to be continue to be
2
zoned for agricultural purposes whereas if the brown line was to be zoned owes
3
a motorway line, there's a possibility that residential development would be
4
extended to the brown line.
5
A
Well, I mean I don't think it's as simple as that. There was an identification
6
of a need for 20,000 population in the area, it had to be accommodated
7
somewhere and this was very well located land. And it is very possible that
8
the, if the blue line were to go ahead that somehow or other a reasonable stop
9
gap for some kind would have to be provided on the south west boundary.
15:01:17 10
Q
505
11
In other words there would have to be development on the other side of the motorway?
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 506
14
However assuming the brown line or a variation of the brown line were to be the motorway line, then obviously the development was going to take place east of
15:01:29 15
that line, isn't that is right?
16
A
17
Q
It was preferable. 507
Yes. Now, at that meeting, I think Mr. Davin, if we could have 2903 please,
18
Mr. Davin had suggested a line, and I think if we look at the second last
19
paragraph of that it says "It was generally felt that we had a lot in common
15:01:52 20
and the meeting ended on the request that I would examine in more detail
21
Mr. Davin's line and its implications and possibly come up with a structure
22
plan based on it which could be the subject of further discussions."
23
Mr. Davin's line at that time, as I understand it and I may be wrong, if we go
24
back to 8554 was in fact the blue line.
15:02:13 25
A
26
Q
That's correct. 508
27
on the basis that the motorway line might in fact be the blue line.
28
A
29
Q
15:02:31 30
So in other words you were being invited by the planners to put in a submission
One or the other. 509
Yes. I think after that meeting, there was a return meeting by Muir & Associates with the roads planning department, if we could have 2906 please. I www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:02:39
15:02:57
96 1
think the roads planning department had expected Muir to return some sort of
2
submissions in relation to the line of the roadway also, but this meeting had
3
been called following on your meeting with the planners in September, sorry in
4
August, isn't that correct? And we see there in the first paragraph, "Fergal
5
McCabe had recently met the County Council planners and had been asked by them
6
to examine a certain proposed location for the road and Muir Associates now
7
wish to discuss this in outline with Cormac Rabbitte before embarking on a
8
detailed proposal which may be at total variance with the roads planning
9
department's ideas."
15:03:19 10
A
11
Q
That is correct?
Yes. I think that may have been the first time I have seen that. 510
It's included in the brief of documents, you would have been reporting back
12
presumably both to Monarch and their other professional consultants including
13
Muir Associates, is that correct?
14
A
15:03:32 15
Q
Yes, that's correct. 511
And you would have been advising them of what had been told to you by Mr.
16
Conway and Mr. Davin at your meeting in August and having regard to what you
17
hades to, they had returned to the roads department to see what the position
18
was, isn't that correct?
19
A
15:03:44 20
Q
Yes. 512
21
And I think you submitted to Mr. Davin on the 20th October 1989 at 2912 a draft structural plan for the above -- for discussion purposes, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 513
24
And I think that map which we have been looking at at 8554, if we could have that on screen, was the structure map that you enclose with that letter, isn't
15:04:13 25
that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 514
28
Now as we go forward, I think into late 1989, the issue of the road becomes an even greater issue, isn't that right, the location of the roadway.
29
A
15:04:35 30
Q
In what context? 515
In relation to your submissions and the submissions that you might put in in www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:04:39
15:04:55
97 1
relation to these lands?
2
A
3
Q
The location of the road was critical. 516
4
Critical, yes. Not just the Southeastern Motorway but also presumably any junction on the motorway and access to the lands?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 517
In any event, on the 27th November 1989 I think you formally submitted a report
7
in relation to the lands, isn't that right, if we have 2918 please. And that's
8
a report as we see it at 2919 prepared by yourself, Dr. Meehan and Muir
9
Associates, isn't that correct?
15:05:14 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 518
Mr. Lynn I think will tell the Tribunal, if I could have 14130 please, that the
12
contents of that submission was generally accepted by the county manager and it
13
formed part of the manager's report to the council in October 1990 entitled the
14
Carrickmines area action plan, do you see that, that's an extract from
15:05:33 15
Mr. Lynn's statement to the Tribunal and I take it that you would accept that
16
and agree with it. Perhaps if we could have the third paragraph highlighted
17
please. Just slightly north of the area action plan. You see a submission was
18
prepared --
19
A
15:06:05 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
Yes. Yes, I see that. 519
That report. 520
That would be Mr. Lynn's evidence, I understand. Is that your evidence? I have no knowledge that it was generally accepted by the county manager.
521
15:06:27 25
We will come in a moment to look at DP90/123, do you say that was substantially different from what you were proposing at that's various meetings and these
26
reports you were submitting?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:06:56 30
Do you accept that, Mr. McCabe?
If I could have see DP90. 522
Yes. If we could have 6937 please. The area shaded in red at the bottom right-hand side corner is the Monarch site as I understand it.
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:07:00
15:07:20
98 1
Q
523
I think the entire valley was being proposed for development for either
2
residential or industrial zoning, the proposals were that there would be
3
development at both sides of the proposed line which is the blue line and that
4
the industrial zoning would be close to the interchange, particularly the
5
interchange at Carrickmines.
6
A
Yes. It's a different layout, I mean I accept the principle that the general
7
body of the lands were to be developed for housing and shopping purposes but
8
the --
9
Q
15:07:40 10
A
11
Q
524
Which is what you were hoping for in your submissions? In principle but not in detail.
525
Yes. Yes. Would you accept that in large part the planners accepted your
12
proposals. I don't want to and I will if necessary go through your submissions
13
and through the manager's report to the council.
14
A
Well I accept that they agreed that lands should be developed to ordinary
15:07:59 15
16
densities. Q
526
17
And do you accept that the submission was generally accepted by the manager, as Mr. Lynn will tell the Tribunal?
18
A
19
Q
In principle. 527
15:08:16 20
Now, this was a submission which was made not during the display period but during the consideration of the maps by the planners, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 528
And I think in fact you were able to tell Mr. Lynn on the 18th January 1990, if
23
we could have 2952 please that your submission was being considered seriously
24
and was being examined, isn't that right?
15:08:33 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 529
27
area was deferred."
28
A
29
Q
15:08:46 30
"However until the line of the road was resolved, the land use planning of the Isn't that right?
Yes. 530
Now, if we could have 2954 please, this is a meeting attended apparently by you held on the 24th January 1990 in relation to the Cherrywood lands, isn't that www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:08:51
15:09:02
99 1
right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 531
This was one of the a series of meetings and I think in relation to the
4
motorway, you were advised that it now appears that the western option was the
5
most favoured by the council but that a clear decision may not emerge for
6
another couple of months?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
15:09:11 10
Q
11
A
Yes. 532
Who advised the meeting of that? I did but --
533
Based on? At the time I would have been generally involved with planning in the southeast
12
area and I would have had quite a number of contacts with the Development Plan
13
team in relation to other lands which were being developed at Ballyogan or
14
Cabinteely. So I would have been generally aware of the debate that was going
15:09:34 15
16
on between the planners and the engineers. Q
534
17
There was no doubt but there was a dispute within the council at this stage between the planners and the road department?
18
A
19
Q
There was a debate. 535
15:09:50 20
Yes, and I think it was your view the planners were likely to win out in that debate?
21
A
22
Q
I believe so that, yes. 536
23
However, that debate wasn't doing anything for the development of the site and it was deemed essential that the motorway line be fixed, isn't that right?
24
A
15:10:06 25
Q
The fixing of the line would resolve many of the planning issues of the site. 537
The merits of an immediate planning application were again discussed at this
26
meeting, isn't that right, and again I think you were of the view that the that
27
that, you should hold off on that?
28
A
I always felt that it was pointless making planning applications until the
29 15:10:25 30
planning situation had settled down. Q
538
Because obviously within the council planning department, at this stage they www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:10:29
15:10:44
100 1
hadn't even decided on the proposals that might be put to the councillors in
2
relation to the review of the plan, isn't that right?
3
A
4
Q
An application would have been entirely premature. 539
I think however the possibility of leverage was also discussed at that meeting
5
and at 2955, I think you or someone suggested that a possible leverage would be
6
to utilise the IDA in relation to the request for 60 acres of land and you
7
indicate that a possible approach to the planners with the IDA might result in
8
the speeding up of a decision, is that right?
9 15:11:07 10
A Q
I didn't make the suggestion about the IDA but that was my response to it. 540
11
Yes. If somebody else suggested the IDA and you suggested that it might sped it up?
12
A
13
Q
That it might, yes. 541
14
Now, there was a meeting again on the 24th January 1990 at 5956 and it would appear from the note of that meeting that Mr. Sweeney was able to advise the
15:11:31 15
assembled experts, including yourself, that the political decision had been
16
made to align the motorway on the western edge of the site although the forward
17
planners in the roads and the planners were continuing meetings and having
18
discussions on options, is that right?
19
A
15:11:47 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I see that, yes. 542
Yes. Can you recall that meeting, Mr. McCabe? No.
543
Do you know the source of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge? No.
544
15:11:59 25
That must have come as a relief, however, to those involved, including yourself, that there was such level of finality in relation to where the line
26
might be.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:12:17 30
Q
Well I don't know with what credibility I would have taken it. 545
Yes. What political decision was Mr. Sweeney referring to? I have no idea.
546
You have absolutely no recollection of that meeting? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:12:27
15:12:41
101 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
Not of the meeting specifically and not particularly of that comment. 547
No. 548
Even though you attended quite a number of these meetings, isn't that right? Yes.
549
7
Was there ever any political or discussion of political interference in relation to any of these matters?
8
A
9
Q
No, certainly not. 550
15:12:53 10
Can you give any indication to the Tribunal how this note of this meeting could contain a reference to Mr. Sweeney's contribution, namely there was a political
11 12
Do you ever recollect any discussions in relation to meetings with ministers?
decision taken namely that in relation to the alignment of the motorway? A
I see it but I didn't place any credibility on it because in my view, the only
13
decision that would have been relevant would have been the ultimate line that
14
was posted on the Draft Development Plan map.
15:13:14 15
Q
551
Just let's take that in stages, you recall the comment presumably because you
16
have been able to tell us that you didn't take any notice of it at the time,
17
isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Or I put it differently, I wouldn't have taken much notice. 552
15:13:38 20
I think your evidence, Mr. McCabe was that you dismissed it at the time, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:13:49 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 553
So you must have recalled hearing it? I must have but --
554
But you can't assist the Tribunal as to the source of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge? No.
555
I think the issue of the IDA again surfaced at that meeting at 2957 and it says
27
"Mr. F McCabe discussed the option of mobilising the idea's support in order to
28
expedite the construction of the sewer."
29
relation to the IDA to that the sewer issue might be expedited and resolved?
15:14:15 30
A
Do you recall having a discussion in
Yes, I probably did. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:14:18
15:14:34
102 1
Q
2
A
556
That the IDA as a development agency, who would be an appropriate body to
3 4
And what did you advise?
assist in furthering the Carrickmines sewer. Q
557
5
Had you been involved in any other development where the IDA had been mobilised to expedite any decisions of the corporation or the council?
6
A
7
Q
No. 558
In any event on the 24th January 1995 at 2958 you were asked by Mr. Lynn to
8
identify the most appropriate 60 acres which could be devoted to industrial
9
lands in order that they could advise the IDA, isn't that right?
15:14:57 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 559
And I think you eventually did provide a report, if I could have the 2960 on
12
the 29th January 1990, you said "The most appropriate location for industrial
13
lands, would I imagine be those indicated in my report." Is that correct?
14
A
15:15:16 15
Q
Yes. 560
And I think you went on to provide a further report to Mr. Monahan on the 15th
16
February, if we could have 2964 please. This is effectively a review of the
17
situation, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 561
15:15:43 20
21
contained in it appears to have been contained in prior reports? A
I remember the late Mr. Monahan asking for it specifically, I don't know the
22 23
purpose. Q
562
24
You agree with me it's like a briefing document that he might want to show some one?
15:15:58 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:16:10 30
Can I ask you why did you come to compile that report since most of what's
Yes. 563
That was on the 15th February 1990, is that right? It's not dated but it would have been 1990, yes.
564
Did you know if Mr. Monahan had any meetings with parties or politicians in relation to this project?
A
No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:16:14
15:16:35
103 1
Q
565
Now, I think on the 15th February 1990, the coordinating committee of the
2
council considered the Carrickmines Valley, if I could have 2969 please and
3
they noted that plans were being drawn up in the planning department for the
4
future development of the area and a number of issues required to be resolved,
5
namely the location of the motorway, the question of the provision and
6
limitation of foul sewer, water requirements, major park requirements,
7
industrial lands and road systems and they asked that reports be provided as a
8
matter of urgency, is that right?
9 15:16:49 10
A Q
Yes. 566
I think you were able to tell Mr. Lynn and Monarch on the 2nd March 1990, if I
11
could have 2170 please, that "You now believe for a good reason that the
12
motorway option selection by the planner and road section of the council was
13
the western most line, option B." Is that correct?
14
A
15:17:11 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
That's correct. 567
Again discussions with the Development Plan again in a general way. 568
Somebody was advising you that this is what was happening? I don't think it was somebody was advising me but these are colleagues whom I
19
would have met on fairly frequent basis and I would have asked them I suppose
15:17:30 20
21
What was the source of your knowledge?
how the debate was going between the roads and planning sections. Q
569
Did you know that there was a suggestion at some stage that perhaps IKEA might
22
be involved together with the IDA, if I could have 2977. So as to expedite the
23
drainage system. This is an extract from a letter written by Mr. Lynn and just
24
look at the final paragraph there, it's E.S. which presumably Mr. Sweeney
15:17:56 25
"indicated that he may be in a position to get a letter from IKEA requiring a
26
100,000 square feet development on the retail park which could be used with the
27
IDA to speed up the drainage contact."
28
make contact with IDA and ascertain whether they would back IKEA in their
29
application, do you recall any discussion in relation to that at that stage?
15:18:16 30
A
"RL" which is presumably Mr. Lynn, "to
No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:18:17
15:18:27
104 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
570
No. 571
4 5
You have no recollection of that being discussed?
Can I just ask you at this stage, Mr. McCabe, what exactly was your role within Monarch in relation to these lands?
A
Well I suppose generally to advise on responses to the statutory planning
6
system, to advise them on what current development plans were saying. What --
7
in the light of the ongoing future of the city, what would be the likely future
8
of the Cherrywood lands and then formal responses to the statutory planning
9
system in relation to the publication of draft plans and advice on the
15:19:04 10
11
implications of those. Q
572
12
Yes. The impression I am getting from what you are saying, Mr. McCabe is that your role was that of giving advice?
13
A
14
Q
15:19:19 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15:19:25 20
Q
21
A
Yes. 573
Did you have any role or did you accept any role lobbying councillors? No.
574
Ever? Ever.
575
On behalf of Monarch? Never.
576
Did you have speak to councillors on their behalf? I think I spoke to one councillor that I met on a social basis at one stage,
22
because I should say that I believed that the proposals for the Cherrywood area
23
made sense but that was on a semi personal basis, otherwise no.
24
Q
15:19:48 25
A
26
Q
577
When would you have spoken to that councillor? I couldn't give a date.
578
27
Could you be mistake in your recollection in relation to your responsibilities in respect of lobbying for making representations to councillors?
28
A
29
Q
15:20:03 30
A
I don't think so. 579
Did you bill for making representations to councillors? In one bill I mentioned a representation and that was the -www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:20:06
15:20:24
105 1
Q
580
8267 please. This is an invoice dated the 3rd December 1991, you set out the
2
role that you had played and for which you were billing I think 6,000 to
3
include VAT, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 581
And I think one of the matters that you set out there was the preparation of
6
reports, various meetings with consultants, discussion with council officials,
7
maps and submissions of objections to the Development Plan together with
8
representations to councillors and the media. So you are saying that
9
representations to councillors there was one representation to one councillor?
15:20:46 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Singular, yes. 582
And you never had a role in making representations to other councillors? None whatever.
583
14
Did you ever recommend to Monarch that they make representations to councillors?
15:20:56 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
No. 584
Were you ever present when representations were made to councillors? No.
585
19
Did Monarch ever discuss with you their representations being made to councillors?
15:21:10 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
No. 586
So you say you had no political interface in relation to these lands? None whatsoever.
587
24
But you knew presumably that a review of the Development Plan would require the input of councillors?
15:21:26 25
A
26
Q
I did of course. 588
27
And you knew that a planning application because it would involve a material contravention or indeed a Section 4 would require the input of councillors?
28
A
29
Q
15:21:38 30
A
Yes. 589
And yet you say you never had any involvement with councillors? That was not my role, I was a professional adviser. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:21:42
15:21:50
106 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
590
Did you ever have any role with politicians? No.
591
Other than councillors? No.
592
6
You agree with me that the issue of political contacts was raised in your presence at various meetings?
7
A
8
Q
It was raised, yes. 593
9
If I could have 2980 please, this is a minute of the meeting of the 3rd May 1990 and again the Carrickmines sewer valley is being, sorry, Carrickmines
15:22:10 10
sewer scheme is being addressed, and you see the fourth paragraph, "it was
11
agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the Carrickmines
12
Valley sewerage scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F McC" which is
13
presumably you, "indicated that a named developer with a company Eddie Sweeney
14
to see Minister Flynn to indicate an overall need in the area."
15:22:33 15
16
The suggestion that Mr. Flynn be approached appears to be your suggestion from
17
that note, is that right?
18
A
Another development which I was engaged in the area had a consent I think for
19
about 900 houses which was held back due to I think 300 had been permitted and
15:22:55 20
the balance was held back pending the arrival of main drainage and my other
21
development in the area felt that there might have been some advantage in both
22
developers pressing the department to expedite the sewer.
23
Q
594
24
Just to take that in stages, there were two developers in this valley who both had a problem in relation to the coming on line of the sewer, the Carrickmines
15:23:25 25
sewer, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 595
28
And that difficulty was being discussed by you and others in the context of Monarch and their lands at Cherrywood.
29
A
15:23:35 30
Q
Yes. 596
And the difficulty or the solution or a possible solution to the difficulty was www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:23:40
15:23:53
107 1
the possibility of political input, namely an approach to the minister?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 597
4
And that was your suggestion and you said that suggestion came about because it was something that was being mooted by another developer?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 598
Well did that meeting take place, can I ask you? I don't believe so.
599
9
We know for example you were supposed to meet with the planners, can we have page 2981, which is the second page of the same document and if we look at the
15:24:06 10
third last paragraph it says "It was agreed that Fergal McCabe and Dr. Brian
11
Meehan would meet with the planners on the documents already submitted after
12
the meeting with the minister had taken place."
13
A
14
Q
I see that but I am not aware a meeting took place. 600
15:24:25 15
What was the strategy meeting the planners after the political representation had been made to the minister?
16
A
17
Q
Presumably if there had been expedition on the arrival of the sewer. 601
18
The expedition would have been brought about as a result of the visit to the minister?
19
A
15:24:38 20
Q
Presumably. 602
21
And that Minister's intervention having taken place you would then meet with the planners.
22
A
23
Q
24
A
15:24:49 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 603
It would be pointless meeting with them in advance of it, is that right? I wouldn't go that far.
604
But that certainly was the thinking that meeting at a strategy? Yes.
605
28
You were intimately involved in the strategy in relation to the planning and development of this site, isn't that right?
29
A
15:25:01 30
Q
Yes. 606
You were key to it as was Mr. Lynn and the other representatives of Monarch, www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:25:06
15:25:28
108 1
albeit, sorry, whether it be putting in a Development Plan submission or a
2
planning submission or advising your clients?
3
A
My involvement would be largely to do with the relationship with the statutory
4 5
planning system. Q
607
Let's look at your advice today, your first advice was not to put in a shopping
6
centre submission at this stage. You then advised I think that a submission
7
should go in at this stage during the review process, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
Yes. 608
15:25:49 10
You had a series of meetings with the various planners and you had relayed the contents of those meetings back to your employer, Monarch, is that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 609
13
You had made a suggestion or had developed a suggestion that the IDA might get involved in an effort to expedite it?
14
A
15:26:03 15
Q
Yes. 610
And it would appear from that document we just looked at, that you had because
16
of your experience elsewhere come up with a suggestion there be a joint
17
approach to the minister to get involved in relation to the expedition of the
18
sewerage system?
19
A
15:26:16 20
Q
Yes. 611
I think there was a meeting on the 5th July 1990, you don't appear to have been
21
at the meeting but you have seen the documentation at which Mr. Sweeney and
22
Lynn were at and 2958 and at 2986, under the heading "access to site" it's
23
taking the second paragraph there RML, which I understand is Mr. Lynn
24
"indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the motorway
15:26:48 25
established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the development
26
and recommended that contact be made at the highest level, ie ministerial level
27
to ascertain the position."
28 29 15:27:03 30
Presumably you would agree with both of those propositions being put forward by Mr. Lynn there? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:27:07
15:27:21
109 1
A
I presume that the position of the motorway was a matter for Dun
2 3
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, not the minister. Q
612
4
What's being suggested here is that we have moved on from the position, we are now talking about the construction.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 613
7
And that the construction of the site was of the motorway was necessary to develop the site.
8
A
9
Q
It wasn't essential, I mean there was access from the Bray Road. 614
15:27:39 10
Well there was access provided a road could be constructed into the site, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 615
13
And there would have been an exit difficulty depending on the level of traffic exiting on to the Bray Road?
14
A
15:27:55 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Certainly the construction of the motorway would have given more accessibility. 616
Now, I think Nathaniel Lichfield got involved, isn't that right? Yes.
617
And in August of 1990, if I could have 2988 please, Delia Lichfield visited the
18
site and she visited you on in the first instance and you took her on a tour of
19
the site, isn't that right?
15:28:09 20
A
21
Q
No, I think she saw the site independently and I met her afterwards. 618
22
that correct?
23
A
24
Q
I don't know that. I thought it was general. 619
15:28:30 25
'85 plan, the maps, the working papers and the ERDO report, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
15:28:51 30
Okay. And I think you suggested as we see at 2989 a series of documents that might be useful studied by her, including the 1983, I referred to there as the
26
29
I understand and I think her involvement was in the context of shopping, is
Yes. 620
And I think it was understood at this stage that an EIS report would probably be required in relation to any large scale development of the site and certainly an EIS report was required in relation to the motorway? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:28:58
15:29:09
110 1
A
2
Q
It was. 621
3
I think you were able to tell her about the position of the motorway as you understood it at that stage, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 622
If we have 2990, I think she was being advised that any approach or overtures
6
to the planners might be counter productive, isn't that correct? You see K
7
Mc E that presumably is a representative of Muir & Associates "was of the
8
opinion that it would be counter productive on making overtures in relation to
9
the planners in relation to the possible short term development and until such
15:29:43 10
time as the outline of the full development was available and would be
11
discussed even at a rough stage."
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 623
14
That was consistent because you had given similar advice previously in relation to a proposal for an outline planning application, isn't that right?
15:29:59 15
A
16
Q
I believe there had to be a context. 624
Yes. And the context here was going to be the Development Plan when it was
17
published, isn't that right, what would be acceptable and if I could just maybe
18
speed it up a little bit, that context was finally published with the report of
19
the manager in October 1990 and the publication of that map which we have just
15:30:20 20
seen of DP90/123, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 625
And we see the manager's report at 3035 and that was presented to a special
23
meeting of the planner on the 18th October 1990. And I think there was a
24
follow up report in November where the manager again having presented that
15:30:39 25
report on the 18th October, on the 16th November updated the members on the
26
report, isn't that right, and finally there was a tour of the valley by the
27
councillors or some of the councillors and the matter came to a head I think on
28
the 6th December 1990, is that correct?
29
A
15:30:57 30
Q
I believe so. 626
On the same day I think you wrote to Mr. Sweeney, if we could have 3068 and you www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:31:02
15:31:17
111 1
advised Mr. Sweeney "That at the meeting last night of planners and councillors
2
to discuss general planning issues in Dublin area and inevitably the current
3
controversy regarding the above lands surfaced."
4 5
Can I ask you, we have been following a series of special meetings and
6
particularly a meeting on the 6th December 1990, since this letter is written
7
on the 6th December 1990, and refers to previous evening's meeting, I take it
8
we are talking about a different meeting, a meeting that possibly took place on
9
the 5th December 1990?
15:31:36 10
A
11
Q
12 13 14
Yes. 627
Can you tell the Tribunal what the circumstances that meeting was held and how you came to be at it?
A
Yes, I can. At the time I was a member of the council of the Irish Planning Institute which is a body which represents professional planners in Ireland and
15:31:50 15
the council during that period was quite disturbed that planning developments
16
in the Dublin area, in relation to apparent land use zoning land use anomalies,
17
for example, in north County Dublin, lots of isolated pieces of land were zoned
18
without any apparent purpose and the movement of the designated centre of the
19
Lucan, Clondalkin area to Quarryvale and we made statements about this. I got
15:32:26 20
a call, I think I was press officer of the council at the time. We got a call
21
from Deputy Liam Lawlor who I didn't know, expressing concern that the
22
professional institute were making these statements and asking for a meeting to
23
see if there was any common ground between I think he was representing the
24
Fianna Fail group and the institute.
15:32:47 25
26
The institute were not in the least happy about the approach but we felt that
27
since it was councillors, deputies who were asking it, we had no option but to
28
go along. So we arranged a meeting in Buswells Hotel on presumably the 5th.
29
And I attended along with Enda Conway who was councillor of the institute and a
15:33:16 30
third member who I can't remember and the Fianna Fail councillors were Deputy www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:33:18
15:33:30
112 1
Lawlor, Colm McGrath and a third councillor who may have been GV Wright but I
2
simply can't remember.
3 4
And I think the intention or the hope of the Fianna Fail councillors was that
5
in some way, the institute might back off or say friendly things regarding the
6
Development Plan process in County Dublin. And it was fairly evident from the
7
outset that they certainly weren't going to do that and a general discussion
8
then involved or ensued. And at one stage I mentioned publication of the
9
manager's plan at Cherrywood and I recollect that, I particularly recollected
15:34:05 10
the views of the councillors that there was a degree of irritation because they
11
hadn't been consulted before its publication and that to a certain extent
12
resulted in negative attitude. I thought that was an interesting piece of
13
information that my clients should be aware of.
14
Q
628
15:34:28 15
There had been no consultation by the planners with the politicians and councillors or there had been no consultation by the developer with the --
16
A
17
Q
No, the planners. 629
18
The planners, the planners were keeping their distance in relation to at least this development and that had irritated the councillors.
19
A
15:34:45 20
Q
That was the impression I got. 630
21
And that's what you are reporting in that letter of the 5th December 1992 to your principals?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Yes. 631
Were you at the council meeting of the 5th December itself? I have never attended a council meeting which had anything to do with planning
15:35:01 25
or zoning.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:35:08 30
Q
632
Sorry -- you have never attended a council meeting? Never.
633
Ever. But never in relation to any project that you were involved in? No, no.
634
Would you have been made aware of the outcome of that meeting which was www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:35:13
15:35:35
113 1
effectively, which was negative towards the managers proposals?
2
A
3
Q
Only what I read in the papers. 635
Yes. But I think you were sent back to the drawing board so to speak by your
4
employers and we see on the 23rd January 1991 at 3094 you are tabling new
5
structure zoning maps in relation to the area, isn't that right?
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 636
Would it be fair to at this stage you are confined now to any proposed
8
development to the eastern side of the proposed motorway line which is likely
9
to run somewhere either through the centre or through the bottom or beyond the
15:36:06 10
Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 637
13 14
that are available to the east for development. A
The more residential accommodation, the more residential development that can
15:36:26 15
16
And obviously the further west that line is, the more of the Cherrywood lands
be accommodated. Q
638
Now, I think Councillor McDonald and councillor, yes, Councillor McDonald
17
tables a handwritten motion at 6972 asking that the council agree to provide
18
for a district shopping center in the rezoning of the lands at Loughlinstown as
19
shown on the attached map and to provide C zoning for same. That would be
15:36:49 20
consistent with what Monarch were seeking at this time, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
It was, yes. 639
No. 640
15:37:06 25
26
Do you know how Councillor Cyril McDonald came to table that motion?
Councillor McDonald sponsored the motion with Councillor Coffey on the 6th December 1990 which eventually stayed DP90/123, is that right?
A
I am not au fait with the various motions and the process of the adoption of
27
the plan.
28
Q
29
A
15:37:21 30
Q
641
Can I ask you, were you ever asked to supply the text of a motion to Monarch. Never.
642
There was a further motion by Councillor McDonald that the lands fronting on to www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:37:28
15:37:48
114 1
the main Dublin, Bray Road and marked in yellow on the map be zoned for amenity
2
lands, that's 6974. I am not going to go through the balance of those motions
3
because in any event, I think the manager short circuited matters by putting
4
forward three proposals in May 1990, is that right?
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
1991 I think.
7 8
Q
643
9 15:38:12 10
Sorry, 1991. Do you recall the debate in May '91 or the lead up
to the debate in May 1991? A
No, I am not au fait with the procedures of the council during the process of
11 12
MR. QUINN:
making the plan. Q
644
Okay. Well in any event I think there was a debate and there were three
13
options put forward by the manager, including the 1983 plan subject to
14
amendments, which according to the manager's plan was known as DP90/129A and
15:38:38 15
that was voted upon to go on display for the Draft Development Plan. You may
16
or may not be aware of it?
17
A
18
Q
No, no, I am not aware of it. 645
In any event, I think that further meetings took place between yourself and
19
Mr. Conroy because the display period as I say had been between the September
15:39:00 20
and December '91 and if we look at 3326, it's a memorandum of a meeting of the
21
2nd September 1991 held in Monarch House and it follows on a meeting where you
22
had undertaken to speak to Mr. Conway to determine the extent of the content of
23
a submission that you would put in in relation to the lands, isn't that right?
24
A
15:39:25 25
Q
That's correct, yes. 646
26
that correct, you had been given instructions to do that?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:39:47 30
And I think that you coordinated a submission which was to be put in, isn't
Yes. 647
At 3339, you were written to on the 11th September 1991 by Mr. Lynn, is that right? And you were asked for a team to put in a submission to the Draft Development Plan and a submission to the officials. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:39:49
15:40:03
115 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 648
You were going to put in two submissions effectively, isn't that right? Yes.
649
And in relation to the submission to the officials, and I think if we look at
5
3340, Mr. Lynn was advising that this submission would be a stronger document
6
and would include the following, and there were a series of documents set out
7
there. Can I ask you why a stronger document might go to the officials that
8
would go in to the plans so to speak?
9
A
I think probably what's intended there is a more detailed document to the
15:40:26 10
planners which might show the actual location of roads, the form of housing,
11
more details as regards open space whereas the Development Plan would be simply
12
colours and notations.
13
Q
650
14
3343 and you got some insights into the council's thinking on issues, isn't
15:40:53 15
16
that right? A
Yes, I was anxious to understand what was the effect of the draft plan zonings
17 18
I think you did in fact have a meeting with Mr. Conroy on the 1st October at
or draft plan adoptions. Q
651
19
In any event I think on the 26th November 1991, you compiled a report which was included in a submission by Monarch on the 2nd December 1991 and if I just take
15:41:14 20
your letter, again I don't want to go in to details on your submission unless
21
you require me to do so but at 3384, we have your submission of the 26th
22
November 1991.
23
A
24
Q
15:41:32 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:41:52 30
Yes. 652
And I think you were there suggesting a designation of AP be altered to A1PS? Yes.
653
In other words pipe sewerage to action area piped sewerage, is that right? That's correct.
654
I understood that AP at this time was piped sewerage at ten houses to the hectare or four to the acre unless otherwise stated?
A
I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:41:53
15:42:04
116 1
Q
655
Okay. The zoning boundaries between AP lands to the east and the agricultural
2
B zoned lands to the west to be altered in line with an attached map, is that
3
correct?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 656
And that a new objective to protect, provide for and/or improve district centre
6
facilities be included in the lands at a location as set out in the map, that
7
would be zone C, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
That's correct. 657
15:42:23 10
And the lands which were fully and visually related to Loughlinstown Stream with a link to Brides Glen, that's the amenity suggestion, isn't that correct?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 658
And there was a suggestion for a link road between the Bray Road on the eastern
13
boundary of the lands and the south eastern motorway on the western boundary.
14
Be indicated that it was a five year road proposal, isn't that right?
15:42:38 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 659
That was to open up the lands for development? If I remember the link was a long-term link.
660
19
I think in early 1991 you got an opportunity to spook to those proposal, isn't that right, in oral submission?
15:42:54 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 661
Just before I move that oral submission is 3575 and I think took place on the
22
5th March 1992. Now, I think at this stage, that is from November 1991 until
23
May of 1992, Bill O'Herlihy had been retained by Monarch, is that right?
24
A
15:43:17 25
Q
26
A
Yes. 662
Did you know that he had been retained? Yes because he organised a number of, I participated in two publicity events
27
that he organised, one was an interview or a debate on East Coast Radio with
28
Michael Smith who is one of the objectors and also I think they made the video
29
and they were the only two involvements I had.
15:43:45 30
Q
663
Yes. I think we see a letter to you on the 20th January 1992 at 3533 where you www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:43:50
15:44:02
117 1
are being advised by Monarch of his appointment, is that right?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 664
4 5
the matter? A
I understood that his function was to extol the virtues of the Monarch
6 7
What, apart, what function did Mr. O'Herlihy have at this stage in relation to
proposal. Q
665
Yes. Now, I think you give further advice to your clients on the 22nd January
8
1992, if we could have 3538 please. Where you wondered whether there could be
9
some of advantage of Monarch writing to the leaders of the political parties?
15:44:22 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That's correct. 666
Setting out the objectives. Largely because of the all party nature of the ERDO study which the political
13
parties had signed up and which seemed to me to be the basis of the entire
14
exercise.
15:44:44 15
Q
667
Just before I leave the matter, I think at that stage the Cherrywood Residents
16
Association, if we look at 3597 were suggesting that a zoning of four houses to
17
the acre and they enclosed their planners report. That's to be found at 3601.
18
I think they were in time to ask that there would be only one house to the
19
acre, isn't that right, but at this stage, it was felt that four to the acre
15:45:13 20
was acceptable.
21
A
22
Q
I have seen the correspondence, yes. 668
23
And this correspondence and these submissions, presumably will be a matter of discussion amongst the planning team within Monarch?
24
A
15:45:32 25
Q
Well I was aware of them, they were copied to me. 669
Yes. Now, we know that Councillor Lydon and Hand had signed a motion which was
26
lodged with the council on the May 1992 at 7144 please. Did you have any input
27
into that motion being signed?
28
A
29
Q
15:46:00 30
A
No. 670
Did you know that Councillor Lydon and Hand had signed such a motion? No. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:46:01
15:46:14
118 1
Q
671
Was there ever a discussion at any of the strategy meetings you attended in
2
relation to this matter as to who would table motions in relation to the
3
proposals at the meetings?
4
A
5
Q
Never. 672
But it would be understood and I take it you would have understood that nothing
6
would have got on the agenda unless it was put forward by way of a motion or
7
proposal by some councillor?
8
A
9
Q
I knew the procedures but I had no involvement whatsoever. 673
15:46:34 10
Were you never curious to know which councillors were likely to support the proposals on behalf of Monarch?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
No. 674
There was never any discussion of it? Not that I recollect.
675
15:46:45 15
Was there ever any discussion of councillors who were supportive of the Monarch situation?
16
A
17
Q
I can't single out anybody. 676
In any event I think the manager produced a proposal which was contained in map
18
92/44 for the area, isn't that right? 7203 please and this was a suggestion I
19
think that the existing pipe sewage would be extended to an action area plan
15:47:29 20
piped sewerage and that an area which had previously been zoned agricultural
21
would be included in that area, isn't that right?
22
A
23
Q
Again, we are going into an area that I had no involvement in. 677
No but it's something that obviously would have been of concern to you and to
24
Monarch whether or not the manager was supporting, the manager's views in
15:47:52 25
relation to the matter was clearly of utmost important in relation to Monarch?
26
A
I had literally no involvement with Monarch during the process of the making of
27
the plans, my involvement generally came in when the plan had been made and the
28
response was required to the draft plan. But the mechanics of the making of it
29
were beyond me.
15:48:14 30
Q
678
But did you not know or were you not curious to know whether or not the manager www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:48:20
15:48:41
119 1
was supporting the proposals or submissions that you had put in and had spoken
2
to in late December 1991 and early 1992?
3
A
I was generally aware that the principle of the development of the lands for
4
new residential communities was approved by the technical officials beyond
5
that, I didn't.
6
Q
679
And didn't Monarch brief you in relation to the merits of what were being
7
proposed by them. For example on the 21st May 1992, if we look at 3695, you
8
were sent a series of bullet points in connection with the Cherrywood village,
9
is that right?
15:48:59 10
A
11
Q
12
A
Yes. 680
Why did you receive that correspondence? I presume this was in relation to Monarch's ongoing campaign, they had designed
13
and prepared a model of the form of development that might have been provided
14
ultimately on the Cherrywood lands. And I think, what was the word, I think
15:49:26 15
they were selling that.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15:49:43 20
Q
681
Isn't that a briefing document effectively? I don't know.
682
3696 please. Yes, they are generally plus points.
683
Exactly. And you didn't have to be convinced because your employers were
21
already relying on your advice, so presumably they were giving you briefing
22
points so that you could brief people in relation to it, isn't that right?
23
A
24
Q
15:49:59 25
A
26
Q
27
A
Yes, but I didn't brief anybody. 684
You are saying you didn't brief anybody? No.
685
Could you be mistaken in that, Mr? I don't think so, I just said one particular councillor was a friend, I
28
mentioned the merits of the scheme as far as I remember, the vote was, the
29
person's vote was negative. Otherwise, I had no contact with any councillors
15:50:19 30
in relation to this scheme. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:50:23
15:50:37
120 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
686
This letter was forwarded to you on the 21st May, isn't that right? Yes.
687
And I think the upcoming vote was on the 26th May. 27th May. Can I ask you,
4
do you recall a motion in relation to moving the line of the motorway, which
5
was proposed by Councillor Fox?
6
A
7
Q
No. 688
8 9
motorway line be moved. A
Well obviously in the general plans we had been preparing for the area which
15:50:59 10
saw the motorway as being the ultimate south western line of the development
11 12
Do you have recall any debate or discussion in relation to a strategy that the
area. Q
689
Well it wouldn't be unreasonable in the context of that situation to have a
13
motion which would consider moving the line of the motorway west wards, there
14
by increasing the take east of it and therefore increasing the possible
15:51:20 15
residential zoning area?
16
A
17
Q
It wouldn't be unreasonable. 690
18 19
suggesting that the line of the motorway be moved? A
My basic strategy at all times was the motorway should be the extreme limit of
15:51:38 20
21
Did you put forward a strategy that a motion which the be considered,
the development land on the southwest. Q
691
Did you know for example that the manager had been written to by Monarch, if I
22
could have 3714 in the context of a motion being proposed by Councillor Fox
23
suggesting that the line of the motorway be moved so as to accommodated a golf
24
course?
15:52:07 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 15:52:28 30
I see that. 692
Do you recall the circumstances under which that letter came to be written? No.
693
That would have been the first letter I suggest to you, to the planning department that you hadn't been involved with?
A
I don't recollect the letter. www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:52:30
15:52:42
121 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
694
You don't recollect that letter? No, I don't.
695
4
And you don't recollect any discussion in relation to tabling a motion that the line of the motorway be moved?
5
A
6
Q
Not the tabling a motion. 696
Yes. Now, I think there was, on the occasion, you have heard evidence from
7
councillor or Mr. Barrett in relation to the success of his motion that the
8
zoning on the lands would be of one house per acre, isn't that right, at that
9
meeting or that vote on the 27th May 1992?
15:53:09 10
A
Well I was here but I really lost thread of the various motions which were
11 12
proposed and the consequences of the motions. Q
697
The 1991 draft plan has been published, submissions have been received, the
13
manager has put forward a proposal, I've put it on the screen, councillors
14
Lydon and McGrath have proposed that manager's proposals be adopted. That has
15:53:33 15
been unsuccessful and there were a series of motions and the last of those
16
motions is by Councillor Barrett that the lands remain at one house -- or be
17
zoned at the density of one house per acre?
18
A
19
Q
15:53:49 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 698
Do you recall any discussion following on that motion within Monarch? No.
699
The Councillor Gilmore motion in relation to the centre, the C zoning, that has
22
been successful, do you recall any discussion following on the success of that
23
motion?
24
A
15:54:02 25
Q
No. 700
26
outcome or what had transpired at the meeting on the 27th May 1992?
27
A
28
Q
29 15:54:23 30
Do you recall being at any meetings where there were post mortems held on the
No, in general political matters weren't discussed in my presence. 701
Is that correct now in that you will recall earlier this afternoon I showed a series of meetings at which you were present, where political matters were discussed? www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:54:23
15:54:48
122 1
A
In the sense of making representations to ministers regarding the bringing
2 3
forward of infrastructure. Q
702
There is no doubt but that Monarch understood that the support of councillors
4
was essential, isn't that right? And in a letter of the 2nd October 1992 at
5
3837 to GRE, if we look at 3838 on the second page, it says "In order to
6
achieve these results, it was and is necessary to continue contact with those
7
representatives favourable to our side. Unfortunately there still is a strong
8
core of members opposed to any development and will take every opportunity to
9
limit development of the lands. We must continue to hold our support and
15:55:18 10
recent discussions with other parties suggest that additional support has been
11
attracted to our side."
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 703
14
where it was agreed that an increased councillor support was required for the
15:55:41 15
16
development? A
No, the only discussions I remember related to the publicity campaign to, as I
17 18
Do you recall any discussions by way of strategy or otherwise within Monarch
said, extol the virtues of the proposal generally. Q
704
19
Now, there are three letters all dated the 30th July 1993 which appear to be amount to submissions in relation to that published plan, if I could have 4321,
15:56:14 20
and whilst the council doesn't appear at this stage to be able to furnish to
21
the Tribunal with the actual letter received, I am just wondering if you can
22
recall making a submission at that stage in relation to the plan. You see that
23
letter 4321 is addressed to the principal officer, Dublin County Council?
24
A
I was looking at that in my file and I gather it came into my office, there's a
15:56:43 25
26
note at the top which says 'not sent'. Q
705
That's one of the three, that's at 8556, the one you are looking at is 4321
27
and there's a further one at 7221, do you recall making a submission in July
28
1993 on behalf of your clients in relation to the published plan?
29
A
15:57:04 30
Q
I am pretty certain I did. 706
And in order to do that and to make that submission, you would have to be aware www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:57:11
15:57:30
123 1
of the outcome of the meeting on the 27th May obviously?
2
A
3
Q
Well the submission is made to the published amendments. 707
4
Yes, and the published amendments are C zoning town centre and also A residential density of one to the acre?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 708
7
Can you recall what your submissions, if any, were at that stage on behalf of your clients?
8
A
9
Q
Well they would be in the text of the proposal. 709
15:57:45 10
You see the difficulty we have, Mr. McCabe, and I don't know if you can resolve it for us, is that we have three different texts, in other words three
11
different letters all saying -- they are all signed by you but they all seek
12
different objectives on behalf of Monarch.
13
A
14
Q
Do the council not have receipt of it? 710
15:58:17 15
So far the council have been unable to provide us with the copy of the letter received.
16
A
17
Q
I see. I don't know how to answer that. 711
First of all, can you give any explanation as to why there would be three
18
different submissions made on behalf of your clients. Three different
19
submissions, all signed.
15:58:42 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Unless they were three drafts. 712
Which were unsent. 713
24
be contained on the lands vis-a-vis -A
I am sure the submission I wished to make was that ordinary densities should
27 28
prevail. Q
29 15:59:30 30
I will circumvent it in this way, can you tell the Tribunal what you were submitting to the council at this stage ought to be, ought to contain, ought to
15:59:03 25
26
Three drafts.
714
When you refer to ordinary densities, are we talking about 20 houses to the hectare?
A
Again without seeing a letter I would have regarded upwards, up to 20 to the www.pcr.ie Day 650
15:59:35
15:59:55
124 1
hectare, that is eight to the acre would have been an appropriate density. But
2
without actually seeing the letter, I can't tell you exactly what I would have
3
said.
4
Q
715
Now I think somebody at this time had come up a strategy that perhaps a science
5
and technology park might be put up on the site? Can you recall who came up
6
with that strategy?
7
A
No, I must say I was out of the loop on that but I do remember that it seems to
8
have been resolved by Monarch as a separate issue. I was involved making
9
submissions, advocating it but I am not terribly sure where the idea came from.
16:00:20 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
716
Not really. 717
13 14
A
Science and technology parks were a relatively new development at that time, it seemed to be an appropriate one.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
16:00:48 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
718
Yes, but it wasn't your proposal? It wasn't my proposal, no.
719
You don't know where it came from? No.
720
You know who devised the strategy? No.
721
23
I think on the, in that context I think there was a visit to Montpelier in September or prior to September 1993, is that correct?
24
A
16:01:04 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
16:01:27 30
Is it a type of thing you would have suggested to your clients as perhaps providing a planning game to the incoming council?
16:00:38 15
29
Is it unusual you wouldn't have been eventually involved in an issue like that?
I don't know, I wasn't on it. 722
You weren't on that trip? No.
723
You did know, however, that there was an upcoming council meeting which would confirm or reject the May 1992 zoning on the lands, isn't that right?
A
Again, I can't say that I was aware there was a council meeting coming up because I generally didn't make it my business to find out when council www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:01:39
16:01:46
125 1
meetings were I didn't take any particular interest in the process of making
2
the plan.
3
Q
724
4
right?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 725
You had been very much involved in putting in the submission in 1991. Yes.
726
9
You had put in the oral submission in 1992. You had been sent the bullet points prior to the council meeting in May 1992.
16:02:02 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 727
12
You may or may not have put in a submission in July '93 but you certainly prepared three possible submissions?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 728
16:02:16 15
But saying that apart from that, you took no real involvement in relation to what was, after all, the largest development in south County Dublin or proposed
16 17
You had been very involved up to the submission in November 1989, isn't that
largest development in south County Dublin at this time? A
No, what I am saying is that I took no particular interest in the internal
18
process of the council in coming to its decisions, in fact it seemed very
19
bewildering to me. I -- my duty was to respond to the outcome of those
16:02:46 20
21
decisions when they were published as a draft plan. Q
729
No, I am talking now about the involvement you might have had with your
22
clients, Monarch, by way of discussions and strategy leading up to those
23
meetings and the persons employed by them in the lead up to those meetings.
24
For example in the lead up to the May 1992 meeting, you had been written to and
16:03:08 25
advised of Mr. O'Herlihy's involvement and I think you have given evidence to
26
the Tribunal of your involvement with him in relation to the matter at that
27
time.
28
A
29
Q
16:03:25 30
Yes. 730
You were written to shortly prior to May 1992 vote and given the bullet points in relation to the advantages of this site, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:03:27
16:03:33
126 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 731
3
And we have put up the three submissions which you made in July 1993, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 732
6
So you were involved within the strategy being devised within Monarch, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes I suppose I was. 733
9
Because you had been involved in the strategy since May or June 1989, is that right?
16:03:52 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 734
You were still part of the strategy team as was presumably Mr. O'Herlihy up to
12
May 1992 as were Muir & Associates, Dr. Meehan, all the other experts, is that
13
right, Mat Lichfield, you had met Delia Lichfield and we had seen that?
14
A
16:04:09 15
Q
Yes. 735
I am just wondering can you tell the Tribunal what the strategy was being
16
devised at this stage, this is a key stage now, we are moving up to September
17
and on through to December 1993?
18
A
I suppose the general hope was that the council would adopt a plan which would
19
in general provide for ordinary residential density on the great area of the
16:04:34 20
land, provide for shopping, associate ancillary shopping and preserve amenities
21 22
and within the context of a well made plan. Q
736
23
But for the council to do anything, the councillors had to do it, isn't that right?
24
A
16:04:51 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
Yes. 737
Who was looking after the councillors at this stage, Mr. McCabe? Well presumably from the documentation you sent me, Mr. Lynn.
738
Leaving aside the documentation I sent, you were sent to by the Tribunal, from
28
your recollection now, can you tell the Tribunal who was looking after the
29
councillors at this stage?
16:05:09 30
A
I was aware that Mr. Lynn was the person who liaised with the councillors. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:05:13
16:05:28
127 1
Q
739
2
councillors in the 1991 local elections?
3
A
4
Q
No. 740
5 A
7
Q
Yes. 741
8
16:05:38 10
And we have seen evidence of where you earlier suggested a visit might be made to the minister on another issue, is that right?
A Q
Yes. 742
11
Well did you have any contribution as to how the councillors might be dealt with at this stage?
12
A
13
Q
No. 743
14
Did you know for example that Monarch had been generous to various candidates in the 1992 general election?
16:05:50 15
A
16
Q
No. 744
17
Was there any discussion of the councillor intentions as known by Monarch in the lead up to the 1993 vote?
18
A
19
Q
16:06:09 20
A
21
Q
No, not that I remember. 745
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop for example had been brought on board? No, I didn't know that until I got documents from this Tribunal.
746
22
Is there any reason why Mr. Dunlop's involvement would have been made known to you?
23
A
24
Q
16:06:21 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 16:06:47 30
You yourself as part of a strategy had in fact invited or suggested that the party leaders would be written to, isn't that right?
6
9
Did you know for example that Monarch had been generous in the support of
I can't think of any. 747
Did you know Mr. Dunlop? As I said to the Tribunal, I met the man 15 years ago for ten minutes.
748
You had never come across Mr. Dunlop in your career as a planner prior to this? I was aware of his involvement with the Quarryvale rezoning.
749
Leaving that aside for the moment, Mr. Dunlop was known to you as a lobbyist I take it?
A
Yes. I mean not known to me, known I mean generally. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:06:48
16:07:03
128 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
750
Yes. 751
4 A
6
Q
7
A
No. 752
Why not? My view was I was a professional planner and my job was to make the best
8
planning case and hope that that would succeed. Q
753
16:07:22 10
11
Did it ever occur to you to suggest to Monarch that perhaps Mr. Dunlop's services might be taken on board?
5
9
Not specifically but generally would have been known as a lobbyist?
You had given other, if I could describe it, political advice to your principles?
A
I think a suggestion seeing the minister regarding bringing forward
12
infrastructure or writing to the party leaders on a matter which they had
13
already taken a view I wouldn't have thought constitutes political advice.
14
Q
754
16:07:42 15
But did you advise your clients or did you understand them to know that the voting intentions of the councillors was crucial?
16
A
17
Q
No. 755
18
Was there ever any discussion of how the Monarch proposals would find its way on to the agenda of the council?
19
A
16:07:54 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
16:08:16 25
No. 756
And you say you never knew that Mr. Dunlop had been employed? Certainly not.
757
You had been crucially involved, isn't that right, throughout the period? Yes.
758
In writing to their partners or their joint venture partners on the 2nd September 1993 at 4344, Monarch set out the likely costs for the September to
26
December 1993 period, if I can have 4349 please. And if we just concentrate on
27
the first three items there, that is Mr. Dunlop, yourself and Mr. Meehan. You
28
see that Mr. Dunlop was receiving or was likely to receive 4,000 per month
29
whereas in fact you were I think 1,000 a month.
16:09:01 30
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:09:01
16:09:11
129 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
759
And yet you were the expert, isn't that right? Yes.
760
And you had been providing all the advice as far as back as May 1989? Yes.
761
6
Does it surprise you that Mr. Dunlop's remuneration would be greater than yours at this time?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
It does seem a significant amount of money. 762
Were you on a success fee as a matter of interest? No.
16:09:33 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn it's nearly quarter past four.
13
MR. QUINN:
Unfortunately Mr. McCabe has obliged the Tribunal by being here
14
today, I understand he has some difficulties tomorrow and I am not sure if the
12
16:09:44 15
Tribunal were to sit early, if it would. I would envisage that I would be no
16
more than a half and hour or three quarters of an hour and if the Tribunal were
17
to sit at ten perhaps.
18 19 16:09:59 20
CHAIRMAN: A
Would that suit you Mr. McCabe tomorrow or some day?
It's not possible to go on?
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
Not this afternoon because we have other commitments.
Well I am not hands of the Tribunal.
24 16:10:05 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well I mean we can offer you tomorrow at 10 o'clock and possibly
26
finish shortly after half ten or alternatively some other time you could talk
27
to --
28
A
No, ten o'clock tomorrow.
29 16:10:21 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right. www.pcr.ie Day 650
16:10:21
16:10:31
130 1 2
MR. SANFEY: Chairman I should say I will have some short questions I hope no
3
more than 10 or 15 minutes
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
tomorrow.
7
A
All right. We might be talking about three quarters of an hour
Okay.
8 9 16:10:41 10
CHAIRMAN: A
Ten o'clock tomorrow.
Thank you.
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
13
FRIDAY, 9TH JUNE, 2006 AT 10.00 A.M.
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 650
10:10:44
11:05:34
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON
2
TUESDAY 13TH JUNE 2006 AT 11 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Morning sir.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. Michael Joseph Cosgrave please.
9 11:05:38 10
MICHAEL JOSEPH COSGRAVE, HAVING BEEN SWORN
11
WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Morning Mr. Cosgrave?
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
Morning Mr. Cosgrave.
16
A.
Good morning.
17
Q. 2
Mr. Cosgrave, you are a member of the Fine Gael party I think?
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 3
You were a member of Dublin Corporation from 1974 to 1985?
A.
That's right.
Q. 4
And a member of Dublin County Council, I think, from 1985 until January '94
11:06:07 15
11:06:16 20
21 22
when you became a member of Fingal County Council, is that correct?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 5
And I think you were asked by the Tribunal to supply a statement in relation to
11:06:32 25
your dealings with personnel connected with the Monarch Group and in particular
26
in relation to lands at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 6
And I think you provided two statements which are more or less the same and the
29 11:06:48 30
first is to be found at page 296 of the brief, that is to say the Tribunal's typed version of your manuscript statement but I don't think you will find that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:06:54
11:07:10
2 1
it differs from your typed statement which is to be found at 294 and 295, and I
2
think dated the 25 of February 2006 you wrote to the Tribunal and said you
3
would have had contact with Mr. Richard Lynn who may have canvassed your
4
support for the project, isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 7
And you say with regard to political donations you had previously informed the
7
Tribunal of 1,000 pounds received from Mr. Dunlop towards the expenses in the
8
Senate elections in 92, 93 and to the best of your recollection you received a
9
political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior to the November
11:07:31 10
92 general election, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 8
And I think that's also what you also told the Fine Gael inquiry into these
13 14 11:07:38 15
matters, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 9
Just dealing in the first instance with the payments that you might have
16
received from Monarch, Mr. Cosgrave, if I could have page 3241, this is a
17
document supplied to the Tribunal on discovery by Monarch and you will see
18
about two thirds of the way down there is a reference to a payment on the 13th
19
June 1991 to MJ Cosgrave, F G, local election expenses is the designation or
11:08:03 20
purpose for the payment and it's in the sum of 300 pounds?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 10
And if I could have 3255 this is an extract from the payments cash book of
23
Monarch and you will see there, just the first five or six entries, you will
24
see on the 13 of June 1991, Michael J Cosgrave, F G, cheque number 3689, 300
11:08:30 25
pounds?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 11
Did you receive in June 1991, 300 pounds from Monarch Properties, Mr. Cosgrave?
28
A.
I may have, but I cannot recollect that.
29
Q. 12
Yes, if you did receive it how do you think you came to receive it?
A.
I'd imagine it would be by cheque.
11:08:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:08:44
11:08:54
3 1
Q. 13
Yes?
2
A.
And that that would be the way, but as I say I don't really recollect it.
3
Q. 14
Did you know Mr. Lynn in 1991?
4
A.
Oh, I would I'd say, yes.
5
Q. 15
How did you first come to meet with and know Mr. Lynn?
6
A.
Well, he would be in the area of the council, you know lobbying on behalf of
7
his clients and he would approach you on different projects. He may have
8
written to me also on projects, I'm not sure of that.
9 11:09:16 10
11
Q. 16
But he certainly sought your support for various projects that he had?
A.
He would have sought my support for various projects I'm sure.
Q. 17
Was he a person therefore that you would have sought contributions from for
12
your local election?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 18
You never sought a contribution from him?
A.
Never, never.
Q. 19
You see Mr. Smyth, Noel Smyth and Partners Solicitors to the Monarch Group, if
11:09:26 15
16 17
I could have 1579 please, wrote to the Tribunal on behalf of his clients on the
18
22nd of June 2000 and on the third paragraph of that letter he says in
19
relation to the 1991 list, and I'm just showing you the 1991 list?
11:09:46 20
21
A.
That's right.
Q. 20
All the contributions are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for
22
assistance to defray local election expenses, save as set out no records have
23
been located in this regard?
24 11:09:59 25
A.
Yeah.
Q. 21
It is Monarch's and Mr. Lynn's understanding I understand, that any payments
26
made in 1991 were made as a result of a request for payment?
27
A.
I don't recall approaching Mr. Lynn for a donation at any time.
28
Q. 22
Did you, was it your practice to solicit donations?
29
A.
No.
Q. 23
Ever?
11:10:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:10:17
11:10:29
4 1
A.
Never.
2
Q. 24
So any payments you would have received would have been received in an -- would
3
have been received by you without having been solicited from the donors?
4
A.
Absolutely.
5
Q. 25
Including --
6
A.
I have never written, to my recollection, to anyone about a donation or I have
7 8
never asked, as far as I can recollect, anyone about a donation. Q. 26
9 11:10:46 10
11
Now that's the 1991 donation, I think you told the Tribunal that you received 500 pounds in November 1992?
A.
That's right.
Q. 27
Prior to the election in November 92, I think you were a candidate in that
12
election is that right?
13
A.
I was indeed, yes.
14
Q. 28
Who did you receive that money from?
A.
That money, I believe would have come from Monarch, from the documentation I
11:10:55 15
16
have received.
17
Q. 29
Yes?
18
A.
It has enlightened me quite a lot, so that I presume it would have come from
19 11:11:09 20
Monarch with a covering letter but I have no documentation from that time. Q. 30
Well you had no documentation when you were telling the Fine Gael inquiry and
21
you were telling the Tribunal that you had received that money isn't that
22
right.
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 31
So you must have been relying on your memory or other documentation you had
11:11:20 25
within your possession?
26
A.
My memory.
27
Q. 32
Your memory. So you have a recollection of receiving 500 pounds from Monarch
28 29 11:11:31 30
for the 92 general election, is that correct? A.
I remember receiving a donation from Monarch.
Q. 33
Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:11:31
11:11:37
5 1
A.
In that election.
2
Q. 34
Yes?
3
A.
On the first interview I had with this Tribunal.
4
Q. 35
Yes?
5
A.
I pointed out that I had received a donation, but I wasn't certain exactly what
6
it was, but I would check and then when I did check I discovered another cheque
7
which I forwarded to this Tribunal, which was in later years, I think it was
8
199 --
9 11:11:55 10
Q. 36
We will come to that in a moment?
A.
But that was my recollection of the time, it was 500, but I am now satisfied
11 12
it was a thousand when I see the documentation. Q. 37
Yes, because the thousand, if we could have please 3586, just in relation to
13
the 500, your evidence I think in, as referred to in your statement earlier
14
this year, which I have just referred to at 296, was that the 500 from Monarch
11:12:22 15
was received prior to the November 92 general election, isn't that right, could
16
I have 296 please? This is your letter to the Tribunal Mr. Cosgrave?
17
A.
This is my letter to the Tribunal, yes that's right.
18
Q. 38
Yes. And you are dealing with monies that you may have received isn't that
19 11:12:38 20
21
right? A.
That's right.
Q. 39
And you say that it was 500, it was from Monarch and it was prior to the
22
November 92 general election?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 40
And that was consistent with what you had told the Fine Gael inquiry, isn't
11:12:50 25
that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 41
So, as to the amount and as to the date of payment you were satisfied in
28
February of 2006 and indeed in May 2000 when you attended before the Fine Gael
29
inquiry, that it was 500 pounds and it was for the 92 general election, isn't
11:13:13 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:13:13
11:13:26
6 1
A.
General and Senate election I suppose, they were both.
2
Q. 42
Well you didn't refer to the Senate election, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, I didn't.
4
Q. 43
If we could go back to 296, you said 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior
5
to November 1992, isn't that what you were telling the Tribunal?
6
A.
That's what I was telling the Tribunal.
7
Q. 44
In fact I think you reiterated that in a letter of the 9th March 2006, if I
8
could have 299 please, you said to the best of my recollection I received a
9
political donation of 500 pounds from Monarch Properties prior to the November
11:13:46 10
1992 election, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 45
So it was prior to the election and it was prior to the November 92 election,
13 14
isn't that right? A.
That was my memory.
Q. 46
And it was 500 pounds?
16
A.
My memory was 500 pounds.
17
Q. 47
Yes. In fact I think either in addition or in substitution for that 500, you
11:13:53 15
18 19 11:14:09 20
did in fact receive one thousand pounds in December 1992, isn't that right? A.
December --
Q. 48
If we could have 3586 please? If you look at the fourth last entry on that
21
list Mr. Cosgrave?
22
A.
Right.
23
Q. 49
You see on the 16th of December 1992?
24
A.
It says Senate elections.
Q. 50
Yes. The general election had taken place in November, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 51
So prior to the general election would have been prior to the 25th of November,
11:14:27 25
28 29 11:14:39 30
I think it was 92? A.
I think it was the 18th.
Q. 52
Prior to the 18th, yes prior to the 18th of November, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:14:42
11:14:59
7 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 53
But whereas in fact the records show that you received a separate and possibly
3 4
additional payment of 1,000 pounds on the 16th of December 1992? A.
5
I received a payment as it has come to my attention now of a thousand pounds only.
6
Q. 54
You say that it's only a thousand pounds?
7
A.
Yeah. It's not 1500.
8
Q. 55
That's the point I want to clarify with you, but if it is this thousand, first
9
of all it is twice what you had told the Tribunal as having received from
11:15:14 10
Monarch, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 56
And it is not before the general election 1992, it's --
13
A.
The Senate election.
14
Q. 57
It's the Senate election?
A.
It was paid in December, the election was over, the general election was over,
11:15:22 15
16 17
so therefore it was into the Senate election. Q. 58
If we could have 8380. You see Monarch have other witnesses that have given
18
evidence of having received two payments, one for the general election and one
19
for the Senate election?
11:15:40 20
21
A.
No.
Q. 59
I'm just wondering could you have equally received two payments, one for the
22
general election and one for the Senate election?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 60
How could you get something, such a simple thing so obviously wrong
11:15:55 25
26
Mr. Cosgrave? A.
27 28
time, you know. Q. 61
29 11:16:11 30
My memory failed me, that's the only thing I can say. We are going back a long
How many cheques for 1,000 pounds would you have received other than Mr. Dunlop's, in the general or Senate election for 92/93?
A.
I think two, I'd have to check that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:16:15
11:16:25
8 1
Q. 62
Two in addition to Mr. Dunlop's?
2
A.
No, no. Mr. Dunlop.
3
Q. 63
Mr. Jones?
4
A.
No, no.
5
Q. 64
No?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 65
If we go back to the election, sorry your statement to the Fine Gael inquiry on
8
the 12th May 2000, and that's at 266. You were satisfied, if we look at 267,
9
you were satisfied at that time that it was in fact 500 pounds you had received
11:16:58 10
from Monarch, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 66
Whereas in fact it was 1,000 pounds?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 67
And you say not 1500?
A.
Not 1500, no.
Q. 68
And then I think you also received, as you have indicated, a further
11:17:08 15
16 17
contribution in 1997, if we could have 6322 please on the third of June 1997
18
you received 495 pounds, isn't that right?
19
A.
495, that's correct.
Q. 69
Yes. Were these the only contributions you received from Monarch?
21
A.
Definitely, yes.
22
Q. 70
And who would have given you those cheques?
23
A.
I would imagine they would have arrived by post.
24
Q. 71
Did you who would you have acknowledged or to whom would you have sent an
11:17:29 20
11:17:47 25
acknowledgement in respect of those cheques?
26
A.
I didn't send any acknowledgements.
27
Q. 72
You didn't send any acknowledgements?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 73
Did you ever thank anybody for the contributions?
A.
Well, if you saw someone who had given you a contribution you would probably
11:17:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:17:59
11:18:11
9 1
thank them, but like it wasn't the thing that was foremost on my mind at the
2
time, you know.
3
Q. 74
Yes. Did you ever thank Mr. Lynn for the contributions?
4
A.
I doubt it very much.
5
Q. 75
Did you ever acknowledge receiving the money?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 76
Did you ever meet Mr. Monahan and thank him for the money?
8
A.
I never met Mr. Monahan.
9
Q. 77
You never met Mr. Monahan?
A.
To my knowledge I never met Mr. Monahan.
Q. 78
Would it be fair to say Mr. Lynn was the only person from within Monarch that
11:18:23 10
11 12
you would have had any contact with?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 79
Did Mr. Dunlop seek your support for the Monarch proposals?
A.
Oh, I would say so, yes.
Q. 80
You did, I think, your first vote in relation to and your only vote in relation
11:18:35 15
16 17
to the Monarch proposals appears to have occurred on the 11th November 1993, if
18
we could have 7263 please.
19 11:19:06 20
This was a proposal by Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey, isn't that
21
right?
22
A.
That's right.
23
Q. 81
Do you recall that motion?
24
A.
I don't really, but you know it happened because we can see it in the minutes.
Q. 82
Yes. Well, would it have been in connection with that motion that Mr. Lynn
11:19:17 25
26
would have sought and Mr. Dunlop, would have sought your support?
27
A.
I think Mr. Dunlop would be more canvassing my support than anyone else.
28
Q. 83
I see.
29
A.
I doubt if Mr. Lynn, he may have mentioned it to me in the lobby or in the --
11:19:38 30
in one of the hotels where we went for a break and that type of thing, but Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:19:41
11:19:59
10 1
other than that I cannot remember Mr. Lynn asking me to support it as such, I
2
think Mr. Dunlop carried out most of the canvassing where I'd be concerned.
3
Q. 84
4
Yes. And you would have presumably advised Mr. Dunlop that it was your intention to support this proposal?
5
A.
I would, yeah.
6
Q. 85
You voted against, I think, a proposal that it would be, that the site would
7
retain a density of one house to the acre, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yeah, that's right.
9
Q. 86
Can I ask you why you supported this proposal?
A.
Well I didn't see the logic in it. One house per acre is very small, I
11:20:12 10
11
couldn't see how that would help develop the site as such, you know, and there
12
was a crying need at that time for people who were leaving the shore and
13
working abroad, there was a crying need for jobs, and I made no secret of this.
14
I have always been supportive of development.
11:20:39 15
Q. 87
16
If we could have 2720, this is a map Mr. Cosgrave, which sets out the site that you supported?
17
A.
Right.
18
Q. 88
You would be reasonably familiar with the area, voted in favour of this and
19 11:20:54 20
21
that? A.
Well, it's so long, the map is correct you can be sure of that.
Q. 89
It's just, I am just slightly curious Mr. Cosgrave, if you were so pro
22
development?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 90
And since the manager was proposing that the entire area coloured yellow be
11:21:10 25
zoned four houses to the acre, why you didn't support or vote that the entire
26 27
area coloured yellow be zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
Well as I say, I was pro development, I suppose if it were zoned at four to the
28
acre it opens up the site and maybe future down the road they could come back
29
in for further extension of the planning permission.
11:21:35 30
Q. 91
But why not do it at the time, why not -- if you are so pro development why Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:21:40
11:21:59
11 1
only support the Monarch end of the site, why not promote the entire site,
2
particularly since the manager was supportive of the entire site being zoned at
3
four houses to the acre?
4
A.
5
I cannot answer that one, I'm sorry. The motion would be put, there would be a debate, you listen to the debate and you make up your mind.
6
Q. 92
Yes?
7
A.
It's probably that was the popular thing in the chamber at the time to do.
8
Q. 93
But you were very much pro development you say, isn't that right?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 94
So an increase in density of lands, particularly lands that had the support of
11:22:10 10
11
the manager, was something that you would be very much in favour of?
12
A.
But this was the motion I had before me in the house.
13
Q. 95
Could you have put forward your own motion?
14
A.
Well could I have at that hour, just before the motion.
Q. 96
Could you not have put forward either a proposed amendment to the Marren Coffey
11:22:26 15
16
motion or alternatively put forward a proposal that the manager's
17
recommendations be accepted.
18
A.
The answer to your question is yes, you could have, but I didn't.
19
Q. 97
I am just wondering why you didn't Mr. Cosgrave, was it because Mr. Dunlop had
11:22:44 20
21
asked you to support only the Monarch proposal? A.
22
I don't remember him saying that to me, but he did ask me to support the proposal.
23
Q. 98
Thank you very much Mr. Cosgrave?
24
A.
Thank you very much.
11:22:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
for Monarch sometime?
11:23:04 30
A.
Just one matter Mr. Cosgrave, we know Mr. Dunlop came on board
Pardon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:23:06
11:23:14
12 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3
mid -- between 92 and 93, I think?
4
A.
5 6
Right. JUDGE FAHERTY:
A.
Mr. Dunlop came on board for Monarch sometime I think in
Do you recall when he first spoke to you about Monarch?
I don't really because Mr. Dunlop had several, several proposals which he was
7
involved in and like he would approach you about all his proposals, specially
8
when they were coming before council.
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:23:38 10
11
And you were Fingal, you were, that was your area, your ward
was up in North County Dublin? A.
Mine is the Howth/Malahide working area.
12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
about Monarch, did you make any inquiries yourself about the lands?
14
A.
11:23:56 15
Could I just ask you, when Mr. Dunlop would have asked you
Not that I can recall, but like I would have listened to the debate in the chamber and I may have inquired from the local councillors in that area as to,
16
you know, the merits of the property.
17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
A.
19
I don't really, but it was my habit to listen to the debate. And if I was unclear about anything, you would ask maybe the representative from the area,
11:24:18 20
you know, to clear the matter up for you.
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
CHAIRMAN:
23
Well, have you any recollection of doing that Mr. Cosgrave?
A.
Fair enough. Thanks.
All right, thank you very much Mr. Cosgrave.
Thank you very much.
24 11:24:27 25
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
Chairman, Mr. Dunlop please.
28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:24:56
11:25:21
13 1
FRANK DUNLOP, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MR. MURPHY:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning Mr. Dunlop.
6
A.
Morning Chairman. Morning.
7
Q. 99
Good morning Mr. Dunlop.
8
A.
Good morning Mr. Murphy.
9
Q. 100
Mr. Dunlop, I think you have provided the Tribunal with two statements to date
11:25:48 10
in the Monarch Module, the first being October 2000 and the second being
11
September 2003, is that right?
12
A.
That's correct, yes.
13
Q. 101
Do you wish those statements to be part of the evidence before the Members of
14 11:26:00 15
16
the Tribunal? A.
Yes.
Q. 102
Thank you. Did you have an opportunity before coming to the witness box today
17
to re read your two statements, did you read your two statements before coming
18
in today?
19 11:26:24 20
A.
Yes, I read them this morning.
Q. 103
Thank you. Did you read the private interviews that you had with the Tribunal
21
in May 2000?
22
A.
Some time ago, yes.
23
Q. 104
All right. In re reading those private interviews from May 2000 and these two
24 11:26:48 25
statements that I have just referred to? A.
Yeah?
26
Q. 105
Did you find them difficult to follow?
27
A.
Not particularly, other than in the -- some inconsistencies in them.
28
Q. 106
Did you find them confusing?
29
A.
I think confusing, Mr. Murphy, is sort of probably a polite word in the context
11:27:16 30
of the totality of this, my involvement in this Module, but for ease of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:27:22
11:27:35
14 1 2
procedure, I would say yes, confusing. Q. 107
The reason I am asking you the question is because I have read the statement,
3
the two statements and your private interviews on a number occasions and I
4
found them extremely confusing, extremely difficult to follow and quite
5
contradictory?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 108
Do you accept -- do you agree with that?
8
A.
Yes I would, I wouldn't disagree with that.
9
Q. 109
Thank you. I will come to it in a bit more detail later on.
A.
Fine.
Q. 110
Would you, do you agree Mr. Dunlop, that you have grossly understated to the
11:27:44 10
11 12
Tribunal the amount of money that you received from Monarch?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 111
Do you agree that you told, in private, the Tribunal in private interview, that
11:28:05 15
the agreement in relation to a fee did not include a success fee and that
16
subsequently you invoiced Monarch in the sum of, in, for a success fee in the
17
sum of 50,000 plus VAT?
18
A.
Correct, yes.
19
Q. 112
Do you agree that in private interview you named two councillors as councillors
11:28:31 20
to whom you, as councillors whom you bribed?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 113
And that when it came to your, the two statements I have referred to, you
23 24 11:28:45 25
dropped those two councillors and replaced them with a different two? A.
Correct.
Q. 114
Would you agree with me, Mr. Dunlop, that all of that amounts to a gross
26
misleading of the Tribunal?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 115
In what way does it not?
29
A.
Well, in the context of the private sessions and the date on which they took
11:28:58 30
place and in the circumstances in which they took place and without the benefit Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:29:03
11:29:26
15 1
of the issue that we have referred to repeatedly in this context from this box
2
and in this room, the road map and when I had time to consider it, all of the
3
issues involved, including having an audit done in relation to payments, that's
4
when we made the statement in 2003.
5
Q. 116
What for example, what bearing would that have on the councillors whom you
6
identified in private session and, as having, as you having bribed them, how
7
would what you have just, the response you have just given the Tribunal, how
8
would that have any bearing on who you would have paid money to for their vote?
9
A.
11:29:50 10
Well, in the context of the private session there is undoubtedly no, no difficulty in my mind in relation to the two named councillors in the private
11
session as being deeply involved with me on a number of occasions, and I
12
incorrectly named them in the private session in relation to this Module.
13
Q. 117
14
All right. I will have to come back to that, Mr. Dunlop, I'm afraid. I understand through Mr. Redmond, that you accept that you were paid the sum of
11:30:21 15
85,000 pounds by Monarch?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 118
All right. Now, unfortunately notwithstanding that Mr. Dunlop, I have to go
18 19 11:30:32 20
with a little bit of detail, I hope not too much, into the payments? A.
Fine, yeah.
Q. 119
And I think you will agree with me that on three occasions in the year 2000 you
21
informed the Tribunal that you had been paid the sum of 25,000 for Monarch, for
22
Cherrywood?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 120
Yes. The first occasion was on the 9th of May 2000, which was a public hearing
11:30:56 25
giving evidence on oath, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 121
When you referred to two tranches of 15,000, a cheque for 15,000 pounds and a
28 29 11:31:06 30
cheque for 10,000 pounds is that correct? A.
Correct.
Q. 122
And then you repeated that I think on a number of occasions in the course of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:31:11
11:31:19
16 1
private interviews in May 2000, is that right?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 123
And you repeated it again in your first narrative statement to the Tribunal in
4
October 2000, isn't that right?
5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 124
So at the end of 2000 as far as the Tribunal was concerned it was 25,000 that
7
you got?
8
A.
That's correct, yes.
9
Q. 125
All right. Now, if we just come on to 2001 for a moment and I think you will
11:31:37 10
agree with all of this, in March 2001 the Tribunal wrote to your solicitors in
11
relation to financial information generally and in particular -- sorry,
12
including Monarch, and the Tribunal was informing you in that letter that it
13
had received information from Monarch which, to the effect that you had
14
received 52,500 from Monarch, isn't that right?
11:32:06 15
16
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 126
And on the 9th May 2001 your solicitors replied to the Tribunal and enclosed a
17
letter from Coyle & Coyle, your accountants, that their letter being 8th of May
18
2001, and that letter again, I will be coming back to it, I will put it up on
19
the screen, but just in general terms, that letter set out a schedule of
11:32:30 20
payments that you were now notifying the Tribunal that you had received from
21
Monarch and it was in the sum of 75,000 pounds, isn't that right?
22
A.
That's correct yes.
23
Q. 127
Now that sum we know is -- there was a 15,000 included in that in error which
24 11:32:46 25
26
was subsequently correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 128
So throughout I will be really, when I say 75,000 there we'll short circuit it
27 28
and it's really 60,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
29 11:33:07 30
That's the point I was just going to make to you. In 2001 after the audit we confirmed to the Tribunal that we had received in the order of 60,000.
Q. 129
Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:33:08
11:33:30
17 1
A.
2 3
And notwithstanding anything that has taken place in the interim, if an audit was still done today we would still say 60,000.
Q. 130
Fine. Yes. So in summary then, in 2000 you were telling the Tribunal 25,000,
4
in response to the Tribunal's information to you about 52,500 from Monarch you
5
came back and you confirmed in 2001 60,000?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 131
That by a further letter, 21st of December 2001, from your solicitors to the
8
Tribunal, that sum of, I think it may well have been confirmed as 75,000 but it
9
means 60,000?
11:33:47 10
11
A.
It means 60,000 thousand, yes.
Q. 132
All right. Now could I just ask you Mr. Dunlop there, why did you tell the
12
Tribunal on a number of occasions in 2000 that you had received 25,000 from
13
Monarch?
14
A.
11:34:13 15
Because I did, that was in my mind. That was the -- certainly to my recollection at the time that was the agreed fee that I arrived at with a
16
representative of Monarch.
17
Q. 133
Yes. And Mr. Dunlop, what was it that changed your mind within a few months?
18
A.
Between 2000 and 2001?
19
Q. 134
Yes, between October 2000 and May 2001?
A.
Well, I think it's that you have fairly graphically outlined, when we got
11:34:43 20
21
letters from the Tribunal saying that they had information available to them
22
from the accounts of Monarch that we had got more money than the 25, we
23
conducted the audit, we conducted an internal audit or our accountants
24
conducted an internal audit and came up with the 60.
11:35:05 25
Q. 135
So, would it mean then in fact you told your accountants Coyle & Coyle that you
26
had received 25,000 but they came back to you having done the audit and said
27
you didn't you received 60?
28 29 11:35:26 30
A.
Well when we got the documentation from the Tribunal Obviously we circulated it had to Coyle & Coyle and we asked them to either confirm or disabuse the Tribunal of the truth or otherwise of the documentation. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:35:29
11:35:47
18 1
Q. 136
2 3
Well, was the Tribunal furnishing you with documentation that you didn't have yourself internally?
A.
Yes, it was. We had already supplied some documentation to the Tribunal, I
4
can't remember exactly what it was at the time now, but we had supplied some
5
invoices and some payment schedules from the accounts of Frank Dunlop and
6
Associates, but we had not done an audit.
7
Q. 137
But I think what you are saying is that for the purpose of the audit you were
8
giving your accountants documentation that had been furnished to you by the
9
Tribunal and that you didn't have yourself?
11:36:10 10
11
A.
Yes, I think that is what occurred yes.
Q. 138
Well, I'd like to know if it did occur or didn't, Mr. Dunlop, because I think
12 13
it's important? A.
14
Well, I can't absolutely say to you definitively. Certainly you are absolutely correct when you say that our statements in relation to the 25, we then were
11:36:29 15
written to by the Tribunal saying that they had indications or evidence or
16
support documentation to the effect that we had received more than 25, and I'm
17
subject to correction on this, I'm sorry I can't be more clear for you, that it
18
was on that basis that we asked that the accountants do an audit as to how much
19
exactly we had got.
11:36:59 20
Q. 139
Do you know Mr. Dunlop, for the purpose of telling the Tribunal 25,000, three
21
times in 2000, do you know what documentation you had that you referred to for
22
giving that information?
23
A.
24 11:37:18 25
Yes, I think we had -- I think I had documentation, I think I had a receipt note.
Q. 140
Would it be a remittance advice?
26
A.
A remittance.
27
Q. 141
In respect of the 15?
28
A.
In respect of two payments, one certainly of 15.
29
Q. 142
Yes, yes?
A.
And again subject to correction on the date of transmission of that
11:37:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:37:32
11:37:52
19 1 2
documentation to the Tribunal, I think we made that available to the Tribunal. Q. 143
Yes. But are you saying then that it was just in respect of those two payments
3
which bore out your 25,000 but you didn't have another shred of paper that
4
related to the balance that made up 52,500 or 60?
5
A.
6
No, we may have or our accountants may have had other documentation which -- I did not certainly examine.
7
Q. 144
Sorry to interrupt you Mr. Dunlop?
8
A.
No no, fine.
9
Q. 145
Did you Mr. Dunlop, you prepared -- sorry, you went to your accountants for an
11:38:07 10
audit in 2001 as you have told us, did you go to your accountants at all before
11
public evidence in May 2001, private interviews in 2001 and a statement in
12
October 2001?
13
A.
No, we did not.
14
Q. 146
All right. Would your accountants in that year have had documents in relation
11:38:24 15
to all of this that were not in your possession?
16
A.
They may well have had, yes.
17
Q. 147
So, you told the Tribunal three times 25,000 without referring to your
18 19
accountants? A.
11:38:39 20
Yes, I don't have any recollection of referring to my accountants prior to any of those statements.
21
Q. 148
Was it your intention to mislead the Tribunal in saying 25,000?
22
A.
No, because that was, as I said to you ten minutes ago, was my recollection as
23 24 11:38:54 25
26
to the agreed fee with a representative of Monarch. Q. 149
So Mr. Dunlop, did you think as an experienced businessman --
A.
What?
Q. 150
Just one second please, if you let me finish the question then you can
27
criticise it, do you think as an experienced businessman that to come into the
28
Tribunal three times and say 25,000 from your recollection without going to
29
your accountants is good enough?
11:39:10 30
A.
Well, that's why I was going to stop you there. Experienced businessman is a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:39:14
11:39:34
20 1
little bit excessive in my context. I would not describe myself as an
2
experienced businessman but I was asked to give evidence in relation to, on one
3
occasion in public here in making a list as to monies I had received, I was
4
asked in private session of my relationship with Monarch, I told it as best
5
could I at the time, and I was asked subsequently what my recollection was as
6
to payment. Certainly it was not my intention to mislead and you did describe
7
the totality of my relationship with Monarch as confusing and certainly --
8
Q. 151
9 11:39:59 10
No, I didn't Mr. Dunlop, what I suggested to you was that your description of it was confusing?
A.
Yes well --
11
Q. 152
Isn't that right?
12
A.
Well that's what you say, yes.
13
Q. 153
And you agreed with me?
14
A.
Well it is confusing, yes.
Q. 154
It's not that your relationship with Monarch is confusing?
16
A.
Well, that was confusing as well.
17
Q. 155
It's how it was interpreted to the Tribunal was confusing?
18
A.
Well, that was confusing as well.
19
Q. 156
But Mr. Dunlop, just coming back to this thing for a second, because you have
11:40:09 15
11:40:24 20
been in private business since '87, I think, is that right?
21
A.
Yes. '86, yes.
22
Q. 157
Nearly 20 years, 20 years, does that not constitute a considerable business
23 24
experience? A.
11:40:41 25
Well, it does to a small degree yes, but not in a very experienced businessman, I'm not in the PLC quality.
26
Q. 158
Mr. Dunlop, to use one of your own phrases, are we from different planets here?
27
A.
No parallel universe is the phrase I used.
28
Q. 159
It's a better one, I think you used both. But are we on parallel universes
29 11:41:01 30
here if 20 years doesn't make you a highly experienced businessman? A.
No, I am not going to get into a semantical discussion with you about who is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:41:05
11:41:13
21 1
and who is not a highly experienced businessman. I was a businessman and I was
2
running a small business.
3
Q. 160
Mr. Dunlop sorry, you needn't -- I am getting into this with you.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 161
If you are telling the Tribunal, on oath, that you are not an experienced
6
businessman after 20 years in private business and successful private business,
7
I mean, I'd like you just to confirm that you are saying that or are you
8
retracting it?
9
A.
11:41:34 10
No, I suppose Mr. Murphy it's sort of an innate modesty, I wouldn't describe myself as a highly experienced businessman, it's just a question --
11
Q. 162
I didn't say successful or good, I just said experienced?
12
A.
I was experienced certainly in the field that I was in, in getting clients and
13 14
servicing the clients that I had, that was certainly fairly experienced -Q. 163
11:41:53 15
put the question instead of wasting a few minutes as to what your answer is
16 17
before we come to you agreeing with me? A.
18 19
Thank you. Mr. Dunlop why don't you agree with me in the first instance when I
Well, I don't know, I can't answer that question, you are asking the questions I am just --
Q. 164
But you are the only person who can answer it, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well, I am just telling you, I would not describe myself in those terms.
21
Q. 165
You have just described yourself in those terms?
22
A.
I am an experienced PR lobbyist, I'm not in the --
23
Q. 166
That's not a business?
24
A.
I'm not in the, in the stratospheric plc category.
Q. 167
You say you didn't intentionally, sorry, I think you said you didn't intend to
11:42:08 20
11:42:29 25
26
mislead the Tribunal in saying 25,000. You didn't take even a reasonable care
27
in coming into the Tribunal with your figure of 25,000 insofar as you didn't
28
refer to your accountants, would you agree with that?
29 11:42:54 30
A.
I would agree I didn't refer to my accountants and if that is not taking reasonable care I would agree. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:42:55
11:43:31
22 1
Q. 168
2
All right. And it may be if you had gone to your accountants then they would have been able to tell you 60 thousand?
3
A.
They may well have done, yes.
4
Q. 169
Now Mr. Dunlop, if I can just ask you then about the two subsequent -- you are
5
now accepting that it was 85,000?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 170
And this is made up of two further cheques, one for 15,000 -- I will probably
8
get my sums wrong here Mr. Dunlop, one for 15,000 and one for 10,000, isn't
9
that right, you have seen those?
11:43:47 10
A.
I was just about to compliment you on your mathematics but you have obviously
11
decided no, the -- my statement was that I got 25 in tranches of 15 and 10. I
12
subsequently agreed, after the audit, that we got 60 and if the audit was
13
conducted again today in the absence of documentation it would still be 60, but
14
I agree on the provision of, I have had sight of a cheque of 15 and of 10,
11:44:20 15
which brings it to 85.
16
Q. 171
Just in relation --
17
A.
Is that not correct.
18
Q. 172
Yes, yes?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 173
I am going back just a little bit Mr. Dunlop for a second in relation to the
11:44:30 20
21
25,000 and it arises now in the difference between 60 and 85?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 174
You are someone who has given considerable evidence to the Tribunal about the
24 11:44:44 25
amount of money you have paid to different councillors? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 175
Varying from low hundreds up to thousands?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 176
How can you possibly give that evidence on the one hand and say on the other
29 11:44:59 30
that I can't remember, my best recollection throughout 2000 is 25,000, but now it's 85,000 when the documentation is shown to me? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:45:02
11:45:19
23 1
A.
Well, I don't see any inconsistency in it. I have already said to you that the
2
initial agreement with the representative of Monarch was for 25,000. Obviously
3
there were subsequent agreements or --
4
Q. 177
I wasn't asking, sorry to interrupt you Mr. Dunlop I, want to keep it as short
5
as I can. I wasn't asking you about the agreement I was asking about what you
6
were paid?
7
A.
I have said ten minutes ago that I agree I was paid 85,000.
8
Q. 178
I think you understand the question I put to you Mr. Dunlop, would you please
9 11:45:30 10
answer? A.
11
But I mean when I go to answer you Mr. Murphy you tell me that I am either digressing or holding the Tribunal up.
12
Q. 179
No. I didn't say either thing Mr. Dunlop.
13
A.
I don't see any difficulty in saying what I have said, that to the best of my
14
recollection at the time I said 25,000, let's park that. Move on, when the
11:45:55 15
audit was done by our accountants we came to 60,000. We told the Tribunal
16
that. I have no difficulty in accepting that I got 25,000 extra in tranches of
17
15 and 10, because up to this morning I have been shown the cheques, I have
18
seen sight of the cheques.
19
Q. 180
11:46:21 20
And if we come in tomorrow and give you 50, documents for 50,000 or a hundred thousand you will be saying you have no trouble agreeing with that Mr. Dunlop,
21
isn't that the position?
22
A.
No, I wouldn't say I have any difficulty in just agreeing with it.
23
Q. 181
How long will this go on for?
24
A.
Well, I am just saying to you, if you come in tomorrow morning with a cheque
11:46:34 25
saying that I got 50,000, which I'm absolutely 100 per cent certain I didn't,
26
but let's see whether you come in tomorrow morning with a cheque for 50,000, I
27
would say fine. I certainly have no recollection of getting 50,000, I did
28
invoice Monarch for 50,000 pounds but I never got it.
29 11:46:58 30
Q. 182
Now, Mr. Dunlop, so okay the position as of today is that in May 2000 you swear that it's 25,000. You agree with the Tribunal that, sorry you tell the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:47:05
11:47:17
24 1
Tribunal it's 60,000 in 2001 and now you say on oath that it's 85,000, isn't
2
that the position?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 183
All right. And you are also saying that that's it?
5
A.
I'm also saying that I invoiced the company Monarch for 50,000, but I am saying
6
to you that I did not get 50,000.
7
Q. 184
Does that mean you might get 50,000 tomorrow from Monarch?
8
A.
Well, they might be generous enough if they want to, but the invoice is still
9 11:47:33 10
out there. Q. 185
11 12
you are saying that's it? A.
13 14 11:47:53 15
Q. 186
Yes. Unless we turn up some documents?
A.
Well, if you do I will examine it and I will look at it and I will either confirm or disabuse you of the truth.
Q. 187
18 19 11:48:07 20
To the best of my recollection, yes and on foot of all of the documentation that I have reviewed I do not recollect getting anything else from Monarch.
16 17
But subject to that invoice, you are saying Mr. Dunlop, subject to that invoice
Is there any chance for example that maybe there is another firm of accountants working for you who might have papers that you haven't gone to?
A.
No, there is not.
Q. 188
No. Mr. Dunlop, could I just ask you in relation to these two payments that
21
you are agreeing this morning about, 10,000 and 15,000, they are actually two
22
payments that the Tribunal put you on notice of in 2001 as information coming
23
from Monarch, so in other words when the Tribunal wrote to you in 2001 they
24
told you about those two payments, now I just, I'm afraid I don't know off the
11:49:07 25
top of my head if you got documentation, because you certainly said the
26
Tribunal was furnishing you documentation in the other matters, but the
27
Tribunal told you that Monarch had told the Tribunal that Monarch had paid you
28
15,000 and 10,000 on respective dates. And yet you did not adopt those
29
payments in coming back to us with your 60,000?
11:49:30 30
A.
Yes. No, well similar to yourself, off the top of my head I can't recollect Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:49:37
11:49:58
25 1
when the Tribunal did or did not tell us, but if they did there was no evidence
2
to suggest that those payments been made or we were not provided, unless I am
3
wrong, we were not provided with any information as to that effect, including
4
up to in recent days in relation to a cheque for 10,000.
5
Q. 189
Yes. But Mr. Dunlop, what you are saying is Coyle & Coyle and you notified the
6
Tribunal of 60,000 because in part of new documentation coming from the
7
Tribunal, from Monarch, isn't that right?
8
A.
9
Yes, just for -- I don't wish to repeat myself Mr. Murphy, but I cannot give you the dates. You probably have them at your fingertips there.
11:50:29 10
We were
contacted by the Tribunal to the effect that evidence had been provided to the
11
Tribunal by Monarch that extra payments had been made, we did an audit and as a
12
result of that audit, including all of Frank Dunlop and Associates books, cash
13
books, receipt books, lodgements, whatever, we came up with 60 and we told the
14
Tribunal that.
11:50:52 15
Q. 190
Yes. Could I have page 491 please? This is actually -- maybe what I should do
16
would be to go to 499 first please. Mr. Dunlop, this is the schedule that
17
Coyle & Coyle came back to the Tribunal with in 2001?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 191
Uncorrected, 75,000?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 192
Now what the mistake relates to?
22
A.
The 15.
23
Q. 193
If you go up to 19th of May 1993, 15,000, that in fact was an invoice which was
11:51:28 20
24 11:51:42 25
paid by the two 7,500's below it? A.
Correct, yes.
26
Q. 194
It's included in error?
27
A.
It's included in error.
28
Q. 195
So if we now go to page 491 we can deal with the corrected schedule, so in fact
29 11:51:55 30
Mr. Dunlop what was happening there was you were telling the Tribunal that you were paid 15,000 more than you believed you were? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:51:57
11:52:06
26 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 196
But in fact we now know you were getting closer to the real figure?
3
A.
Well in the first instance it was a double count.
4
Q. 197
Yes?
5
A.
15 and two separate 7,500's. So when you take out the 15 and you account for
6 7
the two 7,500's you get the 60. Q. 198
Now, Mr. Dunlop, if you go down to the bottom of the page there you see it says
8
"accordingly the above schedule should read as follows 'Frank Dunlop and
9
Associates Limited receipts from Monarch Properties -- this is the Tribunal,
11:52:26 10
sorry --
11
A.
Where are you now, Mr. Murphy, what are you reading from?
12
Q. 199
Sorry halfway down the page 491?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 200
Accordingly the above schedule should read as follows, let's ignore the above
11:52:37 15
schedule, 'Frank Dunlop and Associates Limited receipts from Monarch
16
Properties' and it gives a date of each payment?
17
A.
Mm-hmm.
18
Q. 201
The F. D. A. L amount which is your account, Frank Dunlop Associates Limited
19 11:52:50 20
amount that you got? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 202
This is what you are agreeing you got?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 203
Then it says traced to lodgements and I think the Y letter that goes down there
24 11:53:04 25
should be under traced to lodgements, is that all right? A.
I accept your word for it, yes.
26
Q. 204
I'm afraid --
27
A.
Yes, yes.
28
Q. 205
I suppose it's -- anyway, and then --
29
A.
I don't know what Y stands for.
Q. 206
Sorry, I think what it is is that you see Y is on the right-hand side of five
11:53:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:53:19
11:53:27
27 1
of the six figures?
2
A.
Yes, yes.
3
Q. 207
I think it means that those, if you look at the asterisk on the second one?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 208
And go down below to the asterisk remittance advice from Monarch Properties but
6
not traced to F. D. A. L, I think it probably means that your accountants are
7
telling us that that Y means the others weren't traced so they didn't go into
8
the business account?
9
A.
11:53:51 10
I'm not so sure about that. That all the ones listed with Y behind it were not listed to the business account, they were.
11
Q. 209
Sorry, I beg your pardon?
12
A.
It's The opposite.
13
Q. 210
What it says is --
14
A.
What you mean to say, Mr. Murphy, with due respect, is that those payments with
11:54:01 15
the Y after it are payments that my accountant have traced as being lodged to
16 17
F. D. A. L. Q. 211
Sorry you are absolutely right, you are absolutely right. The 10,000, the
18
second one was not traced to your account, your business account, the others
19
were?
11:54:14 20
A.
That's correct.
21
Q. 212
I beg your pardon. Now the third column is per Tribunal?
22
A.
Homer nods Mr. Murphy, don't worry. Good boy.
23
Q. 213
Yes, exactly and then I think that that is -- sorry I know that's the
24 11:54:30 25
information we gave you that came from Monarch? A.
Yes, which is quite surprising.
26
Q. 214
Sorry, what's surprising?
27
A.
Well 52,500 and we are saying that we got 60,000.
28
Q. 215
What's surprising?
29
A.
It's surprising that Monarch with all it's capabilities and audit facilities
11:54:49 30
and all the rest are telling the Tribunal that I got 52,500 whereas when we did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:54:55
11:55:06
28 1 2
our audit we came up with 60. Q. 216
3 4
Right. Does that mean that two people made a bags of it, is that what you are saying?
A.
I'd prefer if both of us made a bags of it, but what I am saying is that when
5
we did our audit in all of the documentation and information available to our
6
accountants we came up with 60 and traced 60.
7
Q. 217
And when the Tribunal did its audit it comes up with 85.
8
A.
Sure, yes.
9
Q. 218
The point I want to just make here Mr. Dunlop is that as I say, the third
11:55:21 10
column per Tribunal means Monarch has told the Tribunal and the Tribunal is
11
telling you 52,500?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 219
Now you will see under per Tribunal, 26th of May 93, 10,000 pounds?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 220
And go down to the 15,000 underneath that, against the 2nd of November 1993?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 221
They -- sorry, they are, if you compare the Tribunal column, 52,500 with your
11:55:37 15
18 19 11:55:59 20
column 60,000? A.
Yes.
Q. 222
You adopt three of the per Tribunal figures and don't adopt those two figures,
21
the 10,000 and 15,000?
22
A.
From that document that you have in front of me.
23
Q. 223
From that document?
24
A.
That is palpably clear, yes.
Q. 224
And this is the, these are the two payments we are talking about this morning
11:56:17 25
26 27
that you now agree bring it up to 85? A.
Correct and these are the two payments that I have suggested to you earlier on
28
and you are absolutely correct, these are the two payments that there was no
29
documentation whatever available to us. You may point to this, saying the
11:56:38 30
Tribunal had evidence from Monarch that they had paid this, to my knowledge or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:56:42
11:56:58
29 1
recollection we had no evidence to suggest that we had received those payments.
2
Q. 225
Okay.
3
A.
Now I may be wrong, I may be wrong on that point.
4
Q. 226
I will come to that in a moment Mr. Dunlop, the only point I want to make there
5
is that when the Tribunal sends you the 52,500 figure and you come back with
6
the 60,000?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 227
You don't adopt those two figures, you do today, you are saying, I think, that
9
you had no documentation to support those figures, to confirm those figures,
11:57:19 10
but why didn't you sort of say to the Tribunal 'look could we ever have your
11
underlying documentation that you must have got from Monarch, I'm assuming now
12
the Tribunal didn't send to you and I don't know the answer to that, but I mean
13
the Tribunal is putting up 52,500, you are coming back, you are putting up 60
14
in response but omitting that 10 and the five there, surely you'd come back
11:57:42 15
through your solicitors and your accountants and say to the Tribunal 'Monarch
16
say it is paid me those two payments ten and five, please give me the
17
documentation and I will let you know, like we have done today and I will let
18
you know whether I was paid or not'?
19
A.
11:58:05 20
Well, I can't account for the sort of, the line of query that you have put in the sense that I can't speak for the way the accountants treated the matter,
21
the accountants obviously treated the matter on the basis of all of the
22
documentation they had available to them, and I had in the company, and in fact
23
we might have been quite pleased with the fact that we were able to suggest
24
that we had got 60,000 instead of 52,500 which Monarch were saying on the basis
11:58:26 25
26
of what the Tribunal was saying. Q. 228
27 28 29 11:58:57 30
Yes. I suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that at least it's a very, very casual attitude to the Tribunal?
A.
I don't think so Mr. Murphy. I don't think you can suggest that. I'm not going to have a debate about that with you, but I mean I don't think you could suggest that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
11:59:19
12:00:00
30 1
Q. 229
Mr. Dunlop I want to just take that 10,000 figure up with you for a second, and
2
if I could please ask for 4219, now Mr. Dunlop, this is as we have said, this
3
is one of the two cheques which you accept today were, you received from
4
Monarch?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 230
All right. And the reason you didn't accept, you didn't agree that, that you
7
had received that at an earlier stage, was because you had no documentation
8
relating to it, isn't that right?
9
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 231
Yes. Now Mr. Dunlop, if you look at 4219 that's a remittance advice?
11
A.
It is yes.
12
Q. 232
Monarch Property Services Limited paying the money?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 233
To Frank Dunlop?
A.
Yes.
Q. 234
And it says "Dear Sirs, we enclose here with our cheque number 8109 in the sum
12:00:15 10
12:00:31 15
16 17
of 10,000"?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 235
All right. Now I mean that obviously was send, you got the cheque it was
12:00:46 20
21
obviously sent to you? A.
22
Documentation -- the original or a copy of that documentation obviously was sent to me with the cheque.
23
Q. 236
And what happened to it?
24
A.
I don't know.
Q. 237
Right. But you didn't have it and you don't have it?
A.
Well obviously I am looking at it now and I have seen it in some of the
12:00:54 25
26 27 28
briefing material, but to the best of my recollection we did not have that. Q. 238
29 12:01:36 30
Yes. And if I could look at 4223 please -- excuse me, cheque payments book, if you go down, this is Monarch cheque payments book?
A.
Oh yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:01:37
12:01:49
31 1
Q. 239
2
Just to show the money coming out, or sorry recorded as being paid, if you go down five lines, you see Frank Dunlop and Associates and 10,000?
3
A.
Yes, yes.
4
Q. 240
That's Monarch saying that they paid that sum to you?
5
A.
Mm-hmm.
6
Q. 241
And if we go to 4224, which is their bank account, and if you go down to the
7
third of June 1993 you will see cheque 8109, 10,000?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 242
All right? So that's the 10,000 coming out of Monarch account, all right?
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 243
So Monarch paid the cheque of 10,000, isn't that right?
12
A.
Sorry, yes, I beg your pardon, sorry.
13
Q. 244
What are you referring to?
14
A.
No, just having my notes here, in relation to payments made and the scheduling
12:02:17 10
12:02:38 15
of documentation.
16
Q. 245
What is it you are looking at?
17
A.
Payments from Monarch.
18
Q. 246
Yes?
19
A.
And when, just as --
Q. 247
Is that the one we were looking at on the screen a moment ago?
21
A.
Yes, exactly -- no, this is an internal document my solicitors prepared for me.
22
Q. 248
Oh, I see.
23
A.
Just in relation to the payments for Monarch I was just trying to reconcile it
12:02:45 20
24 12:02:59 25
with this one here. Q. 249
Yes?
26
A.
And it's -- we don't have it.
27
Q. 250
Well it --
28
A.
We don't have it. Which --
29
Q. 251
No --
A.
Which goes back to the original of what I said.
12:03:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:03:11
12:03:27
32 1
Q. 252
Yes?
2
A.
Is that notwithstanding the fact that a remittance notice obviously was sent
3
with a cheque, I don't know what happened to the remittance notice if it was in
4
evidence in the books it would have been recorded by the accountants. I don't
5
know what happened to it, and obviously on the journey that you have started in
6
relation to tracing the payment from Monarch's remittance note to the payments
7
book of Monarch and to the withdrawal from, or the debit from the bank account,
8
and then seeing the cheque is the next item on the agenda I should imagine and
9
my signature on the back of it, that is the evidence, that is the only evidence
12:03:56 10
that I have that that payment was made.
11
Q. 253
Yes. That's why it doesn't feature in the document you are looking at there?
12
A.
Correct, yes.
13
Q. 254
And, of course, before the remittance advice there would be your invoice
14 12:04:10 15
presumably, is that right? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 255
Did you always issue an invoice?
17
A.
Yes, we always issued an invoice, yes.
18
Q. 256
And, so anyway your files are missing the invoice and the remittance advice?
19
A.
Yes, there is a gap. There is a gap in relation to two issues.
Q. 257
Yes?
A.
Just two. To summarise, if it is possible to do so in this context, to
12:04:25 20
21 22
summarise, there are two issues which are at the core of this line of
23
questioning, that you have quite legitimately adopted. One is one for 15 and
24
the other is for the ten. You are asking me about this one in relation to the
12:04:44 25
ten, I have absolutely no difficulty in recognising the remittance note,
26
notwithstanding it says Frank Dunlop as distinct from Frank Dunlop and
27
Associates. I see Dominic Glennane's signature on the top of it, who is the
28
financial officer for Monarch Properties, I see the tracing of the journey of
29
the payment through the cash book of Monarch Properties, out of their bank
12:05:10 30
account and as I said the next logical step is to show me the cheque, my Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:05:16
12:05:37
33 1
signature and it's disbursement or it's disposal in some fashion or other.
2
Q. 258
You accept there would have been an invoice?
3
A.
Yes. I would be very surprised if there wasn't an invoice.
4
Q. 259
And so somewhere along the line invoice and remittance advice have got mislaid
5 6
or lost? A.
Yes, but without getting into another area or backing into a cul-de-sac, if the
7
invoice was for ten one would automatically expect that it would be VATed so if
8
the invoice was for ten, was that inclusive of VAT or was VAT not added, or if
9
VAT was added was it not paid? That I cannot answer you.
12:06:06 10
Q. 260
11 12
not you have lost it? A.
13 14
What's that got to do with whether or not there is an invoice and whether or
I am just saying to you that if there was an invoice the logic would be that it would be VATed and if it was for ten plus VAT it would be what? 12,100.
Q. 261
12:06:29 15
Tell me what do you make of this amount of ten you were paid, is this inclusive of VAT or exclusive of VAT?
16
A.
I suspect very strongly that it was exclusive of VAT.
17
Q. 262
So where is the VAT?
18
A.
The VAT either was not paid or was not included in the invoice, that's the
19 12:06:39 20
point I am making. Q. 263
Yes, who would have had to pay the VAT, you?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 264
But I mean, so you know, you are accepting that you got the 10,000?
23
A.
I have no difficulty in saying I got the 10,000 yes.
24
Q. 265
Are you also saying that you should have paid 21 per cent on top of that to the
12:06:54 25
VAT people?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 266
Which you didn't do?
28
A.
Well obviously if this is not recorded.
29
Q. 267
Yes?
A.
In the books of Frank Dunlop and Associates as being receipted, invoiced plus
12:06:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:07:04
12:07:17
34 1
VAT and receipted, therefore there would not -- a VAT payment would not occur
2
because it wasn't recorded in the books.
3
Q. 268
It isn't recorded, isn't that right?
4
A.
As far as we are concerned it's not.
5
Q. 269
No. Did that happen much or is this a unique payment that didn't pay VAT?
6
A.
No I think I have given evidence to the effect previously that invoices were
7
issued without VAT.
8
Q. 270
Okay. So there was nothing unusual about not paying the VAT?
9
A.
I wouldn't say there was nothing unusual about it, but it wasn't, this is not,
12:07:37 10
11
this would not have been the first occasion on which it occurred. Q. 271
12
Well Mr. Dunlop, but you did, anyway normally there would be an invoice but we just don't have it here?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 272
Document 507 please for a second, this is in respect of the first 15,000 which
12:08:01 15
is part of the 25,000, that's a remittance advice, we have no invoice?
16
A.
Right.
17
Q. 273
What do you say about that?
18
A.
Obviously I received it. I thought there was an invoice for that amount
19 12:08:33 20
Mr. Murphy, no, are you sure there is not an invoice for that? Q. 274
I can't hear you?
21
A.
Are you sure there is not an invoice for that amount?
22
Q. 275
Well I am suggesting to you there isn't?
23
A.
Yes sorry no, I'm fast forwarded to another one of the same, of --
24
Q. 276
Do you think there was an invoice?
A.
Let's just --
12:08:53 25
26 27 28
MR REDMOND: Mr. Chairman there is an invoice, I think 4633? A.
29 12:09:07 30
Yes. CHAIRMAN:
A.
Can we go to 4633?
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:09:08
12:09:19
35 1
Q. 277
That, have we got it up? That's a different invoice isn't it.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
We are not talking about that, we are talking about March?
4
A.
March.
5
Q. 278
So could we go back to please, no -- well yes, we have dealt with that.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Could you go back to 507?
8
Q. 279
Mr. Dunlop, I think you think that maybe there is an invoice for that?
9
A.
Sorry, I may have been confused with that one that Mr. Redmond alluded to. I
12:09:48 10
knew there was an invoice for 15 in some context, but, no I don't have a copy
11
invoice here.
12
Q. 280
And why?
13
A.
I just don't know.
14
Q. 281
I mean I think you said a moment ago as an explanation for the other invoice
12:10:04 15
missing that it was unusual?
16
A.
Yes, yes.
17
Q. 282
So it's -- you invoiced but it's missing?
18
A.
Well, I can't see why Monarch would make a payment to me on a remittance advice
19 12:10:20 20
21
note without an invoice of some sort. Q. 283
All right.
A.
I mean I doubt very much if any of the financial representatives, controllers
22
in Monarch would issue payment on a verbal understanding.
23
Q. 284
Okay. But it just means it's missing?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 285
Could we go to 513 please, this is a cheque for 10,000, it's the second payment
12:10:35 25
26
and ten and 15, maybe they make the 25 that was in your mind, I mean I don't
27
know, but it's the second payment, 10,000, that's a remittance advice and there
28
is no invoice?
29 12:11:03 30
A.
You don't have -- we haven't supplied you with an invoice, we don't have an invoice. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:11:04
12:11:14
36 1
Q. 286
2 3
what the position is? A.
4 5
Well I don't have evidence of an invoice either. I don't have a copy of the invoice.
Q. 287
6 7
I'm suggesting to you Mr. Dunlop there is no invoice and I'd like to you say
So the three that I have taken out so far, there is no invoice notwithstanding that you invoiced and you always have them and so on?
A.
Well, again I put it to you in the context that it would be a highly unlikely
8
for Monarch to pay me 25,000 pounds or 35 thousand pounds or whatever sum of
9
money without an invoice.
12:11:30 10
Q. 288
Can we take it all these, VAT doesn't apply either?
11
A.
No, not on that one either.
12
Q. 289
Sorry it applies but you don't pay it?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 290
All right, if we go to 515 for a second that's the 15 we were talking about,
12:12:08 15
which is an invoice that is --
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 291
Taken over by the 2,000, 7500 by twice -- that invoice is paid I think in two
18
sums, tranches to use your word, 7500 and 7500, it's the one we talked about in
19
the schedule?
12:12:27 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 292
Right?
22
A.
Right okay.
23
Q. 293
So that's the sort of thing you would have been expecting in the other three
24 12:12:33 25
cases? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 294
An invoice like that and that one has VAT?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 295
And I suppose we have no idea why we have that one and we don't have the
29 12:12:41 30
others? A.
No, I can't give you a cogent explanation for that at this remove. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:12:46
12:13:21
37 1
Q. 296
And then, sorry 4219, that's the cheque we are dealing with, that's the one we
2
have already, we know we haven't got the invoice in that, could I have 4390
3
please which is a document we have received from Monarch in their discovery and
4
if you go down please to invoice 2068 where it says Frank Dunlop, then it says
5
amount 9680 and then it says copy of Dunlop's invoice. We only have one
6
invoice for 12,100 pounds even though we have made payments of 42,500, Eddie
7
and I think that's Eddie Sweeney in Monarch, is that right?
8
A.
Well, I presume, there was only one Eddie, I'm assuming.
9
Q. 297
Eddie must get invoices?
A.
Mm-hmm.
11
Q. 298
Anything to say?
12
A.
Well, Eddie must get the invoices. Eddie was the man I dealt with in Monarch.
13
Q. 299
Could you now Mr. Dunlop make a bit of sense of what you have been telling me
12:13:46 10
14
for the last ten minutes, namely that you invoice in every case and it would
12:13:59 15
only be exceptional if there wasn't an invoice and Monarch wouldn't dream of
16
paying you unless they got an invoice?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 300
Can you just explain what you were telling the Tribunal for the last few
19 12:14:11 20
minutes? A.
I will repeat it for you, we would issue invoices for our clients and I cannot
21
see a situation in which we would be paid money by Monarch, of the company in
22
stature of Monarch at the time, without invoices.
23
Q. 301
24 12:14:33 25
But what we have just read out is in the teeth of what you have just said because Monarch are saying that they paid out 42,500 without invoices?
A.
Well, you see you are asking me to put myself in the shoes of Monarch or Mr,
26
who is this, this Mr. Caslin's shoes in relation to this, I do not ever
27
recollect Mr. Sweeney asking me for invoices or past invoices or pursuing me
28
for invoices.
29 12:15:05 30
Q. 302
All right. Now can we go back to, sorry not go back to, can we turn to 4221 please. Now, this is the Monarch Property Services Limited cheque, drawn on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:15:20
12:15:37
38 1
it's account at 73 Clanbrassil Street, AIB, and it's a cheque in the sum of
2
10,000. The date is the 26 of May 1993, made out to Frank Dunlop and
3
Associates, isn't that right so far?
4
A.
Correct, yes.
5
Q. 303
And the number of the cheque 8109 and that's the cheque we are talking about
6
isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 304
Made out to you. And then if we go to just the bottom of that page where we
9 12:15:53 10
have I think your signature, is that right? A.
11
Well that is not my signature, it is my name, but I have never written my signature in that fashion before or since.
12
Q. 305
That's what I was wonder Mr Dunlop?
13
A.
Well I'm glad you made the point. I'm not -- I cannot give you an explanation,
14
I saw this this morning, I cannot give you an explanation, it is certainly my
12:16:25 15
name obviously, but my signature has come up on this screen thousands of times
16
during the course of this Tribunal, that is not my signature.
17
Q. 306
Can I just ask you, you say you saw this this morning?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 307
Was this not on, I know Mr. Redmond has told me, I think we faxed something to
12:16:47 20
you yesterday, I'm not quite sure what it was?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 308
Was this not in your brief?
23
A.
No, it was not.
24
Q. 309
I see?
A.
I saw this first thing this morning at 8 o'clock.
26
Q. 310
Right.
27
A.
In my solicitor's office.
28
Q. 311
I am sorry about the fact you didn't get it?
29
A.
No, no that's fine. I don't want to cause unnecessary confusion, but I have no
12:16:52 25
12:17:08 30
difficulty whatsoever in identifying the fact that Monarch Property Services Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:17:13
12:17:39
39 1
Limited has issued the cheque in the name of Frank Dunlop and Associates and
2
that it is a company cheque, payable to a company, that there is a signature on
3
the back of it, which purports to be mine, it is not mine. I have never used
4
that format in signing my name, ever.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
signature?
8
A.
Well, do you recognise the signature, do you recognise the
I don't. I'm sorry Chairman.
9 12:17:46 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Could it be somebody in your office?
It could well be, yes, it could well be, that is a possibility, I wouldn't -- I
12
wouldn't deny that for a minute, but at the same time the only answer that I
13
would add to that is why would it be necessary for anybody in my office to sign
14
the back of a company cheque if the company, if the cheque was being traded in
12:18:13 15
some fashion or other or was being lodged or was being cashed? I mean if I was
16
going to cash that cheque --
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
12:18:34 20
Was that cheque picked up in your lodgement?
No. We have no, we have no history of this payment or this cheque other than what the Tribunal have made available to us in recent days, sorry Mr. Murphy I
21
hope that doesn't cause unnecessary confusion, but I mean it would be
22
disingenuous of me to suggest that -- I have no difficulty about the front of
23
the cheque, there is no doubt whatsoever that that cheque is made payable to my
24
company.
12:19:01 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
Bank in Lucan, is it?
28
A.
Well, on the front of the cheque there is what looks like Ulster
Yes, there is a stamp Ulster Bank Lucan, yes.
29 12:19:09 30
CHAIRMAN:
Well, have you any association with that bank?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:19:12
12:19:27
40 1
A.
No, I have not.
2
Q. 312
And on the back of the cheque there is something written close to your name?
3
A.
You mean immediately behind it or just under it.
4
Q. 313
Kind of at right angles?
5
A.
Yes, is that cleared or cleaned or cleared? Clearing I think is the word,
6 7
clearing, C-L-E-A-R-I-N-G. Q. 314
Try again?
8 9 12:19:46 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Clearys?
A.
Cleary.
11
Q. 315
Pardon?
12
A.
Cleary. C-L-E-A-R-Y.
13
Q. 316
There might be an S at the end of it?
14
A.
Clearys -- I just don't know.
Q. 317
No, no, but what's your best attempt?
16
A.
Well, if I was asked to interpret that I would say that it's CLEARING.
17
Q. 318
How do you make CLEARING out of that, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
Well it's a question of -- it's a question of visual impact Mr. Murphy, it's
12:19:57 15
19 12:20:21 20
not a question of scientific -- it could be Cleary, it could be Cleary. Q. 319
It could be Clearys, S?
21
A.
It could be Clearys, yes it could be, yes, sorry yes.
22
Q. 320
Do you think that may be what it is?
23
A.
Yes, could be.
24
Q. 321
You'd have looked at that, is that the first time you looked at that?
A.
Why it is, yes.
Q. 322
You got that cheque this morning, sorry that page, you saw it for the first
12:20:34 25
26 27
time this morning?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 323
Did you recognise then it wasn't your signature?
A.
Yes I did.
12:20:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:20:43
12:20:54
41 1
Q. 324
You didn't look to see what other writing there was on it?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 325
That couldn't be true Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Well it's -- I mean, as I said I'm just looking at it here now and --
5
Q. 326
What's that got to do with it, Mr. Dunlop. I'm suggesting to you that it
6
couldn't be true, you having seen a cheque for the first time this morning that
7
purports to bear your signature and you didn't look at every other thing that
8
was written on it?
9 12:21:10 10
11
A.
Well I didn't and that is the truth.
Q. 327
That's what you swear to?
A.
That's exactly. I remember I am the one bringing your attention to the fact
12
that that that is not my signature. That is not my signature.
13
Q. 328
If you haven't done it Mr. Dunlop it would have been brought to your attention?
14
A.
Oh good.
Q. 329
And I want to ask you then, what's the status of the cheque and the 10,000,
12:21:26 15
16
because until this morning you were disputing having got this, then this
17
morning the Tribunal is told you accept you got it and now you are saying this
18
is not your signature?
19
A.
12:21:45 20
Yeah well I mean you take it logically if you will, which I presume is what you want to do. Up to the point of close of business yesterday there was no
21
documentary evidence to suggest that this payment had been made. This morning
22
at 8 o'clock I was presented with this document and I can attest to the fact
23
that the people who were present when they presented it with me.
24 12:22:08 25
Q. 330
I have no difficulty with that Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Fine, well if you have no difficulty with that point, let me follow on
26
logically then to suggest to you that when you put this cheque up on the screen
27
I have no difficulty in recognising that it's a Monarch cheque, it's made
28
payable to Frank Dunlop and Associates and as the Chairman pointed out there is
29
a stamp of Ulster Bank on it, which again might I add, had the Chairman not
12:22:28 30
done so, I had not averted to, I just looked upon it as evidence from the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:22:34
12:22:52
42 1 2
Tribunal that we had got 10,000 pounds from Monarch. Q. 331
Mr. Dunlop, this is nonsense. For six years, well, no, is it since 2001, for
3
five years you have told the Tribunal effectively that you weren't, you didn't
4
get this 10,000?
5
A.
There was no evidence that we got the 10,000.
6
Q. 332
Well, it's not all about evidence Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Well, what it is about then?
8
Q. 333
Because you are the person getting the money and issuing invoices?
9
A.
No, no.
Q. 334
Because clearly what you are doing Mr. Dunlop is you are not giving something
12:23:05 10
11
up until it is presented to you in a document from the Tribunal otherwise there
12
is no evidence and it doesn't exist?
13
A.
14
No no, that is -- that is a very warped version of the facts if you allow me to say so, Mr. Murphy. To go back ad nauseum from 25 to 60, there is no evidence,
12:23:28 15
we had no evidence, documentary or otherwise in relation to the receipt of
16
15,000 and 10,000. We accepted, because we saw a cheque of 15,000 -- sorry.
17
Q. 335
Yes?
18
A.
Do you want me to go back on that?
19
Q. 336
Mr. Dunlop are you saying you didn't get this page 4221 or are you saying your
12:23:54 20
solicitors didn't get it, because I want to suggest to you that that, this page
21 22
was in the brief? A.
23 24
Well I certainly haven't seen this page. This page as far as I am concerned was presented to me this morning.
Q. 337
All right.
12:24:10 25
26
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman for the avoidance of doubt those pages were not
27
included in the brief that were circulated.
28
Q. 338
Sorry I beg your pardon that's fine. I'm sorry Chairman, Mr. Dunlop --
29
A.
Mr. Murphy, it's not usual for me, I hasten to add and you have been present
12:24:25 30
here before when I have given evidence and it's quite unusual for me to adopt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:24:31
12:24:54
43 1
this attitude. I am here to cooperate as much as I possibly can with the
2
Tribunal, certainly it is obvious that the Tribunal, notwithstanding the large
3
amount of resources that are available to it, is in the category of Homer
4
nodding on occasion. I got this document this morning, it was not in the
5
brief. Now, whoever is suggesting that it was in the brief, as Mr. Redmond has
6
pointed out, is incorrect. Which is a lot of incorrections in relation to
7
what's happening this morning.
8 9 12:25:07 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 339
11
It wasn't in the brief.
It wasn't in the brief and I have apologised to Mr. Dunlop for suggesting that it was.
12
A.
Thank you.
13
Q. 340
Sorry, it was in the brief but they didn't get it, I don't know what that
14
means. But Mr. Dunlop, could I just correct this for one second, the question
12:25:23 15
of whether or not it was in the brief we have it now, the inaccuracies are
16
coming from you and we have had a litany of them this morning in relation to
17
how much you have understated your money to the Tribunal etcetera?
18
A.
Mm-hmm.
19
Q. 341
Now I think I was asking Mr. Dunlop the status of this amount because for six
12:25:50 20
years you have said you didn't get, you weren't paid this, you now say what
21
that means is there was no evidence, you were given the evidence this morning,
22
you accept you got it, now you say this isn't your signature, this would be the
23
signature that -- I mean if this isn't your signature it's forged, isn't that
24
right?
12:26:05 25
26
A.
Well, obviously somebody else wrote my name on the back of that cheque.
Q. 342
Right. Could you tell me how often in your 20 years as a businessman, you have
27
permitted somebody else to write your name on a cheque?
28
A.
Not very often. I cannot recollect, I recollect one occasion, one --
29
Q. 343
Is that it?
A.
No, no, no. The exact circumstances I cannot recall, but I can do so for you
12:26:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:26:31
12:26:56
44 1
subsequently when I think about it, but I do recollect on one occasion asking a
2
member of my staff to make a lodgement and I gather that he had to sign the
3
back of the cheque when he was making the lodgement. The reason I am pausing
4
for a moment is is that I cannot recollect whether he signed my signature on
5
the back of the cheque purporting that it was mine or that he signed his own
6
and was worried about it. I just can't recollect but it would not be my
7
practice to give anybody permission to sign the back of a cheque with my
8
signature.
9
Q. 344
12:27:12 10
I think the Tribunal can infer from what you just said that you didn't give your consent to this signature?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 345
That means it's forged?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 346
Thank you. And do you recognise the handwriting?
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 347
And does that not mean that you didn't get that cheque, that cheque went to
12:27:24 15
16 17
somebody else?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 348
Who forged your signature?
A.
No, that's a leap too far I might suggest, Mr. Murphy.
21
Q. 349
All right. Why is that?
22
A.
Well because, if we take it again, logically.
23
Q. 350
Do, yeah?
24
A.
It's a Monarch Property Services cheque, it's is made out to Frank Dunlop and
12:27:33 20
12:27:46 25
Associates for a specific amount, it's highly unlikely that it was being paid
26
to me for the benefit of somebody else. So, I mean the cheque was sent to me
27
obviously, and if there is a remittance notice or remittance advice notice in
28
Monarch Properties to that effect.
29 12:28:08 30
Q. 351
Sure we don't know anything about whether it got to you, it's is not in your books? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:28:08
12:28:15
45 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 352
Not that -- isn't that right?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 353
All right. So it may never have got to you, if may have been intercepted
5
somewhere in Monarch, it may have been intercepted somewhere else and somebody
6
wrote your name?
7
A.
It could well be. I don't have any recollection.
8
Q. 354
But Mr. Dunlop --
9
A.
I don't have any recollection of getting the cheque and I certainly have no
12:28:28 10
11
recollection whatever of giving anybody permission. Q. 355
12 13
Mr. Dunlop has to be that you didn't get that amount? A.
14 12:28:56 15
Yes but what I am suggesting -- sorry, the inference from all of that
No I don't accept that. You are not following logical line of thought Mr. Murphy, the next question is the important one.
Q. 356
16
Mr. Dunlop, I am doing my best to follow your answer but I can't follow it so could you give it to me again?
17
A.
No, it does not mean that I did not get that cheque.
18
Q. 357
Why not?
19
A.
I could have got the cheque and given it to somebody else.
Q. 358
What about the signature?
21
A.
I gave nobody any permission to forge my signature on the back of a cheque.
22
Q. 359
All right?
23
A.
And certainly, if it is a cheque to Frank Dunlop and Associates that would be
12:29:09 20
24
lodged, being lodged or even cashed or traded by me, it wouldn't necessarily
12:29:26 25
follow that it had to be signed on the back. If I was trading that cheque, if
26
I went into the bank with that cheque, known in the bank and said I want cash
27
for this, it is highly unlikely that I would be asked to sign the bank of it.
28 29 12:29:47 30
Q. 360
You see what I am wondering about just at the moment in the light of the fact that it's not your signature, you say it's not your signature Mr. Dunlop, I am wondering did you get it and I am just wondering and your response to that is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:29:51
12:30:01
46 1
the example is that maybe you gave it to somebody else, now do you think that's
2
what you did?
3
A.
I don't know. I have no recollection in relation to this cheque at all.
4
Q. 361
All right. Have you often given a cheque to somebody else?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 362
Have you ever?
7
A.
I would not say definitively, no, because that might not be the truth, but it
8 9
would be highly unusual. Q. 363
12:30:23 10
so they could make use of it, would you have done that -- sorry you -- you
11 12
And I presume if you were giving it to somebody else you would actually sign it
jesticulated in agreement with me there, isn't that right? A.
Sorry yes, if I was giving that cheque to somebody else I would sign it, I
13
don't know what the exact banking term is to ensure that this was a tradeable
14
instrument, and that it had the endorsement of the payee as to, for it to be
12:30:53 15
traded, but there is no evidence that I have done that.
16
Q. 364
No, but if you were giving a cheque to somebody else like that?
17
A.
Yes, it would be normal.
18
Q. 365
You sign it?
19
A.
Normal practice.
Q. 366
Do you think you ever did that, do you think you ever gave a cheque to somebody
12:31:02 20
21 22
and signed the back of it so they could negotiate it? A.
I may have done, I just cannot say definitively that I did not. But the only
23
thing I will say to you in ease is that if I did it would be on very, very rare
24
occasions.
12:31:18 25
Q. 367
Okay. But I think you said never would you have given it, handed over the
26
cheque to somebody and not put your signature on it, you wouldn't just hand a
27
cheque to somebody?
28
A.
Highly unusual.
29
Q. 368
Highly unusual?
A.
Yeah.
12:31:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:31:31
12:31:50
47 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
time?
Mr. Dunlop, did you ever, did you owe money to Clearys at that
4
A.
Maybe that's why I didn't recognise the name Clearys. No I did not, no.
5
Q. 369
Do you think maybe that, sorry I am just wonder Mr Dunlop is that what you are
6
saying you think maybe what happened here is you got the cheque and you gave it
7
to somebody without signing it?
8
A.
9 12:32:05 10
It could be yes Mr. Murphy, I am not going to say definitively to you that that is not the case because that would be silly.
Q. 370
All right, it could be the case?
11
A.
It could be the case.
12
Q. 371
Why would you give a cheque to somebody without signing it?
13
A.
That's what's odd.
14
Q. 372
Is it not a bit more than odd?
A.
Like? Unusual.
16
Q. 373
Now what do you know about Clearys Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
It's a shop in O'Connell Street, I have been in it a couple of times.
18
Q. 374
Do you know any other Clearys?
19
A.
Do I know any other Clearys, no I don't. No I don't, you mean a retail outlet
12:32:15 15
12:32:40 20
or a name?
21
Q. 375
Name, do you know anybody by the name of Cleary?
22
A.
No -- I don't think so it doesn't spring to mind anyway.
23
Q. 376
And in particular do you know anybody by the name of Cleary in a shop, in a
24 12:32:58 25
business, in a retail, in any place where you might buy something? A.
No I don't -- it doesn't spring to mind anyway.
26
Q. 377
You are quite hesitant?
27
A.
No, because I am trying to be, trying to help you Mr. Murphy, I don't want to
28
say automatically yes or no to anything in case, just in case there may be a
29
possibility.
12:33:16 30
Q. 378
All right. So do you know the name Cleary or Clearys in connection with any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:33:26
12:33:45
48 1
pub?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 379
Are you sure?
4
A.
It doesn't -- I may do, it doesn't spring to mind, I know the names of pubs but
5 6
I don't know, it doesn't spring to mind. Q. 380
7
Okay. You don't know a pub by the name of -- you don't know Clearys in connection with a pub?
8
A.
Where are we talking about, where is the pub?
9
Q. 381
I am just asking you?
A.
Clearys it doesn't spring to mind, is there an address?
11
Q. 382
Do you know a P and C Murphy trading as Clearys?
12
A.
No, it doesn't spring to mind.
13
Q. 383
When you say it doesn't spring to mind Mr. Dunlop, you did pause quite
12:34:00 10
14
considerably to answer a question which is very, very simple, do you know an F
12:34:33 15
and S Dunlop who own a pub, you know, do you know --
16
A.
I wish we did.
17
Q. 384
Do you know P and C Murphy trading as Cleary?
18
A.
I wish F and S did own a pub, but no, I have no -- you can come along and tell
19
me that you must have known Clearys pub in such-and-such a street or whatever,
12:34:52 20
you may well do that, I may well do, it doesn't spring to mind it's not
21
something in the forefront of my mind, as to your latter question in relation
22
to somebody called Murphy, it doesn't spring so mind.
23
Q. 385
Do you know a P and C Murphy?
24
A.
P and C Murphy. Well I know Murphys but I don't, various Murphys.
Q. 386
Are they P and C?
26
A.
P and C? No.
27
Q. 387
Difficult is it?
28
A.
A little more expansive, Peter and Camilla?
29
Q. 388
No, just, you tell me if you know a P and C Murphy, try Patrick?
A.
Paddy Murphy, Patrick Murphy.
12:35:12 25
12:35:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:35:38
12:35:42
49 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 389
Mr. Murphy is there a P and C Murphy.
Sorry Chairman.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 390
7
Do we know about P and C Murphy?
Well do you know, Chairman, if I can just maybe in this way, Mr. Dunlop, do you know a Patrick Murphy trading as Clearys in Sarsfield Road in Inchicore?
8
A.
No, I do not.
9
Q. 391
And I understand that that's a pub where Mr. Lawlor got cheques cashed for him
12:36:13 10
11
you are smiling and you are nodding? A.
No I just -- I don't know a Clearys trading as Murphys in Inchicore, I don't
12
know whether I have heard that that was one of the places that Mr. Lawlor got
13
cash, cheques cashed or not, I don't know.
14 12:36:30 15
Q. 392
No.
A.
I do know that there was some reference to some pub at some stage during
16
another Module of the Tribunal where Mr. Lawlor got cheques cashed but
17
certainly I can't recollect whether that was the one or not.
18
Q. 393
19 12:36:47 20
You can't recollect if that was the one or not, so you think that Mr. Lawlor has cashed that cheque, this cheque?
A.
No I didn't say that. I said there was evidence in another Module of
21
Mr. Lawlor cashing cheques in a pub, again the name of the pub escapes me it's
22
not relevant anyway, as far as I am concerned, it may be relevant as far as you
23
are concerned Mr. Murphy, but no. I have no evidence to suggest that this
24
cheque was traded by Mr. Lawlor in a pub.
12:37:13 25
Q. 394
26
You have no evidence again, but what about leaving aside the evidence, what you might know that wouldn't be written on a page or anything like that Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
I don't know.
28
Q. 395
Have you any knowledge as to whether or not Mr. Dunlop ever had anything to do
29 12:37:31 30
with this cheque at all, Mr. Lawlor, sorry? A.
No I haven't actually, I have no evidence. I have no knowledge. I have no Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:37:38
12:37:49
50 1 2
recollection, he may well have, he may well not have. Q. 396
3 4
But you know -- he may or may not be involved with it, but if he is you know nothing about it?
A.
No, no.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
this cheque to Mr. Lawlor?
8
A.
Well Mr. Dunlop, are you saying that you definitely did not give
No, I am not saying that Chairman, sorry.
9 12:37:58 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Surely, surely would you remember if you gave a cheque for 10,000
pounds to anyone? A.
Yes.
13 14 12:38:11 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
And particularly Mr. Lawlor or somebody, some other politician?
Yes, I fully agree with you I would, if I did that I would, it would be logical
16
to suggest and rational even to suggest that I would recollect that. I have no
17
recollection of giving a cheque for 10,000 pounds in my company's name to
18
Mr. Lawlor.
19 12:38:26 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
22
But do you think it's possible that that might have happened?
It is possible that Mr. Lawlor had this cheque by some other means, but I have no recollection of my giving this cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
12:38:43 25
But if Mr. Lawlor had this cheque and cashed it, he must have got
it from you or somebody in your business?
26
A.
That would appear logical, yes.
27
Q. 397
But a moment ago you agreed that you wouldn't, I mean it would be odd you said?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 398
That it would be odd to give a cheque to somebody without signing it yourself?
A.
Yes I did and it would be. I repeat it would be odd.
12:39:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:39:06
12:39:24
51 1
Q. 399
2
And you wouldn't give it to somebody and give your, give your consent to that person signing it?
3
A.
No, correct.
4
Q. 400
So I think that means that if a third party got that cheque they didn't have
5
your consent to getting it or to writing your name on it?
6
A.
I think that would appear to be eminently logical, yes.
7
Q. 401
And you seem to think it may have been, Mr. Lawlor, I know you can't say
8
definitively it wasn't or it was, you seem to think it may have been
9
Mr. Lawlor?
12:39:42 10
A.
No no, you are the man, Mr. Murphy, what first mentioned Mr. Lawlor's name.
11
Q. 402
Did I, that's correct?
12
A.
I didn't. I was waiting for you to do it but I didn't do it.
13
Q. 403
Why were you waiting for me to do it?
14
A.
Because when the Chairman said Ulster Bank, Lucan, which again I repeat on
12:40:00 15
sight of this cheque I had not adverted to, a red light went off in my head.
16
Q. 404
Tell us about the red light?
17
A.
Lucan, Mr. Lawlor, they are synonymous.
18
Q. 405
You didn't see any of that until now?
19
A.
No.
Q. 406
Because you didn't bother looking at the rest of the cheque this morning,
12:40:15 20
21
notwithstanding it's not your signature and when you see it now you see Lucan
22
and you think of Mr. Lawlor but you don't mention it to the Tribunal now
23
immediately in the midst of it?
24
A.
12:40:32 25
You are the man asking me the questions, Mr. Murphy, and I was waiting for you to ask me.
26
Q. 407
Mr. Lawlor, you don't ask?
27
A.
I'm not Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Dunlop.
28
Q. 408
Mr. Dunlop you are not seriously asking me to believe that, are you?
29
A.
No, no, I am telling you exactly what has occurred to the best of my ability in
12:40:45 30
relation to this cheque, when I saw it and the discussion we are now having Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:40:49
12:40:57
52 1 2
about it. Q. 409
We are having a little game Mr. Dunlop, you are a mouse and I am trying to
3
catch you, is that what it is, that you won't give me any information until I
4
ask the question?
5
A.
6 7
No. You are duty bound to ask me the question, as per the remit of the Tribunal. I am the person who answers the questions when you ask them.
Q. 410
Well I'll take issue with you on that Mr. Dunlop because you have a duty from
8
that witness box to tell the whole truth. Now I am asking you in considerable
9
detail about a forged, a cheque in respect of which there has been a forgery?
12:41:21 10
A.
11 12
Yes, well what more would you like me to tell you that I haven't told you already.
Q. 411
This precisely, Mr. Dunlop. As we went through to use your own phrase ad
13
nauseum and repeatedly Clearys and trying to work out who they were and you
14
don't know who they are?
12:41:38 15
16
A.
I don't.
Q. 412
But the explanation I have given for it may well be correct, in the meantime
17
you have spotted the Lucan thing and the red light has gone in your mind about
18
Lawlor but you haven't suggested to the three judges that this cheque, while
19
it's not your signature and you don't know who wrote it, and you don't know who
12:41:56 20
Clearys are, there is a red light in your head saying Lucan equals Lawlor?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 413
Now please tell me, please tell the Tribunal why you didn't proffer that?
23
A.
Well you are -- you are the person asking questions in relation to this cheque,
24
I have given you a time line in relation to sight of this cheque, you have
12:42:18 25
already apologised.
26
Q. 414
This is irrelevant, Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
Sorry Mr. Murphy.
28
Q. 415
This is irrelevant, would you please answer the question?
29
A.
Mr. Murphy, like you know we can expedite matters if I can answer the question
12:42:29 30
and I will expedite matters by listening to the question. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:42:32
12:42:44
53 1
Q. 416
We'll expedite matters if you answer the question but you are not doing that?
2
A.
Not to your satisfaction obviously.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
Mr. Lawlor?
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop do you suspect that cheque may have gone to
6
A.
I have, yes, I do suspect.
7
Q. 417
Now Mr. Dunlop, will you please say why you suspect that?
8
A.
Well I --
9
Q. 418
Tell us everything about it?
A.
Yes right, if you'd let me again without interrupting.
11
Q. 419
I won't say another word?
12
A.
Good man. I had first sight of this cheque this morning at 8 o'clock, to be
12:42:53 10
13
precise, a little bit after 8. I look at the cheque, my solicitor says we have
14
received this documentation from the Tribunal overnight, it proves that you got
12:43:13 15
the 10,000 that was in dispute from Monarch. I said fine. That's grand, okay?
16
We'll, if we are asked, if I am asked by Mr. Murphy did I get 85,000 from
17
Monarch I will say yes. Which I did, very early on in the course of this
18
examination. Which you will recall.
19 12:43:32 20
You put this cheque up on the screen, I bring your attention to the fact that
21
it's not my signature, although it is my name. You then go into a disposition
22
in relation to whether it's Clearys, clearings or whatever, the Chairman brings
23
my attention to the fact that there is a stamp on it from Ulster Bank Lucan and
24
I have given you the evidence without repeating it again, that a red light went
12:44:01 25
off in my mind as soon as the Chairman highlighted that, up to that point and
26
now, I have no recollection of ever giving this cheque, receiving this cheque
27
or giving this cheque to any other person, or allowing any other person to put
28
my name on the back of it.
29 12:44:21 30
Q. 420
Now Mr --
A.
Is that clear? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:44:22
12:44:48
54 1
Q. 421
Mr. Dunlop, if I might come in now and what you have just said is a complete
2
repetition of what you have been saying over the last, earlier and to what the
3
question related to, arising out of the Chairman asking did you believe that
4
this was Mr. Lawlor who had, I think, written your name and I asked you --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 422
Why you thought Mr. Lawlor was -- and I asked you to tell us in detail why you
7
thought Mr. Lawlor was involved in this and you gave us a repetition of 8
8
o'clock this morning?
9 12:45:00 10
A.
Yeah.
Q. 423
So could you now please answer the question, which is why do you, Mr. Dunlop,
11
in the witness box, believe that Mr. Lawlor is involved with this cheque that
12
you did not give to him?
13
A.
14
No sorry, when I answered the question to the Chairman I said it is possible that this cheque was traded by Mr. Lawlor and that my name on the back of it is
12:45:23 15
a forgery, whether by Mr. Lawlor or any other person. I have no recollection
16
of ever giving a cheque for 10,000 pounds in the name of Monarch Property
17
Services Limited to Mr. Lawlor or allowing him to trade it, or execute it. So
18
I have no -- I have no recollection of ever giving, receiving this cheque which
19
has been my point up to 8 o'clock this morning, and I have no recollection of
12:45:55 20
21
ever giving this cheque or allowing Mr. Lawlor to trade this cheque. Q. 424
Mr. Dunlop you are a very well educated, intelligent person, I think you
22
understand the question. You are not attempting to answer it and I am going to
23
stay here asking the question until you answer it. I want to know why the red
24
light went on in your head and why you thought that Lawlor, who was nowhere
12:46:29 25
near this cheque on the face of the back or front of it, why in your mind with
26
all your association over the years with Mr. Lawlor, why you think he comes
27
into the picture?
28
A.
29 12:46:51 30
I have already answered that question. In the context of the Chairman bringing my attention to the stamp on the cheque.
Q. 425
But Mr. Dunlop, the stamp is, I understand that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:46:58
12:47:15
55 1
A.
Good.
2
Q. 426
But why, why because Lucan equals Lawlor in your mind?
3
A.
No synonymous, I said not equal.
4
Q. 427
What does it bring -- I mean sorry, maybe if I ask you to go a bit further with
5
it, if Lucan is synonymous with Mr. Lawlor in your mind and the red light goes
6
on, why? I mean what is coming to your mind thereabout Mr. Lawlor and this
7
cheque? I mean I understand Lucan equals Mr. Lawlor, that's fine, but on a
8
cheque here, I don't understand how it comes to your mind, unless there is
9
more?
12:47:37 10
A.
More what.
11
Q. 428
You know -- more information, there is something --
12
A.
Sorry, I beg your pardon, not in relation to this cheque, not in relation to
13
this payment, not in relation to anything that I did or did not do in allowing
14
any other person, a third person or otherwise trade this cheque on a forged
12:47:55 15
16
signature of my name on the back. Q. 429
But Mr. Dunlop, if you, if someone shows you a cheque it could be from anybody
17
written out to you with any cashed -- a cheque made out to you for whatever
18
amount and because Lucan appears in the bank stamp you think of Lawlor, that's
19
fine, Mr. Lawlor, that's fine. But it wouldn't put a red light on. I mean why
12:48:33 20
do you think of -- are you thinking of Mr. Lawlor because you think what
21
happened here is that Mr. Lawlor somehow got his hands on this cheque, not from
22
you because you have told us that you didn't give it to him?
23
A.
No, I have no recollection of doing so is what I said.
24
Q. 430
No, but maybe he got, maybe he got his, he got his hands on the cheque is that
12:48:54 25
what you are thinking.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
think is you said that you have no recognise recollection of giving him the
29
cheque?
12:49:08 30
A.
Mr. Dunlop, I mean what you said there a couple of moments ago I
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:49:09
12:49:24
56 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
or more occasions when you did give Mr. Lawlor a third party cheque? Because
4
if somebody says I have no recollection of giving him this particular cheque it
5
would suggest that it wasn't unusual that you might have given him a cheque,
6
most people would be able to say I never gave anybody a cheque of that size, I
7
never gave Mr. Lawlor a cheque of that size or any cheque, can we take it that
8
you do recollect on occasion giving Mr. Lawlor third party cheques and that
9
while you don't recollect specifically giving him this one this could be one of
12:49:53 10
11
Can we take it therefore that there were occasions, certainly one
those? A.
No, no to both Mr. Chairman. No I do -- it would not have been my practice and
12
I do not recollect ever doing it, giving me Mr. Lawlor a cheque, as a third
13
party executor of an instrument made out to me and certainly I have no
14
recollection of dealing with this particular cheque in that fashion. There was
12:50:17 15
an occasion that I have given evidence before, both in private and I think in
16
public, that there was a payment to Mr. Lawlor, but that was on foot of a false
17
invoice, not on foot of a cheque made payable to me.
18 19 12:50:35 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
But could somebody in your office have given him this cheque?
Highly unlikely. Most unlikely, in fact I would absolutely and categorically rule it out.
22 23 24 12:50:47 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Q. 431
Sorry Mr. Dunlop, categorically that that --
A.
That anybody in my office would have given a cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
Q. 432
Okay. But do you think what happened here is that Mr. Lawlor, you think, do
27 28 29 12:51:15 30
All right.
you think Mr. Lawlor wrote your name on the back of the cheque? A.
Well, while you were asking me various questions there I have been trying, and I don't -- I can't remember what Liam Lawlor's handwriting was like, so I can't attest to the fact that that may well be his writing, I don't know. I just Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:51:26
12:51:44
57 1
don't know Mr. Murphy.
2
Q. 433
Now if, sorry Lucan is synonymous with Mr. Lawlor, red light flashes?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 434
So Mr. Dunlop does that mean it's a possibility in your mind that Mr. Lawlor
5
got this, Mr. Lawlor got this cheque somehow and he got the money for it?
6
A.
It is a possibility, yes.
7
Q. 435
And it wouldn't surprise you or would it?
8
A.
Well I think that's an unfair question, but I mean in the context of what we
9
are doing here, the answer has to be as straightforward as I possibly can give
12:52:03 10
11
it, it wouldn't surprise me. Q. 436
And would it be, I know, I think you have said that you wouldn't have given him
12
permission to sign your name and you wouldn't have, you wouldn't hand it over
13
anyway without signing your name, but would it be with your blessing, I mean
14
could it be that Mr. Lawlor could get a cheque like that made out to you and he
12:52:22 15
16
would have your blessing in cashing it? A.
Well, no, he wouldn't have my blessing in cashing -- well, that begs a number
17
of questions Mr. Murphy, which I think would be necessary to go through before
18
answering that question, as to how he got his hands on the cheque and as I have
19
said to you I have absolutely no recollection of ever giving Mr. Lawlor a
12:52:41 20
cheque of that amount, or and I have answered the Chairman saying it is well
21
nigh impossible to suggest that anybody in my office would have done so. So
22
it's a question of the method of acquisition of this cheque, I mean -- it
23
reinforces.
24 12:52:56 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Sorry to interrupt you, just on that point, a little while ago
26
in answer to Mr. Murphy you said it was possible that Mr, the late Mr. Lawlor
27
might have gotten this cheque by other means?
28
A.
Yes.
29 12:53:07 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think those were the words you used, perhaps you, when you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:53:12
12:53:22
58 1
gave that answer you might tell us what, if you ruled out yourself handing over
2
the cheque or anybody in your office or connected with your business handing
3
over the cheque as I understand it?
4
A.
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
mentioned he may have got it by other means?
8
A.
But notwithstanding that, you did say a little while ago you
Yes.
9 12:53:29 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12
Having ruled yourself out of the equation and ruled your
office out on your evidence, what other means then -A.
Well, he could have got it from Monarch.
13 14 12:53:38 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY: Q. 437
And had that happened previously or after?
A.
No, I have no -- certainly not as far as I am aware, that has never happened
17 18
before. Q. 438
19 12:53:52 20
I see.
Okay, could you just explain then to me, I know you are not saying that's how it happened, isn't that right?
A.
21
Exactly. Because I have -- I have no evidence to suggest that that is the way it happened.
22
Q. 439
No, but you suspect it?
23
A.
Suspicion in evidence Mr. Murphy, you know well enough, you are a senior
24 12:54:12 25
counsel that that's not sufficient, you cannot equate the two. Q. 440
26 27
And could you just explain to me, because I can't see it Mr. Dunlop, how would it come about that Monarch would give a cheque made out to you to Mr. Lawlor?
A.
I don't know, in answer to the honourable judge who asked me if I rule out
28
myself and if I rule out my office and members of my staff, the judge asked the
29
next logical question is how would this, how would it come about that
12:54:41 30
Mr. Lawlor, if this is Mr. Lawlor, that how would he have acquired or come into Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:54:48
12:55:01
59 1
possession of this cheque, which was the question that I suggested to you was
2
the logical question in relation to trying to divine some sort of sense out
3
this.
4
Q. 441
5 6
Mr. Dunlop in the ordinary way cheques that come to you from Monarch or whoever, do they go to your office?
A.
7
Oh, yes, they would go -- they would, well there would be two ways of doing it. Either by arrangement for collection or they would be sent by post.
8
Q. 442
Right and if so by post to your office?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 443
And I mean obviously they are looked after there but they could be lying around
12:55:19 10
11 12
there couldn't they? A.
Normally what happened, it doesn't happen any more because the business is by
13
way of virtually defunct, but what normally happens is the post is opened in
14
the morning, if there are cheques in them they are given to the officer in
12:55:41 15
charge of recording receipts in relation to it, they are handed back to me and
16
I lodge them, cash them or otherwise or I might ask somebody in the office if
17
you are going to the bank lodge that.
18
Q. 444
They are supervised?
19
A.
They are supervised yes.
Q. 445
Would Mr. Lawlor be somebody who would have visited your office from time to
12:55:56 20
21
time?
22
A.
Very frequently.
23
Q. 446
Very frequently?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 447
All right, so he could have got the cheque there without your permission?
26
A.
He could have, yes, but I mean I am not saying that.
27
Q. 448
No, no I know. And but really the only other, the only alternative would be
12:56:03 25
28 29 12:56:25 30
that he got it from Monarch? A.
That's why I thought that was the logical answer to the honourable judge's question. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:56:25
12:57:12
60 1
Q. 449
2
And was there, had that ever happened, were you aware before ever Monarch paying money to Lawlor in respect of, by way of a cheque to you?
3
A.
No, no I definitely did not.
4
Q. 450
Were you ever aware of that happening in other situations in respect of other
5
developments where a developer or a landowner would make a cheque out to you
6
and it would go to Mr. Lawlor or to anybody else?
7
A.
No, I don't think so.
8
Q. 451
You don't think so?
9
A.
No. I'm just, in relation to any of the, any developments that I have been
12:57:30 10
involved with, I don't think any developer would have made a cheque out to me
11 12
and it was traded by Liam Lawlor -- I don't think so, no. Q. 452
Mr. Dunlop I think that that isn't a 'I don't think so category'. I suggest
13
that it's such an extraordinary method of using to pay somebody that the
14
person, the company would make a cheque out to a consultant, somebody who is
12:58:00 15
doing work for them but in fact give that cheque to a third party who would
16
then, they know would negotiate it, so I think you should be able to tell the
17
Tribunal, definitively whether or not you have any experience of it?
18
A.
19
No, to the best -- no I don't have any other experience it have is the simple answer. But I am just attuning myself to your, your thought processes as to
12:58:22 20
what is extraordinary and not extraordinary, but no I don't have any evidence
21
that that ever occurred as far as I am concerned, that a developer or builder
22
issued a cheque to me or a company.
23
Q. 453
24 12:58:44 25
26
Mr. Dunlop if I can cut across you, this isn't a question of having evidence, whether the Tribunal has it or you?
A.
Yes.
Q. 454
You are aware of whether or not there was another instance of a company, let's
27
leave it -- sorry whether it's Monarch or anybody else?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 455
Giving a cheque made out to you to a third party?
A.
The company giving the cheque to a third party? No I have no evidence of that.
12:59:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:59:06
12:59:11
61 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
two o'clock.
All right, Mr. Murphy, it's just one o'clock we'll adjourn until
4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
12:59:23
14:06:44
62 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AFTER LUNCH:
2 3 4
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, the 85,000 which you accept, which you accept that
5
you got from Monarch, is that the height of it?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 456
Is that it?
8
A.
No more.
9
Q. 457
No more. And could I ask you did you ever negotiate a cheque in the Ulster
14:07:00 10
Bank in Lucan?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 458
In any -- did you ever have any dealings whatever with them?
13
A.
None.
14
Q. 459
Thank you. And Mr. Dunlop, you are still accepting that you got 85,000 from
14:07:23 15
Monarch, notwithstanding all the evidence this morning about this cheque for
16
10,000, is that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 460
So the 10,000 made out to you, your signature is forged, it's cashed in Lucan,
19
you have no recollection of it and you seem to believe that a third party,
14:08:07 20
whoever, got hold of it and cashed it. You accept that it's your ten grand
21 22
from Monarch? A.
Well, it's made out to me. It's made out to my company, it's from Monarch
23
services, there is -- it's made out to Frank Dunlop and Associates in the sum
24
of 10,000 pounds, the rest we know as of this morning.
14:08:27 25
Q. 461
26 27
payment of a sum of money in the circumstances that they didn't get it? A.
28 29 14:08:52 30
Mr. Dunlop, I have never heard of anybody accepting or agreeing that they got a
Well, Mr. Murphy, until this morning at 8 o'clock I would have said that the only issue in dispute was that 10,000.
Q. 462
Yes?
A.
Okay. You accept that? You produced a cheque this morning at 8 o'clock made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:09:01
14:09:16
63 1
out in the sum of ten thousand, made out to me. My instructions to my
2
solicitor immediately were fine, if a cheque has been produced made out to
3
Frank Dunlop and Associates we accept that we got it.
4
Q. 463
Yes. Even --
5
A.
Following on that, the cheque was put up on the screen, I immediately
6 7
identified that it was not my signature. Q. 464
And that doesn't mean you change your position in relation to the ten and lead
8
you to the conclusion that you didn't get the ten and therefore it's 75 you got
9
from Monarch and that you'd like to take it up with Monarch as to why you
14:09:41 10
11
didn't get the other ten? A.
12 13
I have no intention of taking it up with Monarch, the matter is closed, over and done with.
Q. 465
14
All right. And can I suggest to you that the reason that having got the, having seen the ten, the cheque for ten, that the reason that you agreed to
14:10:02 15
the, you agreed that the figure that you agreed with the Tribunal that the
16
figure that you got from Monarch was 85, was to avoid having to give any
17
evidence in relation to this cheque?
18
A.
Absolute rubbish.
19
Q. 466
Well why did you agree it?
A.
Why did I agree what.
Q. 467
Why did you agree that you received ten when you didn't, why do you accept now
14:10:23 20
21 22 23
vis-a-vis the Tribunal that you got it? A.
24
The Tribunal has produced a cheque from Monarch made out to Frank Dunlop and Associates, as of midnight last night the only issue in question as far as I
14:10:40 25
and my legal advisers were concerned was 10,000. This morning I was shown a
26
cheque made payable to Frank Dunlop and Associates for 10,000 from Monarch
27
Property Services Limited, I immediately indicated to my solicitor fine, they
28
produced a cheque that's it, we accept responsibility.
29 14:11:23 30
Q. 468
Mr. Dunlop, so you got 85,000 from Monarch and if I'm correct in this, five of those cheques making up 50,000 went through the office accounts, the Frank Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:11:31
14:11:46
64 1 2
Dunlop and Associates Limited accounts? A.
3 4
Are you saying that or -- I mean I don't have -- if that is, if that is the evidence produced by Coyle & Coyle my accountants that is the evidence.
Q. 469
That's my, sorry I am not too sure if it's produced. I can go through each of
5
them if you like and I understand that in respect of five of them and may I
6
have for, on the screen please, if we just go back to that schedule, 491, and I
7
will go through these individually if you like, but I understand that the,
8
looking at the bottom of the page the lower schedule?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 470
That the 15,000 went through AIB College Street?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 471
And the second one, the 10,000 did not and in fact that, there is an asterisk
14:12:19 10
13
on that which, I think is coming from your, from Coyle & Coyle that they
14
couldn't trace it and as far as I am aware that didn't go through the accounts
14:12:46 15
in any event, sorry what I wanted to - I wanted to list with you the five that
16
I understand went through the account of Frank Dunlop and Associates?
17
A.
Okay.
18
Q. 472
First one 15,000?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 473
12 of March 93. The third one, no sorry, yes, the third one for 7,500 dated
14:12:57 20
21
2nd of July 93?
22
A.
Mm-hmm.
23
Q. 474
I understand that went through College Street. I understand that the next one
24
went through College Street as well, 7,500 on 17 of September 1993. And I
14:13:31 25
understand the last two, 15,000 and five thousand went through AIB College
26
Street, the two dates there, 22 of December and 9 of August 95. Now will I
27
bring you through your bank, your account to show you that?
28 29 14:13:55 30
A.
No, I think I accept Mr. Murphy, if you are saying it is your belief it happened. It's contingent on what Y means but this is what my accountant has produced from the documents available to him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:13:57
14:14:26
65 1
Q. 475
Yes. Yes, I hope I am right in that now but I think I am?
2
A.
Okay, I accept that.
3
Q. 476
And the three, of the eight payments -- I'm sorry, maybe I need to explain
4
this, of the 60,000 there on the F. D. A. L amount right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 477
That is now going to become 85 because we are going to bring over two cheques
7
from the per Tribunal column?
8
A.
15 and the 10.
9
Q. 478
Correct?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 479
And the ten is that one there at the 26 of May?
12
A.
Mm-hmm.
13
Q. 480
And then the first of the two 15s?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 481
So if we can just imagine those in the column for your office account?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 482
Sorry now -- yes, what I mean is just imagine them in there for the purpose of
14:14:36 10
14:14:42 15
18 19 14:14:56 20
being eight payments? A.
Yes.
Q. 483
And I understand that three of those, in other words the three remaining ones
21
did not go through the company's books or account, in other words the first
22
10,000 and I will open this up to you now in a moment, the first 10,000, the
23
second of 26 May 93 which comes across from the other column and the 15,000
24
that come across on 2 of December 1993 I hope I'm not complicating that?
14:15:32 25
26
A.
No no, it's quite clear.
Q. 484
Now and in respect of those -- so I am only talking about three cheques now at
27
the moment. The first ten, the second ten and the first 15?
28
A.
Okay.
29
Q. 485
Now the first 10 is one that you have put us on notice of throughout?
A.
Yes.
14:15:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:15:51
14:16:42
66 1
Q. 486
2
And the other two are the two that Monarch told us about and we have agreed you now accept that, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes, that's correct.
4
Q. 487
And in relation to the first ten, if I could turn up page 513 please. No I'm
5
sorry, so 513 is the remittance advice from Monarch to Frank Dunlop and Company
6
Limited, the cheque number 7698 the sum is 10,000 pounds, the date of this is
7
12th March 93, all right?
8
A.
Yes, correct.
9
Q. 488
That's the remittance advice. Now and we have already established there is no
14:17:00 10
invoice?
11
A.
No invoice.
12
Q. 489
And if we could have 4063 please, six from the bottom, 12 of March 93, Frank
13 14
Dunlop and Company Limited, 10,000 in the cheque payments book of Monarch? A.
Yes.
Q. 490
Going out of Monarch?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 491
4064 please and the third last of the first column cheque 7698, 10,000 pounds?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 492
The account of Monarch Properties Services Limit, AIB, so 10,000 going out of
14:17:22 15
14:17:47 20
Monarch's account?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 493
Right. So the money so the money has been paid and there is a remittance
23
advice to you. And 4065 please, which is the cash receipts book for Frank
24
Dunlop and Associates Limited and that 10,000 isn't recorded in your book?
14:18:14 25
A.
Correct.
26
Q. 494
Is that all right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 495
Now Mr. Dunlop, sorry for delaying, really I think I probably want to ask you
29 14:19:06 30
where that 10,000 went, what you did with it? A.
Yes, are you asking me. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:19:07
14:19:22
67 1
Q. 496
Where that ten went?
2
A.
You're asking me, yes. Well, I either cashed it or it could well have been
3
negotiated elsewhere, it could have been lodged to somewhere else, but I cannot
4
definitively say that to you.
5
Q. 497
No. All right. And I have in fact four options, you know that it could have,
6
it didn't necessarily, that it could have gone into your AIB College Street
7
account, that's you and your wife, I think?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 498
And then there is another account in the INBS in Grand Parade and --
A.
Where?
11
Q. 499
INBS?
12
A.
Irish Nationwide Building Society, Grafton Street is it, no, what's the
14:19:44 10
13 14 14:19:59 15
address? Grand Parade. Q. 500
Is it Grafton Street, is it?
A.
Grand parade is the headquarters of INBS, that's what it is, yes. That's the
16
heading on the notepaper, is it?
17
Q. 501
I'm not looking at notepaper?
18
A.
All right.
19
Q. 502
These are options for possibilities as to where it went, which I'm not really
14:20:15 20
interested in, I am going to go through this one and the next two, if you can
21
tell me where, the question essentially is where the 30 grand that didn't go
22
into the Frank Dunlop and Associates account and book, account, what that was
23
used for?
24
A.
Sure yes. What's the other two.
Q. 503
The other two are the other two cheques?
26
A.
Oh the other two cheques you said you had four options.
27
Q. 504
No, no, sorry I beg your pardon. I have four options in relation to that ten
14:20:31 25
28
it might have gone into either of those two accounts and I have option in
29
relation to the other two cheques which are the other ten and other 15?
14:20:49 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:20:49
14:21:08
68 1
Q. 505
2
But my point is really is that they didn't go into your Frank Dunlop account and it amounts to 30,000 and it's monies coming from Monarch?
3
A.
Mm-hmm.
4
Q. 506
Of the 85, it's 30 out of -- it's 35 out of 50 not going through the company
5
account so maybe could you shorten things by letting me know where it would
6
have gone?
7
A.
Well it could either, in relation to your options, my options, it could have
8
either been used, some of it could have been used personally, some of it could
9
have been used for other purposes it could have been lodged into the INBS
14:21:26 10
account or and used, used for other purposes I just cannot definitively say to
11
you, but it's certainly, from a logic point of view, did not go into the
12
company account, were negotiated by me and obviously either into the personal
13
account or into INBS.
14
Q. 507
Or you might just have cashed it?
A.
It is quite likely that I might have cashed it, or cashed part of them.
16
Q. 508
All right. Of them and lodged?
17
A.
And lodged the remainder.
18
Q. 509
Some it have. But from what you said this morning you wouldn't have been
14:21:48 15
19 14:22:04 20
21
paying them to give them over to other people anyway, that wasn't a practice? A.
No.
Q. 510
No okay. And I think that those, those sums wouldn't have been declared for
22 23
tax purposes, is that right? A.
24
Well all, any receipts in relation to any lodgements made to any bank account partially or wholly have all been declared to the Revenue Commissioners but
14:22:26 25
that's a separate issue.
26
Q. 511
Would that be now though, but back then?
27
A.
Back then no but now.
28
Q. 512
I beg your pardon. But when they went, if some of this 30,000 went into either
29 14:22:40 30
your account with your wife or the INBS account then the revenue wouldn't have known? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:22:40
14:23:04
69 1
A.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy, that's my fault in misunderstanding you, yes correct. Yes.
2
Q. 513
All right. Now you said other purposes, what do you have in mind there?
3
A.
Well, I may well have used some of the money for other purposes in relation to
4
politicians, I cannot definitively say to you because as you know and as I have
5
given evidence to the fact already, that I had accounts from which I withdrew
6
money in cash for the purposes of giving to politicians.
7
Q. 514
Yes?
8
A.
Yes, this would include the -- this would include the INBS account. Yes.
9
Q. 515
And yes, and there is an account in Rathfarnham, there was?
A.
Yes but that, there was an account in Rathfarnham, yes.
11
Q. 516
But that's different is that what you want to say, you said but?
12
A.
No, no, that was used. It was part of what I described way back in May 2000 as
14:23:25 10
13 14 14:23:40 15
a war chest. Q. 517
War chest. Now sorry the same for the INBS account?
A.
Well, if I required money and it was easy accessible through the INBS account,
16 17
I withdrew cash. Q. 518
18 19
All right, would you have done it through your account with your wife in College Street, would that have been used for paying politicians as well?
A.
14:24:01 20
No. Unless I lodged money, I lodged a cheque and did not lodge the whole amount and kept some back in cash.
21
Q. 519
Yes.
22
A.
But I would not have withdrawn money the F and S account for the purposes of
23 24
paying politicians. Q. 520
14:24:18 25
Well, I can tell you certainly that in some instances there were lodgements where you did lodge amounts, in fact the very first option if, I will go into
26
it in a moment, but that account in College Street, the joint account of
27
yourself and your wife, a thousand, there is a lodgement on the 12th March 93,
28
a lodgement of a thousand?
29 14:24:33 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 521
So, if it was the ten it may that be you lodged one and kept nine in cash? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:24:41
14:24:45
70 1
A.
2
Yes, it could be, I wouldn't dispute it, the possibility, but I wouldn't definitively say so either.
3
Q. 522
No?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 523
And I think I read somewhere that you said that you had to have what you called
6
a stash of cash?
7
A.
Yes, depends where you read it Mr. Murphy.
8
Q. 524
Well I read it, I don't know whether it was interviews or evidence or was it, I
9 14:25:00 10
don't think, it wasn't your statement but it was your words? A.
Yes, so long as it was in this forum not in any outside forum.
11
Q. 525
Oh no, no?
12
A.
Right.
13
Q. 526
Sorry, do I understand does a stash of cash mean a bag of cash at home or does
14 14:25:13 15
16
it mean an account you can take cash out? A.
No, no, it means a bag of cash, ready, available cash for my use.
Q. 527
All right. Now could I -- just did you have any rule of thumb Mr. Dunlop that
17
if you got a figure from a developer, whether it's five thousand or 50,000,
18
that roughly, in rough terms a percentage of it would be kept for politicians?
19
A.
14:25:40 20
I think, sorry, I shouldn't say I think, I have given evidence to this effect before in another Module.
21
Q. 528
Yes?
22
A.
To the point that in negotiating a fee with a particular developer, builder,
23 24 14:25:54 25
client or whatever it happened to be, that certainly in my mind. Q. 529
Yes?
A.
I would know that a certain amount of money would be necessary, it was then up
26
to me to negotiate or diminish it as much as possible.
27
Q. 530
I perfectly understand that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 531
But the question I am in fact asking you is yes, in your own mind if you get
14:26:11 30
five or ten or 50 does Mr. Dunlop say to himself 'now you know, ten per cent or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:26:18
14:26:30
71 1
50 per cent of that is mine and the rest I will use for disbursements'?
2
A.
Yes, but you take it on each particular Module.
3
Q. 532
Yes?
4
A.
In some instances it was more than I anticipated and in some instances it was,
5 6
I was left with nothing. Q. 533
7 8
per cent or 40 per cent, I know it doesn't, can't apply in every case? A.
9 14:26:51 10
I am just wondering would there be a rule of thumb? You know, would it be ten
I always knew in the context of the people who approached me to, for development whether or not it was going to be required.
Q. 534
Whether or not what was going to be required?
11
A.
Monies were going to be required to politicians to get this through the system.
12
Q. 535
All right?
13
A.
Okay. I would never -- I don't think, I don't recall ever sort of saying well
14 14:27:05 15
16
ten per cent of this is going. Q. 536
Not to them now, I'm talking in your own mind?
A.
No, I am talking about my own mind. In my own mind I would never have said ten
17
per cent of this, it would depend on the negotiation with the politician who
18
asked for money.
19
Q. 537
14:27:21 20
Yes, but surely in your own mind when you were negotiating and we will come on to it in a second here as to what your fee would be, but when you are doing
21
that you must be taking into your, into account this particular Module, this
22
particular developer, the politician that it will be necessary to talk to and
23
to pay and you must build into your brief fee as it were the, whatever the
24
total of the disbursements will be as best you can calculate?
14:27:42 25
A.
In general terms, yes.
26
Q. 538
And could you tell me, what kind of -- how would you build that in?
27
A.
Well, since we are dealing with this Module let's stick with this Module.
28
Q. 539
All right?
29
A.
In this particular Module and my entry into the particular exercise, an awful
14:27:58 30
lot of work had already been done, I was aware that the work had already been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:28:01
14:28:26
72 1
done, albeit not from the company itself but from my own evidence and watching
2
what was happening, and given the circumstances in which I was introduced to
3
this particular client I probably would have said there was going to be some, I
4
am going to have to deal with some and there was a comment made to me in the
5
negotiation in relation to the fee by one of the individuals from Monarch
6
Properties to the effect that he knew that I had to do certain things.
7
Q. 540
Yes, and I will come to that Mr. Dunlop but I don't think that's quite what I'm
8
looking for, just and I was talking more in general terms, but for example if
9
we just go into this particular one just on this point for a moment, what was
14:28:49 10
in your head at the first meeting in relation to how much you'd have to pay
11 12
out, very approximately? A.
Well, gosh I couldn't -- I just -- I wouldn't hazard a guess, but I would not
13
deny on the other hand that the thought was going through my mind that this is
14
going to take, I am going to have to deal with one or two or three or four, I
14:29:11 15
16
don't know how many individuals to ensure that this gets through. Q. 541
17
All right. What I am getting back to is the 50,000 that went to the office account and the 35 thousand that didn't?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 542
I am just wondering in rough terms, this is all coming from Monarch, a
14:29:32 20
developer, and so in rough terms, of that you wouldn't have been paying
21
politicians out of the 50 that went to the office account?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 543
You'd be paying them out of the 35 that went elsewhere?
24
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 544
And what sort of, well maybe you can say, how much of it went elsewhere?
26
A.
Well only four of it went elsewhere.
27
Q. 545
Is that your evidence?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 546
Is that an unusual percentage, is that a very, very low percentage, four
14:29:43 25
14:29:58 30
thousand out of 85? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:29:59
14:30:11
73 1
A.
2
Yes, in the particular incidence it is, but you have to take the circumstances of the particular instance into account.
3
Q. 547
That's fine yes, but it's unusual?
4
A.
I would say it's at the lower end definitely.
5
Q. 548
Lower end, yeah. So, in other words then of the 85 you made 81 thousand?
6
A.
The company made 50 and I made 31.
7
Q. 549
The company made 50 and you made 31?
8
A.
Does that add up?
9
Q. 550
Yes and four for councillors?
A.
Yes.
Q. 551
All right. I think the same point Mr. Dunlop that I'm making here applies to
14:30:27 10
11 12
the other two payments. The other two cheques were cheques, if we go back for
13
a second to 491, we were looking at the first cheque for 10,000 and now in
14
respect of the other 10,000 and the other 15,000, they were two payments which,
14:31:55 15
I can go through it if you like, but as far as we can see, did not go through
16
the office account?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 552
And what you have just said in respect of the first 10,000 presumably applies
19 14:32:11 20
anyway, it's as you say, 31 thousand? A.
Correct.
21
Q. 553
Was yours, four of the 35 went to councillors?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 554
I think, I hope I'm right, I think that means I don't need to go into those
24 14:32:51 25
26
Mr. Dunlop in any further detail? A.
Okay.
Q. 555
Could I have 569 please. Mr. Dunlop on that page if you go down to line five
27
please, question 93, sorry these I should say are the interviews in May 2000
28
and Counsel for the Tribunal asked you as follows "You mentioned a success fee,
29
was it also agreed between yourself and Mr. Sweeney that in the event you
14:33:37 30
succeeded you would get a success fee? Answer: No, there was no success fee Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:33:42
14:33:59
74 1
involved on this particular occasion. Question: Right, so if you had
2
succeeded you would still have only got the 25. Answer:" that's the 25,000.
3
Answer: I was fairly confident in my own mind that this was going to be the
4
case. Question: That you weren't going to succeed. Answer: That it wasn't,
5
even if I did succeed I wasn't going to get any more?"
6
A.
Mm-hmm.
7
Q. 556
You told the Tribunal that there was no success fee, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, yes.
9
Q. 557
Now, if I could come on please to 4133. Now Mr. Dunlop I just want to ask you
14:34:48 10
for a second, could you just have a very quick look at that and I will come
11
back to it, 4133, it's an invoice, Frank Dunlop and Associates, to Monarch, 10
12
of April 93, invoice, in fact it's the one Mr. Redmond referred to this
13
morning, 12,100, I don't ask you to look at it in detail if you just take that
14
in for a second, and could we then please look at 4772 which is invoice number
14:35:24 15
955 for 31,371 Irish pounds?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 558
Isn't that right, do you see that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 559
All right. And then if we go on to 5697, which is an invoice, 6th December 93,
14:35:42 20
bearing the same number as the previous one, 955, for a different amount,
21
22,296.94?
22
A.
Mm-hmm.
23
Q. 560
And then we, and then the fourth one, the final one, is -- sorry 4839, and
24
that's an invoice 14 of December 93 invoice, number 1251 for 60,500. I want to
14:36:10 25
take the four of those invoices for one second and maybe you can explain them
26 27
for me, I don't understand where they fit into the whole pattern? A.
Okay. Right okay. Well, how do you mean you don't understand how they fit in.
28 29 14:36:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
I wonder Mr. Murphy if perhaps Mr. Dunlop might tell us at this
stage what agreement he says he entered into with the people from Monarch, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:36:38
14:36:45
75 1
because I assume these invoices followed on from that agreement in some shape
2
or form?
3
A.
Yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
he came to deal with Monarch, which presumably lead to invoices and payments
7
being made.
8
Q. 561
9
But at the moment we don't have evidence from Mr. Dunlop as to how
All right Chairman. Well then I wonder if -- yes, I wonder then could I just leave that for a second and come to it, move on to something else and come to
14:37:12 10
it when I'm dealing with his meeting with Monarch, if that's all right with the
11
Tribunal.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
invoices mean --
14:37:25 15
Q. 562
Yes it's just that if he is going to explain how, what these
You'd prefer to have it in the context of whatever --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
relationship with Monarch commenced and developed. That might be simpler.
19
Q. 563
14:37:47 20
Well, it would be easier if we were to have evidence about how his
Well I'd prefer then if I may to postpone this rather than to bring the other thing forward. And I will just be coming to what you are talking about now in
21
a moment, if I may. Mr. Dunlop, another topic, the question of payments to
22
councillors and if we look at 573 please and in fact before I just look at that
23
page Mr. Dunlop I just want to ask you how it is that in May 2000 in a private
24
interview with the Tribunal, this would have been after your public evidence in
14:38:50 25
April, a result of which I think was that you took a decision to come clean as
26
it were with the Tribunal and make full disclosure, would that be right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 564
So, in the course of a private interview in May 2000 you referred to the fact
29 14:39:19 30
that you had paid monies in this development, Cherrywood, to Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:39:19
14:39:40
76 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 565
Could you just explain to the Tribunal why you mentioned them as people you,
3 4
councillors you paid in this Module? A.
Yes. In the context of the private sessions at the time in 2000 certainly
5
those two particular politicians were in the forefront of my mind and as I said
6
to you earlier on this morning, subsequently, on foot of a review of the road
7
map, as I have referred to it on numerous occasions, and on examining all of
8
the circumstances in which this particular development took place, I realised
9
that that was wrong, and I, I changed it.
14:40:16 10
Q. 566
Yes. When you say, could you just please explain to me what you mean by when
11
you looked at the road map, I mean now in the context of what you are saying
12
about these councillors, what does that mean?
13
A.
14
Yes, well in relation to my involvement with this particular development and all that took place, my relationship with Monarch, how I was introduced to
14:40:36 15
Monarch.
16
Q. 567
Yes?
17
A.
What was required, what was being done by Monarch itself, who was doing it.
18
Q. 568
Yes?
19
A.
My particular view of what was happening, my recollection of what had occurred
14:40:48 20
as far as I was concerned and the fact that I had taken a view in relation to
21
what was happening without my involvement.
22
Q. 569
What was happening what?
23
A.
What was happening without my involvement, in other words the relationship
24 14:41:05 25
26
between others and politicians. Q. 570
Yes. Sorry is that what looking at the road map means?
A.
What looking at the road map means, looking at all of the motions, all of the
27
maps, all of the -- anything that is extant, either in my own documentation
28
which I had discovered to the Tribunal, or documentation that the Tribunal had
29
which they sent me, and viewing all of that and my relationship with Monarch, I
14:41:33 30
made the 2003 statement is it, 2003. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:41:37
14:41:54
77 1
Q. 571
No, I am thinking of the 2001, sorry October 2000?
2
A.
Yes, October 2000, I beg your pardon.
3
Q. 572
Perhaps I should have completed the picture though we discussed it earlier, May
4
2000 is your private interview and you name Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand, October
5
2000 is your first narrative statement and you name Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath,
6
correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 573
Isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes, that's correct.
Q. 574
And what I want to know Mr. Dunlop is how after the events of the public
14:42:02 10
11
hearings in April 2000 when you came in to come clean with the Tribunal you
12
make the mistake of telling the Tribunal that you paid Messrs Lydon and Hand?
13
A.
14 14:42:24 15
16
Well, I have already said to you that in the circumstances of the private interviews which were shortly after the public session.
Q. 575
Yes?
A.
In a wide review of all of the involvement that I had with Dublin County
17
Council over a period of six, five or six years, this is what I said, it was
18
wrong. And when I made my statement in 2001 or late in -- late in October
19
2000.
14:42:48 20
Q. 576
October 2000, yes?
21
A.
9th of October 2000 if my recollection is correct, I corrected that.
22
Q. 577
You didn't really correct it. You didn't refer to the fact that you had
23 24 14:43:04 25
mentioned two people incorrectly, you just simply name two different people? A.
Yes.
Q. 578
Mr. Dunlop what did you look at between May and October 2000 that reminded you
26 27
that it was Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath not the other two? A.
28 29 14:43:23 30
Well, it's a mixture of what I looked at in relation to the road map that I have outlined to you.
Q. 579
I interpret that as meaning motions and things, is that right?
A.
And my recollection and recall as to who I was dealing with and how I dealt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:43:27
14:43:39
78 1 2
with them in the particular circumstances. Q. 580
3
Mr. Dunlop, would you not have seen any of those motions before coming into the private hearings in May 2000, would you not have had a look at those?
4
A.
In the private --
5
Q. 581
Presumably before coming in to talk to Counsel for the Tribunal in private
6
hearing you would have seen the motions?
7
A.
No, I don't think so, I don't think I did.
8
Q. 582
You don't think you?
9
A.
No, in fact I am quite sure we didn't, we went into private session, at the
14:43:55 10
invitation of the Tribunal, to review my involvement with Dublin County Council
11
and politicians.
12
Q. 583
Yes?
13
A.
And during the course of the private interviews various, sorry let me just go
14
back two steps. I asked from this box in May 2000 that if the Tribunal
14:44:13 15
provided the road map, the documentation in relation to all of the developments
16
that had taken place in Dublin County Council within a given period, 1990 to -
17
from 1990 onwards, 1991 onwards, that I might be able to assist them.
18
Q. 584
You asked for that when you were in the witness box?
19
A.
It's in the transcripts.
Q. 585
Very good?
A.
And the Tribunal then invited me into private session and, I have spoken about
14:44:34 20
21 22
this before Mr. Murphy, but I mean, we then went into private session and
23
various questions were asked of me in private session some of which are
24
relevant, some of which are totally irrelevant and you have the transcripts now
14:44:55 25
as a result of a High Court case.
26
Q. 586
Yes?
27
A.
Of the private sessions.
28
Q. 587
Yes, but what you have just said I think was that in evidence in April or May
29 14:45:07 30
2000 you said that if to the Tribunal, that if you could get the road map and motions and things it would assist me to assist the Tribunal in being -- in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:45:07
14:45:23
79 1
trying to put the jigsaw together?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 588
Right. And did you get those?
4
A.
From the Tribunal, we got a huge amount of documentation from the Tribunal, not
5 6
all at once in a variety of tranches. Q. 589
7 8
to discuss, to talk, into private session? A.
9
recollection is correct, that if the Tribunal provided all of the documentation
11
in relation to developments in Dublin County Council. Q. 590
13 14 14:45:56 15
No, no sorry Mr. Murphy, unless I am making myself terribly unclear. What happened was in public session I suggested to the Tribunal, Mr. Hanratty if my
14:45:44 10
12
So, I presume you made sure that you got whatever you needed before you came in
You have said all that and I understood it Mr. Dunlop, could you move on from it please?
A.
Right.
Q. 591
You are just repeating yourself.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
No I think --
No, no, sorry Mr. Murphy.
19 14:46:00 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Wait now, I think Mr. Dunlop understood you to be wondering?
Yes.
22 23 24 14:46:13 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Why he hadn't or if he had checked that in May 2000 in May 2000.
Q. 592
Yes Chairman?
A.
He says he didn't.
Q. 593
In private session in May 2000 but he is saying in public session, in April or
27
May 2000 he asked the Tribunal for this documentation before coming in.
28 29 14:46:27 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Not before, not before May?
Not before May. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:46:29
14:46:32
80 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 594
He got it then between May and October.
I see, all right.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: Q. 595
When he gave a different account.
Then I misunderstood.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
the Tribunal in May 2000 when he came in.
14:46:45 10
Q. 596
But he didn't have it, we accept he certainly didn't have it from
All right. So the difference between May 2000 and October 2000 is that you had
11
documentation which refreshes your memory and reminds you that it was Mr. Fox
12
and Mr. McGrath and not Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand, is that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 597
Yes. And yes all right. What was the document, what was it in particular that
14:47:17 15
put on a little red light Mr. Dunlop, because you had just, you said in May
16
2000 you named two people for accepting bribes isn't that right, it's a serious
17
matter, isn't it?
18
A.
Oh, yes.
19
Q. 598
Yeah and what was it that between May and October 2000 that you looked at, that
14:47:33 20
21
said 'gosh I got that wrong, it's two other people'? A.
22
Yeah, well I never suggested and I'm not now suggesting that it was any particular document.
23
Q. 599
No?
24
A.
And what I prefaced my remarks to you earlier on by saying was that the
14:47:48 25
availability of all of the documentation reminded me of my relationship with a
26 27
variety of people in relation to particular developments. Q. 600
28 29 14:48:05 30
But Mr. Dunlop, I mean your private interviews, Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand are all over them?
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 601
So I mean, I wouldn't be able to distinguish in reading what I have from you to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:48:10
14:48:29
81 1
date, statements and private interviews, I wouldn't be able to distinguish
2
between Mr. Lydon, Mr. Hand, Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath it couldn't possibly have
3
told you, all four of them are so involved and named so often, I don't see how
4
looking at the whole lot would suddenly say it's not those two it's another
5
two?
6
A.
Well, I can't account for your understanding of that. What I am saying to you
7
is quite clearly that in the period in which I looked at a variety of
8
documentation supplied to me by the Tribunal and recollecting my relationship
9
with Monarch and what I knew was being done by Monarch themselves in relation
14:48:51 10
11
to lobbying, I made the statement I did on the 9th October 2000. Q. 602
12
All right. And without averting to the fact that it was in error that you named the two people back in May?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 603
Yes. Could I just remind you of what you said in May, 573, if we go down to
14:49:20 15
line 16 please, yes, you were correcting something, March 1993 that's about a
16
payment, line 17 "What my role in the context of coming in at that late stage
17
was in the minds of other people I do not know, I cannot account for, but you
18
can take it as certain that, notwithstanding the fact that they may have been
19
in receipt of monies from other people, I did give money to Lydon?
14:49:46 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 604
Hand was already on the books if you describe it?"
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 605
Question. What do you mean he was already on the books. Answer: He had got,
24
he was getting, he had got a substantial amount of money in 1991 question:
14:50:00 25
From you answer: Yes."
26 27
Isn't that very positive terms in which to be naming those two people without
28
looking at your road map?
29 14:50:14 30
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 606
How did you get it so wrong, Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:50:16
14:50:40
82 1
A.
Because these people were involved with me on a number of occasions.
2
Q. 607
If we move on to page 574, line 14 "Whatever Hand would have got from me, he
3
would have been getting on an ongoing basis but he was crucially involved. I
4
definitely gave money to Lydon in relation to Cherrywood?"
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 608
How can you, in May 2000, in a spirit of reconciliation with the Tribunal come
7
up with that language about these two gentlemen and a few months later say
8
that, a few months later decide that that was wrong?
9 14:51:02 10
11
A.
Six months later. That's what I did.
Q. 609
Yes?
A.
That's what I said. It's on record and my statement of 9th October 2000 is
12
also on record.
13
Q. 610
Yes. How do you rate your memory Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
Well, well increasing age, I suppose it happens to us all, but I would rate it
14:51:23 15
16
as reasonable. Q. 611
How do you explain in Monarch to take it as an example, but we have had
17
instances of it in other Modules, how do you explain not recalling that you got
18
as much as 85,000 for a, for your work in this connection and for saying that
19
you got 25,000, and how can you explain naming two wrong councillors?
14:51:57 20
A.
You can't get everything right, Mr. Murphy.
21
Q. 612
That's your explanation?
22
A.
Yep.
23
Q. 613
Does it mean you have got it right the second time?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 614
How do you know that?
26
A.
I am absolutely positive.
27
Q. 615
You see Mr. Dunlop, I can't understand how you can forget in May 2000 and
14:52:06 25
28
throughout 2000 when the serious matter of coming in here, presumably prepared,
29
and to talk about how much, among other things how much you got from the
14:52:34 30
developer, and how you get it wrong by 60,000 pounds in, and at the same time Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:52:48
14:53:08
83 1
say that you paid 50 pounds to a councillor or 250 or 300 or a thousand or five
2
thousand. I can't reconcile those two things. I don't understand how one can
3
be infallible and the other not?
4
A.
Well, you know I have just, what I have just said to you Mr. Murphy is what I
5
am saying in evidence. I have given you the history of it, you have re priced
6
the history of it and that is my evidence.
7
Q. 616
Would you agree that it's highly implausible?
8
A.
No, I would not.
9
Q. 617
And how can you, how many developments were you involved in, 20?
A.
Roughly. I think 18 if my memory serves me right but certainly in or around
14:53:27 10
11
20.
12
Q. 618
And how many councillors did you pay in the different developments?
13
A.
Well, I can't give you the exact number.
14
Q. 619
No, no?
A.
But certainly you are looking at something in the teens.
16
Q. 620
15 say?
17
A.
In or around.
18
Q. 621
Okay 20 different developments roughly?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 622
15 roughly councillors?
21
A.
Regularly.
22
Q. 623
Pardon?
23
A.
Regularly.
24
Q. 624
Yeah, no I understand the regularly, all of them regularly?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 625
They are kind of on a list?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 626
The same people cropping up?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 627
As I think you have said?
14:53:43 15
14:53:55 20
14:54:03 25
14:54:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:54:15
14:54:26
84 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 628
But when they don't appear, I can understand Mr. Dunlop if a particular
3
councillor appears in all, is paid in all 20 of them or some reason like he is
4
paid in the north side ones as opposed to the south or vice versa or two always
5
go together, but when you have gotten entirely different permutations and
6
different amounts of money I don't see how you can get that right from your
7
memory?
8
A.
Well --
9
Q. 629
Particularly, may I add particularly when you are getting 25,000 wrong by
14:54:42 10
11
60,000? A.
Well you know I can't -- I was just trying to make an analogy with you but
12
nothing comes immediately to mind, but I mean there are various things that you
13
recollect more vividly than others.
14
Q. 630
14:55:03 15
16
Now could you just go on with that please, what is it about this you recollect more vigorously than others?
A.
I will recollect for example particular events that took place in this room in
17
2000 and doubtless in five years time I will recollect this little interview
18
with you.
19
Q. 631
Yes Mr. Dunlop, but you couldn't possibly forget that a number of years
14:55:19 20
earlier, 92 to 2000, seven years earlier you picked up 85,000 pounds from this
21
developer and yet you told the Tribunal 25,000 and on the other hand that you
22
bribed Messrs Hand and Lydon when in fact you meant, when in fact it was two
23
other people, you could not get that information wrong?
24
A.
That's your view.
Q. 632
Do you think that there will be another view Mr. Dunlop?
26
A.
No, I don't think there can be another view. I have said what I have said.
27
Q. 633
You don't think there can be another view, does that mean you agree with me?
28
A.
No, I am saying that what I am saying is my evidence.
29
Q. 634
Why yes. But it's nonsense isn't it?
A.
That's about the fifth time during the course of this day that you've used that
14:55:44 25
14:56:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:56:04
14:56:24
85 1
phrase, Mr. Murphy.
2
Q. 635
But isn't it, Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
No, it's not nonsense.
4
Q. 636
I definitely gave money to Lydon in relation to Cherrywood in May 2000 and no
5
mention of him in October 2000?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 637
Mr. Dunlop, recently Ms. Olivia Mitchell gave evidence and -- I haven't got
8 9
page number, but if I can just say to you, read out? A.
Who, who did you say gave evidence.
Q. 638
Olivia Mitchell?
11
A.
Oh right yes, sorry.
12
Q. 639
Page 53 of day 645 please.
14:56:47 10
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
14:57:11 15
get a page up, it will come up on the screen then, if Mr. Dunlop wants to
16 17
Perhaps you would read out because it takes a couple of minutes to
double check. Q. 640
Page 53 and line 14, wait now probably I should go a little bit earlier, sorry
18
I will go up to line five and Mr. Quinn asks you.
19
"In that list at number 21 he identifies a payment to Olivia Mitchell, FG, 500
14:57:39 20
pounds cash, you see that?
21
Answer: I do.
22
Question: Is that the payment that you were referring to in 1992?
23
Answer: This is in 1992, he gave me a donation in 1992. Now my memory, I
24
never actually counted the money myself, my husband thinks it's less than that
14:57:56 25
and Frank Dunlop himself confirmed to me that he gave me 300 pounds" I'm at
26
line 12.
27
Question: When did he confirm that to you?
28
Answer: In the very early stages of the Tribunal.
29
Question: And in what circumstances.
14:58:13 30
Answer: He rang me up and asked me how much he gave me and I said before I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:58:18
14:58:35
86 1
spoke, he said I have a record of giving you 300 here pounds, and I said Frank
2
I thought it might be more than that, and I said no I have a clear memory it
3
was 300. My husband thought it was less. I'm not disputing it because I just
4
don't remember.
5
Question: But one thing you do dispute is that you sought it.
6
Answer: Absolutely."
7
Now this is somebody to whom you made a payment and she says, sorry first of
8
all did you ring her up in those circumstances?
9
A.
14:58:54 10
Could you invert the conversation, just invert the conversation and you will get to the reality, I am ringing her asking her how much I gave her, she is
11
ringing me to know how much she did get from me.
12
Q. 641
Sorry?
13
A.
That's not what she says, that's what I am telling you.
14
Q. 642
I'm --
A.
She is saying that I rang -- he rang me up and asked me how much he gave me.
16
Q. 643
Oh, yes, yes that's not what happened?
17
A.
Are you following me.
18
Q. 644
No, I'm not?
19
A.
But line 15.
Q. 645
Yes?
A.
Answer A "He rang me up and asked me how much he gave me and I said before I
14:59:10 15
14:59:21 20
21 22
spoke, he said I have a record of giving me 300 pounds and I said Frank I
23
thought it might be more."
24 14:59:39 25
Q. 646
Yes, sorry can I just take the slow route?
A.
I certainly never rang up Olivia Mitchell and asked her how much I had given
26
her. The --
27
Q. 647
All right that's fine?
28
A.
The panic was that politicians were ringing me up to know how much they got
29 14:59:50 30
from me. Q. 648
You didn't ring a single politician to know how much you had given them from Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
14:59:54
15:00:06
87 1
the time that this Tribunal was --
2
A.
I spoke to a number of politicians and we have had this out before.
3
Q. 649
Don't mind the fact that we have had it out before Mr. Dunlop, let's have it
4 5
out now? A.
Mr. Murphy please, let's proceed in a sort of a rational way. A number of
6
politicians rang me wanting to know how much money I had given them and in what
7
circumstances.
8
Q. 650
Yes. I follow?
9
A.
Right. Okay. This falls --
Q. 651
Did you ring anybody?
11
A.
This falls into the same -- I cannot say absolutely I did not ring anybody.
12
Q. 652
Come on, Mr. Dunlop. Look you are swearing to the Tribunal that you recall
15:00:22 10
13 14
politicians ringing you? A.
Yes.
Q. 653
To know had you paid them?
16
A.
Correct, yes.
17
Q. 654
And they wanted to know that like anything?
18
A.
Desperately.
19
Q. 655
Now you remember that clearly?
A.
Yes, I do
Q. 656
Are you telling all, whoever is here, that you cannot say whether or not you
15:00:35 15
15:00:43 20
21 22
rang a single politician to check with them did you pay them, how much,
23
whatever?
24
A.
15:00:59 25
spoke with a large number of politicians in relation to their request as to how
26 27
much they had got from me. Q. 657
28 29 15:01:22 30
I did not ring any politician specifically and say how much did I give you. I
Now be that as it may, Ms. Mitchell says "He said I have a record of giving you 300 here pounds" she says that you said you had a record?
A.
Yes.
Q. 658
I'd like to know what you say about that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:01:26
15:01:37
88 1
A.
I never said it, that's hearsay, she is saying this to you.
2
Q. 659
That is not hearsay Mr. Dunlop. That is her saying something and you are being
3
asked to, you are being asked to comment on it?
4
A.
Correct. Correct.
5
Q. 660
It's something, a conversation that she says took place between you and her,
6
that is not hearsay, now would you please answer the question?
7
A.
Right. No I did not.
8
Q. 661
So she makes that up. That you used the word record?
9
A.
Correct. I have no --
Q. 662
Why would she do that?
11
A.
I have no idea.
12
Q. 663
No. All right. But anyway, she has made it up, because you didn't use the
15:01:52 10
13 14
word record in your conversation is that right? A.
15:02:11 15
16
The only record of payments to politicians are those made by cheque and they were few and far between as the evidence to this Tribunal has seen.
Q. 664
Yes. Now the question was Mr. Dunlop, are you saying that you did not use the
17
word record, did you not say in your conversation with Ms. Mitchell I have a
18
record of --
19
A.
I couldn't have said it.
Q. 665
I didn't ask you could you say it?
21
A.
No, I did not say it, that's the answer, I said it to you twice.
22
Q. 666
You didn't say it. Fine.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 667
And I presume you can't think of a reason why she'd make it up?
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 668
And of course it would make complete sense Mr. Dunlop, wouldn't it, if you were
15:02:30 20
15:02:45 25
26 27
able to go to a record, whatever form that record might take, and say it was
28
Ms. Mitchell one day blank pounds, somebody else another day etcetera, that
29
would make, that would absolutely shore up your recollection of what you paid
15:03:14 30
and what you received, isn't that right if you had a record? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:03:17
15:03:30
89 1
A.
That's a hypothetical statement, if it did -- if it did, yes is the answer.
2
Q. 669
I'm not saying you did?
3
A.
No, I am just pointing out it's a hypothetical statement.
4
Q. 670
It's not hypothetical Mr. Dunlop. If --
5
A.
It is.
6
Q. 671
If you had a record that set out every bit of money you paid to politicians it
7
would be understandable that you could in 2000 or 2001 or today say how much
8
you paid each of them?
9
A.
Yes is the answer.
Q. 672
Without it, it's not understandable.
11
A.
To you it may not be.
12
Q. 673
But to you it is?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 674
And surely Mr. Dunlop, when you were making payments to people you get in a big
15:03:44 10
15:04:04 15
sum from, either you get it in before or after, you get in a big sum,
16
substantial sum or small sum from a developer, surely you need to keep check
17
yourself, if you are making payments perhaps at different times of the year so
18
that you know how much your pot of gold is being diminished by, are you
19
listening to me or have you gone and wandered off?
15:04:26 20
A.
I beg your pardon? Would you like me to repeat the question you asked.
21
Q. 675
Well you look as if you are making notes or something Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
I'm not making notes, no I am not.
23
Q. 676
Would you answer the question please?
24
A.
Yes. If you refrain from making comments other than asking questions I will
15:04:44 25
answer the question. The answer is no. I would not need to keep a record in
26
relation to - I knew.
27
Q. 677
Yeah?
28
A.
And I knew what I gave to people and I knew what I was asked for.
29
Q. 678
Yeah?
A.
Is that clear.
15:04:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:04:56
15:05:16
90 1
Q. 679
It's perfectly clear Mr. Dunlop. You knew that, you knew if you paid
2
Ms. Mitchell 300 or somebody else 3000 but you get it wrong when it's 25,000
3
from Monarch to become 85,000?
4
A.
25,000 as the agreed fee from Monarch on an audit which turns out to be very
5
correct notwithstanding your comments earlier this morning about my accountants
6
getting it, making a balls of it, 25,000 as the agreed fee, 60,000 as per the
7
accounts of Frank Dunlop and Associates.
8
Q. 680
I said no such thing this morning?
9
A.
Well you went as far as saying it.
Q. 681
Mr. Dunlop, on some day?
11
A.
On Sunday? Or some day --
12
Q. 682
On some day either someone approached you or you approached someone about you
15:06:08 10
13 14 15:06:28 15
becoming involved in Cherrywood? A.
That is correct.
Q. 683
Please tell me what that date was and who it was, whether you approached
16 17
somebody or somebody approached you? A.
Well I certainly didn't approach anybody Mr. Murphy. I was approached by a
18
representative of Monarch, Mr. Sweeney, by telephone, and I met Mr. Sweeney and
19
Mr. Sweeney explained to me the circumstances in which he and his company found
15:06:57 20
21
themselves in relation to a development in Cherrywood. Q. 684
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I'm sorry to interrupt you there, I do want to go into all of
22
that but I'm sorry the first question is, I just want to get precisely the
23
beginning?
24
A.
Yeah, yeah sure, that's understandable.
Q. 685
And it was Mr. Sweeney who phoned you?
26
A.
Mr. Sweeney who contacted me, yes.
27
Q. 686
Sorry did he phone you or what did he do?
28
A.
The only way that I can help you there Mr. Murphy is that again I have a record
15:07:12 25
29
of a meeting with Mr. Sweeney whom I did not know I hasten to add, I had never
15:07:34 30
met before, Mr. Sweeney contacted me, rang me and I went to see Mr. Sweeney. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:07:42
15:07:57
91 1
Q. 687
2
Mr. Dunlop, why did you keep records of meeting when you didn't need records of payments or receipts?
3
A.
Well, you know you like to make sure that you keep appointments.
4
Q. 688
Anyway your record, what was the contact Mr. Sweeney made with you?
5
A.
Mr. Sweeney contacted me and I met him.
6
Q. 689
No by phone or what?
7
A.
Yes, by phone.
8
Q. 690
He phoned you?
9
A.
I cannot say to you that there was any other, if what you quite understandably,
15:08:12 10
I don't mean to be offensive, if what you'd like to imply was somebody was an
11
intermediary or contacted me and said go and see Eddie Sweeney in Monarch,
12
that's not the case. I was contacted by Eddie Sweeney by phone.
13
Q. 691
How do you know by phone?
14
A.
Well there is no, I hadn't met Mr. Sweeney prior to that.
Q. 692
Can you show me, is there a telephone attendance or is there a message to ring
15:08:31 15
16
him or anything like that?
17
A.
Well, I don't have one here.
18
Q. 693
Have you seen any, have you any documentary evidence of a phone call?
19
A.
No, the only documentary evidence I have is my first recorded meeting with
15:08:45 20
Mr. Sweeney is on the --
21
Q. 694
9th March?
22
A.
The 8th March 93.
23
Q. 695
8th March 93?
24
A.
5 o'clock on 8th March 93, Monday.
Q. 696
Just go back a second. Anyway your evidence is he phoned you, Mr. Sweeney of
15:09:00 25
26
Monarch?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 697
You had never dealt with Mr. Sweeney before?
29
A.
No.
Q. 698
Had you ever dealt with anyone in Monarch before?
15:09:17 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:09:19
15:09:30
92 1
A.
When you say dealt, on a business basis.
2
Q. 699
Well, what do you think?
3
A.
Well, you used the word.
4
Q. 700
You tell me the basis on which did you have dealings, I don't know?
5
A.
Well I certainly, I had met Mr. Phil Monahan either socially or by accident.
6
Q. 701
I see. But business dealings?
7
A.
Oh, business dealing, no.
8
Q. 702
No business dealing?
9
A.
No.
Q. 703
With Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
With Mr. Monahan, no.
12
Q. 704
Or any of the other Monarch people?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 705
Before March 93?
A.
Not to my knowledge, no.
16
Q. 706
What does 'not to your knowledge' mean?
17
A.
Well, no is the answer.
18
Q. 707
Thank you. Sorry Chairman I'm looking for a reference and I just seem to have
15:09:46 10
15:09:54 15
19
lost it. Sorry Mr. Dunlop I'm looking for a reference there and I just can't
15:11:07 20
find it, I might get it and I might come back to it. Sorry, prior to the 8th
21
March 93, prior to the phone call from Mr. Sweeney no dealings, no business
22
dealings with anybody in Monarch?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 708
With Monarch or anybody in Monarch?
A.
No.
Q. 709
All right. At that stage, now March 93, you are very heavily involved in the
15:11:22 25
26 27
Development Plan and on behalf of developers and landowners in relation to
28
rezoning, isn't that right?
29 15:11:41 30
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 710
And you would at that stage I imagine have had quite a reputation for success Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:11:45
15:12:30
93 1 2
in, and assistance in relation to rezonings would that be right? A.
3
I can't account for other people's opinions but I would say that's probably right, yes.
4
Q. 711
All right. When Mr. Sweeney phoned you what did he say to you?
5
A.
He wanted to meet me about Cherrywood and I agreed to meet him.
6
Q. 712
What time of the day or afternoon was the phone call?
7
A.
Gosh, I can't tell.
8
Q. 713
How many days before the meeting?
9
A.
I would imagine -- sorry I shouldn't say I would imagine. I don't know to be
15:12:55 10
11
honest with you. Q. 714
12
Have you any, have you much of a recollection of the phone call, I mean do you remember it well or --
13
A.
Well, I do recall being contacted by phone by Mr. Sweeney.
14
Q. 715
Yes?
A.
I do recall going to see Mr. Sweeney.
16
Q. 716
Just leave that for a second, just the phone call?
17
A.
Yeah sure.
18
Q. 717
All right. Would you tell me, this is a difficult, this is a work, this is a
15:13:06 15
19 15:13:23 20
21
project that gets you 85,000 ultimately? A.
Yes.
Q. 718
So could you just tell us and the phone call is out of the blue, you don't
22
expect it, you have had no hint of it or expectation of it or anything like
23
that?
24
A.
15:13:40 25
No, no I have had no hint of it but I was aware of what was going on in Dublin County Council in relation to Cherrywood because I had met and had discussed,
26
had spoken with various representatives, two representatives of Monarch who
27
were lobbying at the time.
28
Q. 719
Who were they?
29
A.
Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Phillip Reilly.
Q. 720
Yes?
15:13:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:13:57
15:14:14
94 1
A.
Yeah, they were in Dublin County Council on a variety of occasions, Mr. Lynn
2
more than Mr. Reilly I hasten to add but I knew what was going on and I had
3
spoken to them about Cherrywood and what was going on in Dublin County Council.
4
Q. 721
5
Now can I just, because I don't want to go into that aspect of it just at the moment in detail?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 722
But you did, you knew what was going on in, with, in relation to Cherrywood
8 9
before Mr. Sweeney phoned you? A.
Yes.
Q. 723
Is the phone call out of the blue?
11
A.
Yes I would say so, yes.
12
Q. 724
Had you some hint from Mr. Reilly or Mr, who did you say Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
Mr. Lynn, yeah.
14
Q. 725
That they might be getting in touch with you.
A.
No I don't think I had, and I have, I find it extraordinary that nobody in
15:14:24 10
15:14:38 15
16
Monarch seems to know why I was hired or what I was doing in relation to
17
Monarch, so why would I have any hint from Mr. Lynn that I was going to be
18
hired because he said in his statement that he knew nothing about it.
19
Q. 726
15:15:03 20
Okay. And can you just, in a word or in a sentence tell me what was your knowledge of where Cherrywood was, where Cherrywood was on the first of March
21
93?
22
A.
Well, it was in --
23
Q. 727
1st of March 93?
24
A.
The 1st of March 93.
Q. 728
Well, sorry, I beg your pardon the time of the phone call?
A.
As and from the 1st of March 93, well there was a lot of controversy about
15:15:13 25
26 27
Cherrywood, there was a lot of discussion Mr. Murphy by politicians local and
28
otherwise in, at the council, not in the chamber, but at the council and in the
29
environs of the council about the difficulties that were being faced in
15:15:39 30
relation to the zoning application that Monarch wanted as distinct from what Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:15:47
15:16:16
95 1
they might get. There was a very, very carefully professionally organised and
2
orchestrated campaign against the Cherrywood Development by Monarch, organised
3
locally, some of those people were present in the council and it's environs, I
4
saw them there. Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly alluded to them, told me who they were
5
and generally speaking the whole Cherrywood issue was controversial.
6
Q. 729
7 8
Yeah lovely, okay. And was the, was what they were looking for -- I'm sorry I don't want to go into details but was there a problem for Monarch at this time?
A.
9
Yes, what Monarch -- I find this quite difficult to deal with logically in the sense that you don't want to deal with some aspects it have but let me answer
15:16:48 10
you.
11
Q. 730
No only just a short, a little summary I want?
12
A.
And if there is something that is not in accord with as you see it please tell
13
me. The situation was Monarch made an application as all developers or
14
builders had to do in relation to the Development Plan.
15:17:04 15
16
Q. 731
All right?
A.
What they had applied for and what they were likely to get were two different
17
things. Internally in Monarch there seemed to have been some dispute as to
18
whether or not what they had applied for originally could be achieved with some
19
pressure or whether or not a compromise was going to have to take place.
15:17:23 20
Q. 732
Did you know all this before talking to Mr. Sweeney?
21
A.
No, I did not know all of that.
22
Q. 733
But Mr. Dunlop this is what I am asking for, I only want your state of mind and
23
knowledge about all of this before seeing Mr. Sweeney, I just want it in a word
24
or a sentence like Monarch, the thing was in trouble, the project, you know?
15:17:42 25
A.
26
You see Mr. Murphy how difficult it is to answer your question when you leave it so open ended.
27
Q. 734
I don't think it is Mr. Dunlop?
28
A.
My understanding is simple, Cherrywood was on the books in Dublin County
29 15:17:58 30
Council, it was highly controversial and was going to continue to be highly controversial notwithstanding anything that happened by anybody. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:18:01
15:18:09
96 1
Q. 735
Okay, thank you?
2
A.
Is that clear.
3
Q. 736
Thank you. Did you know that from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn and chats or did you
4 5
know if yourself from other people? A.
6 7
politicians in the council and from Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. Q. 737
8 9
Oh no, no, what I knew about Cherrywood was from a mixture of people including
Before the phone call from Mr. Sweeney had you given any advice to Monarch formally or informally or anyone on behalf of Monarch?
A.
15:18:32 10
I might have suggested various things to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, but in fact I probably did, if I was to, if I was to lean in any direction I would say, yes,
11
I probably did.
12
Q. 738
All right we'll take it you did?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 739
Was one of your suggestion that maybe you'd come on board?
A.
No I never suggested that.
16
Q. 740
Or significant like it?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 741
All right. I think I can take it now that the phone call wasn't out of the
15:18:45 15
19 15:18:55 20
blue Mr. Dunlop, is that right? A.
21
Well, it was out of the blue in the sense, I knew what was going on, like I knew about other developments in Dublin County Council.
22
Q. 742
You were half expecting the phone call?
23
A.
No, I don't think so. And I didn't get telephone calls from every developer or
24
builder who had an application before Dublin County Council even though I knew
15:19:15 25
26
what was going on. Q. 743
Was it unusual for you to get a phone call, to get a contact, a communication
27
from the actual developer as opposed to an intermediary in relation to these
28
developments. I mean you had to be introduced to them, sorry you had to come
29
to them in some way, was it usually through an intermediary or was it from the
15:19:34 30
client itself? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:19:35
15:19:55
97 1
A.
2 3
think of ones that were from the client and ones that were from intermediaries. Q. 744
4 5
Well it varied. I am just trying before I answer that, I am just trying to
Simplify it, give me an example of another developer that contacted you directly, that there wasn't an intermediary, like here?
A.
Well, we have had the recent ones where there was an intermediary for example
6
the last couple of Modules, where there was a specific intermediary who
7
introduced various clients, brought clients to me on that basis.
8
Q. 745
9 15:20:15 10
Sorry Mr. Dunlop you misunderstood me, here in this one in Cherrywood there is no intermediary. Mr. Sweeney gets on the phone to you?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 746
I want an example of another development?
12
A.
Oh, Sorry yes.
13
Q. 747
Where it was the client, it was the company, you know it was whoever they are,
14
who contacted you rather than intermediary, you have 20 developments, another
15:20:33 15
developer that contacted you directly?
16
A.
Yes, I think one we have just recently dealt with, Ballycullen Farms.
17
Q. 748
All right?
18
A.
Mr. Chris Jones rang me.
19
Q. 749
Mr. Jones rang you?
A.
Yes, but transpired subsequently that somebody else had introduced or had put
15:20:43 20
21
the notion in Mr. Jones' head but Mr. Jones --
22
Q. 750
That's fine. The phone call came?
23
A.
I can't account for who might have been suggesting that I be hired.
24
Q. 751
That's another question Mr. Dunlop but in Ballycullen, is it?
A.
Ballycullen yes.
Q. 752
Mr. Jones made -- he invited you, he was the person who phoned you and said
15:21:00 25
26 27
would you?
28
A.
He asked me to come and see him, yes.
29
Q. 753
At the instigation of?
A.
As it transpired, though I have no absolute proof of this, that Mr. Liam Lawlor
15:21:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:21:16
15:21:24
98 1 2
had suggested it to him. Q. 754
3
All right. Of the 20 developments how many did Mr. Lawlor introduce you to, roughly?
4
A.
I'd say a good few.
5
Q. 755
Five?
6
A.
Definitely five.
7
Q. 756
Ten?
8
A.
Maybe not quite ten.
9
Q. 757
Nine?
A.
I think after the introduction by law lord to various developments and other
15:21:33 10
11
developers began to realise that I was as you described it yourself, some
12
moments ago, successful, they began to make contact with me.
13
Q. 758
14
but the, Mr. Lawlor was the person who introduced you in something between five
15:22:00 15
16
I'd just like to know who they are now Mr. Dunlop because that's interesting,
and ten developments? A.
17
I don't think I have an accurate figure on that but I can go down through the list of them.
18
Q. 759
We might do that later?
19
A.
Yes of course, yes.
Q. 760
All right. And Mr. Lawlor introduced you in say between five and ten of them,
15:22:07 20
21
and because then you had success they began to come on the phone themselves to
22
you?
23
A.
Well some of them yes, and let me.
24
Q. 761
Who apart from Mr. Jones who was introduced by Mr. Lawlor?
A.
Well, let me deal with it on the basis of the more recent Modules where I have
15:22:24 25
26
given evidence to the effect that a named person brought various developers or
27
builders to me, to meet me. One was in the Lissenhall Module that we have just
28
concluded.
29 15:22:45 30
Q. 762
Would that be Mr. Collins?
A.
Correct. Then you have the Walls Module in Kinseally which is not yet Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:22:52
15:23:01
99 1
concluded.
2
Q. 763
Would that be Mr. Collins?
3
A.
Correct. There is one that has not been opened yet, but is on circulation for.
4
Q. 764
Who introduced you there?
5
A.
Mr. Collins.
6
Q. 765
That's three for Mr. Collins?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q. 766
How many more did Mr. Collins introduce you?
9
A.
I would say probably one or two more.
Q. 767
All right?
11
A.
But to go back to your original question --
12
Q. 768
No, no, sorry before do you, Mr. Dunlop, just I am not tying to you this but
15:23:12 10
13
Mr. Collins is about five developments and Mr. Lawlor is between five and ten,
14
did you put that closer to the ten or closer to the five?
15:23:27 15
A.
16 17
You know I'd prefer to just look at it, look at the list and give you an accurate figure.
Q. 769
All right. So, anyway that would be somewhere between ten and 15, would the
18
remainder be people like Mr. Sweeney where the company gets in touch
19
themselves?
15:23:41 20
A.
Yes and for example you asked me for another example.
21
Q. 770
I did?
22
A.
Yes, right, we'll say Mr. Joe Tiernan of Tiernan Homes, he rang me directly.
23
Q. 771
Mr. Tiernan?
24
A.
But it subsequently transpired without either gentlemen.
Q. 772
Yes?
A.
Indicating that it was the case, that in that instance as well Mr. Lawlor had
15:23:58 25
26 27
suggested to Mr. Tiernan that he --
28
Q. 773
Well, now is that in your five?
29
A.
Yes, that would be in my mind
Q. 774
Sorry, no, no?
15:24:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:24:12
15:24:17
100 1
A.
In my mind for Mr. Lawlor.
2
Q. 775
In the five to ten?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 776
All right?
5
A.
But notwithstanding that here is Mr. Tiernan ringing me.
6
Q. 777
Like Mr. Jones?
7
A.
Correct, like Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Jones.
8
Q. 778
And Mr. Sweeney?
9
A.
Yes, the reason I mentioned --
Q. 779
So did Mr. Lawlor introduced you, he was behind the invitation from
15:24:28 10
11 12
Mr. Sweeney? A.
13 14
As I said in my statement it subsequently transpired that Mr. Lawlor said to me you know, you have been to see Eddie or you know, you have been, so --
Q. 780
No, wait now that wouldn't mean he was responsible for bringing you in?
A.
No, no, but he may have recommended me to him.
16
Q. 781
All right, is that in your five to ten from Mr. Lawlor?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 782
All right wait now, okay you have Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Collins are the two people
15:24:48 15
19 15:25:01 20
21
who introduce you to developers and landowners? A.
Yes.
Q. 783
Is there another intermediary, is there a third person who makes those kind of
22 23
introductions? A.
24 15:25:25 25
but generally that was the, that was the method. Q. 784
26 27
15:25:42 30
Do you think you could possibly forget if there was a third person who made introduction, who was responsible for getting you into one of these things?
A.
28 29
Offhand I can't -- offhand I can't think of another, may do in a moment, but --
I mightn't immediately have remembered, I mightn't immediately recall now in a particular instance like this as you have taken this route.
Q. 785
All right but Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:25:42
15:25:52
101 1
Q. 786
2
The general things in the developments was you were introduced to the company by Mr. Collins or Mr. Lawlor?
3
A.
The general thing, yes.
4
Q. 787
Now name one development where that didn't happen and it was the company got on
5
the phone or whatever they did to make contact with you, without having been,
6
had it suggested to them by Mr. Lawlor or Mr. Collins?
7
A.
Yes, offhand, I can't.
8
Q. 788
Can I take it that the 20 or so developments that you were involved in, you
9 15:26:15 10
were introduced to all of them by Mr. Collins or Mr. Lawlor? A.
11
Or the developer made contact with me which subsequently transpired that they had been advised.
12
Q. 789
I think that's covered by the question?
13
A.
Okay fine.
14
Q. 790
Is that right, all of them -- I hesitate to say all of them, Ms. Dillon says
15:26:33 15
St. Gerard Bray may not have come into that category?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 791
And Fox and Mahony?
18
A.
Fox and Mahony we have never established whether or not Mr. Mahony was advised
19 15:26:51 20
21
by another politician other than Mr. Lawlor Q. 792
All right.
A.
But the reason Mr. Mahony made contact with me, this is reprising evidence in
22
another Module, Mr. Murphy, but I don't have any difficulty about that.
23
Q. 793
I'm sorry about that Mr. Dunlop?
24
A.
No, I don't have any difficulty about that, the reason Mr. Mahony contacted me
15:27:02 25
and I met him with Mr. Noel Fox was because Mr. Mahony said that GV had made a
26 27
mess of it, so there was a discussion -- a discussion between -Q. 794
Sorry Mr. Dunlop, Chairman.
28 29 15:27:18 30
CHAIRMAN:
I think we'll have to stick with Monarch only because we have had
all this evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:27:19
15:27:33
102 1
Q. 795
Sorry, that's probably my fault Chairman. Mr. Dunlop, if I can come back to
2
just the 20 though with the exception of say two, the two I have just
3
mentioned, 18 were introduced by Mr. Collins and Mr. Lawlor, that's fact?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 796
And if necessary, if we don't know already you can identify the ones which, who
6 7
introduced you to which? A.
But you must contextualise Mr. Murphy, I don't know when the contact is made
8
with me initially, Mr. Sweeney doesn't say listen I am ringing you because Liam
9
Lawlor told me to or Chris Jones doesn't ring me and say listen I am ringing
15:27:51 10
you because Liam Lawlor told me to or PJ Walls doesn't say listen I am ringing
11
you because Tim Collins asked me. Tim Collins rings me and says I want to
12
bring somebody to you. In the Lawlor context it's you discover subsequently
13
that Mr. Lawlor has been responsible by virtue of two things. One, Mr. Lawlor
14
looks for money or secondly Mr. Lawlor tells you something that you know he has
15:28:18 15
16
either been in discussion with the principal or had advised the principal. Q. 797
17 18
you? A.
19 15:28:34 20
Mr. Lawlor looks for money is one of the ways of finding out that he introduced
Correct, Lawlor would come along and say you know, I advise that you be brought on this there and can I have.
Q. 798
Is there a kind of a finder's fee?
21
A.
If that's the way you'd like to describe it.
22
Q. 799
An introducer's fee?
23
A.
Introducer's fee.
24
Q. 800
Is there one in this case?
A.
Sorry Mr. Murphy I need to - the kidneys are not as good as they used to be.
15:28:46 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
All right we'll rise for five minutes.
28 29
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AGAIN AS FOLLO
15:29:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:29:23
15:36:40
103 1 2
A.
Thank you Chairman.
3 4
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry Chairman.
5 6
Mr. Dunlop, I just want to interrupt that for one second because the reference
7
I was looking for a little bit earlier, I think I have just found, and I was
8
asking you a short while ago, you have never dealt with Mr. Sweeney before no,
9
had you ever dealt with anyone in Monarch before, when you say dealt on a
15:37:01 10
business basis, what do you think -- anyway, Question: You tell me the basis
11
on which you have dealings. Answer: I don't know. I met Mr. Phil Monahan
12
social see by accident, Question: I see business dealings. Answer: Oh
13
business dealing no. Question. No business dealing Answer: No Question.
14
With Mr. Monahan. Answer: With Mr. Monahan, no. Question: Or any of the
15:37:21 15
other Monarch people Answer: No. Question: Before March 93.
Answer: Not
16
to my knowledge, no. Question: What does not to your knowledge mean? Answer:
17
Well, no is the answer.
18 19
Page 572 please. Page 572 is private interviews Mr. Dunlop and at the end of
15:37:56 20
the page if you look at page, line 27 "I was paid 25,000 in two tranches, one
21
of 15 and one of then. I had got other monies from Monarch previously but that
22
was purely from public relations work, it had nothing whatsoever, it was purely
23
the public relations aspects of various things and I then kept in touch with
24
Richard Lynn. They had to reduce it down to an easy facility phrase, they had
15:38:19 25
their men in place"
26
I think you were going on to another things. You said a few minutes ago you
27
had no dealings before 93 with anyone from Monarch?
28
A.
Mm-hmm, yes, sorry.
29
Q. 801
Not at all?
A.
I don't know what that refers to.
15:38:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:38:34
15:39:05
104 1
Q. 802
All right?
2
A.
Show that to me again, go back to the previous page.
3
Q. 803
Yes, 572. If like to have a look at it there, line 27.
4
A.
Yes, I see it. Yes, I don't know what that means, previously, monies received
5
previously from Monarch? That doesn't ring a bell with me.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, did you do any other work for Monarch besides --
No, I don't.
9 15:39:15 10
CHAIRMAN:
Even subsequently?
11
A.
I don't recall doing any other work for Monarch.
12
Q. 804
Mr. Dunlop how would you say to whoever was asking you these questions in May
13
2000 "I got other monies from Monarch previously but that was purely from
14
public relations work, it was purely the public relations aspect and I then
15:39:45 15
16
kept in touch with Richard Lynn" how would you make it up? A.
I am just wondering is there a confluence here of reference. I got other money
17
from Monarch in relation to this -- I have no recollection -- I do not believe
18
I did any other work for Monarch.
19
Q. 805
You got other money from Monarch in relation to this, what is that?
A.
In relation to Cherrywood.
21
Q. 806
That's not other money?
22
A.
No and if you turn the page again, continue on. "It had nothing whatsoever, it
15:39:58 20
23
was purely the public relations aspect of various things and I then kept in
24
touch with Richard Lynn" no. I don't know. Unless the -- it refers to -- I
15:40:20 25
have no recollection of doing any other work for Monarch.
26
Q. 807
Mr. Dunlop you have to explain this, I mean we are not stupid?
27
A.
Did I suggest you were?
28
Q. 808
But you have told counsel to the Tribunal in May 2000 -- I mean --
29
A.
But there is no evidence that I have done any work.
Q. 809
Mr. Dunlop, these are your words?
15:40:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:40:43
15:41:01
105 1
A.
I know, yes.
2
Q. 810
They are your words, we don't need evidence. Your words are evidence, you are
3
studying law. Your words are evidence Mr. Dunlop. Now please explain to the
4
three Members of the Tribunal what that means when you swore a few moments ago?
5
A.
I have already said to you two minutes ago I do not know what it means because
6
in the context of Monarch my involvement with Monarch related to Cherrywood. I
7
have no -- I do not recall any other work with Monarch for which I was paid by
8
Monarch, in relation to public relations or any other matter, I'm aware of
9
Monarch, was aware of Monarch as a company, I was aware of Phil Monahan, I said
15:41:30 10
I met Phil Monahan on a number of occasions, socially or otherwise and that's
11
it.
12
Q. 811
Unless and until the Tribunal produces a document, what you call evidence?
13
A.
Mm-hmm.
14
Q. 812
To show that that's not right?
A.
Well you have asked me the question and I am saying to you I don't know what
15:41:47 15
16 17
that means. And -Q. 813
5972 please. Sorry, I said 59, I beg your pardon 7972. Your diaries,
18
Mr. Dunlop, Thursday 1st of November, I believe it's 1990 as opposed to 91
19
that's up there for reasons that we went into it before I think?
15:42:35 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 814
9.30 The Square, what does that mean?
22
A.
Presumably it means The Square in Tallaght.
23
Q. 815
Any significance?
24
A.
I don't think so, when was The Square opened.
Q. 816
No idea, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
It was around that time I think.
15:42:44 25
26 27 28 29 15:42:52 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
It was December 1990.
Q. 817
Had you anything to do with the square Mr. Dunlop?
A.
No nothing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:42:52
15:43:17
106 1
Q. 818
That's fine, all right. Now if we go on to - sorry 7973 please, 1990, Tuesday
2
October 23rd your diary, opening of Tallaght Town Centre. I don't know is it
3
8.30 FF HQ that's a different thing, no opening of Tallaght is at 11.30, is
4
that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 819
11.30 opening of Tallaght Town Centre that's your diary, what does that mean?
7
A.
Obviously I was invited to the opening.
8
Q. 820
All right. So do you remember that?
9
A.
I remember being there, yes.
Q. 821
Remember being there?
A.
I don't think I paid too much attention to the actual opening, I was there with
15:43:31 10
11 12
another person for the specific purpose of meeting or introducing that other
13
person to a politician.
14
Q. 822
And Monarch were involved with the Tallaght centre were they?
A.
Yes, they were, yes.
16
Q. 823
All right, had you anything to do with Monarch was that why you were there?
17
A.
No, I had nothing whatsoever to do with Monarch.
18
Q. 824
Were Monarch developers of Tallaght?
19
A.
In conjunction with somebody else, maybe they hadn't joined with somebody else
15:43:55 15
15:44:11 20
at that stage but certainly they were the developers of Tallaght, yes.
21
Q. 825
Who invited you?
22
A.
Who invited me? That I cannot say specifically. I can't say who invited me, I
23 24 15:44:38 25
cannot say. Q. 826
No idea?
A.
Well no sorry I cannot say who invited me that doesn't mean I don't have an
26
idea.
27
Q. 827
I beg your pardon?
28
A.
I was there, I have already said to you I was there with another person for the
29 15:45:01 30
purpose of introducing that other person to a politician, I believe the suggestion that we be there at the opening came from Liam Lawlor to this other Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:45:10
15:45:28
107 1
gentleman and myself, that's why I can't say to you who invited me, I don't
2
remember getting an invitation, I don't remember being specifically invited but
3
we were there, but the purpose that we were there was to meet another
4
politician.
5
Q. 828
Now, okay, were you a guest?
6
A.
Well certainly if Mr. Liam Lawlor suggested we were there we were a guest, we
7 8
were guests in some fashion. Q. 829
9 15:45:44 10
would you be his guest at this? A.
11 12
Well Mr. Lawlor suggested that we be there for the purposes of meeting another politician, and we went there for that purpose.
Q. 830
13 14
How could, I don't understand, how would Mr. Lawlor be inviting you to, how
Who would have been sponsoring, who would have been issuing invitations to the opening?
A.
Presumably Monarch.
Q. 831
Monarch?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 832
Had Mr. Lawlor anything to do with Tallaght?
18
A.
That I can't say whether he had or not.
19
Q. 833
Okay?
A.
I have no evidence to that effect.
21
Q. 834
You would say Monarch were the people who were hosting the opening?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 835
And Mr. Lawlor contacted you, is that it and said come along?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 836
And the purpose being to meet somebody?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 837
A politician?
28
A.
What year again is this.
29
Q. 838
It's 19 -- I don't know.
15:46:00 15
15:46:06 20
15:46:18 25
15:46:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:46:28
15:46:32
108 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
90.
2
Q. 839
1990?
3
A.
Yes okay.
4
Q. 840
Yes?
5
A.
Yes I think I'm right, I think I have got it right yes.
6
Q. 841
You think you got what right?
7
A.
That it was suggested we be there by Mr. Lawlor, I don't recollect getting an
8
invitation from Monarch, but it was suggested by Mr. Lawlor that we be there,
9
so Mr. Lawlor organised it in some fashion or other.
15:46:50 10
Q. 842
Would that constitute an invitation from Mr. Lawlor?
11
A.
Yes, I presume in summary, yes.
12
Q. 843
When I asked you a moment ago who invited you you hadn't a clue?
13
A.
Well, I certainly don't recollect getting an invitation, one gets an invitation
14
specifically in paper form by, to an event or a function, don't recollect ever
15:47:09 15
getting that, my recollection is that I was, another person and I were
16
recommended to be there for the purposes of meeting another politician.
17
Q. 844
Who was the other person that Mr. Lawlor --
18
A.
Well he hasn't been named in this. Do you want me to write down.
19
Q. 845
Yeah sure?
A.
Do you want me to write down the name of the other politician to meet just to
15:47:31 20
21 22
expedite matters. Q. 846
Chairman.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
15:47:47 25
All right you can write it down but we're not concerned with this
at the moment.
26 27
(Mr. Dunlop writes down names)
28
A.
And this is the company for which he worked and this is the politician.
29
Q. 847
Sorry the other person, Mr. Lawlor is suggesting that you and this other
15:48:12 30
politician who worked for a company should attend? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:48:15
15:48:27
109 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 848
Is that right?
3
A.
Mr. Lawlor suggested to this other person and myself that the Tallaght Town
4
Centre was opening, that we should be there with, and a convenient method of
5
meeting this other politician would be at that.
6
Q. 849
And was this another one of these introductions like -- I'm just sorry
7
Mr. Dunlop maybe I am missing somebody, Mr. Lawlor asked, suggested that you
8
would turn up to meet a politician?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 850
You have written his name down?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 851
But there is a second name?
13
A.
That's the other person I am talking about, that the other person and I be
15:49:06 10
14 15:49:14 15
present. Q. 852
Oh, I beg your pardon?
16
A.
Is that okay?
17
Q. 853
That you and the other person?
18
A.
Yes, went at Mr. Lawlor's.
19
Q. 854
To meet the politician?
A.
Recommendation and that it would be, it would be convenient to meet this other
15:49:20 20
21
politician in a semi social context, which was the opening of the Tallaght Town
22
Centre.
23
Q. 855
And the kind of convenience is what?
24
A.
The convenience of the running into this politician and saying by the way I am
15:49:45 25
X, Y or Z and I would like to talk to you about A, B, C.
26
Q. 856
That you are, sorry that you are the person who would --
27
A.
No, the other person, the first name on the list.
28
Q. 857
Yes. Sorry, that -- yes that it would be vehement for him to meet the
29 15:50:04 30
politician? A.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:50:06
15:50:20
110 1
Q. 858
And what, say he's --
2
A.
And say to him that he was proposing or being involved in something or other
3
and that this would be a convenient method of talking to this politician in an
4
informal context.
5
Q. 859
Is this another development?
6
A.
Yes, it is but it is not a Module.
7
Q. 860
No, no fine I'm not going any further with it?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 861
But it's another Module?
A.
No, no it's not another Module.
11
Q. 862
Another development, in the Development Plan?
12
A.
No, no, it was not in the Development Plan.
15:50:30 10
13 14 15:50:40 15
CHAIRMAN: Q. 863
At the rate we are going it might become one.
Sorry Chairman.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
At the rate we are going we it might become another one.
18
Maybe get back to the meeting, Mr. Dunlop's introduction to Monarch in relation
19
to Cherrywood.
15:50:56 20
21
Q. 864
Apparently Chairman, Mr. Dunlop it may be another Module, is that right?
22
A.
No, no, it's not another Module, it is not listed as a Module, it has never
23 24 15:51:17 25
been a Module and it is outside the Development Plan. Q. 865
How do you decide all these things?
A.
Well sorry, I am just operating on the basis of the documentation that is
26
provided to me by you, not by you, I mean you collectively, this institution, I
27
mean it is not listed as a Module, I have never seen it listed as a Module, I
28
have never been asked to give evidence in relation to it as a Module, provide a
29
narrative statement in relation to it as a Module and it has never appeared on
15:51:41 30
the horizon either in this screen or any other screen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:51:44
15:51:50
111 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: Q. 866
4
All right we'll just leave.
That's fine, I don't want to be taken as accepting any of that Mr. Dunlop because I have no idea?
5
A.
You can take it as definite from me.
6
Q. 867
That's fine from you?
7
A.
Yes, from me.
8
Q. 868
The final thing I just want to ask about, why were, I can understand why --
9
sorry Mr. Lawlor wants to introduce the person with the development from to the
15:52:03 10
politician, but I can't see why you are there?
11
A.
Because I am advising, I am advising the person named first on the list.
12
Q. 869
Okay?
13
A.
I have been recruited by the person first on the list and his company to advise
14 15:52:24 15
them, Mr. Lawlor is obviously advising them as well, as per usual. Q. 870
Okay. I thought that possibly that reference in the diary might be --
16
A.
What?
17
Q. 871
Are you all right, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
Yes, I'm fine.
19
Q. 872
I thought the reference in the diary might have meant that it was connected
15:52:41 20
21
with Monarch, with Monarch and? A.
22 23
the opening of Tallaght and I am there in a different context. Q. 873
24
dealings with Monarch prior to March 93? A.
27 28 29 15:53:38 30
But we are left with you in private interview with what we've read out about monies previously and what you've said earlier this afternoon about no business
15:53:07 25
26
Understandably, yes I can understand your interpretation of that, it refers to
Yes, I fully understand why you asked the question Mr. Murphy there is no problem.
Q. 874
Oh, yes, now I'm sorry, before the short break a moment ago Mr. Dunlop, I was asking you, you said something about I think Mr. Lawlor, if he -- I can't remember specifically, if he might, I think, look for money? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:53:41
15:53:49
112 1
A.
Yeah, yes.
2
Q. 875
And I was saying finders fee and we were talking about that and for introducing
3
you to a project?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 876
And I think I was, had just asked you maybe did that happen in Cherrywood?
6
A.
No it did not.
7
Q. 877
Did Mr. Lawlor ask you for money in Cherrywood?
8
A.
No he did not.
9
Q. 878
Did you pay him money in Cherrywood?
A.
No I did not.
11
Q. 879
Did anybody else pay him in Cherrywood that you are aware of?
12
A.
I am not aware that they did.
13
Q. 880
Yes. And were, I think 18 out of the 20 developments it was you were
15:54:01 10
14 15:54:33 15
16
introduced to by Mr. Lynn, by Mr. Collins or by Mr. Lawlor? A.
Yes.
Q. 881
And I don't think you have, with is the exception of the two, those two the
17
other two, are there any other developments where in fact it wasn't either of
18
those that introduced you or brought about the introduction it was the
19
developer him or herself?
15:54:50 20
A.
Yes and again there is one other, it's name escapes me, it's on the north
21
side -- and I'm never quite sure whether this particular individual, he never
22
admitted to it, came to me, you know as it were ab initio on his own, of his
23
own volition or that another politician other than Liam Lawlor or another
24
individual other than Tim Collins had recommended him to me, it is a Module
15:55:22 25
26
that will be coming up. Q. 882
27
So you followed up the phone call from Mr. Sweeney with a visit to him in his offices?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 883
In Harcourt Street, what was the station?
A.
In Harcourt Street, yes.
15:55:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:55:48
15:56:17
113 1
Q. 884
All right. And that meeting was on what date, is that the 8th of March?
2
A.
Yes my record of a meeting with Mr. Sweeney is at 5 pm on Monday the March the
3
8th. Now -- yes, Monday March 8th.
4
Q. 885
Monday March 8th a meeting with Mr. Sweeney?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 886
And that was the first time you entered that office?
7
A.
Yes I don't believe I was ever in that office before.
8
Q. 887
How would you have been if you hadn't done any work for them?
9
A.
Yes, correct.
Q. 888
It was the first time you met Mr. Sweeney?
11
A.
Certainly the first time I met Mr. Sweeney.
12
Q. 889
And the first time you had anything to do with Cherrywood?
13
A.
Other than as I have outlined to you, meeting representatives of Monarch in the
15:56:35 10
14 15:56:50 15
lobby of Dublin County Council. Q. 890
16
And can I be clear of that, that was completely informal, it was social, it was casual, you weren't retained or anything?
17
A.
No, no, this was Richard, Mr. Lynn and Phillip, Phil Reilly.
18
Q. 891
All right?
19
A.
Just talking among ourselves and explaining our various problems or
15:57:09 20
21
commiserating one another over various problems. Q. 892
22
And I think you indicated that in either your statement or your interviews, yes and who was present at that meeting Mr. Dunlop?
23
A.
Just the two of us.
24
Q. 893
And what time did the meeting take place at?
A.
My diary says 5 o'clock.
Q. 894
5 o'clock. Now there is an important thing that I just want to clear up at
15:57:45 25
26 27
this stage Mr. Dunlop, because it was causing me some confusion in reading your
28
statements and your private interviews?
29 15:57:59 30
A.
Yeah.
Q. 895
You know that an important motion took place in May of the previous year, in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
15:58:05
15:58:16
114 1
the council in relation to Cherrywood, don't you?
2
A.
In May of 92.
3
Q. 896
Yes?
4
A.
Yes, which motion now?
5
Q. 897
I want to get this absolutely straight?
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 898
At this stage, because otherwise we'll waste an awful lot of time?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 899
In May 92 there was a motion, sorry there were a number of motions?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 900
I am not going to go into them in detail, Mr. Lydon proposed the manager's
15:58:33 10
11 12
motion for in relation to, in relation to which would provide for the density
13
of houses per acre for the Monarch lands?
14 15:58:54 15
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 901
Just, I'm sorry I don't, maybe I don't think you need to refer to anything just
16 17
at the moment? A.
18 19 15:59:05 20
correct. Q. 902
It's very important, it's May 92?
A.
Well on foot of you saying it's very important that's why I want to get the
21 22
I just want to get the time line right, it's important the time line is
time line right, yeah I have it. Q. 903
And I won't go into the detail but there were 11 motions that day the first one
23
was that Mr. Lydon's motion in relation to the lands was defeated 35 to 33, and
24
it ended up with Mr. Barrett's motion which provided for one house per acre for
15:59:35 25
the lands. Now that was in May 92 and I just want to make sure we're all
26 27
talking about the same thing? A.
28 29 15:59:59 30
Yeah, yes. I see -- my time line is suggesting that on the 27th of May 1992 there was consideration of DP 92/44 and there was 11 motions.
Q. 904
Yes.
A.
There was a motion in the name of Lydon and McGrath. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:00:02
16:00:12
115 1
Q. 905
2 3
I think I have said all that Mr. Dunlop. There is no need for you to repeat it to the Tribunal?
A.
4
No, I just want to satisfy myself that we are talking about the same thing, yes correct.
5
Q. 906
May 92, you are clear on that?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 907
All right. Now you were not on board, you were not on Cherrywood's board on
8 9
that date? A.
No.
Q. 908
You didn't come, and I don't mean board of a company, you weren't on the team?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 909
You didn't come in until March 93?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 910
Because you do say in your interviews, sorry in your statements and in your
16:00:21 10
16:00:34 15
interviews on a number of occasions you do say you came in the end of 92, early
16
93 etcetera and that's fine?
17
A.
Yes, that's in private sessions.
18
Q. 911
No, no. Yes private sessions and in your statement you talk about?
19
A.
Yeah, correct.
Q. 912
Between the end of 92 and March 93 and there is other evidence along those
16:00:47 20
21
lines, but certainly at one stage you say that you must have got your dates
22
wrong and you, because of Mr. Barrett's motion and that you must have been on
23
the team earlier than you thought, and I didn't, wasn't sure what the position
24
was, but you have now confirmed --
16:01:10 25
A.
No, I wasn't on board.
26
Q. 913
In May 92 you were not there and you weren't there until March 93?
27
A.
No, I was not on the board. I was aware of what was going on because I was
28 29 16:01:23 30
there. Q. 914
But that was a social casual business?
A.
Yes, correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:01:24
16:01:51
116 1
Q. 915
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 916
All right. Chairman what would you like to do?
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
won't be long I take it with Mr. Dunlop tomorrow.
7
Q. 917
I am just wondering, we can sit for another 15 minutes or so, you
I will Chairman.
8 9 16:02:06 10
CHAIRMAN: Q. 918
You will? How long.
I don't know.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: Q. 919
Could you give the Tribunal some --
We have somebody fixed for 10 o'clock who will take an hour.
14 16:02:16 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
All right and then how long approximately would you be then to
finish Mr. Dunlop? Q. 920
18
I would have thought I will take the day, there is a witness specially fixed at 4 o'clock tomorrow.
19 16:02:42 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Q. 921
22
We'll sit for another 20 minutes or so.
Now Mr. Dunlop, the meeting, the afternoon, Monday, the only people at that meeting are yourself and Mr. Sweeney, whom you haven't met before?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 922
And he was the person who phoned you, but I think you said it was -- sorry, I
16:03:17 25
think you said it was set up by Mr. Lawlor, that Mr. Lawlor was responsible for
26 27
mentioning your name to Mr. Sweeney? A.
28 29 16:03:30 30
Well, what I have said is that Mr. Lawlor said to me subsequent to the meeting that he knew that I had --
Q. 923
That the meeting had taken place?
A.
Yes and from that I -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:03:32
16:03:48
117 1
Q. 924
All right?
2
A.
I, legitimately or otherwise, deduced that, deducted that, deduced that he had
3 4
been responsible in some fashion or other for the suggestion. Q. 925
5
I think if you are deducing that I think it's possibly, and your experience in other cases, it's probably the case, is that right?
6
A.
Yes, I would accept that.
7
Q. 926
But he hadn't said anything to you about the fact of that?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 927
All right. Now 571 please, line 19 your answer in private interviews
16:04:18 10
Mr. Dunlop, is "The introduction was facilitated by Liam Lawlor with Eddie
11
Sweeney at Monarch's offices in Harcourt Street" which is what you have said "I
12
met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam Lawlor at that office. Sweeney explained to
13
me" etcetera etcetera?
14 16:04:37 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 928
Now what does that mean?
A.
Well, as I have said in my statement, I went and I spoke to Eddie Sweeney,
17
there was no other person present, I did meet with Mr. Sweeney and other
18
representatives of Monarch on various occasions with Mr. Lawlor present.
19
Q. 929
16:05:10 20
No, no, the first meeting Mr. Dunlop, you said a moment ago that you were there on your own with Mr. Sweeney?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 930
And this is the introduction, so on, you said I met with Eddie Sweeney and Liam
23
Lawlor at that office where you are saying that in fact at that first meeting
24
you met Mr. Lawlor?
16:05:24 25
A.
I know that's what it says. What I am saying is there was no other person
26
present with Mr. Sweeney when I met him first, yes I did meet with Mr. Sweeney
27
and Mr. Lawlor and others on various occasions in that office, in the board
28
room, not in Mr. Sweeney's office in particular, but in the board room.
29 16:05:52 30
Q. 931
Yes. So what you said there to the Tribunal in private interview is wrong?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:05:52
16:06:11
118 1
Q. 932
Mr. Lawlor was not present at the first meeting?
2
A.
He was not present at the first meeting, he was present at other meetings.
3
Q. 933
How many meetings did you have with anybody in relation to Monarch, in their
4
offices first of all, how many times did you go to their offices after March,
5
after this date?
6
A.
7
Well I can't give you an exact figure but I think they are all documented in, certainly in my diary.
8
Q. 934
Yes?
9
A.
And I can't put a figure on it.
Q. 935
Roughly?
A.
Let's count, that's the easiest thing to do, isn't it?
16:06:25 10
11 12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, just for the moment Mr. Dunlop was it more than six or seven?
Yes, certainly more than six or seven, certainly.
16:06:53 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well that will do?
Sorry just for clarification, there were certainly more than six or seven
18
meetings, it doesn't necessarily mean all of them were with Mr. Eddie Sweeney.
19
I had meetings with Richard Lynn, I had meetings with one of which Mr. Phil
16:07:12 20
Monahan was present and other board members of Monarch, but yes certainly
21
Chairman, more than six.
22
Q. 936
So you had more than six meetings in Monarch's office, is that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 937
The first one with was Mr. Sweeney on his own and other times with different
16:07:40 25
people?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 938
Page 576 please. Question 12 towards the bottom of the page.
28
"Question: Did you ever meetings in the offices of Monarch in relation to
29
this, apart from the initial meeting with Eddie Sweeney and Liam Lawlor?
16:08:08 30
Answer: After that first one. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:08:11
16:08:26
119 1
Question: Yes.
2
Answer: Yes I did, I was there on one other occasion, again in the presence of
3
Eddie Sweeney, Liam Lawlor and a gentleman I think whose name I mentioned
4
already Murray. Noel Murray, yes, and to which meeting Phil Monahan made a
5
fleeting visit, just came in stood in the room, said we are getting there,
6
we'll get there, we'll get what we want, I have been looking after things and
7
then he walked out" then something about Mr. Lynn participating in that
8
meeting. So, according to you Mr. Dunlop, you only had two meetings in
9
Monarch's offices, and for the second time according to this, Mr. Lawlor was at
16:08:50 10
11
the first one? A.
Right. Let me just short circuit this if I may and if it's acceptable to you,
12
the only time I ever met Mr. Sweeney was in his office, I did not meet
13
Mr. Sweeney in Dublin County Council, I have never met Mr. Sweeney socially,
14
the only place I met him was in Harcourt Street and while I was stopped doing
16:09:22 15
so I was on, in the process of counting the number of entries in my diary to
16
Mr. Sweeney and they are as the Chairman asked me, they are certainly more
17
than, they are certainly more than six or seven.
18
Q. 939
So anyway the point being anyway?
19
A.
Yes I met him more than twice.
Q. 940
In his office?
A.
In his -- I never met him anywhere other than his office. I met other people
16:09:48 20
21 22
from Monarch elsewhere but I never met Mr. Sweeney.
23
Q. 941
You are absolutely clear about that?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 942
And on the one hand you only had two meetings in his office but then you are
16:09:57 25
26
telling us now that you had more than six meetings?
27
A.
As per my diary.
28
Q. 943
Yes. Why did you say to Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty, Mr. Hanratty and
29 16:10:17 30
Mr. Gallagher in May 2000 when you were coming clean with the Tribunal, why did you say to them that you only had two meetings in Monarch offices and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:10:21
16:10:32
120 1
Mr. Lawlor was at the first one?
2
A.
That I cannot tell you.
3
Q. 944
It wasn't true, isn't that right?
4
A.
No it wasn't accurate at that point, no and I did not, had not trawled through
5 6
my diaries at that stage. Q. 945
7
But sure you would have known, wouldn't you when you met them twice or more than six times, isn't that right?
8
A.
You might.
9
Q. 946
All right. So Mr. Dunlop then the conversation that you had with Mr. Sweeney,
16:10:57 10
presumably I don't know, you asked him why you were there or he said -- sorry,
11
what did he say to you on the phone, did he ask you would you come on board or
12
he wanted to take your advice?
13
A.
No he wanted to talk to me, he wanted -- and while I cannot say definitively he
14
wanted to talk to me about Cherrywood I think it would be, you know -- he
16:11:23 15
either said it or I assumed that it was Cherrywood he wanted to talk to me
16
about.
17
Q. 947
About what, did he say like any more detail?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 948
He'd like to talk to you maybe he said about Cherrywood and you said yes and
16:11:37 20
you arranged a meeting?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 949
You went in to him in his office?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 950
And how long of a conversation, how long did the meeting last?
A.
I can't tell you that, it was certainly wasn't short, but it certainly wasn't
16:11:45 25
26
excessively long either but I mean half an hour or more.
27
Q. 951
Half an hour, okay. So what did he, and what did he say to you?
28
A.
What he said to me, he explained the background to what he wanted to talk to me
29 16:12:25 30
about, he wanted to talk to me about Cherrywood and the difficulties that they were facing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:12:27
16:13:09
121 1
Q. 952
Mm-hmm.
2
A.
And in relation to Dublin County Council, he was of the view that they would
3
get some type of zoning but that it might be less than what the company
4
anticipated and if they weren't careful they might get nothing. I'm not saying
5
they were his exact words, I am giving you the culture of the meeting. And --
6
Q. 953
The what of the meeting?
7
A.
The culture of the meeting, what the subject of the discussion was Cherrywood
8
and he was outlining the difficulties that they were facing with Dublin County
9
Council, that there was some internal difference of opinion about whether or
16:13:44 10
not the company should persist in seeking to achieve what it had originally
11
looked for or whether or not they should compromise and I was left with the
12
impression that the opinion of the owner of the company, Mr. Monahan, was that
13
the company should persist or however difficult it was going to be or fight the
14
battle in the Development Plan, for what it had originally looked for, as
16:14:29 15
distinct from compromising. Now, he did say to me that Richard Lynn and
16
Phillip Reilly had extensive contacts with councillors and that they had done a
17
good job, that they had -- which was something I knew already myself because I
18
knew of the extent of the contact that they had with the councillors. And that
19
he thought I might be of help in, I think I said in my statement, in
16:15:22 20
unscrambling some of the confusion that had taken place among, at council
21
level, as a result of various things that happened up to that point which
22
brings into focus the reference that you made earlier on, to a motion in 1992,
23
which had been defeated, notwithstanding the fact if my recollection is
24
correct, that the motion on which the councillors were voting was recommended
16:15:57 25
by the manager for a specific zoning and a specific number of housing units per
26
acre, but nonetheless low and be hold, but maybe in a spirit of consistency
27
with which councillors operated in Dublin County Council they voted against the
28
manager and the motion was lost, and so another attempt to re introduce the
29
matter or to have the matter re introduced had to be undertaken.
16:16:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
16:16:35
16:17:21
122 1
We talked about the contact that Richard Lynn had and that Phillip Reilly had,
2
there was a comment about the extensive contact that Mr. Phil Monahan had with
3
politicians, and if the company wasn't careful the whole thing could collapse,
4
they would end up with nothing. Neither one house to the acre nor four houses
5
to the acre or a district centre or anything. Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that
6
he knew of my relationship with Dublin County Council and that I had been
7
successful in other matters and used words to the effect that you know, you
8
have to do what you have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council.
9 16:18:08 10
We had a discussion about costs, about fees and we agreed 25,000. I didn't --
11
yes I did, I mentioned that. Yes, I think that, as I say the culture and tone
12
of the conversation was along those lines, and would I, would I undertake to
13
help out and I said I would. That's the meeting I think.
14 16:19:21 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right Mr. Murphy, I think we'll leave it there and take it up
tomorrow morning. Mr. Dunlop needn't be here until when?
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
morning to facilitate Mr. Gilmore.
16:19:39 20
I think 11 o'clock, the Tribunal is sitting at 10 am tomorrow Mr Gilmore is facilitating the Tribunal by
coming at ten tomorrow and his evidence is expected to be concluded by 11.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
All right. So it's 11 o'clock for Mr. Dunlop.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
Yes, not before 11 o'clock.
16:19:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
10 o'clock for us.
27 28
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY
29
WEDNESDAY 14TH JUNE 2006 AT 10 AM.
30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 652
10:03:02
10:38:06
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
1ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. GV Wright, please.
9 10:38:13 10
MR. KENNEDY: Chairman, I make the usual application on behalf of Mr. Wright.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Sure.
13 MR. THOMAS GV WRIGHT, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
14
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
10:38:24 15
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Wright.
A.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. Wright.
21
A.
Good morning.
22
Q. 2
Mr. Wright, I think you were a member of Dublin County Council from 1985 to
19 10:38:43 20
23 24 10:38:55 25
1993 and thereafter a member of Fingal County Council, isn't that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 3
I think you were the whip of the Fianna Fail members of Dublin County Council
26
at some stage or the leader of the Fianna Fail members of Dublin County
27
Council.
28
A.
I was whip.
29
Q. 4
What period was that?
A.
Probably after the local elections of '91.
10:39:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:39:15
10:39:26
2 1
Q. 5
So between June, July of '91?
2
A.
Yeah, I think so.
3
Q. 6
Until, when did you cease -- were you a whip right up until December '93?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 7
So between June '91 and December '93 you were the whip of the Fianna Fail
6
councillors in Dublin County Council?
7
A.
Yes, I think you're right.
8
Q. 8
Now, I think you were written to in February of this year and again in March.
9
I hope I'm right in saying that, sorry.
If I could have 2339 in connection with lands at Cherrywood.
10:39:46 10
Isn't that
right? And you were asked a series of questions in relation to those lands and
11
you were asked to provide a statement.
12
solicitor faxed through to the Tribunal, a statement which is at 8492 of the
13
brief.
14
received approaches from Phil Monahan, Richard Lynn and Noel Murray in relation
10:40:10 15
I think yesterday evening your
And in that statement I think you say at paragraph one that you had
to the Cherrywood lands. Isn't that right?
16
A.
That's correct
17
Q. 9
And these are the people that you had contact with in relation to the
18 19 10:40:16 20
Cherrywood lands? A.
Correct.
Q. 10
I think you then went on to say that you had limited contact with Phil Monahan
21
having been approached by him on one or maybe two occasions. Most of my
22
contacts would have been with Richard Lynn whom I would describe as a lobbiest
23
on behalf of the Cherrywood project.
24
lobbying on behalf of other projects other than Monarch related projects?
10:40:35 25
Did you know Mr. Lynn in the context of
A.
At later times.
26
Q. 11
Yes.
27
A.
In later times, yes.
28
Q. 12
But in the period that you were the whip of the Fianna Fail councillors you
29 10:40:49 30
You would have known him in that period?
would have associated him with the Cherrywood project and Monarch in particular? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:40:49
10:41:01
3 1
A.
Basically, yes.
2
Q. 13
You say Mr. Lynn would have approached me on numerous occasions seeking my
3
support for the Cherrywood project and I also recall that he visited my
4
constituency office in Malahide on at least one occasion. Can you recall that
5
occasion and the circumstances under which he came?
6
A.
I can.
7
Q. 14
When did the meeting take place?
8
A.
I'm not sure.
9
Q. 15
And at whose invitation did the meeting take place?
A.
I'm sure it was Mr. Lynn's.
11
Q. 16
And was it by prior appointment?
12
A.
I'm sure it was.
10:41:09 10
13 14 10:41:21 15
I remember the meeting took place.
I think I mentioned later on that I would have known another
director of the company at the time as well. Q. 17
Yes.
A.
I would have thought if I remember correctly, that he made proposals of some
16
Can you recall what was discussed at the meeting?
sort of the ...
17
Q. 18
Of Cherrywood, in relation to Cherrywood?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 19
You go on to say that Mr. Noel Murray whom I mentioned I would have known
10:41:37 20
through mutual involvement in local community matters in the Portmarnock and
21
Malahide area, would have sought my support for the Cherrywood proposals on
22
behalf of Monarch.
23 24
So really what you are you are suggesting there I think is, that the situation
10:41:47 25
was that you were being lobbied by Mr. Murray who was with Monarch, but a local
26
supporter, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Monaghan.
Is that correct?
27
A.
That would be correct. Yeah.
28
Q. 20
And you go on then at 8493 to say that "In an earlier statement 17th of
29 10:42:08 30
November 2004 in the context of another module you identified a payment from Monarch in the sum of 1,000 pounds."
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:42:10
10:42:19
4 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 21
That's what you say you had received by way of a payment during the 1992
3
General Election.
4
Isn't that right?
I think you were a candidate in the 1992 General Election.
5
A.
I was.
6
Q. 22
Now, I think that's exactly what you also told the Fianna Fail Inquiry. Isn't
7
that right?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 23
If we could have 2295, please. I think you advised the Fianna Fail Inquiry
10:42:31 10
that in the 1992 General Election campaign, you had received a sum of 1,000
11
pounds from Monarch and that the donation was unsolicited political donations
12
for election and constituency purposes, isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 24
In a moment we'll come to this but I think the reality is that you received a
10:42:48 15
further 2,000 pounds in December of the same year.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 25
That you did not bring to either the attention of the Tribunal or that inquiry.
18 19 10:42:57 20
Is that correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 26
You go on to say that "I also acknowledge this particular payment in my
21
discussions with Fianna Fail and it's confirmed in the report issued by Fianna
22
Fail." And this report is also part of the brief of documents that relate to
23
this particular module.
24 10:43:07 25
Just in relation to that. I think in a prior module you also discovered that
26
there was a payment that you had received I think was it from Mr. Jones?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 27
That you hadn't brought to the attention of that inquiry also at that time?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 28
Since that evidence have you been contacted in any way by the inquiry or by
10:43:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:43:25
10:43:39
5 1
Fianna Fail in relation to your edition at the time?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 29
Then you go on to say that "I have also noted that in the list of payments
4
provided by Mr. Noel Smyth on behalf of Phil Monahan, with a letter of 22nd of
5
June 2000 there are two further payments for 300 pounds paid to me on the 13th
6
of June 1991, and a further sum of 2,000 pounds paid on the 16th of December
7
1992.
8
Elections expenses in the December 1992 payment is described as being in
9
respect of Senate Election expenses."
300 pounds described in the list of payments is in respect of the Local
10:44:01 10
11
It's fair to say that when you came to compile this statement you had the brief
12
and you knew that --
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 30
That the documentation was going in so to show that you had in fact received
10:44:11 15
this money?
16
A.
Yes. That's correct.
17
Q. 31
Just in relation to that.
If I could just perhaps, if we could get up the
18
actual Monarch discovery itself.
19
payment on the 13th of June.
10:44:25 20
If we could have 1581.
It's the third last from the bottom "GV Wright,
FF Local Election expenses 300 pounds".
21
And I think you know accept that that
was received by you?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 32
Would you have sought that support?
24
A.
No, I don't think so.
Q. 33
You don't believe so.
10:44:35 25
This shows a
In their discovery to the Tribunal and in their
26
correspondence with the Tribunal.
27
behalf of the Monarch interests, so to speak, have advised the Tribunal that in
28
relation to the 1991 list, which is the one we have just been looking at.
29
the contributions are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for assist to
10:44:56 30
If I could have 1579.
Solicitors on
All
defray Local Election expenses, save as set out, no records have been located Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:45:01
10:45:14
6 1
in this regard.
2
As I understand it, Monarch are there saying and in their evidence will be when
3
they come to give evidence that in fact any payment made at that time was
4
solicited.
You dispute that?
5
A.
I have no record of any request.
6
Q. 34
Well was it your practice to issue requests for payment?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 35
So you say that you didn't request?
9
A.
No.
Q. 36
Either the 300 pounds payment?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 37
They do say in that letter, they go on to say in the last paragraph in relation
10:45:26 10
Only on fundraising events.
13
to the 1992, '93 payments, that "again it is believed that these contributions
14
would have arisen on foot of requests for assistance to defray such expenses".
10:45:42 15
Did you seek?
16
A.
That wouldn't be my recollection.
17
Q. 38
That wouldn't be your recollection.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 39
Okay. So you say that Monarch in '91 gave you 300 pounds which wasn't
10:45:52 20
solicited?
21
A.
That's correct.
22
Q. 40
And in November '92 gave you a further 1,000 pounds and then in December '93
23 24
gave you a further 2,000 pounds, is that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 41
And none of those payments have been solicited?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 42
Just in relation to the 1,000 pounds.
10:46:03 25
28
8364, please.
29
Wright, do you see that?
10:46:19 30
A.
We see that cheque.
If I could have
This is on the 17th November 1992, a cheque made payable to GV
I do, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:46:20
10:46:38
7 1
Q. 43
2
If I could have 8365, please.
There are numbers on back of the cheque.
you recognise that No. 30013187.
3
A.
I don't recognise it.
4
Q. 44
Okay.
5
A.
I believe it was sent to the office.
6
Q. 45
Yes.
Do
Is that an account?
Do you know where this money was negotiated?
7 8
MR. KENNEDY: Chairman, I think that account has been -- just off the top of my
9
head -- I think that account has been discovered to the Tribunal long since.
10:46:48 10
I believe it to be an ICS Building Society conducted through Bank of Ireland
11
Malahide. And that's long since identified by Mr. Wright.
12
are aware of it.
And the Tribunal
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
10:46:59 15
16
MR. KENNEDY: I think that is the account in question.
17
spelling of Malahide.
You can see the
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, Bank of Ireland anyway.
10:47:08 20
21
Q. 46
22 23
MR. QUINN: This is the National Irish -- the Irish Civil Service Building Society account, is that right, Mr. Wright?
A.
Yes.
24 10:47:19 25
MR. KENNEDY: And that business is conduct the through the Bank of Ireland
26
branch in Malahide that's the way -- there is a linkage between ICS and Bank of
27
Ireland, Chairman.
28 29
Q. 47
MR. QUINN: Now, we don't have the 2,000 pounds cheque 2960, please.
10:47:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:47:32
10:47:57
8 1
This appears to be a cheque dated the 16th of December 1992 or a request for a
2
cheque of the 16th of December 1992, cheque No. 73519.
3
Do you recall receiving that payment?
4
A.
I do.
Well I make a point at this moment in time.
And for 2,000 pounds.
It may have been sent to
5
the office as well. I just make the point, I believe at that stage I was
6
probably in the Senate campaign at that stage.
7
Q. 48
Yes.
8
A.
And in the context of that, I could be out of the office for a week or maybe
9 10:48:10 10
more at times. Q. 49
11
Yes.
If we could have 3957, please.
This appears to be the internal request
and you are named second on that list.
2,000 pounds GV Wright Fianna Fail.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 50
You say that's a payment made to you at that time which had not been requested
14 10:48:32 15
or sought by you.
Did you know that the payment had been made?
A.
I now know.
16
Q. 51
I know.
17
A.
It's quite possible that I wouldn't have been in the office when that cheque
18 19 10:48:44 20
Did you know in December 1992 that the payment had been made?
arrived. Q. 52
At this time you were the --
A.
I'm basically saying I would have been on a Senate campaign and a Senate
21
campaign takes you out of the office, you could be down in the country.
22
basically a country wide campaign.
23
week.
24
Q. 53
10:49:00 25
It's
And you could be out of the office for a
You were the whip of the Fianna Fail grouping within the office at this time, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 54
You would probably have been the most influential councillor within the Fianna
28 29 10:49:07 30
Fail grouping at the time? A.
No.
Q. 55
You dispute that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:49:08
10:49:19
9 1
A.
Of course I do.
2
Q. 56
And what function did you have as whip?
3
A.
Whip basically as a secretarial basis.
4
Q. 57
You.
5
A.
There was no whip within the party system when I was there.
6
Q. 58
You had no whip at all?
7
A.
Of course there was a whip.
8
Q. 59
You were a member of Fianna Fail -- sorry.
9 10:49:36 10
You would work it as a secretary.
No whip in relation to anybody's vote. You were a member of Dublin County
council as a Fianna Fail councillor before the June '91 election? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 60
And I think Mr. Dunne had in fact been the whip at that time, is that right?
12
A.
He was, yes.
13
Q. 61
Evidence has been given here by Fianna Fail colleagues of your's including
14
Mr. Madigan.
10:49:51 15
That Mr. Dunne organised and effectively shepherded councillors
to vote on particular issues.
16
Did you see or observe or were you ever the
subject of any such --
17
A.
I think the majority of my colleagues would dispute that.
18
Q. 62
Would dispute that?
19
A.
Although basically everybody I would suspect, would vote with their own
10:50:05 20
21
intentions and that was always the way I operated. Q. 63
22
Did you organise the meetings in your capacity as whip that took place above the licenced premises in Conways?
23
A.
I would have.
24
Q. 64
Yes.
A.
I think I mentioned the last time.
10:50:19 25
26 27
10:50:37 30
The only facilities within the council was
a room that would take about 10 or 12 people. Q. 65
28 29
Yes. On the basis, can I just make the point there.
And were you instrumental in your capacity as whip in organising the agenda and when and what matters would be discussed at council?
A.
The agenda would be the agenda of the council.
Q. 66
Did the council ever liaise with you on what would be discussed? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:50:41
10:50:50
10 1
A.
No, I wouldn't be sending out any agenda.
2
Q. 67
No, no, I'm not saying you would send out the agenda. But did you ever discuss
3
the upcoming agenda and agree it with other whips or council officials?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 68
There was never any liaison?
6
A.
Other than the council itself maybe wanting a certain agenda.
7
Q. 69
Exactly.
8 9 10:51:09 10
11
might be included in an agenda with you in your capacity as whip? A.
Yeah.
Q. 70
Yes. Now --
A.
There would be based sorry, Mr. Quinn, they would be based on whether the
12 13
Did the council officials ever discuss an upcoming agenda or what
That could happen now and again but not on a regular basis.
council had some business that they wanted through at a certain date and time. Q. 71
14
If we could -- Mr. Lynn has submitted a number of expenses claim forms, which have been the subject of the, this module.
10:51:30 15
16
If I could have 4320.
17
Cherrywood Properties Limited, which is the Carrickmines company.
18
the 30th of July 1993.
19
in D Lydon/GV Wright and there is an expenses claim which I'm not particularly
10:51:54 20
concerned about.
21
This is one such form in relation to the company
It's in relation to the Draft Development Plan.
Mr. Lydon in relation to Cherrywood? A.
I have no recollection of that.
23
Q. 72
Could such a meeting have taken place?
24
A.
It's possible.
Q. 73
Had it taken place, where would it have taken place?
A.
I couldn't tell you.
26 27
Most of my contacts with Mr. Lynn would have been in
Dublin County Council itself.
28
Q. 74
Yes.
29
A.
In the offices itself.
10:52:21 30
It's
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in July '93 in the company of
22
10:52:06 25
It's dated
Other than the one or two occasions that he may have
come to the constituency office. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:52:22
10:52:28
11 1
Q. 75
Otherwise they would have taken place in the County Council office?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 76
Did you have an office in the council.
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 77
If the meetings were it take place at the council where --
6
A.
There is a Fianna Fail room.
7
Q. 78
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn or Mr. Monahan or any other representatives of
8 9 10:52:45 10
There's a party room for each party.
Monarch's in that Fianna Fail room in -A.
I would have thought I would have met Mr. Lynn, I'm sure of it.
Q. 79
At that room.
11
Did you ever see Mr. Lynn in the lobby of the Fianna Fail or of
the council sorry?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 80
Now, on the 12th of November 1993.
14
If we could have 4655, please.
Again,
there is a further expenses claim form in respect of the Cherrywood Properties
10:52:59 15
Limited.
16
Described as an expense in connection with the Draft Development
Plan GV Wright.
Do you see that?
17
A.
I do.
18
Q. 81
That would have been the day following the meeting at which the lands were
19 10:53:16 20
zoned at four houses to the acre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 82
Do you recall meeting --
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 83
Mr. Lynn or any of the Monarch representatives in or around that vote of the
24 10:53:22 25
26
11th November? A.
I couldn't give an answer to that.
Q. 84
Yes.
26th of November 1993.
I just haven't got a recollection.
If we could have 4738, please.
27
meeting Draft Development Plan, GV Wright.
28
'93?
29 10:53:40 30
A.
I could have.
Q. 85
Okay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
The further
Did you meet Mr. Lynn on November
10:53:40
10:54:01
12 1
A.
As I say, I mean, I have no -- knowing of what Mr. Lynn put in for expenses.
2
Q. 86
I'm not particularly concerned about the amounts.
3
they were spent on.
4
concerned about and the actual corroboration of meetings between you and Mr.
5
Lynn.
6
A.
7 8
He may have over the period, as you know, the file went on for so long.
Q. 87
He
But the matter had been completed at this stage on 12th, 13th of November, 26th of November '93.
Did you ever meet Mr. Lynn in Leinster House?
A.
I probably, would have, yes.
11
Q. 88
How would that have taken place?
12
A.
He that may have asked to see me.
I was the leader and chief whip of the
13
party from '91 onwards in the Senate.
14
full week in the Dail.
10:54:34 15
The dates are really what I'm
may well have been updating various councillors on that.
9 10:54:19 10
We'll ask Mr. Lynn that.
I would be anxious to what
Q. 89
I would have been very involved over a
So you actually had the dual role of being the whip of the Fianna Fail members
16
of Dublin Council after '91 and also the whip of the Fianna Fail Senators in
17
the Senate?
18
A.
19 10:54:49 20
And for a period of time the whip when I was also leader of the Fianna Fail in the Senate. Yes.
Q. 90
Leader and whip?
21
A.
No, leader.
22
Q. 91
Leader.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 92
So you were whip and subsequently leader of the Fianna Fail Senators?
A.
Correct.
26
Q. 93
And you were throughout the --
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 94
Whip of the councillors?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 95
If I could have 4926.
10:54:57 25
10:55:01 30
This is a document discovered by Monarch.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
It appears
10:55:13
10:55:35
13 1
to be from Quick Stream Couriers. And one of the items that appears to have
2
been couriered is something to you on the 7th of December 1993 at Leinster
3
House.
4
Monarch in Leinster House in December '93.
5
A.
6 7
Do you see -- sorry 4926.
Do you recall getting something from
It may have been an update of their proposals.
But I have no recollection of
that. Q. 96
Yes.
Again into early January '94.
If I could have 4951.
There is a
8
further reference to a possible meeting with you on the 21st of January '94.
9
We see there.
10:55:56 10
please.
Again on the 11th of February '94.
If I could have 4972,
Further meeting and a claim by Mr. Lynn.
11 12
Now, at this stage you were a member of Fingal County Council, isn't that
13
right?
14 10:56:03 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 97
Can you tell the Tribunal why Mr. Lynn would be meeting with you in connection
16
with Cherrywood if you are no longer a member of Dun Laoghaire -- or Dublin
17
County Council since Cherrywood fell into Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
18
Council?
19 10:56:19 20
A.
He may have had other files in the Fingal area.
Q. 98
I see.
21
He appears to be putting this to the company Cherrywood Properties
Limited?
22
A.
I can't understand that.
23
Q. 99
Did Mr. Lynn discuss other files with you in relation to other properties?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 100
And were you supportive throughout in relation to the Monarch development in
10:56:29 25
26 27
Cherrywood? A.
I took the view from the very beginning, the Manager's view that the lands, the
28
totality of the lands should be zoned both for residential and industrial and
29
employment, yes.
10:56:45 30
Q. 101
Yes.
I don't think you were present at the first meeting on the first vote in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:56:50
10:57:07
14 1
December 1990 when DP90/123 was debated.
But I think you did vote in favour
2
of the Manager's proposal as put forward by Councillors Lydon and McGrath on
3
27th of May '92.
That was unsuccessful.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 102
The manager had brought that map 92/44, right, which would have suggested four
6 7
houses to the acre on an action area plan. You voted in support of that? A.
8 9
I would say that would be consistent with everything I've done within the Development Plan.
Q. 103
10:57:29 10
But you voted against all of the motions and then the proposed low density development on the same day?
11
A.
Correct. Yes.
12
Q. 104
Including the motion by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 105
And then I think in November 1993 you supported the Marren Coffey proposal.
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 106
Which would have reinstated the lands at four houses to the acre.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 107
So your stance throughout would have been in support of the development as
10:57:35 15
19 10:57:46 20
21
being the motion by Cherrywood at that time? A.
Yes.
Q. 108
If I could just in return I've dealt with February.
22
5,000.
23
discussing Cherrywood with you in 1994?
24
11th of March '94.
There's one on March of
GV Wright again Cherrywood.
Was Mr. Lynn
A.
I don't believe so.
Q. 109
If I --
26
A.
As I say, I don't know Mr. Lynn's accounting procedures or otherwise.
27
Q. 110
Yes.
28
A.
As I say, I had no loan whatsoever at that stage.
29
Q. 111
I am just going to read these for the record, Mr. Wright, so that they will be
10:58:07 25
10:58:22 30
on record but the expenses claim forms go forward for 15th of April '94 at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
10:58:27
10:58:40
15 1
5057.
2
The 20th of May 1994 at 5111.
3
24th of January '94 at 5232.
4
The 25th November '94 at 5512.
5
The 31st of March '95 at 5570.
6
29th of March 1996 at 5747.
7
24th of May '96 at 5951.
8
7th of June '96 at 5974.
9
And the 18th of April '97 at 66 -- 6311.
10:59:04 10
11
Could I just have that document on screen, please.
6311.
12 13
Again, you see Cherrywood Properties Limited and you see the third line down
14
Development Plan review GV Wright?
10:59:18 15
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 112
Do you see that?
17
A.
I do.
18
Q. 113
Now, I think that you did receive on behalf of your election campaign in 1997 a
19 10:59:31 20
further sum of 1,000 pounds, isn't that right, from Mr. Lynn? A.
I'm not sure.
21
Q. 114
In fact, Mr. Murray, I should say.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 115
6323, please.
24
This is a cheque supplied by Monarch Properties Services
Limited to Fianna Fail Dublin north.
10:59:49 25
directed to you.
And the enclosure of the letter is
And it's dated the 3rd of June 1997.
26
A.
That may well have been a fundraiser for the constituency.
27
Q. 116
Yes. Well, in fairness to you, the cheque isn't made payable to you.
28 29 11:00:08 30
But the
letter enclosing the cheque is directed to you? A.
I obviously haven't got that in front of me but I suspect it would have been for a constituency fundraiser. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:00:10
11:00:21
16 1
Q. 117
When you came to the Fianna Fail Inquiry three years later you didn't mention
2
that you had received a further 1,000 pounds, three years previously from
3
Monarch?
4
A.
It may well not have been for me.
5
Q. 118
But you distinguished this 1, 000 from the earlier 3,000 in '92?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 119
In what way do you say that it's different?
8
A.
Insofar as that I suspect that it was for a constituency function.
9 11:00:35 10
I can put that down to. Q. 120
11
Now, you continued to meet with Mr. Lynn in January June '97 at 6363 again in the context of Cherrywood per Mr. Lynn.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 121
At 6376 on 15th of August 1997.
14
And I think Mr. Murray will say that you got
a contribution of 500 pounds in June 1999 towards the Local Election expenses.
11:01:04 15
16
That's all
Do you recall receiving 500 from Mr. Murray in '99. A.
I do, yes. Can I just say in the context of those meetings -- I can't answer
17
for Mr. Lynn obviously as to why he is associated with Cherrywood.
18
have had no role whatsoever.
19
Q. 122
11:01:22 20
Did Mr. Lynn ever ask you to speak to any of your colleagues in connection with his proposals in Cherrywood?
21
A.
He would have asked me to support it.
22
Q. 123
He would have asked you to support it.
23 24
I would
But did he ever ask you to seek the
support of some of your colleagues for the development? A.
11:01:36 25
No.
I mean, I think it's quite clear that he was lobbying ever single
individual, individually himself.
26
Q. 124
Did you ever lobby any of your colleagues for their support?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 125
Did you ever discuss any of matters if with your colleagues?
29
A.
I'm sure it was discussed. There was a file that was going on for three or
11:01:49 30
four years, yes, it would have been discussed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
But not in the context -- It
11:01:52
11:02:04
17 1 2
was way outside of my area and it would have been dealt with that way. Q. 126
Are you surprised that Mr. Lynn would have been so generous towards you and
3
your campaign over that period, considering that the property in question
4
wasn't within your constituency?
5
A.
No.
Insofar as Mr. Lynn and myself became good friends.
And also I
6
mentioned Mr. Murray was, I dealt with Mr. Murray on several constituency
7
files, both in community and in person.
8
Q. 127
Was Mr. Murray a supporter of yours?
9
A.
Yes.
Well I think he is.
Q. 128
Yes.
Is he, for example, in a Cumann or?
11
A.
No, no.
12
Q. 129
But you would look on him as a friend and a supporter?
13
A.
I would, yes.
14
Q. 130
And as you would Mr. Lynn?
A.
Yes.
11:02:22 10
11:02:34 15
16 17
11:02:47 20
Obviously he has been involved in many
other projects over the last number of years. Q. 131
18 19
Mr. Lynn has kept in touch.
Did you ever receive any other monies from Mr. Lynn or Mr. Murray other than the ones we have?
A.
No, absolutely not.
Q. 132
Thank you very much.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Kennedy do you want to ask a few questions?
23 24
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. KENNEDY AS FOLLOWS:
11:02:51 25
26
MR. KENNEDY: Just a few simple matters.
27
I just call up page 2339.
28
2006 asking for a statement.
29
the second paragraph where the period mentioned is January 1990 to 31st of
11:03:10 30
December 1994.
It's the letter Mr. Wright got on 6th of February And just direct the attention of the Tribunal to
I draw attention to that because Mr. Quinn has dealt with two
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:03:16
11:03:34
18 1
payments which arose outside of that period.
A cheque for 1, 000 in '97 I
2
think which was made payable to Fianna Fail Dublin north.
3
he has just dealt with that Mr. Murray gave in June 1999.
4
Just to put that on the record, Chairman.
And the 500 which
5 6
And also to refer back to the cheque that Mr. Quinn drew attention to, that was
7
a copy of which was produced this morning.
1,000 pounds in November 1992.
8 9 11:04:00 10
11
Just I remind the Tribunal that in November of 2004, if we can call up page 238 I think.
It's obliterated from my -- but it's the last page of his statement.
That Mr. Wright gave to the Tribunal.
On the 17th of November 2004.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
14 11:04:13 15
16
MR. KENNEDY: He speculated.
Page 2338.
Sorry, Chairman, it's the previous
page.
17 18
He was explaining a lodgement.
19
It includes two payments which relate to another matter which I think we are
11:04:37 20
I would prefer if the page wasn't called up.
not at liberty to disclose or to draw attention to here. But in the amounts he
21
mentions there he specifically identifies the Monarch cheque that, a copy of
22
which was produced this morning.
23
lodgement that went into that account.
As in his view possibly forming part of a
24 11:04:53 25
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
26 27
MR. KENNEDY: That we referred to earlier, the ICS account.
28
saying all of this to show that quite some time ago Mr. Wright had discovered
29
that particular account.
11:05:07 30
So I'm just
And had offered a view that that particular cheque
was in a particular lodgement.
That has now proven to be the case.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:05:13
11:05:19
19 1 2
And I think he should be given some credit for that.
3
questions of Mr. Wright, Chairman.
I have no specific
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
MR. QUINN: Chairman, just arising out of what my friend has said.
8
just two matters which I should address.
There are
9 11:05:25 10
If I could have 2341.
My friend is correct that the first letter the 1st of
11
February 2006 did refer to the period 1st of January 1990 to 31st of December
12
1994 but you received I think, a further letter on the 7th March 2006.
13
asked for payments in respect of the named persons on 1st of January 1989 to
14
date.
Which
Isn't that right? Just to correct the record in that regard.
11:05:52 15
16
I appreciate my friend's desire not to call up the letter of the 31st of May.
17
We can bring up, because it's included in the brief, the Irish Civil Service
18
Building Society account which you have disclosed to the Tribunal.
19
2328.
11:06:16 20
It's at
And if we look at page 2329 we see a composite lodgement there I think
of 20,000 odd. And I think you advised the Tribunal that the Monarch payment
21
was included in at least 15,550 pounds of that lodgement, isn't that right?
22
But we don't see the 2,000 pounds December cheque being lodged to that account.
23
A.
I couldn't tell you.
24
Q. 133
Thank you very much.
11:06:36 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
think Mr. Quinn has put it to and I think it's correct.
28
of the motion put forward by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey?
29
A.
Just going to ask you Mr. Wright.
Yes.
11:06:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Back in November '93, I You voted in favour
11:06:52
11:07:10
20 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
pointed out to me that the motion appeared to be dated 11th of November as I
3
understand it.
4
been in the council offices at any time prior.
5
A.
And I think from yesterday I think Ms. Dillon explained --
So it's not clear whether it was -- it doesn't appear to have You understand?
I do, yes.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
certainly it's dated that day.
9
A.
So it would appear that it was formulated either that day or And presumably you would have seen it or?
That's possible, yes.
11:07:20 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
can you recall?
13
A.
14
No.
Did you have any discussions with Ms. Coffey about the matter
She would have explained her position.
Anyone that would sign a motion
would explain their position.
11:07:29 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
Fianna Fail colleague.
18
A.
That's what I'm saying.
Obviously she would have been your
Yes.
19 11:07:34 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
22
And she was the local representative if you like.
She would have explained and sought her support, which would happen with any motion signed by any colleague anywhere.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:07:48 25
manager way back as far as 1990.
26 27
You told Mr. Quinn earlier that you you had supported the He had quite ambitious plans for the whole
of the Carrickmines Valley. A.
Yes. Correct.
28 29 11:07:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
As I understand it.
And again, even though he didn't get his
way with the councillors in relation to that back in '92 then when he, when the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:08:04
11:08:13
21 1
matter was brought forward again he was still trying to, if you like, bring
2
some aspect of that into his map.
3
A.
Correct.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
Now it didn't pass, we know that.
7
day.
8
A.
The 92/44 map.
And I think you voted in favour of that.
It was Mr. Barrett's motion that won the
That's right.
9 11:08:23 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that the density was reduced.
But can I just ask you,
11
given that if you like you had rolled in with the manager on those two
12
occasions --
13
A.
Yes.
14 11:08:33 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The manager on 11th of November was saying look, he was
16
recommending delete the whole of change three, which was where all of the
17
lands, including the Monarch lands, obviously a larger tract of lands was zoned
18
at one house to the acre and go back to what had gone out on the first display
19
which was four houses to the acre.
11:08:53 20
A.
Correct.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
Fianna Fail group prior to the vote, as to the merits of what the manager was
24
recommending over and above the actual motion that was put forward on the day?
11:09:10 25
A.
And did you -- was there any discussion do you recall within
I think the motion that was successful would have been seen as a compromise.
26
It would have been seen as a motion that would possibly be successful.
27
manager had tried on several occasions, as you stated, to deal with the
28
totality of the lands but there wasn't support within the council for it.
The
29 11:09:28 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
We've seen the map, indeed, and the outline of the -- it was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:09:32
11:09:38
22 1 2
the Monarch lands. A.
Correct.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
no mention of Monarch on the motion I think.
6
A.
Did you know on the 11th of November that -- because there's I think there was none.
I personally, I probably wouldn't have known that.
It was so far out of my
7
area at the time, it wouldn't have been something that I would have been
8
conscious of.
I would have known that --
9 11:09:53 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11 12
Well did you know that Monarch -- Monarch had put in a
representation I think. A.
Yeah.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:10:05 15
16
At some point.
Wanting the, Mr. Barrett's, what had happened
because of Mr. Barrett's motion to go, to be deleted. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
ending 12th of November -- it's not clear that it was the day obviously.
11:10:16 20
And from what Mr. Quinn tells us, you were certainly the week
Mr. Lynn's expense thing, he certainly had a meeting with you some time between
21
5th of November, that's the week ending the 12th.
22
November '93 and 12th of November.
23
In
A.
Sometime between 5th of
He may have, yes.
24 11:10:30 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26
Q. 134
Did he mention to you, do you recall, that --
27
A.
I have no recollection.
28
I'm sure he would have been lobbying.
I'm sure he
was.
29 11:10:38 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: Because as I understand it, would -- was it normally motions -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:10:44
11:10:55
23 1
would Mr. Lynn have put in a representation.
2
anyway at some point in November from Mr. McCabe, who was the planner I think
3
for Monarch.
4
A.
There was a letter gone in
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
recommending that the whole of the amendment be deleted go back to four houses
8
to the acre.
9
A.
And they were asking the council and the planners are
Yes.
11:11:05 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
motion might be put forward asking for four houses per acre for their lands?
13
A.
I don't recall that.
And do you ever recall Mr. Lynn discussing with you that a
I think the motion may have been done on the day itself.
14 11:11:24 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just on asking you that.
It was done on the day.
As I
16
understand it, the council maps -- the council map per se that the council
17
would have in the offices would be the various maps.
18
A.
Map 27.
Yes
19 11:11:39 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That was put out by the council.
21
I just want to understand this.
22
the council offices.
23
whatever.
24
A.
Now, I may be wrong here.
And obviously they would be easily got from
If somebody wanted to put in a motion and get a map or
Yes.
11:11:53 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
last few days has the Monarch boundaries, presumably, the boundaries of Monarch
28
on it.
29
A.
But we know that the map that was put up here I think in the
Yes.
11:12:04 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:12:04
11:12:19
24 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
I'm just wondering, Mr. Wright, if the motion and map is dated 11th of
3
November.
4
A.
So somebody would have had to know the Monarch boundaries.
You understand?
I do, yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
don't know, maybe I'm wrong, from a folio or a registry or some map attached to
8
the title, do you understand?
9
A.
And you know, the Monarch boundaries can only come from, I
I do. Yes.
11:12:26 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Can you explain or do you know?
Well I'm sure --
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:12:34 15
16
If it was done, we don't know if it was done on the 11th, how
this could be achieved? A.
17
Well, basically I'm sure that Monarch would have supplied all of the councillors with their landholdings. They would have supplied that.
18 19 11:12:42 20
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
So you are saying that that could come from the council?
Not just on this file this would happen --
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
representations certainly back in November.
24
A.
Well, in fairness I think Monarch had put in a map with their
Yes.
11:12:51 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
be a compromise --
28
A.
But you don't recall any discussion as to why, if there was to
No.
29 11:12:55 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Why that would have to just be --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:12:58
11:13:06
25 1
A.
No.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
sure you are familiar enough with them.
5
potion of lands just immediately above the Monarch boundary --
6
A.
Because the maps, I don't want them to come up again. You may not be indeed.
I'm
But the
Yeah.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
one house to the acre, and indeed all above that was one house to the acre.
11:13:19 10
11
That ran to what I think is the Druid's Glen, that remained
Do you understand? A.
I do.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
compromise.
11:13:30 15
16
Why somebody wouldn't say if we are going to have a
Have a compromise where there may be a more understandable
boundary between the four houses to the acre and the one house. A.
I can't give you an answer to that.
17 18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I'm just asking ...
I can't give you an answer.
11:13:38 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right. Fair enough.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Chairman.
11:13:44 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
27 28
MR. QUINN: Ms. Sheila Terry, please.
29 11:13:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:13:48
26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:13:48
11:14:19
27 1
MS. SHEILA TERRY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Terry.
5
A.
Good morning.
6
Q. 135
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Ms. Terry.
You were written to you I think like the
7
previous witness on the 1st of February 2006.
8
You were asked for a statement in relation it your dealings with a number of
9
named individuals and companies concerning Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
11:14:39 10
If I could have 2235, please.
A.
That's right.
11
Q. 136
And I think the early 1990s you were a member of Dublin County Council?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q. 137
I think you were at the time, a member of the Progressive Democrats, then an
14 11:14:55 15
16
independent and latterly a member of Fine Gael, isn't that right? A.
That's right.
Q. 138
Now, you responded I think on 13th of February of this year.
If I could have
17
2237.
18
And you advised the Tribunal that you had no specific memory of any servant or
19
agent of the Monarch Group speaking to you in relation to the lands.
11:15:12 20
Isn't
that right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 139
You say that you knew "Mr. Richard Lynn, Philip Reilly and the late Phil
23 24 11:15:21 25
Monahan."
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 140
I think that you say that Mr. Lynn became an independent consultant lobbiest in
26
recent times, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 141
Do you know Mr. Lynn?
29
A.
Yes, I do.
Q. 142
And do you know him in that context, as an independent lobbiest and consultant?
11:15:31 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:15:33
11:15:48
28 1
A.
I do.
2
Q. 143
You would have known Mr. Lynn back in the early '90s I presume?
3
A.
I would presume so.
As I said in my letter, I don't remember meeting Mr. Lynn
4
in the early '90s but I would have to presume that I did because he was the
5
lobbiest as I remembered on behalf of Monarch.
6
Q. 144
7 8
lands? A.
9 11:16:09 10
Do you remember anybody lobbying you in the early '90s in relation to the
I don't have any specific memory of anybody lobbying me but that's not to say that they didn't.
Q. 145
I actually would presume that they did.
Did anyone within your party or any of your colleagues, any of your councillor
11
colleagues or indeed anyone else within your party, discuss with you the
12
proposals for the Cherrywood area in the early '90s?
13
A.
14
If would have been policy within the party to discuss the agenda for the day on specific days that we were meeting.
11:16:38 15
for it.
16
But nobody would have asked me to vote
We would just have had a general discussion on the agenda for the
day.
17
Q. 146
And where would that meeting or discuss take place?
18
A.
In the party room in Dublin County Council offices.
19
Q. 147
Now, I think were you elected in June '91, is that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 148
So you were there for the earlier votes in December '90 or May of '91, isn't
11:16:56 20
21 22
that right?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 149
Your first occasion to vote on these lands came I think in May '92, isn't that
11:17:07 25
correct after they had been put up on public display?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 150
In a more recent letter then I think on 13th of March also you advised the
28 29 11:17:21 30
Tribunal of payments that you had received, isn't that right? A.
That's correct.
Q. 151
In relation to the matter.
If I could have 2239, please.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:17:26
11:17:38
29 1
This appears to have been a cheque received by you in June of 1991 for 300
2
pounds, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 152
Now, you hadn't been a councillor, isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 153
You were a candidate in the June 1991 election?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 154
It would appear from that letter that you hadn't sought the contribution, isn't
9 11:17:47 10
that right. A.
That's correct.
11
Q. 155
Did you know a contribution had been sought on your behalf in June '91?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 156
Did you know Monarch Properties in June '91?
14
A.
Probably not.
Q. 157
When I say Monarch Properties.
11:18:01 15
Did you know of Monarch Properties in the
16
first instance.
17
identified in the letter to you that we have been dealing with here?
18
A.
19 11:18:22 20
Secondly, did you know any of the personnel that had been
I may have heard of Monarch Properties in the context of Quarryvale which was an issue during the Local Elections.
Q. 158
Yes.
21
A.
But I didn't know any of the lobbiests at that stage.
22
Q. 159
Did you know if contributions had been sought for Monarch in relation to other
23
candidates either by your party, either in your constituency or in other
24
constituencies in June '91?
11:18:39 25
26
A.
No, I didn't know of any such requests.
Q. 160
Yes.
27
Did you receive contributions from others in the June 1991 elections
which had been sought by others on your behalf?
28
A.
To the best of my memory right now I don't think so.
29
Q. 161
Did you ever discuss how Monarch came to be selected as someone that should be,
11:19:08 30
support should be sought for in June '91? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:19:11
11:19:22
30 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 162
But you did know sometime after June '91 that they had supported you because
3
they wrote directly to you as we see from that letter 19th of June?
4
A.
Yes, of course.
5
Q. 163
How did the enclosure of 300 pounds compare to other political contributions at
6 7
that time for that election? A.
8 9
For the June '91 Local Elections, that may well have been the biggest contribution I got.
Q. 164
11:19:50 10
Yes.
Most of my fundraising was done among friends.
So Monarch would have been the single biggest contribution that you
would have got as a candidate in that election?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 165
Now, if I could have 3657.
13
the Tribunal.
14
interpret as Sheila Terry.
11:20:13 15
This is an internal Monarch document produced to
You will see there about five from the end "ST", which we "PD", you were a member of the PDs, 300 pounds.
And you saw the 300 pounds.
Whilst we don't have the cheque.
16
you deny that that was received.
17
in the file?
18
A.
19 11:20:28 20
I don't think
And we saw the letter a moment ago enclosed
Yes, I would have been put into a specific account for the fundraising for the Local Elections.
Q. 166
Yes.
Now, you were to receive, I think, throughout your career, other monies
21
from Monarch.
Did you get to know personnel within Monarch as you went
22
forward in your political career?
23
A.
Only Mr. Lynn.
24
Q. 167
Yes.
A.
But I would have met Philip Reilly once or twice, as far as I can remember.
26
Q. 168
How did you come and get to know Mr. Lynn?
27
A.
Through his lobbying for various projects.
28
Q. 169
Yes.
11:20:44 25
29 11:21:09 30
Did Mr. Lynn ever remind you that Monarch had been probably the only
contributor outside your immediate family in 1991 to your Local Election? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:21:10
11:21:19
31 1
Q. 170
2
Did he ever make reference to the support he had given you in 1991 or subsequently in any discussions that you had with him?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 171
Now --
5
A.
As far as I can remember.
6
Q. 172
Okay.
At 5274 there is an expenses sheet for week ending 25th of July 1990
7
and I think it's probably 1995.
8
has included for the company Cherrywood Properties Limited a Development Plan
9
review expense for S Terry.
11:21:46 10
I stand open to correction.
There seem to be two entries.
Where Mr. Lynn
Do you see second
and third entry under the heading "nature of expense" Development Plan review S
11
Terry and then the next line Development Plan review S Terry?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 173
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn on successive days or maybe twice on the same
14 11:22:10 15
day in or around July 1995? A.
16 17
I don't remember those specific meetings but I would have met him many times, yes.
Q. 174
I think you wrote to him on the 16th of May '95.
18
This documentation is in the brief.
19
to read it.
11:22:31 20
21
If we could have 5626.
I don't know if you've had an opportunity
A.
Yes.
Q. 175
That's -- that appears to be correspondence from you to Mr. Lynn where you were
22
seeking a contribution to the annual draw for your party, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 176
I think a contribution was made.
11:22:51 25
If we look at 5627.
I think 100 pounds was
contributed the on the 18th of May to the Progressive Democrats.
26
Which
presumably was on foot of that previous request?
27
A.
More than likely.
28
Q. 177
And I think that you may not be aware of it but on 26th of January '95 he
29 11:23:15 30
appears to consider contributed 200 pounds to the party fundraising as well. You may not be aware of that or were you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:23:15
11:23:34
32 1
A.
In my letter I think I outlined a number of times that he contributed either to
2
fundraising events that I held and also a number of times that he bought
3
tickets for the party's draw.
4
Q. 178
Yes.
And I think you may have overlooked that particular event.
5
have 2243.
6
comprehensive disclosure in relation to these payments.
7
1991.
8
300 pounds in September 1998.
9
When you joined Fine Gael I think in 2000, is that correct?
11:24:07 10
11
This is your letter of the 13th of March.
500 pounds in March 1996.
Yes.
Q. 179
And then you went into 500 punts in October 2000. 300 Euro in spring 2004.
13
outings?
14 11:24:21 15
This is a more You say 300 pounds in
I was going to come to that in a moment.
A.
12
If we could
500 Euro in March 2002.
They are all in relation to the fundraisers or golf
A.
Yes.
Q. 180
Isn't that right? And I think 160 Euro on 2004/2005 in relation to Fine Gael
16
national draw tickets.
17
isn't that right?
These are fundraising events on behalf of the party,
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 181
Just to go back, if I may, to the payments in 1996.
11:24:41 20
21
If I could have 5750.
22
say 21st of February 1996.
23
claim in for the company Cherrywood Properties Limited for 46 pounds.
24
then on the 14th of March '96 at 5776, he asks or makes a request internally to
11:25:14 25
This is 21st of February 1996.
Again, Mr. Lynn has a Development Plan expenses And
the accountant of Monarch for a cheque for 500 pounds to Councillor Sheila
26
Terry PD.
Do you see that? Would you have sought that payment?
27
A.
Is that the one that I have referred to in my letter?
28
Q. 182
Yes, yes you have referred to it.
29
A.
Yes, yes, I would have.
Q. 183
And we see the cheque then.
11:25:31 30
Week ending I should
If we could have 5798.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
It's a cheque made
11:25:39
11:25:47
33 1
payable to you on 29th of March 1996.
2
A.
That was in respect of a golf outing.
3
Q. 184
A golf outing.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 185
Yes.
Just going back to the meeting which you had identified there at 5750.
6
For the week ending the 21st of February '96.
7
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council after '93?
You were a member of Dun
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 186
Can I ask you why Mr. Lynn would be meeting with you and submitting claim forms
11:26:12 10
for meetings with you in relation to property which fell within Dun
11
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council when you were councillor in another ward,
12
another area?
13
A.
I wouldn't have had a meeting with Mr. Lynn to discuss --
14
Q. 187
Cherrywood?
A.
The Cherrywood at that point in time.
11:26:27 15
16
If it was just dealing with Dun
Laoghaire council.
17
Q. 188
Yes.
18
A.
I wouldn't have --
19
Q. 189
Do you recall meeting with Mr. Lynn after January '94 and discussing other
11:26:39 20
developments of Monarch's?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 190
Would some of these have been within your council?
23
A.
Within Fingal.
24
Q. 191
Within Fingal?
A.
Yes, and only within Fingal.
Q. 192
We you asked in any of those discussions to approach any of your Progressive
11:26:51 25
26 27
Democrat colleagues in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in relation to
28
lands there?
29 11:27:09 30
A.
No, I was never asked to do that.
Q. 193
Mr. Lynn never asked to you do that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:27:11
11:27:22
34 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 194
Another councillor from Fine Gael, Councillor Faherty, has said that she was
3
asked.
You say that you were never asked?
4
A.
No, I was never asked.
5
Q. 195
Now, I think in March 1996.
Then if we could have 2248, please.
The letter
6
enclosing that cheque for 500 pounds while signed by Mr. Lynn is from a company
7
King of The Castle Limited.
8
King of The Castle Limited?
9 11:27:44 10
11
A.
I remember the name distinctly because it was a strange name, yes.
Q. 196
Unusual.
A.
Yes. I never really knew who the company or who was behind the company.
12 13
Mr. Lynn that I knew. Q. 197
14
Just in relation to that.
What I'm really trying to establish was did you
know that you were getting the money object on behalf of Monarch or did you
11:27:59 15
16
Do you know or were you aware of a company called
think Mr. Lynn on his own behalf was contributing to you? A.
I presumed it was from Mr. Lynn.
But I actually -- I suppose I would have
17
thought he was connected with King of The Castle and more than likely that it
18
was coming from that company.
19
realise that that was the same as Monarch.
11:28:27 20
But I didn't.
At that time, I think I didn't
Q. 198
Yes.
21
A.
I'm still not sure.
22
Q. 199
Sorry.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 200
And at some stage I think he went out on his own and became an independent
11:28:44 25
Did you associate --
Did you associate Mr. Lynn with Monarch in the early '90s?
lobbiest or consultant.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 201
This was '96.
28
A.
Um, I'm not sure.
29
Q. 202
Yes.
11:29:00 30
1997.
Was he still with Monarch in 1996? I'm not sure when he went as an independent lobbiest.
You again met him, I think, he says for the week ending 8th of August If we could have 6375, please.
Do you recall meeting him and could
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Just
11:29:09
11:29:27
35 1
you have met him in relation to the Development Plan review in connection with
2
the Cherrywood Properties Limited?
3
A.
4 5
Not in connection with anything that was being dealt with by Dun Laoghaire County Council.
Q. 203
6
Yes.
It would have been for some other project in Fingal.
Mr. Dunlop was retained in, it would appear, sometime in '93 in relation
to these lands.
Do you ever recall discussing the lands with Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
I don't recall ever discussing them with him.
8
Q. 204
Or him ever discussing them with you?
9
A.
No.
Q. 205
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop was lobbying on behalf of Monarch in 1993?
A.
Not particularly.
11:29:45 10
11 12
I mean, I knew Mr. Dunlop was around but I never really had
any dealings with Mr. Dunlop.
13
Q. 206
Yes.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 207
Just on that.
16
A.
Well with him.
17
Q. 208
And he --
18
A.
Did he discuss some other lands.
11:30:10 15
19 11:30:23 20
Well you do appear to have had meetings with Mr. Dunlop?
Was it Ballycullen? I can't remember, to be
honest. Q. 209
You do appear in his diary for meetings in April '93.
And you appear to have
21
left a message for him on 19th of April '93.
22
And there's a meeting in his diary for the 19th of April '93 at 4154.
23
think that that was in relation to other lands or other developments that Mr.
24
Dunlop was involved in?
11:30:52 25
If we could have 4152, please. You
A.
I actually don't know what that meeting was about.
26
Q. 210
But you say that you never met him in relation to Cherrywood or Monarch?
27
A.
Well I have no recollection of meeting with him in relation to it.
28 29 11:31:21 30
have. Q. 211
I don't know.
But I may
To be honest.
If we take the meeting then on the 27th of May 1992.
If we go to 7207.
The
manager had produced a map 92/44 to the council at that meeting, where he was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:31:26
11:31:36
36 1
suggesting I think that the lands in Cherrywood would be zoned A1 on four
2
houses to the acre?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 212
And I think you supported that proposal, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 213
Do you recall the debate and do you recall how you came to support that
7
proposal?
8
A.
Sorry, would you ask that question again.
9
Q. 214
Do you recall the debate in the council which led to that vote or those series
11:31:49 10
of votes that we are going to deal with?
11
A.
I just generally remember the over all debate about the lands.
12
Q. 215
Would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn would have lobbied you by this time in
13 14 11:32:01 15
relation to the lands? A.
More than likely.
Q. 216
And would have sought your support, as he had, as other councillors have told
16
us, in relation to the Monarch position in respect of these lands?
17
A.
Yes, he would have.
18
Q. 217
And you supported the Manager's proposal which would have, had it been
19 11:32:20 20
21
successful, rezoned these lands at four houses to the acre, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 218
You also I think supported other proposals which possibly would have rezoned
22
the lands at one house to the acre, even on septic tank, isn't that right? If
23
we could have 7209.
24
Reeves which we see at 7210, which provided that "The council would resolve
11:32:54 25
that the lands marked AP outlined in red on the attached map which had been
At 7209 there is a motion by Councillors Gordon and
26
signed for identification purposes by the proposer of the motion be AS2." which
27
as I understand it, is septic tank one house to the acre in the review of the
28
Development Plan.
29 11:33:18 30
You voted in favour of that proposal?
A.
Yes. Yes, sorry, your question?
Q. 219
Do you recall how you came to support that proposal which seems to differ from Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:33:24
11:33:44
37 1
your earlier support for the manager's proposal that they be zoned at four
2
houses to the acre on piped sewerage?
3
A.
I don't recall how I came to make the decisions at this point in time I can't
4
remember.
5
chamber.
6
Q. 220
7 8
But obviously a lot of debate would have taken place in the
And would some debate have taken place outside the chamber amongst the Progressive Democrat members of the council?
A.
9
Well, as I said at the outset, we went -- we usually went through the agenda on the day of meetings.
11:34:10 10
Now, that didn't always happen either but generally we
would have met before the meetings to go through the agenda.
Just to discuss,
11
you know, the work of the day.
12
how we would vote but there would be general discussion about the work of the
13
day.
14
Q. 221
11:34:29 15
16
But there was never any decisions taken as to
Well, can I ask you, what was the consensus within the Progressive Democrats in relation to these lands at this time?
A.
I couldn't tell you what the consensus was right now.
I think -- there
17
wouldn't have been a consensus.
18
patterns, some people voted for motions and others voted against them.
19
there wasn't a set pattern.
11:34:57 20
Q. 222
Generally looking back over the voting Now,
Did you ever tell your colleagues, your Progressive Democrat colleagues that
21
you knew Mr. Lynn and that Mr. Lynn had sought your support in relation to the
22
proposals and indeed had been a contributor to your election campaign in 1991?
23
A.
24
I don't remember actually telling them. known.
11:35:25 25
Everybody knew Mr. Lynn.
I think it would have been generally
He would -- I would guess he had approached
everybody as to whether I told them that he had contributed to my campaigns or
26
not, it may not be something that I would specifically tell them.
27
other hand, if, when I was having a golf outing we would talk about who was
28
there or some of my colleagues may even have been at the golf outing and come
29
to the meals.
11:35:54 30
Q. 223
But on the
Or did any of your colleagues tell you that they had been supported by Mr. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:35:59
11:36:07
38 1
Lynn?
2
A.
Again, I --
3
Q. 224
You have no recollection.
4
A.
I have no recollection of that.
5 6
But I know that he would have supported other
fundraising events of other people's. Q. 225
There was I think a motion by Councillors Gilmore and O'Callaghan to have the
7
lands zoned for a town centre, isn't that right, at that meeting in May '92? A
8
proposal that you vote the against.
If we could have 7214, please.
9 11:36:24 10
Do you recall how you came to vote against a town centre for these lands?
11
A.
I don't recall how I came to that decision.
12
Q. 226
Okay.
Now, as it happened, a motion by Councillor Barrett and Dockrell which
13
you supported that the lands be zoned one house to the acre, was successful and
14
the lands went on display at one house to the acre, isn't that right?
11:36:53 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 227
Rather than the four houses, which had been the incoming map which had been
17
identified on the incoming map, isn't that right?
18
A.
Well, I can't disagree with you.
19
Q. 228
Okay. And then I think the map came back before the council on the 11th of
11:37:11 20
November 1993.
I presume you have your facts right.
And there was a further debate.
Do you recall if Mr. Lynn in
21
that intervening period had spoken to you in relation to the lands, that is
22
between May '92 and November '93?
23
A.
24
But, I mean, Mr. Lynn would have been
around, you know, if there were votes that he was -- had an interest in, I
11:37:39 25
26
I can't recall whether he did or not.
think I could safely assume that he would have spoken to me. Q. 229
Now, if I could have 7217.
This is a map and the area coloured yellow in the
27
map is an area which has been proposed for residential zoning at one house to
28
the acre.
29
Dockrell.
11:38:15 30
A.
As a result of the successful motion of Councillor Barrett and
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:38:15
11:38:37
39 1
Q. 230
And you had voted for that.
A motion was tabled at the meeting on the 11th of
2
November 1993 suggesting that the area coloured yellow within -- sorry.
3
Coloured yellow and within the red lines as we see it there, be zoned at four
4
houses to the acre.
5
one house to the acre.
And that the balance of the yellow lands would remain at
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 231
And you voted in favour of that motion.
That was a motion tabled by
8
Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey.
Now, can you tell the Tribunal how
9
you came to vote on that motion in November '93?
11:38:56 10
A.
Again, I can't remember how I arrived at that decision.
But my decisions in
11
the chamber would have been based on the debate put forward in the chamber on
12
the day.
13
Q. 232
14
Do you see any reason why if the council were
minded to zone lands at four houses to the acre, that all of the lands coloured
11:39:25 15
16
Looking at the map on screen.
yellow couldn't have been zoned at four houses to the acre? A.
Today, I mean, and looking at it there.
Without the benefit of, you know, a
17
full debate and somebody going through it as to the benefits or the lack of
18
benefits of doing so is very difficult for me to remember today why such a
19
decision would have been reached.
11:39:52 20
Q. 233
But looking at it there, looking at that map, do you see any reason why lands
21
outlined in red ought to be zoned at four houses to the acre when the balance
22
of the lands, the yellow shaded lands, should remain at one house to the acre?
23
A.
24 11:40:25 25
Well, looking at the map there, the northern part of the yellow may be on the slopes of the mountain.
Would that be correct?
Q. 234
I'm not sure but --
26
A.
If that was the case maybe one --
27
Q. 235
The planners and the manager had suggested four houses to the acre on the
28 29 11:40:37 30
northern part as well as the southern part? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 236
So presumably they wouldn't have identified four houses to the acre if they Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:40:43
11:41:05
40 1 2
believed it could take four houses to the acre and was capable of development? A.
3 4
based on the arguments put forward on the day by other councillors. Q. 237
5 6
A.
Possibly but I would have -- I mean, I would have to be taken through it in more detail before I could arrive at ...
Q. 238
9 11:41:31 10
Would you agree with me that looking at that map it's something that would require some explanation?
7 8
I don't know how I based my decision but obviously as I said it would have been
You have no recollection of the debate or the contribution of any of the parties as to this?
A.
I don't, no.
11
Q. 239
Thank you.
12
A.
Thank you, Mr. Quinn.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
11:41:43 15
motion.
16 17
Just, when you were voting for those lands or for that particular
Would you have been aware or were you aware that the motion, that the
lands to attract the higher density were Monarch lands? A.
Were Monarch lands?
18 19 11:41:57 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Um.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
O mean clearly, somebody had gone to the trouble of extracting from
23
the larger area, the smaller area.
24
the map which you'd have seen at the time you were voting.
And there's a clear boundary marked out on
11:42:16 25
26
Now, would you have been aware or were you aware or do you think you would have
27
been aware that this reduced area was in fact the Monarch lands?
28 29 11:42:41 30
A.
Again, I'm sorry that I can't be, you know, more clear for you on these specific lands but some times we did know the ownership of the lands and other times we didn't.
We may have known that from submissions, representations
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:42:49
11:43:12
41 1
that had been made in terms of material that we would have been given or, you
2
know, the reps that were sent in from the various landowners or people who
3
wrote in submissions.
4
lands outlined in red were the ones owned by Monarch, I can't tell you today
5
specifically.
But as to whether or not I knew on the day that those
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
including yourself, would have asked or wondered why this smaller area was
9
going to attract the higher density or what was so special or unique or
11:43:33 10
But do you think it would have been likely that councillors,
different about it that it was going to be treated differently to the rest of
11
the land? It wouldn't have gone unnoticed, I presume, looking at that map,
12
that this was -- that this was one piece of a larger piece?
13
A.
Yes.
14 11:43:51 15
CHAIRMAN:
So do you think you'd have asked yourself or councillors would have
16
discussed amongst themselves why is it being done like this or what's so
17
different or special about the section of land that was going to receive the
18
higher density?
19
A.
11:44:21 20
Yes, it does seem obvious today looking at it.
I'm not sure why those lands
were being dealt specifically for a higher density.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Because if not, it would suggest that the councillors were just
23
being led, either by a landowner or by people in the council.
24
suggest if they didn't know or didn't ask, it would suggest that they were just
11:44:49 25
being, somebody was coming in with a motion and people were just blindly --
26
councillors were just blindly voting one way or the other.
27
if there was discussion or --
28 29 11:45:26 30
A.
And it would
Can you remember
I can't today remember, you know, why that land was treated differently to the other land.
I don't remember the discussion on the day and I have no memory
of how this land was treated. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:45:29
11:45:39
42 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
For a higher density.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
Would it -- does it look strange to you now?
It does.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
That -- all right.
8 9 11:45:55 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
You accept that Mr. Lynn was a lobbiest, isn't that correct?
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
representative, asking for their support, surely the first thing that would
14
come to your mind is who is this lobbiest appearing for, who is he
11:46:10 15
16
representing. A.
And when lobbiests would approach somebody, especially a public
Wouldn't that be correct?
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
looking for your support.
11:46:25 20
21
So when Mr. Lynn approached you at any stage in relation to Surely, on that basis, you'd have asked him well
who are you representing? A.
Well I knew he was representing Monarch.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
had been voting on not just this motion but the motion in relation to the other
11:46:35 25
So therefore, you knew at all times then that over the period you
land, you'd have known who the owner of the lands were, whether it was a
26
developer or just an owner who might pass on the lands to a developer after
27
rezoning had been completed?
28 29
A.
Yes.
I mean, if Mr. Lynn lobbied me for any piece of land, obviously, I would
know that I would know the ownership of that land.
11:47:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:47:00
11:47:17
43 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
councillors have given evidence to the effect that A, they were never concerned
3
really about who owned the lands.
4
on them to ask who owner was or who in fact was the owner or whether it was a
5
developer or not.
6
any public representative who is approached by a lobbiest, not to ask who that
7
lobbiest represents.
8
You'd accept that?
9
A.
11:47:39 10
Yes.
You see -- I accept that.
The reason I ask is that some
And also that at the time it never dawned
And that's why I asked surely it would be very strange for
Who they were appearing for, who their client is.
But I would also have to say that I didn't at all times know who the
owners of certain pieces of lands were.
11 12 13
JUDGE KEYS: A.
But if they were --
In that we weren't lobbied for every piece of land.
14 11:47:48 15
JUDGE KEYS:
16 17
No.
But where you were lobbied, where any councillors was
lobbied by a lobbiest -A.
Yes.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:47:59 20
21
Would you find it surprising that those councillors would not
know who that lobbiest was appearing for, who they were representing? A.
Yes, I'd find that strange.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
Absolutely strange.
24 11:48:06 25
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
explained yesterday or somebody mentioned it.
29
in south Dublin, south of the county.
11:48:18 30
Just wondering, Ms. Terry.
These lands, I think it was That this Carrickmines Valley
It was basically I think the largest
tract of undeveloped land and it attracted I think as we can see, a lot of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:48:23
11:48:30
44 1 2
motions and debate? A.
Yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
new to the council in '91 so you had no input.
6
the manager after the first display.
7
an action plan.
8
'92 and you had voted initially at the beginning of that meeting with the
9
manager.
11:48:50 10
A.
You had gone from the position initially, obviously you were But by '92 you were supporting
He wanted the four houses to the acre on
And even to extend the residential zoning.
This was back in
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
after that looking for a lower density, one house to the acre.
14
A.
And then there was a number of motions in fairness to yourself
Yes.
11:48:58 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
for that and you've explained that you've said that obviously you had listened
18
to debate.
19
A.
And including Mr. Barrett's successful motion.
And you voted
Do you understand?
Yes.
11:49:13 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
best plan of action was one house to the acre.
23
A.
So by the end of May '92 you seem to come to the view that the You understand?
Yes.
24 11:49:23 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that's what I think went out on the display.
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
again to four houses to the acre on part of the lands.
11:49:41 30
And -- but by November '93, if you like, you had swung back And I'm just
wondering, why do you think you decided then in '93 to go for this? Do you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:49:51
11:50:11
45 1 2
recall any debate about the matter? A.
I don't recall and I can't explain today why I changed my attitude to that.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
All right.
Thank you very much.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
It's ten to twelve.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Colm Tyndall, please.
9 11:50:16 10
11
I know that the Tribunal normally takes a break at this time every morning. But we have two witnesses in some difficulty. Mr. Tyndall is one.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Well then we'll sit.
14 11:50:23 15
16
MS. DILLON:
And the next witness, Mr. O'Callaghan has to be finished by
lunchtime I understand also. So if it's possible ...
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:50:32
11:50:48
46 1
MR. COLM TYNDALL HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
MR. O'DONNELL: I apply for representation.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
Mr. O'Donnell.
7 8
Q. 240
9
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Tyndall. You were elected in the elections of
1991 as a member of the Progressive Democrats to Dublin County Council, isn't
11:51:01 10
that correct?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 241
And thereafter in 1994 when the council split into three you became a member of
13 14 11:51:10 15
South Dublin County Council, isn't that right? A.
That is also correct, yes.
Q. 242
So that insofar as you had an involvement in the Cherrywood lands, that is
16
confined to June 1991 to December 1993, isn't that the position?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 243
Now, you have provided a statement to the Tribunal.
19
of matters with you arising from that statement.
11:51:29 20
And I'll raise a number
But first I want to take you
through your contribution to the planning and zoning of these lands.
21
that's already, all right?
22
A.
That's fine.
23
Q. 244
Now, I think if I could show you first of all the map at 7021.
24 11:51:46 25
If
And the
decision on this map which will come up on screen beside you had been made prior to you becoming a member of the council.
But this is the map that went
26
out on the first public display.
And the yellow lands on that map are the
27
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
28 29 11:52:01 30
And the outline in red are the Monarch lands within the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
And those lands had gone out on four houses
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:52:09
11:52:20
47 1
to the acre, do you understand?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 245
The density on those yellow lands was four houses to the acre for the first
4
public display.
And after the first public display, as you know, Mr. Tyndall,
5
the matter would come back into the council for the council to consider
6
representations and submissions that had been made.
7
before the council in May of 1992.
And the matter came back
Right?
8
A.
That's correct, yes.
9
Q. 246
Now, you are recorded as being in attendance at a meeting on 13th of May 1992.
11:52:38 10
At 7912, please.
11
And at that meeting, this is in effect the introductory meeting in relation to
12
the secondary view of the Carrickmines Valley.
13
Under the heading "Carrickmines Valley".
14
And listed there is representation 001117.
11:53:02 15
16
At 7194.
A number of land owners are listed. Do you see that?
A.
I do.
Q. 247
And the landowner there is lands at Cherrywood Monarch Properties.
Now, that
17
meant that a representation had been received in connection with the Cherrywood
18
lands by Monarch Properties.
19 11:53:15 20
21
A.
That is what the record is showing.
Q. 248
Yeah. Sorry, it's either correct or it's not correct, Mr. Tyndall.
A.
Well I cannot recall.
22 23
Isn't that the position?
If that is what the record is showing so I assume that
that is correct. Q. 249
24
And other landowners in the Carrickmines Valley are also identified but certainly insofar as documents had been circulated to the councillors by May of
11:53:35 25
1992, the councillors would have been provided with any representation that had
26
been received in the course of the first public display?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 250
Included in that representation was a representation from Monarch Properties.
29 11:53:47 30
Isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:53:48
11:53:57
48 1
Q. 251
And within that representation, which I'll show you in a minute, there would
2
have been a map which outlined the Monarch Properties lands.
3
right?
Isn't that
4
A.
That is correct.
5
Q. 252
Now, the manager himself referred in the course of his report on the Cherrywood
6
area.
7
referred in the second paragraph of his report on the Cherrywood area to the
8
Monarch Properties submission.
9
Properties submission illustrates one possible option although at a higher over
11:54:22 10
At 7197 of the same meeting of which you were in attendance.
He
You see that? The manager says "The Monarch
all density whereby this sort of improvement could be achieved."
He's talking
11
about an increase in density as a result of the pipe going through the
12
Carrickmines Valley.
13
A.
I see that, yes.
14
Q. 253
So certainly for those councillors who were present at the meeting, including
11:54:34 15
yourself, on the 13th of May 1992.
16 17
existence of Monarch Properties. A.
According to the record, yes.
Isn't that right?
But I cannot recall specifically at this moment
18
in time.
19
I have no reason to dispute that.
11:54:52 20
They would have been aware of the
But yes, that is what the records of the council contain.
Q. 254
They would have received the submission --
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 255
117 from Monarch Properties.
23 24 11:54:59 25
I mean,
Because they received all of the submissions,
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 256
And the manager himself refers to the submission from Monarch Properties in his
26
report?
27
A.
That is correct.
28
Q. 257
And the lands are being dealt with under the heading of the Cherrywood area.
29 11:55:14 30
So it is a smaller area within the Carrickmines Valley that being identified in connection with Monarch.
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:55:16
11:55:31
49 1
A.
Again, that is -- I am taking it as you were saying it as of this moment in
2
time.
3
And I have no dispute about that whatsoever.
4
Q. 258
5
I cannot recall at that stage but that is what the records are showing.
Certainly what the council were considering at this stage were maps 26 and maps 27.
Maps 26 and 27 relate to the Carrickmines Valley.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 259
And when the manager came to talk about the Monarch Properties submission he
8 9
dealt with it under the heading of the Cherrywood area, isn't that right? A.
That's fine.
Q. 260
So that's a smaller area within the Carrickmines Valley.
11
A.
I accept what you're saying, yes.
12
Q. 261
And then indeed, at the same meeting at 7198.
11:55:49 10
Isn't that right?
The manager outlines a synopsis
13
of the representation that had in fact been made by Monarch Properties.
14
that right? You see there?
11:56:07 15
Isn't
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 262
Isn't that the position?
17
A.
That would appear to be the position.
18
Q. 263
So at the meeting that took place on 13th of May 1992, all of the councillors,
19
including yourself who were present at that meeting, would have been aware of
11:56:19 20
the representation.
Would have been furnished with the map that came with the
21
representation.
22
Monarch as having an interest in the Cherrywood area and would have been given
23
a synopsis of the Monarch's submission, isn't that right?
24 11:56:32 25
Would have heard the Manager's Report which identified
A.
Yes.
Q. 264
So that all of the councillors who were at that meeting would have been aware
26
of the fact that Monarch Properties was a developer that had an interest in the
27
Carrickmines Valley and specifically in the Cherrywood area.
28
right?
29 11:56:46 30
Isn't that
A.
I would have to assume, yes.
Q. 265
So I think that the manager at that meeting had put forward a map called Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:56:52
11:57:08
50 1
DP92/44 at 7203, please.
2 3
Now, this again is a portion of the map of the Carrickmines Valley.
4
the manager was proposing here in connection with this portion of the
5
Carrickmines Valley was an increase in the amount of land that would be zoned
6
residential.
And a change in the density from AP to A1P.
And what
Isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, that would appear to say, yes.
8
Q. 266
Yes. The manager in his report to the meeting on 13th of May 1992 spoke to
9
that map and recommended that it be passed by the council.
11:57:32 10
The council came
to consider it I think including yourself, on 27th of May 1992 at 7205.
11 12
And on the 7206 you will see that when the council came to consider, at 7206,
13
please.
14
manager's motion, they were dealing with representation 1117 Monarch Properties
11:58:08 15
Sorry.
Yes.
You will see when the council came to consider the
lands at Cherrywood, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 267
And you will also see that what was agreed by the council in that paragraph
18
that "It was agreed that the manager's report and the amendments to the draft
19
plan recommended and illustrated on DP92/44, and motions number 1 to 11
11:58:25 20
contained in Section 31A of the agenda relating representation 1117 Monarch
21
Properties would be discussed together but voted on separately."
22
right?
Isn't that
23
A.
That's exactly as it says.
24
Q. 268
Therefore it must have been clear, Mr. Tyndall, to every councillor who was at
11:58:40 25
that meeting and who proceeded to vote on the subsequent motion.
That the
26
only matters that they were discussing were the Monarch lands at Cherrywood,
27
isn't that right?
28
A.
I cannot answer for any other councillor other than --
29
Q. 269
Speaking for yourself?
A.
As is stated there as a true record, yes.
11:58:50 30
I cannot recall the specifics as of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
11:58:55
11:59:02
51 1
that date.
2
Q. 270
But --
3
A.
I accept that it is.
4 5
I have in dispute with what you are saying in any shape
or form. Q. 271
So that what the record shows that the 11 motions that were being voted on
6
which culminated in Councillor Barrett's motion at that time.
7
these motions related to one portion of land which was the Monarch Properties
8
lands within the Carrickmines Valley, that's the heading under which they were
9
being dealt with by the council.
11:59:21 10
11
That all of
Isn't that right?
A.
That appears to be correct, yes.
Q. 272
So that it would be difficult to see, Mr. Tyndall, how somebody could assert
12
that they were unaware when they were voting on a particular motion that it was
13
not to do with the Monarch lands, isn't that right?
14
A.
11:59:42 15
Well, again, there's 11 different motions relating to it this. reading now.
Again, I am listening to, as you say it, I don't recall the
16
specifics of that date, back in 1992 I think it is.
17
saying.
18
Q. 273
19
Yes.
And I think in fact at 7207.
There were seven votes I think on that
that takes place is on the manager's proposals.
21
Lydon and seconded by Councillor McGrath.
22
the map DP92/44.
23
That's what the record shows.
24 12:00:24 25
But I accept what you're
eight votes I beg your pardon, on that particular day.
12:00:04 20
From what I'm
But the first vote
That's proposed by Councillor
What was being proposed there was
And you vote in favour of DP92/44. Isn't that right?
A.
Yes, that seems to be correct.
Q. 274
If that was so, you were in favour of increasing the residential area on the
26
Monarch lands and you were in favour of changing the density from AP to A1P,
27
isn't that right?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 275
All right.
12:00:39 30
Were you approached by anybody in connection with this from
anybody on behalf of Monarch Properties in connection with these? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:00:43
12:01:00
52 1
A.
I don't recall any specific approach relating to Cherrywood but I have no doubt
2
I would have had discussions with Richard Lynn over quite a period of time.
3
But I don't recall any specific meeting directly discussing the Cherrywood
4
lands at any stage.
5
Lynn about them.
6
Q. 276
But I'm not disputing that I would have talked to Mr.
And would you agree that Mr. Lynn as the person lobbying on behalf of Monarch
7
Properties would have an interest in securing your support and indeed other
8
councillor's support for any proposal that would favour Monarch?
9 12:01:13 10
A.
That would make sense.
Q. 277
And can you remember whether the meetings of the Progressive Democrats that
11
took place.
12
discussed?
13
A.
14
I cannot recollect any specific.
The meetings would have been haphazard.
We
wouldn't have discussed -- we would have discussed generally the agenda for a
12:01:31 15
day.
16 17
Whether you recollect the Monarch Properties lands being
Which could have consisted of numerous motions, rarely confined to one
particular piece of land. Q. 278
Your colleague or your then Progressive Democrat colleague I think, Ms. Terry
18
who gave evidence I think just before you this morning, also voted in favour of
19
DP92/44, isn't that right? That's what the record shows?
12:01:51 20
21
A.
That's what the record shows.
Q. 279
Indeed, Councillor Terry is also a person who is recorded as being at the
22
meeting on 13th of May 1992.
23
aware that the lands under discussion were Monarch Properties.
24
been informed at the time that that was the position, isn't that so?
12:02:10 25
26
And therefore, in the same way that you were She would have
A.
Well that's something for Councillor Terry.
Q. 280
If she was at the meeting and informed in the same way that you were it follows
27
It's not something for me.
that she must have been informed isn't that the position?
28
A.
Again, I can only answer for myself.
29
Q. 281
Very good. Well indeed, the second motion that came to be proposed on that day
12:02:27 30
at 7210.
There are two motions being taken together. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
The first is the
12:02:39
12:02:54
53 1
motion in the name of Breathnach, Smyth and Fitzgerald and the second motion is
2
Breathnach and Smyth.
3
The second motion, in case there was any doubt about it, relates specifically
4
to the Monarch lands.
5
the low density residential zoning of one house per acre on the Monarch lands
6
at Lehaunstown and Cherrywood."
And it was agreed that both would be taken together.
Isn't that correct? "This council resolves to retain
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 282
So it's Monarch specific.
9
And the first motion refers to the resolving that
the lands at Cherrywood marked AP, outlined in red be zoned AS2.
12:03:13 10
house per acre on septic tank.
11
Which is one
Isn't that right? So both of these motions
are proposing low density, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes, that would appear to be correct.
13
Q. 283
And you vote in favour of that?
14
A.
So the record shows, yes.
Q. 284
Now, what I would like you to explain to the Tribunal is why having voted in
12:03:26 15
16
favour of the manager's proposal for increased density immediately prior to
17
these motions, you are now voting for low density on these motions?
18
A.
19
Unfortunately, I don't have -- I can't explain to you now as to why.
But I
would have looked at each motion as it came before me at the time.
12:03:49 20
Regrettably, the minutes don't show any recollection of the debate or the
21
debates that would have taken place.
22 23
I would have tried to make as informed an opinion on each motion as it came as
24
best I could.
12:04:03 25
26
Bearing in mind that I wasn't specifically from that particular
area. Q. 285
Well would you agree, Mr. Tyndall, that there is an inconsistency in voting for
27
increased density and extended residential land on D92/44 at page 7207 of the
28
brief and then voting for low density thereafter?
29 12:04:27 30
A.
Well I would agree looking at it now.
It would appear that way.
But I'm
sure I would have had very good reason at that particular time to do that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:04:30
12:04:46
54 1
I'm sorry I can't explain it to you at this moment in time.
But as I say I
2
would have looked at each motion as it came before me and tried to make the
3
best decision as I could at that stage.
4
I suppose at that stage that's the way it was.
Planning wasn't an exact science and
5
Q. 286
So --
6
A.
I would have tried as I say to look at each motion that came before me and made
7 8
a judgement on it. Q. 287
9
believe would have been explicable at the time but that you are not in a
12:05:00 10
11
Is it the position then that you accept there is an inconsistency which you
position to explain it today? A.
Well what I'm saying is that I wouldn't have just voted forever piece of zoning
12
as it appeared in front of me.
13
appeared in front of me and tried to make a proper decision relating as to how
14
the appeared before me.
12:05:16 15
I would have looked in each motion as it
As to whether that drew up inconsistencies.
Well, unfortunately I can't
16
really respond to that because as I say I would have tried to make a decision
17
on each motion as it appeared. And made my decision accordingly.
18
Q. 288
19
Yes. From your consideration of the record, as disclosed to the Tribunal in the minutes of this meeting, Mr. Tyndall.
12:05:32 20
Do you accept that having voted for
increased density and increased residential land on the manager's map DP92/44
21
that that position is inconsistent with a later decision to support low
22
density?
23
A.
24
does not show that there would have been a debate taking place and there would
12:05:50 25
26
It is inconsistent when you look at the records as it shows now. The record
have been valid reasons, which I cannot recall, put forward as to that change. Q. 289
I think on the third vote on that date at 7211, please.
27
it's a motion by Councillor Eithne Fitzgerald.
28
page again, it's seeking density of one house per acre.
29
favour of that again, isn't that right?
12:06:11 30
A.
That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Which again is --
And at the very top of the And you vote in
12:06:12
12:06:26
55 1
Q. 290
So you are supporting low density there?
2
A.
I am.
3
Q. 291
And I think at the next vote which is on the same page Councillor Lohan and
4
Keogh.
And again, it's for low density and I think that at page 7212 you are
5
recorded as voting in favour of that low density also, isn't that the position?
6
A.
That is correct.
7
Q. 292
And I think the next motion that is dealt with by council is Councillor Smyth
8
and Breathnach and it was to extend the high amenity zoning along the river.
9
And you are recorded on the following page at 7213, as voting against that.
12:06:44 10
Isn't that the position?
11
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
12
Q. 293
And on the next motion, No. 6, at 7213.
13 14
The special area amenity order.
You
vote against that, isn't that the position? A.
Yes.
Q. 294
You will see that you are at the very bottom of that page.
16
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
17
Q. 295
And the next motion, at 7214, which came to be considered was the introduction
12:06:58 15
18
of a C zoning or a town centre zoning on the lands.
19
Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan.
12:07:16 20
And this is a motion by
And you will note that the record
records you as voting against that, as indeed your colleague Ms. Terry did
21
also.
Isn't that the position?
22
A.
That is correct.
23
Q. 296
Can you recollect now why you would have voted against the imposition of a town
24 12:07:31 25
centre on those lands? A.
Again, I can only repeat that I would have tried to look at each motion as it
26
was presented, listened to the debate both for and against and tried to make an
27
opinion at that stage.
28
it was put in front of me. At this moment I cannot recall as to why I would
29
habe done that.
12:07:48 30
Q. 297
That would have been how I dealt with every motion as
You, in voting for DP92/44 you had voted for a change in the density to A1P Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:07:54
12:08:01
56 1
isn't that right? An area action plan?
2
A.
In which vote?
3
Q. 298
In the very first vote?
4
A.
Which was four to the acre?
5
Q. 299
No, the very first vote was to vote on the manager's map at 7207.
6
A.
Again, if that is how the record shows, yes, I have no dispute with that
7 8
whatsoever. Q. 300
9
The map that you are recorded here as voting in favour of the manager's proposals, isn't that right? It's the very first vote that took place.
12:08:21 10
We've
looked at it already.
11
A.
Yes, I think we've ....
12
Q. 301
Yes.
And the map on 7207.
That that map can be found at 7203.
13
what you were voting for.
14
A1P and an increase in the amount of residentially zoned land.
12:08:46 15
And this is
You were voting for a change in density from AP to Do you see
that?
16
A.
I see the map, yes.
17
Q. 302
And the map is showing a move from AP to A1P?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 303
And as you know A1P is area Action Plan, isn't that right that?
A.
Would be correct.
Q. 304
And within an area Action Plan, as the manager had outlined on his report to
12:08:57 20
21 22
you on 13th of May 1992, provision would be made for appropriate shopping.
23
7197, please.
24 12:09:14 25
You will see here on the second last paragraph the manager in reporting to the
26
council on DP92/44 said in relation to shopping.
27
that shopping be confined to neighbourhood facilities and he had also said in
28
the third -- sorry -- in the fourth paragraph he had said the Action Plan will
29
provide for the provision of necessary community facilities, schools, shopping
12:09:40 30
etc..
It's considered essential
So the manager had said that the area action plan would provide for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:09:44
12:10:01
57 1
shopping facilities, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's what the record shows.
3
Q. 305
You had then voted in favour of the manager when you had voted in favour of
4
DP92/44.
5
or a town centre at the Cherrywood lands at 7214.
6
A.
And you are now voting against the introduction of a shopping centre
Again, I would have tried to look at each motion as it came before me.
And
7
made a decision on that basis, resulting from the debates and so forth and as
8
they came about.
9
Q. 306
12:10:25 10
And are you in a position to explain that apparent inconsistency to the Tribunal?
11
A.
I'm not at this position at this moment in time, no, I cannot recall.
12
Q. 307
And I think the last vote on that date was at 7216.
Which is Councillor
13
Barrett's motion.
14
low density zoning in the Carrickmines Valley at one house to the acre. And
12:10:40 15
And Councillor Barrett's motion was for the introduction of
you voted in favour of that, isn't that right?
16
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
17
Q. 308
As I think as did your colleague Ms. Terry.
Now, I would suggest to you,
18
subject to anything you may wish to say to the Tribunal, Mr. Tyndall, that your
19
vote in favour of low density and Councillor Barrett's motion is inconsistent
12:11:00 20
21
with your vote on the same occasion in favour of the manager's proposal. A.
It would appear when you look at it in isolation with not the full content of
22
the record there, but I would suggest that I would have looked at each motion
23
as it came up and tried to make as best an informed decision as I could with
24
what was available to me at that time.
12:11:22 25
Q. 309
Yes.
Can you now looking back on it think of any reason why at the early part
26
of the meeting you would have been in favour of increased density and increased
27
residential take on these lands and by the end of the meeting were voting in
28
favour of one house to the acre?
29 12:11:42 30
A.
Obviously it would have been influenced by the debate on that particular day and I would have listened quite intently particularly to the people who would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:11:48
12:12:08
58 1 2
have been more involved and more familiar with that area. Q. 310
3
After that vote was successful, Mr. Tyndall, the map went out on public display for a second time in mid 1993.
And the map that went out is at 7217.
4 5
Now, what had happened to the lands that were zoned residential in the
6
Carrickmines Valley.
7
town centre has been placed on a portion of the lands and the balance are zoned
8
agriculture.
9
would agree I think that certainly by this stage you and probably anybody else
12:12:28 10
A.
I would certainly have known that they were a landowner.
Q. 311
I think indeed if we were to take up some of the motions that you had voted upon and the maps signed attached to those motions show the same outline I
16
think. That you had voted on on 27th of May 1992.
17
maps attached to them, isn't that right? A.
19 12:13:06 20
21
The individual motions had
I think it must be stated also that you would have dealt with tens if not hundreds of maps.
It would be very difficult to recall a specific map.
Q. 312
Yes.
A.
And they wouldn't have been dealt with one after another either.
22 23
Q. 313
Well insofar as this particular map was concerned.
I think the record of the
minutes show the only matter that was being discussed on the 27th of May 1992
12:13:22 25
were the 11 motions relating to the Monarch lands at Cherrywood in County
26
Dublin.
Isn't that what the record shows?
27
A.
I'm quite prepared to accept what the record shows, yes.
28
Q. 314
Because you will note indeed at 7216.
12:13:41 30
There would
have been other maps and considerations in between each time.
24
29
I would not suggest
that I would have known the intricacies of the actual line.
12:12:47 15
18
And you
landowner in the Carrickmines Valley?
13 14
And you can see the outline of the Monarch lands.
A
who had been at these two meetings must have known that Monarch were a
11 12
They were all now zoned at one house to the acre.
That the last motion, which was
Councillor Barrett's motion, concluded the meeting. beginning of the consideration of map 27 to the end. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
So that from the The only matters that
12:13:46
12:14:07
59 1
were considered were those 11 motions.
2
motions identified the Monarch lands.
And that the maps attached to the
Isn't that right? Isn't that right?
3
A.
That would appear to be correct, yes.
4
Q. 315
And I think that what happened then was that the matter came to be considered
5
again by the council in November 1993 and at 7234.
6
3rd of November.
7
vote takes place but the manager makes a report at 7255.
8
to your attention that under the heading "change three".
9
brought about by Mr. Barrett's motion, which reduced the density to one house
12:14:29 10
per acre.
11
Properties.
12
per acre.
You were recorded as being present.
And I want to draw Which is the change
Change of zoning at lands at Carrickmines from AP to two houses That's per hectare.
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 316
That's one house per acre, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 317
The manager at the next page, 7256.
16
And at that meeting no
The heading in the minutes of the meeting are Carrickmines Monarch
13
12:14:42 15
This is the meeting of the
He records the history of the zoning and
17
he recommends deleting the amendment, isn't that right? You will see
18
recommendation delete amendment.
19 12:14:58 20
A.
Yes, I see that.
Q. 318
And what the manager is recommending there, is that Councillor Barrett's
21
amendment be deleted in its entirety.
Isn't that right?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 319
So certainly those attending at the meeting including yourself 3rd of November.
24
Before you came to consider the matter would have known that what you were
12:15:15 25
considering included Monarch Properties lands.
Isn't that right?
26
A.
I would have to assume that is correct.
27
Q. 320
And indeed, I think -- at the meeting of the 11th of November, Mr. Tyndall,
28
which came to consider the matter.
29
by the council but this was the last chance, isn't that right, to change the
12:15:47 30
A number of motions came to be considered
density on these lands? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:15:50
12:16:02
60 1
A.
If that's what you say, yes, I accept that.
2
Q. 321
No, it's not what I say.
3 4
A.
I cannot recall the specific dates as to which, when they arose.
Q. 322
The position in relation to making a Development Plan is that councillors make a plan, it's put on public display?
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 323
Representations are made to it.
A.
That's right.
Q. 324
And it came back in May of '92 to the council.
11 12
it went out on display again.
13
isn't that right?
14
If that's
what the record is showing, I fully accept that.
7
12:16:15 10
You operated
this Development Plan.
5 6
You are the councillor, Mr. Tyndall.
It comes back to the council?
You voted in a certain way and
And it comes back a second time to the council,
A.
That's correct.
Q. 325
And after this decision is made the Development Plan is made, isn't that right?
16
A.
That -- that would have been 1993.
17
Q. 326
And the Development Plan in fact was made on 10th of December 1993 by Dublin
12:16:24 15
18 19
County Council? A.
12:16:42 20
Which would have been just before the councils would have split into their own different areas.
21
Q. 327
In January of 1994?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 328
In November of 1993 what I have been putting to you was this was Monarch's last
24
chance to change the density before the plan was finalised.
12:16:53 25
Isn't that the
position?
26
A.
That would be correct, yes.
27
Q. 329
So the matter came to be considered by you and your colleagues, I think on 11th
28
of November 1993.
29
7259, please.
12:17:12 30
And there were a number of motions that were considered.
And the first motion it's not dealt with at this point in time,
that is a motion seeking to confirm change three. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And that is to confirm low
12:17:18
12:17:40
61 1
density.
It's a motion by Councillor Smyth and Buckley.
2
at 7260.
Is to confirm change three, that's low density, for all of the
3
residential lands and prepare a variation.
4
Councillor Marren and Coffey to accept the manager's recommendation for a
5
portion of the lands and confirm the manager's recommendation for the balance
6
of the lands.
7
that's proposed to the first motion.
8
Barrett's amendment at 7261.
9
7262.
12:18:16 10
The second motion
And motion No. 3 a motion by
And an amendment is proposed by Councillor Barrett. And you vote against Councillor
And on the next page, on the first motion, at
Which is to confirm low density on all of the lands.
that motion.
And
You vote against
Do you see that?
11
A.
I do.
12
Q. 330
Now, you have voted for low density in May of 1992 and you had voted for
13 14
Councillor Barrett's motion.
Isn't that right? In May of '92.
A.
That is correct.
Q. 331
And you are now voting against low density here?
16
A.
That is also correct.
17
Q. 332
It would follow from that, that you had changed your view in the period.
12:18:28 15
18 19 12:18:43 20
21
Isn't that right? A.
I think the first motion I voted for was for higher densities.
Q. 333
Yes, you had.
A.
Again, going back to, I would have listened to each debate and tried to make-up
22 23
my mind on that. Q. 334
24
But certainly, insofar as you had voted for low density. initially for higher density.
12:18:58 25
density in May of '92.
26
That was defeated.
You had voted
You then voted for low
And you are now voting for low density here, isn't
that the position?
27
A.
Well, it would appear I'm going back to the initial position that I had.
28
Q. 335
I think on the second motion, which is also low density, at 7263, you are
29 12:19:16 30
recorded as voting against low density again.
And on Councillor Coffey and
Marren's motion, which is at 7263, you are recorded as voting in favour of it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:19:24
12:19:44
62 1
Isn't that the position?
2
A.
That's what the record shows, yes.
3
Q. 336
And Councillor Coffey and Marren's motion was accompanied by a map, 7227.
4
you see that outline?
5
A.
I do.
6
Q. 337
That is the outline of the Monarch lands, Mr. Tyndall.
7 8
And that is the
outline of the lands that would have been on most of the motions in May of '92? A.
9 12:20:04 10
Do
If that's, yes, I accept -- even at this stage looking at it I wouldn't be able to tell you that was the exact map, having seen them just two minutes ago.
Q. 338
But certainly having looked at what the manager had said, at the time that you
11
were voting on these lands, you must have known that what you were voting on
12
was Monarch's lands because they had been identified in the heading.
13
A.
14
Certainly looking at it now, it would appear to be that way.
12:20:25 15
16
Well, again, I cannot answer as to what -- 'cos I cannot recall the specifics.
hindsight is a wonderful thing. Q. 339
17
Yes.
You voted in favour of Councillor Marren and Coffey's motion.
Isn't
that right?
18
A.
This is the last motion?
19
Q. 340
Yes.
A.
I'm not sure to be honest.
12:20:37 20
But again, 20/20
21
That's again -- this was the last one to increase
the densities.
22
Q. 341
This is at 7263.
23
A.
I did, yes, I did vote.
24
Q. 342
What you were voting for in favour there, Mr. Tyndall, was to increase the
12:20:59 25
This motion is Councillor Marren's.
density on the Monarch lands to four per acre and leave the balance of the
26 27
Yes, 7263.
residentially zoned lands at one per acre. A.
Again, I would have listened to the full debate and tried to make an informed
28
decision. And I think it is regrettable that the minutes don't show that there
29
would have been wholesome and fairly boisterous debates at that stage, both for
12:21:24 30
and against. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:21:24
12:21:35
63 1
Q. 343
So your initial starting position in May of 1992 was in favour of increased
2
density and increased residential zoning.
3
you changed your view and voted in favour of low density.
4
position?
5
A.
their colleagues.
7
changed my mind. Q. 344
9
11
So, yes, I have no problem with saying that I would have
And then when it came to November you were voting against low density, having voted in favour of low density in May of '92.
12:21:55 10
Is that the
There was a duty upon councillors to listen to all relevant facts, including
6
8
And in the course of that meeting
And you then voted in favour of
increasing the density on the Monarch lands. A.
I would have looked at each motion and made a decision on the basis of each
12
motion as presented to me, which would not have basically stated for or against
13
low or high density in any shape or form.
14
it came in front of me.
12:22:12 15
Q. 345
16
It would have been each motion as
Well I think in fairness to yourself, that the density is dealt with on the actual motion at 7226.
This the motion that you voted on.
17
A.
Yep.
18
Q. 346
And I think in fairness to you yourself, you can't be correct when you say you
19 12:22:29 20
weren't considering density because it was the only thing you were -A.
Sorry, just to clarify, what I was suggesting is that I would have looked at
21
each motion as it came in front of me and voted accordingly.
22
a motion there I couldn't have voted on it.
23
Q. 347
24
Now, well leaving that aside for the moment. the moment.
12:22:47 25
Just looking at the motion at
For the moment, Mr. Tyndall, would you agree that the only matter
that you are considering is density?
26
A.
On map No. 27, change No. 3?
27
Q. 348
Yes.
28
A.
If that's ... yes, it would appear that way.
29
Q. 349
Yes.
A.
Remain at two per hectare.
12:23:06 30
If there wasn't
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:23:09
12:23:18
64 1
Q. 350
2
Yes, because change three was the imposition of density at one per acre as a result of Councillor Barrett's motion.
3
A.
Uh-huh.
4
Q. 351
And what this motion is doing is it's changing the density on the lands
5
attached to the map to four to the acre and leaving the rest at one to the
6
acre.
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 352
All right.
9
Mr. Tyndall, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why or what were the
12:23:40 10
reasons that would leave the Monarch lands with the density of four to the acre
11 12
Now, if you go back and you look at the map at 7217.
and the balance of the lands zoned at one to the acre? A.
I cannot.
All I can suggest as to what was going on at that stage, which may
13
have been a compromise put forward to try and get some higher densities
14
through.
12:24:08 15
16
and where to for. Q. 353
17 18
A.
Again, if I had the benefit of the debate both for and against, well then it would be easier now to make that decision.
Q. 354
21 22
Looking at the map, can you see any reason to justify the different densities that were voted on, on the 11th of November '93?
19 12:24:24 20
But I cannot, I'm only speculating because I cannot recall as to why
Yes but looking at that map and with the benefit of your years of experience as a councillor --
A.
With my years of experience I would be a lot more familiar with lands relating
23
my own particular area and would be very much be open to the debate when it
24
came outside of my area.
12:24:43 25
at this moment in time.
So I think it's unfair -- I cannot suggest as to why I can only say to you again that I would have looked
26
at it at the particular time, listened and tried to make an informed decision
27
as best I could at that particular time.
28
Q. 355
29 12:25:01 30
Do you agree that when you voted upon that motion you, whatever about any other councillors, must have known that you were voting on the Monarch lands?
A.
I cannot surmise as to what I must or didn't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
I can only tell you what I
12:25:06
12:25:20
65 1 2
do know now and what I'm looking at, at this point in time. Q. 356
Looking at the minutes of the meeting and looking at the documentation that has
3
been outlined to you and which has been circulated, I think you would have to
4
agree that you must have known that you were dealing with the Monarch
5
Properties lands, isn't that right?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 357
You don't agree with that?
8
A.
I don't agree with that.
9
Q. 358
Then 7225.
A.
I accept that I can look at the maps now and it's very, very clearly -- I don't
12:25:32 10
11
accept and I would be only surmising if I was to state any other thing to you
12
at this moment in time.
13
have been fully aware of each boundary relating to that map.
14
Q. 359
12:25:55 15
16
I do not recall at that particular time that I would
When you were -- were you ever approached by Mr. Lynn or anybody else on his behalf in connection with supporting the Cherrywood lands?
A.
I cannot recall specifically being asked about the Cherrywood lands.
But I
17
have absolutely no doubt that I would have had discussions. I cannot recall a
18
specific meeting relating to Cherrywood.
19
wouldn't have discussed the Cherrywood lands with Mr. Lynn.
12:26:16 20
Q. 360
21 22
But again, I am not disputing that I
Did you ever receive any payment or political subscriptions from Mr. Lynn or from Monarch Properties or anybody on their behalf?
A.
Well I now understand and following documentation received from the Tribunal
23
that I received a payment in 1991 of 300 punts.
24
Local Election, which was held on 27th of June 1991.
12:26:44 25
26
It would have been before the And this payment was
made be it May or June back in 1991. Q. 361
27
Yes.
I think you informed the Tribunal on two occasions I think by letter
dated 17th of February 2006.
2268.
28
A.
That is correct.
29
Q. 362
At paragraph three, "That you never received any payment or benefit from or on
12:27:02 30
behalf of Monarch Properties Limited", a number of companies and then a number Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:27:07
12:27:21
66 1
of named people or any individual or company associated with them.
2
that you had no recollection of any person making representations to you
3
regarding the lands at Cherrywood.
4
have met Mr. Lynn and I think you would accept it's likely that he may have
5
lobbied you in connection with these lands, is that correct?
6
A.
And then
But you would now accept that you must
I have no -- as I stated in my statement, I have no recollection.
But if it
7
is shown -- I have no doubt that there's a possibility of it, I would have
8
spoken to him because I would have met Mr. Lynn on numerous occasions.
9
Q. 363
12:27:41 10
11
We are talking about whether or not he was lobbied.
And at 2272.
On the
24th of March 2006 -A.
Just to clarify something.
That particular statement.
You're right.
I
12
didn't make any reference to monies that were received which was the 300 pounds
13
which I now acknowledge did arrive in 1991.
14
I would have been new to politics, new to the party.
12:28:05 15
Just to clarify that if I may.
the party in May and I wouldn't have had any dealings.
16
June.
17
to monies that would have come from elsewhere.
18
in that because I had no recollection of it.
19
Q. 364
12:28:27 20
21
The election was in
I wouldn't have had any dealings at that particular juncture relating
Sorry, I'm following you.
That's why it wasn't disclosed
You wouldn't have any dealings with monies coming
from elsewhere, Mr. Tyndall, I -A.
22
Just trying to clarify.
I hadn't disclosed that 300 pounds at that moment in
time because I wasn't aware of it.
23
Q. 365
You had forgotten it?
24
A.
I don't believe I was ever aware of it at that stage.
12:28:40 25
I would have only joined
am not disputing that the monies.
I have no dispute.
I
I am not disputing that the monies weren't
26
received.
27
Democrats to run as a local candidate in 1991 or in May of 1991 and my energies
28
at that stage would have been towards getting elected.
29
would have had a constituency office set up.
12:29:03 30
What I am saying to you is that I would have joined the Progressive
the cheque.
It's quite simple.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And I don't recall I
I don't recall actually seeing
12:29:04
12:29:23
67 1
Q. 366
And I think on the 24th of March 2006 you provided a second statement to the
2
Tribunal at 2272.
In which you reiterated that you had never received, isn't
3
that right, any payment via or on behalf of Mr. Monahan, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Sweeney,
4
Mr. Glennane, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Frank Dunlop & Associates or Shefran
5
or Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group, save for an unsolicited payment of 250
6
pounds to Mr. Dunlop." Isn't that the position?
7
A.
Which I had previously mentioned to the Tribunal.
8
Q. 367
Yes, we're talking now about the Monarch Properties payment.
9
A.
I'm talking about the second letter -- the first letter. Just to clarify
12:29:40 10
again, the first letter asked specific dates and that is why the second
11
clarification only related to that.
12
Q. 368
Yes.
13
A.
And the dates actually changed I believe in the second letter from the
14 12:29:52 15
Tribunal. Q. 369
Yes.
In the first letter that you received from the Tribunal, I think you
16
were asked for payments to a particular date I think in fact it was in fact to
17
between the 1st of January 1990 and 31st of December '94. Isn't that right?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q. 370
Now, the payment in June 1991 would fall within that period, isn't that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 371
In the first letter you gave the Tribunal you said you didn't receive any
12:30:12 20
21 22
payments.
23
within an extended period, isn't that right?
24
And you were then asked to provide information relating payments
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 372
But still including June of 1991.
26
A.
Absolutely, yes.
27
Q. 373
And on the second occasion when you provided the information to the Tribunal
12:30:23 25
28
you were still of the belief that you hadn't received any money, isn't that the
29
position that?
12:30:33 30
A.
Would be correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:30:34
12:30:44
68 1
Q. 374
2
Now, I have just been handed a supplemental statement.
And I understand
that -- I don't think we've had a copy of this before.
3 4
MR. O'DONNELL: It was given to the Tribunal earlier on this week.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
earlier on.
12:30:52 10
I don't have a copy.
I'm not disputing that we got a copy of it
But -- It certainly I don't think it has been added to the brief
but it will be added to the brief.
11 12
MR. O'DONNELL: We have copies of it for you, Chairman, Members of the
13
Tribunal, if you wish to have copies.
14
A.
If it would be of any benefit I could explain it to you.
12:31:04 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Well perhaps is it --
17 18
MS. DILLON:
That's fine.
We can put it up on screen.
19
have to be added to the brief.
Simply that it will
12:31:10 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Is it a lengthy statement?
22 23
MS. DILLON:
No, it's not.
24 12:31:13 25
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps if it's read out then and we can add it to the brief.
26 27
MR. O'DONNELL: We'll just give you copies.
28 29
(Handed to the Tribunal)
12:31:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:31:29
12:31:42
69 1
MS. DILLON:
This will be added to the brief and circulated.
2 3
Now, at paragraph 1 of this statement it states as follows.
"It has been
4
suggested in statements tendered to the Tribunal that I received a payment of
5
300 pounds from the Monarch Group on 11th of June 1991.
6
recollection of receiving such a payment.
7
donation was made I do not dispute that it was duly received by me."
I have no
If records demonstrated that such a
8 9
And for the avoidance of doubt, I think it might be as well at this particular
12:31:56 10
point in time, Mr. Tyndall --
11 12
MR. O'DONNELL: Perhaps we could finish reading the statement.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
12:32:04 15
No, I'm sorry. I will deal with this in my own way.
Thank you
as it arises I'm taking the witness.
16 17
You seem to be saying in that paragraph that it suggested that you received the
18
payment.
19
an extract --
12:32:15 20
A.
21
In case there is any dispute about it.
If we have 3191, which is
Sorry, I don't dispute I received it. I mean I have no reason to dispute that I received a payment.
22
Q. 375
It's simply that you say and I quote from your statement, Mr. Tyndall --
23
A.
I didn't recall receiving it. That's how I stated it.
24
Q. 376
And the record I want to draw to your attention is an extract from the cheque
12:32:30 25
payments book from Monarch Properties and if you look at I think 7 from the
26
bottom on that, you will see recorded in the cheque payments book of Monarch
27
Properties a cheque in the sum of 300 pounds.
28
PD.
29 12:32:50 30
Sorry Colm Tyndall TD, do you see that?
A.
Maybe I should check.
Q. 377
Do you see that, Mr. Tyndall? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And the payee is Chris Tyndall
12:32:51
12:33:13
70 1
A.
I do.
2
Q. 378
Yes. And it's the 11th of the 6th 1991.
And I think that there are and then
3
indeed at 3193.
On 19th of June 1991 there is a debit of that cheque No. 3648
4
in the sum of some 7 or 8 up from the bottom cheque No. 3648, in the sum 300
5
pounds from Monarch Properties Services Limited.
6 7
Now, to go back to your third statement, Mr. Tyndall, if I may.
8 9 12:33:25 10
At paragraph two you say.
"Furthermore and for the avoidance of any doubt it
is also suggested that I received two further payments namely, A, a payment
11
from Richard Lynn & Associates Limited on the 25th of March 1999, in the sum of
12
500 pounds.
13
sum of 500 pounds for a golf classic.
And B, a payment from Dunloe Ewart on the 24th of May 1999 in the
14 12:33:43 15
Again, I have no recollection he have of receiving either of these payments
16
during my time in politics I organised two golf classic tournaments to
17
fundraise my election campaigning. I believe it is more likely than not that
18
the payment A above was also in respect of a golf classic."
19 12:33:59 20
I think that the records provided to the Tribunal from Dunloe Ewart show at
21
page 6752, at item 14 on that list, a golf classic in aid of Councillor Colm
22
Tyndall held on 25th of March 1999 and 500 pounds was contributed.
23 24 12:34:22 25
26
And in fact, I think subject to any correction from you, that only one sum of 500 pounds is being referred to, Mr. Tyndall.
And that you may have made an
error in your statement.
27 28
MR. O'DONNELL: No, the second payment is from Dunloe Ewart.
29 12:34:32 30
CHAIRMAN:
This is a list of Dunloe Ewart.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:34:36
12:34:50
71 1
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
This is the Dunloe Ewart list.
The payment is made by
2
Mr. Lynn on behalf of Dunloe Ewart.
So it was not being suggested that there
3
were two payments of 500 pounds.
The Tribunal is only aware of one payment
4
subject to Mr. Tyndall being able to clarify it.
5
A.
I can clarify it, yes.
6
Q. 379
Well, what you have said is that you -- it is suggested you received two
7 8
payments. A.
9 12:35:09 10
Are you telling the Tribunal you received two payments?
What is said in the statement is that I received a payment from Richard Lynn & Associates Limited of 500 pounds.
Q. 380
That's what you say you received?
11
A.
And that is correct, yes.
12
Q. 381
All right.
13
A.
Just to clarify.
14
And at paragraph three -The original letter from the Tribunal asked Richard Lynn and
that's why I felt I was trying to be helpful not to differentiate between
12:35:25 15
16
In addition to the Dunloe Ewart, yes.
Richard Lynn & Associates Limited and just Richard Lynn. Q. 382
And your records -- are you saying that you based that information on your
17
records, Mr. Tyndall, or the information you have been provided by the
18
Tribunal?
19 12:35:40 20
A.
As I understand it, I think it was from details furnished by the Tribunal.
Q. 383
And at paragraph four you said "For the avoidance of doubt, I wish to make it
21
clear that I had and still have no recollection of receiving the payments
22
received to above which is why I did not refer to them in my earlier statements
23
to the Tribunal. Nor have I any contemporaneous records now available of
24
receiving the payments in question.
12:36:01 25
26
However, if other persons records suggest
such payments were made to me I am not in a position to and do not dispute receipt."
27 28
That's dated 29th of May 2006.
29 12:36:08 30
Was that your third statement to the Tribunal, Mr. Tyndall? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:36:10
12:36:15
72 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 384
Thank you very much, Mr. Tyndall.
3
If you answer any questions anybody else
may have for you.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
anything?
Thank you very much.
Sorry, does your counsel wish to ask
7 8
MR. O'DONNELL:
9
24th of May 1999 from Richard Lynn & Associates and a payment from the 25th of
12:36:34 10
March 1999 from Dunloe Ewart? Is it through your own recollection or is it
11 12
Why is it that you believe that you received a payment on the
through documents supplied to you by the Tribunal from both these entries? A.
It is through documents supplied by the Tribunal.
That I have no dispute that
13
I did receive them.
14
any -- I never did any fundraising other than golf classics.
12:36:54 15
16
Q. 385
Yes.
A.
And I can only assume that both of those would have been for participation in
17 18
I can only assume at this moment in time, I never had
the golf outing which I would have held. Q. 386
19
So, if for example, Dunloe Ewart have misrecorded the timing of the payment and that there is only one payment, you accept that that's correct?
12:37:09 20
But you have
no --
21
A.
Absolutely.
22
Q. 387
You have no way at this stage of saying whether there were two or one or none
23 24 12:37:26 25
26
except through the records supplied to you by the Tribunal? A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 388
And that also applies in respect of the earlier payment in June of 1991?
A.
That is also correct, yes.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much.
29 12:37:26 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:37:26
12:37:30
73 1 2
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Denis O'Callaghan, please.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:37:33
12:38:00
74 1
MR. DENIS O'CALLAGHAN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. O'Callaghan
A.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
Q. 389
MR. QUINN: I know that you have an appointment in the afternoon.
6 7 8
So I will
try and get through your evidence as best I can.
9 12:38:09 10
Mr. O'Callaghan, you were written to like other witnesses who have given
11
evidence by the Tribunal.
And you supplied a statement on 19th of April 2006.
12
And that statement is to be found at pages 7617 and 7618 of the brief.
13 14
I think you were a councillor for Dublin County Council having been elected in
12:38:29 15
1991.
Is that correct?
16
A.
That's correct. June of '91.
17
Q. 390
June of 1991.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 391
Workers Party?
A.
That's correct.
Q. 392
And I think Councillor Gilmore and Councillor Rabbitte were also members of
12:38:44 20
21 22
I think you are a member of Democratic Left, is that correct?
I was elected a councillor for the Workers Party in June of '91.
that party at that time, is that right?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 393
I think you are familiar with the Carrickmines lands, isn't that right?
A.
I would have been fairly familiar, yes.
Q. 394
And I think together with your colleague Councillor Gilmore, you promoted some
12:39:01 25
26 27 28
motions in relation to the lands, isn't that right? A.
29 12:39:16 30
As were Councillor Breathnach, Billane and Tipping.
I co-signed motions with Councillor Gilmore and Councillor Breathnach, that's correct.
Q. 395
Just to return to your statement for the moment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
You said that you received
12:39:19
12:39:29
75 1
no payments or benefits from any other persons associated with Monarch.
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 396
You'd know the named persons. Nor indeed did you receive monies from Mr.
4
Dunlop or any of his companies, is that correct?
5
A.
No, I didn't.
6
Q. 397
Now, if we just deal.
7
That's correct. Your first involvement with the lands would have been
in May 1992, isn't that right?
8
A.
That's correct.
9
Q. 398
And at that stage the manager had put forward proposals in relation to the
12:39:46 10
lands, isn't that right?
And those proposals were contained on map DP92/44.
11
And it was more or less to the effect that the area where these lands were
12
situated would be zoned A1 on piped sewage four houses to the acre.
13
up a map if you like, if it would be of assistance. 7203, please.
I can put
14 12:40:06 15
This was the situation coming in after the first public display of the
16
manager's recommendations to the councillors.
And you see there that they had
17
got to public display on piped sewage four houses to the acre.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 399
He was extending the area to proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway?
A.
Yes.
Q. 400
And he was recommending or suggesting an upgrade from AP to A1P, which would
12:40:28 20
21 22
have been on an action area plan, isn't that correct?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 401
And that manager proposal was put forward based on that map.
12:40:44 25
Councillors Lydon and McGrath at that meeting in May '92.
26
7207.
27
You voted against the manager's proposals, isn't that right
28
A.
That's what the record states, that's correct.
29
Q. 402
Yes.
A.
Correct.
12:41:01 30
As did your colleagues at that time?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And proposed by
And if I could have
12:41:02
12:41:16
76 1
Q. 403
Then there were proposals I think by Councillors Breathnach and Smyth as there
2
were by Councillors Gordon and Reeves.
3
the acre. If I could have 7210.
The lands would remain at one house to
4 5
And I think you voted against those proposals, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's what the record shows, correct.
7
Q. 404
Yes. If you were against four houses to the acre and against one house to the
8 9
acre. A.
12:41:54 10
Can I ask you what you were in favour of at that time?
I think it is important to explain to you that I would have co-signed a number of motions in relation to the Carrickmines Valley which included a special
11
amenity area order, the district zoning.
12
argue had a structured plan for the valley.
13
be taken at the beginning of the date.
14
was defeated.
12:42:18 15
A number of motions which I would And we asked that those motions
Now, there was a vote on that, which
Q. 405
Yes.
16
A.
So our motions weren't taken.
17
Q. 406
Yes.
18
A.
At the beginning.
19
Q. 407
If we come to 7213, please. We come to the first of those motions.
12:42:29 20
Namely, a motion "That the council resolve that a special amenity area order be
21
made for the Shangannagh Loughlinstown Valley", isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 408
And you voted obviously in favour of your own motion there, as did your
24 12:42:42 25
26
colleagues? A.
Correct.
Q. 409
And then of we go to the next page at 7214.
We find a second motion.
27
time a proposal that there would be a land zoned C, which was I think a
28
district centre or a town centre.
29 12:42:57 30
A.
No, district centre.
Q. 410
District centre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
This
12:42:57
12:43:05
77 1
A.
Correct.
2
Q. 411
I think that motion was actually successful, isn't that right?
3
A.
The record shows that, that is correct.
4
Q. 412
Can I ask you just in relation to that motion.
5
with any representatives of Monarch before you came to table it?
6
A.
In relation to the particular motion?
7
Q. 413
Yes.
8 9
A.
Not to my knowledge. centre.
11 Q. 414
In relation to, specifically in relation to a district
I would have had representations from Monarch in relation to their
lands over all.
13 14
Or your proposals or your views that it should be a district centre at
this location?
12:43:25 10
12
Had you discussed that motion
I can't recall specifically in relation to a district centre.
Did you have much attraction with the representatives of Monarch in relation to the lands at this time, that's 1992?
A.
12:43:49 15
Not really.
I think I met with Richard Lynn.
He may have shown up at our
advice clinics which we held at that time across the county.
16
And he may have
shown up at one of my advice clinics and discussed his proposals.
17
Q. 415
Yes.
18
A.
With both myself and Deputy Gilmore.
19
Q. 416
Yourself and Deputy Gilmore seem to have been very close in relation to the
12:44:07 20
motions.
You seemed to propose or seconded each others motions?
21
A.
We tended to that as a party.
22
Q. 417
Yes.
23
A.
But you would understand.
24 12:44:19 25
I was a new councillor.
Deputy Gilmore was the
senior councillor. Q. 418
I appreciate that. So in any event, that was a successful motion. Would it be
26
fair to say that you were seeking to promote some sort of development or maybe
27
job creation projects in the valley at this stage?
28 29 12:44:45 30
A.
Yes.
As you know, there was an extensive PR job done by, on behalf of Monarch
Properties in the Loughlinstown and Shankill areas in relation to the development of their lands.
There would have been high unemployment in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:44:51
12:45:14
78 1
area at the time, both in Loughlinstown, Ballybrack and in the Shankill areas.
2
And yes, in putting, in supporting a district zoning there, I would have been
3
of the opinion that it was for the public good.
4
Q. 419
5
Yes, it would create jobs.
But you weren't promoting it on the basis that you had been asked to do so by Monarch?
6
A.
Absolutely not.
7
Q. 420
Or any of their representatives?
8
A.
Absolutely not.
9
Q. 421
Yes. At 7215 we see the third of your motions.
12:45:22 10
Which was a motion that the
council would seem seek agreement with the landowner or developer seeking to
11
confine the construction of the number of houses to a smaller area of the site.
12
And that having regard to the C zoning on a portion of land.
13
were seeking to concentrate the residential development close to the district
14
centre which you had just proposed?
12:45:43 15
A.
16
Is where you
That motion formed part of our initial wraft of motions which we asked to be taken first.
17
Q. 422
Yes.
18
A.
What we were attempting there was to cluster what development was permitted on
19
it.
12:46:06 20
To cluster those houses so as not to impact significantly on the
Carrickmines Valley, which was a beautiful valley, as you know.
21
Q. 423
That motion was unsuccessful I think?
22
A.
That's correct.
23
Q. 424
And then finally, there was a motion tabled by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell
24
suggesting that development would be limited to a density not exceeding one
12:46:23 25
house per acre.
26
A.
That's correct, that would.
27
Q. 425
7216, please.
28 29 12:46:38 30
I think the 1991 draft plan would have had it at four houses to
the acre. A.
Yes.
I supported.
Q. 426
You supported that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:46:39
12:46:54
79 1
A.
I supported that motion.
2
Q. 427
Yes.
3
A.
I supported that motion, yes.
4
Q. 428
And had Councillors Barrett or Dockrell asked you for their support or your
5
It was the last motion I recall on the evening.
support for their motion?
6
A.
No, they hadn't.
7
Q. 429
And had Monarch at any stage asked that you would support a motion for either a
8 9 12:47:10 10
higher density than one house to the acre or indeed four houses to the acre? A.
Not that I can recall, no.
Q. 430
In any event, I think the map went on display on the basis that these lands
11
would be zoned on the basis of one house to the acre on piped sewage, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q. 431
And the matter came back before the council in November 1993.
12:47:25 15
Isn't that
right?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q. 432
I think you had motions again in November 1993.
If we could have 7260.
18
Yourself and Councillor Gilmore had proposed that the lands on public display
19
change 3, map 27 be confirmed as shown.
12:47:48 20
And that the manager be requested to
prepare and submit to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council not later
21
than June 1994, a draft variation of the new County Development Plan, isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q. 433
That motion I think was unsuccessful?
A.
Um, if my memory serves me right it was unsuccessful.
Q. 434
You see at 7262 and 7263 the vote on that.
12:48:00 25
26
There then I think was a motion by
27
Councillors Marren and Coffey asking that the amendments be deleted, isn't that
28
right? We see there at 7263 "That Dublin County Council resolves to accept the
29
County Manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendments in respect of
12:48:24 30
the lands outlined in red on the attached map. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And that the balance of the
12:48:29
12:48:40
80 1
lands remained at two houses to the hectare."
2
If I could have 7217.
3
map.
This is the map, you will see now in a moment on the
I'm sure you've seen it already this morning.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 435
We went through it with other witnesses.
6
The area coloured yellow is an area
proposed in one house to the acre, isn't that right? And this motion --
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 436
Of Councillors Marren and Coffey is that the area encompassed by the red line
9
would revert to four houses to the acre.
12:48:59 10
But that the balance of the lands
coloured yellow would remain at one house to the acre?
11
A.
That's correct and the manager's report was also saying that.
12
Q. 437
The manager's report I think was suggesting that all of the lands --
13
A.
Sorry.
14
Q. 438
Can you put forward any reason as to why the lands encompassed by the red line
12:49:21 15
I apologise, yes.
For the whole.
which coincidentally happen to be the Monarch lands ought to revert to four
16
houses to the acre and that the balance of the lands would remain at one house
17
to the acre?
18 19 12:49:48 20
A.
I can't really.
I can surmise.
That the lands outside of the Monarch lands
marked in red are lands in the Cabinteely, Lahaunstown, Brennanstown area which were the subject of, if you like, a separate extensive lobbying earlier on by
21
the Carrickmines Valley Protection Association who had lobbied quite
22
significantly in, prior to the Local Elections of '91 and indeed after.
23 24 12:50:23 25
So it's just a surmise that public reps would be very conscious of the -- of that association who were very active in retaining a number of things.
One,
26
low density.
27
either Carrickmines or Wyatville and in fact want the to divert traffic off the
28
M50 to both Shankill and Ballinteer.
29
favour of industrial zonings around the -- around those interchanges of
12:50:59 30
Secondly, that I can recall, they didn't want any junctions at
Wyatville and Carrickmines.
And thirdly, they weren't quite in
So there was a pretty powerful lobby. So it's
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:51:03
12:51:12
81 1 2
just -Q. 439
3
But that lobby effected all of the lands coloured yellow, isn't that right? Not just the lands other than the Monarch lands?
4
A.
It did, yes.
5
Q. 440
Yeah.
6
Now, just in relation to the other than the fact that these are Monarch
related lands.
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 441
Can you give any indication or suggestion to the Tribunal any reason why these
9
lands should be singled out as lands that merited four houses to the acre,
12:51:29 10
whereas the balance of the adjoining lands which had the support of the manager
11
at four houses to the acre, ought to be retained at one house to the acre?
12
A.
No, is the answer to you.
13
Q. 442
Thank you very much.
14 12:51:49 15
16
Now, you then continued on I think as a member of Dun
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, isn't that right? A.
That's right, from '94.
Q. 443
Yes, '94.
And I think again yourself, and particularly Councillor Gilmore
17
promoted the concept I think of a science and technology park, isn't that
18
right, for this area?
19 12:52:07 20
A.
It that would be correct, yeah.
Q. 444
Particularly in May '94.
Councillor Gilmore probably more so.
If I could have 5130, please.
This is a report on
21
Councillor Gilmore's suggestion on the science and technology park for the
22
area.
23
propose the science and technology park for this area?
24 12:52:33 25
A.
Can you recall the circumstances under which Councillor Gilmore came to
Well I can recall my own. Gilmore.
Obviously, I can't speak for Councillor Deputy
There was an idea floating at the time, I recall, in relation to the
26
provision of a science and technology park in the Dublin area.
27
number of local authorities were bidding for that science and technology park.
28
Also I think the colleges, a number of colleagues, Trinity, UCD, DTI, DCU
29
obviously were interested in the idea.
12:53:07 30
And I think a
And I think there was an EU programme
also in relation to it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:53:09
12:53:30
82 1
On Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council it was thought it was a tremendious
2
idea.
3
would actually be a partner in it, I think it was if my memory's right, GRE.
We had UCD in the county.
And that it would -- Dun Laoghaire Rathdown
4
Q. 445
Yes.
5
A.
And that it would be a revenue generating base for the local authority.
6
again, would create jobs in the area.
7
idea was warmly welcomed.
And
So my recollection of it was that the
8
Q. 446
Welcomed both by the councillors and by the officials presumably?
9
A.
Certainly by the councillors.
Q. 447
And of course obviously the location of a science and technology park now on
12:53:48 10
11
the area would require an amendment or a variation to the Development Plan?
12
A.
It would require a variation of the County Development Plan, yes.
13
Q. 448
And I think as matters transpired, the issue or the motion Councillor Gilmore's
14
motion, was discussed at a tourism and planning meeting of the council in May
12:54:14 15
'94.
And again in June '94, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 449
Do you recall having any discussions with representatives of Monarch at this
18 19 12:54:29 20
time in relation to the possibility of the science and technology park? A.
No, no.
Q. 450
In any event, I think the council, as you say, were very much in favour of the
21
proposal.
22
Action Plan put on display.
23
letter would be written to a committee or a subcommittee which had been
24
established by the Taoiseach to look into the whole issue of the science and
12:54:53 25
And in June '94 I think, it was decided that there would be a Draft
technology park.
26
A delegation would meet with ministers and a
Isn't that right? 2369.
This would appear to be what the
record of the meeting of 29th of June decided.
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 451
The planning and tourism committee, that was the subcommittee presumably?
29
A.
It would be a subcommittee of the council, yes.
Q. 452
And that seemed be the steering committee in relation to the science and
12:55:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:55:26
12:55:44
83 1
technology issue and also the area action plan, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's where it was appropriate to be raised.
3
Q. 453
And I think by November of 1994, on the 14th of November 1994, the manager was
4
in a position to tell the council that agreement had been reached on terms with
5
GRE and Monarch in relation to the council's perhaps in a science and
6
technology park.
7
display, a variation to the Development Plan to cater for the science and
8
technology park, isn't that right?
9 12:56:05 10
And I think it was resolved that there would be put on
A.
If there was an official report of that I'd accept that.
Q. 454
Yes.
And also I think that that agreement which the manager brokered
11
necessitated other variations by way of an increase in density from agriculture
12
to residential of portions of the Monarch lands?
13
A.
14 12:56:25 15
I think it had a knock on effect on to certain -- maybe and to the written statement also.
Q. 455
Yes. And the written statement.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 456
And I think a map did go on public display.
18
at a meeting.
19
colleagues.
12:56:42 20
And the matter was reviewed again
You voted in favour of those proposals as did 16 other of your
I think there were only two who voted against the proposals.
And the map, 94/85A went on public display.
If we have 7464.
21 22
There are nine changes I think proposed there by way of variation.
23
effectively provide for the E1, which was now to be a science and technology
24
park.
12:57:11 25
And they
The written statement had to be amended obviously accordingly.
Some
of the lands that were being changed were one was the agriculture B 4.5
26
hectares.
27
converted.
28
I think the district centre was replaced by agricultural lands as we'll see at.
29
It's amendment No. 4.
12:57:37 30
A ten houses to the hectare.
20 hectares of that had to be
As did one hectare of C, which was the district centre.
And then
And then amendments No. 5 and 6 proposed that
agricultural land south of what had been a proposed line of the motorway would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:57:42
12:57:57
84 1
now be elevated to in the case of 0.7 hectares C.
2
hectares A, which would have been residential.
3
16 houses to the hectare.
4
A.
Uh-huh.
5
Q. 457
And I think that would went on public display.
In the case of 19.5
But this time residential on
It came back before the
6
council in April 1995 when it was voted on.
7
And again, I think you were one of the 23 Councillors who vote in the favour of
8
the proposal.
9
that right?
12:58:22 10
If I could have 2427, please.
There being only one councillor who voted against them, isn't
A.
If that's what the record says.
11
Q. 458
And 2428.
12
A.
I accept that.
13
Q. 459
And again, throughout this period, did you have any contact with
14 12:58:38 15
16
representatives of Monarch in relation to the matter? A.
That period '95 to the best of my knowledge, no.
Q. 460
Yes.
Now, I think that you were to loose your colleagues Councillors Rabbitte
17
and Gilmore.
18
late '94?
19 12:59:00 20
They became ministers or junior ministers in the Government in
A.
In late '94, '95 to June '97.
Q. 461
Yes.
21
But unfortunately, I think the science and technology park wasn't given
to this district.
22
A.
No, that's correct.
23
Q. 462
Did that come as a disappointment?
24
A.
Yes, for me personally, yes.
Q. 463
Were you involved in seeking to have the park given to the site in Cherrywood?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 464
You didn't lobby for the site to be designated as --
28
A.
Only in my contributions on my own council.
29
Q. 465
Only on your contributions to your own council.
A.
Yes.
12:59:15 25
12:59:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
12:59:38
13:00:03
85 1
Q. 466
I think, I don't want to go through it now.
I think the plan did, that is the
2
1993 plan as varied did come up for review then in 1996.
3
were produced.
4
variation of the plan.
5
that right?
I think by January 1998 there was on display, a draft Which again had submissions from Cherrywood, isn't
6
A.
If that's what the record states.
7
Q. 467
The '93 plan as --
8
A.
As varied in '97.
9
Q. 468
As varied back in 1995.
A.
Yes.
You asked me in relation to representations in '97.
Q. 469
Yes.
No.
13:00:17 10
11 12
And in 1997 maps
That's for the review of --
I'm jumping ahead of myself.
I'm not taking it in stages.
I'm
trying to keep an eye on the time, so to speak.
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q. 470
The '93 plan as varied --
A.
Yes.
Q. 471
And you have seen the variation and I think it was approved in '95. Isn't that
13:00:36 15
16 17
right?
18
A.
Yes. That's correct.
19
Q. 472
And then I think the review took place of the 1993 plan as varied in 1996.
13:00:46 20
other words in 1996 the plan went up for review again in the normal course.
21
A.
Yes, the process was commenced.
22
Q. 473
And I think in early '97 maps were produced.
23 24 13:01:02 25
And an indication given of time
frames etc. A.
Yes.
Q. 474
But on 26th of March 1997 I think another issue came up for debate in the
26
council.
That was the line of the Southeastern Motorway, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's correct.
28
Q. 475
I think you were instrumental in putting forward the motion in relation to
29 13:01:18 30
In
that. 1997.
If we could have 6291.
This is at a meeting of the 26th of March
You had proposed and Councillor Pat Fitzgerald had seconded it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
That
13:01:26
13:01:43
86 1
there would be an adjournment of the council until a full Environmental Impact
2
Statement was given and considered by the members in relation to the effect of
3
the motorway.
4
from early 1990?
5
A.
6 7
Isn't that right? The line of the motorway had been an issue
The line of the motorway had been, yes, a major issue both in the Stepaside area and indeed in the, from the Carrickmines -- in the Carrickmines area, yes.
Q. 476
And it was hugely ifferential in that it had been long since agreed that
8
development would take place to the eastern side of that motorway line.
9
the further west the line went, the further the greater the area that had
13:02:05 10
11
opened up for development, isn't that right? A.
12 13
I certainly had a view that the line of the motorway should determine development, yes.
Q. 477
14 13:02:21 15
So
Back to the sea side --
At this stage, that is March '97, you are seeking to stall matters until a full Environmental Impact Statement is reached on the line of the motorway.
A.
That would be the purpose of the motion, yes.
16
Q. 478
Unfortunately, that motion was lost, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 479
16 votes against four for and there were no abstentions.
Then I think in
19
April '97 your colleagues had put forward the proposal that perhaps the
13:02:40 20
densities would be reinstated in relation to the maps, isn't that right? I
21
think that there were motions, particularly the motion in the name of
22
Councillor Dillon-Byrne, that density on the valley or on the proposed maps
23
would be shown and that they would try and limit the density of the residential
24
density on the development of the Carrickmines area.
13:03:13 25
Do you recall that
debate?
26
A.
If I can see it on the monitor.
27
Q. 480
If we take the meeting of the 2nd of April 1997.
If I have 2556, please.
28
You see there the meeting which had been held on 4th of February 1997.
29
motion that the density zoning of all of the maps with the Dublin Draft
13:03:47 30
In a
Development Plan be restored to that density which was designated and in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:04:02
13:04:07
87 1
same manner as Development Plan presently in being, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 481
Okay.
I notice I wasn't present at that meeting. In any event, I think that motion was unsuccessful.
But the manager
4
did give an indication and an undertaking we'll see at 2560 at the same
5
meeting.
6
the relevant maps showing the changes proposed in the Development Plan which
7
had presented at previous meetings.
8
number of minor updates of drafting amendments would be made to the written
9
statement and maps before they would be put on public display.
That he would make available to members a written list together with
He also informed the members that a
13:04:25 10
11
I think the maps went on public display.
12
relation to -- or on behalf of Monarch in relation to their lands.
13
submissions were considered at a meeting of the council I think in January 1998
14
and voted upon, isn't that right?
13:04:42 15
16
Submissions were received in And those
A.
If the record shows that, I'll accept that.
Q. 482
Yes. Did you ever receive any offers or suggestions of money from anyone
17
connected with Monarch in relation to your approach to these lands?
18
A.
Absolutely not.
19
Q. 483
Did you know of, what appears to be widespread political support by Monarch of
13:05:05 20
your fellow councillors when you were you were a member of the council?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 484
Was it ever referred to at any of the meetings of which at various motions were
23 24 13:05:16 25
discussed? A.
No, not to my knowledge.
Q. 485
Thank you very much.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much,
28 29 13:05:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:05:23
13:05:40
88 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
were dealing with the 11th.
3
sure if Mr. O'Callaghan has indicated how he voted.
4
he voted against the Marren/Coffey proposed motion.
5
well for it to be put on the transcript. This was in relation to the 1993
6
plan.
7
A.
8 9
Just one thing, Mr. Quinn.
Just something I noticed when you
The confirmation meeting in November.
I'm not
I think the records show But it might just be as
That's correct, my recollection is that I voted against the Marren/Coffey motion.
Q. 486
MR. QUINN: You voted against the Marren Coffey motion?
A.
That's my recollection.
11
Q. 487
You were anxious to retain the zoning at one house to the acre?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 488
And I think you voted in favour of a motion by Councillors Barrett and Dockrell
13:05:56 10
14
which was amending a Smyth/Buckley motion to add a draft variation by June
13:06:19 15
'94.
I may or may not have dealt with that.
And then there was one other
16
vote.
I think there was a vote that by Councillors Smyth and Misteil to
17
reduce the district centre to agriculture and you voted against that.
18
A.
I did, yeah.
I was promoting the district centre.
19
Q. 489
You were promoting that. Yes.
Thank you.
13:06:38 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you, Mr. O'Callaghan.
Ten past two.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
13:07:33
14:15:58
89 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Ned Ryan, please.
6 7
MR. NED RYAN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
8
MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:16:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good afternoon, Mr. Ryan.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
12 13 14 14:16:36 15
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Ryan.
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 490
I think that you were a County Councillor between 1991 and 1993.
16
Is that
correct?
17
A.
That's correct, yes.
18
Q. 491
And you are a member of the Fianna Fail party, isn't that correct?
19
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 492
In 1994 what council did you become a member of?
21
A.
Fingal County Council.
22
Q. 493
So that your interest in the subject lands finished in December '93?
23
A.
That's right.
24
Q. 494
Now, I think the Tribunal wrote to you and asked you for certain information
14:16:45 20
14:17:00 25
26
earlier on this year. February 1996.
And you initially replied by letter of the 13th of
At 2069, please.
27 28
And you had been asked in the correspondence from the Tribunal to provide
29
information in relation to contacts with certain people from Monarch Properties
14:17:15 30
and information in relation to political donations, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:17:18
14:17:35
90 1
A.
Is right, please.
2
Q. 495
2069, please.
Now, in your reply you said that you had known the late
3
Mr. Phil Monahan and Richard Lynn for a number of years.
You had had numerous
4
conversations with Mr. Lynn on the golf course and on social occasions because
5
he lived in the area.
6
sure that Cherrywood came up for discussion on some of these occasions.
You had met Mr. Monahan at functions and that you were
7 8 9
So would you say that you met Mr. Richard Lynn fairly frequently? A.
14:17:53 10
You know, he resided in the area.
And I'd have bumped into him, you know, on social occasions and probably on the
11 12
I would say I met him fairly frequently.
golf course and, you know, in or around the general area. Q. 496
You say "That you do not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group
13
but however if there is evidence to the contrary of any contribution expressed
14
as a political donation for election purposes, I would accept such evidence as
14:18:21 15
I have no record of same."
16
A.
Yeah, well, actually, I couldn't recall the details until when I got the --
17
Q. 497
The brief from the Tribunal.
18
A.
The brief from the Tribunal.
19
Q. 498
So prior to you getting the brief from the Tribunal you didn't remember
14:18:29 20
21
receiving any money from Monarch Properties? A.
22 23
I knew I got some donations but I couldn't remember any of the details, you know, of the final details.
Q. 499
24
With respect, what you had said is you could not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group but if there was evidence to the contrary you'd accept
14:18:47 25
it, isn't that right?
26
A.
That's correct.
27
Q. 500
I think then you were subsequently supplied with a brief of documentation from
28
the Tribunal, including documentation relating to the payments you had received
29
from the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
14:18:57 30
A.
That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:18:58
14:19:09
91 1
Q. 501
2
I think you then did, the day before yesterday provide an additional statement to the Tribunal. Isn't that the position?
3
A.
That's the position.
4
Q. 502
And in that statement you confirmed receipt of an election donation on the 5th
5
of June 1991, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's correct, yes.
7
Q. 503
A donation of 2,000 pounds on the 16th of December 1992.
8
A.
That's for the Senate.
9 14:19:19 10
CHAIRMAN:
What's the one on the 5th of June '91?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
The one on the 5th of June, I think it's 1,000 pounds.
13
A.
1, 000. 1,000 pounds for Local Elections.
14
Q. 504
A 1,000 pounds on the 5th of June 1991.
14:19:36 15
2,000 pounds on 16th of December
1992. And 1,000 pounds on 28th of March 1996.
Isn't that right?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q. 505
Now, is it fair to say that you extracted that information from the brief of
18
documents with which you had been furnished and following your consideration of
19
those documents you put in this statement to the Tribunal?
14:19:55 20
A.
21
Yes, my solicitor actually -- he hadn't a chance either looking at the brief. So that was the reason for it.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
13th of February 2006 that you had received substantial donations?
14:20:12 25
A.
Mr. Ryan, you must have known when you wrote to the Tribunal on the
Well I knew I'd got donations.
I wasn't --
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
Tribunal that you could not recall any donation.
29 14:20:29 30
A.
But they were substantial donations.
Well I didn't intend to mislead the Tribunal. I wasn't sure of the detail.
I didn't have --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And yet you told the
As I said, Chairman, it was --
14:20:34
14:20:56
92 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
can't recall the precise amounts.
3
that you received nothing.
4
A.
5
But you could have said that I recall substantial donations but But the clear impression from the letter is
But, Chairman, I did say that I'd accept, you know -- yeah, I did say if there was evidence of any contribution as a political donation for election purposes.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
in extracting information from people whom it is obliged to investigate.
9
we get letters of this nature indicating that nothing, little or nothing, was
14:21:20 10
But it's an example of the difficulty the Tribunal frequently has When
received and then it transpires that the true position is that substantial
11
donations were received.
All right.
12 13
Q. 506
14
MS. DILLON:
Now, I think your second letter is at page 8484, please.
At paragraph subparagraph 1, 2 and 3 of this, you confirm the receipt of three
14:21:45 15
donations.
16
The first is of 1,000 pounds, the second is of 2,000 pounds and
the third of 1,000 pounds.
Isn't that the position?
17
A.
That is the position.
18
Q. 507
And that information is extracted from the documentation the Tribunal has
19 14:21:58 20
21
furnished to you.
Isn't that right, Mr. Ryan?
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 508
So that you are not coming to the Tribunal with any information that you are
22
providing to the Tribunal.
23
independently established.
24
A.
14:22:15 25
26
Rather you are confirming what the Tribunal has Isn't that the position?
Well, as I say, I was aware of the fact that I got contributions.
But as I
mentioned, the detail, you know, I wasn't -- I didn't have the detail. Q. 509
27
Well prior to you getting the brief from the Tribunal, Mr. Ryan, where did you confirm to anybody that you had actually got money from Monarch Properties?
28
A.
Well I wasn't able to confirm.
29
Q. 510
And in June of 2000, at page 2066, Mr. Ryan, you attended at an inquiry by
14:22:48 30
I couldn't really get confirmation.
Fianna Fail, isn't that the position? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:22:50
14:23:03
93 1
A.
Yeah, that's correct.
2
Q. 511
And you are recorded there at the second paragraph as saying that "Ned Ryan
3
informed the committee that he received nothing from Frank Dunlop nor did he
4
receive any from Green Properties.
5
developers in excess of 500 pounds."
6
A.
He did not receive donations from Now, is that a true statement, Mr. Ryan?
Well, I don't recall making that statement because at the -- when I went to
7
that inquiry actually my brother, who I was very close to, had only died, was
8
some days prior to that.
9
making that statement.
14:23:30 10
Q. 512
11
So actually I wasn't focused and I don't recall
Be that as it may, it's in the published document, isn't that right, Mr. Ryan? It's in the published final Fianna Fail report?
12
A.
It is, yes.
13
Q. 513
It is incorrect?
14
A.
That is incorrect. Yeah.
Q. 514
And since you received the brief of documents from the Tribunal that reminded
14:23:40 15
16
you that you had received at least 4,000 pounds from Monarch.
17
any step to set the record straight in relation to this inquiry?
Have you taken
18
A.
Well the letter that came in the other day would have set the record straight.
19
Q. 515
To the Tribunal?
A.
To the Tribunal.
21
Q. 516
Based on the information the Tribunal gave you?
22
A.
Well, and based on what my own recollections were.
23
Q. 517
You misunderstand my question.
14:23:58 20
24
I'm asking you in light of the fact that the
Fianna Fail report contains what you now know to be a factual inaccuracy, since
14:24:19 25
you remembered you had received this amount of money from Monarch.
26
taken any step to inform the Fianna Fail Inquiry that this material is
27
incorrect?
Have you
28
A.
I haven't, no, not yet.
29
Q. 518
Now, if we just move very briefly through the payments. I think in June of
14:24:37 30
1991.
At 3247.
You received a sum, you see there, I think, approximately
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:24:47
14:25:00
94 1
half way down the way page, Mr. Ryan, a sum of 1,000 pounds.
2
Elections.
Isn't that the position?
3
A.
Yeah, that's right, yeah.
4
Q. 519
And you accept now that you received that money?
5
A.
I do, yes.
6
Q. 520
Yes.
7
And I think that in March of 1992 you wrote yourself to Monarch
Properties.
3582, please.
Asking Mr. Richard Lynn for golf sponsorship.
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 521
You will have seen that in the brief.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 522
And --
12
A.
Well, I never actually ran any golf classics or fundraisers myself.
14:25:27 10
For the Local
That was
13
basically for the Lenihan Cup, which is a golf competition that's played for
14
among all of the golfing societies in Dublin west or it was then.
14:25:48 15
Q. 523
16
You knew Mr. Lynn well enough to approach him to ask him for a donation or to support the golf classic, isn't that right?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 524
And indeed, at the following page at 3583.
19 14:26:06 20
21
You thank him in anticipation and
you hope everything is going well for him, isn't that right? A.
Yeah. That's -- yeah.
Q. 525
And there's a notation there that they did in fact support -- they did accede
22
to your request and support the golf classic, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 526
Isn't that the position?
A.
Yes, that's the position, yeah.
Q. 527
And I think at 3371, Mr. Ryan, the document records second from the bottom that
14:26:17 25
26 27
on the 16th of December 1992, you received 2,000 pounds for the Senate Election
28
campaign.
29 14:26:38 30
A.
That's correct, yes.
I accept that, yeah.
Q. 528
Now, can I ask you, Mr. Ryan, in December 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
What was the average
14:26:42
14:26:58
95 1 2
political donation you would have received at that time? A.
3 4
Well, I'd say it would be quite small.
It would be only, you know, maybe a
few 100 pounds. Q. 529
5
What was the biggest donation you got for that Senate campaign can you remember?
6
A.
Well that would certainly be the biggest.
7
Q. 530
Yes.
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 531
And notwithstanding that, Mr. Ryan, you had forgotten all about it, is that the
14:27:08 10
11
That was the biggest?
position? A.
Well I hadn't forgotten about it.
In actual fact, I was aware of the fact
12
that I had got a contribution but I thought actually until I got the brief from
13
the Tribunal, I thought that it would be in the region of, you know, I wasn't
14
sure.
14:27:29 15
Q. 532
I thought it would be in the region of one at most.
And when you got the first letter from the Tribunal and when you made your
16
first reply.
17
1,000 pounds from Monarch for that election?
18
A.
19 14:27:54 20
Was it your belief at that stage that you'd received at least
Well I reckoned if I'd got -- if I had got a donation, you know, which I accepted I had, I reckoned it would be in that region, you know.
Q. 533
21
Notwithstanding that belief, you told the Tribunal that you didn't recall any donation at all.
Isn't that the position?
22
A.
Well, no.
23
Q. 534
Yes.
24
A.
Sorry.
Q. 535
Is that you do not recall any donation received from the Monarch Group?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 536
But I think in March of 1996, at 5777.
14:28:09 25
28 29 14:28:38 30
Actually, I didn't recall the details, you know.
I see.
It's just that what you say in your letter at 2069 --
I didn't actually.
It's the details I hadn't -There's a payment of 1,000 pounds in
connection with by-election expenses, isn't that the position? A.
That's correct, yeah.
Q. 537
And indeed, at 5780 I think a copy of the cheque is available. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Isn't that
14:28:38
14:28:44
96 1
right?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 538
And I think the back of that cheque at 5781, that records your signature.
4
Isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right, yeah.
6
Q. 539
And when you received that documentation, did that assist you in recollecting
7
that you had received the money?
8
A.
It did, yes.
9
Q. 540
And I think in addition, you got a fifth payment in May of 1999.
14:29:00 10
from Dunloe Ewart through Mr. Lynn at item 27.
11
At 6753,
You are recorded as receiving
500 pounds?
12
A.
That's for the Local Election in '91.
13
Q. 541
In '99.
14
A.
Yeah, '99.
Q. 542
Now, can I ask you just specifically about that item there at item 27.
14:29:14 15
I beg your pardon. You
16
were asked in earlier this year about any payments you had received from
17
Mr. Richard Lynn.
18
received that sum of 500 pounds through Mr. Lynn?
19
A.
14:29:41 20
And am I correct in understanding that you would have
Yeah, well, obviously it came through Mr. Lynn.
But again, as I said, until
such time as I got the detail, you know, I didn't -- I didn't recall the --
21
that it was Monarch or -- well Monarch were no longer operating at that stage.
22
So --
23
Q. 543
Sorry do you want to finish?
24
A.
Yeah because well I associated Mr. Lynn more with Monarch than any other
14:30:07 25
26
organisation, yes. Q. 544
But indeed in the correspondence you got from the Tribunal you were asked about
27
any payments from Mr. Lynn and you didn't disclose this payment either, isn't
28
that right, Mr. Ryan?
29 14:30:19 30
A.
Yeah.
Q. 545
So it wasn't until you got all of the documents from the Tribunal that you then Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:30:23
14:30:37
97 1
confirmed to the Tribunal what the Tribunal had given to you, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yeah.
3
Q. 546
So if you received another payment from Monarch of which the Tribunal is
4
unaware, that still hasn't been disclosed wouldn't that be the position
5
Mr. Ryan?
6
A.
Well that would be the position.
7
Q. 547
Insofar as they've been provided to the Tribunal by Monarch Properties?
8
A.
That's correct, yeah.
9
Q. 548
Now, you have also been provided in the documentation with the records in
14:30:53 10
But you have the details --
relation to your voting at local council meetings in connection with the
11
Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
12
A.
That's correct, yeah.
13
Q. 549
May the Tribunal take it, Mr. Ryan, that you at least would have appreciated
14
that when the lands at Monarch.
14:31:09 15
The Monarch lands at Carrickmines or
Cherrywood came up for voting, that you knew those lands were owned by Monarch?
16
A.
I would have known them, yeah.
17
Q. 550
And indeed --
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 551
Did you ever receive any cash payments from Monarch?
A.
No, certainly not, no.
Q. 552
Did you ever, throughout your political career, receive political donations in
14:31:22 20
21 22
I would, yeah.
cash?
23
A.
Well I received small political donations around election time.
24
Q. 553
What would you regard as small, Mr. Ryan?
A.
Maybe around 200 to 300 pounds.
Q. 554
And in the votes that have taken place in connection with the Cherrywood lands.
14:31:37 25
26 27
Insofar as you have voted, would you accept in general that you voted in favour
28
of the Monarch interests?
29 14:31:58 30
A.
Well, no, I wouldn't accept that.
At that particular time, I mean, you had
mass emigration, you had mass unemployment and when this proposal came along I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:32:05
14:32:19
98 1 2
thought it was a very good idea. Q. 555
3
In May of 1992, on the first votes that took place.
You voted in favour of
the Manager's map. Isn't that right, DP92/44?
4
A.
I assume so, yes.
5
Q. 556
That is the map that was most favourable or the position that would have been
6
most favourable to Monarch.
It didn't pass in the event, isn't that right?
7
A.
I'm not sure.
8
Q. 557
And I think in November of 1993, when the matter came back before the council
9
No, I don't think so, that's right.
that you voted in favour of Councillor Marren and Councillor Coffey's motion.
14:32:40 10
Isn't that the position?
11
A.
Yeah, that would be correct. Yeah.
12
Q. 558
And the effect of that was to increase the density on the Monarch lands.
13 14 14:32:50 15
Isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 559
Yes.
16 17
Monarch lands should be increased, Mr. Ryan? A.
18 19 14:33:11 20
Now, why did you believe that the Monarch -- that the density on the
Well I suppose at that stage, you know, I expected that, you know, whatever was the original, one to the acre, which was very low density, you know.
Q. 560
Yes.
A.
So I would have accepted, you know, an increase, like.
It was still in
21
general terms, you know, the increase, you know, compared with the densities
22
I've seen around since. It's still very low density.
23
Q. 561
24
Yes.
If that was your position, Mr. Ryan, why then did you not promote or
suggest that all of the residentially zoned lands in Carrickmines be zoned at
14:33:35 25
four to the acre?
26
A.
I can't recall.
27
Q. 562
Why did you agree to the singling out of the Monarch lands for increased
28 29 14:33:47 30
density? A.
I can't recall now.
Q. 563
Did you disclose to anybody in Dublin County Council at that time that you had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:33:51
14:34:10
99 1
been in receipt of significant sums of money from Monarch prior to your voting
2
in November 1993?
3
A.
No, I didn't, no.
4
Q. 564
Right.
5
Nor I didn't try to influence any other councillors.
And you didn't disclose to anybody that you had been a beneficiary of
Monarch's largesse, as it were, before you came to vote in November 1993?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 565
I see.
8
Thank you very much, Mr. Ryan.
Would you answer any questions
anybody else may have for you.
9 14:34:21 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Ryan.
Thank you, Chairman.
12 13
MS. FOLEY:
Mr. Liam Creaven, please.
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:34:44
14:35:25
100 1
MR. LIAM CREAVEN HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. FOLEY AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Creaven.
A.
Good afternoon.
Q. 566
MS. FOLEY: Good afternoon, Mr. Creaven.
6 7 8
Could you give the Tribunal a brief outline of your political history starting
9
from when you were first elected to Dublin County Council?
14:35:36 10
A.
I'm sorry?
11
Q. 567
When were you first elected to Dublin County Council?
12
A.
Oh, I can't remember the date.
13
Q. 568
Would it be in 1985?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 569
And then again in 1991.
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 570
And then you moved to Fingal County Council --
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 571
In 1993.
A.
Correct.
Q. 572
Could I have page 7633, please.
14:35:46 15
14:35:58 20
21 22
I was elected twice.
And you are a member of the Fianna Fail party.
1st of February 2006.
The Tribunal wrote to you in February, the
And your solicitor replied on the 19th of May.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
I think it's ...
MS. FOLEY:
Following the opening of the module you indicated that you had no
14:36:17 25
26
Q. 573
27
detailed recollection of the Cherrywood lands or of their location.
28
map on screen there now, Mr. Creaven, gives you a rough idea of the location of
29
the Cherrywood lands.
14:36:31 30
A.
Not really. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
So the
14:36:36
14:36:51
101 1
Q. 574
Sorry, Mr. Creaven.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 575
That's a rough outline of the Cherrywood lands.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 576
8151, please. This is an extract from your statement to the Tribunal.
6
Can you see the black area in that map?
And
through your solicitor you say that to the best of your recollection --
7 8 9 14:37:06 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
Q. 577
MS. FOLEY:
That's the wrong page.
8151, please.
11
The first indented paragraph there you say "That to the best of your client's
12
recollection" or your solicitor replying on your behalf says.
13
person that you ever met from the Monarch Group is Mr. Richard Lynn whom you
14
met on a number of occasions.
"That the only
Each time in the council chambers."
14:37:34 15
16
Do you know how you first with Mr. Lynn?
17
A.
I can't remember the first time.
18
Q. 578
And was it in connection with the Cherrywood lands?
19
A.
I presume it was.
14:37:49 20
21
It was during the Draft Development Plan.
He was in the council chamber, in the environs of the
County Council talking to everyone and anyone that he met. Q. 579
22
He certainly says that he had contact with you in respect of these lands, the Cherrywood lands?
23
A.
Sorry?
24
Q. 580
He says that he had contact with you in respect of these lands?
A.
I don't recall him meeting me specifically to talk about the Cherrywood lands.
26
Q. 581
Do you recall talking, discussing the lands with him at all?
27
A.
No. But he may well have.
14:38:03 25
I'm sure, you know, in the corridor or whatever he
28
might have said Liam, I hope you support me on this.
29
taken place.
14:38:24 30
Q. 582
That could well have
Your solicitor also indicates that you have no recollection of receiving any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:38:28
14:38:33
102 1
benefit or payment?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 583
On behalf of the Monarch Group?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 584
Could I have page 3255, please.
This is an extract from the cheque journal of
6
Monarch Properties. And it indicates on 13th of June '91 a cheque was written
7
to you.
And at page 3241, please.
8 9 14:39:03 10
MR. MORAN: Chairman, I mention that in the body of my letter ask for any documentary evidence in relation to payments.
I asked for it very
11
specifically.
Sorry my name is Robert
12
Moran, I appear for Mr. Creaven.
13
brief that was furnished to me. I would have thought in response to my letter
14
that it could have been indicated where these payments were.
Now, it may have been contained.
It may have been contained in the vast
14:39:23 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
But the information is in the brief.
We would expect normally
17
that people and their legal advisors would read the brief.
18 19 14:39:40 20
MR. MORAN: Chairman, I think that you would appreciate that the brief is vast. You know, I don't think it would have been too much difficulty for the legal
21
team of the Tribunal to notify -- just to drop me a line back to say this is
22
where the payments are.
23 24 14:39:54 25
I recollect when we were dealing with the, I think it was the Cloughran Module, that there was a set of payments made known to my client that there were
26
queries being raised about. I don't think that there would have been any
27
difficulty to notify me that there was queries in relation to specific
28
documents.
29 14:40:08 30
CHAIRMAN:
Well, first of all, how better off would you be if the Tribunal had
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:40:12
14:40:35
103 1
in fact -- as it were, spoon fed that material back to you, you having earlier
2
received the brief? I mean, it's the duty of any witness to give information
3
to the Tribunal in response to a request for information.
4
furnished with the brief.
5
recalling information about payments received, they have a particular duty to
6
read the brief and familiarise themselves.
They are then
And if they feel that they have a difficulty in
7 8
But you can raise, I mean, we'll take your point.
It still doesn't take from
9
the fact that we have to hear this evidence from your client today.
14:40:58 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, before my friend does that.
12 13
I understand from Mr. King that he did in fact write and indicate that
14
information in relation to the payment could be found on page 3197.
14:41:09 15
I think
that's the position, Mr. King? He did in fact respond to my friend.
16 17
MR. MORAN: Well I merely say that I have no recollection or I did not receive
18
that.
19 14:41:19 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Well we'll see how we get on.
21 22
Q. 585
MS. FOLEY: And according to Monarch Properties, this payment is listed as one
23
of the donations that they made on 13th of June, 1991.
24
yourself, Mr. Creaven?
14:41:38 25
300 pounds to
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 586
You have no recollection of receiving this payment?
27
A.
I have no recollection.
28
Q. 587
I think you have previously given evidence to the Tribunal in respect of
29 14:41:48 30
political donations, Mr. Creaven. A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:41:48
14:42:01
104 1
Q. 588
2
Where I think initially to put the Fianna Fail Inquiry your position was that you had never received any donations other than from your family?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 589
And then subsequently you informed the Tribunal that you had in fact received a
5
donation of 1,000 pounds from a developer.
6
A.
Yes. Yes.
7
Q. 590
You informed the Tribunal of this in 2003.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 591
And at that point your position was that this was the only donation that you
14:42:10 10
had ever received.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 592
And then subsequently in the Ballycullen Module you said that you had perhaps
13
received 1,000 pounds from the Jones Group.
14
you had received that amount in February of this year?
14:42:25 15
A.
16
So that that was possible that
Well, no, I have no recollection of saying I received 1,000 pounds from the company, the Jones --
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think he said he received that.
MS. FOLEY:
I believe I said that he may have.
19 14:42:35 20
Q. 593
That the Jones Group
21
indicated that this donation and that you didn't recall it but that you may
22
have.
23
A.
24 14:42:52 25
I said I may have. have accepted that.
If there was evidence to show that I did, then I would But personally I have no knowledge of that at all.
Q. 594
And it is the same with this donation?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 595
You have no recollection of it?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 596
But now you accept that you may have received it?
A.
Um.
14:43:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:43:05
14:43:15
105 1
Q. 597
Or is that your position?
2
A.
I have no recollection of receiving it.
But if there is evidence to the fact
3
that I did, that it was given to me, I'll accept that.
4
knowledge.
But I have no
I have no recollection of receiving it.
5
Q. 598
Thank you.
6
A.
I remember even ringing the company first there was, pardon me.
It appeared
7
in one of the daily papers that Monarch Properties had given so much to all
8
councillors.
9 14:43:37 10
And I remember calling them at that time.
Q. 599
Was this very recently, Mr. Creaven?
A.
Oh, no, it's some time ago.
11
call me back and they didn't.
12
was true.
13
Q. 600
14
I asked them to
I just wondered if what they said in the paper
I wanted to familiarise myself with that fact.
But they didn't.
And could I have page 7762, please. This is a note from the Fianna Fail Inquiry, Mr. Creaven, where you indicate
14:44:02 15
that you recall meeting Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, a lobbiest around the council
16 17
But they never responded to me.
chambers. A.
Just, he was at the door as we walked in the chamber he met me, like he met
18
everybody else as they were about to go into the chamber.
19
him as such.
14:44:23 20
But no meeting with
And I don't think he -- I can't even recollect what he said to
me.
21
Q. 601
You can't recall if he spoke to you about the Cherrywood lands?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 602
The lands in question in the 1983 plan were zoned AS1, which is one house to
24 14:44:51 25
26
the acre on septic tank? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 603
Above the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway on page 6677, please.
27
And do you see the square line going through the red lands there?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 604
The lands above that were zoned one to the acre on septic tank and the lands
14:45:04 30
below that line were agriculture. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:45:05
14:45:15
106 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 605
And that line was at the time the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway.
3
A.
Pardon me.
4
Q. 606
Could I have 6937, please.
5 6
This is a map proposed by the manager in late 1990 to develop these lands.
7
included residential with an action area plan industrial and a district centre.
8
These were discussed at a number of meetings but I think, Mr. Creaven, you were
9
not present for those meetings.
14:45:39 10
11
It
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 607
But this is the position as of December 1990 whereupon this map was rejected by
12
the council.
13
This is the map that was put to the council in May of 1991, and I think you
14
were present, Mr. Creaven, at the meeting.
14:46:15 15
Could I have 7019, please.
And the proposals on this map
include upgrading of the residential to four to the acre.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 608
And there's a movement there of the proposed line of the Southeastern Motorway.
18 19 14:46:29 20
You voted against this map.
Do you have any recollection of this?
A.
No.
Q. 609
This in essence, is what went on the first public display. Could I have page
21
2661, please.
22
I think the General Election -- the Local Election took place in 1991.
23
think Mr. Gilbride spoke to us about donations received by councillors during
24
this election.
14:47:06 25
26
And including donation you received yourself.
A.
In what?
Q. 610
One of the number of councillors that received a donation during this election
27
campaign?
28
A.
He said?
29
Q. 611
From Monarch. No, you were.
14:47:17 30
And I
Mr. Gilbride spoke about the councillors
speaking about donations from Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:47:19
14:47:22
107 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 612
Do you recall this?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 613
In the council chambers?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 614
Could I have page 3596, please. This is an expenses claim form submitted by
7
Mr. Lynn
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 615
Which indicates that on the week ending 3rd of April 1992 he indicates that he
14:47:51 10
had some contact with yourself, I think it's Mr. Kennedy and A Davitt, which
11
may be Devitt.
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in the company of these other
12
people in April '92?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 616
In May 1992 the manager presents a new map.
14:48:20 15
proposing further development on the lands.
7203, please.
Which is
You supported this map.
16
A.
Uh-huh.
17
Q. 617
And all of the other motions that took place that day to decrease density, you
18
were against those motions.
19
reason why you voted for the development of these lands.
14:48:38 20
A.
Would that be your normal policy or is there any
I have no recollection other than they are the -- I got a video, I think it was
21
in the mail.
It was certainly a very good presentation of what they proposed.
22
And I know I said to myself then I will support that.
23
Q. 618
And did any of your fellow councillors speak to you about these lands?
24
A.
No.
Q. 619
We have heard evidence from other councillors, in particular, say,
14:49:05 25
26
Mr. Geraghty, that there was a whip in the Fianna Fail party on some of these
27
rezoning motions?
28
A.
29 14:49:25 30
No, there wasn't a whip as such.
You could have been asked and we were asked
I'm sure by one of the party members but it wasn't a binding thing. Q. 620
But would there -- would meetings have taken place before council meetings more Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:49:31
14:49:44
108 1 2
informal meetings? A.
There would be informal meetings in the party room but you didn't have to
3
attend it or you could leave if, when any subject was being discussed.
4
was no whip to stay there.
5
Q. 621
There
And it has been suggested that there would be a consensus of opinion at these
6
meetings about the way people were going to vote.
7
this is not the case?
Is this your position, that
8
A.
I'm sorry.
9
Q. 622
Before going into the chamber that there would be some agreement on how people
14:50:05 10
Would there be a consensus of opinion?
were going to vote?
11
A.
I would say that was true, yes.
12
Q. 623
But you are saying it would be done by agreement rather than by instruction
13 14 14:50:14 15
from a particular individual? A.
Yes.
Q. 624
Between the time of this first vote in May 1992 and the confirming votes in
16
11th November 1993, Mr. Dunlop was engaged by Monarch Properties.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 625
And during this period there were a number of telephone contacts between
19 14:50:49 20
21
yourself and Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 626
Which have already been discussed here at the Tribunal and a number of
22
meetings?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 627
Did Mr. Dunlop ever discuss the Cherrywood lands with you?
A.
I'm sure he did.
14:50:50 25
I'm sure he asked me to support it.
If he did I'm sure I
26
said I would 'cos I'm on the record for saying that Frank Dunlop and myself
27
were close friends.
28
Q. 628
So you have no specific recollection that you believe that it is --
29
A.
Oh, yes.
14:51:12 30
I have no specific recollection but I believe that would be the
case. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:51:12
14:51:37
109 1
Q. 629
Could I have page 4215, please.
2
This is a further expenses claim form of Mr. Lynn for the week ending 21st of
3
May 1993.
4
and N Ryan.
5
A.
6
Q. 630
Where he has recorded Draft Development Plan review Liam Creaven Do you ever recall meeting Mr. Lynn in the company of Mr. Ryan?
No. And then on the 11th of November 1993.
There were a number of votes, again,
7
effecting the Cherrywood lands.
8
Variation Plan being proposed for the lands.
9
confirm two houses per acre and for the motion proposed by Mr. Marren and
14:52:06 10
And in these you voted against a Draft And against the motion to
Ms. Coffey.
11 12
I'll get that motion for you now.
Sorry, Mr. Creaven.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7263.
14:52:22 15
16
MS. FOLEY:
Thank you, Judge.
17 18
7263, please.
19 14:52:36 20
And the motion is at 7226.
This is a motion proposed by Donal Marren, signed
21
also by Larry Lohan, Betty Coffey Liam T Cosgrave and Anne Ormonde that Dublin
22
County Council hereby resolves to accept the County Manager's recommendation
23
and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined in red on the
24
attached map.
And that the balance of the lands remain at two per hectare.
14:53:08 25
26
Could I have the maps side by side, please.
27
A.
Sorry?
28
Q. 631
Just the map is going up on screen now.
29 14:53:28 30
At 7227.
At the time of this motion,
Mr. Creaven, the lands were all zoned at one to the acre following the May 1993 meetings.
You had not voted in favour of this.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
At this point now the
14:53:34
14:53:44
110 1
motion is being put forward here to restore four to the acre on the lands
2
outlined in red?
3
A.
Uh-huh.
4
Q. 632
But that the other surrounding lands remain at one to the acre?
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 633
Can you assist the Tribunal with any reason that you believe this might be so,
7
that these lands were singled out in this motion for increased density but that
8
the surrounding residential lands remain at a low density?
9
A.
14:54:02 10
Other than that I was asked to do that.
That's the only reason I can give
you.
11
Q. 634
You voted on the motion as it was put to you?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 635
Did anybody speak to you about this motion, can you recall?
14
A.
I can't recall that.
14:54:11 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
18
Who asked you to vote?
I don't know, your -- Chairman. I'm not certain.
But I would imagine maybe Mr. Dunlop did but
He would be the one I would imagine that did ask me.
19 14:54:23 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
And would that be sufficient for you to ....?
A.
Coupled with the fact that I had seen the video that I liked.
Q. 636
MS. FOLEY:
22 23
Could I have page 5536, please.
24 14:54:37 25
This is a further expense claim form by Richard Lynn to Cherrywood Properties
26
Limited, dated the week ended the 13th of January 1995.
27 28 29 14:54:55 30
At this point you are a member of Fingal County Council? A.
Yeah.
Q. 637
It indicates that L Creaven and an amount of 3.60 written beside I think might Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:55:03
14:55:08
111 1
be Ongar Developments?
2
A.
Sorry?
3
Q. 638
It might be Ongar.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 639
At this point you are a member of Fingal County Council?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 640
And Mr. Lynn appears to be in contact with you.
8 9 14:55:28 10
Do you recall ever having
contact with Mr. Lynn about lands other than the Cherrywood lands? A.
No.
Q. 641
Could I have page 5753, please.
11 12
This is a letter signed by yourself, Mr. Creaven, and addressed to Mr. Richard
13
Lynn, I think would be Mr. Richard Lynn of Monarch.
14
Can you see that there?
14:56:03 15
A.
16
Don't -- I can't remember that letter, now.
Dated February 1996.
But it's possible that Liam
Fitzgerald asked me.
17
Q. 642
To contact Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
To give him a name.
19
Q. 643
I think you may have signed the letter.
A.
I'm not too sure it's my signature.
Q. 644
The second paragraph of the refer, Mr. Creaven, reads.
14:56:18 20
21
And I could well have done that. It indicates, it's in your name?
22 23
"I am well aware of your extremely busy schedule but I would regard it as a
24
great favour to me personally if you would accept my invitation to sponsor a
14:56:31 25
team and to participate in the event".
26 27
Why would you have used that wording, Mr. Creaven, that it would be a great
28
favour to you personally?
29 14:56:44 30
A.
Well Liam Fitzgerald was a very close friend of mine.
Q. 645
Was your relationship with Mr. Lynn such that personal favours? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:56:49
14:57:02
112 1
A.
Ah, no.
I hardly knew Mr. Lynn.
2
Q. 646
And do you recall whether -- that the bottom of the letter indicates that a
3
cheque would be sent forward in the sum of 400 pounds.
4
was ever --
5
A.
No, no, I have no recollection at all of that.
6
Q. 647
You don't.
7
A.
Sorry.
Do you recall if that
Thank you, Mr. Creaven.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Do you wish to ask?
MR. MORAN:
Sorry, Chairman.
14:57:14 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN:
You can sit down, if you wish.
14 14:57:19 15
MR. MORAN: Just in relation to --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Could you just pull the microphone.
18 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. MORAN AS FOLLOWS:
19 14:57:26 20
21
Q. 648
MR. MORAN: In relation to the last letter.
I think the reference to the
22
recipient of the 400 is, is it Mayfield Fianna Fail or? If you just look at
23
the letter there at the very end?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 649
You see the handwritten note?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 650
I mean, you are certainly not the recipient of the 400?
28
A.
No, no.
29
Q. 651
Who is it?
A.
Oh, yeah.
14:57:37 25
14:57:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
14:57:44
14:58:03
113 1
Q. 652
Airfield, Fianna Fail?
2
A.
To Ayrfield, Fianna Fail.
3
Q. 653
Thank you.
And that's not even my Cumann.
In relation to Mr. Richard Lynn.
You said in your evidence that
4
you met him on occasion at the Council chambers.
5
prior appointment?
Did you ever meet him by
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 654
Would it be fair that say that all of your meetings with him were of a casual
8 9 14:58:11 10
nature? A.
Exactly.
Q. 655
Now, Mr. Creaven, evidence has been adduced here of payments being made to you.
11
You've never received any evidence of any such payment, other than the notes of
12
Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
13
A.
No, that's correct.
14
Q. 656
You've never seen a cheque stub?
A.
That's right.
Q. 657
You've never seen a copy of a cheque made payable to you, nothing of that
14:58:31 15
16 17
nature; isn't that right?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 658
Now, if page 363 could be called up.
14:58:42 20
21 22 23
Q. 659
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
MR. MORAN:
Sorry.
I'm -- I may have taken down the page incorrectly.
It
was the first of those expense sheets.
24 14:58:52 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
26 27
MR. MORAN:
Mr. Lynn's expense sheets.
28 29 14:59:09 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3956, I'm not sure if that was the first one or not.
56 not 46. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
3956.
14:59:15
14:59:22
114 1
MR. MORAN:
No.
This was just a page of expense.
2 3
MS. FOLEY:
3596 I think.
4 5
MR. MORAN:
6
I think if you look at that, Mr. Creaven, I don't know what information you
7
have about Mr. Lynn's expense accounts and what documentation he had to support
8
them.
9
made to you there is no payment in any column across from you? Isn't that
14:59:46 10
My apologies about this.
But wouldn't it appear clear from that, that whilst there is reference
right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 660
I think it says Draft Development Plan Liam Creaven but no payment whatever,
13 14 14:59:52 15
isn't that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 661
Tell me Mr. Creaven, have you any idea of how Mr. Lynn incurred expenses or
16
what he expended money on to incur expenses.
Have you any idea of that?
17
A.
No, I've no idea.
18
Q. 662
Did he ever spend any money on you?
19
A.
No.
Q. 663
Did he give you a bottle of gin once?
21
A.
Oh, at Christmas time, yes.
22
Q. 664
And you have acknowledged that in your correspondence with the Tribunal?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 665
Now, it would be fair to say in relation to your voting at particular meetings
15:00:07 20
15:00:22 25
in favour of zonings or whatever, that in general you would have a
26
prodevelopment ethos, wouldn't that be fair to say?
27
A.
True, yes, I've said that.
28
Q. 666
And would it also be fair to say in general you would vote along party lines.
29 15:00:37 30
Isn't that correct? A.
True. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:00:38
15:00:48
115 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Sir, just before Mr. Creaven concludes.
3 4
In fairness to Mr. Donal King, arising out of the objection that was made by
5
Mr. Dore in relation to the lack of information supplied. A letter dated 23rd
6
of May 2006 was sent by Mr. King. And I just wanted to quote from that letter
7
for the transcript.
8 9 15:01:04 10
He acknowledges receipt of the fax from Mr. Dore of 19th ins the contents of which have been noted.
11 12
"With regard to the payment of 300 pounds from the Monarch Group to your
13
client.
14
circulated to you.
15:01:15 15
16
I refer you to page 3197 of the brief which has already been
Tribunal's part.
Thereby nullifying any suggestion of surprise on the
Indifference to your request the Tribunal will schedule your
client's attendance to 2 p.m. on Thursday the 1st of June. Yours sincerely."
17 18
So the query was raised.
The query was answered
19 15:01:34 20
CHAIRMAN:
Did you receive that letter?
21 22
MR. MORAN:
23
get confirmation that it was all right to come here at 2 o'clock today. Now, I
24
operate a busy one man practice.
15:01:40 25
Just by way of reply. I did telephone Mr. King yesterday just to
I am not saying that a letter may not have
come in. But I certainly was unaware of the contents of the letter.
And I
26
did telephone Mr. King, as I think he will freely acknowledge, yesterday
27
afternoon, to confirm that it would be all right for me to show up today at 2
28
o'clock today with my client.
29 15:01:53 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:01:58
15:02:09
116 1
MR. MORAN:
Chairman, I have been advised that it's in order for me to apply
2
for limited representation costs on that basis in relation to this module.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Well, I can't deal with costs at this stage. I certainly -- I
5
thought we had done so.
6
And costs are a matter which won't arise until some time in the future.
Well certainly you can have limited representation.
7 8
MR. MORAN:
9
Obliged.
I appreciate that. I just thought I'd mention the matter.
15:02:24 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Larry Butler, please.
12 13
MR. ROCHFORD: Chairman, I am solicitor for Larry Butler.
14 15:02:32 15
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:02:48
15:02:55
117 1
MR. LARRY BUTLER HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
2
BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Butler.
5 6
Q. 667
7
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Butler. You were first elected to Dublin
County Council in 1991.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 668
After 1993 and in January 1994 you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
15:03:05 10
County Council.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 669
Your involvement in relation to the Cherrywood lands therefore spans three
13
separate, albeit related matters.
14
Plan.
15:03:21 15
One was the making of the 1993 Development
The second was the making of the variation for the science and
technology park.
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 670
And the third was the review of the 1993 plan culminating in the making of the
18 19 15:03:29 20
1998 plan, isn't that correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 671
Now, would it be fair to say from your consideration of the documentation in
21
relation to your time in Dublin County Council, that you appear to have from
22
your voting adopted a pro low density, anti-high density stance in relation to
23
these lands?
24 15:03:54 25
A.
Yeah.
I think I made it quite clear in previous evidence here that the
Carrickmines Residents Association were very worried at the time about the
26
proposals from the manager for industrialising the complete valley there.
27
you previously pointed out, with other witnesses you have here, that the
28
manager's proposal was overturned in council before I went in there in '91.
29
So, therefore, the people who I was representing in the Carrickmines area and
15:04:28 30
kind of Foxrock and all of that area there were very pro low density at that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
As
15:04:37
15:04:43
118 1
time.
2
Q. 672
Yes.
3
A.
So I supported that.
4
Q. 673
Yes.
5
I think the record shows that at the meeting in May of 1992 that you
voted against the manager's map which was DP92/44?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 674
And that after that, that you voted in general in favour of low density and
8 9 15:04:56 10
that you supported I think Mr. Barrett's motion? A.
That's correct.
Q. 675
And that you were in favour of one house to the acre for the entire of the
11 12
lands, is that correct? A.
13 14
That would be correct.
But I think in fairness, and I want to expand a little
bit there -Q. 676
Please do.
A.
If I could.
16
Q. 677
Yes, yes.
17
A.
I think it's important to bear in mind at the time that there was no
15:05:09 15
18
infrastructural development there on that particular land at that particular
19
time.
15:05:24 20
There was no Carrickmines Valley sewer.
hadn't been developed into the Carrickmines area.
21
infrastructural development at the time.
22
in following that particular line.
23
Q. 678
24 15:05:46 25
There was no M50.
The N11
And with the lack of
I felt I was doing the correct thing
And were you also of the view or did you hold the view, Mr. Butler, that development should stop at the 1983 line of the Southeastern Motorway?
A.
Well, I wasn't hung up too much about where the line stopped but I felt that it
26
was important to make sure that there was a line on the plan for the motorway.
27
Even though it was an imaginary line and could be moved one way or the other.
28
But it was vitally important that the N11, before development took place you
29
probably could see in the Dun Laoghaire, when Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
15:06:17 30
Council came into being that there was huge infrastructural development allowed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:06:25
15:06:54
119 1
to take place and it was subject to planning permission actually that the
2
access in and out of the Cherrywood lands would be subject to the N11 access.
3
Q. 679
And in fact, I think it was in clear that the opening up or development of the
4
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley required putting in place
5
infrastructure including the Wyattville Road extension, is that right?
6
A.
And the Wyattville Road and the kind of, Wyattville fly over.
Also it
7
included the actual inner relief road from Wyatville to link eventually with
8
the M50. That was envisaged at that time.
9
Q. 680
15:07:17 10
And would it be fair to say, Mr. Butler, that from early in your political career from your attendance at public meetings.
People would have become
11
aware of the stance that you had adopted in relation to the development of the
12
Carrickmines Valley?
13
A.
Pretty much, yeah.
14
Q. 681
And that it would have been known that you were in favour of low density in the
15:07:30 15
16
valley. A.
Yeah.
But I think it has to be bear in mind, that it was subject to the
17
actual infrastructural development while I was proposing low density because if
18
you had high density there at that time and you had major traffic problems, you
19
know, there was no proper sewerage, there was no water.
15:07:54 20
21
All of these things
were deficient in the earlier proposal in the '91 proposal. Q. 682
And when the matter came back before the council on 11th of November 1993, you
22
voted against the Marren/Coffey motion to increase the density on the Monarch
23
lands only, isn't that right?
24 15:08:13 25
A.
That's correct.
Q. 683
Now, you had voted in favour of Councillor Barrett's motion in May of '92,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 684
At one house to the acre.
29 15:08:27 30
And does it follow from that approach, that it was
your view that development of the Carrickmines Valley was premature at that particular point in time? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:08:28
15:08:45
120 1
A.
Yes, I did.
2
Q. 685
And it was your view that the pipe needed to go in, is that correct, for sewage
3 4
It is premature at that particular time.
before it could be developed? A.
Sewerage, water.
You know, the development of the N11 access on and off.
5
And as I say, we hadn't decided at that particular time for the M50 line
6
completely.
7
basis of that I felt that, you know, development was premature.
8
Q. 686
9
There was a line there but it hadn't been fixed.
And on the
And that appears to have been the view that you held from 1991 from your election to the making of the Development Plan in December 1993, isn't that
15:09:11 10
right?
11
A.
More or less, yeah.
12
Q. 687
Now, in that period, can I ask you, Mr. Butler, were you approached by anybody
13 14 15:09:19 15
on behalf of Monarch seeking your support? A.
I was, yeah.
Q. 688
And would you outline to the Tribunal who it was that approached you and how it
16 17
arose? A.
Well Mr. O'Herlihy came to my house when I was first elected to the County
18
Council and I think Mr. Lynn, I can't be sure.
19
And as I say, I can't be that sure.
15:09:39 20
else.
There was two people with him.
I think it was Mr. Lynn and somebody
I didn't know the other gentleman.
And, you know, I think I outlined
21
my case pretty well in comparison to what they were talking about.
22
asked all of the various searching questions like, you know, that I felt that
23
it was premature.
24
making at that time unless I seen, you know, new proposals as to how they were
15:10:07 25
I wouldn't be supporting the proposals that they were
going to deal with traffic and the water problem and the sewerage and the roads
26 27
And I
at that time. Q. 689
And I think in your statement to the Tribunal.
At page 134.
You date that
28
meeting with O'Herlihy and the men who came with him at happening shortly after
29
your election in June of 1991?
15:10:26 30
A.
Can you repeat that again, please? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:10:31
15:10:39
121 1
Q. 690
2
Sorry.
In your statement, which is on screen.
You date that meeting as
happening shortly after your election?
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 691
In June of '91?
5
A.
That's correct, yes.
6
Q. 692
It would follow from that, would it not, Mr. Butler, that your position or your
7
stance in relation to the development of the Carrickmines Valley would have
8
been known to Monarch and its representatives from the date of that meeting?
9
A.
15:10:59 10
Yeah.
Well I think I was, you know, reasonably forth coming in terms of
letting the developer know that there was a lot of deficiencies within his
11
proposal.
12
Q. 693
And --
13
A.
And they hadn't satisfied certainly what I was looking for or indeed the
14 15:11:14 15
Carrickmines Residents Association. Q. 694
Yes.
Indeed, you say in the second part of paragraph 1 "I told them no.
16
That my first concern was that I was supporting my local residents association
17
point of view" and that you felt that the application was premature.
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 695
So that your made your position very clear at that meeting.
A.
I would have said so, yes.
Q. 696
And indeed, your voting subsequently replicated that position, isn't that
15:11:31 20
21 22
correct?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 697
Can I ask you, were you in receipt of any payments or political donations from
15:11:47 25
26
Monarch Properties or anybody on their behalf? A.
27 28 29 15:11:58 30
As far as I know, I don't believe I ever got any donations from Monarch Properties, now to the best of my knowledge, yes.
Q. 698
Indeed, in the documentation that has been discovered to the Tribunal, and with which you have been furnished, Mr. Butler, in common with other people. is no record of any payments to you from Monarch Properties, isn't that the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
There
15:12:02
15:12:20
122 1 2
position? A.
No.
I think I gave a very comprehensive list of my donations.
I think we
3
went to a lot of trouble to produce everything and try and get it as accurate
4
as possible.
5
Q. 699
6
I think we have done that quite successfully.
You have produced all of that documentation, isn't that the position, Mr. Butler?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 700
And you produced it on request from the Tribunal when you were initially asked
9 15:12:29 10
11
for matters unrelated to Monarch Properties, isn't that right? A.
Oh absolutely, yes.
Q. 701
And you have made full disclosure of the receipt of payments and itemised and
12
detailed the persons and parties from whom you received donations, isn't that
13
the position?
14 15:12:39 15
A.
That's correct.
Q. 702
And not included in that, if I may put it like that, is Monarch Properties or
16
any of their representatives?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 703
And indeed, Monarch Properties on their side do not suggest that they made any
19 15:12:51 20
21
payments or donations to you.
Isn't that the position also?
A.
That is the position.
Q. 704
Yes. Now, I think in early 1994 when you were a member of Dun
22
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, which became a smaller council, isn't that
23
right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 705
You came to consider the matter of the science and technology park.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 706
And not wanting in any way to put words in your mouth but would it be a fair
15:13:02 25
28
assessment to say that the science and technology park was initially driven by
29
the manager of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
15:13:19 30
A.
It was driven by the manager but I have to say there was a lot of support by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:13:23
15:13:46
123 1
the councillors.
The science and technology park, as you know, Dun
2
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and the Dun Laoghaire area have a very high
3
third level educational system.
4
and technology park would play a major role in ensuring, you know, good, high
5
paid jobs in the future.
6
was that Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was going to be a one-third,
7
have a one-third ...
And it was felt at that time that the science
And also the important thing I think to bear in mind
8
Q. 707
Interest?
9
A.
Investment in the science and technology park.
And I believed that was the
15:14:05 10
right way to go because we would be able to, shall we say, direct operations
11
and ensure quality in the science and technology park that we were going to
12
develop.
13
Q. 708
14
In essence, if I can summarise it.
We'll look at a map in a moment,
Mr. Butler, and you can correct me if I'm wrong. The manager had had
15:14:26 15
negotiations or discussions with GRE and had come to an agreement with them
16
about effectively a joint venture including Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
17
Council?
18
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
19
Q. 709
And I think when the matter was initiated by way of a motion from Councillor
15:14:41 20
Gilmore.
21
There was almost universal acceptance amongst the councillors for
the idea of a science and technology park?
22
A.
Absolutely, yes.
23
Q. 710
Because it was believed at the time that it would increase industry and it
24
would increase employment in an area that needed such an increase; isn't that
15:14:57 25
26
the position? That is correct.
There was 70% unemployment in the immediate area at that
27
particular time.
It was -- there's no doubt about, it, like, there was
28
crisis.
29
many ways, like, hoping that things would get better.
15:15:19 30
A.
Q. 711
And, you know, we were, I suppose, people were clutching at straws in
At that time? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
Things were very bad.
15:15:20
15:15:32
124 1
A.
At that time.
2
Q. 712
And this was seen.
I think when the manager spoke in his Reports to the
3
proposed variation.
It was seen as a chance for Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown to get
4
ahead in the employment stakes?
5
A.
Indeed, yes.
6
Q. 713
And there was almost universal acceptance amongst the Councillors for it.
7
Isn't that the position?
8
A.
Oh, absolutely, yeah.
9
Q. 714
Yes?
A.
I think when the Councils broke up I think was a very good thing really.
15:15:42 10
11
Because you were dealing with land and development in your own particular area.
12
It was very difficult in Dublin County Council to kind of be focused on
13
anything because it's so vast. In lots of cases didn't concern you when it was
14
outside of your own area.
15:16:09 15
I have said before you depended, to a large extent,
on the councillors in particular areas.
In this case we were able to have our
16
fingers know the pulse all the time and we knew what was happening.
17
the land and we knew how the development was going to happen.
18
down there now and see the linkage between, say, the N11, the science and
19
technology park, the M50 and the new housing schemes that's going up and town
15:16:37 20
centre plan for eventualities.
21 22
good planning. Q. 715
23
We knew
When you walk
So, I mean, that's what I call particularly
And I think that's the way it has panned out there in the end.
If I could show you the map in relation to that, at 7464, Mr. Butler.
Not to
delay on this now.
24 15:16:56 25
The area coloured purple, or dark red, is the area that was designated for a
26
town centre; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 716
And that had a cap on retail development in the 1993 plan?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 717
The area coloured blue immediately to the north of that was zoned agriculture?
15:17:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:17:11
15:17:19
125 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 718
But it is now being proposed, in this variation, that it will become
3
residential at 16 houses to the hectare?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 719
The area across the black dotted line, shaded cream or yellow.
6
already zoned residential in the 1993 plan at ten to the hectare.
7
right?
That was Isn't that
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 720
And then if one moves down to the line of the road, which is by way of circles
15:17:36 10
across the page.
11
The line of that road, which is the Wyatville extension, is
being moved slightly; isn't that right?
12
A.
Where are we now? Are we change No. 1?
13
Q. 721
If you were to look at change No. 3.
14
A.
Change No. 3.
Q. 722
And change No. 7.
16
A.
7 and 3?
17
Q. 723
7 and 3.
18
A.
Yeah, I see 7, yes.
19
Q. 724
That the town centre lands beneath those black dots was going to become science
15:17:51 15
15:18:11 20
Sorry.
Okay.
Change No. 3 is moving the town centre.
Do you see the black dots?
and technology?
21
A.
Yes, yes.
22
Q. 725
And a small portion to the northern end of the town centre was going to become
23 24 15:18:18 25
residential? A.
Right.
Q. 726
Okay.
26
So there was, it's going to be a quid pro quo.
What was being lost to
science and technology was to be gained at the other end in terms of acreage?
27
A.
Yes, that was the change made, yes.
28
Q. 727
And then the area beneath the town centre, which was partially agriculture and
29 15:18:39 30
partially residential, was going to be rezoned E1, science and technology? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:18:39
15:18:56
126 1
Q. 728
2 3
So the effect of this from Monarch or GRE's point of view, was they would be left with no lands that were zoned agriculture?
A.
4
More or less, yes.
But there was also a golf course planned for that
particular area as well.
5
Q. 729
But not on those lands?
6
A.
Not on those lands.
7
Q. 730
That was on the adjoining blue lands which were owned by Mr. Galvin; isn't that
8 9 15:19:03 10
the position? A.
That's correct.
Q. 731
On the Monarch lands outlined on that map.
The end result of the variation
11
was that Monarch Property was left without any lands that could not be
12
developed for something or other; isn't that the position?
13
A.
That is correct, yes.
14
Q. 732
Whereas they had commenced the process with two portions of agricultural land
15:19:19 15
which were not available for development; isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 733
And the density that was given under the agreement to Monarch Properties was
18 19
higher than the density on their adjoining lands? A.
15:19:33 20
Well I think the densities had changed as well.
I think it's fair to say,
densities had changed in the meantime.
21
Q. 734
But that was the end result.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 735
That was passed by the Council?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 736
And I think you came to consider all of that again in early 1997 when you
15:19:42 25
That was passed?
26
mentioned the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council review of the 1993 Dublin
27
Development Plan; isn't that the position that?
28
A.
Would be correct, yeah.
29
Q. 737
I think that what happened in the early stages of that plan, Mr. Butler, was
15:20:01 30
that the densities were removed; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:20:04
15:20:16
127 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 738
From --
3
A.
Yes, yes.
4
Q. 739
From the -- if you could just look at the map at 7465, please.
5 6
And you will see there the Monarch lands outlined in red?
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 740
And the changes 13 and 14 relate to the removal of density there. And that was
9 15:20:28 10
11
something that was being suggested by the manager; isn't that the position? A.
Yes.
Q. 741
And I think motions were brought objecting to that.
12
But they were
unsuccessful?
13
A.
That's right.
14
Q. 742
What was your own view in relation to the removal of the densities on those
15:20:38 15
16
lands, Mr. Butler? A.
Well, I mean, things were happening, I suppose, they were beginning to come
17
right in terms of the actual development onto the N11.
And I had softened my
18
approach somewhat in terms of opposition to the thing and certainly with a
19
science and technology park coming in.
So I certainly had softened my
15:21:09 20
approach at that stage.
And also I had contact with the residents association
21
in the area at the time.
And they seemed to, if they were going to be good
22
class housing, and that sort of thing, they were happy enough at that
23
particular time, you know.
24 15:21:31 25
26
Q. 743
That there would be a change in the density?
A.
Yes.
Q. 744
Yes.
And I think if you look at 7285, please.
27 28
In the course of the display of the first display a number of representations
29
were received by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council from Monarch Properties.
15:21:47 30
There was a representation No. 359.
And that was an application to extend the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:21:52
15:22:00
128 1
science and technology zoning into the lands that have the words "rep 359" on
2
that map?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 745
And that was into the Sean Galvin golf course lands?
5
A.
That's right.
6 7
15:22:13 10
I was
ahead of you there for a minute, I'm sorry. Q. 746
8 9
That's where -- that's the one I was talking about.
That's okay.
Those lands had been acquired by Monarch Properties in the
intervening period; isn't that the position? A.
That's right.
Q. 747
And they were now seeking to move the science and technology zoning across the
11
Wyattville Road into those lands?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 748
And immediately north or to the side of that you see the words "rep 362".
14
A.
I two, yeah.
Q. 749
And that's on the town centre, the existing town centre zoning.
15:22:26 15
16
seeking to remove the cap on retail development?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q. 750
And then you see "rep 360".
19 15:22:44 20
21
That was
And that was an application by Monarch to extend
the town centre zoning into the adjoining 11 acres? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 751
And you will be aware then that a meeting took place in January of 1998 of Dun
22
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, at which these matters came to be
23
considered, isn't that right?
24 15:22:54 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 752
And a number of motions were brought before the Council relating to these
26
matters, including at 2624.
27
technology park across the road, as we saw. And there is an amendment; without
28
prejudice to the advancement of the Council's objective to develop a public
29
golf course on the lands.
15:23:24 30
This is in relation to moving the science and
That was an amendment signed by you, isn't that
correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:23:24
15:23:34
129 1
A.
That's correct.
2
Q. 753
At page 2588.
3
A.
That's right.
4
Q. 754
At 2588 you signed the amendment without prejudice to the advancement of the
5
council's objective to develop a public golf course on the lands.
6
go back to 2624.
7
objection to the extension of the science and technology park into the lands
8
across the road, across the Wyattville Road provided it go not interfere with
9
the development of the golf course?
15:23:56 10
And if we
May the Tribunal take from that, Mr. Butler, that you had no
A.
Correct, yes.
11
Q. 755
I think that was passed on a show of hands?
12
A.
It was, yes.
13
Q. 756
Can I ask you, maybe you could help the Tribunal, Mr. Butler, why is it that a
14
large portion of the minutes of the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council don't
15:24:07 15
16
record who actually voted for or against anything? A.
17 18
Well I don't know. know why.
Q. 757
19
All right.
I have to be just honest with you and say I really don't
It's down to the people who were taking the minutes presumably.
And again at 2624 you will see representation 360 and I think
there was a motion in relation to representation 360 by Councillors Lowry and
15:24:32 20
Conroy at 2625.
21
And that was extending the -- sorry at 2625.
That was
extending the district centre zoning into the adjoining lands.
22
A.
Uh-huh.
23
Q. 758
And that was passed I think on a show of hands also.
24
A.
Right.
Q. 759
And I think the third application by Monarch as representation 362 which sought
15:24:46 25
26
to change the cap on retail.
27
that was that the manager suggested an alternative at 2628.
28 29 15:25:15 30
A.
Yeah.
And I think that what happened in relation to
I think there just to elaborate a little on that, would be that I think
we were -- I mean a lot of councillors were very concerned about having, you know, major, major, shopper centre or town centre in Cherrywood. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
What effect
15:25:21
15:25:36
130 1
it might have on Dun Laoghaire.
2
well.
3
against.
And we had to take that into consideration as
I think that was one of the things that were the arguments for and So I think that's where the manager made adjustments I think.
4
Q. 760
Yes.
5
A.
When we brought that to his attention.
6
Q. 761
Yes.
7
And the manager suggested an alternative wording that in fact was
adopted by the councillors?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 762
And effectively what it permits is of retail element that will compliment the
15:25:49 10
adjoining uses.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 763
And the adjoining uses would have been the science and technology park, the
13 14 15:25:59 15
existing retail and the increased density residential. A.
Yes.
Q. 764
Isn't that right? I think that these were all passed ultimately are contained
16
in the Development Plan 1998 at 7292.
17
science and technology zoning has come across the Wyattville Road.
18
area for the town centre has increased and that there is a new objective in
19
relation to retail in place.
15:26:27 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 765
Yes.
And you will see on that map that the That the
Do you have any comment at all on the fact that it would appear from
22
that sequence, Mr. Butler, that Monarch Properties succeeded in getting
23
everything that they asked for?
24
A.
15:26:44 25
Well I think there was a question at time because a lot of what they were looking for was very, very good but it was premature, as I think you went
26
through in the beginning when you were asking me the questions.
27
Q. 766
Yes.
28
A.
By the time that the N11 had been developed access on and off and then the
29 15:27:04 30
internal road and the M50 coming on stream. development now.
I mean, this is all very good
I mean, I think if anybody goes down there and have a look
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:27:08
15:27:29
131 1
at how the planning is working out there.
2
we'd be able to plan other areas like it.
3
it's working out at the moment.
4
but as the development and infrastructural development came in more or less
5
hand in hand with the development, it improved the whole situation down there.
6
Q. 767
I think it's excellent.
I wish
I think it would be a model the way
I certainly had my reservations to begin with
Can I just take you back, Mr. Butler, and ask you, that in 1991 when you were
7
elected and throughout your period up to the end of December of 1993, were you
8
aware that a substantial number of your colleagues in Dublin County Council
9
were in receipt of political payments or indeed payments of any sort from
15:27:52 10
11
Monarch Properties or its related companies? A.
12
Oh, no.
I mean, I never discussed nor nobody has ever discussed payments with
me.
13
Q. 768
I see.
14
A.
Any of my colleagues.
Q. 769
Do you think that it is proper that councillors should receive money from
15:28:03 15
16
developers and then subsequently vote on or make decisions in relation to that
17
developer's lands?
18
A.
19
Well, I mean, I have to be honest with you.
I think if we have a code brought
in now, as you very well know, which all donations has to be registered.
15:28:25 20
think if it's done properly it's fine.
I
I mean, I have received donations
21
myself but I think you will, if you look back on some of the records there, it
22
didn't influence me one way or the other.
23
I voted for some development and I voted against others.
24
bad. It just didn't influence me.
15:28:47 25
Q. 770
If I thought it was
Do you think it's better that people should disclose monies that they receive
26
in circumstances where they are subsequently in a position of power in relation
27
by way of voting or otherwise?
28 29 15:29:06 30
A.
Yes, I certainly would. regulations.
But, I mean, let's put it this way.
There was no
We can all kind of look back and say, you know, great but there
was no regulations there at that particular time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
And I think we have
15:29:11
15:29:29
132 1
regulations now.
2
that's -- if you put regulations there and I think that's the good thing about
3
this Tribunal, it has kind of got people thinking and it's got people to do
4
things properly.
5
that.
6
Q. 771
7
And everybody is adhering to the regulations.
Which wasn't done in them years.
Thank you very much, Mr. Butler.
I mean,
There is no doubt about
If you would answer any questions anybody
may have for you.
8 9
MR. ROCHFORD:
Nothing, Chairman.
Thank you.
15:29:37 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much
Thank you very much.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
That's the witnesses then.
15:29:43 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Sorry, Sir.
Sorry.
I beg your pardon
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten tomorrow?
19 15:29:48 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Or are we sitting earlier?
23 24
MS. DILLON:
No, half ten.
15:29:53 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten.
Thank you.
27 28
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
29
FRIDAY, 2ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
15:30:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
15:30:30
133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 646
09:25:28
10:25:04
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
15TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:15 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
5 6
MR. MURPHY:
Good morning, Chairman.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop.
9 CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP BY MR. MURPHY
10:25:14 10
11 12
AS FOLLOWS: A.
Hello.
Sorry. Do you mind if I take off my jacket?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Oh, certainly. You don't want to take off your jacket, Mr. Murphy.
10:26:06 15
16
MR. MURPHY:
17
suits.
A little bit later, Chairman. Like the high jumpers in the track
18 19 10:26:16 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
21
All right.
No, it got a bit intemperate here yesterday.
The temperature I mean not the
exchanges.
22
Q. 1
MR. MURPHY:
23
A.
Good morning, Mr. Murphy.
24
Q. 2
I'm hoping to finish my examination of you by lunch hour.
10:26:37 25
26
Good morning, Mr. Dunlop.
cross-examination can start after lunch. A.
Excellent.
You mean after, I understand that there is another witness.
27 28 29
So the
CHAIRMAN: A.
There is a short witness at two o'clock.
What time can we expect to be back after that then?
10:26:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:26:48
10:27:00
2 1
CHAIRMAN:
It would be about a quarter past two then.
2
A.
Lovely.
3
Q. 3
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, just one little thing that occurred overnight.
4
relation to.
5
that date, the important meeting.
6
recall that meeting.
In
If I could go back to May '92 the County Council meeting and And you were there, you remember, you
You weren't acting for Monarch at that stage?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 4
And do you have any recollection of Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon having a contact in
9 10:27:24 10
the course of that day, in the course of that meeting? A.
Well I -- well my answer to that would have to be no.
11
Mr. Lydon talking to Mr. Lynn I think.
12
--
13
Q. 5
Yes.
14
A.
-- in the council.
10:27:44 15
exchanges between various people's took place. conversations.
17
wanted to know what had happened. Q. 6
19 10:28:14 20
There was a lot of confusion that day
In fairness to everybody concerned and to say that
16
18
I didn't witness
There was a lot of
People were, didn't quite know what had happened.
So do you say, Mr. Dunlop, sorry.
People
And explanations were being sought.
So you don't actually recall seeing Mr.
Lynn and Mr. Lydon together during that time? A.
21
I wouldn't say definitively that I do or I did not.
I do know that certain
comments were made, right across the board.
22
Q. 7
All right.
23
A.
And comments were made to me as well.
24
Q. 8
I want to turn something up maybe in your statement and I'll put it to you.
10:28:28 25
Mr. Dunlop, just to help, you remember Mr. Lydon proposed a motion that was
26
defeated 35 - 33?
27
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
28
Q. 9
And then he withdrew a motion.
29
A.
That is correct, yes.
Q. 10
Does that help your recollection in any way?
10:28:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:28:42
10:29:03
3 1
A.
Well, let me put it this way to you, Mr. Murphy.
2
definitive or unfair to anybody.
3
would have had to take instructions.
Without being either
What was happening there was that Mr. Lydon
4
Q. 11
Yes.
5
A.
And now, that sounds somewhat dismissive or ...
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
have had to do.
9
A.
Well, sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I think rather than say what he would
Yes.
10:29:15 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Perhaps if you just tell us what you know he did or saw him do.
Well the motion was put forward.
The motion was defeated.
13
the other motion.
14
instructions being given to him that that should take place.
10:29:34 15
He then withdrew
That took place, I cannot say definitively, that I saw But certainly in
the melee that followed, there was a lot of contact between a lot of people.
16
Q. 12
And what about contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon?
17
A.
Yes, I would say there was contact.
18
Q. 13
Did you see it?
19
A.
No, I can't say I definitively saw it. No.
Q. 14
I'll try and find what I'm looking for, Mr. Dunlop and come back to you on it.
10:29:50 20
21
Mr. Lynn, was Mr. Lynn in the chambers all of the day or in the environs all of
22
the day or in and out?
23
A.
24
Well that I can't attest to because for one simple reason, and I'm subject to correction on this.
10:30:10 25
I think the public gallery in that particular chamber
format as it existed then, I think at maximum, at maximum, held ten people.
26
And the press gallery, which was right beside it, inside the door, can --
27
facilitated a maximum of six or seven people.
28
chamber and I can only give you my own experience.
29
necessary to be in the chamber.
10:30:36 30
Q. 15
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
So if you wanted to be in the On occasion it was
10:30:36
10:30:57
4 1
A.
And if you wanted to be in the chamber, you got in there, you took your place,
2
you sat there and you didn't come out because if you came out you couldn't get
3
back in.
4
Q. 16
5 6
I see.
You would know if he was stuck in the chamber for the whole day or
stuck in and around the chamber for the whole day or whether he was ...? A.
The only way I can answer that, Mr. Murphy, is that if I had a motion of
7
enormous importance going through council, that I was controlling or attempting
8
to control, I would be in the chamber.
9
Q. 17
10:31:22 10
11
Mr. Dillon has just found what I was looking for Mr. Dunlop. A.
12 13
All right. Page 589, please.
I knew this was what you were looking for.
I mean, I couldn't recall the
exact detail myself. Q. 18
14
Question 61, "Who would make a decision that a particular motion should be withdrawn."
10:31:45 15
A:
-- private interviews.
"I remember on one particular occasion Richard
16
Lynn signalling Don Lydon to come out of the chamber after he had made a
17
disastrous speech in relation to why this was required and not required and he
18
came back in and he withdrew.
19
Q: Withdrew the motion?
10:31:59 20
A: Yes. The motion."
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 19
Now, can you just say in the light of what you said a moment ago, that you
23
didn't have a recollection seven years ago, no what is it, six years ago you
24
told the Counsel for the Tribunal that you have a recollection of that.
10:32:14 25
A.
Yes. I don't have any difficulty about it, Mr. Murphy.
As I said to you,
26
putting myself in the shoes of Mr. Lynn.
27
chamber, I would be controlling the thing and I would signal Mr. Lydon to come
28
out --
29 10:32:31 30
Q. 20
Well --
A.
Yes, what I did say -- No, I'll continue on.
If I was Mr. Lynn I would be in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
What I did say is that I
10:32:33
10:32:45
5 1
remember an occasion when I saw Mr. Lynn signalling to Don Lydon to come out
2
and subsequent to that --
3
Q. 21
Mr. Dunlop, I want to finish this by lunch hour.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 22
Did Mr.-- you agree that you said that --
6
A.
Oh, I do absolutely, yes.
7
Q. 23
You said to the three judges a few moments ago, that you had no recollection of
8 9 10:33:00 10
11
Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon? A.
Yes, I have no difficulty about it.
Q. 24
Do you now have a recollection because you've been seen this?
A.
I knew I had said something in private session along the lines that Richard
12
Lynn had made a signal to Don Lydon to come out.
13
Q. 25
Why didn't you tell us that?
14
A.
Well, look it, Mr. Murphy, why didn't I -- why don't I say a lot of things.
Q. 26
Exactly.
16
A.
Look it --
17
Q. 27
Why don't you tell us everything, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
I've told you everything so far.
10:33:18 15
19
number of days and you alone can count the number of pages of evidence, so you
10:33:30 20
can make up your mind.
21 22
I've been in this box, for I can't count the
But, yes, there was a relationship between Don Lydon
and -Q. 28
That's not the question, Mr. Dunlop, the question is quite simple.
Why did
23
you tell three Judges here in the Tribunal a few minutes ago that you didn't
24
see that happening?
10:33:45 25
A.
No.
26
Q. 29
You don't have a recollection of it?
27
A.
No, I don't have a recollection of it, it's quite simple.
28
Q. 30
Did it happen?
29
A.
Yes, it did happen.
Q. 31
Now, Mr. Dunlop, yesterday --
10:33:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:33:57
10:34:09
6 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
Are you saying, Mr. Dunlop, that you recollect this occurring on this occasion,
4
the occasion of this particular motion?
5
A.
6
Sorry, just before, because this is important.
In the circumstances that obtained that day, yes.
With the confusion in, the
melee that took place in the chamber and outside.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
being signaled by Mr. Lynn to come out?
10:34:25 10
A.
Are you saying that on that you did of that occasion see Mr. Lydon
Yes.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
So you do recollect it?
I do recollect it, yes.
14 10:34:30 15
MR. HUMPHREYS: Gerard Humphreys with Seamus O'Tuathail, for Mr. Don Lydon.
16 17
What the witness said was that I have no recollection. If he has no
18
recollection he cannot go on to say what occurred. Now, there has to be --
19 10:34:42 20
CHAIRMAN:
Well he said that's something you can take up with him in
21
cross-examination.
That's why.
It concerns us as well.
22
He said in private session that he or it would appear that he had a
23
recollection.
24
he's changed his position again and he says he now has a recollection.
He said this morning that he had no recollection.
He says now
10:35:01 25
26
I mean, that's a matter, you can take up with him certainly.
27
can see the ....
But I mean, I
28 29
MR. HUMPHREYS:
The difficulty is that he said he had no recollection.
10:35:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:35:11
10:35:22
7 1
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, I can't hear you.
2 3
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Sorry the mike is on again.
The difficulty is that he said
4
that he had no recollection of this event.
5
what occurred.
6
Now, he either remembers it or he doesn't remember it.
And now he is continuing to say
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
9 10:35:27 10
MR. HUMPHREYS:
11
I'll take it up in cross-examination as indicated. But I do
see a difficulty with this even at this stage.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
the evidence here today. He said earlier that he had no recollection.
10:35:41 15
Absolutely.
And I share that concern. But I mean, we're taking You
now say you have a recollection.
16 17
I mean, it's important for Mr. Lydon's position that, I mean, that you be
18
absolutely truthful about this.
19
recollection or no recollection or a recollection?
10:35:58 20
A.
I mean, is it that you have a half a
Well, with respect, Chairman, I don't think there's any distinguishing
21
between -- what I've said to Mr. Murphy.
22
relationship with Mr. Lynn.
Mr. Lydon, because Mr. Lydon's
Mr. Lydon would not --
23 24 10:36:16 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
26
No, no, it doesn't matter what --
-- do anything without instructions from Mr. Lynn. Mr. Lawlor --
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Lydon, sorry.
10:36:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
In the circumstances where
10:36:26
10:36:34
8 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
day.
3
A.
We're only interested in what you saw happen on that particular
Not what you assume happened or think should have happened.
I accept that.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
out Mr. Lydon or did you not see or can you remember one way or the other?
7
A.
Now, can you clarify the position.
Did you see Mr. Lynn calling
Well the simple answer to that is yes.
8 9 10:36:48 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
I did see Mr. Lynn signalling to Mr. Lydon to come out.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
You can deal with it in cross-examination.
13 14
MR. HUMPHREYS:
10:37:05 15
I'll take it up in cross-examination.
It was the difficulty
in what he said and then going on to say something else.
16
Thank you.
17 18
Q. 32
19 10:37:14 20
21
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, we were talking about your meeting with Mr. Sweeney
on the 8th of March. A.
Yes.
Q. 33
And just one thing in relation to that.
I want to put to you because I'm not
22
quite sure that you pitched it quite as high as this yesterday. But in your
23
statement, 425 please.
24 10:37:26 25
And if you go down towards the end of the first substantial paragraph.
26
it says "The only discussions".
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 34
Do you see that?
29
A.
Yes, sorry.
Q. 35
"The only discussions with regard to payments to politicians was with
10:37:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Where
10:38:01
10:38:13
9 1
Mr. Sweeney.
With my original meeting with him indicated that he knew that I
2
would have to make payments to councillors to achieve success."
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 36
I just want to stop there for a second "and he said that he knew that this was
5
the only way that things could get done".
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 37
This might be my inaccuracy in recollection because you were saying something
8 9 10:38:26 10
that you couldn't recall what words he said. A.
Yes.
Q. 38
"He indicated to you."
11 12
Is that correct in your statement that he indicated to
you that he knew that you would have to make payments to councillors? A.
Yes.
What I -- I thought I clarified that, particularly with the Chairman
13
yesterday.
14
Mr. Sweeney did not say I know that you have to make payments to politicians.
10:38:47 15
When he asked me in relation to -- I said specifically that
Q. 39
You did.
16
A.
Did I not say that?
17
Q. 40
You did say that.
18
A.
I also said.
19
This was a point that the Chairman raised with me in relation to
saying, you have to do what you have to do or I know what you have to do, it is
10:38:58 20
the only way of getting things done.
21
Q. 41
Yes.
22
A.
And from that, which I described as the culture of the meeting to you on day
23
one, sorry, not day one, day whatever it was.
24
of Mr. Sweeney's knowledge.
10:39:12 25
That that was my interpretation
Q. 42
Yes.
26
A.
Day one of your cross-examination -- of your examination, yes.
27
Q. 43
Oh yes, sorry, I thought you meant meeting.
28 29 10:39:27 30
It was day one wasn't it?
You say in the statement "He said
that he knew that this was the only way that things could get done." A.
Yes.
Q. 44
So he said that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:39:28
10:39:40
10 1
A.
2
He said that he knew.
The phrase when I went on to -- when I was asked by the
Chairman what phraseology --
3 4
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Murphy has just read
5
out a an extract from the statement where it clearly says "indicated that he
6
knew".
He is now paraphrasing it and said that he knew.
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
9
sentence is and what I said was that he knew that this was the only way that
10:39:50 10
No. The next sentence.
things could get done.
11
He said that.
I'm sorry Mr. Redmond, the next
I'm sorry, Mr. Redmond, that's what I
mean.
12 13
MR. REDMOND: My misinterpretation and I want just for the purposes of
14
clarification was; It was very clear to me that what Mr. Murphy was saying
10:40:01 15
whether through error or otherwise was that "he said that I would have to make
16
payments to councillors".
17
throughout.
That he was using "said" instead of indicating
18 19
Q. 45
10:40:15 20
MR. MURPHY:
Well, Mr. Dunlop, what I'm suggesting to you is that in your
statement, your words are "he" being Mr. Sweeney "said that he knew that this
21
was the only way that things would get done".
22
Mr. Sweeney said that part of it to you?
23
A.
24
Is that correct that
I know what you -- what I said to the Chairman yesterday was that you have to do whatever you have to do or phraseology to that extent.
10:40:34 25
That is the only
way that things can be done.
26
Q. 46
All right.
27
A.
And I specifically made it clear, Mr. Murphy, and I hope -- I had hoped I had
28
and I want to make it absolutely clear again here now.
29
said to me, Frank, I know that you have to pay X, Y, or Z: he never said I know
10:40:53 30
That Mr. Sweeney never
that you have pay Mr. Murphy, Mr. Redmond, Ms. Dillon, you know, whoever. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He
10:40:58
10:41:07
11 1
never said anything of that nature.
2
have to do with these politicians.
He said I know you have to do what you That is the only way things can be done.
3
Q. 47
Well is that all he said?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 48
Said that gave you to understand --
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 49
-- that he knew that politicians would have to be paid?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 50
Mr. Sweeney -- you gave us a lot of evidence yesterday.
A.
Dunlop.
Q. 51
Mr. Dunlop, you gave us a lot of evidence yesterday afternoon about the
10:41:30 10
11 12
meetings with Mr. Sweeney, the first one and on subsequent occasions and going
13
back to Mr. Sweeney about an increase in your fees, isn't that right?
14 10:41:44 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 52
Now, do you expect that Mr. Sweeney will agree with that?
A.
Well, firstly, my first immediate answer to that is I don't know.
17
And
secondly, I have seen some documentation in relation to --
18
Q. 53
Yes.
19
A.
-- what Mr. Sweeney has said by way of either preliminary statement or
10:42:05 20
narrative statement and Mr. Sweeney seems to have a completely hazy notion of
21
where I came from or how I came to be involved at all.
22
Q. 54
All right.
23
A.
Now, that is my --
24
Q. 55
If I can take you to page 2199, please. Now, the third paragraph.
10:42:26 25
If I can
read this.
26 27
"The next contact -- the next contact with Liam Lawlor was in 1993/1994 during
28
the Cherrywood campaigns."
29
public relations consultant Frank Dunlop, who was employed as a consultant
10:42:52 30
Sorry. "When he advised on zoning strategy with
around the time of the second Cherrywood rezoning was attempted by Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I
10:42:56
10:43:10
12 1
have no knowledge of when exactly or who appointed Frank Dunlop but can recall
2
that some of the Liam Lawlor/Frank Dunlop meetings were related to the
3
promotion of a number of developments in the Checz Republic especially the Alfa
4
project in Prague."
5
know when exactly you were appointed or who appointed you.
Mr. Sweeney apparently is going to say that he doesn't
6
A.
That's the point I was referring to myself.
7
Q. 56
You believe that he appointed you?
8
A.
Well --
9
Q. 57
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 58
You believe Mr. Sweeney appointed you?
12
A.
Correct. Yes.
13
Q. 59
And if we go on to page 2200, please. The paragraph heading Frank Dunlop and
10:43:19 10
14
Bill O'Herlihy.
10:43:35 15
16
This is Mr. Sweeney's statement "Spanning a period of about one and a half
17
years I would have met Frank Dunlop about six times."
18
second, that bears out what you were saying in your evidence about meeting
19
Mr. Sweeney on a number of occasions.
10:43:50 20
A.
21
If I pause there for a
It's double that actually, according to my rough count yesterday for his references to Mr. Sweeney in my diaries.
22
Q. 60
Would you have met him other than in the Monarch offices?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 61
Because -- all right.
10:44:02 25
in the offices.
Because what you had said in your interviews is twice
"Some of the meetings would have been about the proposed
26
develop in Prague and some of the meetings would have concerned Frank Dunlop's
27
role as public relations advisors in relation to land rezoning, particularly in
28
Cherrywood to which he was introduced some time after the services of Bill
29
Herlihy were no longer required (road show).
10:44:20 30
I can recall no part in any
agreement with Mr. Bill O'Herlihy -- that's irrelevant -- or Frank Dunlop for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:44:23
10:44:33
13 1
the services that they provided -- for the services that they provided to
2
Monarch but I believe that such consultancy agreements would probably have been
3
formalised in writing.
4 5
I personally however, at no time negotiated any agreement or agreed any
6
payments or certified or recommended any payments to Frank Dunlop or Bill
7
O'Herlihy whatsoever.
8
such appointments."
Philip Monahan or Richard Lynn would have dealt with
9 10:44:46 10
11
Now, would you like to comment on that in the light of what you told us? A.
Yeah. We'll take it from the top.
Spanning a period of about one and a half
12
years.
13
can refer to the diary if you so wish and give the exact --
14
Q. 62
10:45:06 15
16
I met with Frank Dunlop about six times.
I'm not interested in that Mr. Dunlop.
I've dealt with that.
We
I'm not interested in the next bit, if
you go down "I can recall no part". A.
Okay.
"I can recall no part".
I think I told you yesterday or the day
17
before, I'm not quite sure, if you go through the names of the people in
18
relation to Monarch that I ever met or dealt with. Philip Monahan, I met on a
19
number of occasions socially or accidentally and he attended one meeting and
10:45:29 20
stuck his head in to another.
I never negotiated any fee.
I never had any
21
writing communication with Mr. Monahan in relation to the Cherrywood project.
22
He never negotiated a fee with me.
23 24 10:45:51 25
Mr. Lynn:
Mr. Lynn and I never discussed my relationship with Monarch
Properties in relation to the Cherrywood project other than in circumstances of
26
strategy as to who he should talk to, who he should lobby, who he should
27
campaign, what type of attitude we should adopt.
28
appoint me.
29
appoint me.
Neither -- he did not
I don't know who told him I was appointed.
10:46:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He certainly did not
10:46:12
10:46:19
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well --
Mr. Philip Reilly.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
that you stand over your evidence to the effect --
6
A.
7
Mr. Dunlop.
Sorry, all Mr. Murphy wants from you is confirmation
I certainly do, Chairman, yes.
But he asked me, just in ease of Mr. Murphy,
he did say is there any comment you wish to make.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:46:37 10
want to in any way alter the evidence you have given, given that Mr. Sweeney
11 12
Yes but we don't need to know, we just want to know whether you
will say what he apparently -A.
13
Let me put it another way, Mr. Chairman.
I totally disagree with that
statement.
14 10:46:48 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
16 17
Q. 63
18 19
MR. MURPHY: Page 4839, please. Now, Mr. Dunlop, I think this is where we were yesterday.
A.
Yes.
Q. 64
I think we were at the bottom of the page "okay" with initials?
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 65
Now, what would "okay" convey to you there?
23
A.
Well, okay would confirm to me that the person who initialled that said this is
10:47:01 20
24 10:47:15 25
okay for payment. Q. 66
Right.
26
A.
That would be my interpretation of it.
27
Q. 67
That's your best effort at working out who that initial is?
28
A.
Oh well my best effort at that is as I said yesterday, it looks to me as either
29 10:47:29 30
Ed or an elaborate Yes. Q. 68
Would you be inclined to think that it's Mr. Sweeney? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:47:33
10:47:44
15 1
A.
2 3
Having seen it yesterday and looking at it now I don't have any doubt that it is Ed Sweeney.
Q. 69
4
Okay.
Right.
Which in fact having regard to what I've just read out to you
about his statement --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 70
-- may not be consistent with what he's saying about not having any dealings
7
with fees about you?
8
A.
Sorry, give me that again, Mr. Murphy.
9
Q. 71
If that's Mr. Sweeney's signature --
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 72
He is okaying your invoice?
12
A.
And then he is saying in his statement he had no dealings with me.
10:47:55 10
13 14
Yes, I
accept that point. Q. 73
10:48:05 15
So if the signature there, his signature there bears out what you are saying that you did have your chats with him about money?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 74
Anyway, that's his signature and what that conveys to you is that he has okayed
18 19 10:48:16 20
this fee, isn't that right? A.
Yes, sorry.
Q. 75
Yes.
Now -- this.
And you told us yesterday that you had this conversation
21
on the phone with one or other of these two gentlemen and they said send it in
22
and we'll see what we can do?
23
A.
See how far you would get.
24
Q. 76
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
10:48:38 25
So then you sent out this invoice on the 14th of
December 1993, which is shortly after, whatever it is, a few weeks after the
26
successful motion.
27
A.
A month I think was it, three weeks, yeah.
28
Q. 77
And -- right.
29
A.
Actually --
Q. 78
Is there something?
10:49:06 30
So he had said to you he'll see how far --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:49:07
10:49:16
16 1
A.
No, no, no, just on the time line.
I was just interested in your reference to
2
how long after the successful motion it was.
3
the successful motion was.
I was just looking up what date
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The 11th of November.
A.
I said a month, yeah.
Q. 79
MR. MURPHY:
We know that from the record.
7 8 9
it? I mean, you had this conversation, you wanted a success fee, 60,500.
10:49:32 10
know that you had no intention of paying the VAT.
11 12
Can you just take us through what happened then in relation to
So success fee is 60,500
and he says -A.
Excuse me, Mr. Murphy, sorry, you cannot say that I had no intentions of paying
13
VAT.
14
which would, if it was received to Frank Dunlop & Associates with the VAT
10:49:51 15
attached go through the books as other invoices had from Frank Dunlop &
16 17
This was Frank Dunlop & Associates Company invoice with VAT attached
Associates to Monarch. Q. 80
18 19
No, I understood from what you said yesterday when you were agreeing the 25,000 at the beginning --
A.
Oh that was a different invoice. This is an invoice with VAT attached --
Q. 81
All right.
21
A.
-- through the company books.
22
Q. 82
All right.
10:50:03 20
23 24 10:50:15 25
We
So success fee, this is your invoice success fee 50,000 is the
success fee.
The rest is VAT and you're going to pay the VAT on it?
A.
Yes.
Q. 83
And it's -- and it says "okay".
So Mr. Sweeney said to you.
And I keep
26
forgetting what you say he said to you which was he said he'll see how far it
27
would go or whatever.
28
A.
Yes. See how far you'll get.
29
Q. 84
See how far you'll get. Yeah, so it's looks as if you're getting pretty far at
10:50:32 30
this stage? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:50:32
10:50:41
17 1
A.
By virtue of that reference on it, yes.
2
Q. 85
So what happened?
3
A.
I didn't get it.
4
Q. 86
You didn't get it?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 87
Is there a reminder letter?
7
A.
No, I don't think so.
There's -- if there was we would have discovered it.
8
I don't think so.
9
whether or not it was going to be paid or not.
10:50:59 10
I think there were some discussions subsequently as to But it just -- it wasn't paid
as far as I'm concerned.
11
Q. 88
You regarded it as outstanding.
12
A.
Putting it clinically, yes, it is a live debt.
13
Q. 89
Is there some other way to put it?
14
A.
No, there's not.
Q. 90
Monarch Properties owe you 60,500.
16
A.
No, I sent this invoice.
17
Q. 91
Was it a joke?
18
A.
We sent this invoice after a discussion that I had with one or other of
10:51:14 15
19
Putting it clinically is what I said.
Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane.
10:51:40 20
It's a live debt?
And you now show me the invoice from the Monarch
file which it as "okay" on it.
21
Q. 92
So you hadn't seen it before, had you not?
22
A.
Well, no I cannot absolutely say that we hadn't seen it before if it was in the
23 24
brief. Q. 93
Can I stop you there for a second, I want to know when you first saw that page?
A.
I can't tell you that.
26
Q. 94
When did you get your brief?
27
A.
Some time ago.
28
Q. 95
Uh-huh.
29
A.
Some time ago.
Q. 96
Uh-huh.
10:51:54 25
10:52:00 30
And had you never seen that -- you hadn't seen it I suppose until you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:52:05
10:52:10
18 1
got the brief?
2
A.
I couldn't have seen it until I got the brief.
3
Q. 97
Well, presumably in the last number of weeks you have seen it, it's not new to
4
you?
5
A.
No, it's not new to me in the sense, it's not in the forefront of my mind.
6
Q. 98
Just tell us please, how you followed up a debt of 60,500.
7
Sorry.
asked you?
8
A.
You did.
9
Q. 99
Is that still -- oh Monarch owes you that and you said not really.
A.
Well that invoice was not paid.
10:52:29 10
A number of conversations took place with
11
Mr. Sweeney and/or Mr. Glennane about the payment of it.
12
some stage that I wasn't going to get paid.
13
money.
14 10:52:51 15
16
It was indicated at
Or I wasn't going to get the
Q. 100
Why not?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 101
They must have given you a reason and you must have protested and said I can't
17 18
I think I
But you'll have to ask Monarch that.
afford to be without 60,000? A.
19
I'm going to have to say to you again, Mr. Murphy, you're going to have to ask Monarch why they didn't pay.
10:53:13 20
I know, or at least from material that I think
is in the brief, that it is -- that certainly indicates that Monarch may have
21
claimed payment of this from somebody else or half of this from somebody else,
22
I don't know.
23
Q. 102
24 10:53:33 25
But, I mean, certainly I didn't get it.
No, no, that's fine.
What's the follow-up to it, sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
I asked
you a second ago -A.
Yes.
26
Q. 103
-- do Monarch owe you 60,500?
27
A.
Well, I don't regard that they do any more.
28
Q. 104
Why not?
29
A.
Well there is not much likelihood of my getting 60,500 from Monarch when I sent
10:53:47 30
an invoice in on the 14th of December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And we are he now at whatever it
10:53:52
10:54:02
19 1 2
is of June 2006. Q. 105
3 4
But it's bad debt, isn't it?
It's money they owe you but they won't pay you
and you can't get? A.
I don't regard it as a bad debt.
It was something that we discussed.
We
5
sent it out on foot of a conversation with the gentleman that I, one or other
6
of the gentlemen that I alluded to.
7
circumstances that I've outlined to you, maybe a couple of telephone
8
conversations.
9
I never followed it up other than in the
Q. 106
Nothing in writing?
A.
Not that I --
11
Q. 107
No reminder?
12
A.
I don't -- I certainly have no documentation extant to me to show that I sent
10:54:16 10
13 14 10:54:27 15
16
them a reminder. Q. 108
No.
A.
When this module is opened this is the first --
Q. 109
When did you write it off? Tell me the date, the month or the year when you
17 18
and Monarch agreed that they didn't owe it to you any longer? A.
19 10:54:47 20
Well I don't think I ever made a conscious decision saying I'm writing this off.
I just wasn't paid and that's it.
Q. 110
Did you get it any other way?
21
A.
No, I did not.
22
Q. 111
Did you get it in cash?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 112
Did you get it from somebody else, not Mr. Sweeney.
A.
No, I never got any money from Mr. Monahan.
26
Q. 113
You never did?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 114
No.
29
A.
And just for ease of your line of questioning.
10:55:00 25
10:55:06 30
Monarch either. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did Mr. Monahan pay you?
I never got any cash from
10:55:16
10:55:48
20 1
Q. 115
Now, could I have, please, 4832.
2
This is an invoice.
This is a document on Monarch Properties Services Limited
3
notepaper.
4
It says invoice No. 2186.
It's a fee note I think.
It says "fee note" in the middle of it.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 116
It says date 10th of December 1993.
Project Cherrywood/Loughlinstown, County
7
Dublin in account Guardian Assurance Plc. This is GRE I think, isn't it? And
8
it says Frank Dunlop success fee.
9
instead of sending on your invoice, would that be right? They have sent --
10:56:14 10
So obviously what they've done is they've
they have incorporated in their own document Frank Dunlop success fee --
11
A.
What is?
12
Q. 117
"ES letter of the 2nd of September '93 and paragraph 1 of MB's letter of 28th
13
September 1993.
14
30,250.
10:56:41 15
Fee 50,000.
50 per cent GRE 25,000, VAT 5,250; total
This is not an invoice for VAT purposes.
A VAT invoice will issue
on receipt of payment and it's stamped by GRE authorised for payment 20th of
16
December 1993.
Can you explain that?
17
A.
No, that's a matter for Monarch.
18
Q. 118
Pardon?
19
A.
That's an internal Monarch document. I mean, I've only seen this in the brief.
10:56:57 20
I know nothing about this.
21
Q. 119
All right.
22
A.
Yes, we discussed that yesterday.
23
Q. 120
That in relation to certain disbursements, I think or expenses that they would
24 10:57:09 25
You know that there is an arrangement between Monarch and GRE?
get back 50 per cent? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 121
Your fees was one of those things?
27
A.
So I understand.
28
Q. 122
And so if there was a success fee, there may be an arrangement -- it may cover,
29 10:57:18 30
that agreement between GRE and Monarch may cover the success fee? A.
That may well be the case. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:57:20
10:57:31
21 1
Q. 123
Yes. All right. That is obviously what is going on?
2
A.
Well, I mean it is intriguing, but that is obviously what is going on.
3
Q. 124
Well, what's intriguing about it?
4
A.
Well, I mean I'm fascinated to know the next element of it.
5
Q. 125
Well, what's fascinating about it?
6
A.
Did they get 25 per cent out of it? Sorry did they get 50 per cent out of it?
7
Q. 126
But before that.
8 9
I mean, wouldn't you expect that your fees would be passed
on to the tune of 50 per cent to GRE? A.
If that is the arrangement with GRE, yes.
Q. 127
Oh, you didn't -- you weren't aware of that?
11
A.
I was never told --
12
Q. 128
That's fine?
13
A.
-- by Monarch that they had an arrangement with GRE that any fee note that I
10:57:43 10
14 10:57:54 15
would send in would be paid half by them. Q. 129
All right.
All right.
I never got any money from GRE.
But, Mr. Dunlop, how is it that -- do you know what
16
this is about? Do you see? If you just compare the information there, invoice
17
No. 2186 with your invoice.
18
A.
19
Yes.
Your invoice is 1251.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't say yes, well it's gone off the screen there now.
Let me see can I get it in my own brief. But I take --
10:58:23 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You can put it up again.
832.
Would you put it up beside it, put the two documents side by side.
23 24
MR. MURPHY: I think that's 4839 and 4832.
10:58:39 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: Yes, 4839 is the next one. A.
Yeah okay.
Q. 130
MR. MURPHY:
A.
Yes.
28 29 10:58:49 30
Your one is on the right-hand side.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
10:58:50
10:59:02
22 1
Q. 131
It's dated 14th of December 1993.
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 132
The Monarch one to GRE is dated -- I don't know whether that's the date of the
4
invoice or whether it's the date of the fee note.
5
A.
Well that's exactly the point that struck me forcibly when I saw this stamp.
6
Q. 133
Yeah. Well, Mr. Dunlop, we'll take it one by one.
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 134
If that information invoice number and date is referring to your document,
9 10:59:22 10
which it should be, because it's your information further down. A.
No -- sorry, Mr. Murphy.
11
you're trying to do.
12
from Monarch to GRE.
For ease of what you're trying to do and I know what
This, as I interpret it, from Monarch, is an invoice
13
Q. 135
All right.
14
A.
And the Monarch number is 2186.
Q. 136
Excellent.
16
A.
I suspect that --
17
Q. 137
No, I was going to suggest that as an alternative.
18
A.
It may be.
19
Q. 138
Just for one second we'll take that.
10:59:37 15
10:59:48 20
All right.
I'll live with that.
So that this Monarch, it says fee note
and -- where does fee note come from.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
This is Monarch's.
23
A.
This is Monarch's.
24
Q. 139
MR. MURPHY:
11:00:02 25
Mr. Murphy, this is Monarch's invoice.
Why would they say fee note.
their invoice, Mr. Dunlop, for a second, it's their invoice No. 2186.
26
fine.
27
that's another matter.
28
is four days before your one.
29 11:00:15 30
Anyway, it doesn't matter.
It's
That's
I don't understand why they don't just simply send on your one but And the date of this is 10th of December 1993.
A.
Correct.
Q. 140
Now, how do you explain that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Which
11:00:17
11:00:31
23 1
A.
I mean, I don't have to offer any explanation for this at all.
This is an
2
internal Monarch document to another entity known as GRE and there are various
3
dates on it.
Obviously --
4
Q. 141
You --
5
A.
Let me just fast track this for you as possible.
6
evidence that I have given to you.
7
success fee.
8
company.
9 11:00:47 10
Q. 142
Yes.
A.
Okay.
11 12
11:00:58 15
I had a conversation in relation to a
I draw up an invoice and I send the invoice.
It's dated and there is an invoice number on it.
What Monarch did either in the interim or subsequently, I cannot
Q. 143
But Monarch would wait until they get your invoice to see what's it's for, isn't that right?
A.
Presumably.
Q. 144
But they have dated their invoice for 50,000 and well VAT because they've
16
included the VAT for GRE for their half.
17
their invoice before they get your's?
18
A.
19
So they've sent, prepared anyway
Well there's a number of thing that strike you forcibly when you look at that. There are three separate dates on it.
11:01:22 20
One is the 10th of the 12th '93.
Which is four days before the date of my invoice.
The second one is
21
authorised for payment the 20th of December, 1993.
22
another stamp of the 15th of January, 1994.
23
Q. 145
And where is 57 Harcourt Street -- oh that's Monarch.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 146
Okay.
26
A.
So I -- while I --
27
Q. 147
All right.
28
A.
-- I would wish to help you.
11:01:38 25
29 11:01:48 30
It's from the
account for.
13 14
I obviously on foot of the
And on top there is
Right.
I cannot help you in the context of an internal
document. Q. 148
But if it's authorised for payment by GRE on the 20th of December -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:01:52
11:02:02
24 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 149
-- the 15th of January is irrelevant for the moment.
3
A.
That's irrelevant, yes, yes.
4 5
three separate dates on that document. Q. 150
6 7
11:02:16 10
A.
You are going to have to ask Mr. Sweeney or whoever -- I don't see any authorisation signature on any of this.
Q. 151
All right.
A.
Other than ES, which presumably means Eddie Sweeney, that's a matter for
11 12
How do they write your invoice, this invoice about your fee to get their half back from GRE without getting your invoice first?
8 9
I'm just pointing out to you that there are
Monarch. Q. 152
Page 3403, please. A letter, Mr. Dunlop, from GRE to Mr. Sweeney.
13
is dated 7th of July, 1993.
14
Excuse me. Invoice No. 2064.
11:02:47 15
16
The letter
Paragraph four. This is GRE saying to Monarch --
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 153
"Although at our meeting in May I agreed the appointment of Frank Dunlop on the
17
basis of 4, 000 per month with no success fee.
18
to invoice for 25,000 which would imply over six months work when Mr. Dunlop
19
was only appointed in May."
11:03:03 20
I therefore find it difficult
A.
I find that paragraph quite gratifying.
21
Q. 154
In what way?
22
A.
First of all, you suggested to me that Mr. Sweeney -- you put up a note know
23
the monitor saying that Mr. Sweeney knew nothing about my appointment or had no
24
negotiations with me.
11:03:23 25
Here is a note from GRE Properties to Mr. Sweeney
saying -- discussing fees in relation to me.
26
Q. 155
I totally accept that, Mr. Dunlop.
27
A.
Thank you.
28
Q. 156
On to the next thing that you find gratifying about it?
29
A.
The next thing I find gratifying about it is I don't know anything about 4,000
11:03:40 30
per month. The next thing I find gratifying about it is -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:03:41
11:04:00
25 1
Q. 157
Yes.
2
A.
I have already said in evidence that there was no discussion about a success
3
fee.
4
it is; that is 25,000 which is what I've always said was agreed between
5
Mr. Sweeney and myself.
6
Q. 158
7 8
That seems to be confirmed there.
All right.
And the 4th or 5th thing, whatever
The 25,000 may well go back to the 25 that you were paid in March,
which was 15 and 10, isn't that right? A.
That's what I am referring to, yes.
9 11:04:10 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Mr. Dunlop, just before we leave that point.
Sorry, Judge.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
invoice for the first two tranches.
11:04:20 15
A.
I understood yesterday I may be wrong, that there was no
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
there was no invoice for the 25.
19
A.
So this is a letter in July 7.
So you've said yesterday
No.
11:04:28 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
invoice could refer to the first tranche of money, two tranches that you got.
23
A.
24
So I'm now at a loss to understand how you can say this
No. With respect, Judge, I didn't say this invoice.
I said the 25,000. I
don't know anything --
11:04:49 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I just wanted to, in fairness --
I see the point you're making and it's quite correct.
I find it gratifying
28
that it's the 25,000 that's referred to which is what I have always said was
29
the agreed fee.
11:04:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:04:52
11:05:02
26 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
an invoice in relation to the first tranche but certainly you didn't raise it
3
anyway.
4
A.
Well we'll have to wait and see whether somebody else raised
No, I did not.
5 6
MR. REDMOND: Chairman, I think again just to clarify the issue in relations to
7
the invoices.
8
If that letter is dated September, by that time Mr. Dunlop has raised an
9
invoice for 10 and for 15 making a total of 25.
11:05:14 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
first 25,000.
I appreciate that, Mr. Redmond.
We were talking about the
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Which we'll have to hear from Monarch.
11:05:22 15
16
Q. 159
MR. MURPHY:
It does say Although at a meeting in May, GRE and this gentleman
17
agreed the appointment, your appointment.
18
you first came on the scene in March certainly from GRE's point of view.
19 11:05:37 20
A.
Thank you.
Q. 160
But you know nothing -- your arrangement for fees had nothing to do with 4,000
21 22
That ties in with you saying that
a month. A.
Were you aware of this arrangement and between GRE and Monarch?
I've already said to you I don't know anything about any arrangement. I don't
23
even know who signed this letter is there another page? I don't know who
24
signed this letter or at least --
11:05:53 25
Q. 161
26
Page 4304.
"Yours sincerely M Baker managing director GRE Properties Limited,
cc G Beng."
27
A.
Never heard of either of them.
28
Q. 162
Good. 4412, please.
29 11:06:19 30
A further letter from GRE to Mr. Sweeney. Eddie, Cherrywood Cabinteely.
28th of September 1993.
With reference to your letter of 2nd of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
"Dear
11:06:23
11:06:34
27 1
September and you are meeting on 27th of September I would confirm approval to
2
the following additional costs.
3
payable 50/50 between GRE and Monarch.
All costs are in Irish pounds and will be
4 5
1.
F Dunlop: A retainer of 4,000 per month from April to December 1993
6
inclusive plus a success fee of 50,000 pounds."
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 163
Now, the first part of that you know nothing about, the 4,000 per month.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 164
But this letter is evidence that GRE agreed with Mr. Sweeney to pay you a
11:06:45 10
11 12
success fee of 50,000 pounds? A.
Well I had no discussion with anybody from the outset about a success fee until
13
towards the end of the project, which we've already discussed ten minutes ago,
14
a conversation with Mr. Sweeney and/or Mr. Glennane some time after the
11:07:12 15
success, after the vote.
I don't know.
I cannot account for --
16
Q. 165
Yes.
17
A.
-- how --
18
Q. 166
Uh-huh.
19
A.
-- any of these internal documents between Monarch and GRE were drawn up.
11:07:24 20
mean, I wasn't party to them.
Certainly there was never any question about
21
4,000 per month.
22
to you earlier on this morning in the conversation with either Mr. Sweeney or
23
Mr. Glennane.
24
Q. 167
11:07:51 25
26
A.
Any idea
Billed and paid.
No.
Well it's in sort of capital letters isn't it,
Mr. Murphy, it might be difficult to decipher? Q. 168
29 11:08:04 30
Mr. Dunlop, the words -- it seems to me to read "billed and paid". whose handwriting?
27 28
And the success fee was in the circumstances that I outlined
That doesn't really matter whether it's difficult or not. it?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did you recognise
I
11:08:05
11:08:19
28 1
Q. 169
2
No. Okay.
And I can't be certain about this.
But it looks as if it seems
to indicate that those figures were paid by GRE to Monarch?
3
A.
Oh, to Monarch.
4
Q. 170
Yes, yes, to Monarch.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 171
And if it was -- so we have what seem to be the words "billed and paid" there
7
written by somebody.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 172
And then on the invoice that went from Monarch to GRE, if you recall, it said
11:08:54 10
"authorised for payment" on the 20th of December by GRE, do you remember that?
11
A.
That I do, yes, that was on the top -- the bottom of the page, yes.
12
Q. 173
So I don't know whether that means that this 50 was billed and paid by Monarch
13
or paid by GRE to Monarch back in September and again in December or whether
14
they are one and the same.
11:09:16 15
16
And you don't know that?
A.
I don't know that.
Q. 174
All right. But it appears anyway, Mr. Dunlop, that you billed Monarch for
17
50,000 plus VAT?
18
A.
No question of that.
19
Q. 175
And somewhere along the line.
11:09:39 20
payment and okay and so on.
And we know the invoice marked authorised for And somewhere along the line GRE may well have
21
paid Monarch once or twice -- presumably half of 50,000 once or twice.
22
seems, on the paperwork, to be the case until Monarch tell us, isn't that
23
right?
24 11:10:06 25
26
A.
It's pretty annoying to discover that.
Q. 176
Right.
A.
Well it's annoying.
That
It's annoying? I mean, if Monarch was sending an internal invoice to GRE
27
on foot of an agreed success fee with me or a success fee that I was told to
28
send in and see how far you'd get.
29
leaves me looking a little bit silly that I didn't get my, what I had invoiced
11:10:25 30
for, which I didn't.
And they got it paid to them or part paid,
I don't know what was going on.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I can't account for it
11:10:31
11:10:41
29 1 2
but I don't know what was going on. Q. 177
Of course, if that was the case that would have been what was happening at a
3
time when they were saying that -- I mean, you were writing it off or what was
4
you were doing, your discussions with Monarch?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 178
They were saying they weren't going to pay you or whatever.
7 8
Maybe they'd been
paid half? A.
9
Now you've got to the core of it now as to the annoyance. actual reality, it is annoying.
11:10:59 10
If that is the
It's been indicated to me that send it in and
see how far you get and then it's not paid.
And now we discover that from
11
internal documentation that it may well be the case that 50 per cent of it was
12
paid to Monarch.
13
Q. 179
Right.
14
A.
Well it's news to me in the context of the brief.
11:11:25 15
But that is of latter days,
you know, I have no knowledge of what the internal relationship between Monarch
16 17
Anyway, that's all news to you, isn't that right?
and GRE were, particularly in relation to my fees. Q. 180
Now, there's a possible explanation on the figures maybe, Mr. Dunlop.
I don't
18
know but I'm just suggesting this to you and see.
19
arrangement with Monarch was 25,000 and then your subsequent visits for
11:11:54 20
Because we know that your
increases?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 181
And we know at the end of the day, at the end of December you got 80, 000.
23 24
There was 5,000 in 1995. A.
11:12:05 25
Which was a long overdue invoice which had been issued in 1993 and wasn't paid until 1995.
26
Q. 182
At the end of December you had received 80,000 from Monarch?
27
A.
Correct, correct.
28
Q. 183
And we know from what we've just seen here, there was an invoice -- this
29 11:12:20 30
invoice for the success fee to GRE and we've seen this that whatever that's all about.
But if you -- if we did the sums in relation to Monarch's apparent Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:12:28
11:12:43
30 1
arrangement with GRE, namely, 4,000 a month?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 184
And if, as according to -- if I could have -- I have it.
4
screen.
5
Nine fours are 36.
The letter on
A retainer of 4,000 per month from April to December is nine months. And if you add a success fee of 50,000 you get 86.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 185
Now, we know you got 86 in 1993.
And this is a letter in September 1993, by
8
which time you haven't got that money, of course.
9
which time GRE are writing to Monarch saying confirming these additional costs
11:13:14 10
11
But by which time GRE -- at
a retainer of 4,000 for those months plus a success fee? A.
I -- with respect, Mr. Murphy, I think we're square pegs around holes here.
I
12
can see what you're trying to tie up loose ends but that may well be some sort
13
of internal financial computation on the part of Monarch.
14
Q. 186
Yeah.
A.
Let me assure you again, the 4,000 per month never arose.
16
Q. 187
I know.
17
A.
Okay. The 25,000, the payment as we discussed yesterday, within four days of
11:13:42 15
Uh-huh.
18
the meeting with Eddie Sweeney, revisits for various amounts.
19
Monarch treated that internally, with respect, I have to suggest to you is
11:14:03 20
21
Now, how
matter for Monarch. Q. 188
22
Yeah.
Okay.
Thanks.
All right.
Yes.
All I'm just trying to point out
there --
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 189
-- is that on the one hand --
A.
Sure.
26
Q. 190
-- you got 80,000 in 1993.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 191
You hadn't got it all by September but you got it.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 192
If you add the Monarch GRE arrangement of 4,000 per month for nine months and
11:14:18 25
11:14:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:14:31
11:14:47
31 1
add 50, it's the same amount.
2
Monarch, you billed them accordingly and then they had a totally different
3
arrangement with GRE and that billing was on the basis of a different
4
arrangement?
5
A.
6
Is it possible that you had an arrangement with
No, no. That would not accord with the arrangement that I had with Mr. Sweeney.
7
Q. 193
Can you even hazard an explanation for this?
8
A.
Again, could I just say to you that observing the good legal protocols, I
9 11:15:06 10
11
should not even hazard a guess, because that would be speculation on my part. I have no explanation for that whatsoever.
I have to suggest to you that you
must ask people from Monarch what the meaning of this is.
12 13
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, again on behalf -- Mr. Murphy has posited a theory
14
that four nines being 36 plus 50,000 brings you to 86 and that may have been an
11:15:27 15
internal arrangement. The documentation as appears on page 4112 make it
16
patently clear that GRE were only to pay 50 per cent of the success fee which
17
is 25,000 which brings it to 61,000.
18
theory, it should at least be limited to 61 and not 86.
So if Mr. Murphy wants to posit a
19 11:15:46 20
CHAIRMAN:
Where do you say it says yeah, they were to pay.
21 22
MR. REDMOND: Page 4412.
23 24 11:15:55 25
CHAIRMAN:
Yes. But the suggestion is that though that there was a 50,000
success fee, half of which GRE would pay.
26 27
MR. REDMOND: That's what I mean, Chairman.
But Mr. Murphy is suggesting that
28
if Monarch were collecting 50 plus 36.
29
of Mr. Dunlop's fee but they weren't collecting 50 plus 36.
That would have covered the entirety
11:16:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:16:12
11:16:18
32 1
CHAIRMAN:
No, that's right.
2 3
MR. REDMOND: At best they were collecting 25 plus 36.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
Q. 194
MR. MURPHY:
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 195
Now, this is another letter that we have to take up with Monarch.
11:16:37 10
look at that.
Mr. Dunlop, 4815, please.
But if you
You will see it's a GRE letter?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 196
It's to Monarch and the stamp is the 5th of January.
Received presumably on
13
5th of January 1994.
And it says "Dear Sirs we have pleasure enclosing cheque
14
for 52,030 pounds in payment of invoice numbers as follows."
11:17:01 15
16
2186: Being one of the invoice numbers which is the -- which is the invoice we
17
were looking at dated 10th of December 1993, from Monarch to GRE.
18
show that to you in a moment again if you want.
And we can
19 11:17:16 20
"We have pleasure enclosing a cheque for 52,030 pounds on payment of a number
21
of invoices" including 2186 which is their one on your behalf in relation to
22
50,000.
23
cheque for payment will be appreciated."
"In respect of attached copy invoices.
Early presentation of the
24 11:17:34 25
And underneath that then -- underneath that is a cheque, 20th of December 1993.
26
GRE's cheque to Monarch, pay Monarch the sum of 52,030 pounds.
27
of this means that by cheque dated 20th of December 1993, GRE paid 52,030
28
pounds to Monarch.
29
The invoice 2186 sent by Monarch to GRE in December '93 in respect of your
11:18:18 30
success fee.
So I think all
Which included their half of the invoice dated -- sorry.
That is, that seems to be clear; is that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:18:22
11:18:44
33 1
A.
Well that seems to be the broad structure of it, as to the actual details and
2
how this was computed or organised I don't know.
3
also a stamp on the bottom of 4815 which obviously is a lodgement stamp.
4
the 21st of December 1993.
5
presumably into the Monarch Properties Services bank account.
6
Q. 197
7
But sorry.
I just notice that there is
So this cheque was lodged with obvious --
All I'm just saying.
I know, this seems to back up that the
December invoice --
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 198
You invoiced Monarch.
11:19:01 10
your invoice.
Monarch then invoiced GRE in December, in respect of
And then we say we found it was authorised for payment.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 199
So this seems to back up the position that GRE paid that success fee, took
13 14
their half of the success fee to Monarch. A.
To Monarch, yes.
Q. 200
Doesn't it?
16
A.
Oh, it does, yes.
17
Q. 201
And you didn't -- all right.
11:19:16 15
18 19
On
Uh-huh.
Mr. Dunlop, can you bring that any
further? A.
11:19:57 20
I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
I'd like to, in the circumstances that I've
outlined to you but I don't think I can.
21
I'm -- I'd be fascinated with the
explanation.
22
Q. 202
And does it -- what conclusion do you come to from it?
23
A.
Well, again, sorry to sort of indicate some sort of ...
24
Q. 203
From your point of view, what do you think it means?
A.
Sorry to indicate some sort of kneafied knowledge of the law but observing the
11:20:19 25
26
protocol to be speculation on my part.
27
of it, unless there is another cogent explanation, is that Monarch indicated to
28
GRE that a success fee was agreed by Monarch.
29
including the success fee.
11:20:47 30
But I mean, what it means on the face
They sent an invoice to GRE,
And that the success fee was paid on the basis of
a 50/50 between GRE and Monarch.
And that Monarch is -- was in receipt of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:20:53
11:21:12
34 1
that money, as per the cheque of the 20th of December, 1993.
2
it, I'm no forensic lawyer, but that -- on the face of it, that looked to be
3
what the explanation is.
4
explanation to the contrary.
5
Q. 204
6
On the face of
And as I said to you, I look forward to an
And finally, that you have not been paid your success fee of 50,000 in the circumstances that Monarch have received half of it from GRE?
7
A.
It's pretty annoying.
8
Q. 205
Now, just to finish with invoices Mr. Dunlop.
9
Could I have -- you've seen the
one about the success fee 14th of December.
11:21:30 10
11
Could I go to 4133, please for a second.
12
Now, this is one we've seen before.
13
yesterday.
There are three other invoices.
And Mr. Redmond brought to our attention
14 11:21:41 15
In your invoice dated 10th of April 1993 to agreed fee re republic affairs
16
strategy and its implementations 10,000 pounds.
17
those initials.
Again, it says okay with
And it says paid on the 1st of June.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 206
And I'm going to skip on to the other two.
A.
Yes.
Q. 207
Because I want to see if you can explain these four Frank Dunlop & Associates
11:22:01 20
21 22
invoices to me in a global way.
That's 4133.
23 24
Could we please have 4772.
11:22:26 25
and it sets out.
Which is your invoice of 6th of December No. 955
And it comes to 31 well, to agreed professional fees re
26
republic affairs strategy and implementation of same.
27
seems to be the same phraseology?
It's the same -- that
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 208
25,000 plus VAT and then to miscellaneous costs etc. a figure and then the
11:22:42 30
total is 31,371.94. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:22:46
11:23:08
35 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 209
And then we go to page 5697, please.
3
Maybe you can explain how this invoice has the same number invoice no. 955, the
4
same number as the previous one and it's for the same stuff -- well in fact
5
actually, yes -- sorry.
The change in it is the 25,000 goes down to 17,500.
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 210
And the total is 22,296.94 pounds and then the fourth one I'm interested in is
8 9 11:23:25 10
the success fee. A.
Yeah.
Q. 211
Now, could you just -- I'm completely at sea in relation to these invoices.
11
The first one is actually marked paid but doesn't seem to relate to any of the
12
payments in that schedule from Coyle & Coyle that we talked about for a while.
13
A.
Does it not?
14
Q. 212
That's the first one.
11:23:50 15
The second one is for 31,000.
Is an invoice No. 955.
And it's the same invoice number as the next one and seems to be the same
16
content except there's a reduction in the fee.
And then you've the success
17
fee.
18
and the four of them together come to 126,000.
And the total of those, three of those are December 1993.
One is April
19 11:24:10 20
So if I take the four of those invoices.
21
three of them are in December.
22
pounds.
23
what they relate to.
You have invoiced three invoices --
You have invoiced Monarch for 126,000 Euro --
So, Mr. Dunlop, these are your invoices so perhaps you can tell me
24 11:24:26 25
26
Three of them in December '93 are at a time when you have already received 80,000 pounds from Monarch.
27 28
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Dunlop takes up that question.
29
it only fair insofar as Mr. Murphy is dealing with these invoices that he also
11:24:44 30
specifically refers to a credit note.
This credit note was generated on the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I think
11:24:49
11:25:18
36 1
31st of October 1995 in the sum of 2296.94.
If you go to the invoice of
2
22,296.94 that nets that invoice down to 20,000.
3
were payments of 15 and 5.
4
clear that the 22,296.94 was paid net a credit note.
5
be involved with the analysis of the invoices.
6
of 20,000 was paid.
7
least has to be taken into consideration along with that particular invoice.
And subsequent thereto there
So in order to make sense of the invoices, it is And a credit note has to
Because it is clear that a sum
And a credit note was given for 22,96.94 and that at
8 9
Q. 213
11:25:38 10
MR. MURPHY:
I think Mr. Redmond is absolutely correct on that.
Looking at page 5697.
Yes, we have it.
11 12
That is invoice number 955 for 22,296.94.
That was paid in two tranches,
13
15,000 in December '93.
14
about. Mr. Redmond is absolutely correct about that.
And the other 5,000 in August 1995 we were talking
11:26:00 15
16
That explains -- so, in other words, that invoice was paid and settled, as it
17
were.
18
August '95.
19
may have been written off, I don't know. That accounts for that invoice.
A lesser figure was paid.
And a further sum of 5,000 was paid in
Leaving a small balance I think, which I think was never paid and
11:26:23 20
21
MR. REDMOND: Again, I just have to point out to Mr. Murphy.
22
specific credit note generated for that sum.
23
A.
There was a
For the small sum.
24 11:26:32 25
MR. MURPHY:
How much was the sum?
26 27
MR. REDMOND: 22,096.64 is the balance left over and a credit note was
28
generated for that.
29 11:26:40 30
MR. MURPHY:
That's fine. That's fine. Yes.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:26:43
11:27:15
37 1
Q. 214
So, Mr. Dunlop.
We have -- that explains that invoice.
2
the 6th of December.
3
which is the same number and is for a higher sum.
4
that for a second?
Invoices raised on
It doesn't explain why the previous invoice exists, Could you just deal with
5 6
Could you look at 4772 please, I wonder could we put that on the screen for a
7
second. You invoiced -- 6th of December, you invoiced Mr. Sweeney invoice No.
8
955 for what's set out there and the amount is 31,000.
9 11:27:30 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 215
And the same date you give him another invoice with a different -- with the
11
same number for the same business with the sum -- for a figure of 22,296.94?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 216
Can you explain that?
14
A.
No, I can't explain to you why the same invoice number is on the two invoices
11:27:57 15
for two separate amounts, other than that there may have been some discussion
16
between Mr. Sweeney and myself.
17
Could you put up? Would it be possible, Mr. Murphy, could you put up the other
18
invoice --
19 11:28:15 20
21
Q. 217
Yes.
A.
-- of the same number.
Q. 218
5697.
I don't know, is the answer.
Just for clarification.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
11:28:39 25
Yes, sorry.
Side by side? Thank you, Chairman.
Why, Mr. Murphy -- yes, sorry.
document 5697, is that a copy or where, what's the genesis of that document?
26
That's our document?
27
Q. 219
I think we got it from you.
28
A.
That's our document, right, okay.
29 11:28:50 30
Is this
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, it is.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:28:54
11:29:08
38 1
Q. 220
MR. MURPHY:
Yes, it was provided by you, Mr. Dunlop.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 221
Oh, yes.
4
A.
You see, that's the point I want to make.
The other one is provided by Monarch. The one on the left now I may be --
5
please accept my assurances on this that I'm just speaking, which I know I
6
shouldn't do, speaking -- thinking out loud as it were.
7
Q. 222
I think it would be a very good idea if you were to talk out loud.
8
A.
To think out loud? No, I think barristers shouldn't speak out loud, Mr.
9 11:29:25 10
Murphy. Q. 223
I think it would get us closer.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop, the one on the left is the one that Monarch got.
Correct.
14 11:29:32 15
16
CHAIRMAN: The one on the right is an internal -A.
That's exactly the point that I wanted to make.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
That seems to explain that.
Are we at one?
11:29:40 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
No but -- now, you can explain why that, the two were generated.
A.
Yeah well the point I want to make is was the one on the right sent?
Q. 224
MR. MURPHY:
A.
I don't think so.
Q. 225
Well why are they generated, the two of them? On the same day.
23 24 11:29:56 25
26 27
Maybe you can tell us.
day?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 226
Two invoices the same number, different amounts.
A.
Well that's the one that they received.
11:30:09 30
On the same
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
One okayed by Mr. Sweeney.
11:30:13
11:30:25
39 1
Q. 227
Why do you have a second one for 10,000 less?
2
A.
As of this moment I can't explain that to.
3
Q. 228
Could you find out over lunch?
4
A.
Yes, yes. Well I'll try, yes.
5
Q. 229
All right.
You see, what I'm wondering is, Mr. Dunlop, did it come about in
6
some way.
7
126,000 roughly.
8
5,000 in '95.
9 11:30:53 10
What I'm saying is if you add these four figures they come to You -- the four invoices.
You were paid 80,000 in '93 and
A.
Yes. In '95.
Q. 230
And I'm wondering is there some way -- does this mean that you in fact billed
11
Monarch for 126,000? Did you bill them with these four invoices?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 231
Well presumably you billed -- which one did you not bill?
14
A.
Well you have the one receipted by Monarch, which is stamped as receipted and
11:31:15 15
okayed for payment.
16
Q. 232
Yeah.
17
A.
That's what you, five seconds ago, you said could you find out over lunch and
18 19
And the other one.
So you think you didn't bill them?
that's what I undertook to do. Q. 233
11:31:29 20
Yes, all right.
But do you accept -- all right.
So they got that one for
31,000?
21
A.
Obviously.
22
Q. 234
And they got the one for the success fee which was for 60,000?
23
A.
Obviously.
24
Q. 235
And they got the one, which was the first one, which is marked okayed and
11:31:38 25
marked paid for 12,100?
26
A.
Yes, because they have -- it's their documentation.
27
Q. 236
Thank you.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 237
Thank you.
And then we'll come back to that one when you've made an inquiry.
Certainly.
11:31:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:31:56
11:32:18
40 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
ten minutes.
Do you want a break, Mr. Dunlop? All right.
Well we'll break for
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
6
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
7 8
A.
Mr. Chairman, I do apologise.
9 11:51:13 10
CHAIRMAN: All right.
11
A.
I got into a conversation out there.
12
Q. 238
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry.
Mr. Dunlop, in relation to these invoices.
Do you remember
13
yesterday and the day before, whenever it was, that we were looking at the
14
transactions that ended up with you being paid 80,000 in 1993?
11:51:39 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 239
And I think the position was, in fact, if I just read it very quickly deal with
17
this and hopefully finally.
18
In respect of the first invoice 15,000 -- sorry.
19
the second one 10,000.
11:51:56 20
First payment 15,000.
And
That's the initial 25,000.
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 240
All right.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 241
We then come on to -- we then come on to an invoice in May which is for 15,000,
24 11:52:15 25
26
There are no invoices from you, isn't that right?
which is subsequently paid by two installments of 7,500, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 242
All right.
27 28
MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman, if we are taking this matter chronologically, it
29
appears, yet again the invoice in April for 12,100 has been omitted.
11:52:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:52:26
11:52:35
41 1
MR. MURPHY:
And for the reason that I was coming to it at the end.
2
I can't relate that to anything.
3
it so I will.
Because
But Mr. Redmond, would like me to deal with
4 5
There is the invoice dated 10th of April 1993 for 10,000 and VAT of 2,100.
6
Total of 12,100.
7
may be wrong.
But I think that doesn't relate to the 15 and 10.
But I
8 9
So just we have the payment of 15,000.
11:52:55 10
Totalling 25,000.
We have the payment of 10,000.
We have this payment that Mr. Redmond is referring me to,
11
the invoice for 12,100, which is in April.
12
I've just referred to, which is paid by two installments of 7,500.
13
payment of 10,000.
14
with the signature that isn't your's.
11:53:25 15
16
We have a payment of 10,000 in May.
A.
Correct. Well the endorsement.
Q. 243
The endorsement.
17
We have a
That's the cheque
We have a cheque -- we have a payment of 7,500 in July.
And again in September.
18
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
19
Q. 244
All right.
11:53:51 20
We have an invoice in May, which
And they'll go back to the invoice in May for 15,000.
And then there's an invoice in November for 15,000.
2nd of
November 1993 for 15,000.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 245
And then we have the invoice in December, 955, for a total of -- well it's for
23
17,500 and others which come up to 22,000.
24
August 1995.
11:54:13 25
I'm going to ignore that for the moment.
A.
Which is an overhang.
26
Q. 246
Which is what?
27
A.
Which is an overhang.
28
Q. 247
It was invoiced two years earlier.
29
A.
It's an overhang.
Q. 248
All right.
11:54:20 30
And then we have a 5,000 paid in
And we know -- I opened to you that document from Monarch that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:54:28
11:54:43
42 1
said that Eddie would have to get invoices from you because they paid out
2
40,000 odd without invoices, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes, you did yesterday, yeah.
4
Q. 249
Is it in summary the position that Monarch paid you without invoices on
5
occasions?
6
A.
Certainly in the case of one.
7
Q. 250
Well that's two payments isn't it?
8
A.
Sorry, there were two payments.
9
Q. 251
Yes.
A.
But the agreement was for 25,000.
11
Q. 252
Yes?
12
A.
Certainly there are no invoices extant other than the advisory remittance
11:54:58 10
13 14
The 25,000.
notices from Monarch which I discovered to the Tribunal.
So --
Q. 253
The first 15 and 10 no invoices?
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 254
Yes.
17
A.
-- that were issued were issued by Frank Dunlop & Associates.
18
Q. 255
Yes.
19
A.
By the company.
Q. 256
Yes.
21
A.
So there were invoices.
22
Q. 257
Yes.
23
A.
Concluding with the highly disputed and dis-- 50,000 pounds success fee, which
11:55:13 15
11:55:27 20
24 11:55:34 25
Then all of these other invoices --
Yes.
was an invoice. Q. 258
26
Yes.
But there was no invoice for the payment where the cheque, your name was
forged by way of endorsement, isn't that right? There was no invoice for that?
27
A.
Yes, there was an invoice.
28
Q. 259
Is that the one that Mr. Redmond was referring to?
29
A.
Yes, it is.
Q. 260
You see, that was a cheque for 10,000 pounds but the invoice was for 12,100
11:55:53 30
There was an invoice for 10,000 pounds.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:56:05
11:56:11
43 1
including VAT?
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 261
So what does that mean? How do they relate?
4
A.
You must ask Monarch that.
5
Q. 262
Well why don't ask I ask you because you invoiced 10th of April 1993, 10,000
6
for the work.
7
presumably you were paid 12,100.
8
controversial cheque is for 10,000 which don't relate?
9 11:56:32 10
11
2,100 for the VAT total 12,100 and it's marked paid so
A.
Well I wasn't paid and the cheque for the 10,000 --
Q. 263
Uh-huh.
A.
-- as we've discussed backwards and forwards, over a number of days, was
12
endorsed in my name by another person.
13
Q. 264
Yes.
14
A.
And indeed not.
Q. 265
Anyway.
11:56:45 15
The cheque we are talking about, the
Was not received by me.
16 17
MR. REDMOND: Chairman, again, before Mr. Murphy continues for the purposes of
18
clarification.
19 11:56:51 20
The invoice for 12,100.
Which was issued in April '93.
21
1st of June 1993 by Monarch.
22
was debited from the account of Monarch.
Is stamped "paid"
And that is also the date that the 10,000 pounds And that's how they relate.
23 24
Q. 266
11:57:15 25
MR. MURPHY:
Right.
Is it the position, Mr. Dunlop, that on occasions you
were paid, as appears from the Monarch document, where there was a note that
26
Eddie should get invoices because 42,000 plus had been paid to you without
27
invoices.
28
invoices from Monarch and that at some point Monarch insisted on invoices
29
because they needed them for GRE?
11:57:40 30
A.
So is it the position that for a time you were being paid without
No, I don't think so, Mr. Murphy.
In fact, I shouldn't say I don't think so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:57:43
11:57:53
44 1
That is not the case.
I have -- there was no discussion ever between anybody
2
from Monarch and myself.
3
Q. 267
Uh-huh.
4
A.
About -- you sort of please send me an invoice or give me the invoice.
5
Q. 268
Exactly.
6
A.
Now, put it another way which, let's look at the converse.
There was no
7
situation in which I received money unsolicited without an invoice and Monarch
8
ringing me up and saying, you know, we've given you the payments so send us the
9
invoice.
11:58:11 10
Q. 269
The invoices that we saw, the three in December 1993, could they have been
11
issued, raised by you at the instigation of Monarch? Could Monarch have said,
12
Mr. Dunlop, we'd like invoices now so ...?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 270
You don't think so or they weren't?
A.
No, they weren't.
11:58:31 15
16
I mean, you sent -- you send the invoice.
And normal
practice would be --
17
Q. 271
I'm not interested in normal practice?
18
A.
Sorry.
19
Good.
Right.
don't get payment.
11:59:00 20
You send the invoice.
You wait for payment.
You ring up and say where's the payment.
You
As I've said to
you earlier, there was no discussion ever between any representative of Monarch
21
and myself saying send us the invoice.
22
Q. 272
Right.
23
A.
Because we have already sent you the money.
24
Q. 273
So that note that I read you the out to you yesterday that we saw on the
11:59:14 25
So --
screen, that you'd been paid 40,000 and the note that Eddie must get invoices
26
from Frank, that's not correct, sorry they never came to you on foot of that
27
and said --
28 29 11:59:30 30
A.
No, no, they never came to me.
There was no such discussion ever took place.
I cannot account for, again, as we other documentation that you have shown me this morning in relation to Monarch.
I cannot account for the internal --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
11:59:34
11:59:48
45 1
Q. 274
All right.
2
A.
-- communications between Monarch and GRE.
Or the internal communications or
3
memos between representatives, between various officers of Monarch. I would
4
like to know.
5
Q. 275
6
Well except that, I'm not asking you to account for their documentation. There aren't invoices for the first 25,000 which was paid in two cheques.
7
A.
That's correct, yes.
8
Q. 276
Is it possible that the success fee that was billed to GRE on foot of your
9 12:00:23 10
December invoice, and that was paid, which GRE paid half of it to Monarch? A.
That what?
11
Q. 277
Is it possible that?
12
A.
What?
13
Q. 278
That was Monarch getting their half from GRE in respect of the 25 that they had
14 12:00:35 15
paid you back in March 1993 without invoices? A.
I don't want to suggest to you that you should open the documents again,
16
Mr. Murphy, but I don't know is the simple answer.
17
much as you would like to know.
18
Q. 279
19 12:00:52 20
Well I'll just help you in this way, Mr. Dunlop.
I would like to know as
Because we know that you got
paid the two the 15 and the 10? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 280
Without raising an invoice?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 281
And we know then that Monarch passed on to GRE a fee note for your success fee
24 12:01:08 25
at 50.
We know they were paid.
We've seen all of that.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 282
You've no --
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 283
-- jurisdiction over that.
29
A.
No.
Q. 284
There is a fee note for 50,000 and VAT in December '93.
12:01:11 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:01:19
12:01:28
46 1
A.
From me?
2
Q. 285
From you.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 286
Did you raise that in response to somebody in Monarch saying we want a fee note
5
so that we can get back from GRE?
6
A.
Absolutely not.
7
Q. 287
We'll delete the so that we can get back from GRE?
8
A.
Absolutely not.
9
Q. 288
Yeah.
A.
No arrangement for a success fee.
11
Q. 289
Yeah.
12
A.
I --
13
Q. 290
Because, Mr. Dunlop, if I can summarise for you, it would be perfectly
12:01:43 10
14
So that we can get back? Absolutely not.
It's as is or was, as I outlined to you.
consistent, you didn't agree on 8th of April -- 8th of March '93 with
12:01:56 15
Mr. Sweeney, you didn't agree a success fee?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 291
There was no success fee?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 292
You told the Tribunal that there was no success fee?
A.
No. I did, sorry, I beg your pardon, yes.
21
Q. 293
And suddenly in December '93 a success fee arises.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 294
And conveniently, or not, it's the figure -- it's double the figure which you
12:02:03 20
24
got from them in March '93.
12:02:27 25
26
So that the money that Monarch paid to you in
March '93, 25,000, would come back from GRE? A.
Yeah, well I don't know about you, Mr. Murphy, but certainly there is
27
absolutely no doubt about it that I'm not -- not only am I not a mathematician,
28
I'm not a forensic accountant.
29
or if not all of this, it can be elucidated by the person responsible in this
12:02:52 30
But I mean I think, with respect, most of this
instance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:02:52
12:03:08
47 1
Q. 295
Yeah.
2
A.
Which we have now established, inconsistent with my evidence, that he was the
3
man with whom I dealt.
And he is the man that everybody seems to be writing
4
to.
5
writing to in relation to a 50/50 arrangement in relation to fees not
6
withstanding the fact that he says he doesn't know why I was -- or who
7
appointed me or what arrangements --
He is the man that I am issuing invoices to.
He is the man that GRE is
8
Q. 296
I think we know all of that, Mr. Dunlop.
9
A.
Fine.
Q. 297
But all I'm saying to you is and I'm just -- what I'm focussing on is your
12:03:21 10
11
input in December '93, I'm not interested in Monarch and GRE.
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 298
Monarch got an invoice for 50,000 plus VAT from you in December.
14
A.
No, but with respect, Mr. Murphy --
Q. 299
In respect of something which you have told us you did not agree back in March?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 300
So it comes out of the blue, a success fee?
18
A.
As per discussion with a representative of Monarch.
19
Q. 301
Yes but in that sense it comes out of the blue, you suddenly in December '93,
12:03:33 15
12:03:47 20
you have a chat with somebody in Monarch about a success fee.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 302
And it so happens that back in March you got 25,000 without an invoice from
23 24
Monarch. A.
12:04:06 25
Yeah.
Well, I think you are trying to tie up desperate loose ends.
hesitate to say that to you, Mr. Murphy.
And I respect what you are trying to
26
do but yes, the circumstances as I have outlined.
27
documentation.
28 29 12:04:26 30
Q. 303
I really
We have seen the
We have seen the clearance and the okay.
Could we just for one second look at 4390 again, please. We looked at this yesterday, Mr. Dunlop. Monarch document.
This is the document that says, the
27th of September 1993.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:04:31
12:04:47
48 1 2
Monarch are referring to a copy of Dunlop's invoice.
I don't know what
3
invoice this is.
4
that Mr. Redmond is talking about I think.
5
12,100 even though we have made payments of 42,500, Eddie must get invoices.
Well actually sorry no, I beg your pardon.
It's the one
We only have one invoice for
6 7
I mean, I totally accept you didn't make this entry.
8
A.
Sure.
9
Q. 304
It may be a fabrication.
12:05:06 10
On the face of it it appears that -- on the face of
it appears that Monarch want Eddie to get invoices from you because they paid
11
out 42 without invoices.
12
A.
Fabrication?
13
Q. 305
What?
14
A.
Fabrication?
Q. 306
Yes.
16
A.
By whom?
17
Q. 307
It may be a fabrication or it may have been invented by somebody in Monarch.
18
A.
Oh, I see.
19
Q. 308
What I'm saying is you're not responsible for that entry.
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 309
But the entry is suggesting that Monarch have been paying you --
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 310
-- considerable sums up to -- payments of 42,000 prior to the 27th of September
12:05:11 15
12:05:21 20
24 12:05:37 25
26
I beg your pardon, yes.
1993 without invoices and therefore except for one invoice, and Eddie must get invoices.
Now, that seems -- we'll find out more from Mr. Sweeney and all of
the Monarch people.
27 28
But just from your point of view, because you are in the box at the moment, Mr.
29
Dunlop.
12:05:50 30
It does appears that Monarch have a problem, they're not getting
invoices and suddenly they are showered with them in December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:05:54
12:06:07
49 1
A.
But that would seem to fly in the face ot the-if you look at the time line of
2
the documentation of invoices that were issued within that period prior to the
3
date of this memo.
4
Q. 311
Well there's none anyway for the first two which make up the 25,000.
5
A.
We're agreed on that.
6
Q. 312
Now, we know the two 7,500 are covered by an invoice?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 313
You have an invoice. Yes.
9
A.
And, yeah, go on.
Q. 314
Yes.
11
A.
We know that there's another.
12
Q. 315
Monarch seem to have a problem with invoices.
12:06:14 10
Okay.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:06:28 15
Sorry.
It might be simpler, because we seem -- I don't think
we're going to solve this mystery and there is a mystery about these invoices.
16 17
It might be simpler if Mr. Dunlop was recalled after Mr. Sweeney and the other
18
witnesses from Monarch because obviously we really will have to hear what they
19
say.
12:06:45 20
21
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Sorry, Chairman.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think we're really going to progress on this point.
24 12:06:50 25
Q. 316
MR. MURPHY:
On that point.
The final question, Mr. Dunlop.
Did -- in any
26
shape or form did Mr. Sweeney request you to raise an invoice or invoices in
27
December '93?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 317
For work that had already been done and paid?
A.
No.
12:07:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:07:04
12:07:28
50 1
Q. 318
Okay, thank you. Now, Mr. Dunlop, can we go back to the meeting.
8th of
2
March 1993 in -- excuse me -- in Monarch's offices with Mr. Sweeney.
3
want to ask you, first of all, you were telling us -- you told us yesterday a
4
little bit about Mr. Monahan.
5
I want to know precisely what Mr. Sweeney said to you about what Mr. Monahan
6
was up to.
7
doing that was causing alarm for Monarch?
Now, Mr. Monahan wasn't at that meeting.
And I don't mean that in a sinister way.
A.
Well --
9
Q. 319
That Mr. Sweeney told you.
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 320
Sorry -- Mr. Dunlop, before you start what's complicated about this?
12
A.
The relationship.
13 14 12:08:11 15
But
I just mean what was he
8
12:07:45 10
And I
That -- how complicated can it get?
I can't account for all of the internal relationships
between people in -Q. 321
I --
A.
What I'm saying to you is that Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that Phil Monahan
16
was unhappy, dissatisfied, aggressive in the context of what could be achieved
17
and what he did not see --
18
Q. 322
Yes.
19
A.
-- was being achieved or he felt that not enough was being done to achieve what
12:08:33 20
he thought should be achieved.
21
Q. 323
So what was he doing about it himself? What had he been doing historical?
22
A.
What had Mr. Sweeney been doing about it?
23
Q. 324
No, no. What did Mr. Sweeney tell you that Mr. Monahan had been doing?
24
A.
He didn't know what Phil was at.
Q. 325
What does that mean? He didn't know what he was at.
12:08:48 25
26
he at?
In other words, what was
You knew, what was he at?
27
A.
The only way I can deal with this is to say --
28
Q. 326
Yeah.
29
A.
-- that from the tone of the conversation and the, what Mr. Sweeney said, that
12:09:03 30
it was obvious and from an -- I did say this to you previously as well from an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:09:10
12:09:24
51 1
anecdotal point of view and from conversations outside of ever being appointed
2
by Monarch.
3
level.
4
Q. 327
That Mr. Monahan had considerable political contacts at a high
Yes.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
were you told by Mr. Sweeney or anyone of the sort of matters that Mr. Monahan
8
was dealing with which Mr. Sweeney saw as causing problems? Were you given any
9
direct information as to what Mr. Monahan was doing that was upsetting
12:09:52 10
11
Wait now.
Mr. Dunlop, we've heard this before.
Do you know --
Mr. Sweeney? A.
12
Yes.
He feared that whatever it was that he suspected Mr. Monahan was doing
would cause a the whole thing to collapse and it would end up --
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:10:08 15
16
No but -- yes, you've said that.
But did he tell you what Mr.
Monahan was doing? A.
No, he didn't say I know that Phil is ....
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
information, indirectly, about what Mr. Monahan was doing? Did you know what
12:10:20 20
21
Well did you understand him to be saying, to be giving you
Mr. Monahan was doing as a result of the conversation with Mr. Sweeney? A.
No.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 12:10:25 25
26
Q. 328
MR. MURPHY:
A.
It would be wrong to say that I had no idea but I do not know in specific
27
You had no idea?
detail.
28
Q. 329
Well give us an idea of what he was doing.
29
A.
My idea.
Q. 330
You used the phrase yesterday a broad brush because we can be quick about it.
12:10:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:10:42
12:11:00
52 1
A.
Quick! We won't be quick.
2
Q. 331
What's the broad brush?
3
A.
Broad brush was that Phil Monahan was conducting a separate parallel lobbying
4
exercise with politicians unnamed status, stature or otherwise, unspecified, in
5
relation to what could or could not be done or what he wanted in relation to
6
Cherrywood.
7
Q. 332
8 9
Broad brush. Yes.
Now, nobody told you.
Sorry, you didn't gather or have
any idea of who those politicians were? A.
No.
Q. 333
By name?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 334
They were outside the council, they weren't just councillors?
13
A.
Well --
14
Q. 335
Politicians?
A.
-- since I didn't know -- I don't know whether they were councillors or senior
12:11:15 10
12:11:22 15
16 17
politicians but just -Q. 336
18 19
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop. politicians.
A.
12:11:41 20
To take your own words you've said a few times by senior
What did you understand by that?
My understanding about senior politicians is that yes, it was well known that Mr. Philip Monahan had very good contacts with senior politicians, Government
21
ministers, let's be specific.
22
Q. 337
Yes. Government ministers.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 338
Ministers who were current - Ministers at that time?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 339
You're talking about 1993?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 340
Okay.
12:11:51 25
29 12:12:02 30
And wouldn't you -- you'd have to know all of this to do your job
properly wouldn't you.
You'd have to know.
As you said to us yesterday you
you'd have to know what councillors had been spoken to. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Did you not make an
12:12:06
12:12:19
53 1
inquiry -- as somebody who has come from the Fianna Fail party and Government
2
in the '70s.
3
A.
4
Did you not know?
Did you not know that I worked for another Government as well.
So why are you
picking out Fianna Fail.
5
Q. 341
Because I mentioned the '70s.
6
A.
Right, okay well just for clarification we worked for other Governments as
7 8
well. Q. 342
9
And did you -- I mean -- Mr. Dunlop, the position you were in. concerned about Monarch.
12:12:32 10
You were very
Monarch getting their act together and then you go
and talk to the councillors etc..
You had to know look who is talking to
11
whom? You must have pursued that, who were the senior ministers.
12
know the senior ministers he was talking about?
Do you
13
A.
No, I don't.
14
Q. 343
You've no idea?
A.
That's a different question, Mr. Murphy.
16
Q. 344
You have an idea?
17
A.
You keep doing this. You ask a specific question and then you open it up into
12:12:47 15
You keep doing this.
18
a broad open ended question and you cut me off when I start to answer.
19
course I have an idea.
12:13:04 20
21 22 23
But it would have been a widely held idea by people as to the identity of senior ministers?
A.
24 12:13:15 25
It's no substantiation whatsoever into what my idea is
or the basis for it. Q. 345
Lots of business people had very, very close contacts with senior political figures.
Q. 346
There's nothing wrong with that is there?
26
A.
I hope not.
27
Q. 347
No.
28
A.
No, I'm not prepared to ...
29
Q. 348
Not prepared to what?
A.
I'm not prepared to speculate.
12:13:25 30
Of
But yet you don't know who those ministers were?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:13:28
12:13:43
54 1
Q. 349
Oh, yeah.
All right.
So anyway, one of the things Mr. Monahan was doing --
2
sorry.
One of the things you knew about Mr. Monday has was he had good
3
contacts with senior -- with ministers?
4
A.
Yes.
Mr. Murphy, before you go any further.
5
Q. 350
Yeah.
6
A.
Just keep on this broad brush quickly.
And I know the Chairman is going to
7
intervene very shortly and say Mr. Dunlop we know all of this.
8
do.
He may well
If he does I'll stop.
9 12:13:55 10
But Mr. Monahan was a great man to sing his own cause.
In other words, he was
11
going to rebuild Dublin, he was going to rebuild the world.
12
line contact with Taoiseachs, ministers, civil servants, planners, the lot.
13
He knew everybody and everything.
14
evidenced by Mr. Sweeney's comments to me and evidenced by comments to me by
12:14:33 15
16
And that is the context in which fear, as
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, as to what Phil was up to. Q. 351
17 18
I can't understand why the company would be afraid of the boss of the company having contacts with Taoiseachs and ministers?
A.
19
You see, I think the success of the company was probably notwithstanding Phil's operations.
12:14:48 20
The company was being run as an entity while Phil was doing all
of these things with other people.
21
You know, that is the way the thing seemed
to me to being run at the time.
22
Q. 352
But I'm lost, Mr. Dunlop.
23
A.
You're lost.
24
Q. 353
This is a huge company --
A.
Yes.
Q. 354
-- being run by its Board and Mr. Sweeney and others.
12:15:02 25
26
He had direct
What was it?
Well I was lost!
And it seems as if it
27
was the Monarch people and Mr. Monahan is out on the wing on his own, is that
28
right?
29 12:15:15 30
A.
Well ...
Q. 355
It seems to be Mr. Monahan as one representative of the company. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And the
12:15:19
12:15:31
55 1 2
other employees, like Mr. Sweeney. A.
3
Well I think.
Is that right?
As I said to you yesterday, I think there was a proposal if we
could go back to Cherrywood.
4
Q. 356
Don't please for a second.
5
A.
There was a proposal.
6
Q. 357
Don't mind that for one second.
7
A.
This will elucidate the point that you are making.
There was a proposal and
8
there was a specific strategy obviously adopted to try and achieve this
9
proposal in conjunction with another party.
12:15:46 10
Officers of the company were
appointed to conduct this or to see to it that this could happen.
11
Q. 358
Uh-huh.
12
A.
This did not happen.
13
Q. 359
Uh-huh.
14
A.
Much to the annoyance, obviously, of Mr. Monahan.
Q. 360
Uh-huh.
A.
Much to the annoyance of the officers who were given the responsible for the
12:15:56 15
16 17
It fell.
strategy.
18
Q. 361
Uh-huh.
19
A.
There then eventuated a scenario where Mr. Monahan had to be controlled in case
12:16:12 20
21
anything that he did would upset the apple cart further. Q. 362
Now, I cannot understand in the context of Cherrywood or in the broader context
22
which we were talking about a moment ago, how Mr.-- what it is that Mr. Monahan
23
was doing that was going to mess up the plans and hopes for Cherrywood.
24
Mr. Monahan, how his contacts with ministers and Taoiseachs could upset the
12:16:42 25
Cherrywood plan. ?
26
A.
Well I don't know that.
27
Q. 363
Of course you do?
28
A.
No I don't.
29
Q. 364
Well, Mr. Dunlop, you go in on the 8th of March, this huge case.
12:16:53 30
What
I don't know whether anybody from Monarch.
to make a fortune out of it, there's problems. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
You're going
The big problem is Mr. Monahan
12:16:59
12:17:13
56 1
is loose and can't be controlled.
2
thing is that he has all of these contacts with the senior ministers and the
3
Taoiseach of the day, I presume that includes the Taoiseach of the day, whoever
4
that was?
5
A.
The one clue that you give to the whole
I did that deliberately, Mr. Murphy, because, I mean, I don't know whether
6
Mr. Monahan -- I prefaced all of this by saying that Mr. Monahan was a great
7
man to sing his own cause.
8
Q. 365
9
But, Mr. Dunlop, please explain to the Tribunal how Mr. Monahan having
great contacts with ministers can be, cause danger to the attempts to get the
12:17:37 10
11
Yes.
density increased that they were looking for? I don't understand. A.
The only explanation that I can give you for that.
12
you of the notion that I do know.
13
to that question is that any contacts that Phil might have with senior
14
politicians might result in those senior politicians either talking to
12:17:59 15
I do not.
First of all, I disabuse
The only answer that I can give
councillors of their own party, or whatever, to try and tell, to influence them
16
as to what they might or might not do.
17
Q. 366
In favour of an increased density, which is what Mr. Monahan wanted?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 367
How does that not help the cause?
A.
The -- you asked me.
12:18:14 20
I have no answer.
21 22 23
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Mr. Dunlop, I wonder could I ask you.
Yes, Judge.
24 12:18:22 25
JUDGE KEYS:
Could it possibly be that Mr. Monahan's interventions with the
26
politicians were such that that could come to the notice of the public.
27
that could create a political scandal resulting in his project being undermined
28
entirely?
29 12:18:41 30
A.
That is a possibility.
Certainly a possibility, Judge.
And
And to that I would
add also, that there is a possibility, and I, I'm using the word because you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:18:47
12:19:02
57 1
used it "a possibility" that if there was a contact with a senior politician
2
and any senior politician did attempt to make contact with somebody to
3
influence what might happen at a council meeting, that that could be counter
4
productive.
5 6
JUDGE KEYS:
7
atmosphere of the time that councillors resented senior politicians intervening
8
in the Development Plan and attempting to get them to vote a certain way?
9
A.
12:19:24 10
I was just going to follow on and ask you that.
Was it the
Well I think and I -- I'm subject to correction on this, Judge, but I think by this stage we had had a public intervention by a senior Government Minister who
11
had described the activities of -- at Dublin County Council as debased coinage.
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
12:19:42 15
Correct.
This was regarded with hilarity by the councillors.
That's a polite way of
describing what was the general impression of the gentleman who actually made
16
that comment.
It's none of his business.
He keeps his nose out of this
17
business we're not going to be listening to him telling us what we're going to
18
do.
19 12:19:57 20
JUDGE KEYS:
Thank you very much.
MR. MURPHY:
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you told us yesterday that one of the -- the
21 22
Q. 368
23
first thing that had to be dealt with was Mr. Monahan.
24
going to do that.
12:20:29 25
A.
26
And that you weren't
Mr. Lawlor was going to do that, isn't that right?
Just again for absolute clarity, Mr. Murphy.
I did not say that it was agreed
between Mr. Sweeney and myself that that would be done.
27
Q. 369
All right.
28
A.
What -- it became quite apparent at subsequent meetings at which Mr. Lawlor
29 12:20:48 30
attended that this is what Mr. Lawlor was doing. intermediary role. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Mr. Lawlor was doing an
12:20:52
12:21:07
58 1
Q. 370
2 3
That that wasn't actually outlined or agreed between you at that meeting on the 8th of March?
A.
4
No, no.
The meeting between on the 8th of March if I could incapsulate it was
there was a strong element of frustration on Eddie Sweeney's part as to what
5
had happened and how they were going to get out of the situation that they
6
found themselves in.
7
what Phil was or was not doing.
8
Q. 371
All right.
9
A.
Jack Whelan was an employee of Ambrose Kelly, is that right? The name is
12:21:49 10
familiar.
11
Yeah.
One of the components of that scrambled situation was
Did you know anything about Mr. Jack Whelan, Mr. Dunlop?
It doesn't strike a great deal of -- it has some resonance but it
doesn't mean very much to me.
Jack Whelan.
An employee of Ambrose Kelly's?
12
Q. 372
Apparently he was a consultant with the company.
13
A.
Right.
14
Q. 373
Retained to carry out various tasks on behalf of the company.
A.
Yes.
Q. 374
In dealing with issues that arose including the Cabinteely lands, according to
12:22:10 15
16 17
Mr. Monahan's statement.
18
A.
Mr. Monahan's statement?
19
Q. 375
Yes.
12:22:23 20
21
A.
No, no, you asked me.
You throw out a name and you asked me for my response.
I gave you my response. Q. 376
24 12:22:42 25
No, it doesn't -- it -- I know of --
I take it that you don't really have anything relevant to add about Jack Whelan?
A.
No.
26
Q. 377
Yeah.
27
A.
-- who I recollect working with Ambrose Kelly.
28 29 12:22:58 30
You are kind of not
very clear as to whether you did know him or not know him?
22 23
Did you -- just tell us what you know about him.
The only Jack Whelan that comes to mind to me is somebody who --
And if it's the same Jack
Whelan, fine. Q. 378
All right. So you know a Jack Whelan who worked in Ambrose Kelly's office, is that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:22:59
12:23:10
59 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 379
All right.
3
A.
I can't recall.
4
Q. 380
You are very, very hesitant Mr. Dunlop.
5
A.
Because I can't recall.
6
Q. 381
Tell us what you know about Mr. Jack Whelan and Cherrywood and Monarch and
Had he anything to do with Monarch? I can't recall.
7
Mr. Monahan.
8
to you that -- before --
9
A.
Why is that?
Tell us everything you know about it now before we put something
You are going to put something to me.
Well, I mean, I'm telling you.
12:23:34 10
would prefer you would put it to me before I tell you.
11
that, the name Jack Whelan means something to me.
12
Q. 382
Now, tell us everything --
13
A.
Sorry.
14
But notwithstanding
The name Jack Whelan means something to me, as far as I recollect,
Mr. Whelan was an employee of Ambrose Kelly's.
12:24:04 15
And I
In what capacity I don't know.
And apart --
16
Q. 383
Mr. Dunlop, may I just say?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 384
I can't understand for a moment how this is such a struggle.
19
You either know
virtually nothing about Mr. Whelan, in which case could you tell us in two
12:24:16 20
seconds.
21
Or you know something or a lot about him.
In which case, would you
tell us in a minute?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 385
In relation --
24
A.
No.
12:24:26 25
It's quite different to that Mr. Murphy.
You asked me a question and
I --
26
Q. 386
What was the question?
27
A.
Endeavouring -- what I know about Jack Whelan.
28
Q. 387
How can that be difficult?
29
A.
First of all I identified Jack Whelan as somebody that I think worked with
12:24:44 30
Ambrose Kelly's, I'm subject to correction. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I don't know.
You've obviously
12:24:44
12:24:59
60 1
indicated to me Jack Whelan, according to Mr. Monahan, worked with Monarch
2
Properties in relation to Cherrywood.
3
Q. 388
I didn't ask you.
That didn't register with me.
Mr. Dunlop, it's as clear as daylight that you know
4
something about Mr. Whelan.
5
here for another hour until you tell me?
6
A.
I have no idea what it is.
But do I have to sit
Mr. Murphy, --
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Dunlop.
No.
12:25:04 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Other than the fact that you think he worked with Ambrose Kelly.
Yes.
13 14 12:25:10 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Did you have any dealings with him?
It doesn't register with me, Chairman.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
19
In relation to Cherrywood ?
Subject to somebody saying yes, I met him or spoke to him or whatever. doesn't register.
It
It's not on my horizon.
12:25:22 20
21 22
Q. 389
23 24 12:25:30 25
MR. MURPHY: Sorry, Chairman.
Dealings with him, as the
Chairman asked you, doesn't register with you? A.
No, it doesn't.
Q. 390
You then went on and have the nerve to say until somebody puts something to
26
you.
In other words, we're back to evidence and documents?
27
A.
Sorry.
28
Q. 391
You are a person.
29 12:25:44 30
Mr. Dunlop.
giving evidence. A.
You are in the witness box.
You are on oath.
You know something about Mr. Whelan.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
You are
12:25:44
12:26:00
61 1
Q. 392
Would you please tell those --
2
A.
I'm very impressed, Mr. Murphy.
You were the one who said "before I put
3
something to you".
You seem to forget every time that you make these throw
4
away remarks.
5
said "before I put something to you".
That's the reason I used the phrase to the Chairman because you Put something to me.
As I sit here --
6
Q. 393
No, Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Fine.
8
Q. 394
For the reason that I want to know what Mr. Dunlop remembers about this man.
9
It may be significant, or it may not.
12:26:14 10
11
If Mr. Dunlop has no recollection he
should tell the Tribunal. A.
12
I have no recollection other than what I've already told you about my identifying the name and the possibility that he worked with Ambrose Kelly's.
13
Q. 395
I'm perfectly happy with that, Mr. Dunlop.
14
A.
You didn't indicate that two seconds ago.
12:26:28 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
He says he doesn't have any recollection.
17
vague recollection that he worked with a particular firm.
He has a
18 19 12:26:34 20
Q. 396
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, on the evening of the 8th of March,
21
as you left Mr. Sweeney's cluttered office in Harcourt Street Station and you
22
knew that Monarch had to get their act together in relation to what they should
23
look for in November '93.
24 12:27:15 25
That was one thing I think; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 397
And the second thing was that once they get their act together, that would be
26
communicated to you as to what they wanted.
27
business of lobbying the Councillors; isn't that right?
28
A.
There would be a unified approach.
29
Q. 398
Did you hear the second bit?
A.
Yes, go to Councillors, yes.
12:27:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And then you'd go about your
12:27:34
12:27:47
62 1
Q. 399
Okay.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 400
Now, you -- so the next thing on your agenda is to meet Mr. Lynn and
4
And the second bit is what applied to you?
Mr. Reilly.
And we know you met them the following day?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 401
We know you met Mr. Lawlor subsequent to that meeting.
7
And I think you said
yesterday it could have been that night or the following day or whatever?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 402
Did you meet Mr. Lawlor before meeting Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
A.
It is quite possible but I cannot say absolutely definitively that I didn't.
12:27:59 10
11
It is quite possible.
12
Q. 403
All right.
13
A.
That's correct, yes.
14
Q. 404
It doesn't matter.
A.
Yes, I did.
16
Q. 405
Just the three of you?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 406
And you know what the task is, presumably, you had a chat with them about the
12:28:11 15
19
You met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
The following day?
difficulties with Mr. Monahan and you probably had a chat with them then about
12:28:27 20
how you were going to swing the vote in November; is that right?
21
A.
Yes, we had a chat about how we proceed from here.
22
Q. 407
Right.
Just tell us, broad brush, what that all amounted to?
23
A.
Right.
Um.
24
Q. 408
Do you think this is funny, Mr. Dunlop?
A.
No, no, I'm just very, very interested in the approach that one minute you want
12:28:44 25
26
a specific answer to a specific question and then you throw up these broad
27
brush questions and as soon as I begin to answer them you jump on me.
28 29 12:29:01 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop, there's no need to engage with Mr. Murphy to that
degree. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:29:02
12:29:06
63 1 2 3
Just answer the questions. A.
I'll follow your advice, Chairman.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
6 7
A.
Yes, we had discussion with -- I had a discussion with Richard Lynn and Phil
8
Reilly.
9
resentment on Mr. Lynn's part that I had -- that I was being brought on board.
12:29:26 10
I indicated to you yesterday that I detected a certain amount of
In fairness to him, as I knew already from my presence in Dublin County
11
Council, he indicated the level of activity that he and Philip Reilly were
12
conducting, or had conducted with Dublin County Councillors.
13
about the necessity for being clear, absolutely clear as to what was needed to
14
be done, by way of what Monarch wanted.
12:30:00 15
achieved.
And we spoke
The possibility of that being
And how it was going to be achieved and who would deal with whom.
16
Q. 409
Yes.
17
A.
And it -- I think -- as I said in my statement, Mr. Lynn indicated that he had
18
contact with a number of cross party representatives, including Mr Gilmore.
19
can't remember whether Gilmore was Democratic Left or Sinn Fein, The Workers
12:30:22 20
Party at that time.
21
He was one of those parties.
I
He wasn't the Labour Party
I think at the time, I think.
22
Q. 410
Uh-huh?
23
A.
And that I would -- and that.
24
Sorry.
That Philip Reilly had contact with
certain members of Fine Gael because of contact that he had in Fine Gael.
12:30:42 25
that Mr. Lynn had direct contact with Don Lydon.
And
And that I would contact as
26
many of the Fianna Fail people as I thought was necessary.
27
indicate that I was on board and to gather any support that was required when
28
we had a unified approach.
29 12:31:18 30
Is that -- that's excellent.
First of all, to
Q. 411
Okay.
That's the broad brush.
A.
I've just -- as I hesitated once or twice there, Mr. Murphy, to you, whether I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:31:24
12:31:38
64 1
had deleted some things.
I know -- we spent some time going down.
2
Q. 412
Yep.
3
A.
Through names as to what the attitude of various people would be.
4
Q. 413
Okay.
Right.
And I'll come back to that now in a second. It was important.
Just one thing
5
while it occurs to me, Mr. Dunlop.
6
and we spoke about the necessity for being clear, absolutely clear as to what
7
continued to be
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 414
You just said.
A.
I beg your pardon, yes.
Q. 415
And we spoke about the necessity for being clear.
12:31:53 10
11 12
Absolutely clear as to what
was needed to be done by way of what Monarch wanted.?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 416
Now, what did that entail?
A.
That entailed looking at what had happened.
12:32:06 15
You said that in --
What the proposal had been.
16
difficulties that had arisen in relation to the May 1992 collapse.
17
withdrawal of another motion.
18
Sean Barrett motion in relation to one per acre.
19
Monarch could offer to assuage any of the political fears that any of
12:32:45 20
The
The passing of the motion in relation to the Discussion about what else
councillors might have because of the impact that this was going to have know
21
on their vote, particularly in the local area, district centre or town centre,
22
I don't doubt that it was town centre, district centre.
23
there?
24 12:33:14 25
Q. 417
Try adding reigning in Mr. Monahan.
A.
Sorry.
And what else was
Well not in -- not in those terms but expressions -- there was no
26
question of Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly or myself reigning in Mr. Monahan.
27
Certainly, I wasn't having any meetings with Mr. Monahan or could have any
28
influence on him.
29 12:33:39 30
The
Q. 418
No, no, but it was terribly important as to how Monarch's united front, you discussed this with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:33:39
12:33:49
65 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 419
What conclusion did you come to as to how Mr. Monahan was going to be dealt
3 4
with? A.
I didn't come to a conclusion as to how Mr. Monahan would be dealt with.
To
5
add to the expression of unease that had been expressed to me by Mr. Sweeney
6
this was replicated by comments from Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
7
way that Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly and I or any of us individually, could reign in
8
Mr. Monahan.
9 12:34:04 10
11
There was no
Q. 420
Sorry.
I understand perfectly.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 421
And Mr. Dunlop, how did you understand the three of you in chat there, very
12
important.
13
did you understand that would be done? I mean, before you go and talk to
14
Mr. Fox or whoever it is --
12:34:19 15
Your first two meeting with these two gentlemen formally.
What
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 422
-- about the whole thing --
17
A.
Yep.
18
Q. 423
-- you need to know this united front.
19
A.
Yes, well --
Q. 424
It's of huge urgency to you on the 9th of March 1993 with these gentleman to
12:34:24 20
21
know how are we going to get that united front and when are we going to have
22
it.
23
A.
24
Well, there was a certain amount of mechanics involved in the context of the second display, what was entailed, whether or not further submissions needed to
12:34:52 25
26
What did the three of you say, did you agree finally about that?
be made. Q. 425
27
Whether or not --
No, no, Mr. Dunlop, I don't think that has anything to do with the united front.
You have to decide what is the united front is.
28
A.
What does Mr. Monarch want.
29
Q. 426
What did Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop (SIC) say about that on that day,
12:35:03 30
on that evening on that day? Were you three in agreement that it should be the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:35:07
12:35:28
66 1 2
more modest proposal of four houses per acre? A.
Well, I think -- no, sorry, Mr. Murphy.
I would say that on the basis of what
3
was now on the books, as it were, in Dublin County Council as a result of what
4
had happened in May 1992 and remember what is now on the books, as you pointed
5
out to me yesterday.
Had Mr. Barrett not done what he did --
6
Q. 427
Yes.
7
A.
-- it would have --
8
Q. 428
Yeah.
9
A.
It would have reverted to four houses per acre. Now --
Q. 429
Are you going to say that if in November '93, the motion to confirm Mr.
12:35:41 10
11
Barrett's motion failed?
12
A.
If that --
13
Q. 430
Monarch would now have what it wanted from Mr. Sweeney's point of view and
14 12:35:54 15
Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn? A.
Or the alternative that on the basis of Mr. Barrett's motion --
16
Q. 431
Yes.
17
A.
-- as to one per acre, whether or not that could be built on by another motion
18
or by putting in a motion saying look it, it is recommended or it has been
19
voted on positively that it be one house per acre.
12:36:14 20
Q. 432
Yes.
21
A.
Here is another motion saying it should be higher density.
22
Q. 433
Yeah.
23
A.
Revert to X, Y and Z.
24
Q. 434
Can I take it from that from March '93.
12:36:25 25
From earlier but from your point of
view, Mr. Dunlop, that with a view to November '93, what is crucial is -- I
26
mean, your spring board is Mr. Barrett's motion because that said one per acre
27
--
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 435
-- 35 vote in the favour 33 voted against.
A.
Yes.
12:36:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:36:40
12:36:45
67 1
Q. 436
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's correct, yes.
3
Q. 437
Isn't that right? That's the spring board, isn't it?
4
A.
Yes, it is, yes.
5
Q. 438
You don't want less than that.
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 439
You want an improvement of that?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 440
You know in no way can you get what Mr. Monahan is looking for?
A.
Whatever that is.
11
Q. 441
Right.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 442
What I asked you was.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 443
Can you just say in a a general way were the three of you gentleman sort of
12:36:56 10
12:37:01 15
You don't want a repeat of that?
Whatever that is?
16
agreed on the four per acre.
17
could get to the position where you'd have been in had Barrett not brought in
18
his motion or if you could get -- yes.
19
Look, I'm not saying Monarch are going to be ecstatic but they would be happy?
12:37:25 20
That if you could get back to -- sorry.
If you could get to that position.
A.
Yes, I would say in general terms, yes.
21
Q. 444
Was that the goal from March '93?
22
A.
The goal -- first of all.
23 24
If you
There were two goals.
certain that nothing further went wrong.
One was to make absolutely
That there was no other cock ups.
Q. 445
Uh-huh.
A.
Secondly, that if the possibility existed to increase the density, to whatever.
26
Q. 446
Uh-huh.
27
A.
In the totality or in specific areas of the lands.
28
Q. 447
Uh-huh.
29
A.
Added in with other, what I might loosely refer to as inducements.
Q. 448
Yes.
12:37:40 25
12:37:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:37:58
12:38:17
68 1
A.
Like educational facilities, district centres, whatever.
2
Q. 449
Yes.
3
A.
Yes.
That once that occurred, and the general thrust as with other
4
developments, and I think I've attested to this previously.
5
don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
6
what you were looking for, at least take the half so that you can then build on
7
it.
8
Q. 450
9
That's fine.
That, you know,
That if you're only getting half of
I think we're agreed on all of this, Mr. Dunlop.
And
essentially, I know that there are trimming, inducements and so on to get the
12:38:36 10
thing through but essentially what we're talking about is a density of four
11
houses per acre is what our aim is.
12
A.
Yes, restore the higher density.
13
Q. 451
For November. Yeah. All right. Crucial to that, before -- to get the united
14
front was to find out, somebody to talk to Mr. Monahan, and have a chat with
12:38:52 15
him, tell him the realities and to get him to go along, he had to agree I
16
presume, had he?
17
A.
Well that would have been -- one would expect that he would have had to, yes.
18
Q. 452
Now, I just want to know, were the three of you there.
19 12:39:07 20
21
The first -- Mr. Lynn
and Mr. Reilly have been over the course for a year? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 453
They know all about it.
They've done the lobbying etc..
22
face.
23
to add to their work.
24
know what the front is to go to Mr. Fox and others about?
12:39:23 25
26
And you are going to do to your bit to add to, as you said yesterday, But before you can get out of the blocks you have to
A.
Yes.
Q. 454
Now, just it must have been a huge concern to you who is going to do what with
27
Mr. Monahan, when are we going to find out.
28
to happen?
29 12:39:41 30
You are the new
A.
What did you understand was going
Well what I understood was going to happen is that Philip Reilly, Richard Lynn and myself would certainly cooperate with one another, liaise with one another Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:39:46
12:40:00
69 1
to the best of our abilities to ensure that Mr. Monahan was going to be
2
controlled.
3
Q. 455
4
No, no, you're talking nonsense, Mr. Dunlop. how was he going to be controlled.
What I'm asking you is, what,
The three of you were --
5
A.
No, no.
6
Q. 456
-- were in complete unanimity about controlling Mr. Monahan.
7
None of the
three of you could do it.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 457
How was it going to be done?
A.
That's correct. That's the point I was just going to make and you interrupted
12:40:08 10
11
me.
12
Q. 458
Well, is the answer that you had any part --
13
A.
None of us had any power to control Phil Monahan.
14
day to the next where Phil Monahan was, or what he was doing or who he was
12:40:21 15
16
We wouldn't know from one
talking to. Q. 459
Can we take it, Mr. Dunlop, that your exercise is put on hold then.
You can
17
do nothing about Mr. Monahan.
18
Mr. Sweeney maybe, and say now we've got Mr. Monahan, we've hauled him in and
19
everything is fine, off you go.
12:40:39 20
21
Somebody is going to have to come back to you,
A.
Yes, yes, in general terms, yes.
Q. 460
Were there -- there had been previously obviously two campaigns going on, isn't
22
that what you were talking about? Mr. Monahan out on his own doing his bit?
23
A.
Yes, yes, sorry.
24
Q. 461
All right. But you agree with what I'm saying.
12:40:58 25
Sorry and I don't want you to
agree just to keep me happy.
26
A.
I wouldn't do that, Mr. Murphy.
27
Q. 462
Mr. Dunlop, it is that -- the three of you were powerless vis-a-vis
28 29 12:41:08 30
Mr. Monahan. A.
That is absolutely correct.
Q. 463
So you have to wait until Mr. Sweeney comes back and tells you what the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:41:12
12:41:40
70 1
position is about Mr. Monahan?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 464
Okay.
Thank you.
Now, I just want to know, Mr. Dunlop, what Mr. Lynn and/or
4
Mr. Reilly said to you in relation to knowledge that you would have to pay
5
councillors?
6
A.
Nothing.
7
Q. 465
Nothing.
Did you have any understanding -- we know your position vis-a-vis
8
Mr. Sweeney.
9
was -- of whether or not they had any knowledge of the need to pay councillors?
12:41:53 10
A.
Did you have any understanding of what their understanding
Well I -- again, yes.
I did have um, a suspicion.
Certainly from a comment
11
that had been made to me, not at this meeting but previously, on the margins of
12
a council meeting by Mr. Lynn to the effect that you'd think these idiots would
13
get their act together it's costing so much.
14
Q. 466
Now, what did that mean?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 467
Mr. Lynn may have another.
17
A.
Oh, they conveyed to me quite specifically that Monarch, in some fashion, or
12:42:15 15
18 19
I know they are the words.
What did they convey to you?
other, recognised and was paying monies to politicians for their support. Q. 468
Politicians or councillors?
A.
Well yeah.
21
Q. 469
You mean councillors?
22
A.
Councillors, yeah.
23
Q. 470
Did Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever tell you, directly or incorrect directly, that
12:42:38 20
24 12:42:56 25
expressly or implicitly, that they had paid money to councillors? A.
No.
26
Q. 471
So you didn't know that they had done this?
27
A.
No, no, no knowledge.
28
Q. 472
But you had a -- sorry?
29
A.
No, no, they did not say directly I have paid.
12:43:11 30
forward a bit. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Other than again if I may move
12:43:11
12:43:19
71 1
Q. 473
Yes.
2
A.
Maybe you are coming to this, I don't know, Mr. Murphy.
3
Q. 474
No.
4
A.
Another comment that was made to me by Mr. Lynn was, you know, these are
5
costing so much.
6
Q. 475
Yes.
7
A.
Councillors.
8
Q. 476
Who said that to you?
9
A.
Mr. Lynn.
Q. 477
On a subsequent occasion?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 478
The councillors are costing so much?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 479
All right.
12:43:25 10
12:43:35 15
16
What are costing so much?
And did that, all of that convey to you that Mr. Lynn knew that
councillors had to be paid and that Monarch were paying councillors? A.
Well, let me put it this way to you.
Yes, it did.
Because Mr. Lynn, as I
17
have -- I haven't met Mr. Lynn since 19 -- certainly a long, long time since I
18
met Mr. Lynn.
19 12:43:52 20
Mr. Lynn is an intelligent man and to quote the phrase that we've used earlier.
21
He was not living on a parallel universe he was living in the real world.
22
I mean, you know, anything that he said in those terms, I understood to mean
23
that Monarch, in some fashion, capacity, or otherwise, recognised the need for
24
and were paying councillors.
12:44:24 25
Q. 480
And so -- you took that understanding from Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
Mr. Lynn is the only person's name I've mentioned so far.
27
Q. 481
I beg your pardon.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 482
You didn't get that understanding from Mr. Reilly?
A.
No, I did not.
12:44:39 30
From Mr. Lynn?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
So,
12:44:40
12:44:47
72 1
Q. 483
How is he different?
2
A.
I don't -- he never made a comment like that to me.
3
Q. 484
All right.
4
A.
What I have --
5
Q. 485
Would Mr. Lynn have made the comment in Mr. Reilly's presence?
6
A.
No, no, sorry?
7
Q. 486
All right. You took that understanding from Mr. Lynn?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 487
You also got similar a sort of understanding from Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 488
Mr. Monarch -- Mr. Monahan, sorry.
12
A.
No, no, no.
12:44:58 10
Again, to say to you.
I have no comment from Mr. Monarch --
13
Mr. oh, dear -- you shouldn't do this Mr. Murphy, we are all falling into the
14
same trap.
12:45:23 15
From Mr. Monahan because I was only at one meeting that
Mr. Monahan attended and as I said to you, he stuck his face around the corner
16
of a room there was a meeting going on.
17
comment to that effect.
But he made no -- never made a
18
Q. 489
You were only at one meeting that Mr.-- Mr. Monahan stuck his head in?
19
A.
Mr. Monahan, as I recollect, Mr. Monahan was at a meeting in Monarch House or
12:45:44 20
Monarch Properties, or whatever it is.
21 22
And that on another occasion called in
briefly or said something to the effect, you know, just carry on or whatever. Q. 490
Mr. Dunlop, your statement says "This disparity and objectives became obvious
23
to me as time progressed and after a number of meetings in Monarch's offices in
24
Harcourt Street with Mr. Monahan, Mr. Noel Murray, Liam Lawlor and I --
12:46:07 25
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 491
Though not always in this format were present."
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 492
It suggests a lot of -- you know, Mr. Monahan was at a number of meetings?
29
A.
Yeah, well, I think the qualifying phrase is though not necessarily in this
12:46:23 30
format. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:46:23
12:46:30
73 1
Q. 493
That was your private interview not your statement.
2
A.
Correct.
3
Q. 494
Sorry what did you say?
4
A.
Though not necessarily in this format is the operative phrase.
5
Q. 495
Okay.
6
So you knew -- you didn't get -- Mr. Monahan never said anything that
gave you the understanding that councillors were being paid by Monarch?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 496
Did you ever have any suspicion that Mr. Monahan was out paying councillors
9 12:46:50 10
himself? A.
A suspicion is the phrase now that you've used?
11
Q. 497
Yes.
12
A.
I could not deny that the suspicion did not enter my mind.
13
Q. 498
Well did you have a high suspicion that Mr. Monahan was doing that?
14
A.
Low suspicion, suspicion, high suspicion.
12:47:12 15
You use -- I would be dishonest if
I did not say to you in answer to your question that did I not have a suspicion
16
that Mr. Monahan was doing something of that nature.
I have no basis other
17
than the nature of your question for answering in that way.
18
Q. 499
Did you ever get a payment yourself from Mr. Monahan?
19
A.
No.
Q. 500
Now, I take it, Mr. Dunlop, while there is a problem at that meeting at the 9th
12:47:37 20
21
of March in that at that stage you don't know what Mr. Monahan is going to do
22
and what's going to happen about him etc..
23
imagine that notwithstanding that you had a chat with -- well in fact you
24
touched on it, with these two gentlemen about whom they had already spoken to?
12:48:20 25
26
But I'd say that not -- I'd
A.
Yes.
Q. 501
And as a matter of interest, did you at that meeting or later ever get a record
27
of the minutes of the meeting in May '92 or anything that would tell you who
28
voted for and who voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
29 12:48:46 30
A.
My immediate response to that -- well on reflection, no. meeting you say? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I don't -- at that
12:48:47
12:48:55
74 1
Q. 502
Yes.
2
A.
Subsequently I may well myself have looked up --
3
Q. 503
Yes.
4
A.
-- the record of the people who did or did not vote.
5
Q. 504
Yeah.
6
A.
But just for ease of reference -- ease of proceeding.
7
Q. 505
Yes.
8
A.
It might not necessarily be absolutely required that you check the way
9
everybody voted.
12:49:13 10
I mean, Phil Reilly and Richard Lynn would be completely au
fait as to the way everybody voted.
11
Q. 506
Well that's fine.
12
A.
All right.
13
Q. 507
Can I take it that it would be -- I mean, the most important thing you could do
14 12:49:39 15
16
would inform yourself, now when you're getting ready to go out and do your job? A.
Yes.
Q. 508
Would be to inform yourself of everything about May '92 meeting but in
17
particular about how they lined up for Mr. Barrett's motion?
18
A.
Yes, I would accept that, yes.
19
Q. 509
So.
12:49:45 20
And can I take it.
It doesn't matter to me whether you've gone into the
minutes or whether you spoke to Mr. Richard Lynn or Mr. Reilly about it.
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 510
But can I take it that at some stage that you had a discussion with Mr. Lynn
23 24 12:49:58 25
and Mr. Reilly about who voted which way? A.
Oh, yes.
Q. 511
And that you would have known the entire of the vote on that day.
You would
26
have apprised yourself of all of the councillors who voted for and all who
27
voted against?
28
A.
Yes, I would.
29
Q. 512
Because the key to it is you've got to swing the against -- the people who are
12:50:16 30
The answer is yes.
against, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:50:17
12:50:32
75 1
A.
Well not quite, Mr. Murphy.
What we had to do, and it's a point that you
2
haven't come to, I know, but you may well be coming to it.
What we have to
3
do, not only may we have to swing people who are against.
We have to
4
consolidate anybody who is in favour --
5
Q. 513
Yes.
6
A.
-- of development in Cherrywood.
7
Q. 514
Yes.
8
A.
And assuage any difficulties that there might be.
9
Make sure that they are on side.
And like, for example, I do
recall that there was some concern about the attitude of, we'll say, Betty
12:50:51 10
Coffey.
Because Betty Coffey was advising caution --
11
Q. 515
Yes.
12
A.
-- about how to proceed.
The reason that that was occurring, and she wasn't
13
the only one.
14
particular locality and they were getting it in the teeth from a highly
12:51:07 15
16
The reason that that was occurring was that these were in the
organised campaign against. Q. 516
Well obviously, Mr. Dunlop, you were going to have to retain the people who
17
voted against Mr. Barrett's motion and turn the heads of a sufficient number of
18
those who voted for it?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 517
Isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 518
I mean, that's what your task is now for the next eight months?
23
A.
Our task is simple.
12:51:27 20
24
recognise we can get.
12:51:43 25
26
Success on the basis of what we want.
Can it be achieved. Q. 519
Yes.
That's the simple task.
And what we
What is it that we want.
What do we do to achieve it.
Now, and -- at that meeting did you carve up the councillors among you
27
and of the 70 plus, agree that Mr. Reilly had already spoken to or was happy
28
about whatever, whoever or whatever and Mr. Lynn the same and that now you can
29
reduce the 70 plus to a lesser number that you can deal with?
12:52:14 30
A.
Yes.
Well, I think that -- I don't know whether I said it here yesterday or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:52:19
12:52:41
76 1
I've said it at some stage.
Probably most likely in my statement.
That
2
obviously because this was a tighter type of operation at this stage and a lot
3
of work had already been done by Philip Reilly and Richard Lynn.
4
point in everybody tripping over one another as to who they were going to
5
contact.
There was no
We knew --
6
Q. 520
I think my question covers that possibility Mr. Dunlop.
7
A.
Right.
8
Q. 521
What I want to know is did you agree at that meeting that Mr. -- in other
9
Okay.
words, from your point of view, could you delete a number of names and say Mr.
12:52:53 10
Lynn and Mr. Reilly are dealing with them?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 522
All right.
13 14
And you meant -- yes, all right.
And did you go away then with a
list of people that would be your's? Did you go away with your list? A.
12:53:14 15
Well not a physical list, no, no, we didn't write down names or didn't produce a list and say listen what was agreed.
What was agreed was that I would
16
concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors by and large I was going to
17
concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors.
Richard Lynn was going to
18
continue with his contact with Don Lydon.
And I would concentrate on Fianna
19
Fail and that it would become known in certain circles that I was now involved.
12:53:37 20
21
Q. 523
And how would that help things?
A.
Well, let me come at it backwards, if I may.
I recall we'll say, for example,
22
Therese Ridge was a Fine Gael councillor expressing satisfaction that I was now
23
involved.
24 12:53:55 25
Q. 524
Right.
A.
So it would help things in the context.
And I'm loathe to put it in this
26
fashion but because it sounds very modest but, I mean, I put it in this way
27
because people were happy that they could communicate with me and say look it,
28
what's going on, what are we going to do or what should we do.
29 12:54:21 30
Q. 525
Uh-huh.
So your -- so now you're lobbying job has actually been reduced.
It's been reduced down to the Fianna Fail side of the fence? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:54:34
12:54:35
77 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 526
Though maybe Therese Ridge was an exception to that was she?
3
A.
Well Therese Ridge was a Phil Reilly contact.
4
I think I explained that to you
yesterday.
5
Q. 527
Yes.
6
A.
But Therese Ridge at that time was a friend of mine.
7
I was close to her at
that time.
8
Q. 528
Yes.
9
A.
For a variety of reasons in relation to -- I don't mean in relation to other
12:54:46 10
developments but I mean in relation to a lot of matters.
11
Q. 529
You were a friend of her's in relation to a number of other developments?
12
A.
She was involved in the context of lobbying.
I was involved with her in the
13
context of lobbying, particularly in the context of Quarryvale because it was
14
in her backyard.
12:55:03 15
Q. 530
16 17
lobby the Fianna Fail councillors and Therese Ridge? A.
18 19 12:55:16 20
All right. But anyway, sorry -- did you agree the three of you that you'd
No, no.
I agreed that I would concentrate on the Fianna Fail councillors.
It would become known, as it was inevitable. Q. 531
Yes.
A.
And as I have I have just given evidence that it did.
That I was involved.
21
And that it was necessary that I would speak to other people.
22
be agreed as we proceeded.
23
Q. 532
24 12:55:32 25
Okay. How many Fianna Fail councillors were there at that time, roughly. don't want to count them?
A.
26
Well this was after the 1991 election so they were decimated in the '91 election, so there was 20 odd.
27
Q. 533
25.
28
A.
In or around figure.
29 12:55:45 30
But that would
Sorry, let's look at it.
councillors. Q. 534
76. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
70 what odd members of the
I
12:55:46
12:55:56
78 1
A.
76, yeah.
2
Q. 535
I'm happy.
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 536
25.
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 537
And but you did say that maybe it would become necessary to talk to others but
7 8
Roughly say.
So your brief now is to lobby 25 councillors, isn't that right?
you'd work that out between the three of you as you went along? A.
9 12:56:13 10
25 that's all right.
Yes and I did say that it was agreed between us that Richard Lynn would continue to have his contact with Don Lydon.
Q. 538
Why is that?
11
A.
Because he had very close contact with Mr. Don Lydon.
12
Q. 539
Did you know Mr. Lydon?
13
A.
Oh, yes.
14
Q. 540
Does that mean that you wouldn't talk to him at all?
A.
Oh, absolutely not.
16
Q. 541
He was very heavily committed to all of this?
17
A.
Oh, he was, yes.
18
Q. 542
He wasn't moving off side, was he?
19
A.
Oh, no.
12:56:22 15
12:56:36 20
I think he was feeling a little bit aggrieved, understandably so, in
the context of the amount of contumaligning that was being heaped on his head
21
for what had occurred in May 1992.
22
Q. 543
What was heaped on his head?
23
A.
Sorry.
24
Q. 544
Oh, yes, yes, yes.
A.
Yes, and members of Fianna Fail itself.
26
Q. 545
I see.
27
A.
And other councillors.
28
Q. 546
Right.
29
A.
He was a sort of a, a bit of a, unfairly, in my view, but nonetheless --
Q. 547
Yes.
12:56:50 25
12:57:03 30
You know, people were very unhappy with him. Who, Monarch?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:57:03
12:57:18
79 1
A.
-- a cock up was made.
And when a cock up is made everybody looks for a
2
scapegoat and Don was the scapegoat in the instance because he didn't think on
3
his feet on the day.
4
Q. 548
How does that explain that you wouldn't talk to him as well?
5
A.
Well --
6
Q. 549
Do you remember you used the phrase yesterday to add support to Mr. Lynn and
7 8
Mr. Reilly? A.
9
relationship between Richard and Don, of long-standing, that that would
12:57:32 10
11
It doesn't necessarily mean that I wouldn't speak to Don but because of the
continue. Q. 550
Now, of the Fianna Fail councillors, the 25 or so, presumably, again at this
12
first meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, you discussed which of them Mr.
13
Lynn and Mr. Reilly had already spoken to.
14
A.
Oh, they would have lobbied.
Q. 551
Yes.
16
A.
They would have lobbied everybody.
17
Q. 552
Yes.
12:57:49 15
They would have lobbied them all?
They would have lobbied them all, yes.
Were you able to rule out a number of them -- did Mr. Lynn and
18
Mr. Reilly say there's no need to talk to the following half a dozen or ten or
19
something like that because they're sick to death of us and they're with us or
12:58:07 20
against us or whatever?
21
A.
Well it's not as simple as that, if I may suggest to you, Mr. Murphy.
22
Q. 553
No.
23
A.
Because of what had happened there was a lot of disaffection among all parties
24
but I'm sticking now with Fianna Fail, within the Fianna Fail organisation.
12:58:23 25
As I said to you two minutes ago, somewhat unfairly, but nonetheless, that was
26
the way the cooky crumbled.
27
saying, look it, for God's sake what are we going to do here.
28 29 12:58:47 30
Q. 554
Don was being blamed for it.
And people were
I understand you, Mr. Dunlop, then to be saying that you had to talk to all of the Fianna Fail councillors, it was your brief to talk to all the Fianna Fail councillors and bring them home? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
12:58:47
12:59:03
80 1
A.
2 3
And talk to them, as many as possible, in view of what was -- what was going to be um, put forward or agreed.
Q. 555
Yes.
And can you just tell me.
I know about the internal difficulties in
4
Monarch.
And I know how this affected the councillors that they ended up
5
confused.
What does Monarch want.
6
who were in favour of Monarch would be upset with the failure of Mr. Lydon's
7
motion.
And that I can see that obviously people
8 9
Why would there be so much dissatisfaction within Fianna Fail, among the Fianna
12:59:23 10
Fail councillors? I mean, these are councillors who are independently voting
11
on whether or not lands should be rezoned or not.
12
speaking in this particular case I'm saying that it doesn't matter but it
13
increased the density.
14
elected representatives and at the moment I'm talking about the 25 or so Fianna
12:59:50 15
Fail ones.
And sorry -- generally
I mean, so that's what they are voting on.
And the vote went against what Monarch were looking for in May
16
'92.
17
in-fighting among the Fianna Fail councillors about the whole thing?
18
A.
19
So it did.
Okay, fine.
Why would that end up with kind of
Well, my immediate reaction -- and I do apologise in advance, Chairman. don't mean to be engaging with Mr. Murphy.
13:00:21 20
These are
And I
But God bless your naiviety.
Fianna Fail councillors obviously were committed to doing what was required in
21
May 1992.
And it didn't happen.
22
Q. 556
What was it sorry to interrupt you -- what was it they were committed to do?
23
A.
The motion that was defeated.
24
Q. 557
Mr. Lydon's motion?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 558
In other words, the Fianna Fail councillors of the 33 --
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 559
-- who lost that motion?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 560
Were committed to it?
13:00:36 25
13:00:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
13:00:43
13:00:59
81 1
A.
Well subject to correction and to a list of who --
2
Q. 561
No, no?
3
A.
We're not going to go into that detail.
But I mean they were mightily annoyed
4
that this had happened.
And as I've said to you five minutes ago, they looked
5
for a scapegoat and they blamed Don Lydon.
6
Q. 562
Why would they be mightily annoyed?
7
A.
Well because of the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Monarch and them
8
and commitments that they had entered into and obviously assurances that had
9
been given that this would be successful.
13:01:18 10
Q. 563
11 12
Now, what are the assurances and what are the commitments.
What are the
commitments that they had entered into? A.
Well, the commitments that they had entered in would be to support it and the
13
assurances that they would do everything possibly within their power to make
14
sure that it was passed.
13:01:37 15
16
Q. 564
And what would that be?
A.
Voting for it.
17 18
CHAIRMAN: Right, Mr. Murphy, it's gone one o'clock. We'll rise until two
19
o'clock. At two o'clock Ms. Harney is giving evidence and so Mr. Dunlop can
13:01:49 20
21
resume at -- if you're here at ten past two.
Not before ten past two.
Hopefully we will resume soon after that.
22 23
Those parties who might -- if we come to that stage in the afternoon, who might
24
want to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop might, it would be helpful if they could agree
13:02:06 25
amongst themselves the order in which they will cross-examine him. All right?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
I think we've already agreed an order I understand.
28
Shipsey is probably going to go first, I understand.
I think Mr.
Subject to correction.
29 13:02:26 30
MR. DULACHAIN: Chairman, just before you rise, there was a matter we raised on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
13:02:29
13:02:53
82 1
day 625, 23rd of March.
And it related to whether there were any records of
2
our account of what was said in the private meetings when the private meetings
3
went off record and it was indicated A, whether anything was available and B,
4
whether that that would then be made available.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
All right. Well we can deal with that after lunch.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
to write us a letter and we'll respond by way of correspondence. We are at a
13:03:01 10
I think in fact the proper thing to do would be for Mr. Dulachain
certain stage -- It's not necessarily information that would be opened in
11
public at this stage as this is a matter of which certain decisions have to be
12
made by the members.
13 14 13:03:15 15
16
But if the query that Mr. O'Dulachain has, can be sent in a letter in so far as we are in a position to provide information to Mr. O'Dulachain in relation to that matter it will of course be provided.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
we can come to some agreement as to how the matter is dealt with.
13:03:30 20
Well just for the moment if yourself and Mr. O'Dulachain can see if
not possible you can raise it in the afternoon.
All right?
21 22
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
23 24
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13:04:25 25
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
If that's
13:04:25
14:02:35
83 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Sir.
4 5
Ms. Mary Harney, please.
6 7
MS. MARY HARNEY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
8
MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:03:04 10
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Ms. Harney.
11
A.
Good afternoon.
12
Q. 565
Quinn good afternoon, Ms. Harney.
13
Ms. Harney, you have been written to on two occasions by the Tribunal in
14
relation to these lands at Cherrywood and the Monarch Property Group.
14:03:16 15
And I think your first response is dated 15th of February 2006.
16
And is to be
found at pages 1008 and 1010 of the brief.
17 18
And your subsequent and most recent response of the 18th of April 2006 is at
19
8713 and 8715 of the brief. If I just take that second response first.
14:03:38 20
21
And if we could have 8713, please.
22
You referred to the Tribunal correspondence and the earlier letter.
23
said that "As you have outlined the nature of your contacts with Philip Monahan
24
and Philip Reilly and his wife Martha, and that you had met Mr. Richard Lynn at
14:03:54 25
And you
a fund-raising event."
26 27
Can I just ask you in relation to your knowledge of and meetings with
28
Mr. Philip Monahan, did you know Mr. Monahan?
29 14:04:08 30
A.
I first met Mr. Monahan around the time The Square opened in Tallaght, that was to the best of my knowledge, the first time I ever met him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I probably met
14:04:13
14:04:26
84 1
him no more than three times in all I think.
2
Q. 566
You also I think, knew Mr. Reilly, is that right?
3
A.
Yes, I had a lot of dealings with Mr. Reilly.
Because he was the, I think
4
public affairs person for The Square in Tallaght.
5
functions in the area.
6
occasions.
7
not twice but he attended a lot of functions.
He attended a lot of
And I was seated at the same table as him on many
He won the Tallaght person of the year on at least one occasion if
8 9
I also held a weekly constituency clinic for about two years in an office in
14:04:42 10
The Square and he was often around on a Saturday and I often spoke to him and
11 12
met him. Q. 567
13 14
He was somebody I knew quite well.
Was that a facility provided by the Tallaght Shopping Centre or the Monarch Group?
A.
14:04:59 15
Yes. It was provided on a day-to-day basis it was used by the Catholic Marriage Advisory Council to the best of my recollection. It was also used by
16
other community groups and a number pf politicians and I used it because it was
17
convenient from a transport point of view for people to come and see me there.
18
Q. 568
And I think you also knew Mr. Richard Lynn, is that correct?
19
A.
I met Mr. Lynn at fundraising events.
14:05:15 20
Certainly, I think I sent you
documentation about three fundraising lunches I organised and I know he
21
attended one of them and he may have attended other fund-raising events that
22
other people organised that I was in attendance at, yes.
23
Q. 569
24 14:05:31 25
26 27
And I think you say that these are the only people associated with Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group that you could recall having met?
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 570
You had been asked I think for details of any contributions received from the Monarch Group and if I could rather than taking you through your statement.
28 29 14:05:46 30
If I take you through a series of documents which you will have been furnished with and which are in the brief.
I think the first contribution, although we
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:05:49
14:06:08
85 1 2
don't have records of it, may have been received in 1990, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I think I -- from a company called JC, which I understand now or I
3
understood I wrote to you in April was a Monarch company.
4
donation of 1,000 pounds to the Progressive Democrats national election.
5
Q. 571
Yes, that would have been in the early 1990s?
6
A.
Yes, I think I gave you the date there, yes.
7
Q. 572
If I could have 8714, please.
They sent a
8 9
I think the Tallaght Town Centre opened on 23rd of October 1990 and you've told
14:06:20 10
us you didn't know Mr. Philip Monahan prior to that date.
Would you have
11
known Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly prior to that date.
12
When I say -- I don't know when I first met Mr. Monahan but it was in
13
connection with The Square.
14
that year.
14:06:40 15
The official opening may have been the end of
But the Square was in an almost finished state for a while before
it actually officially opened.
And I think it was actually used for events.
16
I would say I met Mr. Reilly around the same time when he came to work would at
17
The Square, yes.
18
Q. 573
19 14:06:55 20
So do you think you might have requested or solicited that contribution of 1,000 in early 1990?
A.
I don't believe I would have but I can't be certain.
The national collection
21
was generally organised by the treasurers in each constituency.
And I think
22
70 per cent of it or so went to the party nationally and 30 percent was held in
23
the constituency.
24
practice to write to anybody looking for money for myself.
Until I became leader of the party it would not have been
14:07:16 25
26
I would have written to people in connection with fundraising events.
27
terms of donations for myself, and I think there's one letter there where I
28
wrote on behalf of a boxing club and I began by saying I don't like writing
29
these letter which would be true. When I became leader, it was customary for
14:07:30 30
But in
leaders, although I don't do it now, it would have been customary to write Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:07:35
14:07:49
86 1
letters seeking financial support.
2
Q. 574
You weren't leader, were you, in June 1991?
3
A.
No, I wasn't.
4
Q. 575
If I could have 2239.
This is a letter written to Sheila Terry from Monarch
5
Properties Services Limited.
6
brief.
7
A.
Yes, I did.
8
Q. 576
It's from Mr. Lynn.
9
Again, it's a letter you might have seen in the
And it says "We have been contacted by Minister Mary
Harney on your behalf and have pleasure in enclosing a contribution towards
14:08:03 10
your Local Elections expenses."
11 12
And if we have 1581 we see the contribution there of 300 pounds.
13
is an internal Monarch document discovered to the Tribunal.
14 14:08:13 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 577
There are in fact, I think other contributions to PD candidates.
16
gets 300 pounds.
Catherine Quinn is 300.
17
then Progressive Democrats function 300.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 578
And you will have seen them.
14:08:34 20
21
Again, this
Helen Keogh
Colm Tyndall I think at 300.
And
You will see those on the screen?
Can I just ask you about the circumstances under
which you came to ask for funds on behalf of Ms. Terry? A.
I think what happened was Mr. O'Reilly approached me and said he wanted to
22
support the Local Election campaign of some of the candidates and asked me for
23
recommendations. And the people I recommended were the people I had head
24
hunted into the party just a few months earlier.
14:08:51 25
Sheila Terry was one,
Catherine Quinn was another and a third was Colm Tyndall.
They had no track
26
record in the party and I felt it would have been more difficult for them.
27
they were the ones I recommended. I want wasn't involved in recommending Helen
28
Keogh but I was involved in the recommendation of Colm Tyndall, Catherine Quinn
29
and to the best of my knowledge Breda Cass.
14:09:10 30
So
But her donation was to the party
as I remember or to a function she was having or something rather than to her. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:09:13
14:09:25
87 1
Q. 579
2
These -- just to put this in context.
This was the 1991 Local Elections.
You had been a councillor up to 1991 yourself?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 580
But you weren't going forward on that election.
5
These were candidates in the
election.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 581
They were going to become councillors if they were successful --
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 582
-- at election time?
A.
Yes.
Q. 583
The Tribunal has heard evidence from a councillor who was successful in the
14:09:30 10
11 12
elections but who declined an offer of money towards his campaign by Mr. Lynn
13
or the Monarch interest.
14
you think that there might have been a conflict in seeking or soliciting
14:09:51 15
support from some interest such as Monarch which would have an interest in the
16 17
I'm just wondering with the benefit of hindsight do
Development Plan? A.
Well soliciting.
I didn't solicit he came -- to the best of my recollection,
18
Mr. Reilly came to me and said he wanted to support the Local Election campaign
19
and asked me for ideas.
14:10:08 20
money.
21
I think a lot depends on the motivation when you take
I have received financial support from companies that I subsequently
opposed things that they wanted done.
That is a fact.
22 23
Um, so the fact that somebody gives you political donation in an open fashion,
24
should not be assumed, in my view, that that means that you're going to do
14:10:28 25
whatever that company or individual would wish you to do.
So I think a lot
26
depends.
27
changed a lot in the light of this Tribunal and other Tribunals in terms of the
28
perception of situations of that kind.
29 14:10:44 30
Some people may feel conflict I think perhaps the circumstances have
But certainly --
Q. 584
Did you --
A.
I was never motivated by money somebody gave me to do something for somebody. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:10:49
14:11:03
88 1
Q. 585
2 3
political parties in the June '91 and November '92 General Election? A.
4 5
Did you know that Monarch Properties had been such generous sporters to all
No, I think the sums of money half a million or something.
Not at all, no.
It was a considerable amount of money. Q. 586
Now, that was 1991 and then I think we have a document.
Could I have 3763.
6 7
This is an invoice which is passing between Monarch and GRE.
8
to expenses incurred and which should be shared with GRE.
9
concerned in relation to the first paragraph under the heading The Square "2
14:11:26 10
And it relates
But I'm just
BW" which I presume black-and-white photograph reopening of captain venture by
11
Mary Harney TD Minister for State and Department of the Environment to include
12
proofs prints and captions."
13 14
Did you you perform any in your capacity as Minister any functions in Tallaght
14:11:42 15
16
or otherwise for Monarch? A.
17 18
Clearly, I performed that function for people in need, yes, I would have.
The
photographs weren't given to me, as you can imagine. Q. 587
19
Yes.
I can appreciate that and I think then you wrote again.
have 3544 to Mr. Reilly this time, in January 1992.
14:12:02 20
If we could
And I think you got a
contribution or your party got a contribution of 200 pounds towards a business
21
lunch that was addressed by the leader of your party at the time, isn't that
22
right?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 588
And then I think in November 1992, at 3910 you yourself I think received 1,000
14:12:20 25
pounds from Mr.-- from Monarch but I think Mr. Reilly may have been the contact
26
for that and you'll have seen that in the brief?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 589
Can you recall --
29
A.
I sent you the compliments slip I think I had in my records.
14:12:33 30
Phil Reilly's signature that's on it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I think it's
14:12:35
14:12:47
89 1
Q. 590
And that's at 1012.
Can I just ask you, do you recall whether that money was
2
sought on your behalf or by you from Monarch or whether it was given by
3
Monarch?
4
A.
No, it wasn't sought because I'm fairly certain I never wrote looking for money
5
for myself nor for the constituency.
I did write for fundraising events
6
frequently but not for actual donations.
7
Q. 591
Yes. But you would have known Mr. Reilly at in stage?
8
A.
Yes, I would have known him quite well. Yes, I did.
9
Q. 592
And you acknowledge that as we see at 1011 on 20th of November 1992.
14:13:03 10
I think in -- if we move to 1993.
And then
If I could have sorry -- just before I
11
leave 1992.
12
think there was a contribution of 200 pounds in January of 1992.
13
fundraiser to the Progressive Democrats.
14
Election contribution of 400 pounds on the 20th of October, as we see there.
14:13:31 15
16
At 1582 I As a
And I think Mr. Lohan got a General
Isn't that right? A.
17 18
I think there were other contributions by Monarch.
Well clearly you have the records, yes. Mr. Lohan's donation, yes.
Q. 593
19
But the fund raising, yes.
And I think at 3975 there was a hamper later that year which was given by the Monarch interest.
14:13:49 20
I wouldn't haven't aware of
I think if we go to 1993.
At 1583 there was Helen Keogh I
think had a fund-raising event and may in fact have received a contribution of
21
100 pounds.
22
In May 1993 if we have 4200.
23
pounds towards the cost of two tickets for again a luncheon was provided.
24 14:14:12 25
26
And I think there was a further letter from you to Mr. Reilly.
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 594
Now --
A.
Normally every year I have a fund-raising lunch and it would be .... well known
27
to people.
28
Q. 595
Sorry, I've interrupted you.
29
A.
Sorry.
Q. 596
I didn't mean to.
14:14:21 30
Where it would appear from the records that 200
Sorry.
I think you wrote also to Mr. Monahan at that time
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:14:25
14:14:46
90 1
later in May at 4217.
And we see the contributions.
Then in 1994 at 1584, I
2
think the Progressive Democrats again through Helen Keogh, had an interest free
3
loan of 2,000 pounds given on the 1st of February 1994.
4
were tickets on the 5th of May to the tune of 200 pounds given.
5
in December 1994 as we see at 5517 there was a hamper I think, maybe given to
6
you in relation to -- by the Monarch interest.
7
was 200 pounds given on the 26th of January 1995 to the Progressive Democrats
8
fund-raiser.
And I think there And I think
At 1585 for 1985 I think there
9 14:15:03 10
And on the 18th of May of that year a further 100 pounds.
And then in 1996 I
11
think at 1586, there were just a series of payments.
12
quickly.
13
Sheila Terry, Local Election expenses of 500 pounds.
14
On the 25th of April Progressive Democrats fundraiser 500 pounds.
14:15:25 15
I'll just do them very
You will see them there on the 29th of March '96 to councillor
May, Progressive Democrats, tickets 50 pounds.
16
Keogh lunch 200 pounds.
17
250 pounds.
On the 2nd
On the 27th of June, Helen
On the 23rd of August Councillor Larry Lohan, tickets
18 19
And I think Helen Keogh wrote to Mr. Lynn in relation to a further event.
14:15:39 20
see there at 5815 on the 22nd of April '96.
You
And I think you wrote to
21
Mr. Reilly yourself on the 29th of October 1996.
22
letter I think that you may have referred to earlier in your capacity as leader
23
of the party.
24 14:15:55 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 597
And you will have seen that.
A.
Can I just say in relation to the hampers.
That's at 6115.
That's a
There's a further hamper I think. I see from your documentation to a
27
large number of hampers were given.
28
used to give them away because at Christmas in the past, not so any more, one
29
would get a lot of hampers at Christmas time.
14:16:18 30
generally, I would give away.
They were food hampers and I actually
And certainly food hampers
I just want to clarify that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:16:29
14:16:33
91 1
Q. 598
Just for completeness obviously you will appreciate that --
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
At 1587 for 1997 on the 28th of February Helen Keogh fundraiser 500.
4
of March Councillor Helen Keogh, PD tickets 100 pounds.
5
of June 1997, progressive Democrats Dublin southwest General Election
6
contribution 3,000 pounds.
7
in May 1997 which took place in early June '97.
8
A.
9
And then on the 3rd
I think there had been a General Election called
And that donation was given for my election campaign and that of Colm
Tyndall but because the sum was large I gave it into the party centrally, which
14:16:57 10
11
Yes.
On 14th
I think I've acknowledged. Q. 600
Yes.
So it didn't go into the constituency in fact.
And in fact at 6436, just for completeness, I think the cheque was made
12
payable to Progressive Democrats Dublin south -- it wasn't a cheque made
13
payable to you, isn't that right?
14 14:17:11 15
A.
No, that's right.
Q. 601
And we'll see it going through there.
And then I think in more recent times.
16
Either Mr. Lynn on behalf of another company or through another company I think
17
made contributions to the party.
18
you will see there "Contribution to Dun Laoghaire adult education board
19
requested by councillor Larry Lohan of 800 pounds."
14:17:36 20
If we have 1375.
I think there is at No. 7
And then at No. 8 you
will see Progressive Democrats, grand draw 400 pounds contributed on the 25th
21
of February 1999.
22 23
And then at No. 13 there's a national fundraising draw tickets for Progressive
24
Democrats, 500 pounds on the 15th March 1999. And at 14 a golf classic in aid
14:17:52 25
of Colm Tyndall held on 25th of March 1999, 500 pounds.
And then at 1377
26
there was a business lunch for the Progressive Democrats organised through
27
Senator Helen Keogh of 600 pounds contributed in October 1999, isn't that
28
right?
29 14:18:09 30
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 602
Would it be fair to say that the Monarch interest was a source of political Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:18:16
14:18:28
92 1
contributions to individual members of the party and to the party over the
2
period in question, isn't that right?
3
A.
That's correct, yes.
4
Q. 603
Did anybody within the party ever canvass or lobby you for support either for
5 6
yourself or through, for any of your councillors for any of theirs projects? A.
No, not to the best of my knowledge.
As I told this Tribunal on a previous
7
occasion, once I left the council if somebody lobbied me for a developer I
8
would automatically refer them to the councils.
9 14:18:43 10
I just didn't get involved.
Q. 604
Yes.
A.
And the only planning I would have got involved in was either individual once
11
off housing for constituents, which I'd still be involved with.
12
made to rezone green belts which I was very involved with but other than that.
13
So if somebody did, if for example Mr. Reilly, who I saw frequently, mentioned
14
Cherrywood to me I would have told him to talk to the councillors, in this case
14:19:03 15
it would have been Helen Keogh and Larry Lohan who were in that area. I
16 17
Or attempts
certainly don't have any recollection of that. Q. 605
Of that.
Okay.
And you may not be familiar with the Cherrywood proposals.
18
Because you had left the council I think in June '91.
19
with the rezoning process and the publication of the draft maps and that.
14:19:21 20
21
A.
Sure.
Q. 606
If I could have 7216.
On 27th of May 1992.
But you are familiar
The Cherrywood areas with up for
22
review by the council.
23
Dockrell that the lands in question would be zoned at one house to the acre.
24
In other words, the Manager's proposals were four houses to the acre.
14:19:40 25
And there was a motion by Councillors Barrett and
And the
manageress proposals had been unsuccessful and Councillor Barrett seconded by
26
Dockrell had suggested one house to the acre on the lands.
27
if you look at the councillors who voted in favour of those proposals.
28
are on screen now.
29
Lohan, Morrissey, perhaps Quinn, Tyndall and Terry would have been Progressive
14:20:06 30
And we see there They
Would I be right in thinking that Councillors Cass, Keane,
Democrat councillors at that time or ...? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:20:08
14:20:26
93 1
A.
2 3
I'm not sure about Larry Lohan because he left the party around that time. But certainly the others, yes.
Q. 607
Now, if we go then to the 11th of November 1993.
At 7259, you will see there
4
a motion by Councillors Smyth seconded by Councillor Buckley.
5
which has just now been voted in favour of been confirmed effectively at low
6
density housing at two houses to the hectare or one house to the acre.
7
other words you've had the draft plan containing a change No. 3 in accordance
8
with that successful motion.
9
it comes back for further debate.
14:20:52 10
That the change
So in
And then that plan is put on public display and
Councillors Smyth and Buckley.
And the first motion up is a motion by That that change be confirmed.
The actual text of the motion is at 7259.
And that
11
motion at 7261.
But if we look at
12
7261 you see at the very bottom of the page "The motion proposed by Councillor
13
Smyth, seconded by Councillor Buckley was put and on a division the vote
14
resulted as follows."
And if we look at 7262.
14:21:17 15
16
Councillors Cass, Keane, Keogh, Lohan, Morrissey, Quinn, Terry and Tyndall all
17
vote against it.
18
they would have adopted the previous year.
19
a proposal the previous year that the lands be zoned at one house to the acre.
14:21:37 20
Which appears to be a total reversal of the position that
A motion a year subsequently comes before the council confirming that prior
21
position and the vote against it.
Do you know anything about that or?
22
A.
No, I don't.
23
Q. 608
Was there any discussion within the party?
24
A.
Definitely not.
14:21:54 25
In fact, even since the Tribunal began I haven't discussed it
with them, to be honest with you.
26
And I know you've had most of them here
before you.
27
Q. 609
Okay.
28
A.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
29 14:22:00 30
In other words, they had supported
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:22:02
14:22:05
94 1
A.
Thank you very much.
2 3
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Mr. Dunlop.
7 8
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP BY MR. MURPHY
9
AS FOLLOWS:
14:22:39 10
11
Q. 610
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
12
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, I would like to just resume with an answer you gave just
13
before lunch.
14 14:23:22 15
The answer is on screen -- sorry.
I'll just read out the answer.
"Why would
16
they be something annoyed? That's the councillors.
And the answer is well
17
because of the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Monarch and them and
18
commitments that they had entered into and obviously assurances that had been
19
given that this would be successful."
14:23:44 20
21
"Now, what are the assurances and what are the commitments? What commitments
22
that they had entered into?" And your answer is "The commitment to support it.
23
And the assurances that they would do everything within their power for it.
24
What would that be? Voting for it."
14:24:01 25
26
So what I was asking you about is why these people, these Fianna Fail
27
councillors would have been very distressed with the result of the May '92
28
motion.
29
they gave.
14:24:17 30
Mr. Barrett's motion.
And you've -- I've asked you what commitments
What you meant by that.
And the commitments you were referring
to would have been commitments to support it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:24:19
14:24:30
95 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 611
To support the motion.
3
Which the Manager's proposals proposed by Mr. Lydon
earlier that day, they would have supported it in that way, isn't that right?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 612
That would have been your commitment.
Now, could you tell me what the
6
assurances and obviously assurances that had been given that this would be
7
successful.
8 9
What assurances would have been given to Monarch that the proposal to increase
14:24:46 10
the density as they wished would be successful.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
These are assurances that Mr. Dunlop would know of his own?
13 14
MR. MURPHY: Yes.
14:24:54 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Of his own rather than what he might have heard on the grapevine.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
19
like, he says that one of the reasons they're very distressed is because they
14:25:06 20
Well both beginning with -- chairman, I'm just coming back to --
would have given assurances that the motion would be successful.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
came to be aware of that.
24
was told to you?
14:25:18 25
26
A.
Well is that something that -- just explain, Mr. Dunlop, how you Is that something you knew of your own knowledge or
No, that was something that was told to me.
Obviously, the -- thank you,
Mr. Redmond.
27 28
That was something that was told to me by Mr. Lynn and/or Mr. Reilly.
29
not have been aware of any assurances that would have been given prior to the
14:25:42 30
point -- to my arrival on the scene but given the method of lobbying of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I would
14:25:51
14:26:10
96 1
councillors, people would -- anybody worth his salt lobbying a councillor would
2
do the sums, would do the figures.
3
going to vote and who was not.
Would add up the heads and say who was
4 5 6
MR. HUMPHREYS:
7
Just one point for clarification.
8
What was referred to yesterday as the Manager's motion, if you like.
9
motion that was defeated, 35 - 33.
14:26:26 10
Sorry, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Humphreys on behalf of Senator Lydon.
Was referred to as the Manager's motion
which is what it was because it was the Manager's Report for the whole valley.
11
But just before lunch it was referred to as Mr. Lydon's motion.
12
be just some just clarification.
13
The
A.
There could
Do you know, I think that is correct.
14 14:26:44 15
16
MR. MURPHY: A.
That's my fault.
I think that's correct.
17 18
MR. HUMPHREYS:
19
please the Tribunal.
Sorry to interrupt.
It just needed clarifying. May it
14:26:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
That's all right.
22 23 24
MR. MURPHY:
It's the manager's --
A.
Yes.
Q. 613
Proposals and motion proposed by Mr. Lydon I think is ...
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 614
Mr. Dunlop, the only reason I'm asking you this is because you gave a sworn
14:26:47 25
28
answer that these councillors, you've painted the picture of these people being
29
very, they are looking for a scapegoat.
14:27:04 30
well -- I can't quite read what it is.
They blame Don Lydon.
They might
They were might well -- might really
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:27:08
14:27:25
97 1
annoyed that this has happened.
2
used.
3
be so annoyed.
4
Monarch and them.
I'm not sure what the words are that you
But anyway, you were clearly very annoyed.
I ask you why would they
And you say that the heavy lobbying that had gone on between Perhaps just look at that.
That comes first.
5 6
What are you referring to there ?
7
A.
The heavy lobbying?
8
Q. 615
Yes.
9
A.
I think I have alluded to and directly given evidence in this, to this effect
14:27:33 10
over the course of the last two days.
One is that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly
11
conducted a very professional campaign with the councillors right across the
12
political divide in relation to what Monarch wanted.
13
Q. 616
Now, pause.
14
A.
Okay.
Q. 617
But I don't think that because the Monarch people put a lot of work into
14:27:54 15
I accept that.
16
something and a lot of lobbying, which would make it understandable that when
17
the motion failed they'd be very upset.
18
be upset.
19
talking to the councillors.
14:28:12 20
21
I don't think the councillors would
Simply because Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly had spent a lot of time I don't see why the councillors would be
extremely upset with the defeat of the motion. A.
No.
Unless there's something else.
I don't think there is. There is something else.
But as I said to you
22
just before lunch.
23
councillors in this area -- when a motion is put forward at the council and
24
commitments are entered into or assurances given as to support, councillors
14:28:41 25
want to move on.
When I was admiring your nativity in this matter, is that
They want to deal with that issue and move on to other
26
issues or move on to other motions or to move on to other commitments or
27
assurance that is they have given to other people.
28
because Monarch was upset and because Monarch's upset was transmitted to them
29
through Richard or Philip.
14:29:01 30
Q. 618
They would be upset
When you say they were upset, which you say they were very upset and because of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:29:04
14:29:16
98 1
the heavy lobbying.
2
they had been paid a lot of money?
3
A.
4
Is it obvious -- what you're really saying there is that
No, I did not say that.
And I don't think that's an inference that I can
make.
5
Q. 619
All right.
6
A.
Certainly you can make it because it's your privilege to make it.
7
Q. 620
All right.
8
A.
But I can't make it because I can't sustain that.
9
Q. 621
But you're not hinting at that.
A.
No, no, sorry Mr. Murphy, let me be absolutely clear here now.
In dealing
11
with County Councillors you will get a cross-section of society.
You will get
12
people who when they say yes mean yes.
13
mean yes or no, you will get people when they say yes mean no and you will get
14
people who when they say yes mean maybe.
14:29:30 10
14:29:53 15
difficult exercise.
You are talking about genuine heavy lobbying?
You will get people when they say yes
And lobbying these councillors was a
So Richard Lynn and Phil Reilly had done a very good job
16
in calculating what support would be available.
17
really committed to it and who had assured Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly in an
18
unqualified way in an uncategoric way that they would support him were bloody
19
annoyed that the thing happened the way they did, legitimately.
14:30:18 20
Q. 622
Who were?
21
A.
Any councillors who gave --
22
Q. 623
The councillors, yes.
23
A.
Councillors who gave support.
24
Let's stand into, if I may do so for a second,
the shoes of either Richard Lynn or Philip Reilly.
14:30:33 25
assurances that they would support it.
27
voted for it.
29 14:30:58 30
I would be bloody annoyed.
And I would express my annoyance to all sections including people who had given
26
28
And the people who were
Q. 624
Notwithstanding that they may have
Now, Mr. Dunlop, I know you're talking about assurances.
The commitment to
support it and assurances that they would do everything within their power to -- sorry for it.
But a question earlier you said "And obviously assurances
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:31:03
14:31:20
99 1
that had been given that this would be successful."
So you've said to the
2
three Judges that councillors had -- councillors had given assurances that
3
this -- that this -- that what Monarch was looking for would be successful?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 625
What do you -- I don't -- what does that mean?
6
A.
The councillors that Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly had lobbied in the context
7
of any motions by Monarch -- on behalf of Monarch or the Manager's Report that
8
Monarch was supporting, taking Mr. Humphreys' point, that was put down in the
9
name of or for voting on behalf -- by Don Lydon and others.
14:31:48 10
11
That they would
say yes. Q. 626
No, no, that's not what that's saying.
I mean, a councillor can give an
12
assurance to Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly that he will vote for it and support it
13
and he can carry that out.
14
successful is a different matter?
14:32:04 15
But he gives an assurance that this will be
A.
Sorry.
16
Q. 627
How does an individual councillor.
17
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon.
18
Q. 628
How does an individual councillor give an assurance to Mr. Lynn that the
19 14:32:15 20
You know what I mean?
Manager's motion will be successful? A.
In the vote? That would take place on it.
21
Q. 629
Yes.
22
A.
Because these councillors talked to one another.
23 24
Some councillors would
operate as surrogate lobbiests within their own party -Q. 630
Yes.
A.
-- on behalf of Richard Lynn.
26
Q. 631
Yes.
27
A.
Or Phil Reilly and would talk to other councillors of their acquaintance and
14:32:28 25
28 29 14:32:38 30
say look I'm voting for this. Q. 632
Uh-huh.
A.
This is a matter that would have been discussed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Notwithstanding any evidence
14:32:41
14:33:02
100 1
that you've heard to date.
This would be a matter that would be discussed in
2
party rooms prior to a vote.
3
to get.
4
clear that they were 100 percent in favour of it and there would be councillors
5
who would say well, you know, without reducing matters at absurd -- well if
6
Henry is in favour of that well I'll be in favour of that because I know
7
Henry's judgement in this is good.
As to its status and what support it was going
And the people who would be 100 percent in favour of it would make it
8
Q. 633
Yes.
9
A.
And Henry may well be the local councillor.
Q. 634
All right.
14:33:20 10
11
So obviously, it makes an awful lot of sense.
There are chats
and discussions that go on among the councillors informally?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 635
And on the day there's a meeting, isn't that right? There's a party meeting
14 14:33:34 15
Fianna Fail would have a party meeting? A.
Well just to be absolutely certain about that.
16
Q. 636
Yes.
17
A.
It depends on the particular meeting.
There may not be a meeting on the
18
particular day because there were a succession of meetings.
19
have been a meeting at some stage.
14:33:45 20
Q. 637
All right.
21
A.
Which would discuss various motions which were coming up.
22
Q. 638
Yes.
But there would
And does that mean then that there's a sort of eventually by the time
23
the day of the motion comes up there's a party, a Fianna Fail consensus as to
24
how they vote on a particular motion?
14:34:00 25
A.
There's a Fianna Fail whip.
26
Q. 639
A whip?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 640
All right.
29 14:34:13 30
Now, wait now.
relation to November '93.
I'm just jumping a little bit now, but in Does that mean that on the day then that the Fianna
Fail councillors will all vote the same way? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:34:16
14:34:33
101 1
A.
2
Oh, unless you have a Maverick in the camp or you may have more than one Maverick in the camp.
3
Q. 641
All right.
4
A.
The whip.
5
Q. 642
There is a whip.
6
A.
Well it depends on who the whip was at the particular time.
7
Q. 643
Who was the whip in May '92.
8
A.
Was it GV Wright?
9
Q. 644
I don't know.
14:34:46 10
11
May '92. A.
12 13
And who imposes the whip? The person who is the whip of the group. Who is the whip?
Who was it anyway when you were there -- well you were there in
Who was it when you were there in November '93?
Um, I'm virtually certain it was GV Wright.
I'm not 100 percent about that
now because there was a succession of people. Q. 645
Mr. Wright you think was the whip.
14 14:35:01 15
CHAIRMAN:
16 17
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
I'm just concerned.
Where are you getting
this knowledge? A.
Which knowledge?
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
14:35:10 20
21
I mean, you were never a member of the Fianna Fail party as a
councillor. A.
I was never a member of the Fianna Fail party per se, Chairman.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
councillors as to what went on or what didn't go on at these meetings or
14:35:23 25
28
We've had evidence directly from
whatever there was a whip or the extent of the whip.
26 27
So I'm just wondering.
presumably, just hearsay. A.
Well the -- sorry.
These meetings took place in the upper room in Conways, if
you'll forgive the description.
There was a party room as such.
29 14:35:51 30
But your knowledge is,
CHAIRMAN:
We know that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:35:51
14:35:59
102 1
A.
I was often in Conway's pub while these meetings were going on.
2
they concluded I would be told.
3
now.
4
adopted.
And after
I'm not specifically speaking about this one
But I would be told what had been decided.
What attitude had been
And we're for it or whatever.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
the --
8
All right.
So you didn't have direct knowledge of what went on in
A.
No, I didn't attend these meetings.
Q. 646
MR. MURPHY:
Never attended any such meeting.
9 14:36:09 10
All right.
So we're kind of anticipating November '93 back in
11
March when you are at these meetings with Mr. Lynn and Reilly.
12
that's what's going to happen is on the day.
13
go into the room upstairs in Conways and somebody and they'll agree things and
14
somebody will come out and tell you what's happened?
14:36:27 15
A.
Yeah.
But with respect, Mr. Murphy.
And you know
The Fianna Fail councillors will
You haven't followed through on what I
16
said.
It may not necessarily be that that meeting took place on that day.
17
That meeting could have taken place two days earlier.
18
Q. 647
That doesn't really matter does it?
19
A.
No it doesn't but it is of importance in this sense; that it would have been
14:36:44 20
known therefore maybe a day, two days, a week beforehand what the attitude of
21 22
the Fianna Fail party was going to be. Q. 648
All right.
But what I really want to know is, Mr. Dunlop, if that's the
23
situation -- your target now are these 25 or so Fianna Fail councillors for the
24
next eight months?
14:37:06 25
26
A.
Yeah.
Q. 649
And you know that more than likelihood on the previous practice they'll meet
27
some day or days before the council meeting and they'll agree a strategy which
28
will be which way they're going to vote on the various motions, isn't that
29
right?
14:37:21 30
A.
Correct. Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:37:22
14:37:28
103 1
Q. 650
And you'll be told all of that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 651
All right. Now, I presume a very influential person is the person you are
4
referring to as the whip?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 652
And I understand that Mr. GV Wright has been in evidence here.
I know he has.
7
But he has said that I think he referred to himself as being the leader of the
8
council.
9 14:37:37 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 653
Right.
A.
Yes.
12
And I take it that the leader would be very influential? Sorry.
necessary.
Just I really don't mean to delay this any longer than is But the leader of the group might be something of a figure head.
13
Q. 654
Okay.
14
A.
The whip is the person, what the -- that's why the word is the whip.
14:37:57 15
16
out the whip and he whips them in. Q. 655
17 18
Its like bringing hounds to the hunt.
I thought when I was putting to you about GV Wright being the leader that he was the whip?
A.
19 14:38:15 20
He takes
Whoever is actually the whip who goes out to Conways, who goes out to the hotel next door and says listen lads get in there's a vote on.
Q. 656
Mr. Dunlop, the whip is the important person?
21
A.
The whip is the important man. Yes.
22
Q. 657
Not the leader?
23
A.
Not really.
24
Q. 658
The whip.
14:38:24 25
Would you have known between March and November who the whip would
have been at the November meetings?
26
A.
Oh, yes I would at the time, yes.
27
Q. 659
Who was the whip?
28
A.
As I said to you earlier on, GV Wright's name comes to mind immediately.
29
Q. 660
Oh sorry it's still GV Wright?
A.
Yes.
14:38:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:38:36
14:38:52
104 1
Q. 661
Oh, right.
2
A.
I don't mean to suggest again that there was any further complications.
But
3
the whip -- when you are a whip at one particular time doesn't mean that you
4
stay whip all of the time.
5
years.
For example, Pat Dunne was the whip for years and
6
Q. 662
I'm only talking about '93?
7
A.
Exactly.
But it changes.
8
Q. 663
Uh-huh.
GV was a key person.
9
and Reilly.
14:39:15 10
GV was a key person. Now, Mr. Dunlop, at this meeting with Mr. Lynn
You've told me now when that's over you know, you've got the
Fianna Fail 25 or so councillors to concentrate on.
11
And it seems that the
whip was GV Wright?
12
A.
Subject to correction.
13
Q. 664
Subject to correction.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 665
Now, so they were going to be -- that was your brief then was it for the next
14:39:28 15
16
That's all correct, isn't it?
while then? You were the person going to discuss it with these people?
17
A.
I was going to approach them and talk to them about it.
18
Q. 666
All right.
19
And now the day after your meeting with Mr. Sweeney, for the first
time, you've a clear picture as to how many councillors are involved and how
14:39:53 20
many Fianna Fail people and what your brief is and getting to the heart of it
21
then.
You know roughly how much money you're going to have to spend to turn
22
this around for, on behalf of Monarch, isn't that right?
23
A.
Sorry, at which stage are you? Sorry.
24
Q. 667
This meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 668
You now you've to concentrate on the 25 Fianna Fail councillors?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 669
So you now have fairly good idea.
14:40:14 25
29 14:40:26 30
You must have a fairly good idea as to how
much you're going to have to spend? A.
No, not necessarily. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:40:28
14:40:36
105 1
Q. 670
Why?
2
A.
Because the system was in one sense relatively simple, you approach somebody,
3
councillor.
You talk to him about support or otherwise.
4
Q. 671
Yes.
5
A.
And you wait.
6
Q. 672
Yes.
7
A.
Or you don't wait.
8
Q. 673
Yes.
9
A.
-- inducement --
Q. 674
All right.
A.
Is referred to.
14:40:47 10
11 12 13
You're asked or money is mentioned or some sort of --
And then a discussion takes place or an agreement is made.
And that is when you know. Q. 675
14
All right.
And you had a team of 15 or so I think you said in the teams I
think you said yesterday of councillors to whom over the years of the
14:41:03 15
Development Plan you had paid money?
16
A.
Yes, 10 to 15. Yes.
17
Q. 676
And I think you said you did paid them in a lot of the --
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 677
I don't think you said in all of the developments but a lot of them?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 678
I think you said on other occasions that it was 1,000 or 2,000 pounds each?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 679
Is that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 680
So you paid either 1,000 or 2,000 to them?
A.
Yes.
14:41:12 20
14:41:18 25
26 27
And there were instances earlier than 1993 where other bigger larger
figures were paid.
28
Q. 681
All right.
29
A.
Five and three and ...
Q. 682
All right.
14:41:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:41:30
14:41:46
106 1
A.
And we've gone through that in another module.
2
Q. 683
And you know from your experience.
You could go down the list of those 25
3
councillors and say those people have never asked me before so I can cross them
4
out.
5
calculation in five minutes as to how many councillors are going to ask you for
6
money.
7
whether it's going to be 1,000 or 2,000.
8
were able to make the sums as to how much you're going to have to pay out?
9 14:42:02 10
11
These are the people who always ask me.
So you can make a simple
You are going to pay them, because you have to.
So I suggest to you that evening you
A.
No.
Q. 684
Why not?
A.
Again, going back to what I said to you earlier on.
12
approach.
And you know what,
Is that you make the
You talk to the individual councillor and you wait.
13
Q. 685
You are repeating yourself, Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I know I am because that's the answer to the question.
Q. 686
There's no reason.
16
A.
You've asked the same question again twice.
17
Q. 687
Please tell the intelligent people in this room how on that occasion you, the
14:42:16 15
18
experienced lobbiest, the person who has paid out a fortune, who has got a
19
fortune, huge experience of the Development Plan of all of these meetings and
14:42:34 20
how much has to be paid out, of vital importance has to be to anybody getting a
21
fee to something how much they are going to have to spend.
22
second day.
23
up against.
You have all of the information you need.
It's now the
You know what you're
You must know how much you're likely to spend on councillors.
24 14:42:51 25
For example you have to pay 25 councillors the Fianna Fail fellas and say it's
26
2,000 each you're going to have to spend 50 grand but you know that's never
27
happened.
28
your own family and everything, back then in March 1993, what conclusion you
29
came to about how much this was going to cost you?
14:43:12 30
A.
So please tell me, Mr. Dunlop, looking after your own business and
I've already answered the question.
And let me give you the answer again.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:43:16
14:43:35
107 1
No, in the mechanics of the operation you approached the councillors, you talk
2
to them.
3
in relation to support and by support I mean financial support.
4
discussion takes place, negotiation takes place.
5
Q. 688
6
You seek their support.
And if a discussion is initiated by them Then
Had you ever gone to Mr. Tony Fox, on your evidence, in any other module, in any other development, that he didn't ask you for money?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 689
Of the 25 how many did that apply to?
9
A.
Oh, gosh. Um, um, I would say -- something similar to the answer I gave you
14:43:57 10
yesterday.
10 to 15.
11
Q. 690
In other words, the core of the Fianna Fail councillors who were on your team?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 691
Let's take them at 15 -- let's take 12 for a second.
14 14:44:10 15
It's in the middle is it
between 10 and 15? A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 692
We'll take 12 of the councillors have always asked you to pay?
17
A.
Yes, in a large -- not all -- not always in the same development.
18
Q. 693
Okay.
19
A.
Particularly relating where the development was.
14:44:23 20
21
And the level of lobbying
that you would do with them and what you required them to do. Q. 694
22
I'm not going to ask you just at this moment.
If I put up a list on the board
of 25 councillors?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 695
And we came down to 10 to 15 that are your team?
A.
Yes.
Q. 696
And if we said.
14:44:35 25
26 27
Take just and you're saying that, you know, usually in the
developments they ask for money?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 697
And how many of them would be 1,000 how many of them would be 2,000?
A.
Well, as I said to you earlier there, the vast majority of them are in the
14:44:49 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:44:54
14:45:04
108 1
region of 1,000 it to 2,000.
2
Q. 698
All right.
3
A.
There were instances where five was paid and instances where three was paid.
4
Q. 699
For going to just for convenience leave that out for a second. I'm going to
5
leave that out and take it at 1,500 as an average between the 1,000 and 2 down.
6
A.
Right.
7
Q. 700
1,500 Mr. Dunlop.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, this is me knowing nothing about this and
8
not having any interest in your financial affairs.
9
very few minutes how much you're bribing of these councillors is going to cost
14:45:23 10
in March '93.
And it's going to be an average of 1,500, because it's either
11
1,000 or 2,000.
12
Because that's the outer.
13
highest number of your team.
14
and a half.
14:45:53 15
Working out with you in a
So it's 1,500.
And we're going to take 15 councillors.
That's the highest.
That's the most -- that's the
All right? So that's 15 councillors.
I make that 22,500.
councillors to ask you for money.
15,000
You would normally expect 15 of these 25 You would normally give it to them.
You
16
would be giving them 1,000 or 2000 so that this development is going to cost
17
you in or around 22,500.
Is that right?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 701
No.
A.
I would not have made that calculation.
14:46:11 20
21 22
to you in relation to approaching them. Q. 702
23 24
I'm going back again to what I said
Please don't repeat for the sixth time the nonsense that you gave me as an answer ago a moment ago?
A.
Mr. Murphy --
14:46:24 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry.
Don't.
28 29 14:46:30 30
CHAIRMAN:
Wait now.
Could we just stop there.
Could Mr. Dunlop tell us in
relation to Monarch how he went about, assuming he did, how you went about Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:46:38
14:46:47
109 1
assessing the numbers of councillors that you might have to pay or would have
2
to pay and what sort of money might be involved.
3
A.
Right.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
decide --
7
A.
And then if we could go from there to the point where you actually
Yes.
8 9
CHAIRMAN -- who you are going to pay and then tell us how you went about that
14:46:57 10
11
and who said what to whom. A.
Yes.
Right.
That's relatively simple, Chairman.
12
I knew that I was going to be asked for money by some people, whether it was
13
going to be 10, 15, 1 or 2.
14
calculation.
14:47:18 15
I did not know.
So therefore I could not make a
As I said to Mr. Murphy, it depended on the actual interface
with councillors, individual councillors.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Just explain then what happened.
Yes.
19 14:47:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
How that came about then that interface?
With a councillor.
Well we're moving forward fairly rapidly as to the number
22
of councillors that I spoke to, which would have been the vast majority of the
23
Fianna Fail councillors on the council at the time and talked to them.
24
them know that I was involved.
14:47:48 25
Now involved with Monarch.
Let
And that whatever
needed to be done they would support it or continue to support it on the basis
26
that they had supported it heretofore.
27
two people.
In the event I was asked for money by
That, in summary, is what occurred.
28 29 14:48:10 30
Mr. Murphy's point about sitting down and calculating after my meeting with Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Reilly leaves out one key ingredient. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
And that is,
14:48:15
14:48:25
110 1
evidence that I have already given to Mr. Murphy and to the Tribunal.
2
yes, I had a suspicion that some of these people were paid already.
That,
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But you say only two asked for money?
Correct.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
Does that mean the other whatever number it is --
Didn't.
9 14:48:30 10
11
CHAIRMAN -- didn't ask for money? A.
Correct.
Only two asked and the others didn't.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
All right.
Go on.
Is that okay?
14:48:38 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
So what happened then?
Well then I agreed with the two.
I had a discussion with the two.
18
being Tony Fox and Colm McGrath.
19
a comment in relation to Monarch to the effect that they were pretty mean.
14:49:02 20
I had a discussion with them.
The two Mr. Fox made
Which I understood to mean that there had been some discussion or negotiation
21
or an attempt by him to get money from Monarch prior to my involvement and that
22
he may have got some.
23
Mr. McGrath's case, Mr. McGrath entered into negotiation and we ended up at
24
two.
But I had no evidence to that effect.
And in
Mr. McGrath was looking for more than what I was prepared to give him.
14:49:29 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Sorry, Mr. Murphy.
27 28
Q. 703
29 14:49:53 30
MR. MURPHY:
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you say you paid these two councillors.
what happened when you went to them and I understand that. A.
Yes, sorry, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That's
14:49:53
14:50:06
111 1
Q. 704
And I understand the situation can change when you go to them.
You are going
2
to lobby the 25 Fianna Fail councillors.
3
your money, maybe less.
4
businessman's mind as to what the expenses will be out of his fee?
5
A.
Uh-huh.
6
Q. 705
And he's on day two.
7
A.
Uh-huh.
8
Q. 706
He knows the picture.
9
A.
Yep.
Q. 707
Page 7263.
11
A.
What's this.
12
Q. 708
I think if I'm right.
14:50:35 10
13 14
Maybe more than your 15 will ask for
All I'm talking about is the calculation in the
Now, could I have, please, page 7263.
I hope I'm right now.
Mr. Dunlop --
The following motion
proposed -- this is November '93 the big meeting. A.
14:50:53 15
This is the motion presented by Councillor Marren to increase the density? Sorry.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
19 14:51:03 20
Yes, it is it is, yes. This is the motion, it was the final motion that opened the door for the higher density, is this correct?
Q. 709
21 22
Yes.
MR. MURPHY:
It's the motion that reversed the Barrett motion.
Is that
right? That's what I'm looking for anyway. A.
I'll give it to you.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:51:12 25
Mr. Murphy, this is the 11th of November.
This the Donal
Marren/Betty Coffey motion.
26 27 28
MR. MURPHY: A.
Yes.
Thank you.
Judge Faherty is right.
It is the motion to delete change three.
29 14:51:20 30
MR. MURPHY:
All right. That's enough.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:51:21
14:51:36
112 1
A.
And restore the high density that the Manager was requesting.
2
Q. 710
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 711
In November '93 and as a result of that, we are now back in a situation.
5 A.
Yes.
7
Q. 712
Right.
8
14:51:50 10
It's
successful Monarch and it's 44 -- it's four houses per acre?
6
9
This motion is passed 44 to 27.
So now this is -- this is the high point.
passed we're very happy.
I mean, when this is
Isn't that right?
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 713
Now, just as quickly as you can, Mr. Dunlop.
I want you to look at those, the
11
names of those who voted for.
12
And I want you to call out only the names of the Fianna Fail councillors, the
13
15 or so on your team.
14 14:52:14 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 714
Now, just go through it.
16 17 18
The 44 is for, isn't it? The 44 who voted for.
Okay. Start with S Ardagh, go on to C Boland.
Go through
each line as quickly as you can. A.
Well, Ardagh is Fianna Fail; the answer is no. Cathal Boland is --
19 14:52:22 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
I'm just concerned.
We're concerned about the term "team".
mean, when you say" team" you're talking about Mr. Dunlop's team.
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
24 14:52:33 25
CHAIRMAN:
Just what do you mean to suggest, Mr. Dunlop, by that term?
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
This is the core team.
This is his team.
28
Fianna Fail 25 or so Fianna Fail County Councillors to whom regularly in
29
developments, Mr. Dunlop has paid money.
14:52:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Core team of the
I
14:52:51
14:53:00
113 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 715
MR. MURPHY:
4
A.
Okay.
5
All right.
That's fine.
Clear? Yes.
Ardagh Fianna Fail.
Cathal Boland Fine Gael.
No.
No.
6
Q. 716
Don't bother reading.
7
A.
Sorry I thought you meant go through each of them individually.
8 9
that.
Pick a team?
A.
T Cosgrave.
11
Q. 718
What line is Fox on?
12
A.
Three.
13
Q. 719
Three.
14
A.
Cyril Gallagher.
Q. 720
Sorry.
14:53:33 15
16
Tony Fox.
Thank you.
Cyril Gallagher.
Oh, yes.
Sean Gilbride.
Thank you. Tom Hand.
I haven't marked any of those.
Fianna Fail.
Fox is the only one I've taken.
A.
Do you want all of the team or just the Fianna Fail team.
18
Q. 721
Fianna Fail team?
19
A.
Okay.
Q. 722
Oh wait now Mr. Dunlop for one second.
Let's start again. A early when we were talking about the
21
meeting of the 9th of March between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
22
there was a Fianna Fail team?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 723
Are there others?
A.
As per --
26
Q. 724
Don't mind --
27
A.
No, no, the Chairman asked you a question.
14:53:58 25
Are
you calling those names out as people of your team?
17
14:53:48 20
You said
Sorry.
Q. 717
14:53:14 10
Just go along until you find one of your team?
I understood
28 29 14:54:07 30
CHAIRMAN:
I just want us all to understand what is meant by the term "team".
There's a Fianna Fail party. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:54:09
14:54:18
114 1
A.
Yes.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Now, when you say "team".
Sorry, Chairman.
Mr. Murphy is the man who mentioned team.
My understanding
5
of what Mr. Murphy mentioned by team is the people right across the political
6
divide to whom I ever gave money in support of their vote or whom --
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who you would normally approach.
Correct.
14:54:29 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13 14
Correct.
And you might end up giving them money or not giving them money.
That includes people outside of Fianna Fail.
That's why I began
the way I did. So, Mr. Murphy, do you want me to stick to the -Q. 725
14:54:47 15
MR. MURPHY:
No, I don't, Mr. Dunlop, because for one second I'm going to
divide it up.
16
A.
Good.
17
Q. 726
Because when I was asking you earlier.
What I put to you was out of the 70 or
18
so councillors as a result of the disaster in 1991 it came to 25 or so Fianna
19
Fail councillors.
14:54:59 20
around 15.
21 22
Of which you had a Fianna Fail councillor team of in or
Now, that's what I understood.
And I believe you understood me.
Do you understand it now? A.
No, I don't understand it now.
I do understand it now.
23
trying to be obstreperous or anything like that.
24
to councillors you asked me the other day.
14:55:23 25
councillors to whom I paid money.
But and I'm not
When you mentioned payments
I said 10 to 15 people,
They were right across the board.
26
want me to specifically deal with Fianna Fail ones, which I will do now.
27
then if you want me to deal with others.
28
Q. 727
No, I don't, Mr. Dunlop, because I can make it simpler.
29
A.
Okay.
Q. 728
Because at the meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
14:55:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
If you And
You leave that meeting.
14:55:41
14:55:50
115 1
Your brief is to persuade the Fianna Fail councillors.
2
A.
All right.
3
Q. 729
Everybody else is left to somebody else?
4
A.
Forget everyone else except Fianna Fail.
5
Q. 730
Brilliant.
6
A.
And deal only with those people in Fianna Fail that I ever gave money to and I
7 8 9
expected that I might need to pay money to. Q. 731
Just one second.
Does that mean the team that I am referring to which is
councillors --
14:56:02 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
There is one thing.
We don't want people named who have no idea
12
that they are going to be named or haven't been named.
13 14
MR. MURPHY:
No. I understand that these are on the witness list.
I hope.
14:56:13 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Well we don't know.
17 18
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
19 14:56:18 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Isn't it simpler to approach it on the basis of who he had in mind
in relation to Monarch?
22 23
MR. MURPHY:
That is what I'm talking about, Chairman.
Yeah.
24 14:56:29 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
26 27
MR. MURPHY:
28
all right.
Chairman, sorry.
If I put the question to you to see if it's
29 14:56:35 30
Excuse me.
I want to ask Mr. Dunlop.
I'm talking about his team.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I'm not
14:56:41
14:56:56
116 1
talking about the party.
I'm talking about the Fianna Fail councillors who,
2
to whom he has paid money regularly.
3 4
And I understood that was 15 or so councillors.
5
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
6 7
MR. MURPHY:
In other words, 15 or so Fianna Fail councillors to whom he
8
regularly paid money.
9 14:57:04 10
CHAIRMAN:
No, I don't think so.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
questioning was arising from the 9th of March, as I understand it, the meeting.
14
And the discussions held with Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn.
14:57:19 15
I think in fairness, Mr. Murphy.
In response, all of your
And Mr. Dunlop has
said here and in fairness to yourself that his brief, if you like, was to go
16
out and deal with Fianna Fail County Councillors.
But in the course of those
17
answers he gave an answer to you.
18
the course of the Development Plan 10 to 15 County Councillors.
And my own note said that he had paid over
19 14:57:37 20
MR. MURPHY:
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Though he didn't specifically designate those as being all
23
Fianna Fail County Councillors.
24
have arisen as a result.
And I think that's where some confusion might
14:57:46 25
26
MR. MURPHY:
That's my mistake.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
as a result.
14:57:52 30
A.
Is that -- I think in fairness, some confusion may have arisen
That's correct, absolutely correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:57:53
14:58:13
117 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
Well a solution might be if Mr. Dunlop looks at the list and
3
identifies those who he says he approached seeking support in relation to
4
Monarch.
5
any of the councillors you can name in those circumstances.
And, I mean, there's no ... I mean, there's no shame involved for
6 7
Q. 732
MR. MURPHY:
8
A.
Yes.
9 14:58:33 10
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop, could you answer the Chairman then?
Could I make a suggestion to you.
speed is.
The Chairman, again, for ease of
My answer, if I was responsible for the totality of the Fianna Fail
team, to use Mr. Murphy's phrase, or the Fianna Fail Party, the Fianna Fail
11
members of the council, that would mean from the outset, from the meeting with
12
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, that I would go to virtually all of those and as I
13
said this morning, there was an agreement between Mr. Lynn and myself and
14
Mr. Reilly that he would keep up the link with Don Lydon because he had that
14:58:59 15
relationship.
Don Lydon is Fianna Fail.
That does not necessarily mean that
16
I would not have had a chat with Don Lydon about Cherrywood.
17
be stupid to suggest otherwise.
Because it would
18 19 14:59:24 20
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Mr. Chairman, if I may -- Gerard Humphreys on behalf of
Senator Lydon.
21 22
With respect, I would request that the question that is asked be more specific.
23
Because to group people into a team in a situation like this where it would be
24
some days or weeks before we get an opportunity to clarify it.
14:59:29 25
cause further damage, particularly to members of the Oireachtas.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We're going to drop the term "team".
28 29
Will only
MR. HUMPHREYS:
Please.
14:59:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
14:59:37
14:59:46
118 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
Fianna Fail connection or to deal with the Fianna Fail councillors?
3
A.
No.
Sorry.
Can you -- you say that you were engaged really because of your
I see the point you're making, yes.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
Can you identified the ones that you did not approach in any shape or form
7
seeking support? No mention of money now.
8
A.
Can you -- of all of the Fianna Fail councillors that were there.
Okay.
9 14:59:57 10
CHAIRMAN:
11 12
Can you identify the ones, if there are any, of the Fianna Fail
councillors who you did not approach seeking support from Monarch? A.
Okay.
I think Chairman, it's because of the World Cup that we've got involved
13
in this, Mr. Murphy, the word "team".
14
not approach him.
15:00:22 15
Q. 733
No.
Sean Ardagh, I don't think so. I did
Betty Coffey.
Yes.
Who are you talking to?
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Ardagh you said no. No.
Yes.
18 19 15:00:28 20
Q. 734
MR. MURPHY:
You dropped your voice?
A.
Oh sorry, I dropped my voice.
I beg your pardon. No.
Right, let's start again.
21
Sean Ardagh who is Fianna Fail.
In other words, when I say no I mean I
22
did not approach him or lobby him in relation to the Monarch property.
23 24 15:00:43 25
Um, Seamus Brock.
No.
Q. 735
What about Boland and Brady?
26
A.
They are Fine Gael.
27
Q. 736
Oh yes.
28
A.
Oh, Mr. Murphy, please.
Sorry.
29 15:00:50 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Dunlop, there's no need for that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Mr. Dunlop, if you go
15:00:54
15:01:03
119 1
through the list identifying those in Fianna Fail who you did not contact in
2
relation to or lobby.
3
A.
Well Chairman, with respect that is what I am trying to do.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
7
That's history now.
Sean Ardagh, no. Hanrahan.
Start again.
Seamus Brock, no.
Mr. Ardagh.
Hannon, no.
Sorry that's the wrong
What's his first name?
8 9 15:01:33 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Who are you talking about?
Hanrahan, no.
11 12
MR. MURPHY:
13
A.
Is this?
14
Q. 737
MR. MURPHY:
Hanrahan?
What about Mr. Fox and?
15:01:42 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
No.
These are ones he didn't contact.
Mr. Chairman, can I please.
This is like driving me crazy.
18 19
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman.
15:01:51 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Let's.
You said Mr. Hanrahan.
Go on.
Starting from the beginning.
23 24 15:01:59 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
26
No, no, no we won't start from the beginning.
Are you asking me Chairman to name those people who I did not approach in Fianna Fail.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And start with Mr. Hanrahan
That was my understanding.
15:02:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:02:08
15:02:15
120 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Now, who is the next?
Mr. Murphy, don't interrupt me now.
3 4 5
A.
CHAIRMAN:
Wait now, Mr. Dunlop.
Ardagh, no.
Brock, no.
CHAIRMAN:
And are you saying of all of the others there, you did --
Hannon, no.
Hanrahan, no.
That's it.
6 7 8
A.
I made some -- I made some contact.
I made some approaches to them.
9 15:03:02 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
On the basis of my involvement.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
lobby?
15:03:09 15
A.
And the non-fianna Fail members.
You named those that you did
That I did lobby.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
19
Right.
Okay.
Anne Devitt.
15:04:08 20
The non-fianna Fail members that you did lobby.
Mary Elliott.
Therese Ridge.
Tom Hand.
Olivia Mitchell.
John O'Halloran.
I think that's it.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
are the against --
24
A.
All right.
Could you go to the next page then.
7264.
These
Yes.
15:04:19 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN -- are there any there that you did make contact with from any party? A.
From any party?
28 29 15:04:26 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Right.
Okay.
Yes. Um.
Sean Barrett.
Larry Butler.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
No, not Eamonn Gilmore.
15:04:43
15:05:08
121 1
Stanley Lydon.
Who is that sorry? No.
Pat Rabbitte, definitely not.
2 3 4
A.
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry?
Um, Shatter.
No.
That's it.
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And of that group, two you say asked for money?
Yes.
8 9 15:05:20 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
That's -- and they are who?
Fox and McGrath.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
13 14
Q. 738
15:05:43 15
MR. MURPHY:
Does going through that list help you as to what might have been
in your mind as to how much it would have cost you back on the 9th of March,
16
Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
Not particularly.
18
Q. 739
No.
19 15:06:21 20
Mr. Dunlop, did somebody come back to you at some stage about Mr.
Monahan? A.
21
About Mr. Monahan? Um, in relation to? I presume you mean in relation to the role he was playing that nobody could identify or control.
22
Q. 740
Correct.
23
A.
Correct.
24
No.
But as is evident from my statement and from the level of
diary references in relation to meetings with Monarch.
15:06:49 25
Mr. Monahan attended at least one.
As I have said
But nobody else came back to me in
26
relation to what -- other than -- other than ongoing comments which continued
27
on for quite a period.
28
Q. 741
All right.
29
A.
As to, you know, we hope Phil doesn't --
Q. 742
Rock the boat?
15:07:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:07:09
15:07:25
122 1
A.
Well it was a little more graphic than that.
2
Q. 743
Right. Okay. So.
So I think then probably what's happening is that there
3
isn't a quick resolution of that problem.
4
November '93 at the same time as you're doing your job?
5
A.
6 7
So that's travelling towards
Yes, I don't think there was ever a resolution of that problem if I hasten to add, Mr. Murphy.
Q. 744
Okay.
I take it at some stage it was resolved to the stage that the united
8
front was finalised and you were able to present to the councillors that
9
Monarch would be satisfied by four houses to the acre?
15:07:42 10
A.
11
Yes.
I think, I think that the role of Liam Lawlor and his relationship with
Philip Monahan had some calming effect on Mr. Monahan.
12
Q. 745
Yes.
13
A.
Oh, yes, I did.
14 15:08:04 15
Did you ever discuss this with Mr. Lawlor? Mr. Lawlor was at a number of, quite a number of meetings at
which other members of Monarch were present. Q. 746
All right.
So at some point.
16
November '93.
17
four houses per acre.
I take it getting close to the date in
Monarch had a united front, an agreement in relation to the Is that right?
18
A.
Yes, I would say.
19
Q. 747
Well, for example, presumably, these councillors who were very concerned were
15:08:23 20
Yes, I would say so, yes.
asking you when you were lobbying them well what does Monarch want?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 748
Were you saying that you'd be happy with four houses per acre?
23
A.
We'd be happy with what the original had been had this hiatus not occurred.
24
Sorry, I would never have used the word hiatus.
15:08:44 25
happened.
26
Q. 749
That's four houses to the acre?
27
A.
Whatever increased density could be achieved.
28
Q. 750
Okay.
29
A.
Plus other --
Q. 751
Yeah.
15:08:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That this trauma never had
15:08:53
15:09:12
123 1
A.
-- what, I described before lunch as inducements, like a district centre.
2
Q. 752
I'm not sure if I'm correct in this but I'm going to take you, Mr. Dunlop, as
3
agreeing that some time before the date of the meeting in November '93 the
4
Monarch got its act together.
5
say to them, councillors, who would be interested in the difficulty, that
6
Monarch knows what it wants and look, we're really trying to get four per acre
7
you know and we'll be happy with that.
You and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly were able to
8
A.
Something along those lines, yes.
9
Q. 753
Now, so eventually that gets resolved anyway to some extent, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 754
All right.
12
A.
No, I won't make any comment here.
13
Q. 755
Now, at the same time, your lobbying is going on.
15:09:33 10
14
swing the people who voted.
15:09:49 15
to me.
The crucial thing is to
Sorry, it's to hold on to as you rightly point on
It's to hold on to the 27.
I'm on the wrong motion.
It's to hold
16
on to the people who voted against Mr. Barrett's motion in May 1992 and
17
convince the people who voted for Mr. Barrett's motion to come on your side.
18
That's the job.
19
A.
15:10:15 20
Well the job is to use what's on the record, which is one per acre, as to open the door to get the increased density.
So whoever voted whichever way --
21
Q. 756
Yes.
22
A.
-- whoever is doubtful, for whatever reasons, local, political or otherwise.
23
Look it, we can assure you that you're going to get a district centre or we are
24
going to assure you that you'll get a science park or we'll assure you that
15:10:34 25
26
you'll get X Y or Z, whatever is required to make them less unhappy. Q. 757
27
Yeah. Mr. Dunlop, in November '93 the motion to confirm Mr. Barrett's motion failed.
28
A.
Yes, that is correct -- wait now.
29
Q. 758
How do you keep having to look at this every time, Mr. Dunlop?
15:10:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:10:55
15:11:09
124 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well he has to --
Mr. Murphy, with the greatest of respect you have fall fallen into the trap a
3
couple of times.
4
not --
5
CHAIRMAN:
6
A.
Chairman, I do apologise. circumstances.
8
Barrett's motion.
15:11:26 10
11
13
Now, sorry, Mr. Murphy.
You did say what in relation to Sean
Sean Barrett's motion --
I wasn't talking about that at all?
A.
All right.
Q. 760
I was asking that in relation to a motion in November '93 reversed Mr. Barrett's motion.
A.
14 15:11:36 15
It's very difficult to carry on in these
Q. 759
12
I'm
Witnesses are entitled to look at.
7
9
So try not to get me into the trap as well with you.
Yes.
To de -- yes, that's correct.
A motion in the name of Marren and
Coffey? Q. 761
I don't want any information on it.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 762
And then in fact at that point we go back to the 1991 draft plan and it would
18 19
Isn't that right?
mean four houses per acre? A.
Yes.
Q. 763
If there was no further motions?
21
A.
If there was no further motion.
22
Q. 764
And in fact, what happens is another motion comes in which reduces what would
15:11:47 20
23 24 15:12:00 25
otherwise have happened four houses per acre to the Monarch lands? A.
Yes.
Q. 765
And it makes Monarch lands four houses per acre and the rest one house per
26
acre?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 766
So that final motion is an exclusively pro-Monarch victory?
29
A.
Yes, it is.
Q. 767
Now, all I want -- that's fine.
15:12:16 30
Now, all I want to do, Mr. Dunlop, just for a
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:12:21
15:12:34
125 1
second is.
You had to -- that was your goal.
2
you wanted to achieve that.
3
of Mr. Barrett's motion, isn't that right?
And between March and November
In particular you wanted to achieve the reversal
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 768
And to do that you have to talk to -- your brief was to talk to the Fianna Fail
6
councillors.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 769
And your important person was Mr. Wright because he was the leader.
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 770
Or the whip.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 771
Now, after your meeting with Mr. Lynn and Reilly did you then go and meet
15:12:43 10
13
Mr. Wright? Or what did you do, Mr. Dunlop?
14
the steps you took vis-a-vis the councillors to get the success you achieved in
15:12:58 15
16
November '93? A.
17
Yes.
Well in summary form.
I would have either made direct contact, rang
them up --
18
Q. 772
Please don't say "would have."
19
A.
Sorry.
15:13:14 20
21
Did ring them up, arrange to meet them.
Q. 773
Mr. Dunlop, who was the first councillor.
A.
Can't tell you that.
24
Q. 774
No idea?
A.
Can't tell you that.
26
Q. 775
All right.
27
A.
I would like to but you can't.
28
Q. 776
Was there a group of them.
15:13:34 30
The first Fianna Fail councillor
that you rang after the 9th of March to discuss Cherrywood with?
23
29
Met them in the council
with --
22
15:13:24 25
You take the Tribunal back to
Would there have been maybe it's difficult to say
whether it was Mr. Fox or Mr. Wright.
Would there have been -- can you give
me your top? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:13:35
15:13:41
126 1
A.
Sorry.
2
Q. 777
Top three?
3
A.
Well if you're ... top three.
4
Q. 778
Well whatever the appropriate number is?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Well.
Certainly.
Gallagher.
Tony Fox, Colm McGrath, Sean Gilbride, Cyril
People of that nature.
7
Q. 779
All right.
8
A.
Who had -- with whom I had regular contact.
9
Q. 780
All right.
15:13:59 10
have waited until the summer, maybe you were busy with some other project or
11 12
what? A.
13 14
And would you say you approached those in March '93 or would you
No, I can't say that I approached them in March '93 but can I say to you that very shortly after my appointment by Monarch.
Q. 781
Yes.
A.
And after my meeting with --
16
Q. 782
Yeah.
17
A.
-- Richard Lynn and Phil it became known.
18
Q. 783
Yeah.
19
A.
That I had become involved.
15:14:11 15
15:14:21 20
21
afternoon. Q. 784
Yes.
And as I have already said to you earlier in the
At least one person expressed satisfaction.
That's great.
Does that mean that you didn't approach them.
They
22
came to you is that what it was when you say it became known immediately.
23
Maybe they queued up to you looking for the money?
24
A.
15:14:39 25
No, no, no.
You have an extraordinary ability to look at things from another
perspective.
26
Phil.
But no, what happened was I was appointed.
Richard and Phil agreed a broad strategy as to who should do what.
27
Q. 785
We know that.
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 786
Answer the question, Mr. Dunlop.
A.
Right.
15:14:53 30
I met Richard and
It was -- it was virtually immediately known. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:14:59
15:15:03
127 1
Q. 787
We've had that.
2
A.
That I was on board.
3
Q. 788
We've had that?
4
A.
Right.
5
Q. 789
Mr. Dunlop, when did you approximately approach your top few.
6
You've named
off a list of a few of them?
7
A.
I would say within a week or ten days.
8
Q. 790
All right.
9
Mr. Dunlop, will you please tell me for a moment, at what point
you decided 25,000 wasn't enough and you wanted to go back to Mr. Sweeney to
15:15:21 10
get an extra whatever it was, 15?
11
A.
Um, that I cannot tell you specifically.
12
Q. 791
Well now you've got to, Mr. Dunlop, because what's happening now is you've
13 14 15:15:34 15
agreed 25,000 -A.
Yeah.
Q. 792
-- in March.
16
You now know everything about it.
You know now all you have to
do is to talk to at most the 25 Fianna Fail councillors?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 793
And this is the job you've done in a number of other developments.
19
know -- it's not an enormous job.
15:16:00 20
These are people.
paid money on previous occasions?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 794
So it doesn't seem to me that it's now a very big job.
24
26
29 15:16:34 30
So if you go back to
Mr. Sweeney in, whenever it was, a month or two? A.
Yeah.
Q. 795
To give this extra money.
27 28
You have -- we're not
allowed to use the word "team", but within the 25 there's a core to whom you've
21
15:16:17 25
So you
It was either because it was going to cost you more
money or the job was a much bigger job than you anticipated. A.
Well, it's certainly not the latter. latter.
In the sense that -- I shouldn't say the
Not in sense that it was going to cost me more money.
As I said to
you yesterday, that it was more complicated than we thought at initial stages Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:16:40
15:16:54
128 1
because of the -- the um, um, um, what's the word.
2
Q. 796
Well, with Mr. Monahan.
3
A.
Yes, and the disaffection that there was amongst certain parties in the
4 5
council. Q. 797
I understand that.
You are not going to be doing anything with Mr. Monahan.
6
You may have to do a little bit more convincing of people, of councillors that
7
Mr. Monahan is on side.
So it might mean a few more meetings or a bit more
8
persuasion or whatever.
But I cannot for the life of me, see how that means
9
suddenly in May, April or May you need another 15,000.
15:17:16 10
the end of the year you need more.
And then come towards
At the end of the day you need 25,000 has
11
to go up to 80,000.
12
in this brief over these eight months that meant that 25,000 should go to
13
85,000?
14
A.
15:17:35 15
Would you please explain to the three judges what it was
Yes well I think I answered that yesterday in relation to another question. Was two things.
One the difficulties that have arisen in relation to support
16
among various councillors.
17
that if this was successful this was going to be of major benefit to Monarch.
18
And that I should have part of the success.
19
Q. 798
15:18:03 20
21
And at what had happened from the May 1992.
Tell us as much as you know, Mr. Dunlop, about your meeting with Mr. Fox for the purpose of obtaining his support for the motion?
A.
Yes.
Well I met Mr. Fox regularly.
I cannot say specifically that I met him
22
in a specific location in relation to this particular development.
23
approached him.
24 15:18:25 25
I
Q. 799
You don't know where?
A.
The likelihood is it was in the council because I had arrangements with Mr. Fox
26 27
And
to meet him in a variety of locations. Q. 800
When you say in the council.
When would the date of that -- would that be
28
around the time of the meeting in November '93 or would it be in May 93 I don't
29
know?
15:18:42 30
A.
No, no, no.
What I said to you earlier on is that I would have begun to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:18:48
15:18:59
129 1
approach councillors within a week or ten days.
2
Q. 801
All right.
3
A.
So the likelihood is.
4
I'm not putting it any stronger than that.
That I
would have been in touch with Tony Fox and the other people that I have named.
5
Q. 802
Yes.
6
A.
Very early on.
7
Q. 803
Now, Mr. Dunlop, you must have, I suggest to you, a clear recollection of
8 9 15:19:10 10
Mr. Fox because he was very much on your books, isn't that right? A.
Oh, yes, he was, yes.
Q. 804
And you knew him very well from a business point of view, from these meetings,
11
the council and the developments and so on, isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 805
And you paid him on a number of occasions?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 806
And you knew at this stage when you went to meet him for the first time that he
15:19:21 15
16
was one of the people holding out for the higher density I think, isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
19
Yes.
His attitude -- his attitude was, as I think I said yesterday, not
aggressive but, I mean, he would be for going for the whole hog, whatever the
15:19:43 20
whole hog has to be.
21
Q. 807
Like Mr. Monahan?
22
A.
Yes, and Mr. McGrath.
23
Q. 808
Yes.
24
A.
Both of them.
Q. 809
Now, you must have a clear recollection of having a chat with him?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 810
When these difficulties would be exchanged and you'd be trying to reassure him
15:19:48 25
28
over the months and so on over Mr. Monahan's position.
29
well, you know, you knew this person.
15:20:08 30
And you must remember
You knew how easily he would likely to
come on side in different developments and so on? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:20:11
15:20:30
130 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 811
And so how can you not remember where it was, the meeting about Cherrywood to
3 4
persuade Mr. Fox to agree to the more modest density? A.
5
Well, hardly a week passed that I would not have discussed matters with Tony Fox.
6
Q. 812
All right.
7
A.
And, you know, you have summer months. As I said to you already, that within a
8
week or ten days I would have begun the process.
9
parallel it was known or became known via others that I was involved.
15:20:43 10
Q. 813
All right.
11
A.
So I would have been in touch with Tony Fox.
12
Q. 814
Yeah.
13
A.
At a relatively early stage after.
14
Q. 815
All right.
A.
The --
16
Q. 816
You met him anyway on some occasion?
17
A.
Yeah, can we.
18
Q. 817
We don't know where and we don't?
19
A.
Can we take a break.
Q. 818
Sorry.
A.
Just two minutes.
15:20:51 15
15:20:59 20
21
Contemporaneously and in
Could we break, Chairman?
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
24 15:21:18 25
26
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I wonder, Sir, before Mr. Murphy resumes with Mr. Dunlop.
29 15:29:12 30
Just for housekeeping purposes.
Could I indicate something that I've just
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:29:17
15:29:27
131 1
been told very shortly.
Mr. Dunlop is not available to the Tribunal
2
Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of next week.
3 4
It's likely that Mr. Murphy will go through I'd say until the close of business
5
this evening.
6
behind me that there's at least a day if not two days in the cross-examination
7
of Mr. Dunlop.
And it would also appear likely from my colleague sitting
8 9 15:29:39 10
If Mr. Murphy were to conclude this evening, Tuesday would be available for cross-examination.
But I understand that one of my colleagues who, based on
11
the predictions we have been making, has taken up other commitments for next
12
week and wishes to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
13 14 15:29:55 15
16
So there will have to be some adjustments made to the schedule in relation to that.
Because it doesn't look like that it's now going to be possible to
conclude Mr. Dunlop's evidence in a piece, as it were.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Well is it suggested that Mr. Dunlop would spend Tuesday here being
19
cross-examined?
15:30:08 20
21
MS. DILLON:
By whoever is available to cross-examine him.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
future.
And then, yes, he would return on some date to be agreed in the
15:30:17 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I'm not suggesting anything.
27
so that my colleagues behind me who don't know it would have an opportunity to
28
consider it because they may wish to say something to the Tribunal about it
29
maybe at the close of business this evening.
15:30:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
I'm really just telling you this
15:30:28
15:30:35
132 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
Dunlop.
All right. Well we will try and facilitate everyone, including Mr.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Yes. May it please you, Sir.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
So we'll deal with it at four o'clock.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
MR. MURPHY:
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Fox.
9 15:30:47 10
Q. 819
No.
Okay.
You don't know where you met
11
him and you don't know the date.
12
remember having a chat with him about this matter and about the difficulties on
13
both sides?
14
Just but tell us about -- I mean, but do you
A.
Yes, I do.
Q. 820
And at what stage, how long was that chat?
16
A.
15 minutes.
17
Q. 821
And at what stage did he say something about money?
18
A.
Fairly soon after the conversation began and he identified me as the person
15:31:09 15
19 15:31:25 20
operating for Monarch. Q. 822
And it was no surprise to you that he was going to be looking for money?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 823
What did he look for?
23
A.
Um, he said I'll have to be -- you'll have to give me something for this and I
24
said fine what did he want and he said what are you offering and I offered him
15:31:41 25
2,000 and he said grand.
26
Q. 824
Was that before or after Mr. McGrath?
27
A.
That was before Mr. McGrath.
28
Q. 825
And would you remember if you went, approached any other councillor first for
29 15:31:55 30
their support before you agreed to pay Mr. Fox 2,000? A.
It is likely that I did again in the circumstances of meetings in Dublin County Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:32:00
15:32:30
133 1
Council.
It is likely that I did have discussions with others before Mr. Fox.
2
Q. 826
Was Mr. Fox one of the main people to go and to get on side?
3
A.
Well Mr. Fox, yes.
And can I just again for the purposes of clarification.
4
When Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn, sorry, we're all getting tired.
When Mr. Lynn
5
and Mr. Reilly and myself discussed who would look after what allocation of
6
councillors, reference was made to the support that would come from --
7
Q. 827
Yeah.
8
A.
-- reference was made to the support, the strong support that would be coming
9 15:32:51 10
from various councillors. Q. 828
Yes.
11
A.
Well Mr. Fox -- Mr. Fox had been lobbied.
12
Q. 829
Yes.
13
A.
By Mr.--
14
Q. 830
Yes?
A.
By Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
16
Q. 831
And you'd have a high suspicion that he was paid by them?
17
A.
Well I would have had some suspicion from the remark that he passed to me that
15:33:07 15
18 19 15:33:20 20
Was Mr. Fox an important person to get behind this?
I've already -Q. 832
That Mr. Lynn passed?
A.
No, no, no that Mr. Fox passed.
21
That I alluded to when I was answering the
Chairman.
22
Q. 833
Yes.
23
A.
In relation to, you know, that they were pretty mean.
24
Q. 834
Yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 835
Why would it be necessary to pay him money then, I mean he voted against
15:33:32 25
26
All right.
Mr. Fox had voted against Mr. Barrett's motion.
27
Mr. Barrett's motion and you you are now wondering, you are now hoping that
28
he'll stay on side and discussing it with him and presumably tactics.
29
did you not --
15:33:48 30
A.
And why
Because that's not what Monarch wanted -- was one house to the acre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:33:53
15:34:04
134 1
Q. 836
Mr. Fox voted against that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 837
Yes.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 838
Doesn't matter along with anything.
6
A.
Along with a lot of others.
7
Q. 839
Just stay with this now for a send precisely?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 840
Mr. Fox is a king pin as far as you're concerned?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 841
He has voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 842
You have a high suspicion he was paid and probably handsomely by Monarch?
14
A.
That is not something I can say.
Q. 843
You have a high suspicion that he was paid by Monarch?
16
A.
I have a suspicion, yes.
17
Q. 844
Now, he asked you for money?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 845
I mean, why do you even approach him?
A.
He is, from experience, dealing with Tony Fox, he is relatively important in
15:34:13 10
15:34:24 15
15:34:36 20
If you -- Mr. Fox voted against Sean Barrett's motion.
Along with, where is --
He's on side.
21
the context of, and I've already given evidence in another module in which he
22
has said that, you know, not that he controls other people but that he would
23
speak to other people within the --
24
Q. 846
All right.
A.
He never made that clear.
26
Q. 847
All right.
27
A.
Yes, I did.
28
Q. 848
When?
29
A.
After the vote in November.
Q. 849
After the vote in November.
15:34:56 25
15:35:05 30
Who was he going to speak to that would help?
And did you pay him 2,000?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:35:06
15:35:10
135 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 850
Not before?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 851
I thought they always insisted on it before?
5
A.
They didn't always insist on it.
6
Q. 852
Did Mr. Fox not always get paid before?
7
A.
Yes, sometimes he did.
8
Q. 853
So you paid him afterwards?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 854
When, where?
A.
As I said in my statement I paid one of the locations, I cannot specifically
15:35:22 10
11 12
tell you which one.
13
him he was paid.
14
Q. 855
15:35:37 15
That's fine.
But when I entered into an agreement with Tony Fox to pay
And so after the vote he's done the business.
honour your side of it.
16
locations.
Sometimes I agreed, sometimes I disagreed.
2,000.
You don't know where.
You are going to
One of the
And did you turn up by appointment to meet him or did you --
17
A.
I would have arranged to meet him, yes.
18
Q. 856
Just to pay him this figure.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 857
Nothing else.
21
A.
A few what, a few councillors?
22
Q. 858
No.
23
A.
No, not in this instance.
24
Q. 859
No. How do you know?
A.
That is how it occurred.
Q. 860
How do you know, Mr. Dunlop? You don't know where, you don't know when.
15:35:47 20
15:35:55 25
26 27
Would there be a few of them together?
A few payments?
do you know in this instance you just paid him a one off?
28
A.
Well an arrangement between us in relation to meeting to make the payment.
29
Q. 861
All right.
A.
So you make the payment.
15:36:09 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
How
15:36:10
15:36:27
136 1
Q. 862
Uh-huh.
And tell us how you paid him?
2
A.
Cash.
3
Q. 863
An envelope or a newspaper?
4
A.
No, not -- not a newspaper.
The likelihood is an envelope but I cannot be
5
absolutely say to you that it was in an envelope.
6
not in a newspaper and not in an envelope.
I've given him money before
7
Q. 864
Right.
8
A.
So I cannot absolutely say to you that it was in an envelope.
9
Q. 865
So it was probably an envelope?
A.
I would -- I would -- for good --
11
Q. 866
Yeah.
12
A.
-- for good presentational reasons I would say it was a good envelope.
13
Q. 867
And tell me this.
14
A.
No, no, no.
15:36:41 10
15:36:58 15
How would you -- where in -- it wasn't in his home was it?
I was only in his home.
I've outlined the number of times I was
in his home in the past.
16
Q. 868
Or his work?
17
A.
Or his work. No.
18
Q. 869
All right.
19
A.
-- on a number of occasions.
Q. 870
No, no, no.
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 871
All right. It was Conways was it or the council building?
23
A.
It could have been any one of the locations that I regularly met him.
24
Q. 872
Okay.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 873
What kind of an envelope?
27
A.
Don't ask me.
28
Q. 874
Well you must have had a supply of them, Mr. Dunlop.
29
A.
Well when people make this -- say this remark to me, of course we had a supply
15:37:04 20
15:37:17 25
15:37:30 30
I did call to his workplace --
You know I'm talking about this occasion?
And you turn up with 2,000 pounds in cash in an envelope?
of envelopes in an office. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:37:33
15:37:53
137 1
Q. 875
Well it wouldn't be much use having a little white one, sure it wouldn't?
2
A.
You mean one with a window or just an ordinary white one?
3
Q. 876
Would it, Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
I don't understand what you mean by --
5 6 7
CHAIRMAN: A.
If it was an envelope, Mr. Dunlop --
Yes.
8 9 15:37:54 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
Can you give us a description of the envelope?
Well.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
If you can.
If you can't, you can't.
13
A.
No I --
14
Q. 877
MR. MURPHY:
A.
I'm flabbergasted by the line of questioning.
16
Q. 878
You're flabbergasted by the line of questioning?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 879
You're alleging that you bribed a councillor 2,000 pounds in cash and you are
15:38:00 15
19 15:38:16 20
21
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 880
Mr. Dunlop, I take it more than likely it was the same type of envelope as you used for all of your other payments to Mr. Fox and other councillors?
A.
24 15:38:35 25
26
29
On occasion used envelopes, on occasion did not, on occasion used another method.
One of them you've referred to wrapped in a newspaper.
Q. 881
You did a newspaper once?
A.
And another councillors have given evidence that I left money on his desk in a
27 28
What is an envelope.
flabbergasted that you'd be asked what sort of an envelope it was?
22 23
You can't?
newspaper which I dispute. Q. 882
All right. That's twice newspaper, maybe one twice yes or no.
And the
envelope and what did you say something about another method.
15:38:53 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:38:53
15:39:04
138 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
A.
No, no.
3
Q. 883
MR. MURPHY:
4
No, no, that was --
Well there's something else.
the newspaper.
There's the envelope and there's
Was there any way that you delivered it?
5
A.
I -- um, to Mr. Fox?
6
Q. 884
To anybody.
7
A.
Um, um, I delivered it in various locations in various formats within.
8
Q. 885
Formats.
9
A.
With, in envelopes, not in envelopes.
Q. 886
That's what it was.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 887
If it's not in an envelope and it's not in a newspaper what is it in?
13
A.
Bundle of cash.
14
Q. 888
You would take out 1,000 in cash or 2,000 and give it to the person?
A.
You would not believe, Mr. Murphy, the speed with which that would disappear.
15:39:24 10
15:39:39 15
16 17
Q. 889
A.
(gesturing).
Just tell me one place where you did that -- where you did it in cash, was it
Well I gave various? I certainly gave nobody money in a bus. that one out.
21
cash. Q. 890
23 24
There you are.
in a pub, was it in a bus, was it in a -- where did you?
15:40:02 20
22
Not in envelopes?
Your eye would not be able to account for it.
18 19
Wrapped in newspaper etc.
That remark.
I gave councillors money straight forwardly in
I gave them in the Dail Bar wrapped in a newspaper.
Mr. Dunlop, did you hear the question? Where did you pay money to a councillor in cash?
A.
In lots of places.
Q. 891
Cash without an envelope, without a newspaper?
26
A.
Yes, in lots of places.
27
Q. 892
Okay. In public sight?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 893
Or would you be behind a tree in a carpark?
A.
Not behind a tree in a carpark, no.
15:40:21 25
15:40:29 30
So let's leave
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:40:32
15:40:41
139 1
Q. 894
2
All right.
You'd have this 1,000 or 2,000 in your pocket and you would take
it out and hand it over?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 895
All right. Back to Mr. Fox.
5
Was this in an envelope, cash, or was it without
an envelope and it wasn't a newspaper?
6
A.
It wasn't a newspaper.
7
Q. 896
All right.
8
A.
I've already discussed the issue in relation to an envelope.
9
Q. 897
Now, no envelope is that what you're saying?
A.
What I said to you is in reply to the Chairman.
15:40:52 10
11
It was in cash.
I cannot be absolutely
certain whether it was in an envelope or not.
12
Q. 898
No, if it was an envelope, you made many of these payments with an envelope?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 899
From your office?
A.
Yes.
Q. 900
Now, just visualise for a second the room in your office from which you took
15:41:02 15
16 17
these envelopes.
18
particular sized envelope and you'd need a bit of a stack of them there in a
19
corner or in a shelf that you could take for your payments?
15:41:19 20
A.
Because I imagine if you are paying 1,000 or 2,000 it's a
The stack of envelopes that were available in my office are not there
21
specifically for putting money into.
22
by a professional office.
They are there for normal stationary use
23
Q. 901
Now.
24
A.
They are all size of envelopes. Large, small, medium size and otherwise.
Q. 902
The 2,000 pounds that you got from Mr. Fox, where did it come out?
26
A.
It came out of cash that I had available to me.
27
Q. 903
Available to you.
28
A.
If I hadn't cash available to me I withdrew cash.
29
Q. 904
No, no, you just told me cash available to you.
A.
Cash available to me is in a briefcase at home.
15:41:34 25
15:41:51 30
And where did you keep that cash?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Which is it, Mr. Dunlop?
15:41:54
15:42:04
140 1
Q. 905
Right.
2
A.
Rathbeg, in Dunboyne.
3
Q. 906
I'm sorry in 1993 I'm talking about?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 907
And a briefcase is full of cash?
6
A.
Well it's not necessarily always full of cash but there's some cash available.
7 8
And if that is depleted I may well go and -Q. 908
9 15:42:22 10
You have a briefcase at your home in where, Dunboyne?
I'm not asking you that.
What was the maximum you ever had in that briefcase
roughly? A.
11
Well in the early stages of the Development Plan going back to 1991, I certainly would have in excess of 50,000 pounds.
12
Q. 909
What size briefcase was it?
13
A.
I had it here.
14
Q. 910
I'm sorry. I beg your pardon. 50,000.
A.
It's a briefcase that you carry documents in.
16
Q. 911
You kept it the at home.
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 912
All right.
15:42:35 15
19 15:42:49 20
21
I showed it in evidence. All right. You have some --
And you'd go to that and get your money, your 2,000?
And did you have those in five pound denominations or ten or fifty
or what? A.
Mixture.
Q. 913
Sorry, Chairman.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: Q. 914
15:42:56 25
MR. MURPHY:
We've had this evidence from Mr. Dunlop. All right.
And so you paid him 2,000.
26
And now, Mr. Dunlop, when did you pay -- tell us
about meeting Mr. McGrath for the first time.
27
A.
Well for the first time in relation to Monarch.
28
Q. 915
In relation it to this payment?
29
A.
In relation to this payment, well when I first approached Colm McGrath in
15:43:15 30
relation to Monarch and I told him I was on board. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
He seemed to be quite
15:43:22
15:43:47
141 1
happy with that.
2
he knew already.
3
there was a relationship there, in the sense of lobbying.
4
cannot attest to.
5
resolved.
6
quite aggressive about what could be done or what should be done.
7
remarks about why we were in the situation we happened to be in.
8
needed his support.
9
And I ended up giving him two.
15:44:18 10
Q. 916
11
All right.
I had a suspicion that he knew already.
He didn't say that
I knew from Richard Lynn that he had been lobbied. Anything else I
I said that we were going to try and get the matter
He was quite aggressive.
Not with me, I hasten to add.
He said fine, it'll cost you.
He was Made some I said I
We began a negotiation.
Agreeing to give him two, I should say.
Now, and why were you doing that when he voted against Mr.
Barrett's motion as well?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 917
Yeah, yeah?
14
A.
He was going to be.
Q. 918
Yeah?
A.
A key -- at this stage Mr. McGrath -- I don't mean to suggest that -- but
15:44:32 15
16
That
Because he was a key figure.
He was going to be, along with Fox.
17
presented himself as being a person who was, um, capable of doing quite a lot
18
during the course of the Development Plan and was very, very -- a person who
19
admired Liam Lawlor very much and said well if Liam can do it I can do it.
15:45:06 20
he was presenting himself to developers as somebody that could achieve things
21
for them.
22
Q. 919
And what did Mr. Lawlor have to do with that? He admired Mr. Lawlor?
23
A.
He admired Mr. Lawlor.
24
Q. 920
And how did he know Mr. Lawlor was involved in this?
A.
No, no, no sorry you misinterpreted me.
15:45:23 25
26
He admired Mr. Lawlor's ability.
He admired Mr. Lawlor politically and
advising builders developers and otherwise.
27
Q. 921
How did he know Mr. Lawlor was involved in Cherrywood?
28
A.
I'm not suggesting he knew that Mr. Lawlor was involved in Cherrywood.
29
Q. 922
But you said he admired -- that was one of the reasons why he admired --
A.
He admired Mr. Lawlor's ability to advise developers and builders while
15:45:37 30
So
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:45:43
15:45:59
142 1
Mr. Lawlor was a member of Dublin County Council.
2
Q. 923
What's that got to do with it, Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
Well you seem to be very interested in why Mr. McGrath admired Mr. Lawlor.
4 5
And when I answer you then you say what's it got to do with it. Q. 924
6 7
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. McGrath voted against Mr. Barrett's motion and you felt he was influential and that's why you gave him 2,000?
A.
Yes, because that's what Monarch wanted --
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just on that point before, Mr. Murphy leaves it.
15:46:12 10
11
I understand not only did Mr. McGrath vote against Mr. Barrett's motion on the
12
27th but he had voted in favour of the motion proposed by Senator Lydon and I
13
think he proposed it himself the Manager's Report?
14
A.
He was a co-supporter with Mr. Lydon.
15:46:28 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
If my memory serves me right.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
15:46:36 20
21
Yes, he was.
You don't have to look at it. He co-proposed
the motion I think on the 27th to adopt the Manager's Report? A.
Yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: Which wasn't entirely on all fours with Monarch's proposal.
24
But incorporated a lot of it in terms of four houses to the acre etc; Isn't
15:46:49 25
26
that right? A.
27
Yes.
Excuse me, Judge.
Vastly more important than any of that was the fact
that this was the Manager's Report.
28 29 15:46:58 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
The what the motion in May 1992 related to what the Manager was agreeing to do. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:47:03
15:47:18
143 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
Contrary to what normally occurred, as I think I said to Mr. Murphy yesterday.
4
Normally -- certainly some of the Fianna Fail Councillors would instinctively
5
vote against what the Manager's Report suggested.
6
whatever reason, would not agree.
7
the Manager was proposing on this particular occasion, as you quite rightly
8
say, went a long way towards meeting what Monarch wanted, or at least a section
9
of Monarch wanted.
Because they would, for
Say much more can be achieved.
But what
15:47:38 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
12 13 14
Q. 925
MR. MURPHY:
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 926
Why, if Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 927
Had co-signed or co-proposed this motion?
19
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 928
Yes?
21
A.
With Mr. Lydon?
22
Q. 929
Yes.
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 930
Why would you have to be paying him 2,000?
A.
Well we now have to move forward.
15:47:44 15
15:47:53 20
15:48:00 25
26
But I imagine, Mr. Dunlop, and Judge Faherty wants to know?
And voted against Mr. Barrett's motion?
Fianna Fail to take a stand.
And we need Colm McGrath internally in
I mean, I have approached him.
27
Q. 931
He would have been doing that already.
28
A.
Well he may well have done.
29
Q. 932
Mr.--
A.
He was one of the people who was put aside -- not put off side but was
15:48:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:48:22
15:48:34
144 1
disaffected by what had occurred in May 1992.
2
people who proposed the motion.
3
Q. 933
4
Yes.
Because he was one of the
Mr. Barrett -- Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Wright you said was very important.
Did
you go to him?
5
A.
Yes, I spoke to GV, yes.
6
Q. 934
And?
7
A.
Yes, GV, um, went into a long outline, not that I needed it made to me, about
8 9 15:48:52 10
why, what occurred had occurred.
Why it had occurred.
Q. 935
All right.
A.
And that certainly from Fianna Fail's point of view, if he had anything to do
11
with it, they would support Monarch.
12
Q. 936
Yes?
13
A.
And wanted to continue to support Monarch.
14
Q. 937
Yes?
A.
But that there was confusion.
16
Q. 938
Yes.
17
A.
And that he was in particular.
18
Q. 939
Yeah.
19
A.
Concerned about individual Fianna Fail Councillors maybe running individual
15:49:01 15
15:49:13 20
All right.
campaigns that he didn't know anything about.
21
Q. 940
Mr. Dunlop, was there a whip eventually in November 1993 for this?
22
A.
That I cannot absolutely say to you.
23
Q. 941
How do you not know that, Mr. Dunlop?
24
A.
I cannot absolutely say to you.
15:49:32 25
But it was the absolute norm that when a vote
took place and it involved Fianna Fail people, a discussion took place prior to
26
the meeting as to what the attitude and stance would be.
27
Q. 942
And as you told us earlier, somebody comes out and tells you what happened?
28
A.
Yes, that happened on this occasion.
29
Q. 943
On this occasion, which you were vitally interested, as you've told us, you
15:49:49 30
spent the whole day down there because it's so important to you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Who came out
15:49:56
15:50:05
145 1 2
to you and did he or she tell you that there was a whip? A.
Well I don't recollect anybody in particular came out to me on that particular
3
occasion. What I said to Judge Mahon, when he asked me as Chairman.
4
what happened on occasion.
5
Q. 944
Yeah.
Mr.-- all right.
Mr. Dunlop, what about yeah.
6
now told us about you went to Mr. Wright.
7
motion.
8
Barrett's motion.
This is
Mr. Dunlop, you've
He had voted against Mr. Barrett's
You paid money to Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath, who were against Mr.
9 15:50:22 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
We haven't heard them.
Exactly, we have not heard that.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Paying Mr. McGrath.
About the circumstances.
14 15:50:31 15
MR. MURPHY:
All right.
Sorry, Chairman.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
pounds?
19
A.
Yes.
You said you negotiated with Mr. McGrath.
And you agreed 2,000
After there was a negotiation I agreed 2,000 pounds.
15:50:43 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes, I did.
All right.
Did you pay him?
In cash.
23 24 15:50:47 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
When?
After the vote.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Was that in November?
After it took place, in November, yes.
29 15:50:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
And what do you remember about actually paying him?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:50:55
15:51:20
146 1
A.
Well I know I paid him because I committed to pay him.
I cannot absolutely
2
say to you where the location was.
I've listed in my statement the locations
3
in which I have met Mr. McGrath, including his own office in Clondalkin, in the
4
Royal Dublin Hotel, the environs of the Council.
5
the Gresham Hotel.
And in that I would include
And I also met him in the Green Isle Hotel.
6 7 8
Q. 945
9
MR. MURPHY:
And, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the two payments, Mr. Fox and
Mr. McGrath 2,000 each.
15:51:33 10
the figure.
All you remember is that you paid them and that was
And in respect of both, in this very important allegation against
11
both of them, while you've such a tremendous memory about hundreds of things,
12
you can't remember where or the date or whether there was an envelope or what?
13
A.
14 15:52:04 15
I've already said to you, after the vote in one of the locations that I normally met them being cash.
Q. 946
Did you contact Betty Coffey?
16
A.
Yes, I spoke to Betty Coffey.
17
Q. 947
And what was her attitude?
18
A.
Well Betty was.
19
I think I gave you some indication of this already.
was in -- because she's Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council.
15:52:21 20
type of person in relation to controversy.
Betty
Betty was a nervous
And she was advising caution in
21
the sense that she did not want something to happen in the sense that would
22
cause difficulties for her.
23
Q. 948
Did she ask you for money?
24
A.
No.
Q. 949
All right.
A.
No.
15:52:37 25
26 27
Did she ever ask you for money?
She asked me for support for a -- various political functions that she
ran.
28
Q. 950
Did you ever give her money?
29
A.
I gave her money for support, yes.
Q. 951
How much?
15:52:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:52:51
15:53:02
147 1
A.
2
I cannot tell you off hand.
But they were various amounts, I think ranging
from the low hundreds to 1,000.
3
Q. 952
Did you pay her 2,000 for the 1991 Local Elections?
4
A.
Yes, it's quite possible, yes.
5
Q. 953
All right.
6
A.
In fact, no -- yes.
7
Q. 954
Yes.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 955
That, isn't that right, in public evidence?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 956
She's on a list that you made out?
12
A.
She's on a list that I made out, yes.
13
Q. 957
All right.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 958
For payments in 1992?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 959
So was she on your books?
18
A.
In the context of paying her money for votes?
19
Q. 960
Yes.
A.
No.
21
Q. 961
Yes.
22
A.
No.
15:53:12 10
15:53:20 15
15:53:28 20
23 24
That's -- you told the Tribunal?
And also on the 1992 list?
In the context of a bribe?
In the context of seeking support for political purposes at election time
or fundraising events, yes. Q. 962
15:53:52 25
Yes.
All right.
This list was the Rathfarnham.
out of the Rathfarnham account, Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
26
A.
Which list?
27
Q. 963
You gave the Tribunal -- it's page 433.
28
A.
That's the 1991 Local Elections.
29
Q. 964
Yeah.
15:54:14 30
The withdrawals that came
We'll just have a look at it.
Isn't that the -- isn't that the withdrawals from the Rathfarnham
account, which is the war chest, which is for paying Councillors? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:54:18
15:54:32
148 1
A.
Yes, part of.
2
Q. 965
All right.
3 4
So that's got nothing to do with -- I mean, that's -- isn't that
money for paying Councillors in return for their vote? A.
No.
It's 1991 Local Elections contributions it's headed.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
No, that's a separate.
That's not ....
7 8
MR. MURPHY:
Pardon?
9 15:54:41 10
CHAIRMAN:
I don't think that's correct.
11 12 13
Q. 966
MR. MURPHY:
Could I ask for page 432, please, for a second.
14 15:55:10 15
Question 96.
16 17
"Q: And could I, therefore, ask you to make out a separate list itemising in
18
respect of each disbursements starting with the 6,001 on the 18th of April 1991
19
to identify the parties or persons or entities to whom those payments were
15:55:26 20
made.
21
A: I would just like to seek your guidance, Mr. Hanratty. I will give you
22
where the disbursements were made and the monies applied to it and give you the
23
amounts in each case.
24
account in cash for that purpose.
15:55:35 25
Obviously, these monies were withdrawn from that
Q: Have you established that they were all withdrawn in cash?
26
A:
27
endeavouring to assist. I'm presuming, maybe wrongly, that they were all
28
withdrawn in cash but that is a presumption that I am making.
29
Q: Is it your present belief they were all withdrawn in cash?
15:55:49 30
I haven't established that they were all withdrawn in cash. I am
A: It's my present belief. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:55:52
15:55:58
149 1
Q: Are you in a position to identify the parties or entities to whom those
2
payments were made?
3
A: Yes, I am.
4
Q: Perhaps could you make that list now. Please.
5
Paper handed to Mr. Dunlop.
6
Mr. Dunlop proceeds to make list.
7
List handed to solicitor to the Tribunal.
8
List then handed to Mr. Hanratty."
9 15:56:08 10
Mr. Hanratty says,
11
"Mr. Dunlop, you have written a list of names numbered 1 to 16, opposite each
12
name you've written a number.
13
thousands of pounds?
14
A: Yes."
Does the number opposite the name represent
15:56:20 15
16
Q. 967
And I run out of script there.
17 18
Isn't that the Rathfarnham account and isn't that withdrawals for cash to pay
19
Councillors in return for their vote, Mr. Dunlop?
15:56:28 20
A.
No.
I pointed out to you already, that is a list that was drawn up in the
21
box.
I don't know what date it was.
Did you say what date it was? May 2000
22
headed political contributions, Local Election contributions to politicians.
23
Q. 968
All right.
24
A.
Well why?
Q. 969
But you did pay her the 2,000 pounds in 1991?
26
A.
Local Elections contribution, yeah.
27
Q. 970
And then later another -- money -- 1,000 pounds in 1992?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 971
Yes?
A.
Sorry, yes.
15:56:48 25
15:57:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
15:57:01
15:57:36
150 1
Q. 972
Yes.
All right.
Now, Mr. Dunlop, what about had been -- Mr. Lydon and
2
Mr. Hand, the gentlemen to whom, in your interviews, you so graphically say
3
that you paid monies?
4
A.
Yes, that is a point.
I'm glad you brought that point up, Mr. Murphy.
5
Because contrary to any perception that the Members of the Tribunal might have,
6
as a result of what you said.
7 8
I want to bring your attention to the fact that you said that in my statement
9
of 2003 I mentioned Messrs. Fox and McGrath and did not make any reference to
15:57:59 10
Messrs. Hand and Lydon.
11 12 13
In fact, that statement was made on the 9th of October, 2000. Q. 973
14 15:58:13 15
16
That was perfectly clear, Mr. Dunlop, as we went through it.
Not 2003.
Your private
interview -A.
It wasn't.
Q. 974
Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Hand and Lydon are referred to clearly in private interview.
17
what did you say "I certainly paid Mr. Lydon in Cherrywood" something like
18
that?
19 15:58:21 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 975
How come, with all of this important thing coming up, vote coming up, you go
21
and you pay Mr. Fox and Mr. McGrath 2,000 each who have been paid -- you have a
22
high suspicion have been paid by Monarch.
23
voted in favour. And yet you don't go to Mr. Lydon, Fianna Fail, and you don't
24
go to Mr. Hand?
15:58:42 25
A.
I did not say I didn't go to them.
26
Q. 976
Sorry.
27
A.
Correct.
They are already on side.
They
What I mean is you didn't pay them? I mean, as per the Chairman's request, I went down through the list
28
of the people that I did approach.
29
of March 1993 with Phil Reilly and Richard Lynn, it was agreed that Richard
15:59:03 30
Yes.
And as per the meeting on the 9th
Lynn would continue to make contact with Don Lydon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That does not mean that I
15:59:10
15:59:39
151 1 2
did not speak to Don Lydon about the matter. Q. 977
3
Mr. Dunlop, if I have -- wait now.
Is this right? Sorry.
Mr. Dunlop, I
want to just name the people who voted for Mr. Barrett's motion.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 978
And voted against and voted -- and voted against the confirmation of it.
6
A.
The confirmation of it? In other words, they didn't vote for it.
7
Q. 979
They voted against the motion?
8
A.
Right.
9
Q. 980
Brought by Smith Buckley to -- in relation to for change three?
A.
On what day?
11
Q. 981
On the 11th of November, 1993, Mr. Dunlop.
12
A.
Oh, yes okay.
13
Q. 982
B Cass voted for Barrett.
16:00:00 10
14
Voted against Smith Buckley.
16:00:12 15
Keane C voted for Barrett.
16
Voted against Smith Buckley.
17
Keogh H voted for Barrett.
18
Against Smith Buckley.
19
Lohan L voted for Barrett against Smith Buckley.
16:00:26 20
Mitchell O voted for Barrett against Smith Buckley.
21
Morrissey T voted for Barrett.
22
Against Smith Buckley.
23
Quinn C voted for Barrett.
24
Voted against Smith Buckley.
16:00:47 25
Terry S voted for.
And for Barrett.
And voted against Smith Buckley.
26
And Tyndall C voted for Barrett and voted against Smith Buckley.
27
Now, --
28
A.
You haven't mentioned a Fianna Fail representative yet.
29
Q. 983
Could I please have 7216 and 7262 on the screen together.
16:01:13 30
confirm the way that vote went. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That's just to
16:01:15
16:01:55
152 1 2
Now, the vote in May '92 for Barrett was -- was voted -- 36 voted for Mr.
3
Barrett's motion.
4
against. In November '93 ...
5
A.
24 against.
36 voted for one house per acre.
24 voted
And virtually all of the Fianna Fail representatives on the Council at that
6
stage in that vote with the exception of one or two Mavericks.
7
the wrong words.
8
exception, as I look at it immediately with the exception possibly of Paddy
9
Madigan.
16:02:21 10
Q. 984
Sorry.
I don't mean to be dismissive.
Sorry, that's
Voted against.
With the
And Larry Butler.
And then in November '93.
11 12
This is page 7262, please.
13 14
In November '93 the motion to confirm Mr. Barrett's motion was defeated by 44
16:02:36 15
votes to 26.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 985
Yes.
18
A.
Yep.
19
Q. 986
And the people who changed their votes are the people I read out to you there.
16:02:51 20
Can I have the other one on the same? Sorry.
That I read out in a list to you a few moments ago?
21
A.
Right.
22
Q. 987
They are the key to your success in November '93; isn't that right?
23
A.
Give them to me again.
24 16:03:03 25
be. Q. 988
B Cass?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 989
C Keane?
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 990
H Keogh?
A.
Yeah.
16:03:07 30
Read them out to me again.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Sorry, I don't mean to
16:03:07
16:03:11
153 1
Q. 991
L Lohan?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 992
O Mitchell?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 993
T Morrissey?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 994
C Quinn?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 995
S Terry?
A.
Yeah.
11
Q. 996
And C Tyndall?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 997
Aren't they the people who swung the vote?
14
A.
Yeah, on the vote basis, yes.
Q. 998
Doesn't that mean, or am I missing something.
16:03:13 10
16:03:24 15
They changed their minds and voted for. That it's because of them the
16
vote was changed and Mr. Barrett's motion was voted down and now we're back to
17
four houses per acre?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 999
Did you talk to any of those?
A.
I think I listed Olivia Mitchell when I was going down through the list when
16:03:48 20
21
the Chairman asked me to go down through the list.
22
Q. 1000
Have you any idea how their change of mind was brought about?
23
A.
Well, let me just get this as accurate as I possibly can.
24
In the vote we're
talking about here in November of 1993 is the Sean Barrett motion.
16:03:59 25
Right.
Is it?
Okay.
26
Q. 1001
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, what did you say?
27
A.
The motion that we're talking about in November 1993 is the Sean Barrett
28 29 16:04:06 30
motion. Q. 1002
Yes.
A.
Sean Barrett. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:04:07
16:04:19
154 1
Q. 1003
May '92 is Sean Barrett?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 1004
November '93, the vote to confirm Barrett.
4
A.
To confirm Barrett.
5
But I'm asking you --
Exactly.
Mr. Barrett.
Fine Gael.
So it would
certainly be understandable that the type of.
6
Q. 1005
Yes.
It's a Smith Buckley motion to confirm the change?
7
A.
To confirm the change, yes.
Exactly.
Smith Buckley put forward a motion to
8
preempt everybody by confirming the change that had been made by -- as a result
9
of.
16:04:36 10
Q. 1006
Yeah?
11
A.
The Barrett motion.
12
Q. 1007
Yeah.
13
A.
Coming back off public display.
14
We now have a series, if my recollection is
correct, of something of a dozen.
16:04:48 15
Certainly ten motions in a variety of
formats from a variety of people in relation to the Cherrywood development.
16
Q. 1008
Uh-huh?
17
A.
A lot of motions.
18
Q. 1009
Uh-huh?
19
A.
Some to confirm.
16:05:03 20
centre.
Some to increase.
Some to limit size.
Some to deal with the -- the town
A variety of motions.
So this motion that
21
you're talking about, these are the people who voted to confirm the Barrett
22
motion.
23
Q. 1010
Yes.
24
A.
To confirm what Barrett had done in May 1992.
Q. 1011
And if they'd won that was the end of Monarch; isn't that right?
26
A.
Well if they had won one house per acre would have been confirmed.
27
Q. 1012
Yes.
28
A.
They lost, yes.
29
Q. 1013
And the people who swung it were the people whose names I read out to you?
A.
Because they did not appear on the list of May 1992.
16:05:18 25
16:05:32 30
They lost?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:05:35
16:05:46
155 1
Q. 1014
All right.
Okay.
2
A.
Can we?
3
Q. 1015
Mr.--
4
A.
I have to go?
All right.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
appointment.
A break.
We're going to stop now anyway because I have an
8 9
MR. MURPHY:
Sorry, Chairman, I have to questions.
16:05:53 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Two questions.
12 13 14
Q. 1016
MR. MURPHY:
568, please. I'm sorry.
567. I hope this is right.
16:06:45 15
16
574, please.
17 18
A.
Sorry.
19
Q. 1017
Mr. Dunlop, your private interviews.
A.
Question 5, yeah.
Q. 1018
"Q: Did they, the people that you were dealing with in Monarch know that you
16:06:58 20
21 22
had done that?
23
A:
24
This is the 25,000.
16:07:10 25
26
It was -- it was never.
Question 5.
The fee was agreed".
A.
Yes.
Q. 1019
"And this was agreed sometime in advance.
27
the fee out of Monarch".
We had some difficulty in getting
We've been through all of that?
28
A.
We've been through that, yes.
29
Q. 1020
"So anything that I did was in advance of actually getting the money in
16:07:20 30
which -- in which was a thing that happened". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:07:24
16:07:31
156 1 2
And that's wrong.
3
that right?
You weren't doing things in advance of getting paid; isn't
4
A.
No, I wasn't doing things in advance, no.
5
Q. 1021
"Not regularly but it did happen on occasion.
6
I was dipping into my own funds
and my own war chest in anticipation of getting monies that had been promised"?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1022
I want to suggest to you that what you said there suggests to me that you're
9
dipping into your war chest in the Cherrywood case in anticipation of getting
16:07:52 10
monies from Monarch, you are dipping into your war chest to make disbursements?
11
A.
To make disbursements to whom? To Mr. Fox and to Mr. McGrath?
12
Q. 1023
Councillors.
13
A.
Well they are Councillors.
14
Q. 1024
I suggest to you that what you have said there to Mr. Hanratty and to
16:08:13 15
Mr. Gallagher does not for a moment mean, suggest that you could only have been
16
dipping into -- you were dipping into your -- you were dipping into your "own
17
funds and my own war chest in anticipation of getting monies".
18
you means much more than dipping into your briefcase for 4,000 to pay two
19
Councillors?
16:08:33 20
21
A.
No.
Q. 1025
And if I could have 5 -- that's the first question.
I suggest to
22 23
And 547.
24 16:08:44 25
I think, Mr. Dunlop, if I'm correct.
26
I think you said that you didn't know
anything from Mr. Lynn directly about Monarch paying monies; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1026
547.
Question 109.
29 16:09:04 30
"You mentioned yesterday that, at least I took you to mention, I perhaps I took Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:09:07
16:09:19
157 1
you up wrong.
There were other people distributing money to Councillors apart
2
from yourself. Am I right about that? It May have been in the context first
3
of all of Richard Lynn.
4
A:
5
suspected, as it may gave been widely suspected about me by others.
6
was solely suspected in the context of Cherrywood there was money being
7
disbursed.
8
Q: Who is an alleged facilitator.
9
A:
I have no doubt but I mean I just can't prove it. It was widely But it
Richard Lynn".
16:09:27 10
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1027
Isn't that right?
13
A.
He's the facilitator between Monarch and the Councillors.
14
Q. 1028
"Facilitator" means paying money; doesn't it?
A.
Well I have no -- and I don't think -- I don't think I'm saying there.
16:09:37 15
16 17
no evidence, ever, or that Mr. Lynn gave money to -- to Councillors. Q. 1029
18 19
I have
I'm only just going back over what you said to the Tribunal.
I mean, it's a
question of if you believed what you said at the time. A.
16:10:01 20
Well I'm not going to go into a disposition with you, Mr. Murphy, about these private interviews.
21
That's for another day and for another forum.
And
probably we'll get a result of it quite soon.
22 23
But what I have been asked here and what I have said.
24
that there was wide suspicion.
16:10:19 25
been about me by others.
26 27
It was widely suspected.
Page 548, please.
28 29
And it could have
It was widely suspected in the context of Cherrywood
that there was money being disbursed. Q. 1030
That there was wide --
The last sentence on that page.
16:10:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:10:35
16:10:47
158 1
"But in my mind I have no doubt that Richard Lynn was facilitating certainly
2
Lydon, certainly no doubt about this".
3 4
A.
Well let me go back and say.
5
motions.
6
(Mr. Dunlop reading document to himself)
7
Well, I mean, unless I'm wrong.
8
facilitating Don Lydon.
9
Lydon was the main proposer of what Monarch wanted.
16:11:15 10
11
He had a relationship with Don Lydon, in which Don
With money, is that what you're asking me to? Is that what the core of this question is? Is that what you're asking me?
Q. 1032
Is that your answer? You're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn facilitated Mr. Lydon with money?
A.
I have no evidence that Mr. Lydon -- sorry.
That Mr. Lynn ever gave money to
Mr. Lydon. Q. 1033
18 19
I'm not suggesting that Richard Lynn was
A.
16 17
Excuse me.
Now, just -- you're not suggesting that Mr. Lynn facilitated Mr. Lydon?
14 16:11:32 15
Withdrawals of
Q. 1031
12 13
Sorry.
It goes up a bit further.
So what did you mean when you said you'd no doubt that Richard Lynn was facilitating "certainly Lydon, certainly no doubt about this"?
A.
16:11:47 20
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon had a close relationship, as is obvious if you look at the record of Dublin County Council and what Senator Lydon did, or tried to do.
21
To infer further from that, as I have said on a variety of occasions during the
22
course of the last three days, has it been three days? Yes.
23
course of the last three days.
24
Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lydon.
16:12:13 25
That there was a close relationship between
And after the meeting with Mr. Lydon -- with Mr. Lynn
it was agreed that it he would continue to have that close relationship.
26 27
went on between them, I don't know. Q. 1034
Thank you, Mr. Dunlop.
28 29 16:12:26 30
During the
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
Tuesday at half ten.
Am I? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
Perhaps ...
What
16:12:27
16:12:37
159 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Well ...
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Perhaps parties who wish to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop on Tuesday
5
could talk to the Tribunal legal team.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Okay.
8 9 16:12:45 10
CHAIRMAN:
And arrange.
Make some arrangements.
And those who can't manage
it on Tuesday will be facilitated on another day.
11 12
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
13 14 16:12:55 15
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder if I could just raise an issue?
Mark Sanfey,
for the Monarch contingent, if I could put it that way.
16 17
There are a number of people lining up to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.
And there
18
may be a concern, which perhaps could be explored now very briefly.
About the
19
wisdom of having that cross-examination broken up.
16:13:13 20
21
I understand that Mr. Dunlop is not available on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday
22
of next week.
23 24
Now, that means that certainly -- I think Mr. Shipsey may not be available on
16:13:23 25
Tuesday.
It may be that other parties are available to cross-examine on
26
Tuesday.
But it wouldn't appear that Mr. Dunlop will finish on Tuesday.
27 28
I know various of my clients it's proposed to examine on Wednesday, Thursday or
29
Friday.
I have a slight concern about that.
16:13:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
16:13:42
16:13:57
160 1
CHAIRMAN:
Well the difficulty that we have, and we have had it on other
2
occasions as well.
3
it's not always possible to run a witness from start to finish without a break.
Is because of the large number of legal teams involved,
4 5
So, at the same time, equally important or very important is the fact that the
6
Tribunal can't, if you like, not sit on Tuesday.
7
isn't that right, Ms. Dillon, for Tuesday?
We have no other witnesses
8 9
MS. DILLON:
At the moment that's the position.
16:14:24 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
I mean, we certainly wouldn't ask, we wouldn't ask people to start
12
cross-examination on Tuesday who can't finish on Tuesday.
13 14 16:14:29 15
MS. DILLON:
Would it meet the case, and I don't know.
with my colleagues.
I've had a brief word
I don't want to hold them to anything.
It seems to me
16
the most the cross-examination would be, from what I've heard, would be maybe a
17
day, a day and a half.
18
don't know about Mr. Shipsey's available.
19
is or isn't available on Tuesday.
If the Tribunal were to sit early on Tuesday.
I
I can't remember whether he said he
16:14:46 20
21
Would one very long day conclude Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination I wonder on
22
Tuesday?
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Are you available, Mr. Shipsey, on Tuesday?
16:14:56 25
26
MR. SHIPSEY:
Sorry, Chairman, I'm not available on Tuesday of next week.
27 28
I had not understood that we weren't sitting tomorrow.
29
afraid.
But I'm not available on Tuesday.
16:15:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
That was my error, I'm
16:15:06
16:15:32
161 1
CHAIRMAN:
Well, I think what we'll have to do is to try and fit in as many
2
people.
3
people who aren't here on Tuesday will have an opportunity to see the
4
transcript, and they will be afforded every opportunity to go back over.
I know it's not ideal. And people will have an opportunity to,
5 6
I think that's the best thing to do.
Otherwise we're going to run into
7
difficulty the following week and the following week after that.
8 9 16:15:43 10
So I think we'll sit on Tuesday and we'll do as much as possible.
We won't
ask parties to start on Tuesday who can't finish on Tuesday.
11 12
All right?
13 14
MS. DILLON:
All right.
16:15:50 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
17 18 19 16:20:22 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, TUESDAY, 20TH OF JUNE, 2006.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 654
09:40:04
10:35:46
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
21ST JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
8 9 10:35:54 10
Just on a housekeeping matter.
You will recollect yesterday that the issue
about Mr. Sweeney's legal team informed the Tribunal when they would be
11
available to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop and you had directed that they were to
12
contact the Tribunal by close of business yesterday and indicate a date.
13 14 10:36:12 15
Well, they contacted the Tribunal to indicate that they couldn't, they had no date available.
Now, I understand from speaking to Mr. Redmond that he is
16
available Thursday week, which is the 29th.
17
circuit matters or concentrate people's minds if you were to fix the 29th for
18
the resumption of the cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop and that might lead to
19
any subsequent application that might be considered necessary by Mr. Sweeney or
10:36:34 20
And I wonder it might short
his advisors but at the moment it's just hanging
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
We'll fix the 29th then.
23 24 10:36:44 25
MS. DILLON:
That's Thursday week.
For the resumption of the
cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
That's the 29th of June?
28 29 10:36:53 30
MS. DILLON:
We will inform Mr. Tony Fox's legal team also that that date has
been fixed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:36:54
10:36:56
2 1 2
May it please the Tribunal.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Ms. Ann Gosling, please.
7
MS. ANN GOSLING, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DIL
8 9 10:37:21 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Ms. Gosling.
Good morning.
14 10:37:35 15
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Ms. Gosling.
16 17
I believe that you were the secretary for a long period of time to the late
18
Mr. Philip Monahan who ultimately became Chairman of the Monarch Group; is that
19
correct?
10:37:46 20
21
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 1
You commenced your employment in 1969 as a secretary to Mr. Monahan.
22
You
continued with him in that position until after 2000; isn't that correct?
23
A.
That's correct, yes.
24
Q. 2
Now, throughout that period the business initially commenced and had its
10:38:01 25
offices in Dundalk, County Louth but it subsequently moved to Dublin; is that
26
right?
27
A.
Yes, it moved to Dublin.
28
Q. 3
Now, when it moved to Dublin it initially moved into offices it had in Harcourt
29 10:38:16 30
Street; isn't that correct? A.
Well before the offices in Harcourt Street there had been offices in Earlsfort Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:38:22
10:38:35
3 1
Terrace.
There had been a presence in Dublin.
2
Q. 4
Yes?
3
A.
When they moved completely to Dublin it was to Harcourt Street.
4
Q. 5
Yes.
At the time -- when the offices moved initially to Dublin an office
5
continued to be maintained in Dundalk and you in fact stayed in Dundalk; isn't
6
that correct?
7
A.
The head office remained in Dundalk.
When they set up an office in Earlsfort
8
Terrace it was a Dublin office but head office remained in Dundalk until
9
whenever Harcourt Street opened.
10:38:53 10
Q. 6
Yes.
And I think that Mr. Monahan, that's Mr. Philip Monahan, bought a house
11
which became known as Somerton in or around 1988.
12
substantial grounds and he moved himself at that stage to live in Somerton;
13
isn't that right?
14 10:39:11 15
It was a large house and
A.
That's correct, yes.
Q. 7
And at that time he converted a suite of rooms in Somerton to be his own
16
offices; isn't that right?
17
A.
That's true, yes.
18
Q. 8
When that move took place, I understand, Ms. Gosling, that you also moved to
19 10:39:26 20
21
Dublin at that time; is that right? A.
I did, yes.
Q. 9
But you continued as personal secretary to Mr. Philip Monahan throughout that
22
period?
23
A.
I did.
24
Q. 10
But you were based at that stage in Somerton; is that right?
A.
I was.
Q. 11
Now, at that time and from 1988 onwards would it be fair to say that there were
10:39:36 25
26 27
a number of offices dealing with the Monarch Group business.
28
been an office in Dundalk; is that right?
29 10:39:55 30
There would have
A.
There was an office in Dundalk which was gradually closed down.
Q. 12
It was winding down? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:39:56
10:40:10
4 1
A.
It was winding down.
2
Q. 13
There was an office in the Tallaght Town Centre, a site office?
3
A.
Yes, there was.
4
Q. 14
And that office was mainly dealing with the development of the town centre;
5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 15
And then there was an office in Harcourt Street, the old railway building; is
8 9
that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 16
Mr. Philip Monahan's office in the house in Somerton?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 17
Now, from 1988 onwards ultimately the main two offices became the house, the
10:40:17 10
13
premises in Harcourt Street and Mr. Philip Monahan's private offices in
14
Somerton?
10:40:34 15
16
A.
Yes, that's true.
Q. 18
There was a winding down of the Dundalk business.
17
And there became obviously
a winding down of the Tallaght office once the Tallaght Town Centre opened?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 19
So that there were two separate offices being -- from say 1988 to 1990 onwards
10:40:51 20
being run by the Monarch business.
Would that be fair to say?
21
A.
Yeah, I'm not sure of the exact dates.
22
Q. 20
Yes?
23
A.
But in or around that time, yes.
24
Q. 21
Well, if I ask you to date it in this way, Ms. Gosling, if you can.
10:41:03 25
From the
time of the Cherrywood development, of the purchase of the Cherrywood lands in
26
1989/1990, was the substantial business of the Monarch property being conducted
27
between the offices in Earlsfort Terrace and Mr. Philip Monahan's offices in
28
Somerton?
29 10:41:22 30
A.
In Harcourt Street and Somerton.
Q. 22
In Harcourt Street and Somerton? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:41:24
10:41:34
5 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 23
In Somerton, can I ask you to outline to the Tribunal what the setup was in
3
Somerton.
4
conducted there?
5
A.
Okay.
What offices were there, who worked there and what business was
Well, in those early days there was Philip Monahan and myself and
6
another executive, John Sherwood.
7
difficult to describe.
8
was partly the reason for his move at that time to Somerton.
9
of hospital and he was sort of semi retiring, in a sense, while the main thrust
10:42:21 10
Um, and it was it was -- it's rather
It's a long time ago but Phil hadn't been well, which
of the office, of the business, had moved to Harcourt Street.
11
operated from there.
12
just describe.
He had come out
It was being
So ... it's hard to put myself back in those days and
13
Q. 24
Well, you were based in Somerton; isn't that right?
14
A.
I was.
Q. 25
And obviously you had a full-time job in Somerton?
16
A.
I had, yes.
17
Q. 26
Now, what were you doing?
18
A.
I was continuing basically what I had been doing in Dundalk in answering
10:42:40 15
19
letters, typing whatever needed to be typed and generally doing what I'd always
10:43:09 20
done, making sure that people did what they were meant to do.
21 22
My role was a
support role. Q. 27
When you say that it was your job to make sure that people did what they were
23
supposed to do.
24
at which it would be decided what people were to do and it was your job to
10:43:31 25
Does that pre suppose that first a meeting would take place
follow-up to ensure that those things were done?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 28
Thank you. Is that what was going on?
28
A.
Yes, that's what was going on.
29
Q. 29
So, it would have followed that you would have attended meetings at which
10:43:39 30
decisions were made.
It was your job to make sure those decisions were
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:43:44
10:44:01
6 1
implemented or carried forward; is that right. Not necessarily.
2
have attended.
3
afterwards in the majority of cases, 90% of the time I'd say.
4
Q. 30
5
I wouldn't
I'd have been-- the minutes would have been dictated
Would it have been fair to have described your role throughout this period and earlier that you were probably Mr. Philip Monahan's right hand person?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 31
And I think you've outlined in your statement and I believe, indeed, that there
8
is no dispute on this, you had possession of Mr. Monahan's, one of
9
Mr. Monahan's personal cheque books for example?
10:44:17 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 32
And you would have written cheques on that account and there would have been a
12
monthly reconciliation?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 33
So you would have been a person, you know, in a very trusted position insofar
10:44:28 15
as Mr. Monahan was concerned.
Would that be fair it say?
16
A.
That's true, yes.
17
Q. 34
And while Mr. Monahan may have had ill health would it be fair to say that
18
throughout the period from 1988, 1990 and the Cabinteely development, that he
19
had a continuing interest and took an active part in seeking the development of
10:44:46 20
the Cherrywood lands?
21
A.
Oh, yes.
22
Q. 35
And after the development of the Town Centre in Tallaght, which was a huge
23
success, would it also be fair to say that the purchase of the lands at
24
Cherrywood and their subsequent development was the next biggest project on
10:45:01 25
hand by the Monarch Group in the early 1990s?
26
A.
Yes, it is.
27
Q. 36
And it follows from that, that the development of that project would have
28 29 10:45:13 30
consumed a lot of time of the professional staff of the Monarch Group? A.
Yes.
Q. 37
Now, if I could ask you.
If I give you a number of names of persons if you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:45:18
10:45:32
7 1
could outline, as best you understand it, the various roles that were carried
2
out by these people within the Monarch Group structure.
3 4
Would you outline, first of all, what the function or role carried out by the
5
late Mr. Philip Monahan was?
6
A.
Well, he was the -- he was the entrepreneur, he was the man with the visions,
7
he was the Chairman of the company and the Managing Director of the company and
8
the team leader.
9 10:45:57 10
11
Q. 38
Was he a person who would have been involved in making serious decisions?
A.
Very much so.
Q. 39
So, for example, the decision to buy the Cherrywood lands.
12
Was that a
decision which would have had to have been approved by Mr. Monahan?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 40
Can I ask you about Mr. Dominic Glennane and his function within the group?
A.
Okay.
10:46:10 15
16
He was the financial director and in charge of all the financial
aspects of the company.
17
Q. 41
Was he a shareholder?
18
A.
He was a shareholder, yes.
19
Q. 42
And did you work closely with Mr. Glennane?
A.
I did, yes.
Q. 43
And in terms, if you could outline briefly to the Tribunal, Ms. Gosling, from
10:46:29 20
21 22
your own knowledge, what happened when expenses were incurred on behalf of,
23
say, Monarch Properties or Monarch Properties Services Limited? What was the
24
process whereby these outgoings or expenses were accounted for?
10:46:51 25
A.
Everything had to be vouched, you know, there had to be receipts and there
26
would be -- they would be attached to an expenses claim form, signed by the
27
person who incurred them and passed to that person's direct boss, whoever that
28
was, who would sign them and then they would go to Mr. Glennane for payment.
29 10:47:28 30
Q. 44
So, would it be fair to say that any expense that was incurred in connection with any project would have to be supported with a voucher or a document? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:47:33
10:47:41
8 1
A.
Oh, yes, absolutely.
2
Q. 45
And that prior to payment issuing, there would have to be an invoice, a
3
document, a receipt of some sort?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 46
And while you were there, was that the practice?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 47
Right.
8 9
Mr.-- if you could outline - had - and did Mr. Glennane have a
professional qualification do you know? A.
Yes.
Q. 48
And was that an accountancy qualification?
11
A.
Sorry, an accountancy qualification, yes.
12
Q. 49
And if you could outline to the Tribunal the functional role of Mr. Eddie
10:47:55 10
13 14
Don't ask me to tell you what it is but yes.
Sweeney? A.
10:48:14 15
Well, Mr. Sweeney was the technical director and he was responsible for all the technical aspects, the way -- he had quite a team under him of both architects
16
and engineers, quantity surveyors.
17
aspects.
18
was very much a close knit team.
19 10:48:49 20
He was the -- he controlled the technical
He planned what needed to be done and ensured that it was done.
Q. 50
And Mr. Philip Reilly.
A.
Phil looked after the shopping centres and the management of the shopping
What was his function within the group?
21
centres.
22
parts in Dundalk, in Athlone, Navan, Nutgrove, some other small ones around.
23
And so Phil's role was to manage the Managers of the shopping centres.
24
Q. 51
10:49:19 25
By that stage there were, you know, shopping centres in different
So he would have been responsible for the day-to-day separation of the shopping centres?
26
A.
I think yeah.
27
Q. 52
Overall responsibility?
28
A.
Overall, yes.
29
Q. 53
And would he also have been in charge in that role in Tallaght Town Centre?
A.
Um, yes.
10:49:31 30
It
I think he was more involved in -- at that stage Tallaght was only Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:49:37
10:49:52
9 1
being developed so he played a more active role there, I think, in the
2
marketing as well as the management.
In setting up the systems, uh-huh.
3
Q. 54
And had he an active role in the development of the Tallaght Town Centre?
4
A.
To the best of my recollection, yes.
5
Q. 55
And was the company that developed Tallaght from the Monarch point of view a
6
company called L&C Properties Limited?
7
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
8
Q. 56
And was the L&C Properties partner in the development of Tallaght a combination
9 10:50:13 10
11
of English companies generally known as Guardian Royal or GRE? A.
Yes, I think so.
Q. 57
And was that the same English company that became involved in the subsequent
12
development of the Cherrywood lands at Cabinteely?
13
A.
Yes, I think so.
14
Q. 58
And was that the same English company that became involved in the subsequent
10:50:21 15
development of the Cherrywood Lands at Cabinteely?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 59
So that there was a history of dealing, as it were, between Monarch on the one
18
part and Guardian Royal on the other that predated the purchase of the
19
Cherrywood lands?
10:50:31 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 60
Right.
22
And obviously there would have been agreements in place in Tallaght in
relation to expenses and invoicing and charging out of costs; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 61
Between the two companies?
A.
Yes.
Q. 62
And who was the person that would have been in charge or had overall
10:50:43 25
26 27
responsibility for that function in the development of the Tallaght Town
28
Centre?
29 10:51:00 30
A.
Probably Mr. Glennane, but I'm not sure.
Q. 63
And there would have been agreements between L&C Properties Limited and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:51:05
10:51:19
10 1
Tallaght and the GRE group in relation to Tallaght; isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 64
And did Monarch Properties Services Limited provide project management services
4
to the Tallaght Town Centre?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 65
And was the position effectively the way the operation in Tallaght was run,
7
subject to anything any other witness may say, that there was an agreement
8
between GRE and Monarch about the development, the joint development of
9
Tallaght.
10:51:34 10
11
Is that right?
A.
I believe so, yes.
Q. 66
That the project manager that was appointed managed the project for Monarch on
12
the one hand and GRE on the other was a company called Monarch Properties
13
Services Limited?
14 10:51:50 15
A.
I'm not sure on that one but probably, yes.
Q. 67
And was MPSL, or Monarch Properties Services Limited, the company within the
16
Monarch Group whose function it was to provide project management to projects
17
coming up?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 68
So that --
A.
Yes, yes, it would have been.
Q. 69
So that what Monarch Properties Services Limited would do, is that it would
10:52:05 20
21 22
enter into an agreement to do a project on behalf of Monarch and GRE in this
23
case in Tallaght, and it would charge to both of those companies expenses it
24
had incurred and fees in respect of the job that it had done; is that right?
10:52:27 25
26
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 70
And do you know whether that was the type of relationship that continued into
27 28 29 10:52:53 30
the development of the Cabinteely lands? A.
I presume so but I didn't -- I didn't have the sort of -- I wasn't so active in the company at that stage.
You're asking me to remember things that -- you
bring me to things that I've forgotten all about. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:52:56
10:53:06
11 1
Q. 71
Uh-huh?
2
A.
But I presume yes.
3
Q. 72
You would have known obviously from your general knowledge within the group
4
that the services that were being carried out in connection with the
5
Tallaght -- the development of the Tallaght Town Centre were being carried out
6
by Monarch Properties Services Limited and invoiced to GRE?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 73
And that a similar type relationship developed or grew up or was agreed in
9 10:53:22 10
11
connection with the development of the Cherrywood Lands? A.
I would expect so, yes.
Q. 74
So that Monarch Properties Services Limited was expending monies and paying
12
expenses, including fees to professional persons, for which it subsequently
13
sought to recover those fees from GRE; isn't that right?
14
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 75
And in a general way, that was your understanding of the relationship?
16
A.
I think so, yeah.
17
Q. 76
Can you -- help the Tribunal as to what input, if any, Mr. Philip Reilly would
10:53:41 15
18
have had in relation to the creation of invoices or the seeking of recoupment
19
of funds in connection with the development of Tallaght Town Centre?
10:54:03 20
A.
I don't honestly remember.
It would have been similar I think to what I
21
described, you know, that everything had to be invoiced and passed for payment
22
and authorised for payment and then cheques would be issued.
23
Q. 77
And did you know at that time a Mr. Richard Lynn?
24
A.
Um, yeah, he was an employee.
Q. 78
He was an employee of what company, can you remember?
A.
Um, o off the top of my head I can't.
10:54:33 25
26
Probably Monarch Property Services.
27
That was the company who employed, you know, my employment was with Monarch
28
Property Services Limited.
29 10:54:59 30
Q. 79
And what was Mr.-- your understanding of Mr. Lynn's function?
A.
He was involved with the Cherrywood project. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I don't know what his title was
10:55:05
10:55:24
12 1
but he was -- he came on board to help with the Cherrywood project.
2
Q. 80
And who hired Mr. Lynn?
3
A.
I presume Mr. Monahan.
4
Q. 81
Did you know a Mr. Jack Whelan?
5
A.
Vaguely.
6
Q. 82
And what was Mr. Whelan's function or role?
7
A.
Oh, he was an agent or an auctioneer, I'm not sure which.
8
Q. 83
And who did Mr. Whelan deal with in the Monarch Group?
9
A.
I think he possibly would have dealt with the directors but probably
10:55:42 10
principally with Mr. Monahan.
11
Q. 84
That's Mr. Phillip Monahan?
12
A.
Sorry, if I say Mr. Monahan, there was only one Mr. Monahan and that was
13 14
Mr. Phil. Q. 85
10:55:58 15
So you said Mr. Jack Whelan would have dealt in the main with the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
16
A.
Yeah, I think so.
17
Q. 86
And would Mr. Richard Lynn have dealt mainly with the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
18
A.
I think he would have dealt with all three, with Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Monahan, and
19 10:56:15 20
21
Mr. Glennane. Q. 87
Can I show you on the screen beside you what Mr. Eddie Sweeney apparently will tell the Tribunal about the various relationships between these people.
22 23
2138, please.
24 10:56:32 25
And Mr. Sweeney in his statement to the Tribunal outlines, and we're talking
26
about the same period now, this is commencing in 1988/1989, 1990 onwards
27
thereafter. He says that in Somerton Mr. Monahan had his own office in
28
Somerton and he outlines the people who were there.
29
Sherwood, Ms. Ann Gosling, Mr. Colm Monahan and Mr. Paul Monahan who I'll come
10:56:54 30
back to in a moment and then he says that Somerton would have been regarded by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Mr. Philip Monahan, John
10:56:55
10:57:13
13 1
many as Mr. Philip Monahan's main office and would have been visited by some of
2
his close associates including Jack Whelan, Cathal McCarthy, Richard Lynn and
3
Gerry Enright who spent much of their time in the offices of Somerton.
4
these people have would be regarded as advisors to the Monarch Group they would
5
not in his opinion have gone through the normal strict interview process of
6
Monarch.
7
have been made by Philip Monahan personally.
While
Rather their appointments, remuneration and job specifications would
8 9
He then says that he would have been summoned out to meetings with other
10:57:27 10
members of the team to Somerton with Philip Monahan and he says that during
11
those years the management of Monarch was spread out and it would be fair to
12
say that communications within the company, I think is what he means, were not
13
great making relations between the various functions of staff at Monarch rather
14
difficult.
10:57:46 15
16
Leaving aside the last two paragraphs which I don't want you to comment on Ms.
17
Gosling, can I direct your attention to what he says there about Mr. Jack
18
Whelan, Cathal McCarthy, Richard Lynn and Ger Enright, in which he says they
19
were appointed outside the normal interview process within the Monarch Group
10:58:00 20
and were appointed directly by Mr. Monahan.
And do you agree with that?
21
A.
No, I'd have to disagree with that.
22
Q. 88
Right.
23
A.
Well they were not employed by the company, to the best of my knowledge.
24
Q. 89
Well is that --
A.
By Richard Lynn.
10:58:17 25
26
So do you say then they were not appointed directly by Mr. Monahan?
He was an employee.
And the other people were ... Jack
Whelan was an agent.
27
Q. 90
By an agent you mean he was an independent contractor?
28
A.
I think he was an auctioneer or an, you know, he was somebody who would come
29 10:58:44 30
with projects that he thought might be of interest to the Monarch Group. Q. 91
And would Mr. Whelan have invoiced, as an agent would, the Monarch Group? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
10:58:49
10:59:00
14 1
A.
2
I would think so.
I didn't -- I wouldn't be involved in the actual financial
end of things.
3
Q. 92
Uh-huh?
4
A.
But I would assume yes.
5
Q. 93
But in looking at those two people now.
Mr. Jack Whelan and Mr. Richard Lynn,
6
would you say that their terms of employment or engagement within the Monarch
7
Group were different from each other in that Mr. Lynn was an employee and
8
Mr. Whelan was not?
9
A.
10:59:21 10
11
Yes, I would.
Richard Lynn was an employee and Jack Whelan to the best of my
knowledge was never an employee. Q. 94
Would you agree with Mr. Sweeney in which he says that Mr. Jack Whelan would
12
have gone out to Somerton to visit Mr. Monahan and that he would have dealt
13
directly with Mr. Monahan?
14 10:59:33 15
16
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 95
Now, what exactly was Mr. Whelan doing for Mr. Monahan, can you assist?
A.
No, I don't think so.
Except insofar as he -- I think he tried to sell Phil
17
various properties, get him interested in various developments.
18
that, I don't really recall.
19
few times okay.
11:00:03 20
I didn't know the man very well.
Q. 96
Yes?
21
A.
I don't know what his role was.
22
Q. 97
But you met him with Mr. Monahan.
23
A.
Yes.
24
26
Q. 98
You know, he would come to Somerton and I'd make the tea and if there The absolute
Well, would you have discussed what had Mr. Whelan was doing for the Monarch Group with Mr. Monahan?
A.
29 11:00:46 30
Is that right?
detail, I'm sorry, I don't really recall.
27 28
I met him a
was minutes to be typed afterwards I'd do minutes or whatever.
11:00:19 25
More than
At the -- it's difficult for me to remember things because I didn't have to remember things, you know, I would write them down and put them on the file.
Q. 99
What file is that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:00:47
11:01:04
15 1
A.
Any file.
I mean, my -- for me to go back and remember things is very
2
difficult because I have nothing to refer to.
3
mind.
I wouldn't carry things in my
They would be put down on paper and ...
4
Q. 100
Well, what file would you have put Mr. Whelan on, for example?
5
A.
Whatever he happened to bring at the time.
6
I mean, if he brought a little
parcel of land in Dundalk or ...
7
Q. 101
And did he bring parcels?
8
A.
I'm sorry, but I'm not -- I'm trying to be very helpful but I don't honestly
9 11:01:18 10
remember. Q. 102
11
Well, if I showed you some documents then in connection with Mr. Whelan and they might assist you?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 103
Fine.
14
A.
I didn't have to remember.
Q. 104
If we could have page 8574, please.
11:01:28 15
I work -- I always worked with paper.
16 17
This is an invoice, apparently, which is recorded as being received in April
18
1992 by Monarch Properties and it's dated the 16th of April 1991.
19
that is a mistake or not, I can't assist you.
Whether
11:01:49 20
21
Do you see the document?
22
A.
I see the document, yeah.
23
Q. 105
And it's a fee to services in relation to residential consultancy in Cherrywood
24
in the sum of 150,000 pounds together with 30,000 pounds VAT.
11:02:01 25
Do you see
that?
26
A.
I do.
27
Q. 106
Now, can I draw your attention first of all to the circulation stamp on the
28 29 11:02:07 30
document? A.
Yes.
Q. 107
And can you see the initials PM and DG? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:02:11
11:02:18
16 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 108
PM I assume is Mr. Monahan and DG is Dominic Glennane?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 109
Who made those entries?
5
A.
It looks like my writing but I can't say I recall it.
6
Q. 110
Now, in your statement you have told the Tribunal, I think, that it was your
7
job to have circulated the mail to everybody.
8 9
8530, please.
11:02:33 10
11
We'll just explain that system.
8530 please.
12 13
Now, if you just look there. this is your statement to the Tribunal.
14
second last paragraph and you outline in outlining your duties you say "I would
11:02:51 15
The
have overseen the circulation of all mail that was delivered to the Monarch
16
Group at the Dundalk office during this period.
17
I would have opened most if not all of the correspondence and date stamped each
18
letter or piece of mail.
19
a circulation stamp signifying who the mail should be circulated to, for
11:03:09 20
A system was in place whereby
I would have reviewed the contents there of and used
example PM would have meant that the incoming correspondence should have been
21
reviewed by Mr. Monahan.
22
reviewed by Dominic Glennane and ES would have meant that the correspondence
23
should have been reviewed by Mr. Sweeney.
24
have to be reviewed by all three directors and also Senior managers of the
11:03:26 25
DG would have meant the correspondence to be
Quite often an item of mail would
company.
26 27
That's your statement isn't it
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 111
Now, if we go back to 8574.
11:03:36 30
This is the document dealing with Whelan land.
Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:03:36
11:03:44
17 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 112
And it's -- the circulation stamp is the circulation stamp you were talking
3
about in your statement; isn't that right?
4
A.
It is, yes.
5
Q. 113
It is likely that if this was delivered to Somerton that the initials were PM
6
and DQ -- DG were placed on it by you; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 114
It would follow that you have seen this document?
9
A.
If would.
11:04:03 10
11
have. Q. 115
12
Yes.
I can't say that I recall it.
It certainly looks as if I should
That's not unusual for me not to remember, sorry. It would also mean that Mr. Whelan was putting in a fee of 150,000
pounds?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 116
To Monarch Properties in connection with residential consultancy at Cherrywood?
A.
Okay.
Q. 117
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to what Mr. Whelan might or might
11:04:18 15
16 17
not have done prior to April of 1992 that would have entitled him to 150,000
18
pounds in connection with the residential consultancy at Cherrywood?
19 11:04:38 20
A.
No, I'm sorry.
Q. 118
Is it likely that the person with whom Mr. Whelan would have dealt was the late
21
I don't recall at all, I don't, sorry.
Mr. Monahan?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 119
Would he have dealt with anybody else in the group?
24
A.
Probably not.
Q. 120
Would it be fair to say then that there was a separate and special relationship
11:04:52 25
26
between the late Mr. Jack Whelan and the late Mr. Philip Monahan?
27
A.
I don't think so.
28
Q. 121
You were there, isn't that right, Ms. Gosling, on the ground, as it were?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 122
And you were there at the time this invoice was created and submitted; isn't
11:05:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:05:24
11:05:29
18 1
that right?
2
A.
That's true, yes.
3
Q. 123
It's a very substantial invoice?
4
A.
It's a very substantial invoice.
5
Q. 124
You have already told the Tribunal that Mr. Whelan was never an employee of the
6
Monarch Group; isn't that right?
7
A.
To the best of my knowledge, yes.
8
Q. 125
So, if this invoice is accurate it suggests that Mr. Whelan felt that he had
9
done 150,000 pounds worth of work for the Monarch Group in connection with
11:05:41 10
Cherrywood up to at least April 1992; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's what it certainly suggests, yes.
12
Q. 126
Now, Mr. Whelan dealt, you have told the Tribunal, with the late Mr. Philip
13 14 11:05:52 15
Monahan? A.
Yes.
Q. 127
Now, what could Mr. Whelan have done in connection with Cherrywood for
16
Mr. Monahan that would have entitled him to 150,000 pounds by April 1992?
17
A.
I don't know.
18
Q. 128
Do you know who else in the -- who if anybody in the Monarch Group could assist
19 11:06:12 20
21
the Tribunal as to what exactly Mr. Whelan was doing? A.
Well, I would -- I would think probably Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Glennane.
Q. 129
If I could show you a document at 3999.
Which is a Cherrywood document.
22 23
And I want to draw your attention the last six or seven entries on that.
24
this is an internal document.
11:06:47 25
It's headed Cherrywood Village.
And
So it's in
connection with the Cabinteely development
26
A.
Okay.
27
Q. 130
And you will see there entered Whelan Land Specialists 150,000 pounds?
28
A.
Okay.
29
Q. 131
According to the NL, which is the nominal larger.
11:06:58 30
Golf Club, 1,650? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And beneath that Killiney
11:07:00
11:07:16
19 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 132
The Tribunal has heard evidence that there were attempts made to swap land with
3
a golf club in the area between Cherrywood and a local golf club.
Do you know
4
whether Mr. Whelan had anything to do with any proposed land swap with Killiney
5
Golf Club or any other golf club?
6
A.
I don't.
7
Q. 133
Do you know what project Mr. Whelan was involved in in connection with
8 9
Cherrywood at all? Do you have any idea? A.
11:07:38 10
11
Off the top of my head I've no idea.
No.
At this moment in time no.
you know, a fee of that calibre. Q. 134
I don't recall him as being someone who had, But I just don't know, sorry.
Can I show you another document.
At 5040, please.
12 13
This is also in connection with -- it's an internally generated Monarch
14
Properties document.
11:08:05 15
with GRE.
It's a 1994 or 1995 document and it's itemising balances
In other words, a summary of the amounts due.
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 135
This would be amounts due by GRE to Monarch?
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 136
And I want to draw to your attention the third last item?
A.
Okay.
Q. 137
And there is an entry.
11:08:16 20
21 22
Another entry in relation to Mr. Whelan which is Jack
Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan 121,000 pounds?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 138
So the first invoice that Mr. Whelan has put in is 150,000 pounds.
11:08:33 25
And now
there is a separate amount of either 100,000 plus VAT or 121,000 pounds.
26
you see that?
27
A.
I see that, okay.
28
Q. 139
That would suggest, if that's accurate, Ms. Gosling, that between 1992 and
29 11:08:56 30
Do
1994/1995 Mr. Whelan did around 250,000 pounds worth of work for Monarch Properties, according to himself in connection with Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:08:58
11:09:07
20 1
A.
It would certainly suggest that, yes.
2
Q. 140
Yes.
3
A.
It certainly suggests that, yes.
4
Q. 141
Do you have any idea at all as to what Mr. Whelan was doing?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 142
You agree, I think, that Mr. Whelan would have met Mr. Philip Monahan and had
7
Isn't that right?
Sorry, I don't.
meetings in Somerton with Mr. Philip Monahan.
Is that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 143
Did you ever know him to attend a meeting with anybody else in the Monarch
11:09:26 10
Group?
11
A.
I think he would have, yes.
12
Q. 144
I'm not asking you now what he would have.
13 14 11:09:49 15
But -I'm asking you other than
Mr. Monahan do you know of Mr. Whelan having meetings with anybody else? A.
No.
Q. 145
Can I show you another document.
At 5180.
16 17
This is a document created in June of 1994.
18
being provided to GRE of forthcoming costs, do you understand?
19 11:10:06 20
And these are estimates that are
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 146
And listed under the heading "zoning costs" and under the heading "staff
21
success bonus" there is R Lynn 100,000 pounds and in brackets beside that
22
similar to JW whom I suggest to you is Mr. Jack Whelan?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 147
So, in June of 1994, in addition to the other two payments, this document is
11:10:28 25
recording or seeking going forward into the future from GRE agreement to the
26
payment of 100,000 pounds success fee to Jack Whelan in connection with zoning.
27
Do you see that?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 148
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to what input the late Mr. Jack
11:10:43 30
Whelan might have had into the zoning of Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:10:47
11:11:23
21 1
A.
No, I'm sorry.
I can't.
It wouldn't be -- I would -- it probably seems very
2
strange to say that I don't remember but I don't.
3
the level of being involved.
4
to be typed up and -- so I don't know.
5
getting success bonuses and such.
6
Q. 149
7
I wasn't, um, I wasn't of
I was in the level of typing up whatever needed I certainly -- I've never heard of him
It's news to me.
I just want to draw to your attention what's outlined in the document as giving rise to the success bonus to the staff?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 150
It says over the next six months it will be necessary for the above staff and
11:11:36 10
the above staff are in fact Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lafferty and others to be
11
available on a seven day basis to meet with local politicians, community
12
representatives, sporting groups and others who will have a vested interest in
13
the outcome of the move towards the variation of the Development Plan.
14
will have to be suitably briefed and be available to arrange and attend
11:11:56 15
Staff
functions, meetings and briefings and be sufficiently alert to counter adverse
16
representations which will be made to the local politicians.
17
addition to attending meetings with the local authority officials?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 151
And a success fee there.
11:12:12 20
The above is in
The total amount of success bonus being sought in
respect of the Monarch staff there comes to 180,000 pounds excluding Mr.
21
Whelan?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 152
And Mr. Whelan is, this document suggests that prior to June of 1994 there was
24
a separate arrangement in connection with Mr. Whelan for the payment of 100,000
11:12:30 25
pounds success fee.
Do you understand the point?
26
A.
I understand the point, yes.
27
Q. 153
Do you agree that's what the document says?
28
A.
That's certainly what the document is suggesting, yes.
29
Q. 154
And have you any knowledge of any other arrangement or agreement to pay a
11:12:43 30
success fee of 100,000 pounds to Jack Whelan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:12:46
11:13:02
22 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 155
Do you have any knowledge of an involvement in Prague, that the late
3
Mr. Monahan had an interest for some time in connection with a possible
4
development in Prague.
Were you aware of that?
5
A.
There was certainly something about Prague, yes.
6
Q. 156
Who was the person who introduced the Prague project to Mr. Monahan?
7
A.
That might have been Jack Whelan.
8 9 11:13:30 10
I don't know.
It's possible.
But maybe
I'm just thinking that because what you ... I don't know. Q. 157
Do you know whether Mr. Whelan was involved in the Prague project or not?
A.
You are certainly giving me questions that I wasn't expecting.
I mean, I
11
don't really remember what Prague was but I think possibly, yes, that Jack
12
Whelan was involved with Prague.
13
Q. 158
Did you ever meet the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
14
A.
Once or twice.
Q. 159
Where did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
16
A.
Um, probably at Somerton, yeah.
17
Q. 160
And in whose company was Mr. Lawlor?
18
A.
With Mr. Monahan.
19
Q. 161
Did Mr. Monahan introduce Mr. Lawlor to you?
A.
Yes, yes.
21
Q. 162
And approximately what period of time would this have been.?
22
A.
That would have been after the move to Somerton, which was sort of the end of
11:13:54 15
11:14:09 20
23 24
the 80's, beginning of the 90's. Q. 163
11:14:32 25
Were you aware of any payments made by either Mr. Monahan or the Monarch Group or any of those companies to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
26
A.
Not off the top of my head, no.
27
Q. 164
Were you aware of any assurances or any undertakings given by the late
28 29 11:15:01 30
Mr. Monahan on behalf of Mr. Lawlor or any of Mr. Lawlor's companies? A.
I'm not quite sure what you mean.
Q. 165
For example, an undertaking to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing that if Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:15:07
11:15:24
23 1
defaulted on the repayments of his motorcar that they would be paid by Monarch
2
Properties Limited?
3
A.
Yeah, there was a vague recollection, yes, yeah.
4
Q. 166
And what exactly do you remember about that, Ms. Gosling?
5
A.
I presume it's, it would have been a case where the man couldn't raise a loan
6
for a car in his -- from his own circumstances and so Phil would give a
7
guarantee that if, if Phil believed in someone, that they would, you know,
8
honour a commitment like that but because of their personal circumstances they
9
weren't, they wouldn't qualify under the banking laws, he'd guarantee.
11:16:05 10
11
It
wouldn't be unusual. Q. 167
12
Can you think of anybody for whom Mr. Monahan provided this service other than the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
13
A.
Off the top of my head, no.
14
Q. 168
Well, if it isn't unusual it means that he did it for more than one person.
11:16:26 15
But it wouldn't be unusual.
He was ...
Do you understand, Ms. Gosling?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 169
Leaving you aside.
18
A.
Yeah, he would have done it for people he knew well.
19
Q. 170
Would it follow then that by doing this for the late Mr. Liam Lawlor that at
11:16:40 20
He would have done it for me. You would have worked for him; isn't that right?
the time that the document or at the time that the undertaking was given the
21
late Mr. Monahan must have known the late Mr. Liam Lawlor fairly well?
22
A.
Oh, he wouldn't have done it otherwise, yes.
23
Q. 171
7594.
24 11:16:52 25
This is a document dated June of 1988.
26 27
It's a letter of undertaking to Woodchester Hamilton leasing on behalf of
28
Advance Protein Limited and Advance Protein Limited was a company beneficially
29
owned by the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
11:17:14 30
And it gives an undertaking to Hamilton
Leasing in the event that Advance Protein Limited defaulted on the loan that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:17:20
11:17:33
24 1
Monarch Properties Limited when called upon will re pay the loan?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 172
Do you understand?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 173
So, effectively, what is happening there is that this is Mr. Phil Monahan
6
signature; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 174
Mr. Monahan true the medium of Monarch Properties Limited is guaranteeing the
9 11:17:36 10
11
repayment of the loan by Mr. Lawlor.
Do you understand?
A.
Yes.
Q. 175
And is it your situation -- your evidence that he would not have done so unless
12
he had known the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor well at that stage?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 176
Uh-huh?
A.
He obviously trusted the man.
16
Q. 177
By June of '88?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 178
I would suggest then that the relationship between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor
11:17:52 15
19 11:18:07 20
21
must have predated June of 1988? A.
Yes.
Q. 179
What exactly was the relationship between Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Monahan.
22 23
So, yes.
assist the Tribunal? A.
24
I don't think I can except insofar as there would have been a mutual respect, I suppose, between them.
11:18:37 25
I don't know how the relationship came about or how
long it was in existence.
26
Q. 180
Did you know that Mr. Lawlor was a member of Dublin County Council?
27
A.
I think I knew him as a TD.
So to answer the question, the answer is I don't
28
think I -- I wouldn't have -- I wouldn't have distinguished him as a
29
councillor.
11:19:09 30
Can you
Q. 181
I would have thought of him as a TD.
You would have known he was an elected representative? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:19:12
11:19:21
25 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 182
And certainly the documentation would suggest that Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor
3
knew each other prior to June of 1988?
4
A.
Yes, yes.
5
Q. 183
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you Mr. Lawlor?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 184
Never?
8
A.
Not that I'm aware of, no.
9 11:19:34 10
He wasn't in the habit of discussing people with
me. Q. 185
Did Mr. Lawlor come out to Somerton to visit Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
I don't -- I think that when I met him it was at Somerton.
12
Q. 186
And how many times would you have met him?
13
A.
I think only once or twice.
14
But I think there -- I think there was a
friendship there and they were neighbours or, you know, Mr. Lawlor also lived
11:20:11 15
in a house called Somerton.
His was in Lucan.
It caused a bit of confusion
16
at times insofar as, you know, occasionally a letter would come addressed to
17
Liam Lawlor, Somerton House, Lucan.
18
So ...
19
Q. 187
11:20:39 20
It would arrive in Somerton, Castleknock.
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Lawlor when he was in communication with the Tribunal prepared a list in which he indicated the people who had made
21
political donations and included in that list was Monarch Properties?
22
A.
Was I aware?
23
Q. 188
Uh-huh.?
24
A.
No.
Q. 189
And that Mr. Lawlor indicated to the Tribunal he believed that the amount that
11:20:53 25
26 27
11:21:17 30
But it wouldn't surprise me.
he had received was an amount in the order of 40,000 pounds? A.
28 29
No.
I wasn't involved in the actual payment out of company monies so, if that's what the company says was paid that's what was paid.
Q. 190
That's not what I said.
I said that Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal that he had
received of the order of 40,000 pounds from Monarch Properties but that Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:21:21
11:21:51
26 1
Properties indicated that their records did not show payments of that amount.?
2
A.
No, I wasn't aware of that, sorry.
3
Q. 191
Did you ever hear of a company called Comex Trading Corporation?
4
A.
Not off the top of my head, no, it doesn't ring a bell.
5
Q. 192
The -- I think the late Mr. Liam Lawlor told the Tribunal that he used the name
6
I wasn't.
Comex in order to create invoices on foot of which he would seek payment?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 193
It doesn't ring a bell with you?
9
A.
Not at all.
Q. 194
Can I show you a document at 1255, please.
11:22:12 10
It doesn't ring a bell with me, no.
Not at all.
11 12
Do you recognise the handwriting on that document?
13
A.
Um, no.
14
Q. 195
And I want to draw to your attention, five from the bottom, two entries of the
11:22:32 15
Somebody in the accounts office, but no.
16th of October 1990?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 196
Do you see those two?
18
A.
Yeah, I don't know.
19
Q. 197
And you will see there that on the 16th of October 1990 two cheques are written
11:22:50 20
It's, um, it's not name I recall at all.
to Comex Trading Corporation?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 198
One is for 28,000 and the second is for 28,300 pounds?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 199
And the company who makes the payment is L&C Properties Limited?
A.
Okay.
26
Q. 200
That was the company that developed Tallaght; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 201
Isn't that right?
29
A.
I think so, yes.
Q. 202
And I think the bank statements are at 3013 and 3014.
11:23:06 25
11:23:13 30
I think so.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
They needn't be taken
11:23:20
11:23:34
27 1
up at the moment.
The debits are there?
2
A.
Okay.
3
Q. 203
And I think if I show you 1256.
4 5
And this is an extract from the current account of Economic Reports Limited, a
6
company owned and operated by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor.
7
your attention a lodgement on the 26th of October 1990 in the sum of 28,300.
8
Second from the bottom.
9 11:23:46 10
And I want to draw to
Do you see that
A.
Yeah.
Q. 204
And that appears to be the proceeds of one of the cheques drawn by L&C
11
Properties in favour of Comex Trading Corporation?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 205
That would suggest that in October of 1990 that two cheques one of 28,000 and
14
one of 28,300 were written by L & C Properties Limited in favour of the late
11:24:06 15
Mr. Liam Lawlor's company or in favour of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor through a
16
medium of Comex Trading corporation.
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 206
Right that.
19 11:24:25 20
21
Do you understand?
Would mean that a sum, at that stage 56,300 pounds was paid to
Mr. Lawlor, I think, in October of 1990 is the reality? A.
Okay.
Q. 207
Did the late Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you making any payment to Mr. Lawlor
22
in 1990?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 208
Were you aware of the fact that such a payment was apparently made to
11:24:36 25
Mr. Lawlor or his company in October 1990?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 209
If such a payment had been authorised by Mr. Monahan.
28 29 11:24:47 30
Is it something you
would have expected he would have discussed with you? A.
No.
Q. 210
Are you saying that Mr. Monahan did not in general discuss payments made with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:24:54
11:25:03
28 1 2
you? A.
3
That's what I'm saying.
He wasn't in the habit of discussing payments or
things with me.
4
Q. 211
Did he ever discuss any political payments with you?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 212
Never?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 213
And I want to show you then at 1267.
9 11:25:11 10
An entry in the general ledger in relation to L&C Limited.
11
And if we could
look at the first four lines of that.
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 214
And what I want to draw to your attention there -- if we could just increase
14
the first four lines, please.
11:25:33 15
Of the entries commencing 'interior design'.
You will see the second and third entry are the payments of 28,300 and 28,000.
16
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 215
Will you just read out to the Tribunal the attribution that are given to them.
19 11:25:49 20
How are they described? A.
Strategy plan.
21
Q. 216
Yeah?
22
A.
Strategy plan.
23
Q. 217
Who is the person that would have made the decision to donate those two
24 11:26:00 25
payments as strategy plan? A.
Sorry, I don't know.
26
Q. 218
Who was the accountant in L&C Properties at the time, in 1990?
27
A.
I don't know who the accountant would have been.
28 29 11:26:22 30
The financial director was
Mr. Glennane but who the actual accountant was at that stage, I don't know. Q. 219
So are you saying that Mr. Glennane is the person who would be able to tell the Tribunal why the two payments to Comex Trading Corporation are described as Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:26:24
11:26:47
29 1
strategy plan in the books of L & C Property?
2
A.
I would think so.
3
Q. 220
Would Mr. Philip Reilly, for example, who was also involved in L & C and in
4
Either he or Mr. Sweeney.
Tallaght be able to assist the Tribunal as to how that designation came about?
5
A.
Possibly.
6
Q. 221
Were you ever aware of any requests being made by the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor to
7
I don't know.
Mr. Monahan for money, for finance or for support?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 222
And you were never involved in or connected with making any payment; is that
11:27:09 10
right? Any political payment?
11
A.
No, I wasn't involved, no.
12
Q. 223
Are you being fair to yourself there, Ms. Gosling?
13
A.
I don't know.
14
Q. 224
Were you involved in the 25,000 pounds payment to Mr. Charles Haughey?
A.
No.
Q. 225
I think that, if I can show you 3100.
11:27:28 15
16
Maybe not.
17 18
This is a cheque for 25,000 pounds made out to Charles Haughey, Party Leader's
19
Fund
11:27:45 20
A.
Okay.
21
Q. 226
Signed by Mr. Monahan.
22
A.
Uh-huh, that's right.
23
Q. 227
Whose writing is the main part of the cheque in?
24
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 228
Is it your writing?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 229
Did you know anything about that payment?
28
A.
No, I didn't.
29
Q. 230
If I could show you 8716, please.
11:27:52 25
Is that right?
11:28:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:28:01
11:28:22
30 1
And if I can draw to your attention the fifth entry on that.
And do you see
2
there, Ms. Gosling, Paul Kavanagh re CJH and it looks like snack or a word such
3
as that and then beneath that 25,000 pounds
4
A.
Okay.
5
Q. 231
And that entry is on a diary dated the 15th of January 1991?
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 232
Is that your handwriting?
8
A.
The Paul Kavanagh on Harcourt Street looks like mine, yes.
9
Q. 233
Mr. Monahan when he gave evidence to the Moriarty Tribunal said that that was
11:28:39 10
your handwriting and that he would have provided that information to you.
11 12
you agree with that? A.
13 14 11:28:59 15
Do
No, the Paul Kavanagh is my writing.
The re CJH snack, that's Phil's own
writing. Q. 234
Right.
If I show you exactly what Mr. Monahan told the Moriarty Tribunal.
At 7823.
16 17
At question 40.
He confirms that it's in his secretary's handwriting.
18
he's asked at 41.
19
A:
Yes
11:29:15 20
Q:
And who would have given her that information
And
"Is that whose writing it is your secretary's?
21
A: Me but I have no recollection of having a snack or what the snack consisted
22
of.
23
Question 43: But it's fairly detailed to this extent.
24
limited note it appears to be re CJH which we must assume to be Charles J.
11:29:29 25
Although it's a
Haughey you would agree.
26
A:
Yes.
27
Q 44: And 25,000.
28
diary would you agree
29
A:
Yeah.
11:29:39 30
Q:
And you say you would have imparted that information to the secretary to
So there's a fair amount of detail in that note in the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:29:43
11:29:54
31 1
enable her to fill up the diary?
2
A:
3
And the part I don't have any recollection of having a snack with Paul
4
Kavanagh"
I don't think she'd write it without me without me imparting it to her.
5 6
So do you agree with what Mr. Monahan told the Moriarty Tribunal, that the
7
entry in the diary would have been made by you as a result of information
8
given to you by him?
9
A.
11:30:06 10
11
Yes and no.
Yes, in that you showed me my handwriting.
Kavanagh's' in my handwriting. Q. 235
And at 8716.
The 'Paul
But the others was Phil's own writing.
Which is the document in question.
Can I ask you, are the
12
words 25,000 pounds in your handwriting and the words Harcourt Street in your
13
handwriting?
14 11:30:31 15
A.
Harcourt Street is my writing.
25,000 is not.
That's Mr. Monahan's writing.
Q. 236
And I think it is also mentioned in a diary at 8717.
Which is of February the
16
6th.
17
third from the bottom on the first page if it could be increased, please.
18
Third from the bottom.
19
PM, cheques 8 - 9, Somerton.
11:31:05 20
A.
21 22
11:31:19 25
And some
There is an entry Paul Kavanagh 25,000 pounds.
Paul Kavanagh is my writing.
Is any of that in your handwriting? And 8 - 9 Somerton is my writing.
I don't know
Q. 237
It certainly would appear to be in connection with a cheque for 25,000 pounds isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 238
Can I ask you then about the cheque itself.
3100.
26 27
This is written on the personal account of the late Mr. Monahan isn't that
28
right?
29 11:31:28 30
By
what that meant 8 - 9.
23 24
Which is apparently the day that the cheque was handed over.
A.
Yes.
Q. 239
And is that the account that you would have reconciled on a monthly basis? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:31:35
11:31:45
32 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 240
Because I think in your statement you told the Tribunal that you would have had
3
responsibility for the personal bank account of Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
Well I reconciled it.
5
Q. 241
So you would have reconciled this cheque, obviously?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Well when I say I reconciled it, I did it in retrospect, when the bank
statements came in.
8
Q. 242
Yes?
9
A.
So I didn't necessarily know -- there were two cheque books.
11:32:11 10
one and I had one in the office.
Mrs. Monahan had
But I didn't have access to Mrs. Monahan's
11
cheque book to put names against what they, you know, what the cheques were.
12
So I -- bank reconciliation would show a lot of blank spaces.
13
Q. 243
Uh-huh?
14
A.
Because I would just put the amounts in.
Q. 244
But certainly Mr. Monahan would have trusted you.
11:32:36 15
16
that.
17
book; is that right?
There's no question about
But to the extent that you had possession of a second domestic cheque
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 245
And you also carried out the reconciliation for Mr. Monahan?
A.
Yes.
Q. 246
And so you would have been in a very trusted position with Mr. Monahan.
11:32:49 20
21 22
Wouldn't that be fair to say?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 247
Yes.
11:33:00 25
Notwithstanding that.
pounds to Mr. Haughey.
You know nothing about this payment of 25,000
Is that right?
26
A.
No, I don't.
27
Q. 248
And other than the entries that you acknowledge in the diary are in your
28 29 11:33:10 30
handwriting.
You don't know anything about it?
A.
No.
Q. 249
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan was accustomed to keeping amounts of cash at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:33:15
11:33:20
33 1
Somerton or elsewhere?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 250
No, you don't know or he didn't?
4
A.
He didn't.
5
Q. 251
How do you know that?
6
A.
Well I don't believe -- I don't know that he did.
7
Q. 252
Uh-huh.
8
A.
I can't be sure but I don't believe he did.
9
Q. 253
Approximately how many companies was Mr. Monahan involved in?
A.
Quite a large number.
11:33:42 10
11
I don't think so.
Are you sure about that?
I know at one stage it was like the Heinz 57 variety,
it's, so ...
12
Q. 254
And did all of those companies have bank accounts?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 255
And how did Mr. Monahan fund his own activities out of his personal bank
11:34:13 15
account?
16
A.
I don't honestly know.
17
Q. 256
I mean, Mr. Monahan was in a position to write a cheque for 25,000 pounds in
18 19 11:34:24 20
February of 1991 to Mr. Charles Haughey; isn't that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 257
Yes.
21
Now, do you know what were the source of the funds that came into the
bank account that enabled Mr. Monahan to write that cheque?
22
A.
They would probably have come from --
23
Q. 258
No, no?
24
A.
From Monarch.
Q. 259
No, no.
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 260
Do you know whether or not therefore Mr. Monahan had access to cash or large
11:34:37 25
28 29 11:35:02 30
Do you know where the source of the funds?
amounts of cash? A.
I don't believe he had.
Q. 261
You don't know where the money came from that financed the account of which you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:35:07
11:35:20
34 1
had a cheque book; isn't that right?
2
A.
It came from one of the Monarch accounts.
3
Q. 262
Uh-huh.
4
A.
Probably MPSL.
5
Q. 263
No, no, which one?
6
A.
Sorry, I can't say for definite.
7
Q. 264
Can I just take you back to something.
Which one?
I don't know.
8 9
8717, please.
On the diary.
11:35:31 10
11
On this subject, I just want to draw to your attention to an entry that I think
12
is partly made, subject to correction, by yourself by Mr. Monahan.
13
down the page the 6th of February
14 11:35:45 15
Half way
A.
Okay.
Q. 265
Do you see there PM? I think it's S Murphy, subject to correction, 100,000
16
pounds cash.?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 266
Now, can you assist the Tribunal at all as to why Mr. Monahan would be making
19
an entry about 100,000 pounds cash on the 6th of February 1991, the same date
11:36:08 20
that he's paying 25,000 pounds to Mr. Haughey?
21
A.
Absolutely no idea at this moment in time, no.
22
Q. 267
Well do you know anything about that entry for 100,000 pounds cash on the 6th
23 24 11:36:31 25
of February 1991? A.
I have to truthfully say no.
Q. 268
And if Mr. Monahan had acquired or had in his possession 100,000 pounds cash in
26
I don't remember.
February of 1991, you didn't know about it; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 269
And you don't know where it came from, if he had it; isn't that right?
29
A.
That's right.
Q. 270
And you can't assist as to whether Mr. Monahan is paying Mr. Murphy 100,000
11:36:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:36:53
11:37:01
35 1
pounds cash or Mr. Murphy is paying Mr. Monahan 100,000 pounds cash; isn't that
2
right?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 271
Do you know who Mr. Murphy is?
5
A.
Is I have no idea who Mr. Murphy is.
6
Q. 272
No idea?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 273
All right.
9
But it would certainly appear to suggest, the entry being in
Mr. Monahan's own handwriting, that on the same date as he writes the cheque
11:37:14 10
for 25,000 pounds to Mr. Haughey out of his domestic bank account, he is also
11
involved in some transaction that involves 100,000 pounds cash; isn't that
12
right?
13
A.
It suggests that all right.
14
Q. 274
Uh-huh.
11:37:36 15
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had ever had any dealings in cash or
negotiated with people in cash or dealt with cash at all in the course of his
16
business?
17
A.
I don't think he did.
18
Q. 275
Yes.
19
Can I show you a document at 8105, which is dated May of 1986.
By
which time you would have been in the employment of Mr. Monahan; isn't that
11:37:56 20
right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 276
And this is a discussion about what's going to happen to money that's raised as
23
a result of the Tesco transaction.
24
Ms. Gosling?
11:38:07 25
26
A.
Vaguely, vaguely.
Q. 277
Uh-huh.
27
Do you remember the Tesco transaction,
I'd forgotten all about that.
This is a meeting that takes place between -- would you have typed up
the minutes of this meeting?
28
A.
I don't believe so.
29
Q. 278
Uh-huh?
A.
It was probably typed by Sean Mooney but I've -- well or in Sean Mooney's
11:38:23 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:38:29
11:38:46
36 1
office.
2
probably by Sean Mooney.
3
Q. 279
I don't know.
All right.
Anyway.
I don't remember this, so I would think it was
Paragraph one records that Monarch is in funds because
4
of the completion of the Tesco transaction and PM, that's Mr. Philip Monahan,
5
wants now to make disbursements to Dominic Glennane, Eddie Sweeney and to
6
himself?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 280
Right.
9
And then he goes down -- number -- and he says he outlines the money
that he wants people to get.
At paragraph two the following is recorded.
11:39:00 10
11
From his own viewpoint, Mr. Monahan wants to ensure that there is sufficient
12
cash available to him and to his wife in the event of his death and that this
13
cash is free and not tide up with Monarch.
14
1 million and one and a half million from Monarch tax free.
11:39:17 15
PM would like to withdraw between This money would
not be required all at once but it would be available on loan account to
16
Mr. Monahan as and when he required T
17 18 19 11:39:35 20
Were you aware of that proposal? A.
Well, I would have seen these minutes at some stage but.
Q. 281
Well, were you aware of Mr. Monahan's desire in 1986 to have either one million
21 22
or one million and a half available to himself in cash? A.
23 24
I must have been but, yeah, I suppose I have to answer yes.
I don't remember.
You know, I don't actually remember but, yes, the answer would have to be yes. Q. 282
11:40:04 25
And was there a system in Monarch or an agreement or an understanding in Monarch that when things came good on developments people would be paid
26
bonuses?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 283
And that those bonuses would be paid either in cash or what's described I think
29 11:40:17 30
in the documentation as a tax efficient manner? A.
A tax efficient manner, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:40:19
11:40:25
37 1
Q. 284
Is that right?
2
A.
Uh-huh.
3
Q. 285
And were you yourself a recipient of such a bonus?
4
A.
Um, yes.
5
Q. 286
And were other members of Monarch recipients of such bonuses?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 287
Including payments in cash?
8
A.
Not in cash.
9
Q. 288
Well, Mr. Sweeney swore an affidavit in the High Court in proceedings when he
11:40:39 10
instituted proceedings against Monarch Properties.
11
You will remember those
proceedings between Monarch Properties?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 289
And at page 8056 of this affidavit, Mr. Sweeney's sworn document.
14 11:40:53 15
He records at paragraph 10.
He is talking about an ex gratia payment.
"I
16
requested that any such agreement would be implemented on a professional basis
17
and accordingly, it would be agreed that Mr Sean Mooney of the company's
18
auditors and accountants, Stokes Kennedy Crowley, would be asked to make the
19
necessary arrangements.
11:41:11 20
Various meetings were held between Mr. Monahan and
myself at which we discussed the mechanism for the implementation of this
21
arrangement and it was agreed that ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds would be
22
notionally paid to me".
23 24
That's 8057.
11:41:26 25
"For which I would receive a cash sum of 50,000 pounds in a tax
efficient manner with the balance of 50,000 pounds being paid to Mr. Monahan as
26
consideration for the acquisition of a tranche of his existing shareholding
27
equivalent to 15% of the issued shared capital of the Monarch Group.
28
see that?
29 11:41:41 30
Do you
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 290
What Mr. Monahan is apparently swearing there is that he had an agreement to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:41:47
11:41:57
38 1
receive 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner.
Now, when Mr. Sweeney comes
2
to give evidence we can deal with the efficiency of the manner in which he was
3
paid that sum.
4
A.
Uh-huh.
5
Q. 291
What I'm drawing to your attention here is an apparent agreement according to
6
Mr. Sweeney for the 50,000 pounds in cash.
7
of bonus system that operated in Monarch whether those payments were in cash?
8
A.
9 11:42:17 10
I'm asking you whether the system
Well they were in a -- they would be in a cheque that maybe said cash rather than the person's name.
Q. 292
Well, who would the cheque be made out to?
11
A.
I would think the person concerned.
12
Q. 293
Did you ever receive a bonus?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 294
And who was your cheque made out to?
A.
Ann Gosling.
16
Q. 295
Did you ever receive a cheque by any other mechanism?
17
A.
I don't think so, no.
18
Q. 296
Do you have any involvement in a company called Circinus?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 297
Was that a company in which you had a beneficial interest?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 298
How much of that company did you own?
23
A.
Um, I think it was 50 percent.
24
Q. 299
Did that company receive a disbursement by way of a bonus following on a share
11:42:29 15
11:42:45 20
11:43:05 25
deal involving export sales relief?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 300
And was your share of that a share of 5%?
28
A.
Probably, yeah.
29
Q. 301
And how were you paid that?
A.
I got cheques on two subsequent years I think.
11:43:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:43:28
11:43:42
39 1
Q. 302
Uh-huh?
2
A.
Of a small amount.
3
employment.
And I didn't actually get the remainder until I left my
It was a tax scheme.
4
Q. 303
Uh-huh?
5
A.
Tax scheme to -- but myself and the other person involved, we didn't
6 7
actually -- we just got a small proportion in ... Q. 304
8 9 11:44:01 10
Were the beneficiaries of that particular scheme Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Tom Monahan and yourself?
A.
Yes.
Q. 305
And did you all receive payments made as a result of the profits generated by
11
that scheme?
12
A.
Eventually.
13
Q. 306
And were the shares in that scheme held in a company called Circinus Limited?
14
A.
My share and Mr. Tom Monahan's share was.
Q. 307
Yes.
16
A.
That was one company that had a bank account so the cheques were from Circinus.
17
Q. 308
So that the payment or the profit was paid initially to a company called
11:44:18 15
18 19 11:44:38 20
And were the cheques made payable to Circinus Limited?
Circinus Limited and Circinus paid you? A.
Yes.
Q. 309
And you were a director and I think indeed secretary, together with Mr. Philip
21
Monahan, of Circinus Limited; isn't that right?
22
A.
I think it was Mr. Tom Monahan.
23
Q. 310
I show you a document which is not in the brief but which will be added to the
24
brief.
11:44:55 25
Circinus which records Mr. Phil Monahan and not Tom Monahan as being the
26 27
director? A.
28 29 11:45:31 30
Which is an extract from the company's registrar in relation to
That might be after Tom died (document handed to witness). Thank you. Okay. When -- the original directors were Tom Monahan.
Q. 311
And then --
A.
And then Tom died. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:45:32
11:45:43
40 1
Q. 312
And Mr. Philip Monahan became a director?
2
A.
I think so, yeah.
3
Q. 313
But was Circinus, if I understand it correctly, a vehicle that was designed to
4
take your share of a profit in a scheme.
Is that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 314
And was the entire of the profit, designed to pay out an aggregate sum of 1.8
7
million; is that right?
8
A.
In total to all of the directors.
9
Q. 315
Is that right?
A.
Um, I don't remember the sum sums but probably, yes.
Q. 316
And that Mr. Glennane was to receive 20%, which was 450,000 pounds.
11:45:55 10
11
And
12
Mr. Sweeney was to get 270,000 pounds for his share and Mr. Monahan, I think,
13
was in fact to get 1.08 million for his shares?
14
A.
11:46:17 15
16
Possibly, yeah.
I don't remember the figures.
I'd forgotten the scheme
until now but yes. Q. 317
17
The shares of the profit that were taken by the employees on foot of this agreement were taken in various companies; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 318
So that Mr. Glennane had his company, which I understand was called Aspentree
11:46:32 20
Limited and Mr. Sweeney had his company called Isotope limited and Mr. Monahan
21
had his company; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 319
What was Mr. Monahan's company?
24
A.
You'll have to remind me because I don't -- I'm sorry, I don't remember.
Q. 320
Did Mr. Monahan take his share through Circinus Limited?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 321
But the division that was being paid out at that particular time was a sum of
11:46:45 25
28 29 11:47:01 30
1.08 million to Mr. Phil Monahan; isn't that right? A.
I don't know.
I don't know what the figures were.
Q. 322
Well according to the affidavit sworn by Mr. Sweeney in the proceedings at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:47:05
11:47:23
41 1
8058.
2 3
At paragraph 17.
4
financial success of The Square Shopping Centre the group agreed to pay an
5
aggregate dividend in a tax efficient manner, devised by Stokes Kennedy
6
Crowley, to myself and Messrs. Monahan and Glennane.
7
through Anglo Irish Bank corporation to various especially formed nominee
8
companies.
9
Limited and he describes that as 15 percent of 1.8 million.
11:47:44 10
He says in January '92 as a result of the outstanding
The monies were paid
In this regard I received a dividend of 270,000 pounds via Isotope Mr. Glennane
received 450,000 ie 20 percent via Aspentree with a balance of 1.08 million, 65
11
percent, being paid to Mr. Monahan via Monarch Properties Holdings Limited and
12
Circinus, that is Sirinus but it should be Circinus Limited.
13
A.
14 11:48:07 15
Now --
I don't think his -- I'm not too sure that he is totally accurate there in how it was done.
Q. 323
16
So you say that what was paid to Circinus would have been your share of the bonus or the profit; is that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 324
And there is a dispute on the affidavits between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Sweeney.
19
I don't think the amounts are disputed.
11:48:25 20
payments.
21
What's disputed is the purpose of the
Whether it was by way of an investment or matters such as that
sort?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 325
But do you agree that out of these monies you received a sum equivalent of 5%
24 11:48:48 25
and you took it through a company called Circinus Limited? A.
26
No.
No, I think Circinus was earlier than that.
one you mentioned earlier I think the Tesco one.
27
Q. 326
It was as a result of the Tesco?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 327
Did you receive a second payment?
A.
No.
11:49:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And it was from, from the
11:49:03
11:49:10
42 1
Q. 328
In '92, no?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 329
It was following the Tesco payout?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 330
But certainly if Mr. Sweeney is correct in what he sets out in paragraph 17.
I only received one.
So ...
6
In 1992 Mr. Monahan was receiving 1.08 million which was being taken through a
7
corporate structure.
Did you know anything about that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 331
Well, would you outline to the Tribunal?
A.
But I don't know exactly what I knew.
11:49:34 10
11
There was a -- I know that there's a
scheme set up and handled tax efficiently.
12
Q. 332
Uh-huh?
13
A.
But that's really as much as I can at this moment remember anyway.
14
Q. 333
Certainly it would appear that there was a disbursement because that doesn't
11:49:57 15
appear to be disputed?
16
A.
There was definitely a disbursement, yes.
17
Q. 334
And if the figures are correct then the amount disbursed in 1992 to Mr. Monahan
18 19
through a corporate structure was a sum of 1.08 million? A.
Okay.
Q. 335
No idea?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 336
But you have a recollection of the transaction?
23
A.
There was a transaction of that nature, yes.
24
Q. 337
Do you have any idea what Mr. Monahan would have done with his share?
A.
No.
26
Q. 338
Do you know where he'd have put that money?
27
A.
No, off the top of my head, now, no, I don't know.
28
Q. 339
Did Mr. Monahan have any offshore trusts?
29
A.
Not to my knowledge.
Q. 340
Did Mr.-- did you ever hear of a trust called the Aynsley Trust?
11:50:26 20
11:50:27 25
11:50:42 30
I'm sorry.
I have no idea on the amounts.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:50:51
11:51:06
43 1
A.
The name rings a bell.
2
Q. 341
Do you know what it was?
3
A.
I think it was something to do with Ansbacher.
4
Q. 342
Uh-huh.
5
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had any involvement in the Aynsley
Trust?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 343
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan ever made direct payments himself to people or
8 9 11:51:25 10
to individuals? A.
In what sense?
Q. 344
Did he make payments directly to people, individuals, oversee or supervise
11 12
payments himself? A.
13 14
No.
He'd his own cheque book but anything that was done was done from the
company. Q. 345
11:51:48 15
Uh-huh.
You see, in July of 1992 Mr. Philip Monahan wrote to Mr. Martin Baker
in connection with Tallaght and the Cherrywood Development and at page 3781 of
16
that letter he says the following and he's talking about Tallaght.
17 18
He says "paragraph five: Additional Marketing Costs.
19
of the joint venture key additional marketing costs were incurred.
11:52:06 20
To ensure the success These
costs which were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring
21
the tax status and appropriate tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre".
22 23
Now, stop there for the moment.
24
letter appears to be suggesting two things.
11:52:25 25
He appears to be suggesting that
costs were paid directly by him A, in connection with the tax status of
26 27
And Mr. Monahan who was the author of the
Tallaght and B, the appropriate tenant profile. A.
Would you agree with that?
I wouldn't think that was what was actually intended.
You could take that
28
interpretation from that okay but I don't think that was the ... I think the
29
idea supervised directly by Mr. Monahan simply to ensure that they got done.
11:53:02 30
Q. 346
Well if we look now at what's being said the money is being paid for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
11:53:08
11:53:22
44 1
A.
Okay.
2
Q. 347
Do you agree that according to this letter that the payments that were
3
supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were those in connection with the tax status
4
of the Tallaght Town Centre and the tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre?
5
A.
Well I think Mr. Monahan, as the boss, had the overall responsibility.
So
6
it's -- just reading this in isolation and not being aware of what else was
7
being said in the letter you could take that interpretation but I think it's
8
probably, you'd need to see the whole big picture.
9 11:53:48 10
11
Q. 348
Yeah?
A.
And that he as the -- as, you know, as the Chief Executive was --
Q. 349
Well, this might be an appropriate time to take a break and while of course
12
Ms. Gosling has this letter and has had it for some time can refresh herself
13
and read the letter.
14 11:54:06 15
CHAIRMAN:
We'll take a ten minute break.
16 17 18 19 11:54:18 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
21 22 23 24 12:12:56 25
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Ms. Gosling.
26 27
Could I have page 3781, please.
28 29
3781.
Sorry.
It's on screen.
12:13:08 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:13:08
12:13:26
45 1
And looking at paragraph 5 of that letter.
Which dealt with costs in relation
2
to Tallaght.
3
was the first paragraph in which what was set out there is that certain costs
4
were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan and were critical to ensuring the tax
5
status and appropriate tenant profile of the Tallaght Town Centre.
6
right?
And what I had been asking you before the break, Ms. Gosling,
Is that
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 350
And I was suggesting to you that what was being said there was that Mr. Monahan
9
had made direct payments in connection with tax status and appropriate tenant
12:13:41 10
profile.
11
Isn't that right? Now, do you agree with that? That that's what
the letter says?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 351
Right.
14
The letter goes on.
the 1989 Finance Act.
12:14:00 15
"The Square was included as a designated area in
This dramatically increased its value and led to a
large level of private and institutional investors expressing interest in the
16
project. Institutional sales of 24 million were made before the centre had
17
even opened.
18
area particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght".
He then says significant professional fees were incurred in this
19 12:14:16 20
Now, could you assist the Tribunal at all as to what professional fees were
21
incurred in relation to obtaining the tax status in Tallaght
22
A.
No, I'm sorry.
23
Q. 352
Do you know anything about any programme or strategy about getting tax
24 12:14:29 25
designation for Tallaght? A.
No, I don't.
26
Q. 353
Was this ever discussed by you by Mr. Monahan?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 354
All right.
29 12:14:43 30
On the following page, 3782.
Continuing the same paragraph.
"The Square had sever anchor tenants, Crazy Prices, Dunnes Stores, Pricewise, Hickey's, A wear, UCI and Roches Stores. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
To ensure that these company were
12:14:49
12:15:04
46 1
successfully encouraged to acquire a unit in Tallaght required the personal
2
input involvement of Mr. Monahan which in certain circumstances required
3
compensation payments for changes in contractual trading arrangements.
4
of 850,000 pounds should be allocated to cover the foregoing".
A sum
5 6
And I suggest to you that Mr. Monahan in this letter is seeking a sum of
7
850,000 pounds to cover his outgoings in connection with ensuring the tax
8
status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile.
9
Isn't that right?
A.
It certainly suggests that, yes.
Q. 355
And that's what the letter is seeking.
11
A.
Possibly, yes.
12
Q. 356
So what Mr. Monahan is saying in this letter is I have spent 850,000 pounds
12:15:20 10
Isn't that right?
13
securing the tax status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile for the
14
Tallaght Town Centre and I want you, GRE, to pay me that money.
12:15:41 15
Isn't that
right?
16
A.
Possibly.
17
Q. 357
If Mr. Monahan spent 850,000 pounds securing the tax status of Tallaght and
18 19
ensuring the appropriate tenant profile where did he get the money? A.
From the company.
Q. 358
What company?
21
A.
Whichever one was involved.
22
Q. 359
So that would be L&C Properties in Tallaght; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 360
So you say that the books and records of L&C Properties would show
12:15:55 20
12:16:06 25
disbursements to the sum of 850,000 pounds made directly by Mr. Philip Monahan
26
to ensure the tax status of Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile?
27
A.
I would expect so, yes.
28
Q. 361
Insofar as the appropriate tenant profile is concerned, is what was being
29 12:16:26 30
discussed in this letter the practice, whereby, in order to encourage multiples to come into a shopping centre you paid them what has been described in other Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:16:31
12:16:41
47 1
venues as "hello money?"
2
A.
I wasn't involved in that aspect of things.
3
Q. 362
Were you aware of that aspect of things?
4
A.
Not really.
5
Q. 363
Do you know whether or not monies were ever paid in connection with encouraging
6
So I can't answer that.
people to take up units in Tallaght town centre?
7
A.
I don't.
8
Q. 364
You don't?
9
A.
No.
Q. 365
Do you know what monies might have been paid or who they might have been paid
12:16:50 10
11
to in order to ensure the tax status of Tallaght?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 366
Do you know whether Mr. Philip Monahan himself had direct contact with senior
14 12:17:03 15
16
politicians? A.
No.
No, I don't know.
Q. 367
Do you know what was the basis for this letter, for seeking this money in
17
connection -- could I have 3781 again, please.
18
850,000 pounds in connection with these two items being the tax status of
19
Tallaght and the appropriate tenant profile?
12:17:31 20
For seeking this sum of
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 368
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss any of this with you?
22
A.
No, no.
23
Q. 369
Who is the person in the Monarch Group who could assist in relation to this
24 12:17:41 25
26
letter? A.
Well presumably once again back to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney.
Q. 370
And what about Mr. Philip Reilly who was the man on the ground, as I understand
27
it, in Tallaght.
Would he know all about this?
28
A.
I don't know.
29
Q. 371
Do you know who was involved in any of the transactions that are the subject
12:17:59 30
matter of this paragraph? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:18:00
12:18:19
48 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 372
Now, I want to draw to your attention to the response of GRE.
GRE denied that
3
they had any liability under this heading and they never ever deal in their
4
correspondence with the whole element of tax status but in their reply they do
5
address the tenant profile issue.
6 7
3823, please.
8 9
And the heading is -- 3823.
12:18:31 10
Yes.
And the heading is "paragraph 7 Additional
Marketing Costs in respect of Sales to Owner Occupiers" and it says the source
11
is Section 5 of P Monahan's letter of 22nd July 1992.
12
Mr. Monahan's letter of 22nd of July 1992 is the document at 3781 to which we
13
have just been referring, Ms. Gosling
14 12:18:51 15
Section 5 of
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 373
That was headed Additional Marketing Costs in Mr. Monahan's letter.
It's now
16
being called Additional Marketing Costs in respect of Sales to Owner Occupiers.
17
There is no reference in this reply to the tax status of Tallaght.
18 19
What I want to draw to your attention is what is is said there in relation to
12:19:14 20
item C.
In respect of Dunnes a net price was achieved for the joint venture
21
on the basis that 1 million Irish pounds was paid to Monarch outside the joint
22
venture agreement to reflect deals elsewhere.
23 24 12:19:20 25
26
Do you see that? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 374
What GRE are saying there, apparently, is that in connection with Dunnes
27
Stores, it would appear, I will just say Dunnes in case it's not Dunnes Stores
28
that outside the joint venture a sum of 1 million pounds was paid to Monarch.
29
Do you understand that?
12:19:36 30
A.
Uh-huh. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:19:37
12:19:44
49 1
Q. 375
And it's to reflect deals elsewhere?
2
A.
Uh-huh.
3
Q. 376
Do you know what the deals elsewhere were for which the sum of 1 million pounds
4
was paid?
5
A.
No, I don't.
6
Q. 377
Was any of this ever discussed with you by Mr. Monahan?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 378
Do you know whether Mr. Monahan had contact with any ministers?
9
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 379
Do you know that Mr. Monahan may have met with Mr. Flynn, who was then Minister
12:20:01 10
11
for the Environment?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 380
Were you aware of that?
14
A.
No.
Q. 381
Were you aware that in June of 1989 Monarch Properties Limited paid 16,000
12:20:22 15
16
pounds to Fianna Fail?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 382
Okay.
19 12:20:43 20
At 2864.
Mr. Philip Monahan sent 16,000 pounds to Fianna Fail; isn't
that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 383
Were you aware of that?
22
A.
I just said I wasn't.
23 24 12:20:54 25
the letter.
But I see that's -- my reference is on the bottom of
So I would have typed the letter.
Q. 384
Uh-huh?
A.
I'm sorry; you know, I don't remember.
But when I see something like that.
26
I mean, it's probably difficult for you to appreciate that I don't remember,
27
but I don't.
28
Q. 385
29 12:21:13 30
Would you have known in a general way about the political donations that were made by the Monarch Group?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:21:14
12:21:25
50 1
Q. 386
2
So other than typing the correspondence you wouldn't have been aware of the fact that 16,000 pounds was paid?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 387
And these matters wouldn't have been discussed with you?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 388
All right.
7
Were you aware that in May of 1989 that Mr. Monahan apparently had
a meeting with Mr. Padraig Flynn?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 389
At 7661.
12:21:44 10
11
It would appear that on the 24th of May 1989 Mr. Monahan met Mr. Flynn,
12
according to Mr. Padraig Flynn's ministerial diary.
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q. 390
Do you see the entry there for the 24th of May, P Monaghan?
A.
Well our Mr. Monahan didn't have a G in his name but .... if Mr. Flynn says
12:22:07 15
16 17
that's Mr. Monahan that's Mr. Monahan, obviously. Q. 391
18 19 12:22:29 20
Do you have any idea why Mr. Monahan would have been meeting Mr. Flynn in May of 1989?
A.
No, I'm sorry, I don't.
Q. 392
In November of 1989 Mr. Padraig Flynn's personal diary records a meeting.
21
7662, with Mr. Monahan.
22
You just see there it says "Phil Monahan 4:15".
23
is Mr. Monahan.
24
Mr. Flynn?
12:22:59 25
At
Which is also replicated in the ministerial diary. I think Mr. Flynn agrees it
Do you have any idea why Mr. Monahan would have been meeting
A.
No.
26
Q. 393
In 1989?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 394
Do you know whether there were concerns within the Monarch Group at that time
29 12:23:12 30
about anything to do with Cherrywood that might have necessitated a visit to Mr. Flynn? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:23:15
12:23:29
51 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 395
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you any of his concerns in connection any
3
problems that arose on the Cherrywood Development?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 396
In February of 1991, at 7664.
6
There is an entry in Mr. Padraig Flynn's
ministerial diary for Philip Monahan of Monarch.
Do you see that?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 397
That must be Mr. Philip Monahan; isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 398
Do you have any idea what that's about?
11
A.
No, I don't, sorry.
12
Q. 399
It's five days after the 25,000 pounds was paid to Mr. Haughey.
12:23:53 10
13 14 12:24:06 15
Do you think
those events may have been connected? A.
I don't know.
Q. 400
Do you think the visit in May 1989 of the 24th of May may be in any way
16
connected to the 16,000 pounds on the 9th of June 1989?
17
A.
I don't know, sorry.
18
Q. 401
Were you aware that 15,000 pounds was paid in September 1994 by Monarch by way
19 12:24:29 20
of a pick me up to Fianna Fail? A.
No.
21
Q. 402
Were you aware at the time, did you subsequently become aware of it?
22
A.
Only from the recent newspapers.
23
Q. 403
Did you have any involvement yourself in it?
24
A.
No.
Q. 404
Can I show you page 8514, please.
12:24:42 25
26 27
This is a memorandum from yourself, Ann Gosling, to Sean Mooney dated the 7th
28
of January 1999 following a telephone call you had from the Revenue
29
Commissioners instituting an inquiry into the payment of the pick me up by
12:25:07 30
Monarch; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:25:07
12:25:11
52 1
A.
Uh-huh.
2
Q. 405
Is that right?
3
A.
That's -- yeah.
4
Q. 406
So you told the Tribunal two minutes ago you'd nothing whatsoever to do with
5
the pick me up; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 407
Then or later; isn't that right?
8
A.
Well I was answering as then.
9
Q. 408
Well the payment to Fianna Fail?
A.
No.
12:25:23 10
I hadn't even heard the term "pick me up."
At the time of the payment I knew nothing whatsoever about it. Obviously
11
I had -- I had this call.
12
but even then I didn't hear 'pick me up' until recent newspapers.
13
Q. 409
14
Yeah, but you knew about the payment.
You knew about the fact that the
revenue had telephoned you about a payment that was made by Monarch of 16,000
12:25:47 15
16
At that stage I had to find out something about it
pounds isn't that right or 15,000 pounds? A.
Sorry.
But I didn't make the connection, yeah, okay.
17
memo, yes.
18
MR RYAN: Sorry, Chairman.
19
Jarlath Ryan, I am counsel for Ms. Gosling.
12:26:05 20
I've written this
I had this conversation. May I make an interjection here. My name is I think we just should draw
attention to the date on this memo which is 1999 which is several years, I
21
think nearly eight years after the initial payment was made that Ms. Dillon is
22
alighting on.
I think that should be drawn to the attention of the Tribunal.
23 24 12:26:26 25
26
Ms. Gosling was a secretary of the company at this point but I think when the picking up payment, as characterised, was made she was not an officer of the company.
I just want to make that point.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
has about it, whether it was acquired after the event or ...
12:26:39 30
Yes.
We're just trying to identify what, if any, knowledge she
MR RYAN: I understand it was characterised initially as a pick me up and then I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:26:44
12:26:51
53 1
don't think my client would have characterised the payment in such a way.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
Well she can explain that.
4
MR RYAN: Thank you, Chairman.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
7
pick me up, whether you had any involvement or knowledge in any political
8
payments by Monarch and you said no; isn't that right?
9 12:27:03 10
I asked you earlier this morning, Ms. Gosling, leaving aside the
A.
I did, yes.
Q. 410
We looked then at Mr. Monahan's diary for 1991 in connection with the 25,000
11
pounds payment to Mr. Haughey; isn't that right?
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 411
And your answer was that you had nothing to do with any political payments;
14 12:27:16 15
16
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 412
It would appear in 1999 following communication from the Revenue Commissioners
17
you had an involvement in connection with the payment that was made in 1994 to
18
Saatchi & Saatchi by Monarch; isn't that right?
19 12:27:41 20
A.
Only in the sense that I'm being asked to account for it.
Q. 413
So you received a telephone call from the Revenue Commissioners and you
21
contacted Mr. Sean Mooney and you cc'd the correspondence to Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 414
You received a letter subsequently, at 8517, from the Revenue Commissioners.
24
In which you are described as the secretary of Monarch Properties Limited.
12:27:59 25
that correct?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 415
You were then the secretary of Monarch?
28
A.
At that time, yes.
29
Q. 416
So you were an officer at that stage; isn't that right?
A.
At that stage, but I hadn't been earlier.
12:28:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is
12:28:09
12:28:22
54 1
Q. 417
Grand.
But certainly you were also an officer when you received the telephone
2
call from the Revenue Commissioners on the 7th of January 1999.
3
also right?
Isn't that
4
A.
Yes, because he had gone looking to see who the secretary was, yes.
5
Q. 418
And at page 8517.
Mr. Brendan O'Brien from the Inspector of Taxes refers to
6
previous correspondence, your letter of December and the phone call in January
7
and he wants to know how the invoice or payment relating to the Saatchi &
8
Saatchi was recorded in the books of the company?
9 12:28:38 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 419
And he asked you to provide the information.
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right.
13
Q. 420
And you receive a draft letter.
14 12:28:52 15
And he looks for a response;
At 8515.
From Mr. Sean Mooney of KPMG;
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 421
And I attach a draft letter for the Revenue?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 422
That's the 8th of February 1999?
19
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 423
And that contains a -- it's a draft letter for you to send setting out the
12:28:59 20
21
explanation for how the Saatchi & Saatchi advertising contribution was dealt
22
with in the books of Monarch?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 424
And how political contributions were dealt with; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 425
And you sent off that letter?
27
A.
I did.
28
Q. 426
So that you dealt with two items in that letter.
12:29:14 25
29 12:29:26 30
The first thing you dealt
with was the Saatchi & Saatchi advice advertising and the second thing was the political contributions; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:29:28
12:29:38
55 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 427
Talking about November 1992.
3
And presumably you sent that letter as an
officer of the company?
4
A.
I did.
5
Q. 428
So that you were aware of the fact that there was a Revenue investigation isn't
6
that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 429
And that revenue investigation extended to other payments that had been made
9
including the payment of 16,000 pounds to Fianna Fail in June of 1989; isn't
12:29:54 10
that right?
11
A.
Uh-huh.
12
Q. 430
So that when you told the Tribunal earlier this morning you had no knowledge or
13
information about political payments.
14
that right?
12:30:03 15
That in fact was not correct; isn't
A.
Well, at the time they were made I had no knowledge of them.
16
Q. 431
Well I think if you look back you will see the question was "at any time".?
17
A.
I'm sorry if I misled you I'm sorry.
18
Q. 432
So --
19
A.
It certainly wasn't intentional.
Q. 433
Insofar as the revenue investigation was involved.
12:30:19 20
You were the person with
21
whom the revenue dealt and you obtained the information from the auditors and
22
you provided that information; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 434
Can I show you a document.
12:30:35 25
At 8728, Ms. Gosling.
You might be able to
assist.
26 27
This is a remittance slip from Monarch Properties.
28
Mr. Liam McParland.
29
generate a cheque; isn't that right?
12:30:49 30
A.
And it's addressed to
And this is the document that's filled in in order to
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:30:49
12:30:57
56 1
Q. 435
2
And it's a cheque in the sum of 5,000 pounds and the description is 'expenses re Tallaght zoning'?
3
A.
Okay.
4
Q. 436
Do you see that?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 437
You will see it says Ref - AG.
7
Do you see that handwriting on it just above
the word "amount 5,000 pounds?"
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 438
Would you agree that that is likely to be a reference to yourself?
A.
I don't know why but it would certainly suggest it was me.
11
Q. 439
Well, who else might it be?
12
A.
Are we in 1984 or 1989, sorry?
13
Q. 440
1989.
14
A.
I think at that stage we had another employee with the initials AG in Dublin.
Q. 441
Who is that?
16
A.
She was a lady called Ann Griffin.
17
Q. 442
Griffin?
18
A.
Griffin, Griffith, Griffin, I forget which.
12:31:19 10
12:31:48 15
19 12:32:06 20
If you look at the top of the document.
The 11th of the 7th 1989.?
It caused a little confusion for
a while when we realised there was two AGs around. Q. 443
And similarly then there is a document at 8834.
21 22
Which is a memo to Mr. Glennane from Mr. Lawless of May '88 and was this second
23
person with the initials AG employed in 1988
24
A.
I'm sorry.
Q. 444
This is a payment of 15,000 pounds.?
26
A.
Yeah, I've --
27
Q. 445
And you --
28
A.
I don't think that's me.
29
Q. 446
You don't think that's you?
A.
No, I don't think so.
12:32:32 25
12:32:42 30
I don't remember the dates.
AG ...
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:32:43
12:32:55
57 1
Q. 447
Do you see the reference ANG at the bottom?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 448
WH.KANG, isn't that the reference you've identified previously as being yours?
4
A.
No, no, that was Ann Gilmore.
5
Q. 449
That's not you?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 450
All right.
8 9
So you are saying that the reference to Tallaght Town Centre
zoning that AG mentioned reference to T T C zoning is not you? A.
12:33:12 10
No.
I don't think so.
In fact I'm nearly certain of it.
There were --
there were actually three AGs at one stage so.
11
Q. 451
Uh-huh?
12
A.
This girl, we got her to put AMG because we were in the same building so the
13 14
other girl was in Dublin so. Q. 452
And did you have any involvement with Mr. Frank Dunlop?
A.
No.
16
Q. 453
Were you aware that Mr. Dunlop had been retained by the Monarch Group?
17
A.
No, I wasn't.
18
Q. 454
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you the appointment of Mr. Dunlop?
19
A.
Never.
Q. 455
Were you aware that prior to Mr. Dunlop's involvement Mr. O'Herlihy had been
12:33:33 15
12:33:43 20
21
involved in the Cherrywood Project?
22
A.
Yes, I knee Mr. O'Herlihy.
23
Q. 456
Did you know Mr. O'Herlihy independent of his involvement in Monarch or?
24
A.
No, no, I just knew of him.
Q. 457
You knew of the fact that he had been retained in connection?
26
A.
That he had been retained, yes.
27
Q. 458
You were unaware of the fact that Mr. Dunlop had been retained.
12:33:59 25
28 29 12:34:08 30
correct? A.
That's correct.
Q. 459
Why would that have been? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is that
12:34:12
12:34:32
58 1
A.
I never heard of him, Mr. Dunlop being involved with Monarch.
2
Q. 460
And if we can go back just the to the question of cash and I show you a letter
3
that was drafted by Noel Smyth & Partners.
At 8516.
4 5
And this is in connection with a potential swap in connection with the golf
6
course lands.
7
that's being put forward there. The deal with Dun Laoghaire simply is there to
8
receive 150 acres of land approximately at Cherrywood.
9
be developed into a first class golf course at the cost of the developer.
12:34:57 10
And I want to draw to your attention to the last two paragraphs
thousand square feet is to be built.
That 150 acres is to 10
All cost will be responsibility of the
11
developer and in addition the sum of half a million pounds cash would have to
12
be paid to the club on the actual hand over.
13 14
Were you aware of any such proposal which would have included a proposal to pay
12:35:15 15
half a million pounds in cash to the golf club?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 461
In your statement to the Tribunal, Ms. Gosling, you describe yourself as being
18 19 12:35:32 20
a person in a position of trust within the organisation.
Is that correct?
A.
Yes, I believe so.
Q. 462
And you are a person who is the person who worked solely and completely with
21
Mr. Philip Monahan; is that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 463
At all stages from the time that you were employed in 1969?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 464
And you would have been privy to, certainly from the point of view, at a
12:35:45 25
26
minimum of typing correspondence or dealing with matters such as that sort of
27
Mr. Monahan's affairs; is that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 465
All right.
12:36:04 30
So now -- and insofar as you are here to assist the Tribunal and
correct me if I'm wrong, your position appears to be the following. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
You are
12:36:08
12:36:19
59 1
unaware of any political payments made by Mr. Monahan other than the fact that
2
you might have had latterly some involvement in sorting out revenue matters.
3
Is that correct?
4
A.
That's correct, yes.
5
Q. 466
You are unaware of the involvement of Mr. Jack Whelan in any development other
6
than the fact that he was an agent?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 467
You were totally unaware of the fact that Mr. Dunlop had been retained in
9 12:36:31 10
11
connection with Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 468
You met Mr. Lawlor on two occasions but were unaware that substantial sums of
12
money had been paid to him?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 469
You were aware of a bonus system which you yourself benefited -- by the way,
12:36:45 15
16
how much did you get can I ask you out of the bonus? A.
I'm not -- I honestly don't -- I can't tell you because I don't remember.
And
17
that probably sounds really weird.
18
MR RYAN: Chairman, may I assist the Tribunal as well.
19
pay out in question was part of Ms. Gosling's retirement package from the
12:37:21 20
Monarch Group in early 2000 and as such was used.
And just say that the
That shareholding in that
21
company, the liquidation of that shareholding by way of solventary organisation
22
of the group was used as part of the settlement or retirement lump sum which
23
Ms. Gosling was given.
24 12:37:39 25
CHAIRMAN:
26 27 28
Well, was that the only bonus you received, this one that your
lawyer refers to as having been paid as part of your retirement? A.
Um, well I would probably have received some small amounts for Christmas, through the years.
29 12:38:03 30
CHAIRMAN:
What, hundreds?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:38:05
12:38:15
60 1
A.
Yeah.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Just on that point.
4
look at 8037.
Which is the affidavit sworn by the late Mr. Philip Monahan in
5
the High Court proceedings.
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney which was Mr. Sweeney's share of the pay out of 1.8 million.
7
And Mr. Sweeney takes his share via a company called Isotope, Mr. Glennane
8
takes his via Aspentree and then there is a share to Circinus
9 12:38:39 10
It might assist you, Ms. Gosling.
If you
He is discussing the payment of 270,000 pounds to
A.
Okay.
Q. 470
And in discussing that, what Mr. Monahan says is "in 1991 an opportunity arose
11
to purchase a company with substantial export sales reliefs and profits.
12
Decision was taken to purchase the company and involve in the company a number
13
of individuals who had significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch
14
Group over the years.
I set out below the persons involved.
is getting 40 percent.
Mr. Dominic Glennane 35 percent. Mr Sweeney 15
12:39:00 15
16
Philip Monahan
percent, Mr. Tom Monahan 5 percent and Ms. An Ann Gosling 5 percent?
17
A.
Okay.
18
Q. 471
And if that is correct and the growth -- gross sum being discussed here is the
19
share out as Mr Sweeney sets out in his Affidavit of 1.8 million then you are
12:39:22 20
being attributed as the person who will get five percent of 1.8 million which I
21
calculate at 90,000 pounds; is that right?
22
A.
That sounds right, yes.
23
Q. 472
So are you telling the Tribunal that you'd forgotten that your share of this
24 12:39:38 25
26
I'd say that's right.
scheme, whatever it was, was £90,000? A.
Yes.
Q. 473
Right.
And as I also understand what's being set out in these two affidavits.
27
This disbursement took place in 1991.
28
company called Circinus Limited?
29 12:39:59 30
And you took your share through a
A.
Yes.
Q. 474
And that share may have stayed in that company until such time as you did Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:40:10
12:40:11
61 1
something else with it but it was paid in 1991; is that right?
2
A.
Into the company.
3
Q. 475
Yes?
4
A.
I didn't actually receive it then.
5
Q. 476
And at that time Mr. Monahan would have received his share which was 1.08
6
million paid into whatever corporate structure he wanted; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 477
And you have no idea what Mr. Monahan did with his 1.8 million?
9
A.
No.
Q. 478
Other than the fact that it was paid to him.
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 479
What exactly were you doing, can I ask you, Ms. Gosling, in your employment for
12:40:26 10
13 14
A.
letters. Q. 480
18
12:41:22 20
Basically typing, filing, phoning people to do whatever they were to do, just general day-to-day, you know, taking the post, circulating it, answering
16
19
That's right.
that period of time with Mr. Monahan?
12:40:58 15
17
Is that right?
You were intimately acquainted with the late Mr. Monahan's business; is that fair?
A.
That's fair, yeah.
Q. 481
Okay.
21
You have no idea what he was doing with Mr. Liam Lawlor from 1988
onwards; is that the case?
22
A.
That's the case.
23
Q. 482
Yeah.?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 483
And you don't know what Mr. Jack Whelan was at, other than he was dealing
12:41:30 25
26
directly with the late Mr. Philip Monahan; is that correct?
27
A.
That's correct, yes.
28
Q. 484
You kept Mr. Monahan's diary for him, according to your statement; is that
29 12:41:51 30
right? A.
No, he kept his own diary but. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:41:55
12:42:11
62 1
Q. 485
Yes?
2
A.
I would be aware what was in it.
I wasn't keeping his diary for him.
But
3
he'd put the entries in and I would make sure if he was going to meet someone,
4
that he had whatever he needed with him to go to the meeting.
5
Q. 486
According to Mr. Monahan, in the affidavit that he swore in the High Court,
6
that people who were entitled to share in the 1.8 million were those who had
7
significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch Group over the years?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 487
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 488
Now, how did you, on the basis, as you've just outlined what you've been doing,
12:42:28 10
11 12
the clerical job.
13
Ms. Gosling, but what you have outlined to the Tribunal here this morning as
14
your job in Monarch is that of a clerical assistant.
12:42:45 15
£90,000? A.
18 19 12:43:11 20
Now, what did you do or
what assistance did you give to Mr. Monahan that entitled to you in 1991 to
16 17
I'm not in any way trying to denigrate what you were doing,
Simply it was a share out of the profits.
It was reflecting my long service
as much as anything and the fact that they could depend on me I think. Q. 489
Depend on you for what?
A.
For whatever.
I mean, I -- I was available whenever I was needed.
It
21
wasn't, you know, I didn't go home if a letter or a report had to be typed up
22
at five to six I didn't go home at six o'clock on the dot, as was the finishing
23
time.
24
So, um, I was a part of the team.
Q. 490
Well, was Mr. Lafferty part of the team?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 491
And was Mr. Lynn part of the team?
27
A.
But at that stage, no.
28
Q. 492
Was Mr. Reilly part of the team?
29
A.
At that stage not really, no.
Q. 493
Who else was part of the team in 1991?
12:43:45 25
12:43:57 30
I helped out wherever was needed.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:44:03
12:44:23
63 1
A.
2
I think that was basically the -- that was the core group that had been there from the beginning.
We were all there, you know, this was ...
3 4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Sorry, Ms. Gosling.
Was Mr. Sherwood there in 1991?
In 1991 yes, Mr. Sherwood was there.
6
JUDGE FAHERTY: I think earlier he was described in a document.
7
put together by Mr. Sweeney as I understand.
8
personal assistant and you were described as a personal assistant.
9
A.
Now, it was
He described Mr. Sherwood as a
Yes.
12:44:37 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I think Ms. Dillon is asking, you got this disbursement I
12
think in 1991. Yes.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:44:50 15
16
And I think what Ms. Dillon is asking you is, obviously
certain people got a disbursement; is that correct A.
Yes.
17 18 19 12:44:57 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
From the 1.8 million
Yes. MS DILLON:
May I just correct something.
that disbursement being made in 1991.
I think a reference was made to
As I said, the beneficial ...
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
yes.
12:45:11 25
I understand that absolutely.
It was put into the company,
I accept that.
MS DILLON:
Thank you.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But it doesn't appear, unless Ms. Dillon is going to go on
28
with it, that Mr. Sherwood would have got ...
29 12:45:21 30
MS. DILLON:
It's not recorded as a person who shared.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:45:24
12:45:41
64 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
3
the question she's putting.
4
would have been at the same level, if you like, of terms of employment as
5
Mr. Sherwood.
6
think described you both as personal assistants.
7
A.
I think really what Ms. Dillon is asking you in the context of That you would appear to have gotten it but it
Now, that may not be the case.
But Mr. Sweeney certainly I
Okay.
8 9 12:45:44 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
Well I think that was Mr. Sweeney's description.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14
Yes.
Mr. Sherwood's role was to -- Mr. Sherwood was an engineer. I mean, mine was the -- I was a support role.
12:46:07 15
So his role was,
I was the back room person.
Mr. Sherwood would have had more of an input into projects.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I see.
And technical aspects.
19 12:46:14 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
21 22
MS. DILLON:
No, not at all.
Thank you.
23
Q. 494
You were a director of a number of the companies; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 495
Can you list the companies of which you were a director within the Monarch
12:46:23 25
26
Group?
27
A.
Um, in the list that I gave you?
28
Q. 496
No, no, just tell the Tribunal the companies of which you were a director.?
29
A.
Oh. Um, well there was Monarch Properties.
12:46:45 30
the end of the '90s? Monarch Properties. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
This is towards the end? Towards
Monarch Properties Services.
12:46:53
12:47:11
65 1 2
Circinus. Q. 497
3
Without a list it's rather difficult, sorry.
Well the list that -- you provided a schedule of companies attached to your statement?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 498
And are you suggesting that you were at some stage a director of all of those
6 7
companies? A.
8 9
Not -- no, I'm not suggesting I was a director of all of them.
But at
different stages I probably played a role in a number of them. Q. 499
All right.?
A.
But it's the only -- I didn't have any other records.
11
Q. 500
Well where did you -- how did you make up the list?
12
A.
I had made up that list at some stage at the end of my period of employment,
12:47:29 10
13
because I had to unwind, I had to make sure that I was unwound from all of the
14
companies that I was involved in.
12:47:51 15
Q. 501
So I did a list.
So when you say the companies that you were involved in, does that mean that
16
you were involved in insofar as you were either an officer or you were a
17
shareholder?
18
A.
No, as an officer.
19
Q. 502
As an officer?
A.
Yes.
Q. 503
So at 8534.
12:48:02 20
21
In your schedule of companies which is entitled 'with which AG
22
was associated' and they are listed out there. Are you saying that you were at
23
some stage a director or a secretary of those companies?
24
A.
12:48:27 25
I don't know if I was -- of all of them but certainly of a number of them I would have been the company secretary.
26
Q. 504
And insofar as Circinus Limited was concerned, was that your own company?
27
A.
I was 50 per cent shareholder in that with Tom Monahan.
28
Q. 505
And you were a director of all of these companies you think or a shareholder or
29 12:48:46 30
a secretary; is that right? A.
A secretary more so than a director. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:48:49
12:49:19
66 1
Q. 506
And at 8535.
And at at bottom there's Monarch Property Holdings, Monarch
2
Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services International Limited, Monarch
3
Properties Services Limited and on the next page, 8536, Monarch Retail Limited.
4
And then Pallarang.
5
Do you see all of those companies?
Other companies Pearl Investment, Ping Golf Equipment.
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 507
You think that you were involved in those companies as an officer.
8 9 12:49:33 10
So that
you had fiduciary duties in relation to those companies; is that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 508
Insofar as any of these companies made payments or any monies were paid out,
11
for example, to politicians.
12
right?
You know absolutely nothing about it; is that
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 509
You do, however, deal with it in your statement.
12:49:56 15
just want to take you through this.
You say at page 8531.
The second last paragraph of this
16
statement, Ms. Gosling and see.
17
the company.
18
businessmen, politicians or other principals.
19
from that, that when you say you didn't undertake direct negotiations with
12:50:20 20
politicians.
21
I
You say mine was not a commercial role within
I did not undertake for instance direct negotiations with Is the Tribunal to understand
That such direct negotiations did take place but you weren't
involved?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 510
So who did you understand had the direct negotiations with politicians?
24
A.
This, I made this statement in the light of the knowledge that's in the media
12:50:51 25
etc. I've learnt a lot from the media reports that I never knew at the time.
26
And my role was a support role.
27
was there in support.
28 29 12:51:30 30
Q. 511
I didn't negotiate directly with anybody.
I
You have already said that you accept that, from the statement you've made, that you didn't undertake direct negotiations with politicians.
But it
follows from your statement that somebody did; isn't that right? So who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:51:30
12:51:44
67 1
negotiated directly with politicians, who in the Monarch Group dealt directly
2
with politicians, Ms. Gosling?
3
A.
I cannot answer that question for you because I don't know.
4
Q. 512
Well you know that Mr. Monahan dealt with the late Mr. Liam Lawlor; isn't that
5 6
right? A.
7 8
So if you call that negotiations then Mr. Monahan dealt with Mr. Liam
Lawlor. Q. 513
9 12:51:55 10
Yes.
But you don't know what Mr. Monahan dealt with with Mr. Lawlor isn't that right because you --
A.
I don't know the detail of it so --
11
Q. 514
So --
12
A.
It's hard to sit here and, you know, be truthful about things that you don't
13
know about.
14
know what they actually talked about I have to answer no.
12:52:14 15
Q. 515
16 17
I can say yes, people talk with politicians.
Forget about what they talked about.
But if you don't
Let's establish first of all who talked.
Isn't that the -- who do you know spoke with politicians? A.
Um,.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
12:52:43 20
21
Ms. Gosling, did -- when you worked in Somerton presumably people
came to see Mr. Monahan? A.
Yes.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
From time to time?
From time to time, yes.
12:52:48 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
or?
28
A.
And would you have seen, physically seen these people call or leave
Um.
29 12:52:55 30
CHAIRMAN:
I mean, to get to see Mr. Monahan would they have had to pass
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:52:59
12:53:04
68 1 2
through your office? A.
They wouldn't have to pass through my office.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But would you know that they were --
I would know when someone would be expected.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
TD or a Minister or anyone of that nature coming to see Mr. Monahan?
9
A.
No.
Yeah.
Now, did you ever know of a politician, a councillor, or a
With the exception of Mr. Liam Lawlor.
12:53:24 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
Is he the only one you think?
I can't recall other politicians coming to Somerton.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
12:53:40 15
And did you know of Mr. Monarch seeing politicians outside of
Somerton either because you had access to his diary and you would have known or
16
that he might have mentioned to you or that you might have made appointments
17
for? Irrespective of whatever reason.
18
A.
Okay.
19 12:53:54 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
22
Would you have known?
Well at the time I would have to -- I would know because it would be in his diary.
23 24 12:54:01 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yeah.
But here, now, it's impossible to remember.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
No.
Can you recall the names of any of these people?
I'm sorry.
I've always had a poor memory as regards to names and faces.
29 12:54:15 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just can I add, just to follow on from what the Chairman was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:54:20
12:54:29
69 1
asking you.
2
would have been on the receiving end of telephone calls, I take it and things
3
like that?
4
A.
Obviously you were Mr. Monahan's personal assistant.
And you
Yes.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
been in Somerton ?
8
A.
And how did you, Mr. Monahan, I take it, wouldn't always have
Sorry.
9 12:54:36 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
He wouldn't always have been in the office himself I take it
Um.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
He'd have been out and about
Yes.
12:54:43 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
his day or you'd have to report to him I presume at the end of a day; isn't
18
that correct?
19
A.
And if people were ringing him or calls.
How did you arrange
Oh, yes.
12:54:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
have to be accounted for?
23
A.
So that if there were phone calls or people calling that would
Yes.
24 12:55:01 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And how did you do that, Ms. Gosling?
Phone.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Sorry?
Via the phone, obviously.
12:55:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:55:10
12:55:19
70 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
it Mr. Monahan would have received telephone calls
3
A.
Yes.
But if you are in the office, for example.
And I take
Yes, but he also had his own mobile.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
you put memos on his desk or did you have, we know other witnesses who had
7
secretaries had a telephone call ledger where they would recall the time a call
8
was made and then convey the message to them.
9
A.
12:55:44 10
Okay.
Yes.
If there were people looking for him, for example, did
No, I would generally make a note of it and leave a list of notes on
his desk.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
Mr. Monahan at his house in Somerton that you might have taken the call?
14
A.
And do you ever recall politicians or councillors telephoning
I'm sure there must have been.
But no one stays in my mind or sticks out.
12:56:03 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
the name of any politician to you at all during the period of time you were
12:56:15 20
21
I wonder could I.
Ms. Gosling, did Phil Monahan ever mention
employed by the company? A.
Well I'm sure he must have done.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
names?
12:56:35 25
A.
I'm sorry.
Well, now, must have done.
Can you think now.
I don't have any names to give you.
26 27 28
A.
JUDGE KEYS:
Well is it that you won't tell us
No, I'm sorry.
I really do wish to be as helpful as I can be.
JUDGE KEYS:
Well, so far all you've said is I can't remember.
29 12:56:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Can give us the
12:56:40
12:56:53
71 1
A.
2
And that's the case.
I didn't know I was going to have to remember
everything.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
5
there for quite a number of years
6
A.
You were a highly regarded employee of the company.
You were
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
There's already been evidence given that Mr. Monahan was politically well in,
12:57:06 10
You were intimately involved in the business of the company.
in the sense that he knew a lot of politicians.
And the only name you can
11
give us of a politician is Liam Lawlor? Is that your evidence to this
12
Tribunal?
13
A.
Um, well I'm sure he would also have known several other politicians.
14 12:57:28 15
JUDGE KEYS:
16 17
Well, let's have the names, that's what you've been asked.
You're under oath. A.
Yes, sorry.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
12:57:38 20
that you know or even the names he might have mentioned to you, the people he
21 22
And you're being asked to name the politicians that he met or
knew. A.
Over the years?
23 24 12:57:48 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
Okay.
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Other than Liam Lawlor.
Sorry.
29 12:57:52 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Other than Liam Lawlor.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
12:57:54
12:58:06
72 1
A.
Okay.
Most of them would have been Dundalk people.
2 3 4
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All right.
Who are they?
Um, there's Mr. Dermot Ahern.
5 6 7
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Well that's one politician.
Now we've two politicians.
Um, and I'm sure he -- he would have dealt with all the people.
8 9 12:58:25 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All the people? What do you mean by all the people?
All the TDs for County Louth.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
period of time we can at least identify them.
14
isn't that right later on?
12:58:38 15
A.
In County Louth.
So at least if we do a search during that Now, he moved to Somerton,
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
in the Dublin area he had met?
19
A.
Okay.
Now, since he moved to Somerton can you tell us what politicians
Um, well I know Mr. Brian Lenihan was a neighbour.
12:58:52 20
21 22
JUDGE KEYS: A.
All right.
He lived down the road.
23 24 12:58:59 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Are you saying then that he knew Mr. Brian Lenihan
He was a neighbour.
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Do you say that he knew Mr. Brian Lenihan?
Yes, I presume.
29 12:59:08 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Well that's another politician.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Why didn't you say that in the
12:59:11
12:59:19
73 1 2
beginning when you were asked these questions, Ms. Gosling A.
I'm sorry.
3 4 5
JUDGE KEYS: A.
You've said sorry on a number of occasions now.
Okay.
6 7
JUDGE KEYS:
8
memory.
9
number of politicians. Well let's continue on.
12:59:32 10
A.
Every time you've been asked a question you say you have no
I have pushed you and pushed you and now you suddenly recollect a What other politicians?
I --.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
13
respect.
14
and think about it seriously and after lunch come back and tell us what other
12:59:47 15
Can we put it -- can you perhaps over lunch could you just sit down
politicians in the Dublin area.
16 17
Maybe I should be -- maybe I'm being unfair to you in this
you. A.
You can make a list if you wish, to assist
And give the evidence after lunch.
Could I say to you --
18 19 12:59:59 20
JUDGE KEYS: A.
21
Would that be okay?
May I please suggest.
Could you give me a list and then I'll tell you those
ones that ring a bell.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well, I think we'd prefer if the evidence came from yourself.
I mean --
13:00:11 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
names.
28
them down.
29
prompt you to remember some names.
13:00:36 30
Over the space of an hour you might be able to think of other
And if you wish you can write them down because, I mean, you can write And you have access to the brief of documents as well.
That may
So have a break about it anyway and we'll
sit again at two o'clock. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
13:00:38
13:00:52
74 1
A.
Okay.
2 3 4
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
13:00:56
14:05:34
75 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3 4 5 6
MS. DILLON:
Ms. Gosling, please.
7 8
I understand that over lunch, with the assistance of Mr. Ryan, that Ms. Gosling
9
has prepared a statement that she would like your permission to read to the
14:05:45 10
Tribunal.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Certainly, yes.
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Dillon, Judges.
Firstly, I would like to start about by
apologising because I misunderstood the context of some of the questions.
14:06:01 15
I
thought we were simply talking about Cherrywood and I now understood you are
16
really asking me about the culture of Monarch.
17 18 19 14:06:17 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Uh-huh.
And basically, I mean, Mr. Monahan was a businessman and he met with anyone, politicians, businessmen, community organisations, anyone who would really help the interests of his Monarch Group of companies.
22 23
So, you know, he makes donations to politicians, businessmen.
24
fundraisers, eg golf outings, sports nights.
14:06:39 25
26
He attended
He supported local community
events and as such, support for politicians was basically, it was a way of life which was directed really by Mr. Monahan through, downwards.
27 28
And while I'm saying that I didn't know, couldn't answer questions because I
29
didn't really know the total context.
14:07:06 30
But if you're asking me, you know, did
he meet with politicians on a regular basis, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
And he, he was a man who
14:07:13
14:07:48
76 1
had a marvelous memory for people.
He only had to meet a person once and he
2
would remember them.
3
level.
4
didn't know or had met at some stage.
5
come to mind and if you wish me to read them or give it to you later.
So he mixed with politicians, local level, national
And so there is probably not a politician in the country that he I've made a list of ones that sort of
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll just have a look at the list.
8 9
(Document handed to Tribunal)
14:08:03 10
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN:
I'll just give it to Ms. Dillon.
14 14:08:35 15
(Document handed to Ms. Dillon)
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
Which of -- would any of those have come to Somerton?
The only person I actually remember meeting at Somerton was Liam Lawlor.
19 14:08:49 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
And the others, do you believe he met at different functions?
He'd meet them at different functions or maybe at Harcourt Street or, when we
22
were in Dundalk, in the Dundalk office.
23
to be as helpful as I can.
24
asked if, you know, if I actually knew the context in which he'd meet those
14:09:20 25
people.
And I did -- I mean, it's my desire
And I did also misunderstand that I was being
I wouldn't know the absolute detail.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
politicians.
29
which might be put into writing, are you in a position to identify in more
14:09:40 30
Insofar as you are in a position to name these people, these Can you, not necessarily today, but as part of a new statement,
detail the circumstances in which these various people were met by Mr. Monahan Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:09:45
14:10:01
77 1
and in relation to any, would you be in a position to say what you understand
2
business was transacted or discussed between them?
3
A.
I'm not sure if I ... how much I would know.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Well you've given a large list of ...
6 7
MR. RYAN:
Chairman, may I interrupt.
I beg your pardon again.
8 9 14:10:14 10
Just to assist the Tribunal.
Perhaps we can revisit this point as to whether
or not it would be useful to add another additional statement to the brief from
11
my client after perhaps I have led my client through her statement and explain
12
the context in which she took part in the business.
13 14 14:10:29 15
Maybe at that point we can revisit the issue as to whether or not it would be useful.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
Because the Tribunal would obviously be interested to know the
18
circumstances and the reasons why meetings with these politicians ...
19 14:10:39 20
MR. RYAN:
I understand.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Were held and where they met and details of that nature.
23
that may be better done in the form of a written statement.
Now,
24 14:10:50 25
MR. RYAN:
Absolutely.
And I defer to your written judgement.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Unless Ms. Dillon wishes to return to that subject immediately,
28
we could deal with it in that way.
29 14:11:01 30
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
Sir, there are names on this list which are not part of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:11:04
14:11:13
78 1
this Module and therefore it's probably better to leave the list for the
2
moment.
3 4
But arising from Ms. Gosling's statement I have one or two further short
5
questions.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
Leaving aside the context.
8
MR SANFEY: Chairman, before Ms. Dillon goes much further.
9 14:11:21 10
I also represent the estate of Mr. Monahan.
I wonder would it be possible for
11
us to see the list.
It may be that we could cast some light on it in some
12
way. Now, obviously we can't take instructions from Mr. Monahan.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
14:11:33 15
Yes, I can't see any problem with that. Obviously if Mr. Sanfey
wishes to cross-examine, he can't put anything ...
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
see the names.
19
Monarch in general, then obviously this witness might have to be recalled and
14:11:52 20
At this stage it would be on a confidential basis that you would If there is another statement made of relevance to this, or to
you would then be entitled to cross-examine her.
But you could certainly see
21
the statement for the purposes of identifying those who Ms. Gosling says met
22
with Mr. Monarch.
23
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
24 14:12:08 25
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Or Mr. Monahan.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
understand your position to -- your recollection of the late Mr. Monahan to be
29
that he would have done anything he could to help his company?
14:12:26 30
A.
Ms. Gosling, in the light of what you have just said, do I
Yeah, he was a man of vision.
He had -- he -- he could anticipate the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:12:39
14:12:57
79 1
finalisation of a project.
2
completion.
3
Q. 516
He could conceive the idea and see it through to
Well, was Mr. Monahan a man who would have approached any person whom he
4
thought could assist his company in whatever endeavour his company was involved
5
in?
6
A.
Yes, I, yes.
7
Q. 517
And in 1990 the Tallaght Town Project was substantially complete and the
8
biggest project on the books of Monarch was the Cherrywood Development; isn't
9
that right?
14:13:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 518
And there was a problem in Cherrywood which you, in connection with the sewer.
12
You will have seen that from the documentation?
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 519
And if the solution to that problem lay in the Department of the Environment
14:13:23 15
and the Minister for the Environment.
16
From your knowledge of Mr. Monahan, is
that where he would have gone in order to effect a solution to his problem?
17
A.
It would be one of the ways, yes.
18
Q. 520
Well what would be the other ways?
19 14:13:37 20
MR. RYAN:
Judge, may I interrupt here.
21 22
In terms of the ways in which my client is seeking to assist the Tribunal.
I
23
don't know if that's a fair question to ask her as to what other ways he may
24
have been involved in diverting a sewer pipe in south Dublin.
14:13:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well Ms. Gosling herself said it would be one of the things.
27
if she's thinking of another way.
And we say one way would be to deal through
28
the Department of the Minister.
She obviously has other ways in mind.
29
want to know what they are.
14:14:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
So
So we
14:14:10
14:14:18
80 1
MR. RYAN:
Thank you, Judge.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
5
You said that was one of the ways?
That would be one of the ways.
But the other way would be to deal with the
people on the ground.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Uh-huh.
8 9 14:14:22 10
MS. DILLON:
That would be the officials?
A.
The officials.
11
Q. 521
The officials of the local authority?
12
A.
Yes, to co-operate with what would be best for the area.
13
Q. 522
And to deal with the councillors who had the decision making process in
14 14:14:36 15
16
relation to the land in question, doesn't that follow? A.
It -- you can't take a piece in isolation.
Q. 523
Yes.
So in 1989, it is clear from the documentation that's been supplied to
17
the Tribunal, the Monarch property had purchased land, which was zoned at one
18
house to the acre on septic tank and their first step on the process to
19
realising the potential of the land was to change the zoning of the land?
14:14:59 20
A.
21
Um, I'm not sure if that was the first step.
But it would be one of the
steps.
22
Q. 524
Yes?
23
A.
The land was zoned residential but it -- in order to be developed the services
24 14:15:12 25
had to be provided. Q. 525
The land was zoned residential at one house to the acre?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 526
And in order for it to be developed at a commercial level the zoning density
28 29 14:15:24 30
had to be changed to greater than one house to the acre? A.
Yes.
Q. 527
The only people who could effect the change in the zoning density were the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:15:28
14:15:41
81 1 2
councillors in the review of the Development Plan; isn't that right? A.
3 4
I don't know if they are the only people.
I think that the officials have a
... Q. 528
The officials would have to make a material contravention which in turn would
5
have to come before the county councillors and a majority of 75% of the
6
councillors would have to vote in favour of it.
That is the position?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 529
So one way or other, in order to effect a change in the zoning on the land it
9
was necessary either by way of a change in the Development Plan or by way of
14:15:59 10
material contravention to deal with councillors?
11
A.
Okay.
12
Q. 530
Do I understand from what you've outlined in your statement to the Tribunal
13
that if it was necessary to deal with councillors to increase the value of his
14
land that Mr. Monahan would have done so?
14:16:11 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 531
And would he also have instructed his staff and employees in, who were handling
17
the Cherrywood Development, to do so also?
18
A.
Yes, I believe so.
19
Q. 532
Do you know whether or not it was Mr. Lynn's function within Monarch to lobby
14:16:27 20
the support of councillors for the Cherrywood Development?
21
A.
I believe it was, yes.
22
Q. 533
And was he assigned that task by Mr. Monahan?
23
A.
I would assume so.
24
Q. 534
When requests for monetary support came in from politicians who were the people
14:16:47 25
26
who normally dealt with such requests? A.
It would depend on who they were addressed to.
I mean, most of them would
27
come in addressed to somebody.
28
would be the one who would make a recommendation.
29
stages Mr. Monahan was the one who said yes or no.
14:17:11 30
Q. 535
So, the person to whom they were addressed You know, in the final
And would Mr. Monahan have dealt with a political donation of the order of 200 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:17:13
14:17:36
82 1
pounds, 300 pounds or 500 pounds?
2
A.
Possibly yes.
3
Q. 536
If -- if it was desired to make a political contribution for a Local Election
4
Depending on the context.
would Mr. Monahan personally have to clear every single political donation?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 537
Who in the companies would have had authority to clear political donations?
7
A.
I think most of the Senior staff probably had.
8
Q. 538
And would that have included Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Glennane?
9
A.
Oh, yes.
Q. 539
And would it have included Mr. Reilly?
11
A.
I would think so, yes.
12
Q. 540
And Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 541
And insofar -- was it your understanding of Mr Lynn's job that it was part of
14:17:51 10
14:18:02 15
his job to have contact with and deal with councillors in connection with the
16
Cherrywood Lands specifically?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 542
How did you come about by that understanding of Mr. Lynn's job, can I ask you?
19
A.
I suppose I would have been told.
Q. 543
Who would have told you?
21
A.
Mr. Monahan.
22
Q. 544
And would it be fair then to describe Mr. Lynn's role or one of Mr. Lynn's
14:18:24 20
23
roles within the Monarch Group as the political lobbiest for Monarch in
24
connection with the Cherrywood Lands?
14:18:40 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 545
Do I understand you to tell the Tribunal that Monarch would have been prepared
27
to provide political support to the people with whom they were dealing on the
28
County Council?
29 14:18:59 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 546
And would that have been because Monarch would have viewed it, as you describe Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:19:04
14:19:15
83 1
in your statement, as a necessary evil?
2
A.
I think so, yes.
3
Q. 547
Is it your understanding of the culture that existed within the Monarch Group
4
at the time of the Cherrywood Development that the Monarch Group would never
5
have refused an application for a political donation because it would have seen
6
it as necessary to support financially those politicians who were in turn
7
supporting or dealing with their lands?
8
A.
Yeah, that's my understanding.
9
Q. 548
And from whom did you get that understanding?
A.
That would -- it would -- it was the culture.
Q. 549
That Monarch would always have paid politicians because Monarch considered it
14:19:34 10
11 12 13
was necessary for its business to pay politicians; is that correct? A.
14
I wouldn't describe it as paying politicians.
These people were -- they are
elected representatives of their area and in supporting them you were
14:20:00 15
supporting the community which had elected them.
16 17
It was always that way.
So, my personal view was
that we were supporting the community as against politicians. Q. 550
Page 8531, Ms. Gosling.
In the light of your answer that you've just given to
18
the Tribunal, will you explain why you describe payments to politicians as a
19
necessary evil in your statement at the second last paragraph.
14:20:27 20
sentence.
Fourth last
You state "I believe that if donations were solicited by
21
politicians I think Monarch would have regarded such payments as a necessary
22
evil or something that would have to be done".
23 24
And I suggest to you that that is entirely different to the answer that you
14:20:41 25
have just given where you have said that they would have been supporting the
26
local politicians and supporting the community.
27
A.
Um, that was the culture of the time.
28
Q. 551
Look, Ms. Gosling.
29 14:21:13 30
Will you just tell the Tribunal what it is you're trying
to say in your statement and if you could just do it unambiguously and without equivocation? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:21:13
14:21:28
84 1
A.
Sorry.
2
Q. 552
Either it was a necessary evil or they are supporting the democratic process
3 4
and that's the culture in Monarch. A.
5 6
Okay.
But you can't have it both ways.?
I think my personal view was that they were supporting the community
but the culture was that it was a necessary evil. Q. 553
7
And by a necessary evil, do you mean that it was believed within Monarch that when a politician asked for money they had to pay it?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 554
So that there was no element of freedom of choice within the Monarch Group when
14:21:48 10
it came to making a political donation because these people had power over
11
decisions that would effect Monarch, they always had to be kept on side.
12
that what you're trying to say?
Is
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 555
So that really what you're talking about here is a pragmatic decision that was
14:22:03 15
made within the Monarch Group to support anybody on the political process who
16
requested support in order to keep those people on side for the better good of
17
Monarch?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 556
And if what they are doing is seeking to support, to keep people on side for
14:22:17 20
the better good of Monarch.
Then you're not talking about supporting the
21
democratic process in general; isn't that right? You're talking about making
22
politicians payments in order to benefit Monarch.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 557
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
14:22:35 25
Isn't that right?
If you would answer any questions anybody
else might have for you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
questions
All right.
Mr. Sanfey do you want to ask? Do you want to ask any
29 14:22:42 30
MR. RYAN:
Yes, Chairman, I want to ask a few questions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:22:47
14:22:51
85 1 2
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. RYAN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
MR. RYAN:
5
8529.
I want to rely on the statement of Ms. Gosling, which I gather is
6 7
I just want to, Ms. Gosling, set out the context in which you had a role in the
8
Monarch Group over a period of nearly 30 years.
9
to get a sense of what you did in the group.
And also particularly I want
14:23:08 10
11
You say in your statement that you were a messenger and a facilitator for
12
Mr. Phil Monahan; is that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 558
How did you carry out this role in the Monarch Group, Ms. Gosling?
A.
By ensuring that meetings were held and decisions were taken and people were
14:23:20 15
16 17
assigned tasks that I would present each person with a schedule of those tasks. Q. 559
Thank you.
Can I just go to page five or 8531.
If you wouldn't mind.
18 19 14:24:01 20
I want to go to the fifth paragraph in there if you wouldn't mind enlarging it, please.
21 22
This is your statement, Ms. Gosling.
And I just wish to read it out to you.
23 24 14:24:10 25
26
This is the fifth paragraph. company.
"Mine was not a commercial role within the
I did not undertake for instance direct negotiations with
businessmen, which has been alighted to earlier on."
27 28
When you say that you hadn't a commercial role in the company.
29
indicated earlier on that you were a director of various companies.
14:24:26 30
You've In what
circumstances initially did you become a director of the company? Was it on a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:24:31
14:24:49
86 1
structural basis or can you explain the way in which you initially became a
2
director of a company in Monarch?
3
A.
4
Okay.
It wasn't on a structured basis but occasionally people maybe were
going to be absent on holidays and maybe documentation would need to be signed.
5
Q. 560
So essentially you were an alternate director?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 561
So your role grew from a messenger, facilitator.
8 9 14:25:04 10
You would have become an
alternate director purely to facilitate the basis of the company? A.
Yes.
Q. 562
Thank you.
In terms of your -- your role which you played towards
11
Mr. Monahan, Mr. Phil Monahan.
12
Mr. Sweeney in his statement has pointed out that you were his personal
13
assistant.
14
as you said typing and ordinary secretarial work around Somerton and
14:25:30 15
You were his personal assistant and
The tasks which you would have been involved in on a daily basis,
particularly in later years and before that in Dundalk?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 563
Did you have an executive role in terms of when -- did you attend any board
18 19 14:25:46 20
meetings in an official capacity as a director? A.
No.
Q. 564
Thank you.
21
In terms of meetings where strategy of the group was decided.
Did you ever attend any of those meetings?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 565
Did you ever attend any meetings where a commercial decision was taken?
24
A.
No.
Q. 566
Was your view ever taken into an account or were you ever asked your view on a
14:25:59 25
26
development, should we do this development, should we not do this development?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 567
Your view wouldn't have been sought?
29
A.
No, I would be told what was being done.
Q. 568
So, essentially you would have taken your orders from the top, Ms. Gosling?
14:26:18 30
No, I wouldn't have been, my view wouldn't have been sought.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:26:22
14:26:43
87 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 569
Also, in terms of an executive function.
Would you have seen yourself, whilst
3
it is self evidently the case that you had a position of trust in the business.
4
but you would not even yourself have seen yourself with an executive function
5
within the Monarch Group?
6
A.
I didn't see myself really as an executive as I was a support.
7
Q. 570
I see.
8
Thank you.
So I just want to alight on various points in time,
Ms. Gosling.
9 14:26:56 10
At the time in which the company moved from Dundalk to Castleknock, to Somerton
11
in Castleknock.
12
offices.
13
time between the offices that Phil Monahan had in Castleknock and the offices
14
that the company essentially had in Harcourt Street
14:27:20 15
16
Essentially at that point, and there were various different
Essentially there was a division in the working of Monarch at the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 571
In terms of that division, whilst it's the case that you said that various
17
people would have visited Mr. Monahan, it was around this time as well, late
18
'80s or early '90s that essentially the suggestion that Cherrywood would first
19
be developed; isn't that right?
14:27:41 20
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 572
In your view, did the overall management, the project management of Cherrywood,
22
where did that occur, in Somerton or in Harcourt Street?
23
A.
Oh, that was very much in Harcourt Street.
24
Q. 573
And can you just reiterate again where your position was, where your centre of
14:27:56 25
gravity was let's say, and the centre of gravity of the group as far as you're
26
concerned, where you were located in terms of the services that you rendered to
27
the Monarch Group?
28
A.
Well I was located in Somerton, in Castleknock.
29
Q. 574
And so at that point, Ms. Gosling, since it is the case that you say that you
14:28:12 30
were located in Castleknock.
How did this let's say, did you feel that you,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:28:17
14:28:33
88 1
since the project management in Cherrywood was involved in the Harcourt Street
2
office.
Did you feel at the centre of the Cherrywood project?
3
A.
No, I was very much in the periphery.
4
Q. 575
Were you aware let's say of the members of the project management team of the
5
Cherrywood project?
6
A.
No, I wasn't.
7
Q. 576
I see.
8
Can we go to again I don't know if it's up on the screen 5831.
It
may be there already.
9 14:28:47 10
But also when you say I believe that if donations were solicited by politicians
11
I think Monarch would have regarded such payments as a necessary evil or
12
something that would have had to have been done.
13
don't believe that Monarch would have initiated or proposed such payments to
14
politicians.
I want to continue.
I
14:29:05 15
16
You agree with that still, Ms. Gosling; don't you?
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 577
Monarch Group or Mr. Monahan, I believe, would not have wanted to have been
19
associated in any way with corrupt payments or bribery.
14:29:17 20
You still agree with
that?
21
A.
I still agree with that, yes.
22
Q. 578
Sorry, isn't that page on the screen?
23
A.
It's off.
24
Q. 579
It is now. Thank you.
A.
Yeah, my personal belief is you know, it wasn't -- I didn't see it as corrupt
14:29:28 25
26
It's 8531?
payments -- at that time I didn't see it as corrupt payments or bribery.
27
Q. 580
Thank you.
28
A.
It was the culture of the day.
29
Q. 581
You have explained that already to Ms. Dillon, Ms. Gosling.
14:29:45 30
to alight on the last paragraph of page 8531. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I just also want
The very last sentence.
Where
14:29:50
14:30:08
89 1
you say that you had -- "I would have had responsibility for the personal bank
2
account of Mr. Monahan.
3
a cheque book for the personal account of Phil and Mary Monaghan since I would
4
have been responsible for discharging household and other personal business".
I, along with his late wife Mary, would each have had
5 6
This essentially would have been a domestic role you occupied for Mr. Monahan;
7
is that right?
8
A.
Partly, yes.
9
Q. 582
Thank you.
14:30:17 10
And it also says "I would have no function though in determining
who the payee of such cheques would be".
Is that correct?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 583
Earlier on in the proceedings a cheque was brought up on screen.
I don't want
13
to bring it up again but you were essentially asked about your handwriting and
14
whether or not it was your handwriting but just generally the policy would have
14:30:35 15
been if you had access to a cheque book for Mr. Monahan.
16
You never would have
determined who the payee would be on any occasion?
17
A.
Oh, well I'd pay someone like the ESB or phone bills or something like that.
18
Q. 584
But purely in a domestic context?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 585
Thank you.
14:30:53 20
Also can I bring up page 8716, please.
21 22
At the second paragraph on -- in the third page, the diary.
23
want to just read part of your statement again.
24
would have kept his own diaries but occasionally I and others would have made
14:31:18 25
Yes.
Where I
"I recall that Mr. Monahan
entries in those diaries for him".
26 27
You have identified already your own handwriting on this piece of paper; isn't
28
that right
29 14:31:27 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 586
So this is entirely consistent with your statement that you would have made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:31:29
14:31:40
90 1
entries in Mr. Monahan's diary?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 587
You say, you would like you to -- well, can you reiterate again that the entry
4
re CJH and 25,000 that was not your handwriting?
5
A.
No, my handwriting is Paul Kavanagh and Harcourt Street.
6
Q. 588
Thank you.
Can I bring up page 8514, please.
7 8
This is the letter which is written to Sean Mooney and Dominic Glennane, sorry,
9
this is a memorandum.
14:32:08 10
"I had a phone call this morning from Brendan O'Brien
from the Revenue Commissioners to say that he just received our letter dated
11
21st December", can you read out the date of that memorandum, please,
12
Ms. Gosling
13
A.
The 7th of January 1999?
14
Q. 589
Yes, it's the 7th of January 1999 and you were the secretary of Monarch at this
14:32:27 15
point; weren't you?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 590
Monarch Properties?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 591
When did you become the secretary of Monarch Properties occupying the office of
14:32:41 20
secretary?
21
A.
Um, I think it was the end of the previous year.
22
Q. 592
I see?
23
A.
It was when Mr. Glennane had resigned.
24
Q. 593
I see?
A.
And.
Q. 594
And I have the company office printout in front of me.
14:32:45 25
26
The day in which he
27
resigned was the 23rd of December 1997.
28
Ms. Gosling, you became secretary of Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
29 14:33:01 30
At that point and at that point only,
A.
That's right, the end of '97.
Q. 595
So the context in which the revenue would have been sending or communicating Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:33:04
14:33:16
91 1
with you was purely in the context of being an office holder or being the
2
secretary of Monarch Properties?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 596
So can you just talk us through exactly what happened, e sequence of events?
5
This was in respect of, I think Ms. Dillon referred to this earlier on as a
6
'pick me up' payment?
7
A.
Okay.
8
Q. 597
That there was an inquiry about an accounting procedure?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 598
Say, how the accounting procedure for a political donation to Fianna Fail
14:33:26 10
11
occurred in 1991, at least eight years earlier?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 599
And just for the sake of clarifying the record.
14
payment to Fianna Fail was made in 1991.
14:33:43 15
At the point in which the
You had no knowledge of that payment
did you?
16
A.
I had no knowledge of that payment then, no.
17
Q. 600
And there was also I think a reference to a VAT invoice to Saatchi?
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 601
But you had no knowledge of that payment being made out?
A.
I didn't.
Q. 602
So your involvement with this payment was purely in the context of let's say a
14:33:58 20
21 22
mopping up exercise from the point of view of revenue compliance, Ms. Gosling,
23
wouldn't that be correct?
24 14:34:13 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 603
So, in terms of corresponding with the Revenue, did you contact your advisors
26
in terms of how to deal with this inquiry from the revenue, Ms. Gosling?
27
A.
I did, yes.
28
Q. 604
Who did you contact?
29
A.
I contacted Sean Mooney.
Q. 605
And?
14:34:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:34:28
14:34:38
92 1
A.
I also made contact with Mr. Glennane as well.
2
Q. 606
And can you just talk us through exactly what happened after that?
3
A.
Um,.
4
Q. 607
Did they give you advice?
5
A.
Yes, they -- I mean.
6
Q. 608
So they guided you through?
7
A.
They guided me through it and they drafted the letter which I duly signed
8 9 14:34:57 10
I hadn't known what had happened.
So they ...
having ... Q. 609
I see?
A.
You know, he -- consulted with Mr. Monahan and -- so that I signed the letter
11
on the understanding that the people who had prepared the accounts and dealt
12
with the matter were the best people to explain how they had done what they
13
did.
14
Q. 610
14:35:31 15
If you just bear with me a moment, Ms. Gosling.
Could you go to page 8513,
please.
16 17
This is the letter which you wrote in your capacity as secretary to Brendan
18
O'Brien Esquire, Senior Inspector of Taxes of the Revenue Commissioners, Nassau
19
Street, Dublin 2.
14:35:55 20
"Dear Mr. O'Brien, we refer to your recent telephone call
as a result of our letter of the 24th of November.
21
As we explained to you
during that conversation properties and stuff to Dunloe Ewart".
22 23 24
So that's the start of the letter.
This letter was drafted for you by KPMG
A.
Yes, it was.
Q. 611
And they were the company's auditors?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 612
And this is the context in which you've dealt with that inquiry from the
14:36:08 25
28
Revenue in your position as secretary to the company and purely on advice of
29
the auditors?
14:36:21 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:36:22
14:36:41
93 1
Q. 613
Thank you, Ms. Gosling.
And you have no further knowledge of any payments to
2
Fianna Fail or to Saatchi & Saatchi.
3
dealt with this?
4
A.
Yes, it was.
5
Q. 614
Can I bring up page 8058, please.
That was purely the context in which you
This is the explanation in the affidavit of
6
Mr. Eddie Sweeney as to how a lump sum payment was purported to be made to you
7
over time.
8 9
This was to do with a bonus system effectively due to the success of The Square
14:37:07 10
in Tallaght.
11
And Ms. Dillon asked you earlier on how much you were to receive
from that, which is effectively 5% of 1.8 million I gather.
12
A.
Uh-huh.
13
Q. 615
Which was 90, 000.
14
This was suggested -- this scheme by which you would be
remunerated over time was suggested in 1991.
14:37:32 15
Can I, Ms. Gosling, ask you.
And the Tribunal has asked you and Ms. Dillon has asked you.
That you were a
16
trusted member of the team.
17
I inquire about what your remuneration would be over time in the Monarch Group,
18
let's say when this would have happened in 1991, what would your remuneration
19
be?
14:37:50 20
A.
21 22
Can
I think at that stage it was probably somewhere in the region of 10,000 punts per annum, yeah, punts.
Q. 616
23 24
And you say so yourself in your statement.
And just in the context of the times.
You did you consider that to be an
overpayment or underpayment? A.
Underpayment.
Q. 617
A significant underpayment?
26
A.
Yes, it was.
27
Q. 618
So in the context of this scheme, which has been alighted on by the Tribunal
14:38:05 25
28
and put to you.
29
were a beneficiary or purported beneficiary on this scheme?
14:38:24 30
A.
Can you explain how that arose? How it came to pass that you
Well I think actually the, Mr. Sweeney has got a little bit muddled in his Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:38:34
14:38:48
94 1
description.
2
was --
My loyalty payment came out of the Tesco situation.
And it
3
Q. 619
Well, notwithstanding --
4
A.
I think it was '89 rather than '91.
5
Q. 620
And you have been very candid with the Tribunal in highlighting this, what you
6
see to be a muddle but notwithstanding the source of the funds, whether they
7
came from The Square or from Tesco?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 621
Can you explain -- was it suggested to you, you didn't think up this tax
14:39:04 10
efficient scheme yourself, Ms. Gosling?
11
A.
No, I was very chuffed when I discovered I was part of it.
12
Q. 622
I see.?
13
A.
So ....
14
Q. 623
Can you explain perhaps as to how you were approached or who approached you?
A.
Well, I was basically told by Phil that he had agreed to do this.
Q. 624
I see.
14:39:18 15
16
In the context of the -- of how you were told.
Were you told that
17
this payment, this lump sum would some how augment your regular salary, which
18
we see was significantly lower than average?
19
A.
14:39:45 20
Yeah, well, I would have made various representations looking for a salary increase.
21
Q. 625
And this lump sum, which you were flattered to be a part of frankly?
22
A.
Uh-huh.
23
Q. 626
This would have been seen perhaps as an answer to these representations?
24
A.
Yes, it was.
Q. 627
I see.
26
A.
No, I didn't.
27
Q. 628
And over time, over throughout the whole '90s when you were still working, you
14:39:54 25
And did you receive the lump sum immediately?
28
were working for Monarch.
29
was reference made to this lump sum over time?
14:40:15 30
A.
Did you receive a significant uplift in salary or
I didn't receive a significant uplift, no.
It was always, you know, well, you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:40:22
14:40:40
95 1
know, the Circinus monies are there for you when you need them.
2
Q. 629
I see.
3
A.
Not until I actually left.
4
Q. 630
When was that exactly, Ms. Gosling?
5
A.
That was in February 2003.
6
Q. 631
I see.
7
And ultimately when did you receive the full benefit of the sum?
And up to that point can you explain perhaps the reasons that you
left?
8
A.
Um, basically I left to pursue my own interests.
9
Q. 632
I see?
A.
The company had -- I mean, the situation had changed back in '97 when it was
14:40:56 10
11
sold off to Dunloe and the culture was different.
12
begun to become interested in complimentary therapies and so basically I left
13
to pursue those interests.
14 14:41:25 15
16
Q. 633
And you are currently pursuing those interests?
A.
Yes.
Q. 634
I see.
17
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
And at that time I had
If you answer any other questions
which anyone may have.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:41:41 20
Ms. Gosling, I just want to ask you a couple of things.
In a
couple of the answers that you gave to Ms. Dillon you appeared to be fairly au
21
fait with what Monarch were looking for regarding Cherrywood in the 1990s.
22
You knew they bought the land?
23
A.
Yes.
24 14:41:55 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that it was zoned one house to the acre; is that correct?
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
where would that have come from?
14:42:13 30
A.
And when you would have had this information back in the 1990,
Probably from Mr. Monahan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:42:14
14:42:17
96 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Right.
And the other directors.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
evidence, and we haven't yet heard from any of the Monarch people, in fairness.
7
That he was told when he was being retained in 1993 that there was, if you
8
like, some difference of opinion going forward in 1993 as between Mr. Phil
9
Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan and other people in Monarch.
14:42:48 10
11
Right.
And could I ask you.
Mr. Dunlop has told us in
Do you know
anything about that, Ms. Gosling? A.
I don't recall that.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
that there was a vote which effected, if you like, the Monarch lands?
14:43:02 15
A.
Do you recall -- 1992, would you have been aware of the fact
Yes, I would have --
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
been seeking I think from day one increased density; isn't that correct?
19
A.
There were a number, in fairness to yourself, but Monarch had
Yes.
14:43:23 20
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And you knew that
I knew that.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:43:23 25
26
Did you know at some point that there had been a vote which
was effectively to keep the land at one house to the acre ? A.
There were various different votes, yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
you or his reaction to those votes at any point?
14:43:34 30
A.
Yes.
Did the late Mr. Monahan ever discuss those votes with
I think the general reaction was, you know, one of disappointment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:43:38
14:43:56
97 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
No.
Uh-huh.
You can't be any more specific?
Perhaps I should say that, just on a personal level, at that time my
4
father wasn't well.
So my concentration -- not only was I not involved in
5
Cherrywood as such but my concentration at that time was more on my home scene
6
back in Dundalk.
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
Thanks.
So ....
14:44:07 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
Thank you very much, Ms. Gosling.
Thank you.
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Thank you very much.
14:44:15 15
16
I think probably the best thing to do in relation to the list.
17
will write to Ms. Gosling's solicitors in relation to the matter.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
14:44:24 20
21 22
MS. DILLON: A.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Gosling.
Thank you.
23 24 14:44:28 25
26
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
27 28 29 14:44:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Is that we
14:44:30
14:44:45
98 1
MR. QUINN: Mr. Philip Reilly.
2
MR. PHILIP REILLY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QU
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Reilly.
14:45:01 10
11
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Mr. Reilly.
12
A.
Good afternoon.
13
Q. 635
Mr. Reilly, you were written to by the Tribunal and you responded.
14
And
supplied a statement, which is to be found at pages 8303 and 8304 of the brief;
14:45:15 15
isn't that right? If I could just put those on screen.
And I'll just take
16
you through that statement and I'll ask you one or two questions arising from
17
it.
Is that all right?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 636
I think you told the Tribunal that you joined the Monarch Properties in late
14:45:28 20
1987?
21
A.
Yes, that's right.
22
Q. 637
And had worked previously in the United States from 19 -- I think that's 1983
23 24
is it to 1987? A.
That's a mistake, sorry.
Q. 638
And you were recruited by Mr. Phil Monahan?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 639
Had you known Mr. Monahan?
28
A.
On and off.
14:45:38 25
29 14:45:50 30
I knew he had developed Navan Shopping Centre, I lived in Navan
at the time. Q. 640
So you had known Mr. Monahan before he recruited you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:45:53
14:45:59
99 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 641
Had you been headhunted by Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 642
You go on to say that the title to your position was Group Shopping Centre
5
Manager and you were responsible for shopping centres and other properties at
6
Dundalk, Navan, Finglas, Greystones, Hartstown, City Centre, Athlone,
7
Rathfarnham and Tallaght. Your duties included general day-to-day running of
8
the shopping centres, provision of staff, collection of rents, service charges,
9
dealing with tenants, maintenance issues, budgets, cashflows, marketing
14:46:19 10
promotions and other administrations?
11
A.
That's correct, yeah.
12
Q. 643
Did your duties change at any stage from your initial involvement with Monarch?
13
A.
Not really, no.
14
Q. 644
Were you appointed to that position from day one?
A.
From the beginning, yes, I was, yes.
Q. 645
You say you remained with Monarch until the company was transferred to Dunloe
14:46:31 15
16 17
House plc in 1997 and remained with Dunloe until the end of 1998?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 646
Thereafter you went into partnership with Mr. Glennane?
A.
That's right.
21
Q. 647
Are you still in partnership with Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yes, yes.
23
Q. 648
You say you have no records on your involvement with Cherrywood and you
14:46:49 20
24
prepared this statement based on your memory of events and subject to any
14:47:02 25
necessary corrections should further information arise?
26
A.
Correct, yeah.
27
Q. 649
You may or may not be aware of this, Mr. Reilly.
There's a brief containing a
28
large portion of the documentation, in fact all of the documentation would have
29
been circulated to your solicitors.
14:47:20 30
A.
You would have seen that I take it?
I got a disc from the Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:47:22
14:47:32
100 1
Q. 650
2
Subject to what's contained in that disc.
You have access to no other
documentation?
3
A.
That's correct, yes.
4
Q. 651
You have read what's in that disc I take it?
5
A.
Out of the 8,000 pages or whatever I got I read as much as I could, yeah.
6
Q. 652
Yes.
You go on to say that the Town Square, Tallaght, which at the time was
7
Ireland's largest shopping centre, commenced construction in 1989.
8
would have been two years with the Monarch Group before the construction of the
9
Tallaght Town Centre?
14:47:50 10
So you
A.
About a full year.
11
Q. 653
About a full year?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 654
You say over the next 18 months building period to October 1990 you spent a
14
considerable amount of time as part of the project team.
14:48:03 15
Prior to the opening
of The Square you were responsible for building community relations with the
16
people of Tallaght who were very frustrated with the number of delays in the
17
project.
18
site tours, educational awards, newsletters etc. is that right?
19 14:48:20 20
You go on to describe your organisation of tree planting ceremonies,
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 655
You say that The Square was opened in 1990.
21
Can I just ask you had Mr. Dunlop
any involvement in the opening or organising of the opening of the square?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 656
Had he involvement in organising the opening of the cinema complex?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 657
How long after the opening of The Square?
26
A.
I think it was six weeks.
27
Q. 658
So in November 1990 Mr. Dunlop had been presumably retained by the cinema?
28
A.
UCI.
29
Q. 659
UCI?
A.
Yep.
14:48:34 25
14:48:46 30
Sometime in November.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:48:46
14:48:55
101 1
Q. 660
He was at the opening of the shopping centre, I think?
2
A.
I didn't see him at it.
3
Q. 661
You didn't see him at it?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 662
You would have known Mr. Dunlop?
6
A.
Didn't know him, no.
7
Q. 663
You say that the square opened in 1990 and certain of the units were disposed
8
of to various fund investors at the time. Monarch Properties Services Limited
9
were retained to provide management services to the overall square.
14:49:11 10
management came under your responsibility.
This
The project was a tremendous boost
11
to the area and won both national and international awards and you advised the
12
Tribunal that you were voted Tallaght Person of the Year in 1990 and again in
13
1998; is that correct?
14 14:49:29 15
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 664
Monarch acquired certain lands in Cherrywood in 1989 and, like other employees
16
in the group, you were involved in the marketing and road shows in the late
17
1991, early 1992 period when details of the development and models were brought
18
to various schools and community halls in the area and there was an interaction
19
between the local community to deal with their potential concerns?
14:49:48 20
21
A.
Correct.
Q. 665
Based on your experiences with the community groups in the Tallaght area you
22
were involved with community liaison and outlining the proposals of the scheme.
23
You say that you organised a number of tours to The Square, Tallaght for
24
community groups.
14:50:02 25
Coming up to November 1993, Development Plan vote, you
canvassed a number of politicians you had come to know through your involvement
26
in Tallaght.
And you set out and explained to them Monarch's proposals in
27
respect of the Cherrywood lands when these opportunities arose.
28 29 14:50:21 30
At 8304 you conclude by saying that you had a very limited role in relation to Cherrywood as any of your responsibilities related to shopping centre Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:50:26
14:50:36
102 1
management which took up most of your working days.
And you say that you had
2
no active part in the Cherrywood project team which was led by Mr. Sweeney.
3
Is that correct?
4
A.
Correct, yes.
5
Q. 666
Now, you have heard the evidence of the previous witness, Mr. Reilly?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 667
You have been here this morning?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 668
Before I deal in detail with one or two matters arising in relation to your
14:50:46 10
evidence, is there anything you want to say to the Tribunal or anything extra
11 12
you want to say to the Tribunal in relation to any matter? A.
Well, other than it's focused very much obviously in Tallaght, in terms of the
13
management that I had.
14
which were mentioned earlier in the scheme.
14:51:06 15
16
I was managing. Q. 669
17
I actually managed eight or nine other properties So, it just wasn't only Tallaght
I was managing, as I said, what I listed there myself.
Now, since you are the second Monarch witness.
I think perhaps it might be
best if I could have 8699.
18 19 14:51:23 20
21
Just to start at the beginning, so to speak. A.
Okay.
Q. 670
This is a statement provided to the Tribunal by Arthur Cox Solicitors, who were
22
involved -- who were involved in relation to the acquisition by Guardian
23
Assurance Plc and Ackwood Estates Limited in relation to the Cherrywood site?
24 14:51:46 25
A.
Okay. MR SANFEY: I'm terribly sorry to interrupt Mr. Quinn.
I may be being
26
pedantic here but I think Mr. Quinn referred to Mr. Reilly as being the second
27
Monarch witness.
28 29 14:52:02 30
I wonder if that's a reference to Ms. Gosling. Ms. Gosling is separately represented Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I don't represent Ms. Gosling.
14:52:05
14:52:13
103 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
I think he meant he was the second witness from Monarch.
3
MR SANFEY: I would just like it clarified.
Perhaps I was being pedantic.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
You're not acting for ...
6
MR SANFEY: I don't act for Ms. Gosling.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
other Monarch staff.
14:52:28 10
She is a witness from Monarch.
MR SANFEY:
Indeed, Chairman.
But not represented by with the
Thank you.
11 12
MR. QUINN: You are familiar with the acquisition of this site, Mr. Reilly, I
13
take it and the background to it
14
A.
14:52:40 15
Not really.
I don't know what you mean by "familiar".
site was bought but I wasn't involved in any of the negotiations.
16
Q. 671
Yes.
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 672
Just to put it in context.
19 14:53:00 20
I was aware that the
I'm not going to deal with the negotiations?
I think that by 1989 it appears that the Tallaght
site was going to get off the ground; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
21
Q. 673
And construction had commenced?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 674
And obviously Monarch were looking towards new pastures; isn't that right?
24
A.
Correct.
Q. 675
And for whatever reasonings, the Cherrywood lands, the property of
14:53:07 25
26
Mr. Gallagher were identified as potential investment property; isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
I would assume so.
29
Q. 676
And the position in Tallaght would be that there had been a successful
14:53:22 30
partnership between Monarch and GRE? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:53:24
14:53:43
104 1
A.
I understand that, yes.
2
Q. 677
And that had been coming to fruition and the lands in Cherrywood having been
3
identified I think there was agreement at some stage between Mr. Monahan and
4
Mr. Gallagher that Mr. Monahan would acquire the lands; isn't that right?
5
A.
That was our understanding, yeah.
6
Q. 678
And I think there was some publicity attaching to the acquisition of the lands
7
in or about May or June.
June in fact I think 1989; is that correct?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 679
We can put on screen if necessary?
A.
I'll accept that, yeah.
Q. 680
8510.
14:53:58 10
11
This is an article in the Irish Times on the 12th of May 1989.
12 13 14
And I think it advices that these lands had been acquired. A.
Right.
Q. 681
Were you aware that these lands were about to be acquired?
16
A.
I don't remember exactly but I probably heard about it in the company itself.
17
Q. 682
Yeah.
14:54:10 15
18 19
Okay.
You were very high up with in the company; isn't that right? At that
time? A.
14:54:31 20
I wasn't -- I was an employee of the company.
Shopping Centre Manager managing shopping centres.
21
Not on the development
side.
22
Q. 683
Yes.?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 684
If we could have 2165.
14:54:45 25
This is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's statement where
he attempts to give the management team structure for The Square in Tallaght.
26
I think Mr. Monahan is the Chairman and managing director; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
28
Q. 685
And finance director Mr. Glennane?
29
A.
Dominic Glennane, yes.
Q. 686
Your current partner.
14:54:59 30
I was given the role of Group
And Mr. Sweeney who is the development director?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:55:03
14:55:10
105 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 687
Under Mr. Glennane was Mr. Murray who was the Marketing and Sales?
3
A.
Correct, yes.
4
Q. 688
And then immediately after him?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 689
Was the shopping centre management?
7
A.
Correct, yes.
8
Q. 690
And that was you?
9
A.
Yes, that's me, yeah.
Q. 691
So you held a fairly responsible position?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 692
And a fairly senior position within the company; isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 693
And you held it before, during and after the development of these lands; isn't
14:55:15 10
14:55:26 15
that right?
16
A.
Yes, of Tallaght, yes.
17
Q. 694
So you would have known that Mr. Monahan or the company were about to acquire
18 19
these lands and enter into negotiations of the acquisition of these lands? A.
14:55:45 20
Not necessarily, no because I was very much focussed. Just to explain.
I
arrived in '87 and in '88 I had to revamp most of the shopping centres around
21
the country, I'd quite a bit of staff changes to make etc..
22
difficulties as well within that year.
23
into the job and I brought people back, my family back from America.
24
Unfortunately, my two parents died very suddenly during the middle of the whole
14:56:14 25
Some personal
So I was very much focused on settling
thing. So I really didn't become involved in Tallaght until early '89, '89.
26
But I wasn't in the mainstream of -- can't in terms of what was happening I was
27
...
28 29 14:56:36 30
Q. 695
So you're saying that, like everybody else, other than Mr. Galvin and Mr. Monahan, you didn't realise that Monarch had acquired these lands until you read about it in the newspaper? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:56:37
14:56:54
106 1
A.
2 3
Well, I might have heard about it in the office. discussions.
Q. 696
4
I wasn't at any meetings or
Nobody came and asked me.
Now, I think that the lands once acquired, posed a number of difficulties; isn't that right, from a development point of view?
5
A.
Well, again I wasn't really aware of that itself.
6
Q. 697
Were you not even curious to know what the potential of the site was after it
7 8
was acquired? A.
9 14:57:15 10
I wasn't involved as I say.
Curious yeah but not into any great detail. shopping centre on it.
I was told we wanted to build a
That was extent of it, that was the extent of mine.
Q. 698
Shopping centres were the track record of Monarch?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 699
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 700
But this was a Greenfield site; isn't that right?
A.
Correct.
16
Q. 701
It had no access?
17
A.
Again, at that time I wasn't familiar with it.
18
Q. 702
When did you become familiar with the site?
19
A.
Well I suppose the first time I went to it might have been at the end of '91.
Q. 703
So you had no involvement with this site?
21
A.
Not --
22
Q. 704
Between 1989 when it was purchased?
23
A.
Not really.
24
Q. 705
And the end of 1991, did you say the end of 1991?
A.
Well I'm trying to remember.
Q. 706
So between 1989 and 1991, even though you were the Manager in charge of
14:57:22 15
14:57:46 20
14:57:46 25
26
Sometime in '91.
27
shopping centres in the group, you knew nothing about the site and hadn't
28
visited?
29 14:58:02 30
A.
No, it's not that I knew nothing about it.
I knew something about it.
didn't get into any of the detail of .... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
But I
14:58:05
14:58:22
107 1
Q. 707
Did you know that it had been zoned for shopping centre development?
2
A.
Well I knew it was zoned for something.
It was for development.
But, again,
3
sorry, and I don't mean to keep repeating myself.
4
shopping centre and trying to get a new development off the ground, which was
5
tough.
6
Q. 708
7
You know, I was running a
Did you know that there was a moveable line vis-a-vis the proposed Southeastern Motorway running across.
8
A.
I wasn't involved in any of that, no.
9
Q. 709
Did you know that there was no immediate access to the site?
A.
No, I don't recall that.
11
Q. 710
Did you know that there was no planning on the site?
12
A.
Well, planning to start building tomorrow, no, there was no planning.
14:58:33 10
13 14 14:58:45 15
that. Q. 711
And you knew that there was no sewage to the site?
A.
I wasn't familiar with it now.
16 17
Again, I'm sorry, as I say, I wasn't familiar
with that. Q. 712
18 19
I knew
Can I just ask you.
At what stage did you get involved in relation to
shopping centre management, is it after or is it before its constructed? A.
14:59:04 20
I suppose to follow the line was -- in Tallaght for instance it had planning permission.
I arrived in '89.
Work had already commenced on the site itself
21
in '88 we started putting in the foundations.
22
to start setting up the management structures and to get to know the people in
23
the community.
24 14:59:28 25
26
That's when I really get involved in projects.
Q. 713
So you say that you didn't arrive in Tallaght until 1989, is it?
A.
'89.
Q. 714
And Tallaght I think was being run at that time, was it, by L & C Properties
27
Correct, yeah.
Limited?
28
A.
L & C Properties.
29
Q. 715
L & C Properties?
A.
Yeah, L & C Properties.
14:59:41 30
I arrived in '89 and that was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
14:59:42
14:59:52
108 1
Q. 716
And did you have authority to ask that monies be drawn on that company?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 717
I see. So any cheques drawn on L & C Properties?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 718
Did not go through you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 719
So if you wanted, for example, to expend money in relation to Tallaght.
8 9
was the procedure? A.
15:00:05 10
Well, I would obviously check with the project Manager that I was going to spend certain money.
11
I would then -- obviously we'd raise an invoice.
Q. 720
So you did have approving rights?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 721
On expenditure?
A.
Sorry, yeah, on expenditure.
16
Q. 722
Did you a moment ago tell me that you didn't?
17
A.
No, sorry.
18 19
The
invoice sorry from the company, third party, would be approved by me and paid.
12
15:00:19 15
What
I was interpreting that I could write a cheque.
I wasn't
involved in that end of it. Q. 723
You didn't have signing authority on the cheque?
A.
No, absolutely not.
21
Q. 724
But you could ask that a cheque be paid?
22
A.
Drawn, yes.
23
Q. 725
And you could approve a request by others, that is a cheque be paid?
24
A.
Yeah, if a third party, if one of the team came along and said that they wanted
15:00:31 20
15:00:43 25
something paid, yes.
26
Q. 726
So whilst your signature wasn't recognised by the bank?
27
A.
Correct, yeah.
28
Q. 727
Nonetheless you could approve a payment?
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 728
And your approval wasn't questionable by anybody higher; isn't that right?
15:00:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:00:56
15:01:11
109 1
A.
Oh, it would, yeah.
I mean, I would have cleared it with somebody that this
2
was a legitimate expense, Eddie Sweeney probably, as he was the Project
3
Manager.
4
Q. 729
And other than Mr. Sweeney, would you have to clear it with anybody else?
5
A.
Depending on the circumstances.
6
Q. 730
Yes.?
7
A.
Or Noel Murray, depending on what --
8
Q. 731
In what circumstances might you go to Mr. Glennane or Mr. Murray as opposed to
9 15:01:27 10
Perhaps Dominic Glennane.
Mr. Sweeney in relation to the approval your payment? A.
Well, I suppose I wanted to take on some staff, for instance.
And to do that
11
I would have had to go to, we would set out an interview process and set out a
12
salary etc. because Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray were on the marketing and
13
commercial side.
14
Q. 732
15:01:50 15
Yes.
Now, do I understand your evidence to the Tribunal to be that because of
the particular role you had in Tallaght, you had occasion to come in contact
16
with the community leaders and local organisations?
17
A.
Correct, yes.
18
Q. 733
And in that regard, did you also come in contact with local politicians?
19
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 734
And did you build up a rapport with local politicians in Tallaght?
A.
Not initially.
15:02:09 20
21
My initial contact was with the Tallaght Community Council and
22
the Get Tallaght Working Group and some other groups, the Tallaght Welfare
23
Society and the schools and people like that.
24
approach on Tallaght.
15:02:29 25
Q. 735
26
Can I just ask you.
Where were you, where were you operating from? Where
were your offices?
27
A.
Part of my time was in the project office itself.
28
Q. 736
In Tallaght?
29
A.
And my other office was in Tallaght.
Q. 737
Yes.
15:02:40 30
That was the main thrust of the
So you were in Tallaght throughout the development of Tallaght? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:02:45
15:02:52
110 1
A.
Some of the time, not all of the time.
2
Q. 738
After it was opened in October 1990 did you continue to have a presence in
3
Tallaght?
4
A.
Yes, I spent a lot of time there.
5
Q. 739
Yes?
6
A.
For the first three or four years.
7
Q. 740
So that would be up to '93, '94?
8
A.
And after it, I don't know, Mr. Quinn.
9
Q. 741
Did you ease off on it after your attendance in the other office at that stage?
A.
No, I still maintained an office in town as I was running other projects for
15:03:05 10
11 12
other investors and institutions. Q. 742
13 14
And was it usual to have group strategy meetings in Tallaght in relation to the development of the site there?
A.
Um, sorry.
Q. 743
Yes?
16
A.
Which were the shopping centre management team.
17
Q. 744
What about the other teams?
18
A.
On occasion I would join some of the technical team meetings.
15:03:24 15
19 15:03:46 20
I had meetings with my own team.
On occasion.
But I didn't
attend the main board meetings between the two properties L&C and Monarch. Q. 745
We know, for example, by October 1990.
If we could have 1255.
This is at a
21
time when you would have been well bedded in in Tallaght.
22
payments to a company, Comex Trading Corporation in the sums of 28,000 and
23
28,300 pounds respectively.
24
There were two
You'll have seen those?
A.
Correct.
Q. 746
In the documentation which you received?
26
A.
Correct.
27
Q. 747
And you will have heard evidence in relation to them this morning?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 748
Did you approve those payments?
A.
No.
15:04:04 25
15:04:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:04:12
15:04:23
111 1
Q. 749
Did you know those payments had been made?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 750
When was the first time you heard that those payments had been met?
4
A.
A few minutes ago, earlier in the Tribunal.
5
Q. 751
Are you saying that up to the evidence of the last witness you had never heard
6
that two payments totalling 56,300 pounds had been made to a company called
7
Comex Trading Company?
8
A.
No, I didn't even know who they were.
9
Q. 752
I was going to ask you that now.
A.
Sorry, I'm jumping ahead.
Q. 753
As somebody intimately involved in the development of Tallaght, can you tell
15:04:39 10
11 12
the Tribunal what contribution a company Comex Trading Corporation would have
13
made to the development of the site in Tallaght?
14
A.
I had no knowledge.
Q. 754
The 16th of October 1990. What was the opening date of the?
16
A.
The 23rd of October.
17
Q. 755
Seven days before Tallaght was opened?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 756
You can't tell the Tribunal about an expenditure of 56,300 pounds?
A.
No, no, absolutely no idea.
21
Q. 757
Did you know Mr. Lawlor?
22
A.
Yes, I met Mr. Lawlor, yeah.
23
Q. 758
When did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
24
A.
I was trying to remember that.
15:04:49 15
15:05:03 20
15:05:17 25
I met him socially.
26
Q. 759
Yes.
27
A.
I didn't really know him.
28
Q. 760
Where did you meet Mr. Lawlor?
29
A.
At a social party.
Q. 761
In Tallaght?
15:05:31 30
Probably sometime in '90.
How well did you know Mr. Lawlor by October 1990? I'd only met him at one stage.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Sometime in 1990
15:05:32
15:05:38
112 1
A.
No, in Sandyford.
2
Q. 762
Well, taking that expenditure as we see it there.
3
Who would have approved
that expenditure?
4
A.
I don't know.
5
Q. 763
Does that document on screen give you any indication of who would have approved
6
it?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 764
Who in your opinion might have approved it or had the power to approve an
9 15:05:51 10
expenditure of 56,000? A.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Obviously the people who were in Tallaght, the
11
project leader was Eddie Sweeney.
But, you know, other people would have
12
approved payments for John Sisk or other people like that.
13
Q. 765
Well what other people would have approved?
14
A.
I don't know.
15:06:14 15
I mean, obviously, for instance, the certificate for John Sisk
and Sons was raised every month, although I wasn't involved in that.
16
Q. 766
That's an architect's certificate?
17
A.
Yes, an architect's certificate.
18
Q. 767
And who would receive that architect's certificate?
19
A.
It would probably go to the Project Manager.
Q. 768
That's Mr. Sweeney, is it?
21
A.
Yeah, Mr. Sweeney.
22
Q. 769
What about Mr. Glennane?
23
A.
No, I don't believe it would have gone to him.
15:06:28 20
24 15:06:49 25
Maybe eventually for when the
cheque was written but not initially. Q. 770
26
Somebody would have had to approve the payment and somebody would have to make the payment; isn't that right?
27
A.
Correct, yes.
28
Q. 771
And what was the procedure in Tallaght in October 1990 for the making of
29 15:06:49 30
payments? A.
Well once an invoice was passed it was sent to our office in town and they drew Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:06:54
15:07:02
113 1 2
the cheque. Q. 772
3
So an invoice would have had to have been received from Comex Trading corporation in Tallaght or in town?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 773
It would have had to have been addressed to someone?
6
A.
I assume so.
7
Q. 774
It would have had to have been passed and a direction that the monies had been
8 9 15:07:10 10
paid? A.
Correct.
Q. 775
So whoever engaged a company such as Comex would know that they had been
11
engaged?
12
A.
I assume so.
13
Q. 776
Whoever received the invoice for the works done would know that the works were
14 15:07:23 15
done; isn't that right? A.
Correct, yeah.
16
Q. 777
Somebody would have had to approve the invoice isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 778
And then somebody would have to give a direction presumably the same person,
19 15:07:33 20
that the monies be expended? A.
Correct, yeah.
21
Q. 779
A cheque would have to be drawn; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes, that was the procedure.
23
Q. 780
A payment made on foot of that invoice?
24
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 781
And then was there a procedure for auditing from time to time or cashflow
15:07:42 25
26 27
projections? A.
Yeah.
I assume there were.
Maybe just to back up a bit again.
I wasn't
28
involved in the accounts end of it. If I had an invoice I wanted paid I got it
29
approved having cleared it with the relevant supervisor or manager or whatever
15:08:05 30
else.
It was sent into town and after that it was paid or otherwise. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:08:09
15:08:28
114 1
Q. 782
2
And are you saying that an expenditure such as this would never have come to your attention?
3
A.
No, no.
4
Q. 783
Do you ever recall any discussion about a payment to Mr. Lawlor or indeed to
5
Sorry, no, absolutely not.
Comex Trading company?
6
A.
No, absolutely not.
7
Q. 784
It was never mentioned in Tallaght?
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 785
Was his name ever mentioned in connection with any other project involving
15:08:39 10
His name was never mentioned in Tallaght.
Monarch?
11
A.
No, not that I ever heard of, no.
12
Q. 786
Did you ever hear mention of Mr. Lawlor's name at any stage in relation to
13 14
Cherrywood or other projects? A.
There was one in Prague, Mr. Lawlor was involved in.
Q. 787
You weren't involved in that project?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 788
How did you know that Mr. Lawlor was involved in it?
18
A.
Probably somebody in the office told me that he was organising it through --
15:08:53 15
19 15:09:04 20
probably Ambrose Kelly was the architect. Q. 789
And you had no involvement in it?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 790
Other than Mr. Monahan, who else was involved in the?
23
A.
I don't know.
24 15:09:16 25
I think the project architect was -- Ambrose Kelly was involved
in it. Q. 791
26
I think you yourself, I think received PR payments in 1990, 1989 and 1990; isn't that right?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 792
If we could have 8596, please.
29 15:09:31 30
This is an L&C payment by accounts.
Do you see this document?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:09:40
15:09:54
115 1
A.
I can, yeah.
2
Q. 793
If you go about two-thirds of the way down you see Phil Reilly, PR work? For
3
the month of April 1989?
4
A.
I never got that payment.
5
Q. 794
You never got that payment?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 795
Did you make that claim for that payment?
8
A.
No, absolutely not.
9
Q. 796
Can you you give any indication to the Tribunal as to why your name would
15:10:03 10
appear in such a list for a claim for PR work?
11
A.
Other than it's allocated as public relations work which I was doing.
12
Q. 797
Did you make a claim for the public relations work which you were doing?
13
A.
No, I did not, no.
14
Q. 798
You were an employee; is that correct?
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 799
Did you ever get any of the bonuses that we have heard evidence of this
15:10:21 15
16 17
morning?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 800
Or any similar type bonus?
A.
No, absolutely not.
Q. 801
So you can't tell the Tribunal why Phil Reilly, PR Work, claim for 50,000
15:10:29 20
21 22
pounds in April 1989 would have been made?
23
A.
Absolutely not, no.
24
Q. 802
You certainly made no such claim against L&C Properties?
A.
No, certainly not.
Q. 803
Therefore, can I take it, if we could have 8597.
15:10:41 25
26 27
A claim for 150,000 for
April 1990 was also not made by you?
28
A.
No, that's the first time I've seen these.
29
Q. 804
These are documents supplied to the Tribunal by Monarch.?
A.
Yeah.
15:11:02 30
Again, all I can say is that it's public relations work but I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:11:08
15:11:20
116 1
absolutely never got these payments.
2
Q. 805
You did public relations work?
3
A.
Well, sorry the work I did.
4 5
public relations field. Q. 806
6
I managed shopping centres but I was in the
But I was talking to various community groups etc.
You see, I understood your evidence to be that you were effectively in charge of shopping centres?
7
A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
8
Q. 807
So would the designation PR work apply to you at all?
9
A.
For that element of it I mean, for instance, we had educational awards, there
15:11:39 10
was 40,000 Euro for or 40,000 pounds given out to schools for scholarships etc.
11
There would have been other public relationships work launching the scheme and
12
whatever but .... you know.
13
Q. 808
You can't help the Tribunal as to why there would be?
14
A.
Absolutely not.
Q. 809
There would be documentation showing claims or payments to you?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 810
Totalling 300,000 pounds in 1989 and 1990?
18
A.
No, absolutely not.
19
Q. 811
And you say that you never received those monies?
A.
No, absolutely not.
21
Q. 812
You didn't know of Mr. Lawlor's claim either through Comex or otherwise?
22
A.
No, absolutely not.
23
Q. 813
For any monies on Tallaght?
24
A.
No, absolutely not.
15:12:01 15
15:12:13 20
15:12:20 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn, I think it's 200,000.
27 28
MR. QUINN: It's 50,000 and 150,000 -- sorry 200,000.
29
could have 3061, please and it maybe a further error on the author of this
15:12:38 30
Yes.
In fact, if we
document, Mr. Reilly, but like me, he has totalled the 150 plus the 50 to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:12:44
15:13:01
117 1 2
300,000 as you can see there. A.
Sorry, I saw that document and I got the disc and I queried it with my own
3
solicitor to find out what was that all about but I haven't heard back from
4
him.
5
50's, absolutely.
6
Q. 814
7
I can certainly assure this Tribunal that I got no 300,000 or 100 or
Did you know that Mr. Monahan was making a claim for additional management costs in relation to Tallaght in July of 1993, 1992
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 815
If I could have 3781.
15:13:21 10
11
You heard the evidence of the previous witness in relation to a letter written
12
in July 1992 by Mr. Monahan on Monarch Property Limited's paper to GRE, its
13
partner.
14
the Tallaght project
15:13:44 15
A.
16 17
15:14:00 20
I had no involvement in that.
I never attended any meeting with
Mr. Monahan or with GRE. Q. 816
18 19
Yeah.
Where there is a claim for in excess of 7 million pounds on foot of
Leaving aside the meetings between Mr. Monahan and GRE, this is a claim in relation to a project that you certainly were involved in; isn't that right.
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 817
And you would have been involved when the site was designated for tax purposes;
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
I don't know when it was designated for tax purposes.
23
Q. 818
It appears to, according to this letter.
24 15:14:16 25
It had been included in the
designated area in the 1989 Finance Act? A.
Yeah, I think --
26
Q. 819
I think you told us were employed from 1987; is that right?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 820
So you would have been employed when it was designated; isn't that right?
29
A.
Well obviously, yeah.
Q. 821
Well it's not just obviously?
15:14:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:14:28
15:14:38
118 1
A.
Sorry, yeah.
2
Q. 822
I suggest to you that Mr. Reilly, there's no need to be coy about this?
3
A.
I'm certainly not, no.
4
Q. 823
This is something that you would remember as a course; isn't that right? It
5
would have meant a huge uplift in the value of the centre that you were
6
involved in?
7
A.
I'm sorry.
If I can just restate what my particular role was in the
8
particular scheme itself.
9
for The Square Town Centre, Tallaght.
15:14:59 10
I came in 1989 to set up the management structure Okay? I didn't -- I was not involved
in the overall project management of the scheme.
11
relations with the community groups.
12
the scheme in October, 23rd of October 1990.
13
designation or whatever else.
14
Q. 824
15:15:29 15
My role was to build
Okay? I, what do you call it, I opened I was not involved in any tax
I had heard designation had been granted.
And this would have been something that would not have gone unnoticed by anybody in the Monarch team in Tallaght; isn't that right?
16
A.
Tax designated, yeah.
17
Q. 825
It was a huge uplift to the shopping centre?
18
A.
It was good for the area.
19
This I understood from -- this was I understood
having lobbied by the Tallaght Community Council and on the various other
15:15:48 20
groups as a necessary part of getting the scheme off the ground.
21
Q. 826
Had your employers, Monarch Properties Limited, lobbied for it?
22
A.
I would assume they had.
23
Q. 827
Had you lobbied any of the councillors you were getting to know at this time
24 15:16:00 25
26
for it? A.
No.
Q. 828
When you say that it had been lobbied by community groups.
27
any of the community groups, on behalf of your employers, to lobby for it?
28
A.
I wasn't involved in that end of it, no.
29
Q. 829
If we look at 3781.
15:16:32 30
Had you encouraged
This is, as I say, a letter from Mr. Monahan to GRE under
the heading Additional Marketing Costs.
This is the type of thing, I suggest
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:16:32
15:16:41
119 1
to you, Mr. Reilly, that you would know about.
It says "to ensure the success
2
of the joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred.
3
costs which were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring
4
the tax status and appropriate tax profile for the Tallaght Town Centre.
These
5 6
Were you involved with the tenant profile for the town centre?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 830
Do you know -- are you familiar with the phrase 'appropriate tenant profile'?
9
A.
Yeah, appropriate tenant profile would be the tenant mix, I would call it.
Q. 831
Was there any discussion in Tallaght in your time about who might be an
15:16:57 10
11 12
appropriate tenant for the shopping certainty? A.
When I arrived a deal had been done with, it was Quinnsworth or Crazy Prices in
13
the day.
14
on board and then they let the rest of the scheme.
15:17:19 15
And then UCI came on board, as I recall, and then Dunnes Stores came
Q. 832
Did Dunnes Stores come on board when you were with the company?
16
A.
Yeah, it would have been, yeah, I think so.
17
Q. 833
Were you involved in the negotiations coming on board?
18
A.
No, no.
19
The only negotiations I was
involved in with Dunnes Stores was the service charge, which I was responsible
15:17:35 20
for the cost of running the scheme when it was open.
21 22
The only -- just to clarify that.
That's the only meeting
I had with Dunnes Stores on that. Q. 834
It says The Square was included as a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act.
23
In fact the designation may have occurred as a result of a government decision
24
in '88.
15:17:58 25
This dramatically increased its value and led to a large level of
private and institution investors expressing interest in the project.
26 27 28
Do you recall, first of all, the increase in value as described here A.
29 15:18:12 30
I wasn't involved in values.
I had no idea what values were.
first thing I say to you. Q. 835
Okay.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
That's the
15:18:13
15:18:32
120 1
A.
Just to explain to you about Tallaght.
When I got there in 1989.
We arrived
2
on 100 acres site which was full of scrap cars and it was a tip.
3
lot of frustration in the community in terms of the scheme not having got off
4
the ground.
5
particular role within it was to change the whole perception of Tallaght and
6
hence my involvement, which was my main involvement in Tallaght, was dealing
7
with the community and getting to know the people, getting support for the
8
project and stopping the absolute aggravation that these people had against
9
Monarch for taking so long to get the scheme off the ground.
15:18:57 10
There was a
Tallaght at that stage was getting very bad press.
in the project.
My
That was my role
I then recruited people, set up the systems and opened the
11
scheme.
12
I was not involved in negotiations with the tenants, other than when a tent
13
would arrive to start to fit out, to show them where their shop was etc..
14
that was my role.
15:19:18 15
Q. 836
16
But I was not involved in the overall management at main board level.
But
The letter goes on to say "significant professional fees were incurred in this area particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght"
17 18 19
Did you know that significant professional fees ... A.
No.
Q. 837
Had been incurred in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 838
From your expertise and knowledge of Tallaght and generally as a shopping
15:19:30 20
23
centre manager, can you identify for the Tribunal what type of fees you think
24
might be incurred in obtaining a tax status for a shopping centre?
15:19:51 25
26
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 839
Well under what headings could one look to to find significant fees for that
27 28
type of activity? A.
29 15:20:12 30
I really don't know.
I don't know how you'd go about getting tax designation.
I really don't. Q. 840
And can you give any indication to the Tribunal of how one might incur any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:20:18
15:20:38
121 1
fees, never mind significant or significant professional fees, to obtain tax
2
status for a development?
3
A.
Well I suppose what you might do, if you were to, maybe you'd employ an
4
accountancy firm or KPMG or somebody to do a study or a marketing study or
5
whatever.
6
Q. 841
7
I don't know.
I was never involved.
To your knowledge was any such investment undertaken by L & C Properties or indeed any of the Monarch interest in relation to Tallaght?
8
A.
I have no knowledge.
9
Q. 842
We know, for example, from 3782.
15:20:55 10
heading is 850,000.
11
That the sum being claimed under that
Although some of that appears to relate to encouraging
various interests to acquire a unit in the centre; isn't that right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 843
Yes?
14
A.
No, I know nothing about this.
Q. 844
So other than commissioning a firm of accountants to prepare some sort of data,
15:21:14 15
16 17
you can think of no other ...? A.
Sorry, yeah.
I mean, no, I'm being asked here for something that I don't
18
really know anything about.
19
it and I've given my honest answer.
15:21:31 20
Q. 845
21
I would have to think it how would you go about
Now, you say that you got involved in the Cherrywood site sometime towards the, was it the end of 1991?
22
A.
The end of 1991, yeah.
23
Q. 846
And how did you manage to avoid being involved with the site prior to the end
24 15:21:45 25
of 1991? A.
It wasn't my job to be involved in it.
26
Q. 847
But you did become involved?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 848
How and how did it become your job to get involved?
29
A.
Well, what happened was, first and foremost, Tallaght was our show case, all
15:21:59 30
right.
It was a very big and successful launch office scheme, that was very Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:22:06
15:22:29
122 1
well received in the market.
It was practically fully let when it opened.
2
It traded well at the start.
3
it was our show case.
4
asked by Richard Lynn to go to meet with Bill O'Herlihy to talk about marketing
5
and PR which I had been involved in, in the community aspect, in the launch in
6
Tallaght.
It was like, as I say, the travelling salesman,
My recollection of having got involved in '91 was I was
7
Q. 849
That would have been around November 1991?
8
A.
I think it was around that.
9
Q. 850
When you went to that meeting with Mr. O'Herlihy at the invitation of Mr. Lynn,
15:22:44 10
were you aware of the zoning status of the site?
11
A.
Yeah, it was zoned one house to the acre, as I recall.
12
Q. 851
And did you visit the site?
13
A.
I probably drove around it but I don't ....
14
Q. 852
Had you attended any of the meetings in relation to the strategy that might be
15:23:09 15
It was a low zoning.
employed?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 853
To change the zoning status of the site?
18
A.
No, I hadn't.
19
Q. 854
Did you know why Mr. O'Herlihy was being retained?
A.
Well there was a campaign against Cherrywood itself and the view was, to
15:23:17 20
Not that I can recall.
21
counter that argument, that they were taking on a public relations firm that
22
would counter that argument.
23
Q. 855
Presumably that firm had to be briefed on the zoning status of the site?
24
A.
Yeah, I would think so, yeah.
Q. 856
And you say that was towards the end of 1991, I believe that was towards the
15:23:34 25
26
end of '91. And you attended at least one meeting, did you, with
27
Mr. O'Herlihy?
28
A.
Yeah, I did.
29
Q. 857
Well, presumably, having made your contribution to the marketing aspect of the
15:23:58 30
With Richard Lynn and Bill O'Herlihy in his office.
brief from Mr. O'Herlihy that ended your involvement? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:24:02
15:24:27
123 1
A.
No, it didn't.
What was discussed at that meeting, as I recall, was the
2
various approaches to the media, obviously press releases, news letters and
3
some other, you know, media, what do you call it, the road shows, that have
4
been mentioned, were one of the particular avenues that they decided that they
5
would use, to go out and tell the public exactly what was proposed for the
6
scheme itself.
7
Q. 858
This was a strategy to advise the public on what was proposed for the site?
8
A.
To try and get a balanced message out, yeah.
9
Q. 859
Did you get more and more involved then thereafter in relation to the site?
A.
No, not really.
11
Q. 860
I see?
12
A.
I did attend the road shows and go to some of them, not all of them.
13
Q. 861
In what capacity did you attend the road shows?
14
A.
It was just to try and help out and just watch what people were saying.
15:24:44 10
15:24:57 15
The
whole office went out to it, from secretaries to the people in marketing. We
16
even brought our tea lady out to it.
17
weren't the three headed monsters that perhaps we're being painted as in the
18
media.
19
So, I mean, it was really a -- we
Q. 862
So who else attended at the meeting between yourself and Mr. O'Herlihy?
A.
Just myself and Richard Lynn.
21
Q. 863
And was that your very first involvement in relation to the Cherrywood?
22
A.
That was as I recall it, yeah.
23
Q. 864
So after November 1991 did you know that planning submissions were being
15:25:19 20
24 15:25:35 25
received by the council in relation to the site? A.
26 27
side of it or what was being submitted to the local authority itself. Q. 865
28 29 15:26:03 30
I wasn't really familiar with that side of it, with the canvassing or lobbying
It wasn't lobbying at this stage, it was planning permission put in by planning experts on behalf of Monarch?
A.
I wasn't involved in any of that. I didn't attend.
Q. 866
Did you know what Monarch wanted on the site? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:26:03
15:26:05
124 1
A.
At that stage they wanted a shopping centre on it.
2
Q. 867
Were they also trying to prove the density on it?
3
A.
I believe they were, yes.
4
Q. 868
Who told you about that?
5
A.
I suppose Richard Lynn or Eddie Sweeney.
6
Q. 869
Did you attend many meetings with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney in relation to the
7
site?
8
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
9
Q. 870
So you had this one meeting with Mr. O'Herlihy where you may or may not have
15:26:21 10
learned of the zoning on the site?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 871
And you attended a few residential meetings thereafter; is that right with the
13 14
other staff of? A.
15:26:35 15
Yeah, well what happened effectively was from that meeting a model was made, a video was made and it explained the whole development itself.
16
Q. 872
Did you have a contribution to make to the video?
17
A.
No, I don't think I was involved in it.
18
Q. 873
So you weren't involved in the video and you weren't presumably involved in the
19 15:26:50 20
making of the model? A.
No.
21
Q. 874
So what was your involvement?
22
A.
Sorry.
23 24 15:26:58 25
From that I learnt about the scheme itself.
Where it was, what was
proposed for it. Q. 875
Yes?
A.
As I recall, there was a designer who worked on The Square.
He did some
26
sketch schemes as well about building an underground shopping centre and a
27
village on top of it.
28
thoughts etc. that were put together.
29
about it.
15:27:20 30
Q. 876
And these were some of the, what do you call it
Did you know this much.
And that's as much as how I learned
Did you know that it would require a vote of the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:27:24
15:27:36
125 1
councillors to change the zoning on the site?
2
A.
I knew there was something happening in '92 all right, yeah.
3
Q. 877
When you say you knew there was something happening?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 878
Did you not know that from the outset of November '91?
6
A.
Well my recollection of '91 was, what do you call it, it had been proposed as
Sorry.
I knew that it had to go through a process, yeah.
7
industrial and that was rejected.
8
with Richard Lynn.
9
balanced view as there was opposition from some residents to the scheme itself.
15:28:00 10
That was from a conversation that I had
And then the attack was to go out and try and get a
Q. 879
And some councillors I think perhaps?
11
A.
Oh, councillors, yeah, there was.
12
Q. 880
Did you know that there was councillors opposed to the scheme?
13
A.
Yeah, there was some media coverage at the time as I recall.
14
Q. 881
Yes?
A.
And the plan then was to get Bill O'Herlihy on board to try and get a balanced
15:28:10 15
16 17
view. Q. 882
18 19 15:28:26 20
21
Yes.
And Mr. O'Herlihy produced a video and that was distributed.
Had you
any input as to who was to see video? A.
No, I don't remember sending it out to anybody myself.
Q. 883
How many meetings did you attend?
A.
I was trying to remember that for today.
22
Probably, sorry, these are the road
shows?
23
Q. 884
Yes.?
24
A.
Probably three or four.
15:28:42 25
One was in the Royal Dublin, which was presented to
the councillors.
26
Q. 885
Who attended -- did you attend that meeting?
27
A.
I did, yeah.
28
Q. 886
Did you meet any councillors at that meeting that you would have known from
29 15:28:50 30
Tallaght? A.
I can't say I did, no.
I might have known one or two.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
But I didn't have any
15:28:55
15:29:06
126 1
conversation with them as such.
2
Q. 887
And in what capacity did you attend the meeting then?
3
A.
I was just an observer as much.
4 5
make any ... Q. 888
6 7
I wasn't familiar enough with the scheme to
Did you at any stage become familiar with the scheme to the extent that you could advice those interested on which way you would like them to have voted?
A.
Well I suppose we were trying -- my role in this again, I suppose, as somebody
8
said to me one day, I was the friendly face.
9
great scheme over in Tallaght.
We were -- it was, what was proposed was a
good scheme for Cherrywood.
They were a prominent, successful, professional
15:29:30 10
Monarch were after doing a
11
company.
12
models, showing houses, showing what was proposed.
13
then to bring that out to the public.
14
At this stage there was a lobby group against the scheme itself.
15:30:02 15
That they were trying, I suppose, to get the message across, showing One to the councillors and
To try and get the public reaction. And they
were trying to get a balance in the thing.
16
Q. 889
And you were heading up that with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney; is that right?
17
A.
No, I wasn't heading it up at all.
18
Q. 890
You were just helping out?
19
A.
I was just helping out when I had time.
Q. 891
Okay.
15:30:16 20
Did you know that the Manager had proposed in DP92/44, for example,
21
that there would be an increase in density in the site or that the density
22
would be at four houses to the acre?
23
A.
I don't remember.
24
Q. 892
You don't remember that?
A.
No, I don't remember.
Q. 893
Did you know that two councillors had proposed that the Manager's proposals be
15:30:30 25
26 27 28
adopted at a meeting in May '92? A.
29 15:30:43 30
I knew there was a vote in May '92 but I wasn't involved as I can recall in that end of it itself.
Q. 894
You weren't involved in that.
When you say that end of it what do you mean?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:30:48
15:31:00
127 1
A.
Meeting councillors or talking to councillors.
2
Q. 895
Well, was Monarch involved in meeting councillors?
3
A.
I assume they were, yeah.
4
I assume if you had two councillors.
Well Richard
Lynn was out talking to councillors.
5
Q. 896
Was there anybody else out talking to councillors?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Perhaps he might have brought some of the technical people with
him to try and explain.
8
Q. 897
Did he ever tell you how he was getting on in his chats with the councillors?
9
A.
It wasn't -- certainly I don't remember it.
Q. 898
You have given me the impression, Mr. Reilly, as somebody who had no great
15:31:15 10
11 12
interest, if you don't mind me saying o? A.
13 14
Sorry, that's not true. I don't mean it to come across like that to this Tribunal.
Q. 899
15:31:34 15
16
Maybe a conversation --
I can assure you of that. I was busy running my business.
I accept all that. I'm really anxious to find out your involvement in relation to Cherrywood.?
A.
Yeah.
What my involvement was.
I went to the road shows.
I tried to help
17
out and explain to anybody who asked me a question about what I knew about
18
houses, about where the valley was, there was Tully Church, how would they get
19
into the place, when would it be built.
15:31:56 20
from the public at large.
There was a very positive response
Each member of the public was asked to sign a
21
comment sheet on the way out.
22
were mainly 90% for it.
23
said, the anti-development stance that some of the neighbours were taking and
24
on that basis that it was, what do you call it, to try and get support from the
15:32:25 25
There was a stack of them in the office that
The objective of this road show was to balance, as I
councillors.
26
Q. 900
Exactly Mr. Reilly?
27
A.
So sorry, I'm not ...
28
Q. 901
You were involved in the road show and you attended three road shows including
29 15:32:36 30
one where you tried to brief councillors; isn't that correct? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:32:36
15:32:41
128 1
Q. 902
In the Royal Dublin?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 903
And we know that there was a meeting in May 1992?
4
A.
Correct.
5
Q. 904
You should have known, I suggest to you?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 905
That the support of the councillors was vital; isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 906
And apart from allaying fears amongst locals, the big push coming up to May '92
15:32:55 10
would have been to get the support of councillors; isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct, yes.
12
Q. 907
And Monarch required a motion to be put down by at least two councillors isn't
13 14
that right? A.
Well yes.
Q. 908
And we know that Councillors Lydon and Hand did table a motion?
16
A.
I wasn't aware who was tabling what.
17
Q. 909
You weren't aware that there was a motion being tabled?
18
A.
I didn't know what the process was.
19
Q. 910
You didn't know what the process was even though you were intimately involved
15:33:03 15
15:33:19 20
with it at the time?
21
A.
Intimately is too strongly a word I believe.
22
Q. 911
You were able to tell anybody who asked you where access was likely to be,
23 24 15:33:31 25
where the development was likely to take place? A.
Yes.
Q. 912
You were on the road shows. For any disinterested person or any interested
26
person you were representing the Monarch interest?
27
A.
I didn't.
28
Q. 913
You were at the top table for any of these road shows?
29
A.
Not the top table as such.
Q. 914
And you knew that the councillors would have to vote?
15:33:46 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:33:50
15:34:00
129 1
A.
Yeah. I knew it would have to go through a process.
2
Q. 915
Were you not just curious as to how it was going, how it was going to be tabled
3 4
or likely to get on the agenda? A.
Sorry.
I had never been involved in planning before in terms of the process
5
itself.
6
process that it was..
7
Q. 916
8 9
I knew that the councillors had a vote on it.
I didn't know the
Did you never discuss the process with the others from within Monarch who were involved in it?
A.
15:34:18 10
Sorry, I did, yeah.
My understanding was that the Manager was proposing that
this scheme would go ahead in a certain way and that was with four houses to
11
the acre. Maybe -- I'm trying to be clear , actually at the time it was four
12
houses to the acre.
13
Q. 917
14
But you also knew that for the matter to be debated that there would have to have been a vote or a motion; isn't that right? We know that Councillors Lydon
15:34:42 15
and Hand did table a motion.
If we could have 7209, please.
This is a
16
motion that had been put forward by Councillors Lydon and Hand.
17
didn't proceed in the event because the Manager's proposals were unsuccessful.
18
When did you first discover that that motion, for example, had been signed and
19
was tabled for the meeting in May' 92?
15:35:01 20
A.
Sorry.
Just to be clear.
21
happened to it.
22
proposal was put up.
23
Q. 918
24 15:35:19 25
I didn't know the process.
Now, it
I didn't know what
I thought that you just went to a meeting and that the I didn't understand the process of motions or whatever.
Were you ever at a meeting with Mr. Lynn or Mr. Sweeney at which there was discussion on what was likely to happen?
A.
Not at that stage, no.
26
Q. 919
Not at that stage?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 920
Did your involvement become greater at a later stage?
29
A.
Yes, it did.
Q. 921
Who was spearheading, from within Monarch, the Monarch position at this stage?
15:35:27 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:35:31
15:35:46
130 1
A.
Well Richard Lynn certainly was doing all of the public relations work and all
2
of that.
3
Sweeney was the project Manager.
4
Q. 922
5
And he was dealing with the councillors and I was aware and Eddie
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn were directly involved and you to a lesser extent at this stage?
6
A.
Well I was very periphery, very periphery.
7
Q. 923
After Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn, other than yourself, who was the most senior
8 9
other Monarch person involved at this time, even in a peripheral way? A.
15:36:08 10
11
Well in a peripheral way I suppose you had the in-house project team, which there were a number of architects working on that.
Q. 924
12
Did you ever attend any meetings with Mr. Monahan in relation to the development at this time?
13
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
14
Q. 925
Did you ever attend any meetings between Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney Mr. Hand, Mr.
15:36:24 15
Lynn?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 926
Did you meet any councillors at this stage in relation to the matter, other
18 19
than the meeting that you referred to earlier where the video was produced? A.
15:36:40 20
I -- my -- I have a very good friend, Therese Ridge, who I would have spoken to a couple of times about it.
But there was no great detailed discussion about
21
what was coming up for a vote and as I recall the Manager was proposing
22
something.
But I didn't do anything really at that stage or.
23
Q. 927
At that stage you didn't ask her to support a proposal?
24
A.
Well I said the scheme looks good to me or something like that.
Q. 928
Sorry?
26
A.
The scheme looks good to me.
27
Q. 929
You said?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 930
And did you look for her support?
A.
I hope you can support it. Something like that I would have said to her.
15:37:01 25
15:37:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:37:11
15:37:17
131 1
Q. 931
2
Did you ask her would she seek to get the support from some of her colleagues for the scheme?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 932
Just her support only?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 933
Now in, the event we know that the Manager's proposal as proposed by
7
Councillors Lydon and McGrath was unsuccessful?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 934
We see that at 7207?
A.
Is this it here now yeah?
Q. 935
It should be coming up now.
15:37:31 10
11 12 13
the proposal? A.
14 15:37:49 15
Did Councillor Ridge say that she would support
Well yeah, I think she said if it was the Manager. as I recall.
She said she'd look at it
Yeah, I think she did.
Q. 936
She did support it; isn't that right?
16
A.
Did she? Sorry, Ridge I see it, yeah, T Ridge.
17
Q. 937
Are you saying that you didn't know until just now that Councillor Ridge ...
18
A.
No, no, sorry I'm trying to remember.
19
Q. 938
It's the type of thing you would remember whether your friend had supported it
15:38:04 20
or not?
21
A.
No, you're right, yeah.
22
Q. 939
So you did know?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 940
So it's not a surprise to you to discover now that she did support it?
A.
No, absolutely not.
26
Q. 941
Were you at that meeting?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 942
You didn't go to that council meeting?
29
A.
No.
Q. 943
Were you not curious to know what went on at the meeting?
15:38:13 25
15:38:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:38:23
15:38:42
132 1
A.
Again it wasn't my primary job.
I don't want to go back to saying I was busy
2
at other things.
3
helped as I understand, as I was asked to do.
4
Q. 944
5
I was very busy at other things.
It wasn't my job. I had
Did you know for example that councillors O'Callaghan and Gilmore had a motion for the shopping centre or for a town centre, or neighbourhood centre?
6
A.
Which one was this now?
7
Q. 945
In May '92 for the site.
8
A.
Yeah, I had.
9
Q. 946
7214.
A.
Probably Richard.
11
Q. 947
So he had told you about one motion but not about the other; is that it?
12
A.
That's not fair to say.
15:38:56 10
13 14
Who told you about that?
centre on it. Q. 948
15:39:15 15
What was being proposed was that there be a shopping
That was my keen interest.
You knew that there was going to be a proposal that there be a shopping centre there?
16
A.
I thought it was the Manager's
17
Q. 949
You thought it was the Manager's?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 950
Now, Councillor Ridge supported that proposal also. Presumably you had asked
15:39:25 20
her to support the shopping centre?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 951
Did you know that there was a proposal also for the meeting that the site be
23 24 15:39:47 25
26
zoned at one house to the acre? A.
Yeah, that was Sean Barrett's motion, yeah.
Q. 952
Did you know of that in advance?
A.
Yes, I knew Barrett was opposed to the development that had been discussed in
27
the office.
28
Q. 953
That had been discussed in the office?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 954
Had you been at the discussions on that?
15:39:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:39:47
15:40:01
133 1
A.
No, it was just, I'd say it was just said we have to get over Barrett's motion.
2
Q. 955
So you knew that there was at least one motion which would, if successful,
3
would have adversely effected the site?
4
A.
Well it wouldn't have changed the zoning on it.
5
Q. 956
Would it have reduced the density on the site?
6
A.
I think it was still only one to the acre wasn't it.
7
Q. 957
No, it was four to the acre at this stage.?
8
A.
Was it.
9
Q. 958
On piped sewage.
15:40:19 10
On the manager's proposal. On DP90/1249 A voted on in May
1991?
11
A.
Sorry, I thought it was always ...
12
Q. 959
Had you asked Councillor Ridge to vote against Councillor Barrett's detail?
13
A.
I didn't get into that detail, sorry.
14
Q. 960
Did you know that she voted against his proposal?
A.
I suppose I did, but I don't recall.
Q. 961
So in any event, it was now one house to the acre coming out of that meeting in
15:40:31 15
16 17
May '92, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 962
Despite the road shows and all of the different various meetings; isn't that
15:40:45 20
right?
21
A.
It didn't work.
22
Q. 963
It didn't work?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 964
So were you at any strategy meetings thereafter as to how matters might
15:40:51 25
26
proceed? A.
Well what happened after that.
My recollection is that within probably a
27
couple of weeks after that either Eddie Sweeney, probably Eddie, called me into
28
the office one day, as Richard had said look, the only way we're going to get
29
these lands through is to get support from the local councillors.
15:41:14 30
And Eddie
said since we've been involved in Tallaght, since you have been involved in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:41:17
15:41:46
134 1
Tallaght, one of my architects lives in Loughlinstown, would you join him at a
2
meeting with the Loughlinstown Community Council and tell them what we're
3
trying to do.
4
We went to a meeting that night at the Loughlinstown Community Council.
5
he talked to them about what the proposal was and whatever else.
6
recollection of that meeting is that they were a bit sceptical about us, what
7
are you coming near us for.
8
that somebody suggested, and it probably was myself, that perhaps they might
9
like to see, as I said earlier, a show case in Tallaght.
15:42:12 10
And explain to them.
And Michael Cassidy was the man's name.
My
And it evolved over the next couple of months
And we organised
tours to bring them over to Tallaght to see the project.
And it was at least
11
two, maybe three, on a Saturday.
12
scheme etc, most of them hadn't been there, because it was -- the area was
13
pretty deprived from Loughlinstown and Ballybrack.
14
the Tallaght Community Council, who made a short presentation on their
15:42:39 15
And
And apart from taking them through the
We also introduced them to
experience with the Monarch Company in Tallaght, with their frustrations and
16
delays etc. getting the scheme up and running.
17
suppose change that it brought to the whole Tallaght area and it had given a a
18
great boost to the community.
19
council went back and thought about it and were very invigorated about what
15:43:05 20
But with the marvelous -- I
And my recollection is that the community
they had seen and what they'd heard in Tallaght and they'd spoken to the
21
community council people.
And they then went back to their local councillors
22
to say look, we want this development to proceed.
23
Q. 965
In early 1993 I think Mr. Dunlop got involved; isn't that right?
24
A.
Yeah, sometime in March.
Q. 966
March '93?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 967
Mr. McCabe, who was the planner dealing with the site said he did not know Mr.
15:43:27 25
28 29 15:43:39 30
Dunlop was involved? A.
Yeah.
Q. 968
And the last witness, Ms. Gosling, said she did not know that Mr. Dunlop was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:43:43
15:43:52
135 1
involved?
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 969
Is there any reason that you can proffer to the Tribunal why both of those
4
witnesses would not know that Mr. Dunlop had become involved with the project?
5
A.
I don't know.
6
Q. 970
What involvement had you with Mr. Dunlop becoming involved in this site?
7
A.
None.
8
Q. 971
Did you know Mr. Dunlop was involved in it?
9
A.
I did.
Q. 972
Well when were you told.
A.
I was told when I was called into a meeting sometime, again, in March, into the
15:44:09 10
11 12
I don't know.
I can't help you there, sorry.
To be honest with you.
Well, sorry, I knew when I was told.
board room and ...
13
Q. 973
Who was present at that meeting?
14
A.
Well Richard Lynn was there certainly.
Q. 974
Yes?
16
A.
And Eddie Sweeney, was there.
17
Q. 975
Yes?
18
A.
I was there.
19
Q. 976
Yes?
A.
And I believe one of our architects was there, pat Lafferty, and there may
15:44:21 15
15:44:26 20
21
have been one or two others there as well.
22
Q. 977
Was Mr. Monahan at the meeting?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 978
And had the decision been made at that stage to involve Mr. Dunlop?
A.
He seemed to have been appointed.
26
Q. 979
Sorry.
27
A.
He was there to help.
28
Q. 980
Was Mr. Dunlop at that meeting?
29
A.
He was, yeah.
Q. 981
So before that meeting which Mr. Dunlop attended you did not know Mr. Dunlop
15:44:44 25
15:44:49 30
He was already appointed?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:44:54
15:45:01
136 1
was going to be involved?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 982
You did not meet Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Oh, I had.
5
Q. 983
You had met him in the council?
6
A.
In the council offices on a number of occasions.
7
Q. 984
So you had been attending the council had you?
8
A.
Sorry, I was never at a council meeting.
9 15:45:17 10
Sorry.
Sorry, I had met him at the council.
I was never inside the chamber.
Monarch had two other projects.
Q. 985
Yes?
11
A.
Somerton and Ongar.
12
Q. 986
Yes?
13
A.
Which, I was outside the council at those meetings and I believe that's where I
14 15:45:29 15
16
met Frank Dunlop for the first time. Q. 987
What were you doing outside the council at those meetings?
A.
Well I was, what do you call it, I had spoken to a couple of councillors
17
telling them that there was a couple of projects comes up and if they could
18
help us with it, if they could support it, we'd appreciate it.
19 15:45:47 20
21
Q. 988
Were you lobbying for the rezoning of those projects?
A.
Well, I would have to debate with myself what's lobbying or canvassing.
Q. 989
We'll take the neutral.
22
Were you canvassing support for both of those on
behalf of your employers?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 990
Presumably you must have been familiar with the old process?
A.
Not really.
26
Q. 991
You didn't know what was required to change the zoning on a particular site?
27
A.
I knew that you had to get the majority of councillors to support a project.
28
Q. 992
Yes?
29
A.
Okay.
15:46:06 25
15:46:24 30
And in relation to Ongar.
and Somerton.
That was some lands outside of Clonsilla
Obviously one in Castleknock.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
I knew that you had to have a
15:46:29
15:46:46
137 1
majority of councillors to support those.
2
Q. 993
When did you get involved with Ongar and the other project?
3
A.
It wasn't that long, a couple of weeks before that.
4
Q. 994
So '92, '93 you became more and more involved with canvassing councillors for
5 6
their support to change zoning on behalf of Monarch? A.
7 8
I go back.
My job was running shopping centres.
whole scheme of things. Q. 995
9
This was a side show in the
I spent very little time doing that.
You spent very little time doing this.
But yet Mr. Dunlop has given evidence
to the Tribunal, and from what I understand you to be now saying, you don't
15:47:08 10
dispute it.
11
That he would have met yourself and Mr. Lynn outside the council
chamber during council meetings?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 996
Which were considered rezonings of lands around Dublin?
14
A.
Yeah.
15:47:22 15
But Mr. Dunlop also gave the impression that I was working full-time on
this and whatever.
I was not.
It was only a very small part.
And the
16
reason for that was I knew some councillors from Tallaght and got on well with
17
them.
18
suppose, there to remind them that we were good developers.
19 15:47:42 20
They knew we had done a good development over there and hence I was, I
Q. 997
You could have written to them?
A.
Yeah, I suppose I could have.
21
But I think the personal touch is always
better.
22
Q. 998
And you kept on attending various meetings; isn't that right?
23
A.
Not that many, no.
24 15:47:57 25
No, sorry, I never went to a meeting.
I would go to
the -- either the lobby to meet them ... Q. 999
Yes?
26
A.
Sorry.
27
Q. 1000
I'm not saying that you physically attended a council meeting?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 1001
Attended a council meeting, Mr. Reilly?
A.
No.
15:48:04 30
Just a moment.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:48:05
15:48:19
138 1
Q. 1002
But you know what I?
2
A.
I went to where the meetings were taking place, sorry.
3 4
And obviously you'd
meet them in either Toddy's or Royal Dublin. Q. 1003
And yet you did not know that it was the intention of your employers,
5
notwithstanding on your involvement on behalf of this and other sites with
6
councillors, to retain the services of Mr. Dunlop until his services were
7
actually retained; isn't that correct?
8
A.
That's correct, yeah.
9
Q. 1004
Even though you might have met him from time to time at meetings you must have
15:48:34 10
been tremendously surprised to turn up at a meeting and find him present?
11
A.
I was surprised, yeah.
12
Q. 1005
Did you ask him who employed him or why he was there?
13
A.
I didn't, no.
14
Q. 1006
Did you make any inquiries from your employers why he was there or how he came
15:48:50 15
16
to be there? A.
17 18
No, I didn't to be honest with you.
It was just another, somebody added to
the team. Q. 1007
If we could have 4045, please.
19 15:48:59 20
This is an entry in Mr. Dunlop's diary for the 9th of March 1993.
21 22
You will see that Mr. Dunlop had a meeting at five o'clock on the previous
23
evening with Mr. Sweeney.
24
Have you seen that?
A.
E Sweeney is it?
Q. 1008
Yes.?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 1009
And then on the 9th of March he has a 5:15 meeting with Richard Lynn/Philip
15:49:15 25
28 29 15:49:25 30
Reilly.
Do you see that there?
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 1010
There's no mention there of Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Lafferty? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:49:28
15:49:34
139 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 1011
Is that the first meeting that you had with Mr. Dunlop or do you say?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 1012
That meeting never took place?
5
A.
That meeting never took place.
6
Q. 1013
That meeting never took place?
7
A.
I believe that meeting was sometime in the morning.
8
Q. 1014
In the morning?
9
A.
Some day.
Q. 1015
Rather than?
11
A.
And then.
12
Q. 1016
Yeah.
13
A.
I don't know it's just my memory.
14
Q. 1017
What was discussed at the meeting?
A.
What was discussed was the meeting had started when I got in and as I recall,
15:49:41 10
15:49:50 15
Why was it in the morning do you believe?
16
as I said, Richard was outlining, I suppose, the current status of the project
17
and as I said there was a general discussion on how it would move forward and
18
there was a vote coming up later, what year was that? '93.
19
coming up later, in fact, at the end of the year.
15:50:21 20
There was a vote
And what we discussed then
was I had been talking to, as I say, my good friend Therese Ridge and a couple
21
of councillors, and after that then it was, I'm a bit fuzzy on it other than I
22
think I was going to continue doing what I was doing.
23
from it.
24
Q. 1018
Which was to?
A.
Just to talk to the people I knew about the project.
26
Q. 1019
Yeah.
27
A.
Therese Ridge, some of the other councillors.
28
Q. 1020
Perhaps now is the time to name the councillors?
29
A.
Well if I can remember them all.
Q. 1021
Yes?
15:50:37 25
15:50:52 30
That's what I remember
So the people you knew included Therese Ridge, who else did you know?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:50:52
15:51:14
140 1
A.
I would have known quite a number of the Tallaght people.
2
Q. 1022
Let's name the councillors that you were going to talk to, Mr. Reilly.?
3
A.
I was going to talk to Breda Cass. Olivia Mitchell.
I was going to talk to probably Mary
4
Elliott.
Who else was there? I was going to talk to, I
5
knew some the lads in the labour party, Eamon Walsh, some of the Fianna Fail
6
people like John Hannon, Charlie O'Connor whom I knew.
7
some more.
I'm just speaking from memory, you know.
8
Q. 1023
Yes.
9
A.
Not necessarily my responsibility.
15:51:38 10
And there was probably
These were going to be your responsibility? But I would say 'look I'll keep talking to
these people, you know'.
11
Q. 1024
Yes.
12
A.
Well, I suppose he was going to talk to some of the people that he knew.
13
Q. 1025
Did he identify the people that he knew?
14
A.
I don't believe he did, no.
Q. 1026
He mention no names?
16
A.
I don't believe so, no.
17
Q. 1027
Did you know the circumstances of Mr. Dunlop's engagement?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 1028
Did you know how much he was being paid?
A.
No.
21
Q. 1029
Did you not inquire?
22
A.
No, I didn't, no.
23
Q. 1030
I see.
24
A.
Well Monarch would have employed him.
Q. 1031
No, but who within Monarch?
A.
I suppose Eddie Sweeney was the project Manager but I don't know, I can't
15:51:54 15
15:52:02 20
15:52:15 25
26 27 28
And I don't believe he mentioned the names.
It was none of my business.
Who would have employed Mr. Dunlop?
answer that. Q. 1032
29 15:52:29 30
And what was Mr. Dunlop going to do?
You don't know who employed him.
If anybody was to employ him Mr. Sweeney was
the most likely person? A.
Or Phil Monahan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:52:30
15:52:43
141 1
Q. 1033
2
Or Phil Monahan.
You didn't inquire of the circumstances under which he came
to be employed?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 1034
How long did Mr. Dunlop stay employed with Monarch?
5
A.
I think up to the end of the year.
6
Q. 1035
How many meetings did you attend with Mr. Dunlop during that period?
7
A.
I believe I dropped plans down the following day or a day or two afterwards to
8
his office that he asked.
9
recall.
15:52:57 10
And that was the only formal meeting that I can
Q. 1036
What plans did you drop to his office?
11
A.
Well the Cherrywood plans.
12
Q. 1037
And how did you?
13
A.
Sorry.
14
Q. 1038
Did you brief Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Well the architect briefed Mr. Dunlop.
16
Q. 1039
In your presence?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 1040
So yourself and the architect attended in Mr. Dunlop's office with a set of
15:53:07 15
19 15:53:19 20
21
One of the architects came with me to explain him.
plans and you briefed Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Pat Lafferty briefed him.
Q. 1041
If we could have 4049. This is a telephone attendance of Mr Dunlop on the 10th
22
of March 1993 where you appear to have rang looking for Mr. Dunlop and giving a
23
telephone number.
24
Is that correct?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1042
Is that you?
26
A.
Yeah, I could have been returning his call either.
27
Q. 1043
And at 8832.
15:53:30 25
28 29 15:53:58 30
This is a further telephone attendance for the 16th of March.
Where you seem to have rang twice on the same day? A.
I could have been bringing the plans, I don't remember.
Q. 1044
So having briefed Mr. Dunlop on the plans. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
Can I ask you.
Was there any --
15:53:58
15:54:09
142 1
any divergence or view within Monarch at that stage as to what was required on
2
this site?
3
A.
No.
I think, sorry.
My recollection of it was what we needed to do, what
4
the company needed to do was to obviously get enough councillors to vote in
5
favour of the --
6
Q. 1045
Well in favour of what, Mr. Reilly?
7
A.
Well that's a good question.
8 9 15:54:24 10
11
I suppose in favour of the proposal for four
houses to the acre. Q. 1046
Did you hear Mr. Dunlop's evidence, Mr. Reilly?
A.
Some of it, yeah.
Q. 1047
Did you hear his evidence in relation to that meeting with Mr. Sweeney when he
12
first became involved?
13
A.
If you'd maybe repeat it, please.
14
Q. 1048
Well his evidence.
A.
Sorry.
Q. 1049
That Mr. Monahan was doing his own thing in relation to the matter, the
15:54:36 15
16
I'm going to summarise it.?
17
circumstances under which he came to be engaged effectively to reign in
18
Mr. Monahan?
19 15:54:51 20
A.
Yeah, I heard that, but I didn't understand what he meant.
Q. 1050
I see.
21
Are you saying that there was no divergence or view within Monarch at
that stage as to what was required?
22
A.
I wasn't aware of it.
23
Q. 1051
You weren't aware of any?
24
A.
No.
Q. 1052
As far as you were concerned, the concept was to get increased density from one
15:55:01 25
26
to four houses to the acre and to proceed with the shopping centre; was that
27
right?
28
A.
Yeah, that was my understanding, yeah.
29
Q. 1053
Now, you continued, you say, to liaise with your councillors; is that right?
A.
Yeah.
15:55:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:55:22
15:55:37
143 1
Q. 1054
In the lead up to the November '93 vote.
I think there had been a proposal at
2
some stage, had there, to move the golf club from Dun Laoghaire to Cherrywood;
3
isn't that right?
4
A.
I wasn't aware of that.
5
Q. 1055
You weren't aware of that?
6
A.
No.
7 8
aware of it. Q. 1056
9 15:55:53 10
11
I knew there was some talk about moving golf clubs somewhere but I wasn't
I take it this vague talk somewhere about moving golf clubs. Can you tell the Tribunal vaguely when you might have heard about that sort of talk?
A.
Maybe it was sometime over the summer, I don't know.
Q. 1057
If we could have 8516, please.
This is a letter from Mr. Noel Smyth who
12
appears to have been acting for Mr. Monahan and the Monarch interest at this
13
time.
14 15:56:09 15
You'll have seen this brief written in August 1993.?
A.
Right.
Q. 1058
Do you see a reference there to a deal with Dun Laoghaire to transfer the golf
16
course to Cherrywood?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 1059
Yes?
19
A.
I see that all right, yeah.
Q. 1060
Did you know in August 1993 that there was a suggestion that the golf course
15:56:21 20
21
would --
22
A.
Probably heard about it, yeah.
23
Q. 1061
Who was promoting that at the time?
24
A.
I don't know.
Q. 1062
Yes.
15:56:33 25
It could have been Phil himself.
It's unlikely that Mr. Monahan would have been promoting that idea
26
without bringing it to the attention of the rest of the board and particularly
27
those who were involved in seeking the rezoning of the site?
28
A.
That's right, yeah.
29
Q. 1063
That's the type of information that might be of interest to councillors,
15:56:48 30
That's Noel's job.
particularly those in the Dun Laoghaire area; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:56:54
15:57:06
144 1
A.
Perhaps, yeah.
2
Q. 1064
It would be of benefit to those canvassing those councillors for their support
3
I'm not saying it would.
for the Cherrywood site; isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah, I suppose it could be, yeah.
5
Q. 1065
That would include you; isn't that right?
6
A.
Well it could include me, yeah.
7
Q. 1066
It's the type of information I suggest to you that you would know about not
8 9
just in a vague way -A.
Sorry.
Q. 1067
You would have been briefed on it?
11
A.
I wasn't briefed on it, no.
12
Q. 1068
You weren't briefed on it?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 1069
Who would have told you about it?
A.
I would have probably heard about it in the office.
16
Q. 1070
Were you surprised you weren't briefed on it?
17
A.
Not really.
18
Q. 1071
I accept it wasn't your full-time job, Mr. Reilly.?
19
A.
You keep saying that. Sorry, I do.
Q. 1072
You attended the meetings.
15:57:16 10
15:57:23 15
15:57:38 20
Again, this was not my full-time job.
I was only --
You were bringing the architect to Mr. Dunlop who
21
has been recently appointed.
22
that you have identified You are updating them on what's happening.
23
are saying that you don't know the proposal to move the golf course to
24
Cherrywood?
15:57:55 25
You are talking to at least eight councillors
A.
I heard about it in the office but I had no detail on it.
26
Q. 1073
Did you not acquire or seek detail on it?
27
A.
No, not really and just to be clear about talking to seven or eight
28
councillors.
29
whenever the, what do you call it, the summer intervened.
15:58:26 30
And you
What happened, as I recall, was in April, May or whenever,
little contact, as I recall, with the councillors etc.. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
There was very
What happened then
15:58:26
15:58:38
145 1
was it was coming back up for a decision in, later in the year, in October or
2
November, I think it was November in the end.
3
came back to me and said look we're going to go this, that or the other or
4
anything else.
5
Q. 1074
There was no -- nobody ever
Do you not think that the councillors that you were talking to, Mr. Reilly,
6
would be very disappointed if you weren't able to tell them the proposals of
7
Monarch in relation to the transfer of the golf course?
8
A.
I never spoke to them about it.
9
Q. 1075
I accept that.
15:58:56 10
Had they heard what you heard. Do you not think they would be
very disappointed that you couldn't brief them on it?
11
A.
I'm not sure they heard it.
12
Q. 1076
You only heard it by the by in the office?
13
A.
I think there was some talk about it, yeah.
14
Q. 1077
Well who spoke about it?
A.
I don't know.
16
Q. 1078
Yes.
17
A.
Oh, I don't know about that.
18
Q. 1079
Was that something that was being promoted by Mr. Monahan himself?
19
A.
It could have been, yeah.
Q. 1080
Did you know Mr. Whelan?
21
A.
I'd met Jack, yeah, on a few occasions, yeah.
22
Q. 1081
What was Mr. Whelan's involvement with Monarch?
23
A.
He was a land agent as I understand it.
24
Q. 1082
Do you know why he would have sought a quarter of a million pounds in the early
15:59:06 15
15:59:18 20
15:59:37 25
It could have been Richard Lynn.
I don't remember.
Had it board approval?
1990s from Monarch in relation to the Cherrywood project?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 1083
Did anybody tell you anything about that in the office Mr. Reilly?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 1084
Did Mr. Lynn ever discuss it with you?
A.
No.
15:59:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
15:59:49
16:00:00
146 1
Q. 1085
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss it with you?
2
A.
No, absolutely not.
3
Q. 1086
If we could have 8574, please.
4
You'll have seen this document on the screen
earlier, Mr. Reilly?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 1087
You will see the claim there 'fees to services in relation to residential
7
consultancy at Cherrywood 150,000 plus VAT' making a total of 180.?
8
A.
Uh-huh.
9
Q. 1088
Do you know anything about that?
A.
No.
11
Q. 1089
When was the first time you saw that document?
12
A.
A few minutes ago.
13
Q. 1090
You had never seen it before this morning?
14
A.
No.
Q. 1091
Yet you knew Mr. Whelan?
16
A.
I knew Jack.
17
Q. 1092
How well did you know Mr. Whelan?
18
A.
Not very well.
19
Q. 1093
When did you first get to know Mr. Whelan?
A.
Oh, I don't know.
21
Q. 1094
Yes.
When you say before that.
22
A.
'92.
I can't say exactly.
23
Q. 1095
And in what context did you get to know Mr. Whelan?
24
A.
He was working for Phil Monahan doing some work.
Q. 1096
What was he doing for Mr. Monahan?
26
A.
I don't know.
27
Q. 1097
What was he doing for Mr. Monahan that would have enabled him to submit a fee
16:00:12 10
16:00:19 15
16:00:28 20
16:00:46 25
Maybe a year or two before that.
He'd been a land agent.
Before 1991 or 1992?
I just can't say exactly.
28
for 150,000 in 1991 or 1992 in relation to the Cherrywood residential
29
consultancy?
16:00:59 30
A.
No idea.
Absolutely no idea. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
16:01:02
16:01:15
147 1
Q. 1098
2
Even now, are you not curious, Mr. Reilly, to know how that claim might have arisen?
3
A.
I am, but I don't know what he did.
4
Q. 1099
Well, what might he have done, from your knowledge of him and his association
5 6
with Mr. Monahan? A.
7 8
I don't know. Q. 1100
9 16:01:33 10
11
I don't know. Unless he was trying to buy extra land or something out there. I'm speculating.
Mr. Reilly? A.
I assume as a fee.
Q. 1101
Why would you pay somebody to help you buy land. relation to selling land.
13
land?
16:01:51 15
I'm sorry.
Why would Mr. Monahan pay somebody nearly 180,000 pounds to help him buy land,
12
14
I can't help the Tribunal.
I don't understand the fee in relation to acquiring
A.
I think agents can earn fees both ways.
Q. 1102
Yeah.
16
I can understand a fee in
If we can have 5040.
introducing Dwyer Nolan.
They can act as an agent to acquire.
This is a claim for a further 121,000 for
Do you see that? This is a claim on GRE by Monarch?
17
A.
Oh, I see it down near the end, yeah.
18
Q. 1103
Do you know anything about that?
19
A.
No, absolutely not.
16:02:12 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
o'clock.
23
A.
Sorry.
Mr. Quinn, it's four o'clock.
Or it's after four
So we might adjourn now until half ten tomorrow.
Okay.
24 16:02:23 25
26 27
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, THURSDAY, 22ND JUNE
28
AT 10:30 A.M..
29 16:03:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 656
09:57:53
10:42:21
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,
2
22ND JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
7 8
Mr. O'Halloran, please.
9 10:42:25 10
JOHN O'HALLORAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS
11
FOLLOWS BY MR. DOYLE:
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. O'Halloran.
Good morning.
10:42:52 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Good morning.
17 18
Q. 1
19 10:43:04 20
MR DOYLE: Mr. O'Halloran, I believe that you were first elected on the 22nd of June 1991 to the Lucan ward of Dublin County Council, isn't that correct?
A.
That's correct.
21
Q. 2
And I think that you are a member of the Labour Party at that time?
22
A.
I was.
23
Q. 3
You subsequently left the party, isn't that correct?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 4
What I propose to do, Mr. O'Halloran, is just briefly bring you through some of
10:43:11 25
26
the statements and or correspondence you've sent to the Tribunal and any
27
matters arising out of those and then go through some of the planning in
28
relation to the Development Plan up as far as 1994.
29 10:43:33 30
A.
That's grand.
Q. 5
Okay.
All right?
Now, I think that you sent a statement to the Tribunal on the 20th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:43:39
10:43:57
2 1
December, 2000.
And that was sent on foot of a letter from the Tribunal of
2
the 22nd of November, 2000.
3
you directly in relation to your statement so that there's no confusion.
And in your letter to the Tribunal, I'll quote
4 5
You made a number of points in your statement.
6
1775.
7
"I did not receive any payment from Frank Dunlop in the course of the review of
8
the 1993 Dublin County Development Plan."
9
"you had received a donation of 3,500 in 1996 election, by-election."
10:44:22 10
11
And just to, as I say, page
I think that you have said there's no allegation in this module that A,
And I think you went on to say that
A.
That's right.
Q. 6
I think at D then, at page 1776 you said "I do confirm that I did not seek or
12
obtain sums of money from Phil Monahan of Monahan Properties in 1996/1997 on my
13
on behalf whether connected to or in the proposed rezoning or planning matter.
14
I recall on one occasion approaching Mr. Monahan for a contribution to the
10:44:38 15
Multiple Sclerosis Society which I raised funds during this period and I
16
further recall receiving a donation from Mr. Monahan of approximately 100
17
pounds by way of cheque which I believe I transmitted onward to this society.
18 19 10:44:56 20
I may have sought other small donations from Mr. Monahan."
1777.
"On behalf
of the Multiple Sclerosis Society during this period."
21 22
I think you go on and your solicitor, a letter sent by your solicitor to the
23
Tribunal dated 25th of November 2002, and that's page 1779.
24
clarify in relation to your recollection of a payment.
10:45:16 25
And I think you
And at the second
paragraph there your solicitors Cullen & Co. state that "Our client has now
26
brought to our attention that he has a recollection of receiving a political
27
donation from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of approximately 500 pounds."
28 29 10:45:33 30
And further on you say "Between June 1991 and December 1993 at or in the environs of the council headquarters in upper O'Connell Street, he believes Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:45:37
10:45:52
3 1
that the donation was made by Mr. Dunlop following a conversation.
You
2
further state that the donation was a straight forward political contribution
3
without any express or implied agreement or understanding that -- accept in was
4
in return for agreeing to support any land rezoning proposal in the Dublin
5
Draft Development Plan either concerning lands in Carrickmines or otherwise.
6
And it was with a matter of considerable embarrassment to our client that he
7
did not recall this political contribution at an earlier stage."
8 9
I think the Tribunal wrote to you in relation to this module on the 7th of
10:46:10 10
April 2006.
And that's at 1789.
11
And I think you having suffered an unfortunate bereavement very recently, your
12
solicitors advised us of this.
13
today is effectively your evidence and/or in the absence of a statement your
14
views of what transpired in relation to the Development Plan and Cherrywood.
10:46:39 15
16
And in the circumstances your evidence here
A.
Yes.
Q. 7
Now, I propose just to deal with the planning then, Mr. O'Halloran.
I think
17
when you were elected it was late, June 27th of June 1991.
18
you came into the council the previous May, around the 24th of May, the council
19
had already voted on a Development Plan and map proposal and that is at page
10:47:06 20
And I think when
7019.
21 22
And that was map DP90/129A.
23
once again with this area.
24
it's clear from the map that there, if you can see there the Monarch lands are
10:47:26 25
Maybe just to re -- or to familiarise yourself
You can see the map on screen there.
And I think
outlined in red.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 8
Do you recollect this map? Does it make any sense to you?
28
A.
No, no.
29
Q. 9
No. The Cherrywood lands are on this map here, the Monarch lands are outlined
10:47:44 30
in red as I've stated.
There's a line going through, a dotted line going
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:47:44
10:48:11
4 1
through the Monarch lands.
And that was the proposed line of the Southeastern
2
Motorway.
3
proposed change in residential density on the lands and that was from a density
4
of one house per acre to a four houses per acre on piped sewage.
5
was the map that was in existence when you came to the council?
And on the map you can see AS 1 to AP.
Now, that was a change
And this map
6
A.
Uh-huh.
7
Q. 10
Is that right?
8
A.
I accept that.
9
Q. 11
Yeah. And I think then that this map was put on public display between
10:48:22 10
September 1991 or a version of if.
And that's at page 7021, was put on public
11
display between September '91 and December '91. That was put on public display
12
and again, you can see a very similar map, the Monarch lands/Cherrywood lands
13
are outlined again in orange.
14
Southeastern Motorway transecting the lands there.
10:48:49 15
relation again it's quite small.
There are a number of proposed lines of the You can see that in
If we could bring up, if it's possible to
16
bring up the size of the map again.
17
densities are outlined on this map.
Again the residential zonings and
18 19
So a number of objections and representations were received and you would have
10:49:08 20
been in attendance in a meeting of the County Council on 13th of May 1992.
21
Have you any recollection of that meeting?
22
A.
I don't.
23
Q. 12
You don't.
24 10:49:25 25
And I believe it was at that meeting that the manager reported on
the representations and objections received and made a number of recommendations regarding the proposed lands and zoning and density in the
26
Southeastern Motorways, the line of the Southeastern Motorway.
27
ultimately led o to DP92/44.
And that
And that's at 7203.
28 29 10:50:01 30
Now, as you can see from that map, there's a - and I will deal with that in a moment.
This map was a map that arose out of and by reason of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:50:07
10:50:21
5 1
representations received from the County Council from various parties.
2
remember any of the representations or the manager discussing any of the
3
proposals or objections?
4
A.
I don't recall them offhand, no, I'll be honest.
5
Q. 13
All right.
6
A.
Although I'm aware of the density question but not with regard to any
7
Do you
specifics.
8
Q. 14
Right.
9
A.
There was, I remember the one per acre and then somebody else had suggested
10:50:39 10
more houses per acre but I can't recall specifically any particular argument
11 12
for or against. Q. 15
13 14 10:50:56 15
And when you say you're aware of the density --
Do you remember the manager reporting on a particular representation being representation 1117, this was representation of Monarch Properties?
A.
No, no I don't, no.
Q. 16
And which it was proposed by Monarch that there be a higher density on the
16
lands.
That some of the lands be rezoned from agricultural to residential and
17
the line of the Southeastern Motorway be moved.
18
A.
No, I'm really sorry.
19
Q. 17
Not to worry.
10:51:17 20
I can't remember the specifics.
If you can see from the map there, the proposal in DP92/44 was
that the lands go from AP, that is four houses to the acre, to A1P, piped
21
sewage no density limitation.
22
going through that.
23
Motorway.
24
agricultural land as previously zoned would be A1.
10:51:45 25
And if you can see there's a big black line
That would be the proposed route of the Southeastern
And if you can see west of that B to A1 and that would be the That is residential and no
density limitation.
26 27
Have you any recollection of this map or having discussed this map?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 18
In any event, this meeting, there was no decision made at this meeting.
10:51:59 30
think that there was a meeting held on the 27th of May 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I
And that's at
10:52:04
10:52:14
6 1
7205, please.
2 3
Again, you were at this meeting, Mr. O'Halloran.
4
of being at this meeting, which DP92/44 was discussed?
5
A.
6
Sorry, I know it sounds evasive.
Do you have any recollection
It's a long time ago I wouldn't have a
particular recollection of individual meetings to be honest with you.
7
Q. 19
Other than the density meeting as you say?
8
A.
Other than, I accept the record shows I was there and ....
9
Q. 20
Yeah.
10:52:29 10
All right.
Now, I can I can advise you or maybe help your memory in
relation to this meeting:
there was 11 motions considered and obviously I
11
don't intend dealing with all of them.
12
important motions.
13
McGrath.
But there were and No. 3 in particular
And the first motion was a motion of Councillor Lydon and
That's 7207, please.
14 10:52:50 15
And if you can see there "It was proposed by Councillor Lydon and seconded by
16
Councillor McGrath that the manager's report proposed amendments to the draft
17
plan and recommended therein shown DP92/44 be adopted and approved."
18
to approve the zoning density in relation to the lands and the rezoning of
19
certain of these lands from agricultural to residential.
That is
10:53:14 20
21 22
Now, do you remember voting on this motion? A.
23 24
Again, I'm sorry.
Not particularly.
But I'm looking at the record and I
accept that's an accurate record so ... Q. 21
10:53:30 25
And you'll see that there for and against the motion was lost. for the motion.
26
And as I say, it was lost.
You did vote
You have no recollection of
voting on that are you saying?
27
A.
I don't, no.
28
Q. 22
Do you remember any -- anything about this motion, any discussion about this
29 10:53:44 30
motion? A.
No but going back to that time, I mean, it was a good hectic time in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:53:49
10:53:54
7 1
council.
2
Q. 23
Uh-huh.
3
A.
So there was a lot of activity.
4
had records.
5
Q. 24
Uh-huh.
6
A.
Which, I don't have.
7
Q. 25
Of course.
8
A.
I accept.
9 10:54:02 10
11
It would be difficult to recall unless you
This, as we've heard -I would have been generally in favour of development within the
county. Q. 26
Sure.
A.
In fact, I would have supported a motion of a higher density.
If somebody
12
lives in an area where there's 12 and 14 houses per acre it didn't seem to be
13
sensible to be building houses one to the acre and indeed four to the acre.
14
So I think I would have been generally in favour of a higher density.
10:54:18 15
Q. 27
Right.
This particular piece of land where it was the largest tract of
16
development land in South County Dublin at the time.
17
wondering did it not stand out in your mind.
18
there was many maps being dealt with over the months --
19 10:54:36 20
Yeah.
Q. 28
-- this would have been a significant piece of land, a significant tract of land and did involve considerable debate and a lot of media reporting?
A.
Well I can recall debates around those subjects but not in any specific way.
23
That's all I was trying to say.
24
indeed votes specifically.
10:54:53 25
In that it wasn't -- I know
A.
21 22
That's why I, I'm
Q. 29
Right.
All right.
I can't recall meetings specifically or
As I say, you voted for that.
26
on, another motion amongst the 11.
27
motion.
There was another, moving
And that was the Gilmore O'Callaghan
And that is at 7214, please.
28 29
And that motion proposed that Dublin County Council resolve that the lands on
10:55:19 30
map 27 be zoned C, so that was -- they were seeking to have a town centre on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:55:22
10:55:37
8 1
the lands.
2
this motion which was carried by the council.
3
that?
4
A.
And again, I can say that you voted and you voted in favour of
Again, I'm really sorry.
Have you any recollection of
I don't have a specific recollection but I accept --
5
I'm looking at the records here and I accept the record is accurate and I voted
6
for it. Yeah.
7
Q. 30
And I think then there was a motion, the final one, around that motion.
8
meeting was the Barrett Dockrell motion.
9
density residential density to one house per acre.
10:56:06 10
This
And that motion was to reduce And can we have that,
7216, please.
11 12
And you can see there that "Dublin County Council hereby resolves that the
13
lands indicated in red stretching from Glenamuck Road to Cherrywood Road,
14
Loughlinstown be zoned for residential development at a density not exceeding
10:56:24 15
one house per acre.
You voted against this motion.
16
A.
Well, as I said a few minutes ago --
17
Q. 31
Yep.
18
A.
-- I mean, that would have been in line with the way I would have thought or
19 10:56:34 20
believed, yeah. Q. 32
Yes.
And I think in fairness to you, Mr. O'Halloran, I think there were a
21
number of other motions.
22
density on the land and in each of those motions you voted against lower
23
density.
24
prodevelopment and proincreased zoning density.
10:56:54 25
26
I won't go into but they were seeking a lower
As we can see from the record here, you would have voted
A.
Yes.
Q. 33
Now, in relation to your voting, and I accept it's some time ago and you're
27
saying you seem to have a vague recollection of it.
28
remember being approached by anybody or being asked for your views on how you
29
might vote in relation to these motions at this meeting?
10:57:20 30
A.
Notwithstanding, can you
I was lobbied by a couple of people from Monarch Property but I honestly can't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:57:25
10:57:52
9 1
remember their names because it would have been early on in my council career,
2
who showed a proposal and whatever.
3
Like, I can't remember their names.
4
by fellow councillors and, you know, councillors for the area, whatever, you
5
know, in a similar fashion.
But I cannot remember the two gentlemen.
That's -- but I would have been lobbied
6
Q. 34
Councillors for the area being whom?
7
A.
Whoever, I mean, it was the normal process if there was a motion effecting your
8
area if you were in support of it you would try and secure support from your
9
fellow councillors.
10:58:00 10
Q. 35
11
All right.
Going back to what you just said in relation to certain persons
from Monarch.
If we could have 1414, please.
12 13
It might assist you in relation to this matter.
14
Mr. Richard Lynn dated the 14th of June 2000 regarding the lands to Cherrywood
10:58:25 15
and you can see there at one.
This is a statement from
"I met" Mr. Lynn states in the statement "I met
16
with most members of Dublin County Council up to 1993 and all members of Dun
17
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council after 1993.
18
I attach an extract from the County Council meeting on the 16th of October 1992
19
and have placed a tick against those members that I recollect having met in the
10:58:47 20
As a sample of those I have met
context of Cherrywood."
21 22
And 1416, please. 1416.
23
by Mr. Lynn as an example of his contacts.
24 10:59:04 25
Now, this was a document handed in, Mr. O'Halloran,
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 36
And this relates to one meeting only but from his statement, as you can see,
26
this is just an example of his general form over this period.
27
you can see, is the meeting held on the 16th of October 1992.
And he has
28
ticked off a number of names as he has said in his statement.
And he has
29
placed a tick against those names I recollect having met.
10:59:32 30
name there is a tick.
Now, this, as
Again, beside your
Does this help your memory in any way?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:59:35
10:59:48
10 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 37
No memory of meeting Mr. Lynn in particular?
3
A.
No, not at that time.
4
Q. 38
So are you saying you don't remember meeting Mr. Lynn or you don't remember --
5
A.
Meeting him in connection to this development.
6
Q. 39
Do you know Mr. Lynn?
7
A.
I do. I subsequently would have got to know him but I mean that's 14 years ago
8 9 11:00:01 10
Q. 40
When you would you have first met Mr. Lynn?
A.
Well, if he claims that he spoke to me in 1992, I presume that's the first time.
Q. 41
13 14
I just have no memory.
so I wouldn't have --
11 12
Again, I'm not refuting it either.
I can't remember absolutely.
Well would it have been during the '80s or the '90s or when would you have got to know Mr. Lynn?
A.
11:00:17 15
Oh no. No, it would have been after I got elected, some time after I was elected to the council.
16
Q. 42
Sometimes after June '91?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 43
And how do you or do you remember the circumstances under which you met Mr.
19 11:00:28 20
Lynn? A.
Again, I can't really, I mean.
21
Q. 44
Well you know him well now, isn't that right?
22
A.
Well I would have gotten to know him because he was involved in other projects,
23 24 11:00:40 25
I think, you know, at a later stage. Q. 45
All right.
A.
So I don't know, he would be around the council and whatever.
26
wouldn't have known many of these people.
27
far as I was concerned.
28
Q. 46
In 1992 I
You know they were only faces as
If I could have page 571, please.
29 11:00:54 30
This is an interview Mr. Dunlop was engaged in with the Tribunal on the 25th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:01:07
11:02:41
11 1
May 2000. And Mr. Dunlop is asked by Mr. Gallagher to discuss his relationship
2
with Monarch.
As you can see there at the top.
And at page 578, please.
3 4
And this is in relation to, as I say, Monarch and persons involved in Dublin
5
County Council.
6
other words, that persons has agreed to.
7
A:
8
that he or she has been paid that that person was on the payroll but you would
9
not want again to remember what was exactly said.
11:02:41 10
At 20 there.
It could be two things.
Question 20.
At page 578.
"It's okay.
In
It might not always mean that when it was said
But you would not want an
IQ of more that one to know that there was a specific list and it is a small
11
list all the time.
12
would have been very close contact between Richard Lynn and Liam Cosgrave.
13
Between Richard Lynn and Tony Fox.
14
others that he would need to come on board then like some of the independents
11:02:43 15
It is the same people.
For example, I'm aware that there
Between Richard Lynn and Don Lydon and
Lyons, O'Halloran, who may well have been still in the Labour Party at that
16
stage, had not come out of it but even though he was in the Labour Party he was
17
operating on an independent basis."
18 19
That was Mr. Dunlop.
11:02:43 20
21
Regarding your relationship with Mr. Lynn. Would you
like to comment in relation to that? A.
22
No. Mr. Dunlop has made allegations, with suggestions that he approached me on different projects and I said here on a number of occasions --
23
Q. 47
That's correct --
24
A.
And I never ever discussed anything with Mr. Dunlop.
Q. 48
Right.
26
A.
Well I have no comment.
27
Q. 49
You accept you had a relationship with Mr. Lynn?
28
A.
No, no, no.
29
Q. 50
No.
11:02:57 25
11:03:07 30
But this is Mr. Dunlop about your relationship with Mr. Lynn.
Would you accept that you were close to Mr. Lynn, as this would seem to
indicate? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:03:07
11:03:26
12 1
A.
No.
I mean, it depends.
I mean, I wasn't close to him.
I would have met
2
him on several occasions because he was around the council and whatever but I
3
wouldn't suggest there was a close relationship.
4
Q. 51
5
That you might have come on board as a result of Mr. Lynn's relationship with you?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 52
Who introduced you to Mr. Lynn?
8
A.
I'm not sure.
9
Q. 53
You were aware that Mr. Dunlop was a lobbiest at this time?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 54
You have given that evidence on previous modules.
12
A.
Not for the project.
13
Q. 55
I accept that's --
14
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 56
For another matter, Quarryvale I believe.
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 57
Could Mr. Dunlop have introduced to you Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
He could have, but I don't remember.
11:03:41 10
11:03:53 15
19
21
But, as I said before I was --
or he didn't.
11:04:07 20
He probably introduced himself to me, I'm not sure.
He could have again, I can't say he did
To deny it would be wrong.
In the same way to suggest he did
would be also wrong because I don't remember. Q. 58
22
Right.
So you certainly would have known Mr. Dunlop at this time as a
lobbiest?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 59
In or around the environs of the City Hall.
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 60
And you came to know Mr. Lynn around this time.
27
A.
Around 1992?
28
Q. 61
Yes.
29
A.
I can't remember back that far.
11:04:18 25
11:04:30 30
Again, I know I sound vague but there were so
many people around South Dublin County Council, Dublin County Council as it was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:04:34
11:04:48
13 1
then, that it's not possible at times to remember when people appeared first or
2
whatever.
3
have been one of them.
4
Q. 62
5 6
But where people would have a constant presence, Mr. Lynn could
Right but you have no specific memory but you accept that you would have known him at this time?
A.
7
Oh, yeah.
Probably at that time.
I've no memory of when I first would have
met him.
8
Q. 63
Did Mr. Lynn lobby you in relation to Cherrywood?
9
A.
I mean, I've been asked this and I have thought about it. I can never remember
11:05:02 10
him asking me anything about Cherrywood.
11
gentlemen came to me.
And I don't think one of them was Richard Lynn.
12
Q. 64
You don't think?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 65
Who was the other man?
A.
I can't remember their names.
11:05:13 15
16
I remember two different -- two
I mean it was only a fairly brief fleeting kind
of a conversation and presentation or whatever.
17
Q. 66
Would you have met Mr. Lynn with, say, Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
No, no.
19
Q. 67
You're certain of that?
A.
Positive, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Q. 68
You can't remember meeting -- you can't remember much detail but you can say
11:05:26 20
21 22 23
that you are positive you didn't meet Mr. Lynn with Mr. Dunlop? A.
24 11:05:47 25
26
Certainly in relation to Cherrywood, no.
In relation to Cherrywood.
If you're asking me did I meet both of them at the
same time on any occasion, I could have. Q. 69
And so you could have in Cherrywood?
A.
Yeah but Mr. Dunlop would never have approached me or spoke to me about
27
Cherrywood or any other project.
28
Q. 70
So you are certain of that.
29
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 71
You're not certain that you could have met Mr. Dunlop with Mr. Lynn.
11:05:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
It's a
11:06:01
11:06:10
14 1
possibility, isn't it?
2
A.
In a casual way, yeah.
3
Q. 72
This was in the environs of the City Hall.
4
A.
Yeah, in the County Council offices, yeah.
5
Q. 73
Where you would be meeting Dunlop as you've said in previous evidence in
6 7
relation to another development? A.
8 9
No, no, meeting with him is a casual hello, goodbye it wasn't a meeting set up to discussion anything, you know.
Q. 74
11:06:27 10
Right.
And likewise, Mr. Lynn would have been around the environs of City
Hall and you would have been discussing --
11
A.
He would have been.
12
Q. 75
And it's possible you discussed Cherrywood with Mr. Lynn?
13
A.
It is possible, yeah.
14
Q. 76
And possibly in the company of Mr. Dunlop.
A.
It's unlikely.
16
Q. 77
Yes.
17
A.
Because as I say, I wasn't aware of Mr. Dunlop's involvement.
18
Q. 78
Right.
11:06:37 15
19
That's all I'm saying.
Now, I think arising out of the meeting of the 27th of May 1992.
further, and that is map page 7217.
11:07:10 20
You can't say you didn't?
A
And this is the map that went ultimately
on public display and I'll deal with that in a moment in relation to the lands.
21
And I'll come back to that.
22
the 27th of May and as you say yourself, you haven't a great recollection but
23
you certainly know that you were there and we know how you voted; and that was
24
pro the rezoning and pro the increased density?
11:07:29 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
Right.
Just to conclude, as a result of the meeting of
Now, just in -- could I have page 4041, please.
27 28
There are a number of meetings and whilst I accept that some of these have been
29
dealt with in previous modules. I don't think your evidence was that you could
11:07:49 30
recollect.
But we're -- having dealt with some of the evidence here already Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:07:55
11:08:18
15 1
today.
I'm hoping that maybe you will remember.
These are meetings and/or
2
contacts with Mr. Frank Dunlop between March and June of 1993.
3
after the vote in May 1992 in relation to the Development Plan and prior to the
4
next meeting on the 11th of November '93.
So this is
5 6
And at 4041.
7
John O'Halloran in Dublin County Council this afternoon".
8
through them briefly and you can comment.
9
1993. 10:30 John O'Halloran don't send out cheque for football gear."
11:08:39 10
11
The 8th of March 1993, telephone attendance "Mr. Frank Dunlop
A.
Sorry.
Q. 80
It's what is written in.
12
It's a telephone attendance 10:30 John O'Halloran.
13
A.
I see it a.
14
Q. 81
At 10:30 do you see that? 10th of March. That's a 12 noon, that's 4049. again later."
17
4096.
23rd of March 1993.
18
4179.
3rd of May 1993.
19
looking for him." That's at 240. On the 13th of May.
21
see you in council tomorrow."
22
17th of May.
23
And finally.
24
numbers given there.
4198. 4254.
"12:55 John O'Halloran."
"2:40.
4196.
That's at 4046.
Page 4049, "12 noon John O'Halloran will call
16
11:09:31 20
"9th of March 1993, 4046, 9th March
I didn't get the last piece of that.
"Don't send out cheque for football gear."
11:08:56 15
I'll just go
John O'Halloran in the centre.
13th of May 1993.
FD
11:15 "John O'Halloran will
"John O'Halloran in DCC hall parter." 17th of June 1993.
9:20 John O'Halloran and two
11:09:57 25
26
Now, in relation to that and those contacts, does it surprise you that there
27
are so many?
28
A.
Well it does really, yeah, yeah.
29
Q. 82
And have you any explanation as to why Mr. Dunlop would have contacted you over
11:10:15 30
this period of time, on certainly not a frequent basis but certainly a regular Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:10:20
11:10:30
16 1 2
basis? A.
3
Well I refer back to the cheque for the football gear.
Mr. Dunlop would have
been very --
4
Q. 83
You mean March, is that correct?
5
A.
Generous. Presumably it would have been money with regard to donations to
6
clubs in the area.
7
Q. 84
Uh-huh.
8
A.
I would have on occasion contacted Mr. Dunlop in the hope of getting some
9
support for whatever club it might be, whether it be football or indeed any
11:10:43 10
other club.
11
Q. 85
Sure.
12
A.
So I would have had contact with him, you know.
13
Q. 86
During this period did you ever have any contact with Mr. Lynn for similar
14 11:10:52 15
projects? A.
No, no.
16
Q. 87
And you're certain of that?
17
A.
Positive, yeah.
18
Q. 88
And is it possible that these contacts with Mr. Dunlop were in relation to the
19 11:11:00 20
Cherrywood lands? A.
No.
21
Q. 89
You're certain of that?
22
A.
Positive, yeah.
23
Q. 90
But you can't tell us exactly why they might have been other than ...?
24
A.
No.
Q. 91
All right.
11:11:11 25
Moving on to the map, 27, at 7217.
We'll go back to that.
This
26
map, as I say, was as a result of the vote taken on the 27th of May 1992.
27
This was the map that was put on public display 1st of July to August '93.
28
And you can see in that map we now have, if we could increase the size there,
29
please, of the map, in particular the specific Cherrywood lands.
11:11:44 30
There are a
number of proposed routes for the line of the Southeastern Motorway. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
The
11:11:49
11:12:15
17 1
Monarch lands are outlined in red.
You can see that the density that is
2
change No. 3, is now one house to the acre.
3
the town centre proposal and Mr Gilmore and O'Callaghan's now appear on the
4
map.
5
right through the Monarch property.
There's also 4A and 4B, that is
And there's the lands west of the Southeastern Motorway which is cutting You can see that?
6
A.
I can, yeah.
7
Q. 92
Now, do you remember anybody saying to you, Mr. Lynn at this time, do you
8
remember anybody such as Mr. Lynn expressing concern regarding this proposed
9
plan and map?
11:12:31 10
A.
No.
11
Q. 93
At all in relation to its impact on the Cherrywood lands?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 94
You say you were, have given evidence that you would have been prodevelopment,
14
pro increased zoning and this, as I've said to you, being the largest tract of
11:12:56 15
development land in south County Dublin at the time.
16 17
anybody commenting to you in relation to the low density zoning on this land? A.
18 19
You don't remember
Not specifically.
I remember there was an issue at the time but I don't
remember anybody particularly coming to me and discussing it. Q. 95
11:13:14 20
All right.
Now, I think there was a meeting in relation to this -- this map.
And representations received and that was on the 11th of November '93, that's
21
7258, please.
22 23
You can see there, Mr. O'Halloran, on the right-hand side half way down your
24
own -- you were in attendance at this meeting.
11:13:33 25
I have to ask you again do you
remember attending this meeting?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 96
Do you remember anybody discussing this meeting in advance in relation to
28 29 11:13:43 30
voting -A.
Again, I am he sorry.
Q. 97
Sure.
I have to say now.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I mean, it's 13 years ago.
11:13:43
11:13:57
18 1
A.
2 3
I don't remember specific meetings. meetings a week.
Q. 98
4
I accept that.
We were having meetings up to eight
I can't remember specific meetings.
Again as you say -- or advised it was a very very
controversial piece of zoning at the time?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 99
And that's why I was hoping it might stand out in your mind.
7
A.
It doesn't, sorry.
8
Q. 100
As you say, you also knew or had met with Mr. Lynn who was one of the persons
9
from Monarch who, Monarch were the developers of this land.
11:14:12 10
And it's in that
context that I ask you, do you remember this specific meeting?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 101
And I think in relation to this.
Again, there were a number of motions
13
received in relation to this proposed zoning and densities.
14
particular, there was a motion to confirm or two motions to confirm low
11:14:36 15
density.
And in
And 7261, please.
16 17
That was by Councillor Smyth and Buckley and at 7262 by Councillor Gilmore and
18
O'Callaghan.
19
maintain the low density zoning on those lands.
11:15:02 20
And these two motions were to maintain the status quo, to
the record would show.
You voted against those, as
And then there was the, what's known as the
21
Marren/Coffey motion and that's at 7263.
22
effectively delete change No. 3 on the map, which was the one house per acre,
23
and to increase the density to two per hectare.
24 11:15:41 25
A.
Again, I'm really sorry, I don't.
Q. 102
I'll show you a copy of the motion.
This motion was to delete,
Do you remember that?
It's 7226, please.
26
Map No. 27 change No. 3 "Dublin County Council hereby resolves to accept the
27
county manager's recommendation and delete the 1993 amendments in respect of
28
lands outlined in red on the attached map."
29 11:16:01 30
Now, I should have said, Mr. O'Halloran, that the -- and assisted your memory. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:16:06
11:16:26
19 1
The manager recommended the removal of change No. 3, that is to increase the
2
density.
3
And this motion was seeking to accept the manager's recommendation.
4
there's an amendment there regarding the balance of the lands to remain at two
5
per hectare. Could we have 7227, please.
To remove the low density and to increase the density on the lands. And
6 7
Again, this is a map, Mr. O'Halloran, showing the lands that this motion
8
relates to.
9
only.
11:16:56 10
And the balance of the lands are not effected by an increased in zoning
density.
11
And as you can see, these are the Monarch and Monarch owned lands
And Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey signed those.
Have you any
recollection of this vote?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 103
Of seeing this map?
14
A.
No.
Q. 104
And I can tell you that you voted in favour of the increase in density and this
11:17:06 15
16
motion was carried.
17
way in relation to any motion, this is the specific motion you say you can't
18
remember.
19
increase zoning density in regards to these lands?
11:17:34 20
A.
No.
Did anybody approach you, and can you remember, in any
Do you remember anybody approaching you in relation to a motion to
But I do what I do say to you is this; when councillors put forward
21
motions they would generally lobby fellow councillors with regard to the
22
motion.
23
I would have been available anyway because I wouldn't agree with low density
24
housing anyway.
11:17:58 25
26
So I would assume that the proposers would have sought my support.
So -- but I have no recollection of anybody particularly or
specifically. Q. 105
27
Do you know what objective criteria you would have used to vote yes or no other than your general belief in increased ...?
28
A.
Well I thought it was very useful land.
29
Q. 106
Right.
A.
No, better use of land.
11:18:13 30
Useful land.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:18:25
11:18:25
20 1
Q. 107
Better use of the land?
2
A.
To put more houses on it.
3
Q. 108
You remember that much.
4
A.
That's a philosophy I had but not specifically with regard to any of these
5 6
motions or maps. Q. 109
Again in, relation to your relationship with Mr. Lynn, who as I have said and
7
it has been put to you, would have met you some time in and around 1992.
8
is late 1993.
9
increased density?
11:18:44 10
Do you remember Mr. Lynn approaching you in relation to
A.
No.
11
Q. 110
Or in relation to these lands?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 111
Not at all?
14
A.
No.
Q. 112
A number of other motions were dealt with in relation to the changes to the
11:18:51 15
16
town centre zoning and maintaining those and I don't intend to go into detail
17
in any of those matters.
18 19
There's a -- 4761, please.
11:19:09 20
Dunlop.
At 10.10 am on the 30th of November 1993.
21
A.
I don't.
22
Q. 113
-- such contact.
23 24
This is a further contact between yourself and Mr.
Do you recall discussing any matter to do with lands,
density, zonings in relation to the Development Plan with Mr. Dunlop? A.
No.
Q. 114
Around this period in relation to the Cherrywood lands?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 115
Yes, I accept that.
28
A.
No, not at all.
29
Q. 116
Okay.
11:19:29 25
Do you recall --
As I said earlier --
If I might -- page 5165, please.
11:19:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
This
11:19:47
11:20:29
21 1
5065.
This is a, an expenses claim form.
It's signed by Richard Lynn and
2
it's a Monarch document.
3
second line down you can see "Development Plan review J O'Halloran".
4
would have -- this is an expenditure claim form for Mr. Lynn to Monarch
5
indicating some contact between yourself and himself at this time and the
6
expenditure of same.
7
relation to lunch or for a meal?
And it's dated week ending 22nd of April 1994.
And
So this
Do you remember meeting Mr. Lynn in April '94 in
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 117
Have you any comment to make in relation to this document?
A.
None at all, no.
Q. 118
Again, 5029, please. It's a similar document, 20th of May 1994 and again, five
11:20:51 10
11 12
lines down.
13
of meeting Mr. Lynn around this time?
14
"Development Plan J O'Halloran, 40.15 pounds."
Any recollection
A.
No.
Q. 119
20th of May.
A.
Could I just qualify that.
I'm not denying it either but I just don't -- I
17
don't recall it, you know.
So I'm not suggesting that it never took place.
18
I mean, if he has records of it I'd have to accept that.
11:21:13 15
16
19 11:21:31 20
21
Q. 120
All right.
A.
It's a better recollection than I would have.
Q. 121
All right.
There's a further document in July of 1995.
22
similar, it's an expenses claim form.
23
same in relation to that?
24 11:21:45 25
5274.
It's
And I take it that your evidence is the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 122
There's a, 5758 a diary entry for the 14th of March 1996.
"Mr. Dunlop".
And
26
subsequent to that 5776, there's a memo from Richard Lynn regarding Dublin west
27
by-election.
28
that 5776.
And requests for financial contribution.
Your name appears on
"John O'Halloran, independent 500 pounds."
29 11:22:19 30
Do you recall seeking funds from Mr. Lynn during this period? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:22:24
11:22:36
22 1
A.
I don't particularly.
I don't even remember receiving it but I accept that he
2
probably would have paid it, yeah.
3
time, yeah.
4
Q. 123
5
I would have welcomed any support at the
And have you any explanation as to why Mr. Lynn would have provided you with election funds around this time?
6
A.
No, I'm afraid Mr. Lynn would have to offer that explanation.
7
Q. 124
Sorry.
8
A.
No, I can't explain why he would have offered support other than he was
9 11:22:48 10
generous enough to do it. Q. 125
And there's a number of documents, you don't deny, there's a cheque at 5793 for
11
500 pounds made out to yourself, dated 29th of March 1996.
12
goes through Monarch Properties Services Limited on that same date 29th of
13
March '96.
14
As you say, you've no recollection of receiving the money and you don't know
11:23:20 15
And this payment
And it's attributed to yourself 500 pounds and that's at 5787.
why you might have received it?
16
A.
No, other than support for, towards expenses of the by-election, you know.
17
Q. 126
And I think you received further sums from Mr. Monahan and that's at 5822.
18
And that's in 1996, that's in April 1996.
19
Again, you can see there's -- would the contacts with Mr. Dunlop and these
11:23:54 20
"MS fundraiser, 250 pounds."
funds received by you, is there any connection between the two?
21
A.
Sorry, can you repeat that?
22
Q. 127
Your contact with Mr. Dunlop in March '96 and these payments by Monarch to you,
23
these election donations and the MS fundraiser, is there any connection between
24
the two?
11:24:09 25
A.
No.
26
Q. 128
Do you ever remember discussing with Mr. Dunlop seeking funds from Monarch?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 129
Thank you.
29 11:24:26 30
Did you ever discuss receiving these funds do you remember
receiving discussing receiving funds from Monarch in a general way with Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:24:27
11:24:51
23 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 130
And then finally in January 1997.
Again, there's a receipt at page 6151.
3
It's a letter you write to Mr. Richard Lynn seeking support for Multiple
4
Sclerosis fundraiser.
5
Lynn and a cheque as well.
6
A.
And there's a receipt of payment of 500 pounds from Mr. Do you recollect that in 1997?
Not specifically but Mr. Lynn has been a very generous supporter for my walking
7
for MS and indeed continues to be.
8
for me to seek his support and indeed get his support.
9
Q. 131
11:25:23 10
So, I mean, it wouldn't have been unusual
And notwithstanding that, did he ever seek from you any, anything in return for his friendship or his provision of electoral funds or funds for MS or
11
otherwise?
12
A.
No, no, there was no tie in between support for MS or anything else.
13
Q. 132
And/or your election funding?
14
A.
If he was associated with something I'm sure he would have tried to gain my
11:25:43 15
support but there is no connection between any financial support politically
16 17
and any support I would have given in terms of voting. Q. 133
18 19
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. O'Halloran.
You might answer any of my
colleagues questions. A.
Okay.
11:25:59 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
a moment please. Can I just ask you, Mr. O'Halloran, on the 11th of November
23
when the final vote was taken in relation to the Cherrywood lands, the very
24
first couple of motions were motions to confirm what had gone out on the
11:26:27 25
Just one short matter, Mr. O'Halloran.
display after Mr. Barrett's motion.
26
one house per acre.
27
out, you voted against that.
28
your ward was west Dublin, Lucan?
29 11:26:46 30
A.
Could I have 7217 for
That was motions to confirm the lands at
And the record shows I think, as Mr. Doyle has pointed And I think earlier you told us that you came --
That's right. JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I think everybody knows that in most of Lucan, certainly
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:26:50
11:26:57
24 1
the ones, the parts that's developed, there would be 12 to 14 houses to the
2
acre, by and large.
3
A.
And more.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
motions to confirm it at one house to the acre, you were looking at a broader
7
picture, that you wanted --
8
A.
And more perhaps indeed.
So obviously by voting against
Well I'd like to think --
9 11:27:11 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You saw no reason why these lands should just be one house to
11
the acre.
12
that was proposed by Mr. Marren and Ms. Coffey, had been signed by a number of
13
councillors.
14
back to what it had been on the first display effectively.
11:27:37 15
acre.
And we know that later on there was another motion then, the motion
And they were seeking to change it, to delete the change, to go Four houses to the
But they -- their proposal -- they were at idiom with the Manager on
16
that because the manager was also recommending that the one house per acre be
17
scrapped effectively and go back to four houses per acre.
18 19 11:27:58 20
And the manager was recommending that and had made his report I think on the 3rd of November and indeed on the 11th of November.
But Mr. Marren and
21
Ms. Coffey's motion that was proposed was qualified that they were only seeking
22
the four houses to the acre for the Monarch lands.
23
was produced and there was an amendment on the motion that the rest of the
24
lands and if you look at that map, the Monarch lands are outlined in a red
11:28:22 25
outline.
And in fact the map that
But there is still a substantial body of lands that were zoned
26
residential that they were happy enough to leave at one house to the acre.
27
at least for some reason they left it at one house to the acre.
28
have a particular view on land and on the use of lands.
Or
You seem to
29 11:28:48 30
Why would you have supported that particular motion when they were only, if you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:28:52
11:29:08
25 1
like, outlining a proposal for four houses to the acre in relation to certain
2
lands?
3
A.
4
Because at the time I probably felt it was the best thing he could get at that time.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But --
Well my own preference would have been for a much higher density.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:29:24 10
11
Yes.
But why not -- why confine it just to the lands
outlined in red Mr. O'Halloran? A.
I can't recall the specifics of the motion now or the whys or wherefores.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
boundary of a particular landowner's lands at the time?
11:29:36 15
A.
16
I suppose so.
Did you know that the map that was produced was a particular
When a motion is put you either vote for it or against or
abstain. The motions they put, I felt was a reasonable compromise.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
amendments to the --
11:29:53 20
A.
But there is provision presumably for anybody to seek
There is, yeah.
21 22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But you didn't seek any amendments.
No.
24 11:29:56 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
26 27
If you were going to go the way you were going it would be for
all of the lands at the time? A.
That would have been my preference, yes.
28 29 11:30:06 30
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Do you know why you didn't do that or?
I don't. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:30:07
11:30:11
26 1 2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
Thanks very much, Mr. O'Halloran.
Okay.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
7 8
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
9 11:30:16 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Reilly is due at half eleven.
Well perhaps rather than break
his evidence we will take a short break now.
12 13
MS. DILLON:
You are going to rise now?
14 11:30:27 15
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
Just for ten minutes.
16 17
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
18 19 11:30:55 20
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
21 22
MR. QUINN: Mr. Reilly, please.
23 24 11:49:43 25
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:49:43
11:49:54
27 1
MR. PATRICK REILLY, CONTINUED TO BE QUESTION
2
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
3 4 5
MR. CHAIRMAN: good morning, Mr. Reilly. Q. 134
6
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Reilly.
Yesterday you had been telling the Tribunal
about your involvement in relation to the Cherrywood lands, isn't that right?
7
A.
That's correct, yes.
8
Q. 135
And I think you advised the Tribunal that you didn't really become involved in
9
the lobbying process or indeed the PR campaign in relation to Cherrywood until
11:50:12 10
late 1991 and that was in relation to Mr. O'Herlihy's involvement? Is that
11
right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 136
And that you attended a number of road shows but that you did not attend the
14
meeting in 1991 or indeed 1992, that is the council meeting in '92, is that
11:50:27 15
correct?
16
A.
Correct, yes.
17
Q. 137
Well after 1992 I think you indicated that you probably became more involved.
18 19 11:50:34 20
Is that right? A.
I did, that's right.
Q. 138
And I think you were also involved in relation to other Monarch lands and
21
attempts to have those rezoned, isn't that right?
22
A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
23
Q. 139
I think you told the Tribunal that you began to attend the council chamber but
24
not -- but only in an observer capacity and for the purposes of keeping up
11:50:55 25
contacts with councillors, isn't that right?
26
A.
Correct, yes.
27
Q. 140
And keeping up contacts with councillors in relation to other Monarch lands but
28 29 11:51:04 30
also the Cherrywood lands? A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 141
And you would have met Mr. Dunlop I take it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:51:06
11:51:12
28 1
A.
That's right.
2
Q. 142
And Mr. Dunlop has a recollection of meeting yourself and Mr. Lynn at those
3
meetings?
4
A.
Yes, that's right.
5
Q. 143
And then I think you advised the Tribunal that although you did not know he was
6
being appointed, you had a formal meeting with Mr. Dunlop and Monarch architect
7
in Mr. Dunlop's offices after his appointment for the purposes of briefing him
8
in relation to the lands.
9
Is that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 144
I take it that meeting would have taken place some time after March 1993?
11
A.
As I remember it, yeah.
12
Q. 145
You recall Mr. Dunlop's evidence that there was confusion and I think he said
11:51:31 10
13
that there was annoyance on your part in relation to the way Mr. Phil Monahan
14
was effectively going about having the lands rezoned, isn't that right?
11:51:51 15
16
A.
Yeah, that was his evidence, yeah.
Q. 146
I accept that.
17
That was Mr. Dunlop's evidence.
And you heard Mr. Dunlop in
relation to that?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 147
Do you agree with Mr. Dunlop's evidence in that regard?
A.
Not really, no.
Q. 148
Well was there a divergence of view as to how matters might proceed in these
11:52:02 20
21 22
I didn't --
lands in early or mid 1993?
23
A.
Not that I was aware of, no.
24
Q. 149
So Mr. Dunlop is completely mistaken in his perception that you had, that you
11:52:19 25
were frustrated with Mr. Phil Monahan's approach to this matter?
26
A.
I would say so, yeah, I think he was wrong, yeah.
27
Q. 150
Was there any basis for Mr. Dunlop coming to the conclusion that there was
28
frustration or dissension or confusion putting it at its mildest, within the
29
Monarch camp in relation to these lands?
11:52:40 30
A.
Not to these lands but I suppose in relation to Phil, Phil operated out of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:52:46
11:53:01
29 1
Somerton in Castleknock and, I mean, he -- we didn't really -- I certainly
2
didn't know what other developments Phil would have been involved in.
3
Q. 151
You didn't know what other developments he was involved in?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 152
Did you know that he was involved in a meeting with politicians or councillors
6
in relation to these lands?
7
A.
No, I wouldn't know that.
8
Q. 153
Did you is suspect that he might have been involved?
9
A.
No, not really, no.
Q. 154
Did you hear his secretary yesterday, Ms. Gosling, say that Mr. Monahan was the
11:53:08 10
11
type of man that would do whatever was necessary to have --
12
A.
I heard that.
13
Q. 155
The position of his companies?
14
A.
I heard that, yes.
Q. 156
Would you agree with that evidence?
16
A.
I'd say he worked hard for his company, yes.
17
Q. 157
And would it surprise you therefore that he would have met politicians with a
11:53:20 15
18
view to convincing them that they might take an approach or take a rezoning
19
view to these lands?
11:53:36 20
A.
21
It would have surprised me that he would have gone out to meet councillors, yes.
22
Q. 158
You think he might have gone out to see more senior politicians?
23
A.
I don't know, I don't know.
24
Q. 159
You agreed with me yesterday and I think it is the case that there was nothing
11:53:49 25
going to happen in Cherrywood in the absence of a favourable vote from
26
councillors?
27
A.
Correct, yes.
28
Q. 160
And if Mr. Monahan was anxious to improve the development potential of his
29 11:54:01 30
lands he would need the support of councillors? A.
Correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:54:02
11:54:15
30 1
Q. 161
And if Mr. Monahan was the type of man who was prepared to do whatever was
2
necessary in order to improve the development potential of lands, presumably he
3
would also approach councillors?
4
A.
Well I don't believe he approached councillors.
5
Q. 162
You don't believe he --
6
A.
I never heard he approached councillors, no.
7
Q. 163
I see. Does that surprise you?
8
A.
Not really, no.
9
Q. 164
Yeah.
A.
Yeah, it's just, I mean, I suppose Mr. Monahan operated, Phil operated out of
11:54:24 10
Because --
11
Somerton.
12
the centres managing the centres, he didn't visit the centres that often.
13
he was working on his own out in Castleknock.
14
there were never any formal meetings that I was at with Phil or any other
11:54:50 15
16
people. Q. 165
17
He didn't come to the office that very often and when I was around So
Now, I don't know, as I said,
He would call occasionally to the office, sorry.
He would call but would you be surprised that he would take an interest in what was happening?
18
A.
Oh, I'd say he took an interest in it.
19
Q. 166
Cherrywood was the single biggest project after Tallaght and possibly now that
11:55:11 20
Tallaght was underway, the biggest project?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 167
And the rezoning of Cherrywood was itself this single biggest project?
23
A.
Yes, it would have been.
24
Q. 168
And it dominated Monarch's business throughout '92 and '93, isn't that right?
A.
Well it was part of it, yes.
Q. 169
That prospect of the development in Cherrywood had been set back because of the
11:55:22 25
26 27
vote in May '92, isn't that right?
28
A.
Well it was going through its process, yes.
29
Q. 170
But it had suffered a set back in May '92 with the vote in May '92?
A.
Well it was still on Barrett's motion of one house to the acre, yeah.
11:55:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:55:41
11:55:54
31 1
Q. 171
Yes. It was always on one house to the acre isn't that right even back in 1989
2
and 1990 when the lands were purchased, the lands were on one house to the acre
3
albeit on septic tank, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah. That's as I understand it, yeah.
5
Q. 172
So it was back to square one in 1992 vis-a-vis residential development?
6
A.
I suppose it was.
7
Q. 173
And there was substantial monies owed on these lands, isn't that right?
8
A.
I didn't know what was borrowed on it. I wasn't involved in the financial
9 11:56:07 10
side. Q. 174
At all?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 175
Just in relation to Tallaght. Just to go back to Tallaght for a moment.
13
have indicated that you were the manager of the centre in Tallaght.
14
have any involvement at all in the financial end of Tallaght?
11:56:19 15
16
No.
Q. 176
Were you not appraised of the incoming -- sorry the outgoings and the income in Tallaght ever?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 177
Were you ever circulated with any of the accounts analysis sheet?
A.
No.
21
Q. 178
Monthly figures or anything like that?
22
A.
No.
23 24 11:56:46 25
26
Did you
A.
17
11:56:37 20
You
I wasn't the Manager in Tallaght.
manager.
I was the group shopping centre
I appointed a Manager in in Tallaght, sorry.
Q. 179
Okay.
You appointed --
A.
Yeah, sorry, I just ....
Q. 180
But as group shopping centre manager, you say you never had any responsibility
27
and you were never furnished with any of the financial information of the group
28
or any of the companies within the group?
29 11:57:00 30
A.
No.
Q. 181
And did you know any of the financial information concerning the group Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:57:05
11:57:16
32 1
otherwise than --
2
A.
No, it wasn't my end of the business.
3
Q. 182
I appreciate that you say that you had no responsibility for it but presumably
4
I wasn't --
you knew the various companies within the group?
5
A.
I knew of them but I was never involved in the financial side of the business.
6
Q. 183
But did you know for example that there was Monarch Properties Services
7
Limited, a company which was responsible for carrying out the project
8
development in Cherrywood for example?
9
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
Q. 184
Did you know that there was an L&C Properties Limited?
11
A.
Yes, L&C was the Tallaght project.
12
Q. 185
Monarch Properties Limited.
13
A.
That was the mother company, yeah.
14
Q. 186
So you did know the individual companies?
A.
Absolutely, yeah.
Q. 187
And when you would give directions, as you indicated yesterday, for monies to
11:57:33 10
11:57:44 15
16 17
be paid, did you direct from which account to which company was to pay the
18
monies?
19 11:57:55 20
21
A.
No, I didn't, no.
Q. 188
You never gave such a direction?
A.
No. Just on that.
22
Just to be clear, I would have cleared an invoice for --
it would normally come in MPSL, Monarch Properties Services Limited.
23
Q. 189
But you would have never indicated the account from which it was to be paid?
24
A.
I don't believe so, no.
Q. 190
Could I have 6095, please.
11:58:15 25
26
This is an instruction to a Bill McMunn, which appears to be from you,
27
Mr. Reilly dated 17th of October 1996.
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 191
And the subject is Colm McGrath golf classic.
A.
Yes.
11:58:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
11:58:28
11:58:37
33 1
Q. 192
2
It says "I attach herewith the original signed receipt, 500 pounds by Richard Lynn which should be charged to Monarch Property Limited."
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 193
"Thank you for all your help."
5
A.
Yeah. Sorry, that can I --
6
Q. 194
You say that that receipt was already charged to Monarch Properties Services
7 8
when you received it? A.
9
He was going to a
golf classic that day and the cheque wasn't signed and could I get some money
11
to cover the cost of the golf classic itself. Q. 195
13 14
I got a call from our
accounts girl just to say that Richard Lynn was very upset.
11:58:57 10
12
No, I'll tell you exactly what happened in that case.
Why, since you had no responsibility with finance, did that request come through to you?
A.
11:59:18 15
Sorry.
What happened was, I'm explaining, from the accounts office, the girl
rang me, she was very upset.
Richard was after getting very annoyed with her
16
and said obviously the cheque hadn't been signed and was delayed or whatever
17
else.
18
get 500 pounds from petty cash from Bill McMunn, who was our head of security.
19
And I brought that cheque in, brought that cash in.
11:59:44 20
I said I believe I may have been in Tallaght at the time.
I said I
I got Richard to sign for
it.
21
Q. 196
Yes.
22
A.
And I sent an instruction back to ensure because that was from The Square
23
Management Limited, which was a separate company, which was the, owned The
24
Square at that stage, to charge this back to Monarch Properties Limited was it,
12:00:02 25
26
yeah. Q. 197
27 28 29 12:00:20 30
You see, I still don't understand how the cash query came to you Mr. Reilly, since you had no responsibility?
A.
Sorry it wasn't a cash query. company.
It was a row between two members of the
Monarch had a very difficult job and I arranged this and I said made
sure it's charged, it was not a Square receipt. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:00:23
12:00:37
34 1
Q. 198
You didn't want it as a Square receipt?
2
A.
No, it was nothing to do with The Square.
3
Q. 199
Why did Mr. Lynn not get on to, or the girl in accounts not get on to Mr, for
4
example, Mr. Glennane, since he was the accounts --
5
A.
I don't know.
6
Q. 200
Expert --
7
A.
I can't answer that, no.
8
Q. 201
So you say that's how you came to charge that payment --
9
A.
Exactly.
Q. 202
-- to Mr. McGrath to Monarch Properties Limited?
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 203
I asked you yesterday what the objective was in 1993 after Mr. Dunlop came on
12:00:45 10
I got I think a receipt signed by Richard for that.
13
board in relation to the lands.
14
isn't that right?
12:01:06 15
And you indicated it was to increase density,
A.
No, it was to get the lands approved.
16
Q. 204
Yes but approved for what I asked you?
17
A.
Sorry.
18
Q. 205
Yes.
19 12:01:19 20
21
Increase from one acre to four acres. Was there a suggestion at this time also that the lands might be zoned
for industrial purposes? A.
I don't remember that, no.
Q. 206
That's the type of thing you, if it were the case, you should have known, isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
I would say I would have, somebody would have told me I guess, yes.
24
Q. 207
Because you were out lobbying some councillors particularly those in the
12:01:31 25
Tallaght area, isn't that right?
26
A.
We're back to canvassing.
27
Q. 208
Or canvassing.
28 29 12:01:42 30
My apologies.
I'll stick to the terminology you dictate and
we will call it canvassing. A.
Sorry.
Q. 209
You were out canvassing councillors that you knew in relation to the lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:01:45
12:01:53
35 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 210
And obviously you would know or should know or ought to know what you were
3
seeking on the lands, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 211
And you say that you did not know that you were looking for industrial zoning
6 7
on the lands in 1993, isn't that right? A.
What I was told and I can't remember the exact period was that the best that
8
could be got on the lands was the manager's proposal, which was four houses to
9
the acre on sewerage.
12:02:20 10
11
And a neighbourhood shopping centre.
And that was
what canvassing I did. Q. 212
If we could have 4312.
This is a memorandum of a meeting held in the County
12
Manager's office between Mr. Pat Field of GRE, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Lynn, and
13
Mr. O'Sullivan, who is the manager, and Mr. Murray.
14 12:02:38 15
Now, it would appear are from this memorandum that there were two possible
16
proposals from the Monarch side.
17
Mr. Sweeney, "tabled two draft submissions for the Development Plan review and
18
outlined two possible proposals.
19
spaces or C, zoning with E zoning, that is science and technology/industry.
12:03:03 20
And it commences ES, whom I presume is
C zoning A1 that's action area, plus F open A
1, which action area zoning and F, zoning."
21 22
Did you know that there was the question of industrial zoning being sited on
23
these lands in July 1993?
24 12:03:20 25
A.
I don't believe I did.
Maybe at a later stage, yes.
Q. 213
Did you know that there was a strategy being devised whereby the manager was
26
being offered lands for a science and technology park in exchange for an
27
increased density?
28
A.
No, I didn't know that.
29
Q. 214
You didn't know that that strategy was taking place?
A.
No.
12:03:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:03:38
12:03:57
36 1
Q. 215
Are you surprised now that you didn't know of that at the time?
2
A.
No.
Well if I can remember, as I say, I'm going back on my memory itself.
3
What I recall was that the plan went on display some time after that in July or
4
August.
5
discussion about a shopping centre, which I was originally interested in.
6
I gather I think as I recall Richard Lynn came back and said look Willie Murray
7
won't let anything go into it other than a neighbourhood shopping centre and
8
the manager was continuing to support four houses per acre on septic tanks.
I think it was August.
What happened then was that there was a And
9 12:04:21 10
Possibly at later stage there was some talk about a science park or whatever
11
else but that was never brought out to bring to councillors or anything else
12
like that.
13
Q. 216
14
No, I'm not suggesting that it was being brought to councillors at this stage. But what I'm saying is that the strategy was being devised at this stage.
12:04:37 15
And
that there had been meetings and discussions with the manager and his staff and
16
certain representatives of Monarch in relation to that strategy at this early
17
stage, that is to say July 1993.
18
A.
Right.
19
Q. 217
You say you did not know in July 1993?
A.
I do --
21
Q. 218
That that strategy was being devised or that those meetings were taking place?
22
A.
No, I do not know that I knew at that stage.
23
Q. 219
Yes.
12:04:51 20
24
To an observer, let's say take any of the councillors, you would have
been identified with Mr. Lynn as someone who would have been seeking the
12:05:07 25
rezoning of these lands at that time, isn't that right?
26
A.
Um, possibly, yeah, I suppose, yeah.
27
Q. 220
Yes.
28
A.
Or outside the council offices.
29
Q. 221
Other than yourself and Mr. Lynn, and indeed latterly be Dunlop on behalf of
12:05:23 30
I was in the council.
Monarch, was there any other representative of Monarch outside the council Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:05:27
12:05:37
37 1
offices?
2
A.
Maybe our architect came along in case there was a technical query.
3
Q. 222
Yes.
4
A.
Yeah, but --
5
Q. 223
And you had in the mind of councillors you would have been, the two of you
6 7
But otherwise it would have been yourself and Mr. Lynn?
would have been associated with the Monarch Group and the Monarch strategy? A.
Certainly I was associated with Monarch and with Tallaght.
I keep going back
8
to that but I have to keep going back because it was not my -- I have to keep
9
repeating it, I'm sorry.
12:05:54 10
Q. 224
Yes.
11
A.
It was a side show for me.
12
Q. 225
Yes. Was there anything going on in Tallaght that required rezoning at this
13 14 12:06:01 15
time? A.
No, I don't so.
Q. 226
So you were if you were attending these meetings it was for Monarch Properties
16
other than Tallaght?
17
A.
Either Ongar or Somerton or Cherrywood.
18
Q. 227
If I could have 4321.
19 12:06:18 20
21
Mr. McCabe, presumably you knew that Mr. Fergal McCabe
was the planner retained on behalf of Monarch, isn't that right? A.
Yeah, I knew Fergal was involved, yeah.
Q. 228
And Mr. McCabe drafted three different letters.
And unfortunately, the
22
Tribunal has been unable it to know, which, if any, were submitted to the
23
council in relation to the 1993 draft plan.
24
amendments to the 1991 draft plan.
12:06:43 25
26
I think in fact it's the 1993
A.
Right.
Q. 229
But for the moment we'll call it the 1993 draft plan which was on display in
27
July '93.
28
density on the residential to effectively four houses to the acre.
29
industrial seeking industrial increase on 28 hectares. Do you see that?
12:07:07 30
A.
And you see there a submission which speaks about increasing the
I do, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And on
12:07:07
12:07:30
38 1
Q. 230
That's one letter date the 30th of July 1993 there are two letters.
Could I
2
have 8556.
This is a letter which we know has a note on it which says "not
3
sent".
4
the plan in the context of residential and then industrial zoning.
5
finally there is a letter, if I could have 7221, a further letter. Again dated
6
30th of July 1993, which speaks to the plan in the context of residential
7
development?
So we presume that this one was not sent.
But again it speaks to And then
8
A.
Right.
9
Q. 231
Now, would you agree with me that that would tend to suggest that at that stage
12:07:48 10
that Monarch were undecided as to whether or not they would seek industrial
11 12
Okay.
zoning on the site at that time? A.
Well I haven't read them in detail but if I can explain, I've never seen these
13
letters.
14
any meeting that I can recall with the council on this.
12:08:11 15
12:08:23 20
And I was not
for it. Q. 232
18 19
I was never at
involved in the absolute detail of what Cherrywood or what that strategy was
16 17
I was never involved in the preparation of them.
So you're saying that you had no involvement in the strategy in relation to Cherrywood?
A.
Not in terms of science parks or whatever else other than --
Q. 233
You never attended any meetings in which there could have been discussions
21
concerning science parks?
22
A.
No. No.
23
Q. 234
Mr. Lynn never advised of you about meetings that he had attended with the
24 12:08:37 25
manager together with Mr. Sweeney as I have identified there at 4312? A.
Not in any great detail.
26
Q. 235
But in any detail at all?
27
A.
I don't believe so.
28
Q. 236
Do you think it unusual that you would have been lobbying the support of
29 12:08:53 30
I don't believe so.
councillors in the company of the one other representative of Monarch's present and he would have more knowledge in relation to the matter than you would have? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:08:57
12:09:17
39 1
A.
Richard, this was a full-time job for Richard.
2
the summer was quiet.
3
particularly in July and August.
4
Q. 237
I think as I said yesterday,
Everything went quiet.
And again in August 1993.
Everybody wanted holidays,
The push came on in September.
I had put up 8156 -- the proposal in relation to
5
the possible transfer or swap of golf course lands with lands in Cherrywood.
6
And again, you said yesterday that apart from some office rumour you had no
7
knowledge of that either?
8
A.
None whatsoever, no.
9
Q. 238
Now, if I could have 7258, please.
12:09:37 10
This is the attendance on the 11th of November, 1993.
And you are your
11
canvassing campaign would have culminated on the vote on the 11th of November
12
isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes, that's right.
14
Q. 239
And you would have been campaigning presumably or canvassing that the lands
12:10:00 15
16
would be zoned at four houses to the acre, is that right? A.
My recollection is that it was, we were going for the manager's report and
17
again just to be clear, I wasn't going around with armfuls of plans or motions
18
or whatever else, I was literally saying to anybody I knew, I hope you can
19
support us on the day.
12:10:23 20
Q. 240
Yes.
Now, just before I get to that.
At 5206, this is a plan drawn up by
21
Mr. Lynn for Monarch on the 15th of June 1994, and we see that at 5212.
22
a plan that's drawn up in 1994.
23
it in historical context.
24
So just to put it in context and just to put
We had the vote in November 1993?
A.
Right.
Q. 241
And then the plan is confirmed in December 1993?
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 242
There's a meeting which we'll be dealing with in a moment in early January
12:10:48 25
28
1994.
29
This has been acceded to by the council.
12:11:08 30
It's
And there is a proposal to have a variation to the Development Plan. And then in May 1994 that variation
comes before the council as does a motion by Councillor Gilmore that there be a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:11:12
12:11:41
40 1
science and technology park.
2
motion which is before the planning and development committee of the council is
3
adjourned to the 26th of June of 1994.
4
1994 a strategy document is put together, possibly by Mr. Lynn but certainly
5
contributed to by Mr. Lynn.
6
heading "Progress report for 1994 Cherrywood" at 5206 and it starts with the
7
variation to the Development Plan.
8
referred you to a meeting between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney and the manager in
9
July of 1993?
12:11:56 10
11
And that variation and Councillor Gilmore's
And in the intervening period in June
And from that strategy document we see under the
And you will recall a moment ago I
A.
Right.
Q. 243
And we see now that under the heading "variation to the Development Plan" Mr.
12
Lynn is advising the Monarch representatives that "In September 1993
13
Monarch/Guardian agreed to give a letter to Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan committing the
14
landowners to reserving a significant portion of lands which could be
12:12:17 15
considered by the incoming council for possible industrial use to accommodate a
16
science and technology park.
Any residentially zoned lands thus taken up for
17
industrial purposes was to be compensated by bringing in the agriculturally
18
zoned lands for residential purposes."
19 12:12:33 20
Did you know that there had been such an agreement?
21
A.
I don't know.
22
Q. 244
Sorry you did not?
23
A.
I did not, no.
24 12:12:43 25
I did not, no.
Again, just to be clear.
I wasn't involved in any of these
discussions. Q. 245
I accept that you may not have been involved in the discussions and indeed, in
26
fairness to you, you don't appear to be -- to appear on any of the memos that I
27
referred to as having been in attendance.
28
ground, so to speak, seeking the support of councillors.
29
you didn't know that this strategy was being devised or if these agreements had
12:13:03 30
been reached? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
But as somebody who was on the Are you saying that
12:13:04
12:13:15
41 1
A.
No, I didn't know any agreement had been reached.
2
Q. 246
Or that these meetings had taken place with the manager?
3
A.
There were ongoing meetings with the council, I was never appraised of the
4 5
detail of them. Q. 247
6
Were are you surprised that you weren't appraised as some one who was expected to canvass the support of councillors?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 248
On the current up-to-date level of negotiations?
9
A.
Again.
Q. 249
Between Monarch and the council officials?
11
A.
No, this was not part of my job.
12
Q. 250
But just from a briefing point of view and just to put you in the picture, so o
12:13:22 10
13
to speak, are you surprised that you weren't au fait with the current
14
up-to-date position in relation to negotiations and discussions between the
12:13:36 15
between the Monarch Group and the planners at this time?
16
A.
No, I'm not surprised because I wasn't part of the Cherrywood project team.
17
Q. 251
If a councillor, whose support you were canvassing, had asked you to be
18
briefed -- had asked to be briefed by you in relation to the matter.
19
would not have been in a position to fully brief him, isn't that right?
12:13:55 20
A.
21 22
12:14:10 25
If he asked me I would have said if there's any issue talk to
Richard Lynn or Eddie Sweeney. Q. 252
23 24
Correct, yeah.
You
And they would -- Mr. Lynn if that discussion had taken place outside the council chamber Mr. Lynn would have been beside you?
A.
Not necessarily, no.
Q. 253
Do you think that a councillor would have great confidence in you if you were
26
not in a position to tell them the up-to-date current position within Monarch
27
in relation to their objectives for their lands particularly in circumstances
28
where you were seeking their support?
29 12:14:29 30
A.
Sorry.
Just again just to repeat.
I was, as I say, just attended a number
of meetings prior to the November '93 vote. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I didn't get into any detail with
12:14:35
12:14:52
42 1
any of the councillors on it.
2
other parks.
3
meetings.
Nobody asked me about science parks or any
I can't say and again, I repeat I didn't go to any of the
I wasn't being appraised of them.
And that's as I remember it.
4
Q. 254
Were you on a success bonus?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 255
In relation to the rezoning of the lands?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 256
Could I have 5180, you will have seen the document that I put on screen.
9
will have seen that report in June 1994.
12:15:07 10
In the CD sent to you and the papers
sent to you, Mr. Reilly, I have no doubt?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 257
And you will see this there that in dealing with the projective zoning costs
13
for 1994 there was 10,000 pounds being set aside per Mr. Sweeney for
14
entertainment and lobbying.
12:15:21 15
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
16
Q. 258
And then for staff.
17
A.
Yes, I see my name there.
18
Q. 259
Are you surprised --
19
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 260
-- that you were include in 30,000 pounds success bonus?
A.
Absolutely.
12:15:30 20
21
You
"Success bonuses".
You were in for 30,000 pounds?
It was never discussed with me.
Just it be clear, when the 1993
22
vote went through, as I said before, I was working on the shopping centres.
23
then went back to my shopping centres and I faded out of Cherrywood entirely.
24
Just, as I say, to bring it to the point.
12:15:53 25
The only time I would have been
involved in Cherrywood would be perhaps say there is a lunch on I've bought
26 27
I
tickets for something can you come out. Q. 261
So can you give or proffer any explanation to the Tribunal as to why Mr. Lynn
28
or Mr. Sweeney would have indicated that you would be due a 30,000 success
29
bonus in early 1994 for the industrial zoning of these lands?
12:16:15 30
A.
I have no idea.
Absolutely no idea.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:16:18
12:16:30
43 1
Q. 262
2 3
And do you see the -- did you ever see this document other than when you received it in the brief?
A.
4
No, the first time I saw it was when you sent it. And was it ever sent anywhere can I ask you.
5
Q. 263
You are Monarch's first official representative in the witness box.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 264
So we'll have to ask Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn presumably.
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 265
Where it went and who saw it and why it was prepared.
12:16:44 10
You say in any event
you knew nothing about it?
11
A.
Absolutely not.
12
Q. 266
Do you see the very first item there "lobbying - entertainment 10,000 pounds."
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 267
Pre um, Presumably lobbying there is in the context of councillors?
A.
I assume so, yeah.
16
Q. 268
Yes.
17
A.
Or whoever else would be involved in it.
18
Q. 269
Well a change in the plan would only be brought about by a vote of the
12:16:59 15
19 12:17:11 20
21
It was never discussed with me.
Maybe there was, I don't know.
councillors as I understand? A.
I presume so.
Q. 270
So therefore if that change were to take place it would be in relation to the
22
councillors, isn't that right?
23
A.
I assume so.
24
Q. 271
Now I'm talking -- now do you see underneath entertainment "other"
A.
I didn't.
Q. 272
So in other words the entertainment expense was to be 10,000.
12:17:24 25
26
But can you
27
give any indication to the Tribunal what the reference "other per E S" would
28
be?
29 12:17:37 30
A.
No, I haven't a clue.
Sorry.
Q. 273
Do you know if Mr. Lynn got 100,000 pounds success fee in relation to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:17:42
12:17:47
44 1
rezoning, industrial rezoning of the shopping centre?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 274
Or of the Carrickmines lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 275
Do you know if Mr. Lafferty or indeed any others got success bonus fees in
6
relation to the Cherrywood lands?
7
A.
No, no.
8
Q. 276
Do you see the reference to Mr. Lynn, 100,000 (similar to JW)?
9
A.
Yeah, I see that, yeah.
Q. 277
Apart from Mr. Whelan, were there others within the Monarch Group who had the
12:18:03 10
11 12
reference JW, to whom the initials JW might have applied? A.
I can't, no, I don't believe so.
There were a couple of Whelans in it but
13
they were, one was Donna Whelan and there was a, she was a secretary and her
14
mother worked there as well, Marie Whelan, that was all.
12:18:28 15
Q. 278
W, no, I can't say.
Yesterday I think you told the Tribunal whilst you knew Mr. Jack Whelan, you
16
could not think of any reason as to why he might have received almost or sought
17
or received almost a quarter of a million pounds in relation to the Cherrywood
18
lands?
19 12:18:43 20
A.
I have no idea.
Q. 279
Now, the -- under the heading "note".
What was required was being set out
21
there.
22
be available on a 7 day basis to meet with local politicians, community
23
representatives, sporting groups and others who will have a vested interest in
24
the outcome of the move to the variation of the Development Plan.
12:19:04 25
"Over the next six months it would be necessary for the above staff to
The staff
will have to be suitably briefed and be available to arrange and attend
26
functions, meetings and briefings and be sufficiently alert to counter adverse
27
representations which will be made to the local politicians.
28
addition to attending meetings with the local authority officials."
29 12:19:20 30
Did you carry out any of those functions -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
The above is in
12:19:22
12:19:31
45 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 280
-- in 1994 in relation to the variation of the Development Plan?
3
A.
No, I don't believe I did.
4
Q. 281
Did you have any involvement in relation to the siting of the science and
5
No.
technology park?
6
A.
No, no.
7
Q. 282
In --
8
A.
No.
9
Q. 283
Were you aware that those functions were being performed by others in relation
12:19:41 10
11
to the matter at that time? A.
Well I assumed Eddie Sweeney or Richard Lynn would have been dealing with that.
12
The only thing I can remember on the science park, Eddie asked me to do a
13
management proposal for managing the park when it was built.
14
thing I can remember.
12:19:57 15
Q. 284
Now, if I can 5178.
That's the only
This is another schedule and you will have seen it again
16
in the documentation, dated the 20th of June 1994.
17
"general promotions".
18
that might be incurred in relation to this matter.
19
of political parties and round sum figures being placed beside them?
12:20:19 20
And it's under the heading
Again, it's a projection I suggest to you of, of outlay And you see there a number
A.
Right.
21
Q. 285
Do you know anything about that type of transaction?
22
A.
I never saw that document before.
23
Q. 286
Do you see sponsorship?
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 287
And again, you see round figure sums?
26
A.
I do, yes.
27
Q. 288
I think in Tallaght you were quite involved with community support groups?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 289
You see there a sum of 10,000 pounds being set aside for community support
12:20:30 25
12:20:43 30
I had no input it.
groups? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:20:43
12:20:52
46 1
A.
I do, yes.
2
Q. 290
Do you see gifts, vouchers, flowers, 5,000 pounds?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 291
Entertainment 5,000.
5
A.
Right, yeah.
6
Q. 292
Now, if I could go back to 1993.
General commerce 2,000?
I do, yes. If I could have 7258, please.
This is a
7
list of councillors present at the meeting on the 11th of November 1993.
8
just for completeness sake, perhaps if we go through the list you might
9
identify your councillors.
12:21:21 10
Mr. Dunlop in evidence said that yourself Mr. Lynn
and himself more or less decided the councillors into three between you.
11
And
And
I think you yesterday named a number of councillors?
12
A.
I named a few, yeah.
13
Q. 293
That you had particular close association with in particular Councillor Therese
14 12:21:35 15
16
Ridge, is that right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 294
And I think you said some other local councillors including Councillor Charlie
17
O'Connor?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 295
John Hannon, was that correct?
A.
Yeah.
21
Q. 296
Breda Cass?
22
A.
Breda Cass, yeah.
23
Q. 297
Yes.
24
A.
Can I just clarify that.
Q. 298
Yes.
A.
Just on that meeting, there was no list taken out and a tick, this is Phil or
12:21:43 20
12:21:49 25
26 27
this is Frank's and this is Richard's.
28
continue to do.
29 12:22:07 30
Q. 299
I just said what I was going to
But presumably there was to be -- there was some organisation to what you were doing yourself and Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
You weren't all meeting the same
12:22:11
12:22:27
47 1 2
councillors presumably? A.
Well it wasn't a case of meeting the councillors.
I never met them other than
3
as I can recall outside the chamber or they were in either Toddy's or the Royal
4
Dublin.
5
Q. 300
I was just to continue to talk to them.
Would you agree with me that having regard to what you have said this morning
6
in relation to your knowledge of what was going on.
7
briefed to meet with councillors in relation to this project?
8
A.
9 12:22:46 10
Badly briefed.
You yourself were badly
I don't know what you mean by badly briefed.
were concerned -Q. 301
You weren't au fait with everything that was going on?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 302
In relation to the site, isn't that right?
13
A.
Science parks or anything like that, no.
14 12:22:56 15
As far as we
Or golf courses, if you are
referring that, yes. Q. 303
So you were badly briefed insofar as you were meeting councillors and putting
16
forward a strategy or proposal or seeking their, canvassing their support for
17
rezoning on the site?
18
A.
19
Yeah, but I wasn't meeting councillors in the site of arranging a meeting, sit down and have a long discussion about the pros and cons of it.
12:23:14 20
shopping centres.
I was running
And on days when there were, what do you call it meetings
21
and particularly coming up to the '93 meeting.
22
said without getting into any great detail I hope you can support, please.
23
Q. 304
24 12:23:40 25
I attended those meetings and
Well going through the list now and as best you can, can you identify the councillors that you would have approached at those meetings for support?
A.
Well if you can take them easy.
26
whatever.
27
certainly, I asked her.
You see, again, it was in the corridor or
Wait until we see now.
We can go through them.
Mary Elliott, I probably said the same to her.
28
Q. 305
Yes.
29
A.
Sorry, I'm just going down through as carefully as I can.
Q. 306
John Hannon.
12:24:05 30
Breda Cass,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
John Hannon, yes.
12:24:06
12:24:52
48 1
A.
Yeah.
Probably Cait Keane.
2
Barry Lohan, yes.
3
Mitchell, Charlie O'Connor.
4
Eamonn Walsh, certainly.
Michael Keating, yes.
Stanley Laing, yes.
Joan Maher, I asked her, yeah, certainly. Catherine Quinn, I'd say yes. There may have been others.
Olivia
Therese Ridge. I mean, I'm --
5
Q. 307
I make that about 11 of the 78 councillors?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 308
Now, did you know which councillors Mr. Lynn and/or Mr. Dunlop were likely to
8 9 12:25:08 10
11
be in contact with? A.
Not really.
Q. 309
Yes.
A.
I was only canvassing. Sorry, canvassing, yeah.
12
Richard was doing the lobbying, if you want to talk lobbying.
I was, as somebody said, the
friendly face of Monarch.
13
Q. 310
Yes.
14
A.
That's what somebody said to me in the, what do you call it ...
Q. 311
You weren't privy to any of the discussions concerning the tactics or the
12:25:24 15
You were the friendly face of Monarch, is that it?
16
strategy that might be adopted.
17
You didn't know which councillors were likely to table motions.
18
stage when you didn't even know that it was necessary to table a motion?
19
A.
12:25:45 20
You didn't know who was promoting the site. It was a
No but what happened closer to the event was that -- and again, it comes back to the strategy that I mentioned about the Loughlinstown and Ballybrack
21
committee, community council.
22
councillors to support the scheme and that was the local councillors.
23
Possibly a few days or a week or so beforehand I think Mr, Councillor Marren
24
had given a commitment that he was going to support it.
12:26:13 25
others, I don't remember exactly.
26 27
12:26:27 30
And one or two
But that was -- that was what the strategy
was. Q. 312
28 29
The strategy was that we had to get the local
If we could have 7263, please.
Was Councillor Marren's commitment seen as a
break through? A.
I think it was very positive.
Q. 313
And were you present when that commitment was given? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:26:31
12:26:37
49 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 314
Can you recall the circumstances under which you came to hear that Councillor
3
Marren was supporting?
4
A.
I'd say Richard told me.
5
Q. 315
Richard Lynn?
6
A.
Richard Lynn, yes.
7
Q. 316
And I think that as we see hear here, there was a motion proposed by Councillor
8
Marren and seconded by Councillor Coffey but in fact, it's a motion that was
9
signed by others.
12:26:52 10
11
A.
Okay, yeah.
Q. 317
And do you recall the circumstances under which that motion came to be
12 13
proposed? Well in the first instance signed? A.
14
Richard came back and said that
also. Q. 318
17 18
Well no other than what I've told you.
Councillor Marren was going to support it and obviously Councillor Betty Coffey
12:27:11 15
16
Isn't that right?
Did you canvass Councillor Marren's support for the proposal at any stage over the previous years?
A.
19
Not really.
I would have spoken to him on a number of occasions but to
actually sit down and say, no, please, I want you to sign this motion, no.
12:27:28 20
I
mean, again, my introduction to him was through the Loughlinstown community
21
council.
22
Q. 319
Yes.
23
A.
What happened, just to be clear, what happened to the Loughlinstown after their
24
tour to Tallaght.
12:27:43 25
26
They went all of the local councillors and they said we
want this development. Q. 320
27
Can I ask you, you mentioned the tour of Tallaght. politicians to come to Tallaght.
28
A.
They were in it all of the time.
29
Q. 321
Well apart from shopping?
A.
No, sorry, they were.
12:27:57 30
Was it usual for
They were shopping.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:27:59
12:28:20
50 1
Q. 322
2 3
Official visits. Tallaght.
A.
Yeah.
Were there ever helicopter visits or tour of politicians to
I'm going back to now to '88 or '89?
If my memory serves me correctly.
We had a top-out ceremony and we
4
had obviously the official opening.
And prior to that I believe in June of
5
'89 we had two nights on the site.
The first one was we brought all of the
6
solicitors and accountants and tenants, the fit out people etc, to just to tell
7
them we're opening on the 23rd of October.
8
shops to open on time.
9
minute to fit out.
12:28:48 10
It's always very difficult to get
Every tenant sits back and leave it until the last
And the second night then we had a party, again,
announcing the 23rd of October as our date of opening and we brought anybody
11
from the communities, and schools and the local Garda and politicians and
12
whatever else.
Sorry, the centre opened.
13
Q. 323
That was in June '89 you said?
14
A.
No, sorry, '90.
Q. 324
June 1990?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 325
And any -- was there any politicians at either of those?
18
A.
Oh, the second night there were, yeah. All of the community was brought.
19
Q. 326
Was it just local politicians or were there any national politicians, were
12:29:08 15
12:29:20 20
21
there any ministers at that? A.
22 23
26
No, I don't believe there was.
Unless there was a local politician a
Minister, I don't remember. Q. 327
24 12:29:34 25
The year it opened.
Going back to now to 1993 -- you have sought the support of a number of people you say in the lead up?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 328
And you were told by Mr. Lynn that Councillor Marren was going to propose a
27
motion?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 329
This was seen as a break through --
A.
Oh, it was, yeah.
12:29:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:29:43
12:29:59
51 1
Q. 330
2
And we know that Councillor Coffey and others supported that motion, isn't that right?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 331
And the motion was successful?
5
A.
Correct, yeah.
6
Q. 332
And you say that you had no further involvement with the site after that?
7
A.
Very little.
8
Q. 333
And you certainly had -- you knew nothing of the claim in paper, at least, that
9 12:30:09 10
you were likely to receive 30,000 in bonuses? A.
Absolutely no, not.
11
Q. 334
In early '94 in relation to the matter?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 335
And you don't know how that came into existence?
14
A.
No, it was never discussed with me.
Q. 336
Or --
16
A.
No, it was never discussed with me.
17
Q. 337
And yesterday I had dealt with a claim in relation to Tallaght.
12:30:18 15
If I could
18
have 8596.
19
And do you recall that? Again, you say you know nothing about?
12:30:34 20
This is a claim for a series of monies for Phil Reilly PR work.
A.
It I never got paid that money, I can assure you of that.
21
Q. 338
Did you ever seek it?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 339
Just to -- just in relation to that.
24
one of the payments.
12:30:54 25
Reilly/PR work 50,000 pounds under heading April 1989? A.
Yes.
27
Q. 340
And then if I could have 8597.
28
12:31:11 30
I -- I omitted
The document on screen, which is 8596, speaks about Phil
26
29
Just to, for clarity.
There is Phil Reilly PR work under a heading
April 1990, 150,000? A.
Yeah.
Q. 341
And I had omitted to refer to the second payment on that line under the heading Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:31:16
12:31:18
52 1
October 1990?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 342
100,000.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 343
Although I had referred to it, if we could have 8598.
6
total of those payments Phil Reilly?
7
A.
300.
8
Q. 344
PR work 300,000.
9
A.
I did not get paid that money.
Q. 345
My arithmetic was correct.
12:31:34 10
11
I had forgotten to highlight one of those
100,000s.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 346
Just looking at the document on screen.
14
payments there.
12:31:50 15
One of the payments there is to MPSL Tallaght account.
relation to Tallaght. A.
I
relations figure.
19
Tallaght. Q. 347
21
That monies would be paid to the MPSL account?
Yeah, again, I wasn't involved in the accounts but it was, I mean, the public
18
12:32:10 20
Just looking down through it and the
presume that that wouldn't be an unreasonable expenditure at that time in
16 17
A reference to the
And again, I'm using it, it cost about 35 million to build
Well do you see the Pembrook, PR.
Did the shopping centre have as agent
Pembroke?
22
A.
John Buttimer, yes.
23
Q. 348
Was Pembroke PR employed in relation to Tallaght?
24
A.
Yes, they were, yes.
Q. 349
And would a figure of 35, 000 be representative of what they might have sought
12:32:26 25
26
or been paid?
27
A.
It's 10,000 in my sheet here.
28
Q. 350
Well I'm looking.
29
A.
I'm looking at 1360.
Q. 351
I'm going to put 8598.
12:32:40 30
If we could have 8598?
It's just two above Phil Reilly.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
Do you see that?
12:32:48
12:32:58
53 1
Pembroke PR 35, 000?
2
A.
Oh, yeah.
3
Q. 352
Sorry.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 353
Petty cash is 35.
6
That's petty cash on mine still.
Apologies.
It's 10,000.
Well evening taking the petty cash.
have been reasonable for Tallaght at that time?
7
A.
I don't know.
8
Q. 354
Would 10,000 have been reasonable for Pembroke PR?
9
A.
I thought it would have been low.
Q. 355
Yeah.
12:33:15 10
Would 35 petty cash
11
I don't know, I suppose it would have been, I don't know.
Do you know Mr. Tierney stone mason who seems to have been in for 10,
600?
12
A.
There was a PJ Tierney on-site he was working for Sisk, I thought yeah.
13
Q. 356
Did McKeever solicitors do works.
14
A.
I don't know what they did.
Q. 357
Or Lombard and Ulster 28,000?
16
A.
I don't know.
17
Q. 358
Do you recognise any of the parties named on that sheet?
18
A.
Well, yeah, I do, yeah.
19
Q. 359
It's not a fabricated document is it, Mr. Reilly?
A.
I don't know where it came from.
21
Q. 360
It came to the Tribunal from discovery from Monarch?
22
A.
Oh, did it.
12:33:35 15
12:33:56 20
Would 62,000 have been reasonable for them?
I wasn't involved in any of that.
J Braid Security was security, yeah.
Sorry.
I mean --
23 24 12:34:06 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn can I ask you the document it says L&C payments
accounts
26 27
MR. QUINN: That's correct.
28 29 12:34:11 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And there is a date --
MR. QUINN: 29th of June 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:34:13
12:34:18
54 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
1992.
3 4
MR. QUINN: These are the accounts total as of November 1990.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, I just wanted to ....
7 8 9
Q. 361
MR. QUINN: Who would be able to explain this document to the Tribunal?
A.
Dominic Glennane.
11
Q. 362
Dominic Glennane?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 363
Well perhaps it's --
14
A.
He was the financial director of the company.
Q. 364
Certainly you say you never sought and were never paid these figures?
16
A.
Absolutely not. Just to be clear.
17
Q. 365
Did you seek it?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 366
And decide --
A.
Absolutely not.
12:34:24 10
12:34:31 15
12:34:47 20
Just to be clear.
Sorry.
Just.
When we launched The
21
Square in Tallaght we would have spent pre launch and post launch probably one
22
and a half million pounds at that stage.
23
huge task to bring Tallaght, as I say, we got a lot of negative publicity about
24
Tallaght over the previous ten years.
12:35:00 25
Q. 367
I think as I said to you, we had a
Can I just ask you about your involvement and meeting with any senior
26
politician.
27
Michael Smith at any stage in relation to any of the Tallaght projects?
28
A.
29 12:35:27 30
If I could have 8849.
Did you have a meeting with Ministers
I got this document about an hour ago.
It's the first time I've seen it.
And I have no recollection of this meeting. Q. 368
Now, at 8851.
This is a Kildare Street visitors book.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And it shows a seven
12:35:33
12:35:48
55 1
o'clock meeting in the Dail for a number of people.
2
people, I suggest to you.
Which could be Monarch
There is E Sweeney, P -- is that Lafferty?
3
A.
Lafferty, yeah.
4
Q. 369
And P Reilly?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 370
And a J Barry.
7
A.
No, Monarch, yeah.
8
Q. 371
Who?
9
A.
The only J Barry that looking at this document was Jim Barry was a councillor
12:36:02 10
Was there a J Barry employed by?
at some stage in Tallaght.
11
Q. 372
Well do you recall a councillor in Tallaght arranging a meeting for you?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 373
With Minister Flynn?
14
A.
No.
Q. 374
In 1992?
16
A.
I'd say it's -- it says Minister Smith here, sorry.
17
Q. 375
Minister Smith I should say sorry?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 376
I understand that there is a line through the entry that means that the people
12:36:11 15
12:36:24 20
attended?
21
A.
I don't know that.
22
Q. 377
Yeah.
23
A.
I don't.
I have no recollection of ever --
24 12:36:31 25
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, we did only receive this document this morning
26
Mr. Reilly has had no opportunity to consider it or to refer to any
27
contemporaneous resources.
28
the document.
29
which Mr. Quinn refers, is different to the handwriting that is below it.
12:36:54 30
I wonder could we be told a little bit more about
I notice for instance, that the handwriting on the page 8851 to
in fact, it seems to refer to appointments which were earlier than the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
12:36:58
12:37:13
56 1
appointments which appear to be for Messrs. Barry, Sweeney, Lafferty and
2
Reilly.
3
how the handwriting comes to be different? Or do we indeed know anything about
4
it at all.
Do we know anything about who was the author of this document? Or
5 6
MR. QUINN: I can tell my friend, that if necessary we can call evidence in
7
relation to this but previous similar type documents have been dealt with in
8
other modules.
9
the gate, visitors gate in Leinster House.
12:37:34 10
And they are, as best I understand it, from records held at And it seems to be the practice
that visitors to members of the house would have entered, would have been
11
booked to visit and would turn up for their appointments.
12
would have their names crossed out.
13
relation to it.
14
concerned about a possible meeting that Mr. Reilly might have had in Leinster
12:38:01 15
And once there
But if necessary we can call in evidence
I'm not particularly concerned about the document.
House in 1992.
I'm more
You accept you would either remember or you don't.
16
A.
I don't remember having a meeting with Michael Smyth.
17
Q. 378
Do you ever remember having a meeting in Leinster House with anyone?
18
A.
I was in Leinster House on a number of occasions over the years for Senate
19 12:38:19 20
Elections. Q. 379
But you don't remember any meeting with any Minister?
21
A.
No, I'm sorry.
22
Q. 380
If I could have 2136.
23
Mr. Reilly.
This is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's statement,
And just I want to refer you to the last paragraph.
24 12:38:43 25
You see it says "The site set up was very, was run very efficiently and had
26
full catering facilities capable of putting on silver service lunches and had
27
numerous visitors from politicians and businessmen from all over the country as
28
well as abroad.
29
development in Ireland at this particular time.
12:39:04 30
As Tallaght was at the forefront in terms of property
employment point of view.
From a public relations and
Many commercial and political people visited the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:39:07
12:39:20
57 1
site.
Some of them arriving in Phil Monahan's helicopter and were shown
2
around the development as part of a marketing exercise to raise the profile
3
which was seriously in need of such treatment."
4 5
That's in Mr. Sweeney's statement.
6
A.
All right.
7
Q. 381
Do you disagree with anything that is said there?
8
A.
Well many politicians.
9
Q. 382
Well do you recall any politician arriving in Mr. Monahan's helicopter in
12:39:34 10
11
I don't know how many he means.
Tallaght? A.
I genuinely don't.
A few politicians -- I've outlined the politicians pre
12
opening.
13
from Taoiseachs.
14
each party arrived for a tour or a walk around.
12:40:01 15
Q. 383
Post opening we had a lot of politicians certainly after it opened Any time there was an election on every senior politician in
Now, a number of politicians have given evidence here, a number of councillors,
16
Mr. Reilly, and you will have, if you have been present, have heard their
17
evidence.
18
relation to the Cherrywood site?
19 12:40:20 20
And they have spoken of being canvassed for their support in
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 384
And quite a number of them have given evidence to the Tribunal and it has been
21
discovered to the Tribunal by Monarch that they have received payments; isn't
22
that right?
23
A.
Correct, yes.
24
Q. 385
You would be aware of that.
12:40:33 25
You heard Ms. Gosling's evidence yesterday in
relation to that?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 386
And you heard that she felt or that it was Monarch's feeling that claims for
28
monies by politicians was effectively a necessary evil I think she described it
29
as?
12:40:45 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:40:45
12:40:55
58 1
Q. 387
2 3
I think that was the ethos or the philosophy within Monarch.
Would you agree
with that? A.
4
I wouldn't, no.
Necessary evil is not certainly the way I understood it in
Monarch.
5
Q. 388
Sorry.
6
A.
A necessary evil was not the way I understood it in Monarch.
7
Q. 389
Yes.
Well when you joined Monarch in 1987 was there a policy in place in
8
relation to requests for political subscriptions by councillors and political
9
parties?
12:41:12 10
A.
I wasn't aware of it at that stage.
11
Q. 390
You weren't aware of it at that stage?
12
A.
No, at what stage did you become aware of a policy in relation to such
13 14 12:41:34 15
16
requests. The first one that I can recall was the '91 Local Elections. Q. 391
Had you known of any payments by Monarch prior to May or June 1991?
A.
1991, no, not that I can recall.
Q. 392
Had you sanctioned or had anybody sought from you payments prior to May or June
17
1991?
18
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
19
Q. 393
Well can you tell the Tribunal the context in which you first came to learn of
12:41:53 20
21
the policy of Monarch towards such a request for money? A.
Well what happened exactly was that I was in the office in Harcourt Street one
22
evening, the elections were coming up, Richard said we're gonna send somebody
23
out to, some donations to politicians.
24
did you know any of these people from Tallaght.
12:42:25 25
He had a list on his desk and he said And I looked down through the
list and although I didn't recall, I obviously had met Mary Harney and she had
26
suggested a number of names and I think they were added to the list.
27
asked him was this normal and he said yes, he understood that there had been a
28
tradition of making donations to politicians at election times.
29 12:42:53 30
Q. 394
When I asked you about a culture of payments to politicians.
Was there any
policy in relation to requests by politicians for payments to others? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And I
12:42:58
12:43:06
59 1
A.
How do you mean?
2
Q. 395
On behalf of for example organisations?
3
A.
Oh, yes there was.
4
Q. 396
That always existed?
5
A.
It did, yeah.
There would have been, yes.
Certainly my experience in Tallaght was there was so many
6
needs.
The needs were so great out there you were being I suppose canvassed
7
or requested by politicians for donations to different groups.
8
Q. 397
And what was the policy within Monarch towards such requests?
9
A.
Support them.
Q. 398
And now, we move on to 1991 and you are speaking to Mr. Lynn in Harcourt Street
12:43:23 10
11
in the context of the upcoming Local Election?
12
A.
Correct, yes.
13
Q. 399
And Mr. Lynn is putting forward to you a list of people in the context of
14 12:43:42 15
16
payments to people on that list, is that correct? A.
In relation to contributions.
Q. 400
And it's being spoken about by you and Mr. Lynn in the context of unsolicited
17
contributions by Monarch, isn't that right, because you'd been asked who you
18
knew on the list, isn't that right?
19 12:44:01 20
A.
Well I was being asked did I know any of these people on the list, yeah.
Q. 401
Would you agree with me that this implies that those people you identified on
21 22
the list were going to receive or be offered support by Monarch? A.
23 24
Can I follow that up, exactly what he asked me to do was to ring some of the people on the list.
Q. 402
Yes.
A.
And ask them could we assist in the election expenses.
26
Q. 403
And this was being brought by Mr. Lynn, isn't that right?
27
A.
That's as I understood it.
28
Q. 404
And Mr. Lynn, as I understood it, had nothing to do with the with the financial
12:44:12 25
29 12:44:32 30
end of the Monarch Group? A.
No, he was a project manager as I understood him to be. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:44:34
12:44:45
60 1
Q. 405
Yes.
And did you understand from your conversation with Mr. Lynn that he had
2
cleared what he was proposing to do with others or that he had been directed by
3
others to do?
4
A.
Well I think he was going to get it cleared.
5
Q. 406
Yes.
6
A.
When the list was prepared.
7
Q. 407
Yes.
8 9
And did you ask him why he was taking upon himself to support the
democratic process? A.
12:45:01 10
Well I can't remember the exact words he said but I will be dealing with these people in the future.
Monarch will be dealing with these people in the future
11
and I need to be able to talk to them and get their time, something like that.
12
Somewhere along those lines.
13
Q. 408
14 12:45:20 15
Yes.
And it was in that context that you were asked to look at a list and see
were there people on the list that you could recommend for payment or sought? A.
Not recommend.
That I recognised the names.
16
Q. 409
Yes.
17
A.
Again, just despite the fact having been in the business for a long time before
18
that, for 20 odd years.
19
was an election coming up.
12:45:35 20
Q. 410
21 22
Yes.
This was the first company I was ever in when there
And did you identify people? Did you make contact with a number of
people? A.
Well, on the list I had I said well I recognise that name or whatever else.
23
Despite the fact that there were a hell of a lot of politicians in County
24
Dublin, as you know.
12:45:54 25
And in Tallaght there was quite a number.
know that many of them at the time.
26
couple.
27
No, she was all right.
28
some tickets for it.
29
was running as well.
12:46:18 30
I didn't
I did do what Richard asked me to a
I rang, as I said, Therese Ridge who I had become friendly with.
certainly rang him.
She had a raffle or something on, I said I would buy
I may have rang, I think there was Michael Hanrahan who I knew him from -- he was in one of the charities, I As I say, Mary Harney reminded me of the conversation
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:46:23
12:46:38
61 1
that I had forgotten and that there was a couple of new councillors that --
2
sorry, they weren't councillors, they were ordinary people.
3
to Richard.
4
Q. 411
Were they on the list?
5
A.
I don't know if they were on his list originally.
6
And I gave them
I can't remember now to be
honest with you.
7
Q. 412
How many names were on Mr. Lynn's list?
8
A.
Oh, I don't know.
9
Q. 413
And where was he taking the list from?
A.
I don't know where he got it from.
11
Q. 414
Or how it was compiled?
12
A.
I don't know.
13
Q. 415
Was there a discussion about how much you would contribute or how much Monarch
12:46:52 10
14 12:47:04 15
16
15 or 20 maybe.
would contribute to the people on the list? A.
I don't recall, no.
Q. 416
How long did the conversation take, the conversation last, the conversation
17
As I said, it was my first time in this, at this.
between yourself and Mr. Lynn?
18
A.
I'd say three four minutes, maybe five minutes.
19
Q. 417
Did you ask him how much his budget was in relation to it?
A.
No.
Q. 418
Did you have any discussion about what would be a reasonable contribution to
12:47:21 20
21 22 23
make? A.
24 12:47:38 25
I can't say exactly that I did but, I mean, what do you do.
If somebody said
something like that what do you normally pay, you know. Q. 419
Sorry?
26
A.
What would you normally pay.
27
Q. 420
Yes.
28
A.
But I didn't know, as I say, it was new to me.
29
Q. 421
You were going to ring some of the people on the list, isn't that right?
A.
Well I assume he set the figure whether it was 300 Euros or 300 Euros or 500 or
12:47:48 30
What donation is a typical donation.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:47:55
12:48:24
62 1 2
whatever it was, pounds sorry. Q. 422
If we could have 3248, please.
This is again a list supplied to the Tribunal
3
by Monarch.
In relation to possible payments in 1991, and going through that
4
list, there appear to be payments made between May and June 1991.
5
you, looking at the list can you tell the Tribunal the names on that list as we
6
see it, that you would have been responsible for?
7
A.
Well if I can tell you the names I would have recognised.
8
Q. 423
Yes.
9
A.
Which is John Hannon.
12:48:54 10
Sean Haughey.
Quinn, Catherine Quinn.
11
Therese Ridge.
Michael Hanrahan. S Terry.
Can I ask
Michael Keating.
C Tyndall.
And after
that I'm -- I don't be -- maybe Senator Larry McMahon.
12
Q. 424
And did you contact those various people that you have identified?
13
A.
I can't say exactly.
14
I would have certainly I rang Therese Ridge and I
believe I rang Michael Hanrahan.
12:49:28 15
And I would have obviously got the other
names from Terry, Tyndall and whatever the third one was -- whoever the third
16
PD was.
17
Q. 425
Cass was it?
18
A.
Quinn.
19
Q. 426
Catherine Quinn?
A.
Catherine Quinn I think it was.
21
Q. 427
What about Mr. Ryan, did you mention Mr. Ryan?
22
A.
No, no, I didn't know him.
23
Q. 428
You didn't know him?
24
A.
No.
Q. 429
And I think save for Councillor Ridge, all of the others got a subscription of
12:49:50 20
12:49:51 25
26
But I don't remember calling those.
300 pounds, is that right?
27
A.
So it would seem, yeah.
28
Q. 430
Did you ring any of the councillors to be told that they didn't require any
29 12:50:06 30
I'm not crossing checking now as I'm reading this.
assistance? A.
Well other than Theresa.
She said she didn't.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I bought tickets for a raffle
12:50:10
12:50:22
63 1
or something that she was running.
2
Q. 431
And that was the context in which those councillors received --
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 432
So when those councillors say that the monies that they received in 1991 were
5
unsolicited, certainly insofar as the councillors that you have identified are
6
concerned, your evidence to the Tribunal is they were unsolicited?
7
A.
Well other than the few I spoke to.
8
Q. 433
Yes.
9
A.
Could we help them.
Q. 434
Yes. But they didn't contact you seeking support, you contacted them in the
12:50:34 10
11 12
first instance, isn't that what your evidence is? A.
13 14
I asked them.
I can't say with certainty that I didn't get a letter or two in but I don't remember.
Q. 435
12:50:53 15
Now, having identified the councillors that you were going to support. did you next do to implement that?
16
A.
I didn't do anything.
17
Q. 436
Well presumably you must have given the names to somebody?
18
A.
No, I -- I identified them for Richard and he took it from there.
19
Q. 437
He took it from there.
12:51:11 20
21
He is the person within Monarch who decided who was
going to make the payments? A.
22
Well he asked.
I assume he went to somebody, either Eddie or whoever, and
just said I want to make these contributions.
23
Q. 438
Well why do you say Mr. Sweeney?
24
A.
Well, I don't know.
12:51:27 25
He was working for, he was working on the Cherrywood
project at the time.
26
Q. 439
So it was in the context of the Cherrywood project that --
27
A.
Well and Ongar and Somerton, I assume.
28
Q. 440
Yes.
29
A.
Well he was on the technical side so I suppose he was, yeah.
Q. 441
Well you either know or --
12:51:42 30
What
Was Mr. Sweeney involved in Ongar and Somerton as well?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:51:44
12:51:59
64 1
A.
2
Sorry, I assumed he was, yeah, I assumed he was. evasive.
Sorry, I don't mean to be
I'm just trying to be honest and give you a straight answer.
3
Q. 442
And it was in that context that these monies were paid, isn't that right?
4
A.
Correct, yeah.
5
Q. 443
Now, I'm not going to go into detail with you and trace the monies right
6
through.
7
about, other than the fact that they were paid by Monarch, isn't that right?
8
A.
9 12:52:18 10
That's perhaps some thing you would rightly tell me you know nothing
No, I didn't sign the cheques or do any of the accounts or bank reconciliation or anything like that.
Q. 444
You don't know which accounts or company made the payments?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 445
Or from whence the payments were made?
13
A.
No, no.
14
Q. 446
Or in fact that the payments were made?
A.
I assume they were made, yeah.
Q. 447
Now, I think in 1992 there were, there was a further series of disbursements,
12:52:25 15
16 17
isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 448
For candidates.
12:52:49 20
21
If we could have 1582.
Now, can you tell the Tribunal any
involvement you had in relation to these payments? A.
22
Well I raised a memo which you probably have on file here, which is probably the ones that the particular ones that I was certainly involved in.
23
Q. 449
If we could have 3190, please.
24
A.
Correct, yes.
Q. 450
Well now can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you came to
12:53:13 25
26 27
Is this the memo that you were relating to?
raise this memo of the 18th of November? A.
Well this is for the General Election 1922.
28
there's an election in 1992.
29
councillors, Tallaght, Clondalkin councillors.
12:53:38 30
I went to Dominic and I said it
And I went on the basis that these were Tallaght These were people that were
running for office, sorry, Mary Harney wasn't a councillor, I think she was a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:53:43
12:54:08
65 1
TD at the time.
And the reason I raised this list was that Tallaght when it
2
started in 1990, I think as I explained was almost a wilderness.
3
had been built.
4
100 acres site of which 20 of it was The Square.
5
development that was taking place had taken place prior to the arrival of the
6
building was the Garda Station.
7
honestly will say to you, that I wanted good politicians representing The
8
Square in Tallaght.
The Square
There was still a lot of issues, we were sitting on probably And the only other
And I firmly believed at the time, and
Sorry, the Tallaght area.
9 12:54:24 10
And I chose these people because I believed that they were all, they were all
11 12
very committed to their area and they were all very good people. Q. 451
13 14 12:54:47 15
You have just earlier told us of the circumstances and of your contribution to the 1991 payments, isn't that right?
A.
Correct.
Q. 452
And there had been no policy as far as you were concerned in relation to
16
political support but that Mr. Lynn on an evening in Harcourt Street had come
17
to you and had given you a list and asked you to identify people that Monarch
18
might support, isn't that right?
19
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 453
And you have contributed to that list?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 454
And you have made calls to the various people involved?
23
A.
Right.
24
Q. 455
And I suggested to you that it was an unsolicited contribution and I think you
12:55:04 20
12:55:15 25
agreed with me?
26
A.
Well unsolicited if that's how you define it, yeah on that basis, yeah.
27
Q. 456
If I could have 1579, please.
In correspondence with the Tribunal the
28
solicitors to Monarch.
29
Tribunal that in relation to the 1991 list, all of the contributions are
12:55:33 30
If you look at the third paragraph.
Have advised the
believed to have risen on foot of requests for assistance to defray Local Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:55:38
12:55:46
66 1
Elections expenses save as set out, no records have been locate in the this
2
regard.
3 4
Now, in the first instance I would ask you to agree with me.
5
suggests that it is Monarch's position that the 1991 contributions all had been
6
solicited?
7
A.
Well.
8
Q. 457
Or had all been solicited I should say.
9
A.
Well I've given you my evidence.
Q. 458
Yes, that's fair enough.
12:55:58 10
11 12
A.
Yeah, there may have been some letters in but I don't remember them but certainly --
Q. 459
12:56:13 15
16
And you disagree with Monarch's solicitors
understanding of the 1991 contributions?
13 14
That that letter
-- certainly in relation to the people you've identified they were unsolicited contributions you say?
A.
Yeah, other than if I had a conversation with a politician, such as has been
17
given as evidence here, and I think was referred to from the PD people, that
18
they could do with some help.
19 12:56:34 20
21
Is that's solicited or unsolicited?
Q. 460
That was the request by Ms. Hard Harney I think on behalf of --
A.
Correct, yeah.
Q. 461
That letter has been opened.
But other than that request.
Any other
22
payments that you would have made or authorised would have been unsolicited
23
isn't that right?
24
A.
12:56:47 25
Not -- sorry.
Can I go back to my own list maybe if I can talk you through
it, my memo?
26
Q. 462
You want to go back to the 1991 list is it?
27
A.
No, the '92 memo, please.
28
Q. 463
Sorry, I'm dealing in 1991?
29
A.
Sorry.
Q. 464
I'll come to 1992 in a moment?
12:56:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:56:59
12:57:14
67 1
A.
Sorry.
Right.
2
Q. 465
The letter on screen is only dealing with 1991.
3
A.
Yeah.
Just to be absolutely clear, when I left Monarch in '97 I've had no
4
input other than with Monarch or discussions or whatever else in relation to --
5
they ran the around the business or in relation to this Tribunal until I
6
received correspondence.
So nobody asked me when preparing this letter.
7
Q. 466
So for your contribution in relation to that?
8
A.
I had no contribution in relation to this letter.
9 12:57:28 10
That's the point I'm
making. Q. 467
11
I understand. So wherever Messrs. Smyth & Partners got their information. They certainly didn't get it from you?
12
A.
Absolutely not.
13
Q. 468
Yes. Does that surprise you that they would, as solicitors to the Group, put
14
forward information to the Tribunal without contacting you, since you were
12:57:44 15
16
involved in 1991 and 1992 with the contributions? A.
17 18
Sorry, I don't know what way you want me to answer that.
But, I mean, I had
no dealings with Smyths. Q. 469
19 12:58:04 20
Nobody contacted me.
You had a contribution to make to the position concerning payments in '91 and in '92. Isn't that right?
A.
Well obviously, yes.
21
Q. 470
Now, if we return to your 1992 memo.
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 471
And it's your direction to Mr. Glennane, who is the financial person within
24 12:58:21 25
That's at 3910.
Monarch? A.
Request. It's a request.
26
Q. 472
Yes?
27
A.
It's a request.
28
Q. 473
Yes?
29
A.
Just about.
Q. 474
This is your memo and this is your opportunity Mr. Reilly, to speak to it?
12:58:27 30
If I can talk to you.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
12:58:31
12:58:38
68 1
A.
I know.
2
Q. 475
And take your time.
3
A.
It's important to me as well.
4
Q. 476
That's the point I'm making?
5
A.
Sorry.
6
Q. 477
So you have as much time as you wish in relation to it.
7
A.
Certainly on the first one.
Please, take your time.
It's important?
Michael Keating or how the 1,000 Euros arose.
8
was talking to one of his people who happened to be a friend of my wife.
9
it was a casual conversation, how are things going for the Election, which
12:58:56 10
would be typical, were broke.
And I assume a bit of help wouldn't be any
11
harm, or words to that effect.
They are not the exact words.
12
some help.
13
Theresa, I didn't speak to.
14
But again, let me repeat.
12:59:19 15
Tallaght.
That was one of the -- certainly that was one of them. And I don't believe I spoke to the rest of them. I wanted good people.
And very committed to
Still even after all these years, they are a huge -- at that time
as I told you, there were a lot of problems out there.
17
tremendous work the voluntary groups were doing.
18
given evidence to this Tribunal, I wanted the best people in the Dail to try
19
and get the hospitals, the schools, etc..
21
And I saw the As far as I believe and have
And that is why I wrote that
specific memo and that's why I asked for that money from Dominic Q. 478
22
Now, there's no doubt but that you were able to sanction payments totalling I think about 4,000 pounds, per that list?
23
A.
Yes, request.
24
Q. 479
You had that authority to request that payments be made?
A.
Yes, please.
26
Q. 480
Well "sanction" or "request"?
27
A.
No, there's a big difference in my mind.
28
Q. 481
I see.
29
A.
Sanction would, that would have to go then to the accounts office.
13:00:03 25
13:00:11 30
And
Do you need
16
12:59:47 20
I
And
somebody in the accounts office would say well who has -- requested and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
13:00:16
13:00:27
69 1
sanctioned are different in my view.
2
Q. 482
I see.
3
A.
So Dominic Glennane had to say to whoever in the accounts office will you draw
4 5
up these requests. Q. 483
6
So you are saying even though you sent in that request to Mr. Glennane, that somebody else within Monarch could have refused to make those payments?
7
A.
Yes, correct, yes.
8
Q. 484
Have you ever submitted a request which has been refused?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 485
Yes?
11
A.
Not for this end of it, you know.
12
Q. 486
Refused, presumably, because there wasn't a proper backup invoice or?
13
A.
Not necessarily.
13:00:41 10
14
Not for politics.
It may have been too dear or what the hell are you doing
with that, why are you spending money on that, you know, that's crazy, sorry
13:00:57 15
about this.
16
Q. 487
Nobody within Monarch raised that query about this request?
17
A.
No, because as I firmly believed, as I said to you today, I said to Dominic at
18 19
the time. Q. 488
Did you have a chat with Mr. Glennane at the time about it?
A.
Oh, I did, yeah, I spoke to him about it.
21
Q. 489
And did he have any contribution to make towards the list?
22
A.
Not that I recall other than, I suppose, maybe he saw the bit of passion that
13:01:12 20
23
was in me about it, you know.
24 13:01:25 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
All right, Mr. Quinn, it's just gone one o'clock.
adjourn until two o'clock.
27 28 29
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
13:01:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
So we'll
13:01:49
14:04:17
70 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
Q. 490
MR. QUINN: Just before lunch, I think before lunch we were dealing with 3910,
4
which was your memo to Mr. Glennane.
And I think you were advising the
5
Tribunal of a discussion you had with Mr. Glennane in relation to contributions
6
which you proposed to make during that election.
Isn't that right?
7
A.
That's correct, yeah.
8
Q. 491
And can I ask you, you have given evidence and you have -- that you selected
9
the councillors that you proposed or the politicians or candidates that you
14:04:39 10
proposed to support in that election.
Isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 492
That's your selection?
13
A.
That's my selection, correct.
14
Q. 493
Can I ask you, did you also decide the amounts you were going to contribute or
14:04:51 15
was that somebody else's input?
16
A.
No, that was my input.
17
Q. 494
How did you settle on the figures that we see there, can I ask you?
18
A.
Well, I suppose, I had an idea from the '91 elections what sort of
19
contributions were given.
14:05:12 20
And what I did then was certainly having spoken to
one of the Fine Gael people, it was obviously a national election is a lot more
21
expensive than a Local Election.
22
maybe I was trying to pick the winners.
23
Q. 495
24 14:05:36 25
26
Yes.
When you say you were trying to pick the winners, you were trying to
give more to the people who were likely to be successful? A.
Perhaps, yeah, to put it that way.
Q. 496
If we can have 8579, please.
27
'91 payments.
28
see this, these?
29 14:05:55 30
So I just picked those amounts, I suppose,
That's all I can remember.
This is an internal list in relation to the June
Did you prior to receiving this list in the brief did you ever
A.
No, I never saw that before.
Q. 497
We see there that in that Local Election that the standard contribution Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:06:02
14:06:14
71 1
appeared to be somewhere between 300 and 600 pounds, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
3
Q. 498
Did you have any input into the amounts being given in that election?
4
A.
That's the '91?
5
Q. 499
Yes.
6
A.
No, I believe I was guided by Richard on that.
7
Q. 500
Do you know that Mr. Tom Hand for example had received 5,000 pounds in 1991?
8
A.
No, I did not.
9
Q. 501
Did you know the late Mr. Hand?
A.
I met him a couple of times but I didn't know him at that stage.
Q. 502
Mr. Dunlop gave the impression that you, perhaps through your association with
14:06:33 10
11 12
Ms. Ridge, was more associated with the Fine Gael parties than perhaps with the
13
other parties would that be fair?
14
A.
14:07:25 15
Sorry, I knew some Fine Gael parties. party.
16
But I knew everybody in every other
Mr. Dunne with all due respects didn't know me.
I'm not associated
just for the record.
17
Q. 503
You're not associated.
18
A.
Not with any party.
19
Q. 504
Had you met Mr, the late Mr. Hand?
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
Q. 505
Did you know that Mr. Hand was supportive of the Monarch position in relation
14:07:26 20
21 22
to Cherrywood?
23
A.
I didn't really know what position he was in.
24
Q. 506
I see.
A.
I didn't discuss it where him so --
26
Q. 507
You don't know what position he held?
27
A.
No, not really, no.
28
Q. 508
Did you know Mr. Lydon?
29
A.
Yes, I knew Mr. Lydon, yes.
Q. 509
Did you discuss the Cherrywood position with Mr. Lydon?
14:07:26 25
14:07:27 30
But I think he may have supported some motions.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:07:27
14:07:36
72 1
A.
No, not discuss, no.
2
Q. 510
Did you mention the Cherrywood?
3
A.
Well I would have said I hope we'll be all right on the day or whatever,
4 5
something like that. Q. 511
6
Yes.
I hope you can support it.
I think your word for that is "canvass".
Did you canvass Mr. Lydon's
support?
7
A.
Other than what I've said to you if that's canvassing. Yeah.
8
Q. 512
Yes.
9
A.
The only time I can recall speaking to Senator Lydon was in the lobby.
14:07:55 10
could have been there, I don't know, it was in the middle of a crowd.
11 12
14:08:06 15
He It
wasn't a special meeting anyway. Q. 513
13 14
Was a Mr. Lynn with you when you spoke with Senator Lydon?
He didn't receive any special treatment for you, from you other than any other councillor who would support you?
A.
No, no.
Q. 514
Did you know that Mr.-- that Councillor Lydon was supportive of the Monarch
16
proposals?
17
A.
Yeah, well he had a proposal in, in '92 as I recall, yeah.
18
Q. 515
Yes.
19
A.
Oh, I did, yeah, yeah.
Q. 516
And was he seen within the Monarch Group as a supportive councillor?
A.
Well, I would say about supportive councillors, I think the majority of Fianna
14:08:22 20
21
Yes.
And you knew that, if not in '92 certainly subsequently?
22
Fail people I spoke to would have been pro-development and Senator Lydon
23
wouldn't have been any different I believe.
24
Q. 517
Yes. Did you know that Councillor Hand was supportive?
A.
Yes, I did, yes, I would say yes.
26
Q. 518
Councillor Coffey I think seconded the motion in 1993, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 519
Did you seek her support at any stage for this proposal?
29
A.
Again, no more than a casual, maybe a comment.
14:08:45 25
14:09:41 30
originally was Dun Laoghaire.
Her biggest issue was,
That if we build a big shopping centre in Dun
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:09:41
14:09:42
73 1 2
Laoghaire it would kill Dun Laoghaire. Q. 520
And I think that Monarch at some stage hit upon the idea of developing Dun
3
Laoghaire and developing both the Pavilion site and what is now the Bloomfield
4
site?
5
A.
The Bloomfield site, yes.
6
Q. 521
And was that brought to Councillor Coffey's attention?
7
A.
I'm sure she was aware of it at that stage, yes.
8
Q. 522
Now, I think you would have written and contributed after '92 to different
9 14:09:43 10
11
candidates and different politicians, isn't that right? A.
Monarch would have.
Q. 523
Monarch would have.
12
Within Monarch you would have been associated with
directing some of the payments, isn't that right?
13
A.
Requesting them, yeah.
14
Q. 524
If we could have -- this by the way.
A.
All right, yeah.
Q. 525
If we could have 4170, for example.
14:09:57 15
16 17
And it's dated the 27th of April 1993.
18
in 1993.
19
MS association.
14:10:17 20
21
I don't intend to go through them all.
This is a memo to you from Ms. Gosling. I don't believe there was an election
But in any event, Senator McGennis was looking for support for the
A.
Yeah.
Q. 526
And I think Ms. Gosling wrote to you and referred to a telephone conversation.
22
And said you were going to deal with it.
23
right hand corner "200 pounds to be given to me to deliver in person".
24
that a note written by you or somebody?
14:10:35 25
And we see a note at the bottom
A.
I think it's looks like Richard's writing, Mr. Lynn's.
26
Q. 527
And is it directed to you?
27
A.
Yes, it is, yeah.
28
Q. 528
So you must have spoken to Richard Lynn?
29
A.
I probably asked him, yeah.
Q. 529
As to what --
14:10:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
Is
14:10:49
14:10:58
74 1
A.
What we'd do, yeah.
2
Q. 530
Did he tell you why he wanted to deliver it in person?
3
A.
No, he didn't, no.
4
Q. 531
I think sometimes your view was sought in relation to payments, isn't that
5
right? If I could have 3807.
6
on the 5th of August 1992.
It's -- you're writing to Councillor Flaherty
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 532
And you are referring to a letter from Eddie Sweeney and Richard Lynn and I
9 14:11:21 10
think there's a note at the bottom.
Is that in your handwriting?
A.
It is, yeah.
11
Q. 533
It would be paid?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 534
You were anxious to confirm whether or not it was paid, is that right?
14
A.
Well I think as I recall, obviously she had written in requesting something for
14:12:54 15
a golf classic and both Eddie and Richard were away, obviously not available.
16
Both on holidays.
17
I don't know if we ever made a contribution to it or not.
18
Q. 535
19 14:12:55 20
21
And I don't know when I wrote Richard would be paid this.
If I could have 5972.
This is a letter to Mr. Monahan from Councillor
McGrath? A.
Right.
Q. 536
There's a note on the bottom right hand corner "Richard talk to me".
22
Is that
Phil?
23
A.
That's me, yeah.
24
Q. 537
That's 17th of May.
A.
It is, Richard Lynn, yeah, yeah.
26
Q. 538
On the bottom left hand corner "Richard Lynn recommended 500 Euros".
27
A.
That's my note, yeah.
28
Q. 539
Do you recall discussing whether or not that payment should be made?
29
A.
Yes, I did, yeah, with Richard, yeah.
Q. 540
And was it Mr. Lynn that sanctioned the payment?
14:12:56 25
14:12:56 30
Do you recall speaking to Mr. Lynn I presume?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:12:56
14:12:56
75 1
A.
Well he said pay 500 Euro.
2
Q. 541
Yes.
3
A.
And I would have assumed I sent it over to the accounts office.
4
Q. 542
Yes.
5
Was Mr. Lynn the contact person within the company that you would
generally talk to about whether or not these sort of --
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 543
Subscriptions should be paid?
8
A.
Yes, he was, yes.
9
Q. 544
You wrote I think to Senator Owen in June '97.
14:12:57 10
contribution.
At 8300 enclosing a
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 545
Would you have cleared it with Mr. Lynn or --
13
A.
We would have discussed it, yes.
14
Q. 546
There is 1996 please. This is a letter of the 3rd June 1997 to Mr. Don
14:13:07 15
Tipping.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 547
Again, you enclosed a contribution, would you have discussed that with Mr.
18 19 14:13:12 20
Lynn? A.
Probably, yes, I would have, yeah.
Q. 548
If we could have sorry 4654.
21
This is a request for the Labour Party national collection 1993 dated the 12th
22
of November 1993.
23
that in your writing
24
And you see up on the top "how much should we give".
A.
Sorry.
Q. 549
Mr. Sweeney.
26
A.
Directing it to me for some reason it seems.
27
Q. 550
That's Mr. Sweeney asking you whether or not a contribution should be given or
14:13:38 25
28 29 14:13:56 30
I'd say that's from.
Is
Yeah, it looks like Eddie's writing I think.
And who is he directing it to?
how much should be given? A.
Yeah I believe I sent back 200.
It says if anything -- on the side of it Phil
and he said yes and I ended up paying 100 for some reason. I don't know why Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:14:00
14:14:12
76 1
but anyway.
2
Q. 551
That was Mr. Sweeney seeking your advice on that occasion?
3
A.
Yeah, this is Mervyn Taylor, yeah.
4
Q. 552
If I could have 8559.
This one on the 5th of March 1997.
5
Noel Murray on behalf of a community enterprise society.
6
Noel approved?
It's a letter to Is that your writing
7
A.
Question mark, yeah.
8
Q. 553
Yes.
9
A.
PR to, I don't know what that says, the one on top.
Q. 554
I don't know.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 555
Would that be Phil Reilly to action?
13
A.
I assume so, yeah.
14
Q. 556
Somebody would have written that to you is that --
A.
Yeah, it was written in Owen Murray.
16
Q. 557
What position did Mr. Murray hold within the company?
17
A.
He was the marketing director for the company, he was the commercial marketing
14:14:31 10
14:14:38 15
18 19
And he must have obviously.
PR to action is it?
director. Q. 558
Did he operate out of Tallaght or out of Harcourt Street?
A.
No, Harcourt Street, 57 Harcourt Street.
21
Q. 559
Did you have to report to Mr. Murray or did you work closely --
22
A.
On some occasions Noel was marketing the units in the centre, so if a unit
14:14:53 20
23
became vacant in any of the eight or nine centres he would initially advice on
24
which agency we would use.
14:15:09 25
Q. 560
And would Mr. Murray come into play once the developments were up and running?
26
A.
Oh, prior to it.
27
Q. 561
Prior to it?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 562
Prior to them coming on stream?
A.
Yes.
14:15:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:15:19
14:15:33
77 1
Q. 563
He would be involved?
2
A.
Yes, he would be letting the shops.
3
Q. 564
I see.
4
But his input would be after the development had been undertaken but
before completion where he would advise on how to, tenants etc.
5
A.
Correct, yeah. Tenant mix and agree in terms and all of that, yeah.
6
Q. 565
Was Mr. Murray with the company when you joined it in 1987?
7
A.
He was, yes.
8
Q. 566
Did you have -- can I just ask you.
9
with council officials at any stage in relation to the Cherrywood site or
14:15:58 10
11
Did you have any contacts or interaction
indeed any of the Monarch lands? A.
On Cherrywood, no, I don't believe I had.
Although there is one memo I think
12
which you may have there of a discussion that took place at which I attended
13
with Willie Murray after the opening in April I think.
14 14:16:19 15
16
Q. 567 A. Q. 568
17
This is April of 1991? '94. April' 94. The one I was more particularly concerned about. 5603.
If I could have
Is an entry in Mr. Murray's diary for the 22nd of October 1993.
18
A.
Where is it? Sorry, I can't see it.
19
Q. 569
It's at 2.30 entry for Phil Reilly I think and Pat Lafferty is it Monarch?
A.
Yeah, it is, yeah.
21
Q. 570
Do you recall meeting Mr. Murray in October 1993 with Mr. Lafferty?
22
A.
I could have put I don't have any recollection at this stage.
23
Q. 571
Was that in connection with Cherrywood?
24
A.
I don't honestly know.
Q. 572
Was there -- we know that you met Mr. Dunlop with Mr. Lafferty after his
14:16:42 20
14:17:00 25
26
appointment in March '93, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, I did, yeah.
28
Q. 573
You gave evidence --
29
A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 574
-- in relation to that.
14:17:13 30
So could you have met Mr. Murray with Mr. Lafferty in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:17:18
14:17:35
78 1 2
relation to Cherrywood in October '93? A.
3 4
Possibly, yes, I could have, yeah but I don't recall it.
I'm sure if it's in
the diary I would have met him, yeah. Q. 575
Earlier this morning I was asking you about meetings between other Monarch
5
representatives and the council officials and the manager in July and in
6
September '93.
7
place at those meetings?
And you had no knowledge of those meetings or what was taking
8
A.
Correct, yeah.
9
Q. 576
Can I now ask you what that meeting was in connection with?
A.
I have no idea, sorry, I can't help you.
Q. 577
If it were in connection with Cherrywood, would you agree with me that you were
14:17:51 10
11 12
at a complete disadvantage meeting the planning officer in relation to
13
Cherrywood since you had no knowledge of other meetings taking place in or
14
around that time between other Monarch representatives and Mr. Murray and
14:18:11 15
Mr. O'Sullivan?
16
A.
Oh, yeah I would have been.
17
Q. 578
Do you know if there were any other meetings between you and other Monarch
18 19
I would have been au fait with what was going on.
representatives with council officials dating back to '87, '88, '89? A.
14:18:36 20
In 1987 certainly in Tallaght I was involved with the local authority at the time.
We set up a little subcommittee of one of the development people plus
21
one of the officials from the council.
22
between what was happening in the centre itself.
23
Q. 579
Yes.
24
A.
No.
Q. 580
If I could have 2816.
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 581
There appears a series of meetings.
14:18:56 25
And it was a communications group
Did you ever have meetings with Mr. Redmond, for example?
You will have seen them in the meeting
28
with Mr. Redmond and Monarch representatives.
29
diaries.
14:19:12 30
A.
That's for the 23rd of February 1998.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
These are Mr. Redmond's
14:19:13
14:19:31
79 1
Q. 582
2
And if I could have 2817.
That's the 26th of February.
I could have 2818, please, again. A.
I never met Mr. Redmond.
4
Q. 583
And finally on the 18th of April at 2819.
5
A.
No, I never met Mr. Redmond at any time.
6
Q. 584
There may also have been a meeting --
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 585
Sorry.
14:20:00 10
11
Did you have a meeting with Mr. Cremin in April '94? If I could have
5073, please. A.
I don't believe so, no.
Q. 586
You say that you had no meetings in connection or no involvement in connection
12
with the Cherrywood lands after the vote on the 11th of November '93.
13
right?
14
A.
14:20:17 15
put it up. Q. 587
Yes.
17
A.
I think it's in early '94 with Willie Murray.
18
Q. 588
Is that the 4th of January '94 I think.
19
A.
I'll see if I have a note of it.
14:20:34 20
What date is the meeting?
about Nutgrove. Sorry. Q. 589
22
I don't know what number it is.
Myself and Pat Lafferty went to meet him
If it can be found.
There's a meeting of the 6th of January, '94.
That's the only one that .... If I could have 4923, please.
Mr. Lafferty is noted as having attended a meeting with Willie Murray --
23
A.
No, it's not that one, no.
24
Q. 590
It's not that one?
A.
No, it's one later.
14:21:04 25
Is that
Yes, there is one, as I say, minute of a meeting if I can explain if you can
16
21
If
That's the 6th of April.
3
9
11.30 meeting.
If I can just ... that's the only one that I can recall
26
that I was with Willie Murray with.
27
was Nutgrove was making some changes there, we were adding extensions.
28
Lafferty was the project architect.
29
Cherrywood and Pat kept the memo, because I didn't know what he was talking
14:21:48 30
about.
Sorry.
It ran on but the primary purpose of that Pat
And Willie Murray went on to talk about
Just for the record.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:21:48
14:21:52
80 1
Q. 591
You had no understanding of what --
2
A.
They were talking roads and all of that.
3
Q. 592
Access, is that correct?
4
A.
It could have been, yeah.
5
Q. 593
We'll come back to that if that's okay.
6
Sorry, I just can't put my finger on it now myself. If we could have 2764.
There are a
series of expenses claims form, which you, if you have been present --
7
A.
Sorry.
8
Q. 594
-- will have been dealt with a number of councillors.
9
instance, without getting into the specifics.
14:22:11 10
Can I just in the first
Was it the practice within the
Monarch Group for executives to submit expenses claims forms?
11
A.
Yes, it was, yes.
12
Q. 595
And presumably that's for the purpose of being paid expenses incurred in
13 14 14:22:25 15
connection -A.
Yes, yes, with any development, which any ...
Q. 596
I agree, yes.
16
The form itself had set out the company that the claim was to
be made in respect of or the project, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, yes.
18
Q. 597
And there were so many different companies presumably there were so many
19 14:22:39 20
21
different projects coming on? A.
Charities.
Q. 598
So therefore whoever filled out the form gave the designation of the charge,
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Well that was my practice anyway.
24
Q. 599
And it appears to have been Mr. Lynn's practice also.
14:22:51 25
So, for example, if we
look at the claim form on screen which appears to be for January.
26
understand it may be in fact for January 1993.
27
by, is that your signature?
I
This is a claim form submitted
28
A.
Yes, correct.
29
Q. 600
Is that company described by you as Somerton, Cherrywood and Ongar?
A.
Ongar.
14:23:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:23:12
14:23:22
81 1
Q. 601
They were the three projects which were before the council at that time?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 602
I think it's a claim form headed or the nature of the expense is Senate canvass
4
- T Ridge?
5
A.
That's correct, yes.
6
Q. 603
Can I ask you to explain to the Tribunal what that was in connection with?
7
A.
Well she was running for the Senate.
She was, as I said, a good friend of
8
mine, still is.
9
I am originally from Cavan and I live in Meath.
14:23:44 10
By accident she said she was coming down to Meath and Cavan. And I said I know how tough
Senate campaigns are or I certainly knew after this day or two I spent with
11
her.
12
mine, S MacEntee there joined us and we drove around Cavan and Meath, it was
13
just to give her a hand but I didn't take part.
14
councillors or anybody that she was going to visit.
14:24:07 15
it.
And I said if you want a drive for a bit of company.
And a friend of
I didn't know any of the That's the background to
We did that again when ever the next election was.
16
Q. 604
Just before we leave that?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 605
This is a -- your contribution to Ms. Ridge's election campaign?
19
A.
Senate.
Q. 606
Senate campaign?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 607
Ms. Ridge, is a friend of your's?
23
A.
Correct, yeah.
24
Q. 608
But it's being charged up to your employers Monarch, isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 609
It's being charged up in connection with Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar, is
14:24:18 20
14:24:27 25
26 27
that right?
28
A.
That's right, yeah.
29
Q. 610
So presumably you and your employers, you are submitting an expense form claim
14:24:39 30
form to your employers and your employers sanctioning the payment must have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:24:42
14:24:57
82 1
been of the view that this was a worth while expenditure in relation to
2
Ms. Ridge?
3
A.
4 5
Well I wouldn't quite put it like that.
It was an expense that I incurred in
the course of the day and they paid it. Q. 611
But it wasn't just a meeting with Ms. Ridge, it was incurred and identified
6
correctly as having being incurred in relation it her Senate canvass, isn't
7
that right?
8
A.
Canvass, correct, yes.
9
Q. 612
Presumably as I understand it, I may be wrong, that Senators, or potential
14:25:17 10
senators have to canvass existing TDs and Senators and others councillors,
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
Councillors.
13
Q. 613
Only councillors?
14
A.
Only councillors as I understand it.
Q. 614
So what we are looking at there is your contribution to transporting Ms. Ridge
14:25:24 15
16
to councillors somewhere in the State for support in connection with her 1993
17
campaign?
18
A.
Cavan, Meath and Louth to be exact, yeah.
19
Q. 615
Did she select the councillors or did you select the councillors?
A.
Oh, no she selected them.
21
Q. 616
Did you solicit support from any councillors on behalf of Ms. Ridge?
22
A.
No, I didn't know any of them.
23
Q. 617
Now, if we could have page 4057, please.
14:25:43 20
24
I didn't know any of them.
I just was the driver.
representation of an expense claim.
14:26:08 25
I think there's another
This time assigned to the Ongar Stud in
relation to modest expenditure in connection with refreshments and
26
entertainment.
Is that right?
27
A.
Correct. Yes, that's correct.
28
Q. 618
Can I just ask you going back to the last expense claim form at 2764.
29 14:26:28 30
How did
you, how did you decide to designate the expense to both -- to all three projects.
That is to say Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:26:33
14:26:52
83 1
A.
I don't know.
I suppose there wasn't any activity, I suppose, I don't know.
2
I suppose I put if in to them because maybe that was, when was it, January '93?
3
I don't really know, I suppose.
4
that's the expense heading I put it in to.
5
Q. 619
6
I just put those down as possibly, you know,
There are no companies, Cherrywood, Somerton and Ongar.
There are three
projects but no company, isn't that right?
7
A.
No. That's right, yeah. I don't know where it was charged in the end.
8
Q. 620
Yes. Who would have decided where the charge would lay?
9
A.
I'd say somebody in the accounts office would just pick one of those and put it
14:27:08 10
through.
11
Q. 621
Yes.
Who had overall responsibility in the accounts office?
12
A.
Well, I mean, the top man is back Mr. Glennane again, Dominic Glennane.
13
don't know if he ever got involved in the nitty gritty of minor payments like
14
that of where they were charged.
14:27:26 15
Q. 622
Nut whoever received in this expense must have been satisfied that you,
16
Mr. Reilly, had incurred an expense in relation to those three projects, isn't
17
that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 623
For example if we could have 5729.
14:27:40 20
This again is a modest expenditure in
relation to Ms. Ridge on the 15th of December.
21
It's a Christmas time
expenditure but this time it's being written up under MPSL, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 624
Not any of the--
24
A.
No.
Q. 625
-- three projects?
26
A.
No, I wasn't involved in any other.
27
Q. 626
Projects. Whereas you were involved in the Cherrywood project in '93, isn't
14:27:57 25
28 29 14:28:07 30
that right? A.
That's correct, yeah.
Q. 627
And might that have been the reason why you felt it was know an expense Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
But I
14:28:11
14:28:18
84 1
incurred in connection with Cherrywood?
2
A.
Probably. Yeah, yeah.
3
Q. 628
I'm not going to go through the others.
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 629
-- in the brief.
6
You have seen them in the --
Unless there is anything in particular you want to draw to
the attention's Tribunal in relation to it?
7
A.
No, I don't think so anyway.
8
Q. 630
Can I just go back to one document.
9
Could I have 4346, please.
cost projection to the 1st of January 1994.
14:28:37 10
created in 1993.
11
This a is a
It's so it's a cost projection
In fact the 1st of September 1993 as it appears from the
bottom left hand corner?
12
A.
Okay.
13
Q. 631
I just want to get your assistance in relation to this.
14
three items? Item No. 12.
14:28:57 15
sewage scheme 1994.
Do you see the last
This is a cost projection.
"Carrickmines Valley
Third party costs to accelerate access to the sewer."
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 632
Can you give any indication to the Tribunal as to what sort of costs are
18 19 14:29:14 20
referred to there or are understood to be referred to there? A.
No, I'm sorry.
Q. 633
Do you see the next one.
21
I can't help. No. 13.
"Incentive bonus payments for Senior staff
1994 for achieving zoning and enhanced value of site."
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 634
Do you have any idea?
24
A.
No.
Q. 635
Did you know that if there were a bonus system in place for senior staff in
14:29:25 25
26
1994?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 636
For achieving zoning and enhanced value?
29
A.
No, no, it was never discussed.
14:29:38 30
I think that was in an earlier document you
showed me. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:29:39
14:29:55
85 1
Q. 637
2
Yes.
If such a system ask did exist having regard to your contribution
presumably you would have been entitled to benefit from such a scheme?
3
A.
Yeah well there was no scheme that I was aware of.
4
Q. 638
Yes. Was Mr. Lynn in receipt of bonus payments 1994 or 1993?
5
A.
Well I think I saw some correspondence on the GRE paper.
6
Q. 639
Yes.
7
A.
Or some correspondence.
8
Q. 640
You didn't know at the time?
9
A.
No.
Q. 641
And you never knew what Mr. Dunlop was being paid or what the arrangement was
14:30:05 10
11
That's all I knew.
I never discussed his payments.
for his payment.
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 642
You never discussed his payment?
14
A.
No.
Q. 643
And what system was in place between March 1993 and November 1993 between
14:30:11 15
16
yourself, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop and indeed Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray,
17
Mr. Monahan in relation to your progress with your canvassing of support from
18
councillors?
19
A.
14:30:31 20
Well there wasn't any formal system that I recall. meeting in March.
As I said, there was that
And then it went quiet for the summer.
21
Q. 644
Well how did you update each other on --
22
A.
Well I suppose we spoke on the telephone or just had a quick chat but I don't
23 24
believe -Q. 645
14:30:55 25
Were there ever any regular meetings where you would discuss the rate of progress?
26
A.
No, no, it was -- there were just informal discussions.
27
Q. 646
For example, when you first heard that Councillor Marren had come on board.
28
Was that at a meeting or a semi formal meeting in relation to the Cherrywood
29
site?
14:31:07 30
A.
I can't say exactly.
It was just, it could have been Richard standing outside
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:31:14
14:31:26
86 1
my door talking to somebody else saying it's good news Mr. Marren will support
2
the scheme.
3
Q. 647
And you'll have over heard what he said?
4
A.
Not over heard.
5
Q. 648
Just in relation to your offices, you had told us I think you had an office in
6
He might have said, listen this is the latest development.
Tallaght for a time and you had an office in Harcourt Street?
7
A.
Harcourt Street up to the time I left my employment.
8
Q. 649
Yes.
9
A.
He was on the first floor.
Q. 650
In Harcourt Street?
11
A.
Correct, yeah.
12
Q. 651
Mr. Murray?
13
A.
He was next to him.
14
Q. 652
Mr. Sweeney?
A.
He was at the back of the reception.
16
Q. 653
In Harcourt Street?
17
A.
In Harcourt Street, yeah.
18
Q. 654
Mr. Phil Monahan?
19
A.
He was in Somerton.
14:31:42 10
14:31:47 15
14:31:57 20
Had Mr. Glennane an office.
Where was Mr. Glennane's office?
He'd no office in Harcourt Street. When he'd come in
he'd use the board room the seldom time he'd come in.
21
Q. 655
And what about Mr. Lynn?
22
A.
Mr. Lynn had an office on the same floor as I had.
23
Q. 656
Was it close to your office?
24
A.
Next door to it.
Q. 657
So the two of you operated out of the same floor, next door offices?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 658
What about Mr. Paul Monahan?
28
A.
No, I don't think he was around much at the time.
14:32:08 25
29 14:32:19 30
If he was he was in
Somerton. Q. 659
I think Ms. Gosling has given evidence that she was in Somerton? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:32:22
14:32:27
87 1
A.
Somerton, that's right, yes.
2
Q. 660
Thank you very much, Mr. Reilly.
3
A.
Thank you.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Mr. Sanfey?
6 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. SANFEY AS FOLLOWS:
7 8 9
MR. SANFEY: Just one or two questions, Mr. Chairman.
14:32:33 10
11
Q. 661
12
Mr. Reilly, you weren't at -- well in attendance in May 1992 in relation to the vote on the Manager's proposals, isn't that right?
13
A.
No, I wasn't there, no.
14
Q. 662
So you certainly can't assist us as to Mr. Lynn's whereabouts on that day?
A.
No, no.
Q. 663
In relation to the Marren Coffey motion in November 1993.
14:32:49 15
16 17
that day I think?
18
A.
I was but not in the chamber.
19
Q. 664
Yes.
14:33:03 20
Is, what's your recollection of Mr. Lynn's movements on those, on that
date?
21
A.
I think he was in the chamber most of the day.
22
Q. 665
Is that what you would have expected?
23
A.
Oh, I would have yeah.
24 14:33:14 25
You were present on
I would have stayed in the chamber when there was a
vote on, yeah. Q. 666
In March 1993 when Mr. Dunlop was taken on board, did you have any idea at that
26
time that Mr. Dunlop's modus operandi, if I can put it that way, was to pay
27
money to councillors for votes?
28
A.
Absolutely not.
29
Q. 667
To your knowledge did anybody in Monarch have that understanding?
A.
No.
14:33:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:33:36
14:33:43
88 1
Q. 668
You are not aware of anybody in Monarch having that understanding?
2
A.
Absolutely not, no.
3
Q. 669
Thank you, Chairman.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
6
Could I just ask you, Mr. Reilly, in relation.
7
the extent of the briefing that you got before going off to lobby councillors
8
or talk to councillors.
9
A.
Thank you.
Do you want to ask any questions? In relation to the issue of
Uh-huh.
14:34:09 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
very little about the detail of what was being proposed or what plans Monarch
13
had in relation to the lands.
14
councillors you would want to be in a position where you could deal with
14:34:30 15
You say you knew
Presumably, when you went to talk to
queries that they would raise.
16 17
You got little or no briefing, as I understand.
I'm just wondering how you've -- how you
carried out that function without detailed briefing? A.
Yeah.
I mean, as I said earlier, for the November vote itself, what we were
18
looking for was seeking the manager's support.
19
would get Richard to deal with it.
14:35:05 20
If a councillor had a query, I
I would call Richard in and say look
there's a query on this or a query on , that you know, that ....
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
you would go to one of the councillors that you knew and say please vote for
24
whatever?
14:35:22 25
A.
Does that mean that you saw your job as merely a messenger where
That was the extent of what I did.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Without knowing much about what you were asking them to?
I was clear on what I was asking them to support the manager's position.
29 14:35:34 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, but if they turned to you and said well what is the manager's
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:35:38
14:35:56
89 1 2
position would you have been able to answer them? A.
I would have said it was four houses to the acre on septic tank.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
6
And would that be the extent of your --
That was the extent of all I needed.
I didn't have any plans or motions or
any documents with me.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
And who would tell you that, that such a motion was coming up next?
Richard Lynn.
14:36:01 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
of the council or the councillors?
13
A.
Richard Lynn.
So he would effectively point you in the direction
Correct.
14 14:36:08 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A.
Or the councillors from time to time.
That's correct, yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
and cons of a particular motion or --
14:36:19 20
A.
And did, in practice did councillors question you as to the pros
Well, I would believe that by the time I was in the lobby of the hall that
21
Richard would have met most of them and explained in detail what was -- what
22
was proposed etc.
23
I suppose describing me as the messenger, I wasn't the lead singer, if you want
24
to put it that way.
14:36:46 25
No, there was very few queries from me but, again, without
I was only assisting Richard to the extent I've already
explained.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
approach or lobby in this way to say yes, confirm yes, I'll support that or?
29 14:37:03 30
A.
But was there a tendency amongst the councillors that you would
Not necessarily. about it.
Some of them said no.
Some said that they would think
And some wouldn't give any commitment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:37:07
14:37:24
90 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
possibly in an effort to change their view?
3
A.
But you wouldn't then engage in any discussion with them about it,
Well, yeah, I wasn't -- no, I would say to them, as I recall, you know, it's
4
the manager's position.
We hope you can support it.
5
are supporting it and if you could please help.
6
canvass.
The local councillors
That was the extent of my
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
your close link to the councillors involved?
14:37:42 10
A.
And why were you brought in for that purpose? Was it because of
No.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
I mean, you weren't being brought in as an expert in any shape?
No, correct that's true. I was brought in because I was quite well known to a number of councillors in the Tallaght area.
14:37:57 15
The second thing was, I suppose,
it was a reminder to the great scheme that has made such a difference to
16
Tallaght even up to this very day. It was a catalyst for all of the
17
development.
18
said.
19
that, as I said, the show case, the Tallaght show case.
The -- Monarch were good developers, they delivered on what they
And I suppose I was almost there like as a reminder to those people of
14:38:21 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
22
were in effect paying money to councillors either for their support or to keep
23
them on side, so to speak?
24
A.
Did you have any sense yourself that Monarch were -- that Monarch
No, not in that sense.
14:38:42 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A.
You didn't think that was the?
No, absolutely not, no.
The payments were made, as we've talked about and as
28
you've seen, generally at election time or subsequent to that when they wrote
29
in for contributions to golf days or whatever other charities that they wanted
14:39:03 30
to support. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:39:03
14:39:22
91 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
level it was if Cherrywood didn't exist?
3
A.
But do you think the generosity of Monarch would have been at the
Well my experience, and all I can talk about is my experience of Monarch was.
4
I referred to it earlier, that certainly at Tallaght and it continued after
5
Tallaght, that they were very generous to the community at large.
6
that there was I believe almost 40,000 pounds donated to the Education Awards
7
in Tallaght.
8
education, it was to support them buying clothes, books or whatever else.
9
remember in Dun Laoghaire that they set up the golf show, which still -- not
14:39:46 10
I mentioned
And these were kids that although that they were getting free
the golf show, the horse show, it still runs today.
I
And by the nature of the
11
business that we're in in terms of shopping centres.
It is the focal point of
12
the community and even to today the shopping centres I manage, all they are
13
continual requests for payments from charity events etc..
14 14:40:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well charity is one thing --
Yes, yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
politicians is a slightly different category.
14:40:18 20
A.
Paying -- making contributions or paying councillors -- paying
Yes.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A.
24
No.
It's not a charity.
But today there are still requests coming in for golf classics etc. for
politicians, to this day.
14:40:29 25
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
And what about contributions at election time?
Well I haven't had an election in a couple of years. remember now just at this stage.
I'll have to think about that.
29 14:40:43 30
CHAIRMAN:
I don't -- I can't
Thank you.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:40:44
14:41:04
92 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
please.
3
you a couple of things about that document.
4
looking for.
5
about a document where there's references between April '89 and October '90.
6
That there's sums of money -- it isn't that one I'll have to look -- it should
7
be attributable to being paid.
8
--
9
A.
Yes.
Just one or two things.
I think that's the one.
Yes, it is.
It might be one prior to that.
Could I have document 8596,
Mr. Reilly, could I just ask Maybe that's not the one I'm But anyway, Mr. Quinn asked you
Do you understand? There was sums put to you
Yeah, that's right.
14:41:20 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- earlier by Mr. Quinn -A.
Yes.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:41:30 15
16
50,000 in April '89.
150,000 in April 1990 and October 1990
100,000. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
are all on the one document and they add up to 300,000.
14:41:38 20
A.
I think there's one document where there's a composite, they
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And it would appear that --
23 24
MR. QUINN: 3061.
14:41:51 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY:
27
Yes.
28
A.
Thanks Mr. Quinn. That's the one I'm looking for probably.
Do you see that document?
That's the total amount, yeah.
29 14:42:02 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes, exactly.
And it's made up of the three composite amount
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:42:05
14:42:15
93 1
we've talked about.
That's headed L&C payments accounts.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 670
Do you see the very top line?
4
A.
Yes.
5 6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Do you know what that means?
I do not know and I didn't see this document until I got it from the Tribunal
8
itself.
Just for the record, I've asked my solicitor to query from that
9
figure came from.
To repeat I did not receive 300,000 Euro or 300,000 pounds.
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I just want to ask, a lot of the sums there would appear that
12
monies paid out by L&C to various suppliers, isn't that correct?
14:42:34 10
13
A.
Yes.
14 14:42:43 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And presumably most of those, there's Murrays Van Rental there
16
for example and Mondello Sports Limited and various other consultancies and
17
suppliers obviously.
18
A.
Correct, yeah.
19 14:42:59 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And I think this was in relation to Tallaght, is that correct?
Yes, L&C Properties was Tallaght, yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
most -- you will be able to give this general evidence.
14:43:13 25
26
Yes, I think Mr. Quinn mentioned that.
That most amounts
paid out by L&C Properties would be on foot of invoices. A.
Correct, yes, that's right.
All that, yeah, you needed paper to get anything.
27 28 29
And presumably
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
For actually, for sums to be paid out.
Yes.
14:43:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:43:24
14:43:33
94 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Are you surprised to see the sum of 300,000.
Absolutely.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
that you did as PR work.
6
A.
No.
Attributed to you.
That either you got that for you work
Or you got it to pay for PR work.
I can assure you --
7 8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes, I know that.
Absolutely surprised.
14:43:42 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Are you surprised to see that attribution to you
Yes absolutely surprised.
I've asked my solicitor to get details of that.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:43:54 15
Yes.
Because this is -- we don't know and I can't say
obviously how the sums, how it comes to be described thus in this document.
16
But would you agree with me that if the books of L&C were audited by the
17
Revenue back in, back in 1993 or '94 or whatever time they might -- that they
18
would -- that you would be seen as having received 300,000 over and above.
19
And you were an employee of --
14:44:23 20
A.
Absolutely.
21 22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Who employed you exactly?
I think it was Monarch Properties Services Limited.
24 14:44:28 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Monarch Properties Services.
But wouldn't you agree with me
26
that that, if it had been audited, you are down as an employee and you were
27
paid and your tax was deducted.
28
A.
Correct.
29 14:44:41 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But it would appear that you received extra monies.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:44:44
14:44:54
95 1
A.
I have to keep repeating.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
either as a sole trader or as an independent contractor or whatever.
5
A.
They could.
Oh absolutely. Somebody could come to that conclusion that
They would be totally wrong.
The only thing I can put it down
6
to was, part of my public relations role for Tallaght, dealing with the
7
community groups etc.
8
2,00000 pounds on all of the various launches, promotions, activities within
9
that.
We would have spent approximately one and a half to
Whether that figure is put against it or not.
14:45:16 10
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Why would that be attributed you to you specifically?
I don't know.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:45:22 15
16
You were an employee but at that rate they could pick anybody
and just attribute that sum to. A.
Maybe I was identified in having the public relations role.
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
that work, that was part of your job if you like.
14:45:46 20
21
But surely, Mr. Reilly, you are employed.
If you were doing
You were there, you were
the group manager. A.
Correct, yeah.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
were being paid for, isn't that correct?
14:45:47 25
A.
26
And you were on the ground in Tallaght and that's what you
That's correct, yeah.
And I have asked, as I said, for how that figure is
made up, through my solicitor.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Fair enough.
And please God we'll be able to get that detail.
14:45:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:45:55
14:46:05
96 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Astounded.
But you were surprised in any event?
Not surprised, astounded
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
responses there to Mr. Quinn in relation to the claim form for January 1993.
6
You said I think that you made a claim regarding three projects.
7
A.
And can I is ask you just to deal with something else in your
Yes.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:46:18 10
11
was Somerton. A.
Correct, yes.
Or referred to three projects Cherrywood, Ongar and I think it
And this was the day you were driving Ms. Ridge?
Days I think there were two days.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14:46:36 15
Did you discuss matters with her on that day, Mr. ?
Not about, no -- we were, what do you call it we were trying to find out where this guy lived or this councillor lived or what roads to take.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
And whatever.
19 14:46:41 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Presumably that sum was paid?
Oh, it was, yes.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
particular day, whatever day in January it was.
14:46:57 25
26
If you were able to put in an expenses claim form for that Obviously, you did so as an
employee of Monarch? A.
Monarch Properties Services, yeah.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And obviously you hadn't taken a day off to assist a friend.
No, I was working.
14:47:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:47:06
14:47:12
97 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
So you were working for Monarch
Yes, that's right, yes.
3 4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
6
Exactly.
Driving Ms. Ridge effectively.
Well I was doing it as a friend, I can assure you of that.
asked me to go out and drive her around.
Nobody
I volunteered.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
whatever it was or the petrol or whatever you were billing Monarch for,
14:47:27 10
11
Mr. Reilly. A.
Yes.
But then why bill Monarch for the costs of the lunch or
If you were doing it as a friend?
Well that was what I did.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
help a friend, isn't that correct?
14:47:38 15
A.
You didn't take a day's leave to say well I'm off today to
That's correct, yeah.
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
I mean, you saw fit to bill the company.
And the company paid it.
19 14:47:44 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
Yes.
And that -- so you must have regarded it as being in
the nature of your duties for the company then. A.
Yes.
I suppose yes if you want to put it that way, yeah.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14:48:02 25
26
And just one other matter.
You said the late Mr. Hand, you
didn't -- you were brought in late '92 I think you said or after the vote. A.
Well sorry, yeah, I became actively involved.
27 28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
You knew about the whole, obviously the proposals.
Yeah.
14:48:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:48:14
14:48:22
98 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
liaised with Mr. Hand?
3
A.
Do you know who in Monarch dealt with Mr. Hand or talked to or
Sorry, I believe it was Richard Lynn, I believe.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Was it?
6
Fine Gael people.
The late Mr. Hand was Fine Gael.
7
A.
8
You had said earlier that you were liaising with
Sorry, Frank Dunlop said that.
I did have some Fine Gael people but I did
cover others --
9 14:48:35 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You mentioned more than Fine Gael people, in fairness to
11
yourself, including Mr. O'Connor.
12
relation to mr. Hand?
13
A.
You didn't have any interactions in
Not with Mr. Hand, no.
14 14:48:44 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thanks very much.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
me.
19
company, such as Monarch, who has, who is in the process of attempting to
14:49:04 20
Mr. Reilly, I wonder could you answer this question for
do you believe that it's a healthy practice where you have a development
rezone part of its lands, or all of its lands, to pay councillors monies during
21 22
Yes.
the process of that rezoning project? A.
Well if I can answer you personally just to clear this.
23 24 14:49:22 25
JUDGE KEYS: A.
26
Yes.
I mean any of the payments that I recommended there was no ties to them whatsoever.
27 28 29
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Whether there are ties or not?
Yeah.
14:49:29 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:49:29
14:49:51
99 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
under going a process of, attempting to rezone its lands, pay considerable sums
3
of money to councillors even at election time when they have the power to vote
4
on whether that piece of land is rezoned or not?
5
A.
Do you think it is healthy that a development company who is
Well I suppose having gone through this I'd prefer if it wasn't done.
6 7 8
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Pardon?
I'd prefer if it wasn't done, yes.
9 14:49:58 10
JUDGE KEYS:
11 12
Well do you think it's unhealthy, do you think there's something
wrong with it or do you think it's all right? A.
13
If you have to go through a Tribunal like I have I'd prefer it wasn't done to be honest with you.
14 14:50:09 15
JUDGE KEYS:
Well, I mention that because as I understand it, when you were
16
talking to Mr. Lynn in relation to what politicians should receive donations.
17
He more or less, as I understand your evidence, said words to the effect well
18
we'll be meeting these people in the future.
19
A.
Correct, yes.
14:50:28 20
21
JUDGE KEYS:
22
have to meet these people again in the future because we're depending on their
23
votes to sway the council in voting in favour of rezoning their lands?
24
A.
Now, one can read into that enormous lengths such as that we'll
Yeah.
14:50:43 25
26 27 28
JUDGE KEYS: A.
No.
But surely there's something wrong with that?
Well again, I think it's back to I don't believe.
obviously.
29 14:50:51 30
JUDGE KEYS:
Yes
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
I'm saying this,
14:50:52
14:51:04
100 1
A.
That any of those payments were linked to them doing something.
All right?
2 3
JUDGE KEYS:
4
Why?
5
A.
But why would any company pay large sums of monies like that?
Well it was a tradition in the company.
Because again, going back to, I
6
suppose, shopping centres, with the nature of it being the focal point no more
7
than when my own father was in business, when it was a small pub down the
8
country, when there was a raffle on for something else --
9 14:51:23 10
11
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Well a raffle is different.
I know that.
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
I'm talking about money, cash, either by cash or cheque --
Cheque.
14:51:30 15
16
JUDGE KEYS:
17
considering whether a company who has given them that money is going to have
18
their lands rezoned which in turn will make that particular company very well
19
off.
14:51:43 20
A.
Into somebody's hand.
And they are in the process of
Well, I think it's incumbent on any company, and I'm not defending Monarch or
21
whatever, my own company, to try and get them maximum for what they are doing,
22
okay?
23 24
JUDGE KEYS:
14:51:57 25
26
Yes but it depends on how you do it. There are ways of doing it,
there is the correct way and the incorrect way. A.
My understanding, which I queried at the time was this okay from Richard Lynn.
27 28 29
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
And he said yes, these were elections expenses.
14:52:07 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:52:07
14:52:16
101 1 2
JUDGE KEYS: A.
And these were people we're going to be meeting again.
Correct.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
5
their vote in our favour so that we can rezone our lands and develop them
6
A.
And meeting again whether in the context of whether we can secure
I don't think he extended it to that.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
they want to meet them again if that's the case? For what purpose?
14:52:29 10
A.
11
No I know but can you give me another meaning then? Why would
Because by the nature of when you're dealing with councillors etc. you want to be able to get access to them all right?
12 13 14
JUDGE KEYS: A.
14:52:46 15
Yes.
And you were supporting, I suppose, to some extent the democracy and that you -- what do you call it, made these donations.
16 17
JUDGE KEYS:
18
Monarch could have said to the Fianna Fail party we will give a lump sum to
19
headquarters for them to equally distribute the monies to the councillors
14:53:02 20
rather than the company individually paying councillors who had the actual vote
21 22
Couldn't democracy be supported in other ways for example,
in deciding that the lands were going to be rezoned or not. A.
23
Well payments were made from the records I have seen to headquarters, whatever, and what happened it I don't know after that.
24 14:53:22 25
JUDGE KEYS:
Well put it like this.
Do you think that Monarch would have
26
paid those sums of monies if they had no property in Cherrywood or in that area
27
and there was no motions going to come before the council? Do you think these
28
councillors would have been paid any monies by Monarch?
29
A.
I think some of the councillors would have been paid by Monarch.
14:53:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:53:45
14:54:04
102 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
area, the company has no development plans?
3
A.
Even though they have no business interests whatsoever in the
Well I can take it and bring it back to my '92 memo that I asked for.
There
4
was no Development Plans I'm aware of that the council were involved in at that
5
time or since.
6
that I believed that it was good to have a strong representation in the Dail to
7
try and approve Tallaght.
And those monies were paid on, at my request, on the basis
8 9
JUDGE KEYS:
14:54:20 10
11
That was in relation to yourself.
I'm talking about the company
Monarch as a whole. A.
Sorry.
12 13
JUDGE KEYS:
14
along with all of the other members of the company would have paid these sort
14:54:32 15
of monies if they had no development plans in the area and no motions were
16 17
I asked you did you believe that Monarch as a whole, Mr. Lynn,
going to come before the council? A.
Monarch paid the memo that I put through.
18 19 14:54:41 20
JUDGE KEYS: A.
21
Right.
I know that.
But Monarch paid it.
Yes, if that's the answer that you want.
At
that stage that they did that they had no activity in Tallaght at that stage.
22 23
JUDGE KEYS:
24
opening of this module there was a figure of something like half a million
14:55:00 25
Well can I put it like this.
I do take it then -- I think the
mentioned in relation to monies which were paid in contributions, call them
26
contributions.
27
irrespective of whether Monarch had any interest in building or looking for
28
rezoning in the Cherrywood area?
29 14:55:19 30
A.
Are you saying that that sum of money would have been paid
Well again I think I was an employee of the company.
I think that's something
that should be perhaps addressed to the directors of the company. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:55:22
14:55:36
103 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
of people who went out to canvass councillors.
3
views.
4
anything which may damage Monarch but it's a question which I think is very
5
pertinent.
6
A.
Yes but you are part of the company.
You were part of a group
I'm just asking you for your
You may think it's an unfair question because you don't want to say
I have come here to be very honest.
7 8 9
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
With what I believe.
14:55:40 10
11 12
JUDGE KEYS: A.
13
Yes.
If there was half a million pounds, I didn't think it was that high that was paid over.
14 14:55:46 15
16
JUDGE KEYS: A.
It's over a period of time now.
Over 12 or 14 years.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
Where Monarch had, as I understand it, had business interests, they had lands
14:55:59 20
to be rezoned.
At a time when all developments were going on in these areas.
They were involved in Tallaght and so forth.
I'm just asking
21
you, do you believe that the same sort of monies or the level of monies being
22
paid if this development wasn't being carried on by this company at all?
23
A.
24
I, I suppose I -- if you want.
Let me just think about that for a moment.
Would they have paid out the money.
14:56:22 25
26 27
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Yes.
I don't know I suppose is my answer.
If you want a personal opinion on the
28
future, which I suppose this whole Tribunal, it's better if no monies were paid
29
by any organisation, whether a developer or whatever, to a political party.
14:56:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:56:39
14:56:59
104 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
it's a matter of -- we'll have to think about in more detail.
3
that's why I asked you.
4
you have a business interest like a motion pending before a council, that that
5
particular company should depart money to politicians who have the power to say
6
you will succeed or you will not succeed? That's the point I'm making. It
7
goes back to --
8
A.
9
Well perhaps at a time when you may be correct, I don't know, But perhaps
Is it fair or sorry -- is it proper really that when
Well I suppose having looked back on the last ten years it's preferable if they didn't do that.
14:57:17 10
11
JUDGE KEYS:
12
of view of democracy and the public perception that people would have a
13
perception of politicians.
14 14:57:30 15
A.
Do you agree then it's an unhealthy point of view from the point
Well people's perception is certainly it's not healthy. with the Monarch people.
From my experience
I always found them to be honest, straight forward
16
people.
Any of the payments that were made, were made, what do you call it
17
the cheques were made payable to the councillors or to the parties themselves.
18
And they were straight forward.
19 14:57:46 20
JUDGE KEYS:
Yes.
Thank you very much.
21 22
MR. SANFEY: Judge, just before we finish.
23
when you were speaking to Mr. O'Reilly.
24
pounds paid as political contributions referred to in the opening. I wonder if
14:58:01 25
There was just one point you made
I think you referred to a sum of 500
I could just clarify that by reading from Ms. Dillon's opening statement.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
28
million pounds for political contributions.
29
statement was looking at all of the figures that were the subject matter of
14:58:17 30
I think it was under inquiry.
It wasn't suggested that half a
What I said in the opening
inquiry in this module, they amounted to 510,000 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
14:58:21
14:58:27
105 1
JUDGE KEYS:
I just called them contributions.
2 3
MR. SANFEY: If we could just clarify --
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
Certainly.
6 7
MR. SANFEY: -- that they were political contributions.
8
point out that Ms. Dillon just before breaking down that 500,000 pounds also
9
said it's not being suggesting that the full sum of 508,000 pounds amount to
14:58:40 10
11
And if I may also
corrupt payments but rather by reason of the matters that are set out in this opening they have become the subject of inquiry.
12 13
So subject to that clarification.
14 14:58:48 15
JUDGE KEYS:
I'm not stating whether the 500,000 pounds.
I don't want it to
16
be interpreted by anybody that they were corrupt payments.
17
that a sum of money was paid out in certain circumstances.
18
witness whether in fact it was healthy bearing in mind that the people
19
receiving the monies had in fact had the power to decide whether the company
14:59:10 20
I'm just saying I just asked the
benefits or not from their vote.
21 22
MR. SANFEY: Yes, I suppose Judge, the point I wanted to clarify is that I
23
don't think it ever has been suggested that the 500,000 pounds all went to
24
politicians.
14:59:19 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
Fair enough.
That clarifies the matter.
28
MS. DILLON:
Just to be absolutely clear about it.
29
There are a number of those payments that, withdrawals and payments cheques
27
14:59:29 30
drawn on the books of Monarch where it is not known who the payee was. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
14:59:36
14:59:53
106 1
it's not to say that they're not political payments.
The situation is that
2
the payee or the recipient of the monies is not yet known but may become known.
3 4
JUDGE KEYS:
Well that clarifies the matter.
5 6
MR. QUINN: Sir, there was just one matter arising out of Mr. Reilly's answer
7
to Judge keys.
8 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
9 14:59:54 10
11
Q. 671
12
I think, Mr. Reilly, you referred if I could have 3910 to your payments in November '92, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 672
And I think you said that they had nothing to do with the Cherrywood project.
15:00:06 15
16
Isn't that right? A.
17 18
Tallaght. Q. 673
19 15:00:17 20
Sorry, I said that they were for, as far as I was concerned they were for
You may not know this but the evidence I think will show that they were assigned to the Cherrywood project?
A.
Were they, yeah, sorry.
I didn't know that, sorry.
Okay.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
24 15:00:23 25
CHAIRMAN:
Is that the?
26 27
MS. DILLON:
That's the conclusion of the witnesses for today.
28 29 15:00:30 30
There are two witnesses for tomorrow morning, commencing at half ten. it's anticipated that they will both conclude before lunchtime tomorrow. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
And
15:00:34
15:08:53
107 1 2
CHAIRMAN: All right.
Thank you.
Half ten.
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Thank you.
5 6
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
7 8 9
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 657
10:11:54
10:33:44
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
23RD JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Colm McGrath, please.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning.
7 8
MR. COLM McGRATH HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED
9
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:
10:34:16 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. McGrath.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. McGrath.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 2
Mr. McGrath, you were a member of Dublin County Council I think from 1985 until
13 14 10:34:21 15
16 17
December 1993 and thereafter I think you became a member of South Dublin County
18
Council, isn't that right?
19 10:34:31 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 3
You had been first elected I think in June 1985 is that correct? You had been
21
reelected in the June 1991?
22
A.
Yes, I think we've established all of that already.
23
Q. 4
Yes.
24
And you were written to I think in November 2000 by the Tribunal and you
were advised -- if we could have 1482, please -- that the Tribunal were
10:34:53 25
investigating certain allegations being made.
Isn't that correct?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 5
And in particular, that since 1990 you had directly or indirectly received on a
28
number of occasions monies from Mr. Dunlop in connection with certain rezoning
29
projects, isn't that correct?
10:35:10 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:35:11
10:35:33
2 1
Q. 6
And you responded to that letter.
If we could have 1485, please.
On the
2
14th of December 2000.
And in that letter you advised the Tribunal that you'd
3
received unconditional political donations from Monarch Properties amongst
4
others, donations typically 500 pounds by way of cheque and lodged to your bank
5
account, isn't that correct?
6
A.
Um, yeah.
7
Q. 7
And you say that "Monarch Properties and/or Richard Lynn supported my
8
fundraising and unconditional cheque donations were lodged to my bank account."
9 10:35:43 10
11
Isn't that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 8
I think earlier this year you were written to in the context of lands at
12
Cherrywood.
13
pages 1493 and 1494 of the brief.
14
April 2006.
10:36:01 15
That's a letter of the 14th of March, 2006.
And you responded I think on the 18th of
And I think you advised the Tribunal that you'd been lobbied by
Mr. Lynn on several occasions and you recall contact with Mr. Philip Reilly and
16
Mr. Richard Lynn.
Is that correct?
17
A.
That's not up but I remember that, yes, yeah.
18
Q. 9
Yes.
19 10:36:21 20
21
Which is at both
And you said that you could not recall any contact from Mr. Philip
Monahan, Eddie Sweeney or Dominic Glennane, is that correct? A.
Yes, that's correct.
Q. 10
And I think you said that you never received any payment from anybody in
22
relation to the Cherrywood lands?
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q. 11
You said Monarch Properties, Richard Lynn, Glenroy Properties Limited, Frank
10:36:29 25
Dunlop & Associates supported your fundraising on various occasions, is that
26
correct?
27
A.
Yes, yeah.
28
Q. 12
And then you referred cheques you said from fundraising events would have been
29 10:36:42 30
lodged to your bank account and you gave your bank account details. A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:36:42
10:36:51
3 1
Q. 13
2
Now, just in relation to these lands.
You were elected I think for the Lucan
ward, is that right? For south --
3
A.
Clondalkin.
4
Q. 14
Clondalkin.
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 15
The lands in Cherrywood would not, you wouldn't have been the local councillor
7
for the lands in Cherrywood, isn't that right?
8
A.
No, no.
9
Q. 16
But you recall, I take it, being in attendance in late 1990 at a series of
10:37:04 10
special meetings of the council to review the Development Plan.
And you may
11
or may not recall the manager proposing certain proposals for development of
12
lands including the Cherrywood lands.
13
which is referred to as DP90/123 which would have included the Cherrywood area.
14
Do you recall that?
10:37:28 15
16
A.
Vaguely, yes.
Q. 17
Yes.
17
If we could have 6397.
This is a map
I think the records of the meetings, the special meetings show you in
attendance?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 18
I think the Cherrywood lands or the Monarch lands are to be seen on the bottom
10:37:39 20
right hand corner of that map.
21
that right?
22
A.
Yes, I was there I'm sure, yeah.
23
Q. 19
Yes.
24 10:37:55 25
26
You would have attended those meeting, isn't
If we have 6930 I think it shows you being in attendance on the 18th of
October 1990. A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 20
And again on the 16th of November 1990, at 6945, you are again recorded as
27
having been in attendance.
And then I think the matter came on by way of a
28
motion on the 6th of December 1990.
29
recorded as having been in attendance.
If I could have 6952.
10:38:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Again, you are
10:38:14
10:38:32
4 1
Just before I get to that meeting on the 6th of December 1990.
2
been given to the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath, by Mr. Fergal McCabe, who is a well
3
known planner, who had been retained by the Monarch interest.
4
Mr. McCabe?
5
A.
Not personally no.
6
Q. 21
Did you ever meet Mr. McCabe?
7
A.
I think I met him in the recent past but not around that time.
8
Q. 22
Yes.
9
Evidence has
Did you know
And it was Mr. McCabe's recollection that he had a meeting with three
councillors on the eve of this meeting on the 5th, 6th of September 1990.
10:38:50 10
If
I could have day 650, please, page 111.
11 12
Mr. McCabe had an involvement at that time with the council of Irish Planning
13
Institute and had been requested to attend a meeting with a number of
14
councillors.
10:39:18 15
And he identified two of those councillors as being Deputy Liam
Lawlor, who would in 1990 have been a member of Dublin County Council, yourself
16
and possibly Councillor GV Wright.
17
Buswells Hotel.
A meeting which may have taken place in
Do you have any recollection of any such meeting?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 23
Could such a meeting have taken place?
A.
Well ...
21
Q. 24
And you would have forgotten about?
22
A.
I think you know the answer to that yourself now.
23
Q. 25
Yeah.
24
A.
Let's not be silly now.
Q. 26
Sorry, Mr.--
10:39:39 20
10:39:47 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
be certain what your evidence is.
29
A.
Mr. McGrath, that is not silly.
You are being asked.
You're being asked --
I'm being asked a hypothetical question, Chairman.
10:39:58 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
We have to
10:39:58
10:40:13
5 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
not a silly question and a response like that is not called for.
3
A.
No. You are being asked -- then you can give an answer.
But it's
Well, I mean, a lot of what's being put to me before we even get into the
4
questioning is already established fact.
I have no recollection.
I have
5
already said I have no recollection of having a meeting with Mr. Fergal McCabe.
6
So why is not just then left like that?
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
may not have met him.
10:40:31 10
A.
Because the answer then could have been I'm absolutely certain I Or I could have met him but I cannot recall.
Chairman, with respect there's only one answer to the last question put to me.
11
I think the question was is it possible that such a meeting could have taken
12
place?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah.
10:40:38 15
16 17
MR. QUINN: And you could have forgotten about it. A.
You couldn't say no to that.
Of course it's possible.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
10:40:46 20
21
You could have said I wasn't there at the time.
I wasn't in
Dublin. A.
I can't be sure of that.
I can't remember whether I was there or not.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
10:40:58 25
If that's your attitude --
That's not an attitude.
If you are trying to establish facts on the basis of
hypothetical questions that's not a very good way of going forward.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
It's not a hypothetical question.
28
A.
Well I think it is anyway. Maybe we should move on.
29
Q. 27
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, just on that before we do move on, maybe if I put the
10:41:09 30
meeting in context for you.
Do you recall any level of irritation amongst
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:41:14
10:41:29
6 1
councillors in late 1990 in relation to the contacts between the officials and
2
the councillors concerning the Cherrywood lands?
3
A.
No, I don't recall any irritation.
4
Q. 28
Sorry.
5
A.
I don't recall any irritation.
6
Q. 29
Yes.
7 8
Do you recall any discussion amongst councillors in relation to the
views of the Irish Planning Institute in relation to rezonings at that time? A.
9
Not specifically, no.
I recall that there was a wide ranging debate about the
Cherrywood lands with various different opinions being expressed from all
10:41:54 10
quarters.
I -- if there were differences of opinions as between the elected
11
members and the council management, well that would not be uncommon.
12
that was very common.
13
respect for each other's opinions I'd say.
14
Q. 30
10:42:18 15
Yes.
It didn't cause irritation.
In fact,
It was just a mutual
Do you ever recall, for example, discussing with Deputy Lawlor or your
colleague, Mr. Wright, the prospect of meeting with members of the Irish
16
Planning Institute to discuss if there were any common grounds between you as
17
councillors and them in relation to the review of the Development Plan?
18
A.
19 10:42:39 20
No, not specifically, no.
Although I do recall attending several of the Irish
Planning Institute's conference over the years. Q. 31
Yes.
21
A.
And I might have expressed opinions at that.
22
Q. 32
Yes.
If we could just have perhaps 3068, please.
23
McCabe to Mr. Sweeney.
24
Mr. McCabe had been retained by Monarch.
10:43:06 25
And Mr. McCabe is reporting back to You
will have seen that letter in the brief, Mr. McGrath.
27
A.
I may have all right.
28
Q. 33
Yes.
10:43:30 30
Mr. Sweeney was involved on behalf of Monarch and
Mr. Sweeney in relation to the meeting he had had the previous night.
26
29
This is a letter from Mr.
When asked about that letter Mr. McCabe said that he was a member of the
council of the Irish Planning Institute, which was a body which represented professional planners.
And during the period, they were quite disturbed that
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:43:45
10:43:58
7 1
planning developments in the Dublin area.
And in relation in particular to
2
the rezoning of land use in north County Dublin.
3
by Deputy Lawlor to a meeting to see if there was any common ground between the
4
parties.
5
Councillor Lawlor, who attended that meeting.
6
in your recollection of whether or not such a meeting took place?
And that he had been invited
And he identified you as one of three councillors, including Does that in any way assist you
7
A.
No, it doesn't.
8
Q. 34
And you have no recollection of discussing the views of the Irish Planning
9 10:44:18 10
11
Institute with Deputy Lawlor or Deputy Wright? A.
No, no recollection whatsoever.
Q. 35
And it was Mr. McCabe's view was expressed in that letter.
And arising from
12
that meeting that there was a degree of irritation by those present at the
13
meeting because of the lack of consultation in relation to the Cherrywood site
14
between the planners and the councillors.
10:44:39 15
16
Again, does that in any way assist you in relation to your recollection? A.
No, it doesn't but it doesn't surprise me either though because I'm surprised
17
that Mr. McCabe didn't know the way the system worked.
18
draft plan without the elected members input and that was then presented to the
19
members for their input and comments and observations.
10:45:02 20
The manager produced a
So maybe it was at the
stage of the manager's draft preparation that Mr. McCabe observed what goes on.
21
And he probably didn't take into account that the members did have quite a
22
substantial input into the preparation of the plan following on from the
23
manager's draft preparations.
24
Q. 36
10:45:25 25
No.
Mr. McCabe was quite specific.
And as appears from that contemporaneous
letter of the 6th of December, Mr. McGrath --
26
A.
Yeah, I'm reading it here.
27
Q. 37
-- that in fact his view was that there was a degree of irritation because
28
there hadn't been adequate consultation between the planners and the
29
councillors in advance of the publication of that draft, which I had on the
10:45:42 30
screen a moment ago, that is DP90/123. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:45:46
10:45:58
8 1
A.
All right.
2
Q. 38
Yeah.
3
A.
I would put that a little bit lower than a view.
4 5
His actual words were that was the impression he got.
I don't think that he'd
actually formed a view on it he just got an impression. Q. 39
6
You are interpreting what he said from that letter.
I'm putting to you what
he said in evidence, Mr. McGrath.
7
A.
Okay, well I'm not aware of what he said in evidence.
8
Q. 40
Yeah. It's to that extent I'm putting it to you.
9
A.
All right.
Q. 41
So you say no such meeting took place and if such a meeting took place it's
10:46:10 10
11
unlikely you would have been at it?
12
A.
I cannot recall being at any meeting with Fergal McCabe.
13
Q. 42
You have no recollection of any discussion between yourself, Mr. Lawlor and
14
Mr. Wright either in relation to the publication of the draft plan or the
10:46:25 15
prospect of having a meeting with the representatives of the Irish Planning
16
Institute?
17
A.
No. Not in relation to Cherrywood, I have no specific --
18
Q. 43
Well no, I'm not saying that the meeting was called in the context of
19
Cherrywood, although Cherrywood was raised in the course of the meeting, do you
10:46:41 20
understand? It was a general meeting in relation to the views of the Irish
21 22
Planning Institute at that time? A.
Well I would have probably discussed the general Development Plan on several
23
occasions with Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Wright in the course of the general adoption
24
of the Development Plan.
10:47:05 25
26 27
But I can't recall that specific meeting or whatever
it's being referred to there. Q. 44
Well can you recall the special meeting of the council on the 6th of December 1990? If I could have 6952 again, please.
28 29 10:47:20 30
This is a meeting which dealt with the Carrickmines area and in particular dealt with the motion tabled by Councillors McDonald and Coffey. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
If I could
10:47:25
10:47:46
9 1
have 6953, please.
Councillors McDonald and Coffey had tabled a motion that
2
the draft development for the 1990 for the Carrickmines Valley area be prepared
3
on the basis of limiting zoning development to the eastern side of the
4
Southeastern Motorway proposed line and taking cognisance of developments
5
approved for the area -- if we look at 6954 -- adoption of the 1983 plan and in
6
doing this, significantly reduced the number of areas proposed for industrial
7
zoning and indicate where public open space/parks could be provided and
8
indicate the nature of residential zoning for proposed industrial lands.
9 10:48:01 10
That was a proposal or motion put forwards by Councillors McDonald and Coffey.
11 12
I think -- do you recall that motion coming on? A.
13 14
Not specifically but I mean it's there and I was there. it?
Q. 45
10:48:23 15
Well you voted -- first of all, you voted against a proposed amendment as we see there.
And then in relation to the vote -- that proposed amendment was
16
unsuccessful.
17
actual motion itself?
And if we look at 6955 we see that you voted in favour of the
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 46
Do you recall that vote?
A.
I don't but obviously I did.
Q. 47
Yeah.
10:48:30 20
21 22
Okay.
That would have effectively limited development to the line on the
proposed Southeastern motorway, isn't that right? Do you recall?
23
A.
Presumably so, yes.
24
Q. 48
And that was your proposal at the time.
10:48:53 25
And did I vote for
could have 7003.
If that's what the motion said. Then on the 25th of May 1991.
If I
There was a further meeting or special meeting of the
26
council in relation to the Development Plan.
27
put forward three proposals.
28
that there would be one of three options put forward for the Draft Development
29
Plan 1991.
10:49:22 30
And at that meeting the manager
If I could have 7006.
And he was proposing
And the first option was a drawing DP90A/129A.
against that proposal.
Do you recall that vote?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
And you voted
10:49:24
10:49:35
10 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 49
You don't recall that vote? You don't recall that meeting or you that vote?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 50
I see.
5
A.
-- but I'll accept what's in the minutes, you know what I mean.
6
Q. 51
I see. Do you recall anything about the can lands in Cherrywood, Mr. McGrath?
7
A.
Oh, I do I recall that I would have supported their development.
8
Q. 52
Yes.
9
A.
The development of the Cherrywood lands.
Q. 53
Yes.
10:49:51 10
I don't recall any of these meetings --
You would have supported the Monarch development?
When I'm referring to the Cherrywood lands now I'm referring in the
11
context of Monarch Properties.
When you're referring to the Cherrywood lands
12
are you referring to the lands at Cherrywood including the Monarch lands?
13
A.
I would be, yes.
14
Q. 54
Yeah.
A.
I wouldn't be attaching any significance to the ownership.
Q. 55
I see.
10:50:05 15
16 17
Well the matter came back before the council I think in May 1992.
you recall the matter coming back before the council in May '92.
18
A.
No but if you remind me I'm sure I will.
19
Q. 56
Yes.
10:50:28 20
On the 13th of May '92, the manager If I could have 7203, please.
Do you recall this map being debated and being voted upon? A.
23 24
If I could have 7193, please.
presented his report, which was map DP90/44.
21 22
Do
Not specifically but I mean, I have no no doubt that that was the map presented.
Q. 57
10:50:57 25
If I could have 7144, please.
This is a motion in the name of Councillors
Lydon and Hand which had been signed, received by the council on the 4th of May
26
'92.
And would have come on in the normal way for review on the 25th of May
27
'92.
Do you recall that motion or receiving that motion?
28
A.
29 10:51:21 30
Not specifically.
I don't specifically recall any motion.
the agenda I would have -Q. 58
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But if it was on
10:51:22
10:51:35
11 1
A.
-- deliberated over it I'm sure.
2
Q. 59
Yes. Do you recall any meetings in Conways where the Fianna Fail grouping
3
would discuss upcoming matters in the council agenda?
4
A.
Yes, we had regular meeting in Conways.
5
Q. 60
Do you recall any meeting in which this proposed motion was discussed?
6
A.
Not specifically but it would have been discussed I'm sure. Yes.
7
Q. 61
I think Councillor Lydon would have been a member of your party at this time,
8 9 10:51:47 10
11
is that right? A.
Yes, that's right.
Q. 62
And do you recall discussing the motion with Councillor Lydon?
A.
I don't recall discussing it with him but I'm sure I would have discussed it
12 13
with him because it was in his area. Q. 63
14
Yes, yeah. 1992.
10:52:12 15
At that meeting on the 25th, I said in fact it's the 27th of May
If I could have 7207, please.
The manager's proposal at DP92/44 was
proposed by Councillor Lydon and yourself, Mr. McGrath.
And I'm just
16
wondering if you can assist the Tribunal on how you came to second that
17
proposal on that date.
18
A.
It could have been for a variety of reasons.
19
Q. 64
Well can you give the actual reason in the first instance Mr. McGrath?
A.
Well I can't specifically give you the actual reason.
21
Q. 65
Why not?
22
A.
I would have -- I'll try and explain to you now.
23
Q. 66
That's what I'm asking you.
24
A.
One reason could have been which was very often --
Q. 67
I don't want a hypothetical reasons, Mr. McGrath. I'm anxious that you can,
10:52:29 20
10:52:41 25
26
give the precise reason and how you supported and seconded that motion?
27
A.
Well I'll try and recall why I did that.
28
Q. 68
Please.
29
A.
Let me see now.
10:53:02 30
Perhaps I was sitting beside Councillor Lydon at the time.
And to put the motion on the floor I may have seconded it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But more than
10:53:07
10:53:25
12 1
likely, the more than likely answer is that I supported the thrust of the
2
motion and I was happy to second it.
3
Q. 69
Yes.
So the Tribunal has the option of accepting either the fact that you
4
happened to be located beside Councillor Lydon on the day or alternatively you
5
supported the proposal?
6
A.
No, I think what I'm trying to say to you and it's not hypothetical.
Is that
7
very often in the cauldron that was Dublin County Council at the time.
8
colleague had a motion before the floor and was proposing a motion, courtesy
9
alone was enough reason -- enough to second somebody's motion.
10:53:44 10
without a seconder a motion doesn't fly and it falls.
If a
Because
So common courtesy some
11
times just was the reason why some people seconded motions.
12
the floor for debate and then to be dealt with by the council.
13
necessarily have been no motive or no reason behind some times seconding a
14
motion.
10:54:08 15
16
To get them on
So there may
But I would be fairly confident in that case I was happy to second
that motion because I supported it. Q. 70
If we could have 7144, please.
This is the actual motion that Councillor
17
Lydon was proposing for the meeting, Mr. McGrath.
18
that motion, that was Councillor Hand.
19
Hand was present on the occasion.
10:54:29 20
And he had a seconder for
And we can see at 7205 that Councillor
We can see also that Councillor Hand voted
in favour of the motion I had on the screen a moment ago.
So Councillor Lydon
21
already had a seconder for his own motion and we know that the seconder voted
22
in favour of the proposal that you seconded?
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 71
So would you agree with me that it's unlikely that Councillor Lydon would have
10:54:46 25
been deprived of a seconder? Could we have 7207, please.
26
A.
Mr. Hand may not have been in the room.
27
Q. 72
Well he voted on the motion?
28
A.
But he may not have been in the room when it was proposed.
29
Q. 73
He spoke in favour of it, Mr. McGrath.
10:55:11 30
Do you see 7207? It says "Following
discussions to which Councillors Lydon, Hand and others contributed the manager Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:55:16
10:55:25
13 1
replied to queries raised."
2
A.
I see that, yeah.
3
Q. 74
And do you also see the motion -- and underneath the motion those councillors
4
that voted in favour of it?
5
A.
I do see that.
6
Q. 75
And do you see Councillor Hand's name there as having spoken in favour of it?
7
A.
I see that, yeah but that doesn't change the fact that he may not have been in
8 9
the room when the motion was proposed. Q. 76
10:55:42 10
11
So you think that you came to second this motion because Councillor Hand may not have been present in the room even though he spoke in favour of the motion?
A.
12
I came to second the motion because -- well I mean it's a question that you have to ask Mr. Hand but --
13
Q. 77
Now, Mr. McGrath.
14
A.
I beg your pardon, sorry.
10:55:59 15
have been in the room.
16
That's slipped my memory.
If, Mr. Hand may not
So if there's a pregnant pause between the proposing
of a motion and a seconding, well then somebody has to second it.
17
Q. 78
Yes.
18
A.
And if I support the motion, second it.
19
Q. 79
You were there, Mr. McGrath, isn't that right? And you are now here and you're
10:56:14 20
assisting the Tribunal.
And I'm asking you what transpired and how you came
21
to second the motion, isn't that correct? And what you're telling the Tribunal
22
is that they should ask the deceased Mr. Hand.
23
A.
24
No, I withdrew that now and I apologised for it so I don't know why you're pursuing that line of questioning.
10:56:33 25
are you trying to get at here.
Also -- you see, maybe if you explain what
I don't understand your thinking on this.
26
Q. 80
I have no thinking.
27
A.
I seconded a motion which I support and voted for and consistently voted for.
28
Q. 81
I'm just asking you, Mr. McGrath, to explain how you came to second the motion.
29 10:56:50 30
There was already a motion by Councillor Lydon and Councillor Hand. A.
But Mr. Hand didn't second it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:56:52
10:56:57
14 1
Q. 82
2
He didn't second this proposal, even though he has voted in favour of it, isn't that right?
3
A.
Is it Mr. Quinn is it?
4
Q. 83
Yes, Mr. McGrath.
5
A.
Mr. Quinn, a motion, irrespective of whether it's written down and signed it
6
still has to be proposed on the floor of the meeting to get it, to give
7
ownership to the meeting of the motion.
8
seconded. Now --
9 10:57:14 10
And it has to be proposed and
Q. 84
This --
A.
I'm suggesting to you and I think it's unreasonable of you not to accept my
11
proposal, that Mr. Hand may have been out of the room when Mr. Lydon proposed
12
the motion.
13
council meeting.
14
Q. 85
10:57:34 15
So I seconded the motion to give it flight on the floor of the
In any event, the motion was unsuccessful, isn't that right? And Mr. Lydon withdrew his motion as did Councillor Hand.
16
Do you recall that meeting,
Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Not specifically, no.
18
Q. 86
Can I just ask you, by May 1992 had any body from Monarch asked for your
19 10:57:53 20
support for their proposals? A.
21 22
I would have discussed it with, I'm sure, yes, various representatives from Monarch.
Q. 87
23 24
Not in detail, no.
Well could you identify for the Tribunal the representatives that you might have discussed it with?
A.
I definitely recall discussing it with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
Q. 88
How did you know Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
I came to know him through his, his regular attendance at council meetings.
27
Q. 89
I take it that Mr. Lynn would have been in attendance seeking support for
10:58:08 25
28 29 10:58:23 30
various of the Monarch proposals? A.
He was, yes.
Q. 90
I think one of those was the Cherrywood site and another may have been Somerton Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:58:27
10:58:36
15 1
or Ongar Stud, is that right?
2
A.
Ongar.
3
Q. 91
Yes.
4
A.
However, he was there.
5
Q. 92
Yes.
6
A.
As were others, as you know.
7
Q. 93
What about Mr. Reilly?
8
A.
Um, well Mr. Reilly, I'm not sure how I came to meet Mr. Reilly, in similar
9 10:58:47 10
I don't recall that, no, no.
He was omnipresent, as they say.
circumstances I would say. Q. 94
Had you met Mr. Reilly by May '92?
11
A.
I may have met him in the context of The Square in Tallaght.
12
Q. 95
Yes.
13
A.
Yes, at various ceremonies, opening ceremonies or whatever.
14
Q. 96
I'm just wondering would you have seen Mr. Reilly at council meetings up to May
10:59:06 15
That would have been back in 1990 I think?
1992 or did his attendance become more prominent after 1992?
16
A.
Oh, it's very difficult to say.
17
Q. 97
Yes.
18
A.
But, I mean, he was in attendance at some council meetings and I would have met
19 10:59:19 20
him at an odd one, as they say. Q. 98
Now, we do know that you met Mr. Lynn in early '93, isn't that right? If we
21
could have 4038.
22
week ending the 26th of February '93.
23
of expenses and one of them, second last one you will see Draft Development
24
Plan McGrath et al.
10:59:53 25
Limited.
This is an expense claim form submitted by Mr. Lynn for the And he has there identified as a series
You see that? In connection with the Cherrywood Property
Do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in February of 1993?
26
A.
No, I don't recall it, no.
27
Q. 99
If you did meet Mr. Lynn in February 1993 in connection with the Cherrywood
28 29 11:00:10 30
Properties Limited what would it have been in connection with? A.
If I did meet him?
Q. 100
Yeah.
What would you have been discussing? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:00:13
11:00:22
16 1
A.
In relation to the Cherrywood Properties?
2
Q. 101
Yes.
3
A.
I presume we would have been discussing the proposed -- the proposals for those
4 5
lands. Q. 102
6
Yes.
Were you very much in support of the development in those lands
Mr. McGrath?
7
A.
I was, yes.
8
Q. 103
Now, Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that in early March 1993 he became -- he
9
was retained by the Monarch interest in relation to the lands and that
11:00:41 10
subsequently he had a discussion with you after he was retained.
11
You'll have
seen that in the brief?
12
A.
Yeah, I saw some of it.
13
Q. 104
And heard some the parties evidence in relation to it?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 105
You I think had some telephone attendance with Mr. Dunlop on the 9th of March
11:00:53 15
16
1993, if we could have 4046.
17
in March 1993?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 106
Yes.
A.
Most likely Quarryvale.
Q. 107
Yes.
11:01:11 20
21
I've no idea.
Do you recall why you were contacting Mr. Dunlop
It could have been for several reasons.
Now, in relation to Cherrywood.
Do you recall first hearing that Mr.
22
Dunlop had been taken on board by the Quarryvale team -- sorry the Cherrywood
23
team?
24
A.
No, I didn't hear he'd been taken on board, no.
Q. 108
Did you know that at some stage he was on board?
26
A.
No, it wasn't clear to me for quite some time that he was on board no.
27
Q. 109
When did it become clear to you that he was on board?
28
A.
It didn't become clear to me at any stage that he was on board.
29
Q. 110
I see.
A.
But he seemed to be --
11:01:30 25
11:01:45 30
So --
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:01:47
11:01:57
17 1
Q. 111
Did you know that he was ever on board?
2
A.
He seemed to be hovering on the wings of it, he seemed to be hovering on the
3 4
background. Q. 112
5
So is it your evidence to the Tribunal that you never knew Mr. Dunlop was involved in the Cherrywood proposals?
6
A.
No, it wasn't clear to me that he was involved.
7
Q. 113
But in your statement I think you have said that he discussed it with it with
8 9
you, isn't that right? A.
11:02:15 10
11
Well sure we would have discussed what was going on on the day, any day, with anybody.
Q. 114
12
Just to put, to be fair to you.
You say "I discussed a proposal with Frank
Dunlop at least once."
13
A.
Yeah, I probably did, yeah.
14
Q. 115
So are you saying that your discussion with Mr. Dunlop in relation to
11:02:27 15
Cherrywood was in the context of a general discussion?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 116
And not in the context of a discussion between you, a councillor, and Mr.
18 19 11:02:43 20
21
Dunlop, a lobbiest, who had been retained by the Monarch interest? A.
No, that's a good way of putting it, yeah.
Q. 117
Yeah.
A.
My recollection is discussing it with him but I don't remember it being on a
22
specific mano mano basis vis-a-vis Cherrywood.
23
remember just discussing it with him all right.
24
Q. 118
11:03:01 25
Him coming lobbying me.
Yes. Now, Mr. Dunlop has said in evidence, Mr. McGrath, that shortly after he was appointed that he had a conversation with you and that he -- he felt that
26
you already knew that he had been taken on board.
What do you say to that?
27
A.
What do you want me to say? I've just said I didn't know he was on board.
28
Q. 119
He said you seemed to be quite happy with that.
29 11:03:30 30
I
That is to say that you were
quite happy with the fact that he was now on board? A.
Uh-huh.
Are you asking me a question? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:03:32
11:03:41
18 1
Q. 120
Yes.
2
A.
Go ahead.
3
Q. 121
I'm asking you to comment on Mr. Dunlop's evidence because I'm putting to you
4
what Mr. Dunlop has said, Mr. McGrath.
5
comment on it, do you understand?
Just to give you an opportunity to
6
A.
I really have nothing to say to that, I mean it's --
7
Q. 122
Okay.
8
A.
Honest to God.
9
Q. 123
He goes on to say that "He had a suspicion that you already knew that he was on
11:03:51 10
board."
11
A.
A suspicion.
Why would he use the word suspicion?
12
Q. 124
Yeah. Now, you had had a meeting with Mr. Lynn on I think the 26th of March as
13
we saw a moment ago.
14
26th of February I should have said.
11:04:08 15
And Mr. Dunlop dates his appointment to early -- sorry And Mr. Dunlop dates his appointment to
early March which would be about a week later.
Did you discuss the possible
16
involvement of Mr. Dunlop with the site with Mr. Lynn when you met him on the
17
26th of February '93, can you recall?
18
A.
No, I wouldn't have, no.
19
Q. 125
Mr. Dunlop said that he knew from his discussions with Mr. Richard Lynn that
11:04:28 20
you had already been lobbied in relation to the proposal?
21
A.
No comment.
22
Q. 126
He said that there was a relationship there in the sense of lobbying.
23
to say a relationship there between you and Mr. Lynn.
24
evidence that you had been lobbied by Mr. Lynn, isn't that right?
11:04:49 25
That is
I think you've given
A.
I was lobbied by Mr. Lynn, yes.
26
Q. 127
So he could be correct in that assertion?
27
A.
Well I would be very, very slow to attach correctness to anything Mr. Dunlop
28
says to be honest with you.
29
really, you know, Mr. Dunlop -- ah go on anyway, I don't where this is going!
11:05:08 30
Q. 128
But the point is, I don't see where this is going
I don't want to interrupt anything you want to say that might be of assistance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:05:12
11:05:25
19 1 2
to the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath. A.
3
But is there something you do want to say?
No, I've nothing to say about those. frivolous.
I find them very trivial and very
Can we get down to the --
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. McGrath, what do you find trivial and frivolous?
Well going back to some of the previous questions, Chairman.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
What previous question as soon as --
What difference does it make whether I'm happy or not about --
11:05:39 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13
We're not asking you to say whether you are happy or not.
Chairman, can I suggest to you, the questions are sort of being put in such a way that it almost makes one seem to be uncooperative because they are --
14 11:05:51 15
CHAIRMAN:
No, no. This is a similar line of questioning that is adopted with
16
everyone or with most witnesses.
17
Tribunal, one of our tasks is to determine the extent to which Mr. Dunlop may
18
or may not be telling the truth to the Tribunal and other witnesses.
19
of evidence or statements of evidence made by Mr. Dunlop that relate to you or
11:06:16 20
21
Things that Mr. Dunlop have said to the
So items
that might be relevant to you, to your position, are quite properly put to you. A.
Yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
that particular statement is a truthful statement.
11:06:32 25
But it's quite correct
that you be given the opportunity to comment on what Mr. Dunlop has said.
26 27
So that you can -- it doesn't mean that Mr. Quinn believes that
you can disagree or agree with it or .... A.
Okay.
28 29 11:06:53 30
CHAIRMAN: A.
Or say --
In response to that, Chairman, can I just say this. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
If Mr. Quinn asks me a
And
11:06:53
11:07:07
20 1
question which involves details of something that happened whatever it is, 15
2
years ago at a meeting and I honestly tell him that I cannot specifically
3
recall and you know and thankfully with prompting from the screen and all of
4
the paperwork you have, some times it jogs your memory.
5
details in relation to questions, around something that I do recall attending
6
and being involved to the extent that I was there and involved in debate and
7
that.
8
sentence involving seven words that's supposed to have been said to me 15 years
9
ago by a individual and I say no or I say -- and he wants me to comment.
11:07:30 10
If I can't give him
And then he comes along and asks me a question about do I recall a
All
I'm saying is how does he expect me to remember whether or not Frank Dunlop
11
said something to me 15 years ago, when I can't remember something that I was
12
involved in and had lots of paperwork to back it up and loads prompting and
13
loads of reminders of what was going on.
14
I'm just saying do you really expect me to be able to remember that? That's
11:07:50 15
So I'm not saying I don't remember.
what I'm saying.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
that witnesses who initially might say they don't recollect something.
19
who then are prompted by evidence that may have come into the possession of the
11:08:04 20
Well we don't know.
Because people's memories vary.
And we know And
Tribunal or evidence of other witnesses, when prompted, they then start to
21
recollect or recollect something more than they -- than was the position
22
earlier.
23
doesn't mean or suggest that Mr. Quinn or anyone else disbelieves you when you
24
say that you can't recollect.
11:08:30 25
26
So that's the reason why these bits of evidence are put to you.
It
The purpose of prompting you with other
evidence is to see if we can -- if that aids your recollection. A.
All right.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
additional material having been so prompted.
11:08:46 30
And some witnesses have been able to provide very significant Not because they were
withholding it but because their memories have been aided by whatever the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:08:50
11:09:00
21 1 2
prompt was.
And that's the reason for it.
A.
Okay.
I accept that Chairman, right.
Q. 129
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, Mr. Dunlop went on to say that when he discussed the
3 4 5
matter with you, that you were quite aggressive about what could be done or
6
what should be done on the site.
7
developing the site, very much pro having the site developed for residential,
8
increased density residential development.
9
A.
11:09:23 10
I was pro-development on the site.
I would never describe my attitude to any
of those matters as being aggressive.
11 12
In other words, in a you were very much pro
enthusiastic. Q. 130
The strongest I would put it would be
But I do not recall discussing that with Mr. Dunlop.
Do you recall being disappointed that the manager's 92/44 that we had on the
13
screen a moment ago, that you seconded, that that proposal had been
14
unsuccessful and Councillor Barrett's motion was successful which effectively
11:09:46 15
16
proposed a zoning of one house to the acre on the land at the time? A.
17 18
No, I wouldn't describe my feelings about losing on a vote like that as disappointment. That's just the cut and thrust of the democratic system.
Q. 131
19
Yes. Mr. Dunlop went on to say that you made some remarks about why you were in the situation you were in.
11:10:07 20
That is to say why the lands were now proposed
for a zoning at only one house to the acre.
When you -- you've told the
21
Tribunal that you recall discussing the site with Mr. Dunlop on at least one
22
occasion, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah, I think I did, yeah.
24
Q. 132
Can I ask you to tell the Tribunal your recollection of that discussion? What
11:10:23 25
26
would you have said to Mr. Dunlop in relation to the site, can you recall? A.
I'd be -- I can only speculate on what I might have said to him.
I more than
27
likely told him that I was supporting the development of those lands at a
28
reasonably -- at a sustainable density.
29
speculate on what I might have told him, you know.
11:10:47 30
Something like that.
I probably gave him enough
to leave him with the impression that I was supporting -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I can only
11:10:50
11:11:02
22 1
Q. 133
Yes.
2
A.
-- the motions to rezone, so.
3
Q. 134
He'd have known that I presume had he attended any of the council meetings
4
because you would have et vote in the favour of the proposals on the site,
5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah, I think my position in the Development Plan was fairly consistent so.
7
Q. 135
Did it occur to you to ask Mr. Dunlop why he was asking you how you were likely
8 9
to vote or what your attitude was in relation to the site? A.
No, I wouldn't have had any reason to ask him that either.
Q. 136
Were you not curious?
11
A.
No because it was part of his job.
12
Q. 137
Yes.
13
A.
Um.
14
Q. 138
So therefore, that implies that you you knew that he was employed in relation
11:11:29 10
11:11:31 15
16
It was what he did.
to the matter? A.
No, it doesn't.
As I said to you earlier, we may have just discussed it in
17
general discussion.
18
he wasn't involved in in the course of general discussion.
19
Q. 139
11:11:49 20
And we very often may have discussed other projects that
Mr. Dunlop's recollection of those meetings and in particular this meeting which took place in and around 1993 and shortly after he was retained by the
21
Monarch interest, was that he advised you or told you that he needed your
22
support.
And your response to that was fine but it'll cost you?
23
A.
(laughter) No, I reject that out of hand.
24
Q. 140
He says you began a negotiation and that he agreed to give you 2,000 pounds.
A.
No, I totally refute that.
Q. 141
You refute that you entered into a negotiation request Mr. Dunlop for your
11:12:14 25
26 27
support for the site.
Is that right?
28
A.
Totally! Totally refute that.
29
Q. 142
Yes.
11:12:34 30
He says that you were a key figure -- were you a key figure,
Mr. McGrath, in relation to the group, the Fianna Fail grouping in the council Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:12:38
11:12:47
23 1
in 1993?
2
A.
I wouldn't have regarded myself as a key figure. No.
3
Q. 143
Yes.
4
A.
Um, yes.
5
Q. 144
And you had survived the election in 1991, isn't that right?
6
A.
I like the way you put it.
7
Q. 145
Well when I say that, Mr. McGrath, I think that a lot of councillors did not
You had been in the council I think since 1985, isn't that right?
8
survive the 1991 election, isn't that right? There was quite a big turn around
9
in 1991.
11:13:02 10
A.
Well the electorate are very fickle, Mr. Quinn.
11
Q. 146
Yes.
12
A.
And you know, you can attribute a variety of reasons as to why somebody might
13 14 11:13:11 15
not be reelected. Q. 147
Yes.
A.
Or why somebody is reelected.
16 17
over the years. Q. 148
18 19
It's something I've never managed to fathom
There had been a big turn around in 1991, isn't that right? A lot of your colleagues had lost their seats in 1991.
A.
There was a swing against Fianna Fail in 1991 as far as I can recall. Yeah.
Q. 149
And you had been reelected?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 150
So you would have been seen by the incoming fresh councillors as somebody with
11:13:28 20
23
experience and somebody who had been in the council for some time, isn't that
24
right?
11:13:40 25
26
A.
Perhaps so.
Q. 151
Yes. And you had quite a detailed knowledge of the council and its working at
27
that stage, isn't that right?
28
A.
I'll accept that, yes.
29
Q. 152
Do you recall being lobbied by any of the Monarch interest between May 1992 and
11:13:54 30
November 1993 in relation to the project? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:13:58
11:14:15
24 1
A.
2 3
I'm sure Mr. Lynn would have been in regular -- he was in regular contact with us.
Q. 153
4
When you say in regular contact.
Do you mean to imply that he was regularly
on the phone to you and regularly meeting with you?
5
A.
No, was regularly in attendance.
6
Q. 154
At council meetings?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 155
And was it your practice to meet with him there and maybe have a coffee with
9 11:14:24 10
him or -A.
The meeting was unavoidable.
11
Q. 156
Yes.
12
A.
I don't recall specifically.
13 14
Yeah, we may have had coffee or perhaps a drink
together on occasions but -Q. 157
Yeah.
A.
-- that was just the logistics of Dublin County Council at the time.
16
Q. 158
Did you come to see Mr. Reilly at the council meetings at that time also?
17
A.
Yes, I recall him being there at least once or twice anyway, yeah.
18
Q. 159
Did Mr. Reilly ever ask for your support for the project?
19
A.
I can't recall him specifically asking for my support, no.
Q. 160
Did you ever discuss with --
21
A.
But he would have discussed it with me I'm sure.
22
Q. 161
Yes.
11:14:35 15
11:14:59 20
23 24
Did you ever discuss with Mr. Lynn the possible support for others for
the project? A.
11:15:13 25
Not the possible support of others, no but we may have discussed in general terms who might be likely to support it.
26
Q. 162
Yes.
27
A.
Yeah, we probably did, yes.
28
Q. 163
And would you have an idea of the councillors within Fianna Fail in particular
29 11:15:26 30
That's what I mean.
who might or might not support the project? A.
Not specifically but I would only be able to go on patterns of -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:15:31
11:15:38
25 1
Q. 164
Yes.
2
A.
-- similar to my own.
3
Q. 165
Yes.
4
A.
Pro-development.
5
Q. 166
In favour of rezoning?
6
A.
Well pro-development.
7
Q. 167
Yes.
People who were generally --
Well pro-development councillors would have been well known, I take it,
8
to somebody like Mr. Lynn who was regularly in attendance at these meetings,
9
isn't that right?
11:15:48 10
11
A.
Well it's not hard to identify pro-development councillors.
Q. 168
What I'm asking you, Mr. McGrath, is did a rapport develop between yourself and
12
Mr. Lynn in relation to the site or Monarch interest at this time?
13
A.
I wouldn't call it a rapport, no, but obviously familiarity creeps in.
14
Q. 169
Yes. You were on first name terms for example?
A.
Yes, we would have been after several meetings.
16
Q. 170
And were you on first named terms with Mr. Reilly?
17
A.
Eventually, yes.
18
Q. 171
Eventually?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 172
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn was more prominent than Mr. Reilly in
11:16:13 15
11:16:21 20
21
relation to the project?
22
A.
Yes, in attendance, yes, yeah.
23
Q. 173
Yeah.
24
A.
Yes, I would say so, yeah.
Q. 174
Did you ever discuss the project with Mr. Lynn in the company of colleagues, in
11:16:36 25
26
Mr. Reilly played a lesser role?
other words, other councillors?
27
A.
Oh, um, I may have but I don't specifically recall that, no.
28
Q. 175
How long would those --
29
A.
Sorry, there may have been -- often there might be a grouping of people
11:16:53 30
together. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:16:53
11:17:03
26 1
Q. 176
That's what I'm asking you Mr. McGrath, yeah.
2
A.
We were in confined spaces.
3
Q. 177
Yeah.
4
A.
If you stopped to talk to somebody, there may be already somebody there or in
5
ear short or shoulder to shoulder. Yeah, the answer is I suppose is yes we
6
would have.
7
Q. 178
8 9
Did you often retire to the local hostelries with Mr. Lynn and others after or during those council meetings?
A.
I would say probably yes but not by specific arrangement.
Q. 179
I appreciate that.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 180
But you could find yourself perhaps in Mr. Lynn's company?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 181
In Conways is that fair?
A.
I think it's fair to say we all gravitated to Conways after meetings or during
11:17:15 10
11:17:22 15
16 17
lunch breaks. Q. 182
So for example if somebody were to go into o Conways in mid or late 1993 it
18
wouldn't be unusual to find you there with Mr. Lynn or other councillors or
19
find Mr. Lynn there with other councillors?
11:17:39 20
A.
No, that wouldn't be unusual, no.
21
Q. 183
Maybe even Mr. Dunlop there also?
22
A.
I think he made the odd appearance, yes.
23
Q. 184
Yeah.
24
your view of how the motions in relation to the project were likely to go at
11:18:00 25
26
And would you have discussed with Mr. Lynn at any of those meetings
future meetings? A.
No. I'd be fairly confident in saying that when one got to Conways we regarded
27
that as our break from what were sometimes seven and eight hour long meetings.
28
And we really relished the chance to get out of that chamber and go for a cup
29
of coffee and a sandwich.
11:18:24 30
So very often, you know, it was a little taboo to
be getting into the actual discussion of the items that were up, you know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
We
11:18:28
11:18:40
27 1
usually took a break and talked about more domestic things, you know.
2
Q. 185
You were off duty.
3
A.
Off duty, that's a good way of putting it, yeah.
4
Q. 186
Did you ever discuss this project with Councillor Fox, for example?
5
A.
No, not that I can recall, no.
6
Q. 187
Do you ever recall a Fianna Fail meeting in Conways at which the Carrickmines
7
or the Cherrywood lands were, the Monarch lands were discussed?
8
A.
They would have been discussed at our group meeting, yes.
9
Q. 188
Yes.
11:18:58 10
11
and who spoke against the project at those meetings? A.
12 13
Um, well, Councillor Lydon would have spoke in favour of them. Councillor Fox.
Q. 189
14 11:19:21 15
And do you recall who spoke in favour of the project at those meetings
Yes.
Perhaps
Now, I can't recall anybody speaking against them, no.
But you will have identified Councillor Lydon with the project, would
you? A.
Not specifically, no.
16
Q. 190
That's what I mean?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 191
He was the local councillor, isn't that right or certainly --
19
A.
Usually when an item came up for discussion at a group meeting, the Chairman of
11:19:33 20
It was his area.
That's the only reason.
the meeting would advert to the local councillor in the first instance to get
21
his synopsis on the situation, you know.
22
Q. 192
Did you ever discuss the matter with Councillor Lydon?
23
A.
I'm sure I would have, yes.
24
Q. 193
Did you ever discuss strategy in relation to the site with Councillor Lydon?
A.
Strategy in relation to the site?
26
Q. 194
Yes.
27
A.
Um, no, not strategy in relation to the site, I wouldn't think so, no.
28
Q. 195
Yes.
29
A.
There were so many various proposals for that site.
Q. 196
Between March and October 1993, and I'm not going to put these up on screen
11:19:54 25
11:20:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:20:16
11:20:34
28 1
unless you want me to, Mr. McGrath, there were a number of telephone
2
attendances on you, that is to say you ringing Mr. Dunlop's office.
3
Dunlop not being there and his secretary taking memos of the fact that you had
4
rang.
5
March '93 and October '93.
6
reasonably regular contact with Mr. Dunlop at this time?
Mr.
I think in all there were 16 calls recorded as having been made between Would it be fair to say that you were in
7
A.
Yeah, that's fair to say, yeah.
8
Q. 197
You would have been ringing him and presumably you would have been meeting him
9 11:20:55 10
in the way that you described with Mr. Lynn earlier at the special meetings? A.
I'd probably be returning his calls.
11
Q. 198
I appreciate that.
12
A.
Do we have those records?
13
Q. 199
Yes.
14
A.
No, his calls to me.
Q. 200
No.
16
A.
Well, I don't have the resources to discover those calls.
17
Q. 201
Do such notes exist, Mr. McGrath?
18
A.
No, they don't but --
19
Q. 202
And therefore --
A.
Could you not have established these facts from Eircom?
Q. 203
No.
11:21:07 15
11:21:19 20
21 22 23
They are in the brief and we can put them up if you wish?
You haven't discovered any such calls, Mr. McGrath?
Mr. McGrath, the issue of resources don't arise.
If you don't have the
notes they don't exist, isn't that right? A.
24
Resources.
I'm putting time as being the most important resource not money.
I would put it to you that I think you should have got the records to show if
11:21:43 25
Mr. Dunlop had made a call to me around the same time -- or on the same days
26
and prior to my call coming to him.
27
Q. 204
So you --
28
A.
I think that's very relevant.
29
Q. 205
You think it's relevant that the contacts which are recorded as having been
11:21:59 30
made by you with Mr. Dunlop in that period ought to be put in the context of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:22:04
11:22:20
29 1 2
you returning calls that is Mr. Dunlop made to you is that correct? A.
Well if you're attaching any relevance to -- you are making a point that I
3
contacted him 16 times over a seven or eight month period. So I'm saying to
4
you that perhaps I was returning phone calls.
5
prove that.
6
Q. 206
We can't seem to be able to
The point I'm making to you, Mr. McGrath, is that and you've agreed with it,
7
is that there was regular contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in this
8
period whether it was 16 times or 20 times you've accepted it I think?
9 11:22:33 10
A.
I have accepted it, yes.
Q. 207
And it is your evidence I understand to the Tribunal, that there was regular
11 12
contact between you in this time? A.
13 14
Yes but I'm curious to know if those entries in Mr. Dunlop's diaries are supported by Eircom evidence?
Q. 208
You think these are a forgery?
A.
I'm suggesting to you that they can be.
16
Q. 209
Are you suggesting that you didn't make those contacts?
17
A.
No, I'm not suggesting that at all.
18
Q. 210
If you look at the document on screen, Mr. McGrath?
19
A.
I'm suggesting that --
Q. 211
Just look at the document 4046 on screen.
11:22:46 15
11:22:55 20
It's a telephone message of the 9th
21
of March 1993. 9:25 Colm McGrath.
22
two telephone numbers including a mobile did you recognise either of those
23
numbers, Mr. McGrath?
24 11:23:15 25
Not urgent please call him." And there are
A.
I think you're missing the point, Mr. Quinn.
Q. 212
No, no just answer my question, Mr. McGrath.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
The point that Mr. Quinn is making in relation to the specific
28
telephone call and I only put it -- one can only speculate.
29
which it is recorded if it is a contemporaneous note suggests and I'll only put
11:23:28 30
the word suggests, because we can't do anything in fairness to everybody -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
The manner in
11:23:33
11:23:42
30 1
A.
Okay.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
office and left to numbers.
5
A.
Colm McGrath at 9:25 on the 9th of March called Mr. Dunlop's
Okay.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
that in itself couldn't be further grounded by any search in the Eircom
9
telephone records because that's, save your own telephone records, Mr. McGrath,
11:23:59 10
11
I think what Mr. Quinn is, in relation to that specific one,
because that suggests -A.
Okay.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- a call coming in to Mr. Dunlop's.
14
other calls by you may well be a response to a telephone call from Mr. Dunlop.
11:24:11 15
A.
That's not to say that
All right.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
specific one.
19 11:24:20 20
A.
All right.
I think that's as much as Mr. Quinn is putting to you that
I accept that and thank you for that.
But the point I still
maintain is No. one, I can neither say whether these calls were in response to
21
a call made to me.
I can't confirm nor I won't confirm any of those calls
22
made by me to Mr. Dunlop for the moment anyway.
23
this road of attaching importance to whether I made them or not.
If we're going to go down
24 11:24:41 25
I'm also surprised to see that in March of 1993 that I would see it necessary
26
to leave my two phone numbers with Mr. Dunlop.
27
well knew at the time and probably had them in his mobile phone.
28
surprised to see that I would have to leave numbers for him.
29
trying to be awkward Chairman, I'm just trying to say that if a secretary -- I
11:25:03 30
Two numbers which he quite I'm
Now, I'm not
accept that I was in regular contact with Mr. Dunlop on the phone but I'm not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:25:08
11:25:19
31 1
going to confirm any specific time or date that I phoned him.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
would be very difficult for you to do.
5
A.
No.
We're not asking you to condition firm that because that
It, yeah.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
establish the level of contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop.
9
itself doesn't mean that there's anything amiss about that --
11:25:30 10
A.
The importance of the evidence, insofar as it is important, is to Which in
No, I accept that.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
it's 15 times or 20 times or whether you called him or he called you or
14
whatever.
11:25:44 15
It's just to establish.
Now, it doesn't really matter whether
We're not interested in that detail.
A.
Okay.
Q. 213
MR. QUINN: Mr. McGrath, just in relation to the numbers on screen.
16 17 18 19
say that they were your phone numbers at that time? A.
Yes, and still are.
Q. 214
You recognise them?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 215
Now, if we could have 4264.
11:25:51 20
This is a message, for example, that you appear
23
to have left on the 25th of June '93.
24
weekend" and you give another number.
11:26:06 25
"At 4:25.
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 216
Yeah.
27
A.
I see that.
28
Q. 217
Yeah.
29
A.
No -- I have to repeat myself.
Q. 218
You're not confirming any of those calls.
11:26:20 30
Do you
Please call him over the
You were anxious that Mr. Dunlop would call you over that weekend? I'm not confirming any of those phone calls.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:26:22
11:26:42
32 1
A.
2 3
No. All I'll confirm is that I was in regular contact with Mr. Dunlop during that period.
Q. 219
If we could have 8051.
This was a message left on the 1st September 1993, two
4
messages one at 10:10 in the morning and the other at 4:30.
5
numbers given "need to speak to you before he sends this out.
6
Again, do you recognise those numbers?
7
A.
Yeah, the same numbers.
8
Q. 220
They are the same numbers?
9
A.
Yeah, I recognise those numbers.
11:26:56 10
11
Again, two Fax from him."
I repeat though I'm not confirming any of
these notes as being 100 percent accurate. Q. 221
12
8504.
On the 24th of September 1993.
11:15 Colm McGrath Fianna Fail rooms
in DCC -- which presumably is Dublin County Council and the number given.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 222
Is that the number for the Fianna Fail room?
A.
Yes, I recognise the number, yes.
16
Q. 223
On the 16th of September '93 at 8503.
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 224
And you say that despite this level of contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop,
11:27:13 15
10:36 a.m. a mobile number given.
19
you had no specific conversation with him in relation to the Cherrywood lands
11:27:38 20
although you would have discussed it in a general way with him and you, as I
21
understand it, did not understand him to have been retained by Monarch in
22
relation to the lands?
23
A.
24
No, that wasn't made clear to me.
My contact with Mr. Dunlop was
predominantly in relation to the Quarryvale Module.
11:27:59 25
And after that I cannot
confirm to you any of those calls or their contents, which is probably more
26
interesting, the content would be more interesting I'm sure.
27
Q. 225
Well there are only two people that can give that evidence, Mr. McGrath?
28
A.
Exactly.
29
Q. 226
You are one of them, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
11:28:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:28:15
11:28:30
33 1
Q. 227
But you are not in a position, you say to tell the Tribunal what that is?
2
A.
Well I can't recall seeing anything in the folders that suggested that Mr.
3 4
Dunlop was able to say what the content of those calls were. Q. 228
Well whatever about the contents of the telephone calls, Mr. Dunlop has given
5
very specific evidence which you objected to my putting to you in detail a
6
moment ago concerning a meeting some time in March 1993 where he sought your
7
support in relation to Cherrywood where you asked him, told him it would cost
8
him.
9
agreement that you would be paid 2,000 pounds.
11:28:51 10
You asked him for money.
There was a negotiation and there was an And that was his evidence,
Mr. McGrath.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 229
Now, can you recall the vote on the 11th of November 1993?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 230
If we could have 7258, please.
11:29:07 15
Okay.
Did you know, for example, that Councillors
Marren and Coffey and others had tabled a motion for the 11th of, which was
16
heard on the 11th of May '93?
17
A.
I would have been aware of it, I'm sure if it was on the agenda.
18
Q. 231
7266, please.
19
A.
Have we established that it was an agenda motion?
Q. 232
Well it would appear to be tabled on the day I think has been the evidence to
11:29:26 20
21
date?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q. 233
There is the motion on the screen.
24 11:29:41 25
Well if it was tabled -- sorry.
Okay.
26
Q. 234
Taking the motion on the screen.
27
A.
Yes.
28
11:29:53 30
There's
another motion in relation to the neighbourhood centre. A.
29
In fact there were two motions.
The answer then is if it was tabled on the day I would have had no
notice of it. Q. 235
In advance.
A.
No. That wasn't unusual. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:29:55
11:30:08
34 1
Q. 236
The motion was, what appears to have been on the agenda for the day Ms. Dillon
2
advices me.
Which I think would suggest that it had been tabled in advance,
3
isn't that right?
4
A.
In which case I would have had notice then.
5
Q. 237
Yes.
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 238
Do you recall discussing the motion with any of the people who either proposed
8 9
or seconded the motion in advance? A.
11:30:22 10
No, not specifically.
I would have -- I may have involved myself in the
discussion when it was put to the floor, other than that I have no recollection
11
of discussing it with anyone.
12
Q. 239
Do you have a recollection of discussing the motion in Conways?
13
A.
No, I don't.
14
Q. 240
I think in fact the motion was tabled on the day.
11:30:41 15
Councillor Coffey will be
giving evidence in a moment and she can clarify the matter?
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q. 241
The evidence to date has been that it was tabled on the day?
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q. 242
Yes.
11:30:55 20
21
Well I would have had no notice of it so. And would you have notice of it even if it were tabled on the day at the
Conway meeting, do you think? A.
22
No.
I -- just looking at that particularly with the handwritten addendum to
it.
23
Q. 243
Yes.
24
A.
It looks like a motion that was formulated on the day arising out of the
11:31:10 25
debate, arising out of discussions in the chamber.
26
Q. 244
Yes.
Do you recall anything of the debate or on the day?
27
A.
Well I can -- I generally recall that there was quite a robust debate on it
28
because there was a lot of opinions being expressed vis-a-vie the development
29
of these lands and how they should be developed and there was reference to a
11:31:35 30
science and technology park.
There were -- the core issues seemed to revolve
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:31:41
11:31:57
35 1
around what densities that these lands should be developed at.
2
Q. 245
Either one or four houses to the acre, isn't that right?
3
A.
Well whatever, yes, yeah, there was, yeah.
4 5
That's where the real crux of
difference of opinion occurred as far as I recall. Q. 246
Yes.
In any event, you voted in favour of that proposal, isn't that right?
6
And you would say that it was consistent with your position to date, is that
7
right?
8
A.
9 11:32:14 10
Yeah, consistent with my opinion that land in County Dublin shouldn't be wasted at such low densities.
Q. 247
11
Mr. McGrath, did you continue to meet with Mr. Lynn after that motion and that is to say after November 1993?
12
A.
As in what context, Mr. Quinn?
13
Q. 248
Well if we look at, if I could have 5433, please.
14
There have been a series of
expense claim forms discovered to the Tribunal by the Monarch interest.
11:32:41 15
appear to have been submitted by Mr. Lynn.
And the one on screen is for the
16
3rd of November 1994.
17
have been a councillor for south Dublin, is that correct?
Now, in November 1994, as I understand it, you would
18
A.
Yes, I was, yeah, yeah.
19
Q. 249
And do you see the second last entry in that form?
A.
I do, yes. I see it.
Q. 250
"Development Plan review C McGrath."
11:32:58 20
21 22
Which
And then there's an expense claim, which
is irrelevant.
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 251
But did you meet Mr. Lynn in November 1994 in relation to the Development Plan
11:33:11 25
review?
26
A.
I may have, I may have.
27
Q. 252
The Development Plan would have been confirmed I think in December 1993?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 253
Although there was a variation to the plan in relation to lands including these
11:33:25 30
I've no recollection of it.
lands, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:33:26
11:33:37
36 1
A.
2
Yeah, yeah, there would have been, yeah.
Is there any more supporting
documentation to the expense claim form?
3
Q. 254
Well what type of documentation would you like, Mr. McGrath?
4
A.
Venue.
5
Q. 255
Where might you have met Mr. Lynn?
6
A.
Well that's what I'm seeking your assistance on.
7
Q. 256
Yeah.
8 9 11:33:51 10
Can you recall where you met Mr. Lynn other than in the council
meetings, Mr. McGrath? A.
No.
Q. 257
So your meetings with Mr. Lynn would have been either in the foyer of the
11
Except perhaps in one of the nearby hotels.
council chamber or in one of the nearby hotels?
12
A.
Or in Conways perhaps.
13
Q. 258
Or in Conways.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 259
And do you recall meeting Mr. Lynn in 1994 in any of those three locations,
11:34:04 15
16
Mr. McGrath?
17
A.
Um, yes, I'm sure I do but I couldn't be specific as to when.
18
Q. 260
That expense claim form is in relation to the Cherrywood Properties.
19 11:34:27 20
21
Do you
see that in the top left hand corner under the heading "company"? A.
Yes, I see that.
Q. 261
But you would have been a councillor in South Dublin County Council at that
22
time, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, I would.
24
Q. 262
Can you tell the Tribunal why Mr. Lynn might be meeting with you in the context
11:34:46 25
of Cherrywood Properties which was situated in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
26
Council when you were a member of South Dublin County Council?
27
A.
No, I can't tell you why.
28
Q. 263
Yes.
29
A.
Perhaps Mr. Lynn was representing somebody else as well.
Q. 264
Well did Mr. Lynn ever approach you in relation to other properties in
11:34:53 30
It may have been for some other reason then.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:34:58
11:35:03
37 1 2
Cherrywood? A.
Um, in Cherrywood?
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Other than Cherrywood.
5 6
Q. 265
MR. QUINN: Other than Cherrywood.
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 266
Did he ever receive your support for other Monarch Properties? Yesterday,
9
I can't specifically.
Sorry.
No, I don't think he did, no.
Mr. Reilly gave evidence that there were two other projects current at this
11:35:17 10
time.
11
One in relation to Ongar Stud and the other in relation to Somerton,
where Mr. Monahan was based.
12
A.
No, I don't recall him approaching me about those, no.
13
Q. 267
Did you know Mr. Phil Monahan?
14
A.
Not personally, no.
Q. 268
Did you ever meet Mr. Phil Monahan?
16
A.
Yes, I've met him once I think, yeah.
17
Q. 269
Did anybody other than Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly ever seek your support for the
11:35:32 15
18 19
Cherrywood project? A.
As in relation to the Monarch group?
Q. 270
Yes.
21
A.
No, I think they are the only two I can recall dealing with.
22
Q. 271
Now Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal, Mr. McGrath, that following on his
11:35:45 20
23
negotiation and following on the debate and the vote that in accordance with
24
his prior agreement with you.
11:36:03 25
That he paid you 2,000 pounds in cash.
You
have seen that evidence, isn't that right?
26
A.
Yeah, I've seen that evidence, yeah.
27
Q. 272
Now, you presumably denied that you received that?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 273
You have given evidence in the past of having received unsolicited cash from
11:36:16 30
Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:36:17
11:36:28
38 1
A.
I have, yes.
2
Q. 274
But you say that you did not receive this money, isn't that right?
3
A.
No, absolutely not.
4
Q. 275
You did receive some support from the Monarch interest, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I did.
6
Q. 276
In 1991 I think, on the 5th of June 1991, if we could have 1584, please.
They supported my fundraisers, yes.
7
Sorry.
8
appear to suggest that you had been paid on the 5th of June 1991 a sum of 600
9
pounds, isn't that right?
11:37:02 10
A.
11
1581.
Monarch have discovered to the Tribunal a document which would
Well I don't -- I'm on record already.
I don't accept the word "pay".
received a donation.
12
Q. 277
Did you seek that donation?
13
A.
Quite possibly.
14
Q. 278
Who would you have sought it from?
A.
Um, I would have written to their headquarters I'm sure.
11:37:16 15
16 17
I
I can't remember who
specifically. Q. 279
At 3809.
This is for 1992, Mr. McGrath, on the 17th of November 1992, Monarch
18
have discovered to the Tribunal records which suggest that you received a sum
19
of 500 pounds for what was described as General Elections expenses of that
11:37:46 20
year.
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 280
If I could have 3880.
This is an extract from the Monarch Properties Services
23
Limited cash book.
24
Colm McGrath Fianna Fail 500 pounds.
11:38:04 25
And you will see at No. 18 on that screen, a payment to Did you -- first of all, I take it that
you accept you received that money?
26
A.
I'm sure I did.
27
Q. 281
And again, could I ask you, did you seek that money or -- and if you did from
28 29 11:38:18 30
I'm sure I did.
whom? A.
I would have probably -- it's the same answer.
Yeah, it was a fundraiser I
would say which they were sent a brochure and that was their response. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:38:22
11:38:41
39 1
Q. 282
2
And I think you sent a letter to Mr. Monahan in May 1996. 5972, please.
If we could have
Where you again sought, I think funds of --
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 283
Isn't that correct?
5
A.
That's typical of what I would do at around election time.
6
Q. 284
You were seeking a contribution to your election war chest?
7
A.
Yeah.
8
Q. 285
Which you said was crucial to the success of your campaign, isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 286
And I think on foot of that request, you received 500 pounds, isn't that right?
11:38:54 10
11
Can I just ask you in relation to that, Mr. McGrath, you would have known Mr.
12
Lynn quite well at this stage, isn't that right, this is 1996?
13
A.
Yes, we would have developed a relationship, yeah.
14
Q. 287
And you knew Mr. Lynn was working for Monarch?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 288
You had ever only met Mr. Philip Monahan once, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, I think so, yeah.
18
Q. 289
Why didn't you write to Mr. Lynn within Monarch for that subscription? Why did
11:39:12 15
19 11:39:26 20
you write to Mr. Monahan as opposed to Mr. Lynn? A.
Maybe Mr. Lynn suggested that I write to Mr. Monahan.
21
Q. 290
Uh-huh.
22
A.
Sorry.
23
Q. 291
Yes.
24
A.
Was Mr. Lynn not out on his own at that stage?
Q. 292
I understood he was still with Monarch but I may be wrong in that.
A.
'96? Maybe he was, yeah.
11:39:47 25
26 27 28 29 11:40:12 30
I think you got a further subscription in July 1996 of 500 pounds? There's another part to that answer perhaps.
He did go out on his own I think at one point.
Okay. Q. 293
At 6038, there appears to be a further payment on the 3rd of July '96, to Mr. Colm McGrath.
"MCC Fianna Fail 500 pounds."
acknowledge receiving that payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Again, I take it that you
11:40:13
11:40:29
40 1
A.
I'm sure I did, yes, yeah.
2
Q. 294
On the 3rd of October 1996, at 6096, there's a further 500 pounds towards a
3
golf classic.
Isn't that right? And again at -- I take it that you accept
4
receiving that money?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 295
Cheque 8540?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 296
And I think you received a further sum of 500 pounds in May 1999 for a golf
9
classic fundraiser towards your Local Election funds, at 6753. Again I take it
11:40:48 10
that you accept that?
11
A.
Yeah, I accept that, yeah.
12
Q. 297
Thank you, Mr. McGrath.
13 14 11:41:00 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Are there any questions for Mr. McGrath?
Okay.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
previously said that you were generally pro-development?
19
A.
Just to ask you, Mr. McGrath.
You've said I think and
Uh-huh.
11:41:11 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
on the houses.
23
A.
And you said that I think earlier that in terms of the density
You didn't think that land should be wasted with low density?
No, that's right, yes.
24 11:41:22 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And we know, as far as I understand it, that when the
26
manager's map was put up, as his recommendations to go out on the second
27
display, this is back in May 1992.
28
four houses to the acre.
29
A.
He was recommending at that stage I think
Uh-huh.
11:41:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:41:39
11:41:47
41 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
With an action area plan I think?
Yes, yeah.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
extension of lands to be zoned further south or further west, whichever way you
6
look at it.
7
A.
And indeed, he was also recommending, if I recall, a further
And you vote in the favour of that?
Yes, I would have.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:42:02 10
Now we know, and the record shows that in fairness.
Now, we
know that that motion didn't get anywhere because it was fairly narrowly
11
defeated.
12
Mr. McGrath.
13
months later or whatever, I take it your view was still the same in terms of
14
you, you think there should be --
11:42:28 15
A.
I just want to ask you, and I've asked this to other people, When it came to debating these lands again, which was some 18
Higher density?
16 17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes, that there should have been higher density.
It would have been, yeah.
19 11:42:34 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Because we know what happened after May when Mr. Barrett's
21
motion was passed.
22
including the lands of all Cherrywood, were zoned one house to the acre.
23
A.
All the lands the subject matter of that motion and
Uh-huh.
24 11:42:47 25
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You obviously were fairly pro active in the council because it
26
looks as if back in May when, this is '92, when the manager was putting forward
27
his proposals, you've seconded that.
28
that could be courtesy
29
A.
And you've said fair you have enough
Uh-huh.
11:43:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:43:05
11:43:13
42 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
It would appear that your voice was heard in any event.
Fair enough.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
motion was produced and obviously it appears, probably Ms. Coffey will be able
6
to give us more details, the motion in 1993 is produced.
7
A.
In some shape or form on the day.
Can I just ask you.
A
Uh-huh.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:43:27 10
Which seeks to uphold or support the manager's recommendation
to take away change three I think it is, which was to take away the one house
11
and to put four houses to the acre on the lands.
12
that's only in relation to the Monarch lands.
13
A.
But that there's a -- but
Uh-huh.
14 11:43:42 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And I'm just wondering if -- can you recall if at all, why you
16
wouldn't have queried why it should be just as it was apparently the lands of
17
Monarch? Because the manager was recommending the change be deleted for the
18
entire of the lands.
19
A.
Yeah.
11:44:06 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
in May '92.
23 24 11:44:21 25
A.
Uh-huh.
And that's something in fairness that you had supported back
Well I can only speculate as to why.
Densities -- my recollection
of when densities were being sited upon, if you were proposing the development of lands in close proximity to an existing development.
And if that existing
26
development had a density of X per acre, it was normal practice that the
27
immediate development which was proposed to take place in the newly zoned lands
28
would be in sympathy for a certain distance with the existing development.
29
And then -- in fact, that still prevails today.
11:44:49 30
And then perhaps as you move
further away from those lands at the lower density, you can then raise the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:44:53
11:45:00
43 1
density.
2 3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
If you put up 7217.
It's more sympathetic.
5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY:
7
the map that was, that went out, as I understand it, after the -- Mr. Barrett's
8
vote effectively.
9
ultimately then zoned or not zoned but voted on for four houses to the acre.
11:45:23 10
11
I just want to get the map.
Do you see that map? That was
And if you look at the lands outlined in red, they were
But outside of that red line we're left at one house to the acre. A.
Uh-huh.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
back in May, the year previously, were supportive of the fact that all of the
11:45:41 15
16
Whereas, yourself and indeed others who have given evidence,
lands marked, zoned, in yellow, which are the residential lands -A.
Uh-huh.
17 18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY: -- should be four houses to the acre on the action area plan. A.
Yeah, that would have been --
11:45:51 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
modified your views.
23 24 11:46:08 25
26
A.
I'm just wondering then why you would have restricted or
I don't think I modified my view. resistance.
I would assume that there was -- there was
In fact, I recall there was resistance from local residents
associations to the four per acre density.
And obviously that was reflected
eventually in the modified proposal.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
why if there was debate on the day or indeed, why the actual land that was
11:46:34 30
But do I take it from what you're saying, that you don't know
zoned four to the acre would have run along the boundary of Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:46:40
11:46:45
44 1 2
effectively? A.
I can't recall why that.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Obviously not all because there was some land left
5
agricultural in fairness. No, I can't say why that actually happened on the
6
day.
7
lands.
8
got four to the acre on a substantial portion of the lands.
I mean, I would have supported four to the acre on the entirety of the So perhaps I saw it as just a good fall-back position that at least we
9 11:47:01 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
12
All right.
I wasn't that tuned into the fact that it was specifically Monarch lands. That wasn't very clear to me at the time.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:47:13 15
We know -- just on that point as I understand it, especially
in May '92 there were a number of motions put to the floor.
And a lot of
16
them -- these were zoned, to keep it, after the first display, where it was
17
four to the acre, to keep it at one to the acre.
18
think, refer specifically to Monarch.
19
have seemed from the minutes appeared on a fairly regular basis.
11:47:34 20
A.
And a lot of the motions I
I mean, Monarch, the word Monarch would
Yeah.
21 22 23 24 11:47:47 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Would you agree with that, Mr. McGrath?
Well I have no doubt yes they did because I've read some of the minutes, yeah. Chairman, you'd have to be in constant attendance or Judge, at some of these meetings to really have 100 percent feel for exactly what's going on at any
26
given time.
That sort of detail is quite often lost on the members if they're
27
actually there for the full debate.
28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thanks very much, that's all I have.
11:48:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
11:48:02
11:48:07
45 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
Thank you very much.
All right.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
We'll rise for, say, ten minutes.
5 6
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
7 8
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.
9 11:48:14 10
11
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Sir.
Ms. Elizabeth Coffey, please.
MR. FARREN:
Chairman, before Mrs. Coffey gives evidence.
14 12:02:23 15
This is Brian
16
Farren, counsel for Mrs. Coffey instructed by Langwell solicitors. Mrs. Coffey
17
was granted limited representation in relation to two previous modules.
18
would simply apply for a continuation of that.
19 12:02:39 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Granted.
21 22
MR. FARREN:
Thank you, Chairman.
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I
12:02:43
12:02:57
46 1
MRS. BETTY COFFEY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
2
MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Good afternoon, Ms. Coffey.
5 6
Q. 298
MS. DILLON: Good afternoon, Mrs. Coffey.
7
You have previously given evidence to the Tribunal in the Carrickmines 1
8
Module, isn't that right? And also in a subsequent module dealing with lands
9
in north County Dublin?
12:03:13 10
11
A.
That's correct, Ms. Dillon.
Q. 299
And you were during the period that we're looking at in the Carrickmines lands
12
a member of Dublin County Council and subsequently a member and indeed
13
Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
14 12:03:32 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 300
Now, in relation to the evidence that you gave to the Tribunal in the
16
Carrickmines 1 Module, is there any part of that evidence that you wish to
17
change?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 301
If I could deal, first of all, with the sequence of your disclosure to the
12:03:41 20
Tribunal in relation to payments in connection with Mr. Frank Dunlop.
And if
21
I could start by showing you what you told the internal Fianna Fail Inquiry, at
22
page 148, please.
23
you that was carried out by the Fianna Fail Inquiry.
Now, this is a record of the report on the interview with
24 12:04:05 25
And at the second paragraph it records that "Councillor Coffey indicated her
26
dismay at the recent revelations and the manner in which they reflected on
27
councillors, who like herself, had dedicated themselves to public service and
28
who had never been motivated by personal gain."
29 12:04:20 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 302
"Constituency records show that Frank Dunlop made a donation of 250 pounds to a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:04:22
12:04:33
47 1
constituency fundraising committee.
This donation was for constituency
2
funding.
3
no personal donations from any developer or builder."
Councillor Coffey received no personal donation from Mr. Dunlop and
4 5
Now, is that accurate insofar as it relates, in the first instance, to Mr.
6
Dunlop and in the second instance to developers or builders, Ms. Coffey?
7
A.
Well the interview with Fianna Fail I wasn't clear and I had no records, by the
8
way, of any donations for election campaigns.
9
phoned Frank Dunlop to ask him and I think that's recorded, had he given me any
12:04:59 10
donations and he informed me he had.
11
As a matter of fact, I had
So I had no records and I stand over
that statement.
12
Q. 303
Uh-huh.
13
A.
In the sense that my family and their friends, who are business friends, would
14
fund my General Election campaigns.
12:05:20 15
16
And indeed, would fund Fianna Fail
fundraising events. Q. 304
So your position is that you did not receive any personal donations from Mr.
17
Dunlop and you did not receive any personal donations from any developer or
18
builder, is that your position?
19
A.
12:05:35 20
discovered a donation from Monarch for the 1992 General Election of 1,000
21 22
pounds. Q. 305
23 24
Since that statement I wrote a letter in to Fianna Fail to tell them that I had
I actually wrote to letter to Fianna Fail.
And insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned, has your position in relation to what monies Mr. Dunlop might have given you changed?
A.
12:05:59 25
Well, I accept that Mr. Dunlop gave me 1,000 pounds for the 1992 General Election which I sent him a letter thanking him for.
26
He had said he gave me
1,000 in 1991, which I do not remember and I have no records.
27
Q. 306
Yes.
28
A.
And I don't think he has either.
29
Q. 307
Do you recollect receiving 1,000 pounds from Mr. Sean Dunne for the 1991
12:06:20 30
elections? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:06:21
12:06:39
48 1
A.
No, I don't remember that.
2
Q. 308
Yes.
That's it.
So insofar as your initial position with the Fianna Fail Inquiry was,
3
Mrs. Coffey, as I understand what's recorded in the document at page 148.
4
that you hadn't received any personal donations from Mr. Dunlop or any personal
5
donations from any developer or builder.
6
accept you did receive at least 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop in 1992 for which
7
you wrote a letter thanking him which I'll come to in a moment.
8
did at least receive 1,000 pounds from Monarch Properties, isn't that right?
9
A.
12:07:05 10
Your position now is, is that you
I was a member of the fundraising committee in Dun Laoghaire, I was one of the prominent members of it.
12
that contributed to those fundraising events.
13
committee, who was sitting then, of that.
12:07:27 15
And there was a lot of people, including builders, And I informed Fianna Fail
Q. 309
So --
A.
So, some of them could have been, like, some -- I find the fundraising events
16 17
And that you
Since that I discovered that I received 1,000 pounds from Monarch Properties.
11
14
were confused with personal contributions to General Elections. Q. 310
Yes.
But the position is as of now, Ms. Coffey, that 1,000 pounds that you
18
received on the 17th of November 1992 was a personal donation to you from
19
Monarch Properties, isn't that right?
12:07:48 20
21
A.
It was.
Q. 311
It wasn't anything to do with constituency fundraising or anything else, isn't
22 23
that the position? A.
24 12:07:58 25
26
No, it was a contribution for a General Election.
And like when you say
"personal." Q. 312
Yes.
A.
You know, I want to make it clear.
And I think we have been down this before.
27
A contribution for a General Election is not what I consider a personal, as
28
it's worded there.
29
law of the land, it's not personal to me.
12:08:29 30
Was
Q. 313
Yes.
It's a contribution to fund election times and that is the
Insofar as you first provided information to the Tribunal, Mrs. Coffey, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:08:29
12:08:40
49 1
in connection with your dealings with Mr. Dunlop at page 160 please.
2
statement you provided to the Tribunal in connection with the Carrickmines 1
3
Module.
4
Ms. Coffey.
5
or payment whether for elections expenses or otherwise" and in the view of what
6
you just said a moment ago I emphasise the word "otherwise" was ever made by
7
Mr. Frank Dunlop to me."
If I just draw your attention to the last sentence in that statement, And I quote "Insofar as I can assert and no contribution donation
8
A.
Yes, I accept that's there.
9
Q. 314
And you --
A.
I accept that I made a mistake.
12:08:53 10
The
Actually I rang Frank Dunlop and you have it
11
in one of the documentations, to ask him had he contributed to any campaigns.
12
And in reading through the statements, he told me he had.
13
letter at that time and I don't know -- oh, no he had the letter that's right.
14
I didn't have that letter in file with where I thanked him.
12:09:18 15
letter.
16 17
12:09:34 20
Q. 315
So I was wrong and I admit I was wrong but I actually phoned him to
Yes.
So that it was your belief in October of 2002 that you had not received
any money for any purpose whatsoever from Mr. Dunlop, isn't that the position? A.
It was.
Q. 316
And you subsequently came into the Tribunal on day 412 and you swore to the
21
truth of that statement, isn't that correct?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 317
At question 138.
24 12:09:49 25
26
He had the
find out had he.
18 19
I hadn't got the
And you confirmed on sworn testimony to the Tribunal that
you had not received any money from Mr. Dunlop isn't that also the position? A.
That was what I believed at that time, yes.
Q. 318
And when I asked you this morning was there any part of your evidence in
27
relation to Carrickmines 1 that you wished to change, you indicated that there
28
was no part of your evidence that you had given in the Carrickmines 1 Module
29
that you wished to change.
12:10:06 30
And I ask you again now.
Is there any part of
your evidence that you had previously given to the Tribunal in the Carrickmines Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:10:09
12:10:44
50 1 2
1 Module that you now wish to change? A.
Are you asking me and I want to be very careful about this because I had a very
3
gruesome time in the Carrickmines 1 Module with the questioning, or I was very
4
upset at it, I must say.
5
to assist the Tribunal in every way.
6
lie.
7
discovered that Frank Dunlop gave me 1,000.
8
yes, change that, please.
9
CHAIRMAN:
12:11:10 10
11
And I understand what the Tribunal is at and I want If you're asking me did I lie, I didn't
If you're asking me for the record, am I to change it now that I've Well I will change it and say
But if you're asking me did I lie to the Tribunal.
No you are simply being asked do you want to change your evidence.
It doesn't mean -A.
It doesn't mean that I'm lying.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
It doesn't necessarily mean that you lied to the Tribunal.
No.
12:11:17 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
the record, if it's to be changed, for whatever reason.
18
A.
But it's important that we know that the evidence which is there on
Right.
19 12:11:24 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A.
Okay.
That it is changed.
Well that's fine.
That's why you're being asked.
Well then you can change it to say that I got, to
22
the best of my knowledge. No, not to the best of my knowledge, because we have
23
proof of it now because Mr. Dunlop gave the letter that I sent him.
24
form of a letter to people who thanked, who do things for you during election.
12:11:47 25
1,000 pounds in 1992.
That's a
Is that all right?
26 27
Q. 319
MS. DILLON:
Is it your position then, Ms. Coffey, just so the Tribunal
28
understands it, that it was not until production of the letter by Mr. Dunlop
29
that you recollected that you had in fact received money from Mr. Dunlop?
12:12:09 30
A.
Well that was the proof I got that I had received it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I think -- I don't know
12:12:14
12:12:33
51 1
when the phone call took place.
I can't recollect what date that was.
2
did say he gave it to me but I had no records and I had no proof.
He
3
Q. 320
Can you recollect now whether that donation by Mr. Dunlop was in cash?
4
A.
No, I can't.
5
Q. 321
According to Mr. Dunlop, you see, Mr. Dunlop says that when he -- that when he
6
paid you this May donation in 1992, that it was probably in cash and it may
7
have been either 1,000 or 2,000 pounds.
8
amount that Mr. Dunlop gave you?
9
A.
12:13:01 10
And can you assist at all as to the
Well Mr. Dunlop did a summary of payments to Betty Coffey, page 332. he stated Betty Coffey 1,000; 1991.
1, 000; 1992.
In which
1,500 for fundraising
11
events.
12
women's lunch which the Taoiseach was at and he would have paid 500 pounds for
13
that.
14
my previous evidence.
12:13:32 15
And I'm quite positive about the 1,500 because he attended the
That's where he said he met me for lunch.
that's that.
16
You may recollect that from
And 1,000 pounds for a St. Patrick's Day event.
So
But when he tots it up he won't get ten out of ten for maths.
He tots it up as the 4,500 in in fact it amounts to 3,500.
17
Q. 322
Did you you accept that's the amount of money Mr. Dunlop paid you; 3,500?
18
A.
He didn't send me 3,500.
19
He says he sent me 1,000 in 1991.
if it was from him or from Berland.
12:14:05 20
I have no records.
He doesn't know
He has no records
but I have no problem whatsoever in saying to you I accept that he may have
21
sent me an election campaign donation.
22
Nobody ever paid me anything only at election time to contribute to help me get
23
elected.
24 12:14:31 25
Q. 323
And I'm -- I must emphasise that.
All we're trying to do at the moment, if we can at all, Ms. Coffey.
And if
you'd answer the questions I ask you we might make a bit more progress.
Is to
26
try and now establish in light of your previous evidence and the correspondence
27
you have had with the Tribunal, what in fact you now accept that you got from
28
Mr. Dunlop.
29
that you now accept you got 1,000 pounds in 1991 and a similar amount in 1992
12:14:52 30
And do I understand your evidence to the Tribunal today to be,
from Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:14:54
12:15:15
52 1
A.
I accept I got 1,000 pounds in 1992.
I've no record and I don't remember
2
getting 1,000 pounds in 1991. And the other sum of money he's mentioned, which
3
I brought to the attention of the Tribunal by the way and asked them to correct
4
it, which they haven't, was for fundraising, fianna Fail fundraising events so
5
we're talking about two payments.
6
records of it and doesn't appear he has either.
7
Q. 324
8 9 12:15:31 10
11
A.
Absolutely.
Q. 325
And did you get that money in cash, as Mr. Dunlop says he paid it?
A.
I don't remember.
I would have thought it would have been a cheque but I
don't remember. Q. 326
14
It wouldn't appear that there are any cheques in a, for that sum in Mr. Dunlop's records or the records of Mr. Dunlop's business to you in 1991,
12:15:51 15
16
So is it your evidence then that you accept that you received in 1992 a sum of 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop?
12 13
One of which I don't remember and I have no
Ms. Coffey. A.
Mr. Dunlop has never handed me personally cash.
He may have come to what we
17
always had an election campaign office and a team would be there and he could
18
have left it for me.
19
memory.
12:16:14 20
Q. 327
But he never personally handed me cash to the best of my
And I think I would remember if he handed me cash.
And certainly you accept that Mr. Dunlop was a supporter of your -- of the
21
fundraising of the Fianna Fail organisation in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, is that
22
right?
23
A.
Absolutely.
24
Q. 328
And can I ask you about Mr. Sean Dunne and Berland Homes and whether or not you
12:16:32 25
ever recollect receiving 1,000 pounds from Mr. Dunlop and being told it was
26
being paid on behalf of Mr. Sean Dunne?
27
A.
No. I've no memory of that whatsoever.
28
Q. 329
You will have seen the statement that has been provided to the Tribunal by
29 12:16:48 30
Mr. Sean Dunne, 8852. A.
Yes, I just got that today. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:16:49
12:17:00
53 1
Q. 330
Yes. And you will see there that Mr. Dunne confirms and will apparently next
2
week tell the Tribunal, that he made a payment of 1,000 pounds in 1991 as a
3
contribution to it your Local Election campaign.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 331
It was made on behalf of Berland Homes Limited which I understand to be a
6
development company, and I cannot recollect whether it was made directly to
7
Ms. Coffey or through Mr. Dunlop.
8
Berland Homes Limited.
9
It was fully approved by the board of
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 332
Right.
11
A.
I do.
12
Q. 333
Is Mr. Dunne a developer?
13
A.
He is.
14
Q. 334
And is Berland Homes a developer?
A.
They are.
16
Q. 335
And is Monarch Properties a developer?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 336
And when you told the Fianna Fail Inquiry, I think we looked at a it earlier.
19
A.
Can you go back to that statement.
Q. 337
Which one do you want, the Fianna Fail one?
21
A.
Yes, the Fianna Fail statement.
22
Q. 338
Yes 148, please.
12:17:15 10
12:17:23 15
12:17:37 20
23 24
I have no problem with that but I have no record of it.
Do you know Mr. Sean Dunne?
Now, "Councillor Coffey received no personal donations from
Mr. Dunlop and no personal donations from any developer or builder." A.
12:18:06 25
Yes.
I never received anything on a, on a personal nature from any developer
or any builder, anything I ever received which I didn't look after at all, I
26
received as a contribution to my um, election campaigns.
27
Q. 339
Yes.
28
A.
I think the question put to me.
29 12:18:22 30
Can you put that one back up again?
personally get any money. Q. 340
And I cannot be sure, was did you ever
No, I never personally got any money from anyone.
And certainly when you were asked by the Tribunal to identify the source of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:18:26
12:18:44
54 1
political donations received by you.
You provided information which is
2
recorded on pages 149 and 150.
3
political donation from Mr. Sean Mulryan and indeed Monarch Properties.
4
don't identify having received any money from Mr. Sean Dunne or Berland Homes,
5
isn't that right?
And while you identify having received a
6
A.
Well actually you have more than that.
7
Q. 341
Sorry.
You have --
The question, Ms. Coffey, is did you identify having received a sum of
8
money from either Mr. Sean Dunne or Berland Homes.
9
question and then expand on whatever point you want to make.
12:19:02 10
A.
You
No, I didn't put it in.
So if you just answer that
And I'm sure there's other people I've left out too
11
because I can't remember who paid me.
12
They are all in business and some of their business friends would have sent me
13
political contributions.
14 12:19:21 15
I have a -- my family is in business.
Q. 342
And --
A.
And it's actually unfair to put the few names down you can remember though you
16
don't have records and leave out all of the others.
17
Dunne by the way that would have sent me a political contribution but I know
18
Sean Dunne well.
19
Q. 343
12:19:40 20
right? A.
23 24
But you weren't in a position, is that the case, your memory was jogged by the recent correspondence from Mr. Dunne in relation to that payment, is that
21 22
Yes.
Q. 344
Yes.
If Sean
And you accept now having seen the letter that you wrote to Mr. Dunlop
that you got a payment from Mr. Dunlop in 1992?
26
A.
I do.
27
Q. 345
Yes.
28
12:20:13 30
Well, Sean Dunne said, I'm confused by the '91 contribution.
Dunne said he sent me 1,000 pounds for the 1991, I would accept that.
12:20:02 25
29
So there's more than Sean
And if we just look then very quickly at the situation in relation to
Monarch Properties? A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 346
There were a number of payments, Ms. Coffey, and some of them were payments in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:20:20
12:20:35
55 1
connection with the St. Patrick's Day lunch in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's correct.
3
Q. 347
And that's, as I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, a
4
fundraising activity that's carried out in the constituency as it were?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 348
And is it the position that the funds generated by that are constituency funds?
7
A.
Yes, definitely.
8
Q. 349
Yes.
9 12:20:48 10
But insofar as the November 1992 contribution of 1,000 pounds is
concerned, that was a contribution to yourself, isn't that right? A.
It was a contribution, an unsolicited contribution to my election campaign of
11
1992.
12
parties reading through the, some of the statements you sent out to me.
13
Q. 350
14
Yes.
Which I believe Monarch sent to very many politicians of different
It would appear that in June of 1991 at 3185.
That a cheque was drawn,
apparently, in favour of you but never sent because it was cancelled by Monarch
12:21:18 15
Properties.
If you look some half way down approximately of that list between
16
Paddy Madigan and Therese Ridge you will see "Betty Coffey FF 300 pounds" and
17
the word "cancelled" beside it. Can you confirm in fact that you did not
18
receive that donation?
19
A.
12:21:38 20
Well I don't know anything about that donation to be honest with you. missed it when going through these.
And I
And may I apologise to the Tribunal for
21
one thing.
22
very, grave family commitments at the moment.
23
through all of them but I tried to choose the pieces that I thought would be
24
relevant.
12:22:04 25
26
I have something like 19 volumes of documents and I have some
So my apologies for that.
I haven't been able to read
I haven't really been able to have the
time to do it. Q. 351
27
And insofar as November 1992 is concerned, Ms. Coffey.
I think you accept
that you received a sum of 1,000 pounds by way of a cheque?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 352
You say that that was unsolicited and you didn't seek it, is that correct?
A.
Correct.
12:22:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:22:18
12:22:25
56 1
Q. 353
At that time would you have known Mr. Richard Lynn?
2
A.
Yes.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
That 1,000 pounds is that from Monarch?
5 6
Q. 354
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
That's from Monarch Properties.
7
from Monarch Properties is recorded at page 3880.
8
1,000 pounds to Mr. GV Wright.
9 12:22:48 10
Sorry, the 1,000 pounds
Just above a payment of
A.
Yes.
Q. 355
You will see that, an extract from the cheque payments book that records
11
receipt, payment of a cheque in the sum of 1,000 pounds to you, isn't that
12
right, Mrs. Coffey?
13
A.
Yes, that's right.
14
Q. 356
And I think that in March of 1994, Monarch Properties disclose at page 5005,
12:22:59 15
payment of a sum of 1,000 pounds as a fundraiser to the St. Patrick's Day
16
lunch.
17
A.
That's.
18
Q. 357
And in brackets Betty Coffey "B Coffey", isn't that right?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 358
And would it have been the normal way, would you have written out to Monarch
12:23:12 20
21 22
Properties seeking their support for that? A.
It would have been, we would have sent out Comhairle Dail cheantair headed
23
paper to various people, in the area, all the business people in the Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown area seeking support for the lunch.
12:23:32 25
Q. 359
And I think Monarch Properties also contributed a sum of 700 pounds towards an
26
activity that was being run by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Chamber of Commerce.
27
8567.
This was the Endeavour Awards, isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 360
And I just want to draw to your attention a note at the bottom where it's
12:23:54 30
recorded that "Betty Coffey's husband is running this". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Do you see that note
12:23:59
12:24:05
57 1 2
at the bottom? A.
3
I see T 1994.
I think my husband was president of the Chamber of Commerce
then.
4
Q. 361
And that?
5
A.
I could be wrong though but he was at certain stages.
6
Q. 362
And that request is directed to Mr. Noel Murray.
7 8
Mr. Noel Murray? A.
9
Yes, you would meet Noel Murray at various functions particularly the Chamber of Commerce.
12:24:23 10
11
Would you have known
I think they were members of the Chamber of Commerce, Monarch
and you'd see Noel Murray and people like that there. Q. 363
12
Yes.
And I think again in February of 1996 you wrote to Mr. Richard Lynn
seeking support for the St. Patrick's day lunch.
5763.
13
A.
Uh-huh.
14
Q. 364
You confirm that you wrote that letter, isn't that right?
A.
Well you see again I signed it "Betty" but the top of it, it's from the Fianna
12:24:41 15
16
Fail Comhairle Dail cheantair Dun Laoghaire.
17
sign that because that's ...
And they would have asked me to
18
Q. 365
Yes.
19
A.
They would have known that I knew Richard Lynn.
Q. 366
Because there's a note there at the bottom there "Richard phone me re this
12:24:57 20
21
lunch" and that's a note from you, is it?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 367
So you were asking Mr. Lynn to contact you directly about the lunch, isn't that
24 12:25:06 25
right? A.
26 27
sold. Q. 368
28 29 12:25:17 30
To see did he want it take a table at lunch so we'd know how many tables we
Right, so he did in fact -- I think the sum of 1,300 pounds was paid on that occasion, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 369
And I think again Dublin -- Dun Laoghaire Community Enterprise Society, of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:25:23
12:25:45
58 1
which you were a member of the board, received funding from Monarch Properties
2
as well isn't that right, in the sum of 1,000 pounds?
3
A.
Well the Dun Laoghaire Enterprise Board was made up of and indeed the founder
4
members, John Docklan and myself.
5
in the centre of Dun Laoghaire which we're very proud of, to try and create
6
some jobs.
7
asking them to help us and sponsor it.
8
the old fire station, very successful.
9
Q. 370
12:26:03 10
And it was to set up an enterprise centre
And yes, we wrote to every business person in the community and And the building is there today, it is
And did you yourself make a personal approach in advance of any correspondence from the board to Monarch in order to get funding?
11
A.
No, I wouldn't do that.
The letter would go out.
12
Q. 371
Could I have page 8559, please.
That's it.
This is the letter that was sent on the 5th
13
of March 1997 which appears to be the first or introductory letter.
14
just want to draw to your attention the second paragraph "I understand from
12:26:20 15
And I
Councillor Betty Coffey, who is a member of our board, that Monarch kindly
16
agreed to donate 1,000 pounds towards the cost of this work.
We are indeed
17
grateful for the contribution and I am now writing to request that you might
18
forward same as your convenience as we are now nearing completion of the
19
project."
12:26:36 20
21
That would suggest, Ms. Coffey, if it's an accurate note of the letter, that
22
you had been in touch with Monarch directly and sought the sponsorship.
23
that right?
24 12:26:50 25
Isn't
A.
Well, I think I can put it a different way to you.
Q. 372
Now I'm just dealing with the answer you gave a few minutes ago when I asked
26
you would you have made a direct approach to somebody in Monarch and you said
27
no?
28 29 12:27:08 30
A.
I would on a regular have basis have met business people at Chamber of Commerce lunches, I would have met Noel Murray, I would have met all of the Monarch people.
And not only to them but to other people I would have said look the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:27:13
12:27:35
59 1
enterprise centre now is definitely going to happen will you support it.
2
me personally an enterprise centre.
3
Q. 373
Not
Yes but insofar as I had asked you a few moments ago whether you had approached
4
Monarch Properties directly in advance of correspondence issuing the DUn
5
Laoghaire Community Enterprise Society Limited, do you accept now that the
6
position is that it is likely that you would have made a direct approach to
7
somebody in Monarch for this support in advance of the correspondence?
8
A.
Well I don't remember.
9
Q. 374
Yes.
12:27:46 10
And certainly it would appear that you must have known some of the
people in Monarch well enough to be able to approach them to seek their support
11 12
But if it's in writing, then I did it.
for a project such as this, isn't that right? A.
Well the people in Monarch were involved in everything in Dun Laoghaire.
It
13
would be very hard if you were Cathaoirleach for instance and a member of the
14
council not to know all of the people in Monarch.
12:28:04 15
Commerce.
16 17 18 19 12:28:32 20
21
They were sponsors of the Horse Show.
things they were in. Q. 375
They were in the Chamber of I couldn't name the list of
They were very well known to everyone.
Was it your position in relation to Monarch's proposed development in Cherrywood, Ms. Coffey, that you were against it from the beginning?
A.
I wasn't against development in Cherrywood.
And it's a story in itself and I
don't know how to answer your question like yes or no.
I know the Tribunal
wants to know how things happen.
22 23
I was against massive rezoning all throughout the Carrickmines Valley and over
24
it.
12:28:55 25
I -- the different -- as the meetings evolved it was Monarch's land that
was the land that was in the prime position for, say, the first development and
26
they had a very, very aggressive lobby to support what they wanted.
27
had -- you had three lobbies.
28
Ballybrack and then you had the Carrickmines Valley Protection Society.
29
my main aim was that the town of Dun Laoghaire in 1991 there was no
12:29:23 30
development.
You also
You had the lobby from Loughlinstown,
There was no development anywhere.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
But
And I can assure you that
12:29:27
12:29:39
60 1
there was nobody looking to buy a house at that stage because nobody had a job
2
at that stage.
3 4
And I was adamantly opposed to Monarch getting a town centre or even a district
5
centre zoning on that land.
6
it would destroy Dun Laoghaire.
7
Laoghaire town.
8
building a huge district centre/town centre opposition to it a couple of miles
9
up the road.
12:30:07 10
11
Completely opposed to it because it would be -We had to try and get investment into the Dun
That was the main town first before we started thinking of
That was my position then and it was my position to the day I
left the council two years ago. Q. 376
So I just want to understand this before we go to look at the documents and the
12
sequence in relation to the meetings, Ms. Coffey.
13
were opposed to development because of the development of a possible town
14
centre on the lands which would have adversely effected the viability of Dun
12:30:28 15
It's your position that you
Laoghaire town centre?
16
A.
Yes, that's correct.
17
Q. 377
Now, at 176 you have provided a statement to the Tribunal and in it you say two
18
things.
And I just want to clarify that this is your position so that the
19
Tribunal can understand it.
12:30:44 20
21
In the second paragraph you say the following "During late 1989/1990
22
discussions at Dublin County Council began regarding the lands at Cherrywood as
23
part of the discussion on the proposed County Development Plan.
24
Properties, the owners of the lands at Cherrywood started to lobby councillors
12:31:00 25
Monarch
for a major rezoning which included a town centre zoning on the part of the
26
land.
27
have drastic repercussions on the future development of Dun Laoghaire town
28
centre.
29
rezoning.
12:31:18 30
I was deeply concerned that a town centre zoning on this land would
In this regard, I was totally opposed to Monarch's proposals for such I considered that this was a major rezoning which would have
important implications for the whole of the Dun Laoghaire area and I expressed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:31:22
12:31:32
61 1
my views at Fianna Fail group meetings."
2 3
You then say at subparagraphs one and two that "You were contacted by Mr. Lynn
4
and during the coming years you had several meetings with Mr. Lynn but never
5
changed your mind."
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 378
That's your position?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 379
So it was always your position that you were an opponent to the Monarch
12:31:40 10
proposals for the rezoning of the lands, for the change in density on the lands
11
at Carrickmines.
Is that right?
12
A.
For the development of the retail element of the land in particular.
13
Q. 380
Well where in your statement do you make that distinction for the Tribunal,
14 12:31:57 15
Mrs. Coffey? A.
Well I make the distinction in stating that my main concern was the town
16
centre/ what's it district centre zoning was definitely going to destroy Dun
17
Laoghaire.
18
the residential element of it.
19
you had the Carrickmines Valley, which started off wanting nothing and then
12:32:26 20
The other aspects of it, which I think you're talking about, is Well you had then, on the on the other hand
stepped down to one house to the acre.
21
And then you had the Loughlinstown
group which wanted the whole land developed I suppose for jobs.
22 23
But my -- all my arguments to my colleagues was for the protection of the Dun
24
Laoghaire town centre.
12:32:55 25
The difference in the residential zoning came as a
result of the lobbying from both sides.
I mean, Monarch wanted 16 to the
26
acre, we've got to remember that.
27
got -- I wouldn't say a quarter of what they wanted.
28 29 12:33:23 30
Q. 381
They got nothing in the final motion they
You will have seen in the documentation, Mrs. Coffey, that in November of 1993 you were a signatory to two motions; isn't that right? Having previously been a signatory to a number of other motions which if necessary I will go back to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:33:28
12:33:40
62 1
deal with, but you were a signatory to two motions that dealt in particular
2
with the Carrickmines lands, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
In '93 you're talking about.
4
Q. 382
The review of the '83 Plan?
5
A.
Oh, yes, yes.
6
Q. 383
And in summary.
So that I can outline the position in summary.
Initially
7
what had happened was that the manager had brought certain proposals before the
8
council for the development of a large portion of land in a map called DP90/123
9
which was the subject of discussion in Carrickmines 1?
12:33:59 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 384
And that was voted down as a result of a motion by yourself in December of
12
1990, isn't that right?
13
A.
Correct, yes.
14
Q. 385
And following that, the manager was directed to prepare new maps which he
12:34:09 15
presented to you and your colleagues in January of 1991?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 386
Following that, in May of 1991 prior to the first public display, the manager
18
brought a second map known as option one DP90/129A to the council and that was
19
adopted by the council and went on public display.
12:34:34 20
A.
21 22
Isn't that right?
Uh-huh. Well I don't have the map up and yes if it's there it's right, I don't want to delay the Tribunal.
Q. 387
When the matter came back into the council after the first public display, a
23
number of motions were brought before the council and a meeting took place on
24
the 27th of May 1992.
12:34:50 25
A.
Uh-huh.
26
Q. 388
There were 11 motions at that meeting.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 389
And two of those motions were successful.
29 12:35:04 30
Yes.
One was a motion by Councillor
Gilmore and others for a district centre on a portion of the lands.
And the
other was a motion by Councillor Barrett to reduce the density on the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:35:09
12:35:26
63 1
residential portion of all of the lands from four to the acre to one to the
2
acre?
3
A.
4 5
Yes. Now, I don't think I was in attendance at those votes.
Not -- was it
Eamonn Gilmore's motion for the district centre. Q. 390
6
What happened and the record shows is you were in attendance on the 27th of May 1992.
You voted against the manager's proposals on DP92/44.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 391
At page 7207.
9
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 392
You will see there on the record you are recorded as voting against the
12:35:40 10
11
manager's proposals for the rezoning effectively of the plans?
12
A.
Oh, yes.
13
Q. 393
And you are not recorded as voting on the balance of the motions that took
14 12:35:59 15
16
place. A.
Yes, I voted against that motion.
Q. 394
You did and indeed, you are recorded in a, in the newspapers the following day.
17
If I could have 8161, please.
18
please.
19
A number of -- Fianna Fail Councillors told the meeting that she would be
12:36:31 20
And if we look at the fourth column across,
And if we could increase the fourth column across.
And it's there.
voting against Councillor Lydon's motion which would have allowed the company
21
to build 6.6 houses on each acre of this site.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 395
Now, the -- can the Tribunal take it, Mrs. Coffey, that everybody at this
24
meeting knew that what was being discussed were the Carrickmines lands were the
12:36:47 25
26
Monarch lands? A.
I wouldn't -- I wouldn't say that they -- that the whole council, 78 members
27
knew that the land was called Monarch.
28
say they were voting on the Cherrywood proposal.
29
lands as the developer, you know.
12:37:09 30
Q. 396
They called it Cherrywood.
So they'd
We didn't always refer to
Well Councillor Lydon seems to have been aware that the lands were Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:37:13
12:37:32
64 1
lands because he's recorded in the newspapers as saying and I quote "basically
2
the outcome means the company can build 167 huge mansions on the site but I
3
understand they will not proceed with this said Councillor Lydon after the
4
meeting."
5 6
And it also records that Councillor Lydon had made a passionate plea on behalf
7
of Monarch saying that the project would bring 1,000 permanent jobs to the
8
area.
9
day, Ms. Coffey, the only developer or landowner who is mentioned or discussed
12:37:41 10
11
And if one reads the article that was in the newspaper the following
is Monarch. A.
Well in the press by Councillor Lydon but you asked me would all of the
12
councillors be aware that it was the Monarch land.
13
--
14 12:37:54 15
16
I couldn't answer that but
Q. 397
Were you aware it was the Monarch lands?
A.
Yes.
Q. 398
And had you been approached by anybody seeking you -- seeking your support for
17
an increase in density or a change on the Monarch lands?
18
A.
What year was that?
19
Q. 399
1992.
A.
Oh, yes.
21
Q. 400
And 1992 or 1993.
22
A.
Well the man I dealt with, and I think the only person I dealt with was Richard
12:38:09 20
Who approached you?
23
Lynn.
24
And I had passionately spoken in the council chamber that I was not and never
12:38:32 25
would support what Monarch initially wanted.
26 27
And many, many meetings with Richard Lynn but he knew my position.
meetings, he met me. Q. 401
So in May of 1992, and as appears to be the position that's set out in the
28
record.
29
proposing, which is recorded on 7203, please.
12:38:59 30
But, you know, people ask for
Your position was that you were against what the manager was
Mrs. Coffey. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Which is the manager's map,
12:38:59
12:39:15
65 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 402
The manager had brought a report in favour of this map and he had sought
3
changes on the map.
And I think the council officials who have given evidence
4
to the Tribunal have agreed that the substantial portion of the changes,
5
suggested on this map, concerned only the Monarch lands.
So --
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 403
So it would appear that certainly from the official point of view what was
8 9
being proposed by the manager related primarily to the Monarch lands? A.
I'm sorry.
Q. 404
Yeah.
11
A.
Yes, I see it.
12
Q. 405
And the manager was proposing a change from AP to A1P and a slight increase in
12:39:30 10
13 14
They are the lands outlined in red on that map.
the area that would be zoned residential. A.
Yes.
Q. 406
And you voted against that.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 407
Now, the manager had in his report to the meeting indicated that what he meant
12:39:41 15
18 19
by A1P was low density residential four houses to the acre? A.
Correct.
Q. 408
So you voted against that?
21
A.
I did.
22
Q. 409
So you were not in favour of four houses to the acre on the Monarch lands in
12:39:53 20
23 24 12:40:01 25
May of 1992? A.
No.
Q. 410
But in November of 1993 you were a co-signatory to a motion which had as its
26
direct effect the increase in density on the Monarch lands from one house to
27
the acre to four houses to the acre, isn't that right?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 411
Now, why did you do that?
A.
Well we are on the motion I signed with Councillor Marren aren't we?
12:40:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:40:23
12:40:38
66 1
Q. 412
Yes.
2
A.
Well I'll tell you why I signed that: After the manager's motion I voted
3
against it.
4
was one to the acre, which I voted in favour of -- no wrong.
5
motion was by Councillor Breathnach and I don't know who seconded it, which was
6
one to the acre, which I voted in favour and that was lost.
7
the final motion, which is the one had -- you have to forgive me if I don't
8
remember number in all of the motions.
9
the manager's motion was only lost by two votes.
12:41:06 10
The following motion was a motion by Councillor Dockrell, which The following
We now come to
So we come to the final motion. Of which I was one.
Now,
The
final motion, which was Donal Marren's motion or including Larry Lohan, myself,
11
Liam Cosgrave and I think it's Anne Ormonde, because it's not right to say one
12
person owns a motion or not, that's incorrect.
13
to the manager's motion except that there was a certain amount of the land
14
zoned one to the acre.
12:41:37 15
That motion was very similar
And forgive me if I preempt your question, why did I
only support Monarch and leave out one to the acre.
16
the other land was not owned by Monarch.
17
Monarch.
18
honest truth.
I was never aware that
I thought the whole lot was owned by
You might find that silly or not but that's the way I -- that's the
19 12:41:50 20
And you're in a council chamber and you know what support you're getting, cross
21
party or otherwise.
22
proposal was only lost by two votes, then councillor -- the substantive motion
23
signed by the five of us was definitely going to be voted through.
24
And you know the numbers.
If you see that the manager's
Q. 413
With respect --
A.
It was the best we could get at the time.
26
Q. 414
You are mixing up two sets of minutes, Ms. Coffey.
27
A.
Well I --
28
Q. 415
And I'll take responsibility for that because I've been trying to hurry the
12:42:18 25
29 12:42:33 30
process along.
You are cobbling together the events of May 1992 and November
1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:42:34
12:42:43
67 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 416
Because the manager's motion takes place on the 27th of May 1992 and is lost.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 417
Councillor Barrett's motion is successful on the same day.
And your motion
5
and your colleague's motion to rezone the Monarch lands does not come before
6
the council until November 1993?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 418
So --
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Ms. Dillon.
Just to put it into context in fairness.
12:42:54 10
11
MS. DILLON:
I think I'll go back --
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
successful motion, the second public display goes out.
12:43:06 15
And all of the lands
the subject matter of Mr. Barrett's motion are zoned one house to the acre.
16 17
What happens after May 1992, Ms. Coffey, when Mr. Barrett's
So that's the second public display. A.
Thank you very much.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And that happens over the course of I think it's 1993.
12:43:20 20
21
MS. DILLON:
July 1993.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
effectively, the last of the meetings regarding the whole of the Carrickmines
12:43:29 25
July 1993 and it comes back then to the council for
Valley for the confirmation meeting.
26 27
Q. 419
MS. DILLON:
If I show you a map it might make things simpler.
28
This is the effect of the May 1992 meeting.
29
residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley.
12:43:46 30
The yellow lands are all the
red are the lands owned by Monarch Properties. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
7217, please.
The lands outlined in
And the box part of those
12:43:51
12:44:09
68 1
lands were the lands zoned for a town centre by Councillor Gilmore at the
2
meeting on the 27th of May.
3
the yellow lands has a residential density of one to the acre.
4
first public display they'd had a residential density of four to the acre.
As a result of Councillor Barrett's motion all of
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 420
In May of 1992 you voted for two motions.
7
Whereas in the
Councillors Gordon and Reeves and
Breathnach and Smyth to keep the lands at one house per acre and that was lost.
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 421
And Councillor Barrett's motion on which you did not vote, was won.
12:44:29 10
And the
effect of that was that all of those lands on the map on screen that are
11
coloured yellow were zoned one house to the acre.
12
public display.
13
November 1993.
14
with the town centre and one in connection with the residential density.
12:44:53 15
That went out on the second
It came back into the council for further consideration in At which stage you signed two motions.
One in connection The
residential density motion that you signed is at 7226.
16
A.
7226?
17
Q. 422
It's going to come on up on screen now.
This is the motion in relation to the
18
residential density and the motion seeks to accept the County Manager agencies'
19
recommendation and delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined
12:45:16 20
in red on the attached map and the balance of the lands remained at two per
21
acre.
22
entire of Councillor Breathnach's change and reverting for the entire of the
23
residential lands back to four per acre.
24
The manager in his report to the meeting had recommended deleting the
A.
That's correct.
Q. 423
The motion, the map that's signed by you and attached to the motion is 7227.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 424
And the lands that are outlined in red are those portion of the Monarch lands
12:45:30 25
28
that go as far as the old 1983 Southeastern Motorway line.
29
zoned portion of the Monarch lands.
12:45:51 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
The residentially
12:45:51
12:46:07
69 1
Q. 425
Right.
So what your motion, Ms. Coffey, and Mr. Marren's motion, seeks to do
2
is to change the density on the Monarch lands from one per acre to four per
3
acre and leave the balance of the residentially zoned lands at one per acre?
4
A.
That's correct.
5
Q. 426
Right.
6
A.
And the district centre remains at neighbourhood centre.
7
Q. 427
I will come to the district centre in a moment.
8
A.
All right.
9
Q. 428
What I would like you to outline to the Tribunal, do you accept first of all,
12:46:18 10
that this is a change in position for yourself?
11
A.
Yes, I do.
12
Q. 429
All right.
And would you just explain to the Tribunal, the factual basis on
13
which you came to change your opinion and then the circumstances in which you
14
came to sign this motion?
12:46:33 15
A.
I will.
First of all, we better -- I'll explain to you how I signed the
16
motion to the best of my memory.
17
motion.
18
asked me would I support, would I support the motion.
19
then he said will you sign it.
12:47:02 20
Councillor Marren came to me with the
And as you see, Larry Lohan's name is underneath his name.
And
I said I would.
I remember saying well why do you need to sign
it because he said you've spoken so often on the development, if your signature
21
is on it, it will carry weight.
22
I'd had achieved what I wanted to achieve.
23
centre on it and that took the risk away from Dun Laoghaire town centre.
24
the land --
12:47:31 25
Q. 430
26 27
12:47:43 30
So I agreed to do that.
Mainly because one,
I'd had achieved a neighbourhood Two,
Can I just stop you there on that. Are you reading from some sort of prepared script?
A.
28 29
And
No, I'm not. You can have this if you like.
This is the motion in front of
me. Q. 431
Before you go on to talk about the neighbourhood centre, can I ask you this, which motion was dealt with first? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:47:46
12:47:57
70 1
A.
2 3
I'm dealing with which is referred to as the Marren Coffey motion. ARe you happy with that?
Q. 432
Yes. You're talking about the neighbourhood centre being kept at neighbourhood
4
size.
I am suggesting to you, Ms. Coffey, that that motion was voted on after
5
this motion was voted on, isn't that right?
6
A.
Well I'm -- I've lost you a bit but I accept what you're saying.
7
Q. 433
We'll just get it clear in fairness to yourself, Ms. Coffey?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 434
You appear to be making a point to the Tribunal because you had satisfied
12:48:11 10
yourself about the size of the neighbourhood centre, you were then in a
11
position to change your position and sign this motion, is that the position?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 435
However, any amendment to the neighbourhood centre change took place after this
14 12:48:25 15
16
motion was voted upon so the record shows, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 436
But if your concern had been to ensure that the changes that you were proposing
17
to the neighbourhood centre, one would have expected that you would have
18
ensured that that motion would have been voted on first?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 437
Did that happen?
21
A.
Well the manager's report on his initial --
22
Q. 438
Sorry.
23
A.
-- motion.
24
Q. 439
Sorry can you just answer the question, Mrs. Coffey?
A.
I can't answer the question.
26
Q. 440
Was the neighbourhood motion voted on first?
27
A.
Sorry, I can't answer the question the way you are putting it.
12:48:37 20
12:48:45 25
28
explain to the Tribunal.
29 12:48:52 30
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I want to
12:48:53
12:49:01
71 1
A.
I want to explain to the Tribunal.
2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
When I spoke to the other signatories of this motion which I only spoke to
5
Donal Marren and Larry Lohan.
6
neighbourhood centre would stand, which was in the manager's initial motion
7
which I had vetted voted against.
8
motion.
9
talking plan, we're talking politics. And in politics you have to have
12:49:28 10
They said that there was agreement to, that the
And that this was a completely compromised
And I'm sorry, the Tribunal must just remember, we are not just
positions.
You have a position that you might start and another position that
11
you might end.
12
certainly would not sustain a district centre or town centre.
13
sustain it.
14
the amendment in his own writing there was to appease the Carrickmines Valley
12:49:55 15
Four houses to the acre is a fairly low density.
It
It would not
And my understanding was that the reason that Donal Marren put
Protection Society and Michael Smyth's group, wherever they were, by keeping
16
some of the land one to the acre.
It's as simple as that.
17 18
Q. 441
19 12:50:13 20
21
MS. DILLON:
The first motion that was to be dealt with that day.
Could I
have page please 7224 for Ms. Coffey. A.
7224?
Q. 442
Yes.
It will come up on screen beside you.
The first motion that was to be
22
dealt with was a motion by Councillor Smyth, Buckley and Misteil resolving that
23
the lands on change three be confirmed at low density housing of one or two
24
houses to the acre.
12:50:29 25
And that was the first motion that was dealt with, isn't
that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 443
Now, you had voted in favour of such a motion in May of 1992, isn't that right?
28
A.
Uh-huh.
29
Q. 444
You didn't do so on this occasion, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
12:50:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:50:40
12:51:00
72 1
Q. 445
Now, what I have asked you to do on a number of occasions, I think this is my
2
third time now to ask you, Ms. Coffey, is to explain to the Tribunal the
3
factual basis on which you came to change your mind?
4
A.
Well I don't think that I can explain it any more factually than I explained
5
it.
6
different political parties.
7
the people that you represent.
8
different political parties.
9
everybody watches the West Wing but it would be really, it would educate you
12:51:29 10
But I will try again.
about politics.
You are in a council chamber made up of all You've tried to achieve an end result that suits There's interlinking going on between the
It's a political arena.
I don't know if
At the end of the day it's numbers.
And remember,
11
Ms. Dillon, you told me one time, the last time we're not only bums on seats
12
and I was really insulted but at the end of the day it is numbers.
13
you can achieve.
14
the acre was a formula by which Monarch could never ever build a major shopping
12:51:59 15
I couldn't achieve one to the acre.
centre because they wouldn't sustain it.
16
It's what
And actually one to
Neither could they build a district
centre or a town centre at four to the acre.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
What did you understand this motion would achieve?
The motion would achieve.
12:52:10 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Which would in some way satisfy your own view?
The motion achieved that in the council chamber, talking to the heads of the
23
different groups that they were happy with a neighbourhood centre.
24
nobody was going to try and push through a district centre.
12:52:34 25
That
And this motion
sustained a neighbourhood centre and gave, it gave everybody something.
It
26
gave Loughlinstown Ballybrack some job creation, something that would keep them
27
going.
28
at four to the acre, which they must have been desperately disappointed in.
29
And they gave the Carrickmines Valley, their one to the acre, and land to the
12:53:05 30
It gave Monarch enough to develop the land to a neighbourhood centre
north of it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:53:05
12:53:20
73 1 2
And I tell you I am an honourable person.
3
it to you now.
4
the numbers game at what you can achieve.
5
in the centre of Dun Laoghaire.
6
people and I look at it now, if anyone here lives in Dun Laoghaire, I mean Dun
7
Laoghaire now has an opportunity to boom.
8
drive through Cherrywood and if you see the science and technology park and
9
what has established and the houses.
12:53:47 10
I'm an honest person.
I'm saying
In all honesty, that was all behind the toing and froing and
can't go out and meet Wicklow.
I was working for my town.
I love Dun Laoghaire.
I live
I was protecting the
It's fantastic.
And if you now
Where were we to go? We were warned you
You only had to go that way.
11
gone up to Stepaside.
Now, I may be going on in yards.
12
impress on you, I'm not here to cod anyone.
13
what I did then.
14
way it was.
And now we've
But I want to
I'm here passionately telling you
And I don't want to get upset, you know, I'm -- that's the
12:54:08 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
17 18
Q. 446
19 12:54:15 20
MS. DILLON:
In January of 1994 the councils were going to separate into three
separate councils, Mrs. Coffey, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
21
Q. 447
Fingal, south Dublin and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 448
This event is happening in November 1993, some two months before Dun
24
Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council takes up its own statutory functions, isn't
12:54:29 25
that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 449
And when Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council was established on the 1st of
28
January 1994, the number of councillors dealing with the matter or the area
29
would have been much reduced, isn't that right from the 78?
12:54:40 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:54:40
12:55:03
74 1
Q. 450
Isn't that the position? Now on the 11th of November 1993, Councillor Barrett
2
brought an amendment to councillor Misteil's motion at which he suggested at
3
7225.
4
to the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council not later than June '94, a draft
5
variation of the new County Development Plan for these lands.
6
the residentially zoned lands.
That the amendment that the manager be requested to prepare and submit
And they are
Do you see that, Mrs. Coffey?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 451
This was an opportunity I suggest to you to have taken the entire difficult
9
situation that you have described and take it out of the hands of Dublin County
12:55:20 10
Council for a two or three month period and put it in the hands of effectively
11
the local councillors in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, isn't that right?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 452
You voted against that amendment, isn't that right? That's what the record
14 12:55:34 15
shows. A.
Well if the record shows it.
16
Q. 453
7261, please?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 454
What I would like you to explain to the Tribunal, Mrs. Coffey, is this.
19
What
was the urgency or the great necessity in November 1993 to get four houses to
12:55:51 20
21
You're not putting it up.
the acre for Monarch? A.
The urgency was and I think Councillor Marren put it to you.
The urgency was
22
this; 1992, that's 16 years ago isn't it now? 16.
And you're asking me, by
23
the way, and I have to remind you, to think back to what way I was thinking 16
24
years ago.
16 years ago I didn't qualify for my bus pass.
I do now.
12:56:23 25
26
However, what was trying to be achieved is, and there were huge debates.
27
a pity, the minutes don't reflect debates in the council chamber.
28
was going to achieve was it was going to get land developed that was going to
29
produce jobs for Loughlinstown Ballybrack.
12:56:51 30
low density housing to sustain it.
What this
It was going to produce a fairly
And then it was going to, it was a piece.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
It's
12:56:56
12:57:07
75 1
That's all I can say to you.
And the debate had gone.
Can you give me the
2
vote on that motion? What was the vote on that motion?
3
Q. 455
On which motion the amendment motion?
4
A.
Councillor Barrett's.
5
Q. 456
7267. 43 to 27.
6
A.
43 to 27?
7
Q. 457
Uh-huh.
8
A.
So 43 people voted it down, did they?
9
Q. 458
Voted against it.
A.
They voted against it.
11
Q. 459
Yes.
12
A.
So if I only could have the debate that was in the chamber.
12:57:17 10
13 14 12:57:28 15
16
you what I was thinking. Q. 460
What I am asking you, Mrs. Coffey, is to explain how?
A.
I don't --
Q. 461
When the manager had made a substantially similar proposal which he had brought
17
to the chamber in May of 1992 you voted against it.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 462
Yes.
12:57:44 20
21
Then I can tell
You are now voting for Monarch only and signing a motion that benefits
Monarch only in November 1993. A.
Isn't that the position?
It happens to be the way you can interpret the position.
But I'm telling you
22
that even though it was a Monarch only piece of land, the other piece of land,
23
one to the acre, I wasn't even aware that Monarch did not own it.
24
going to go down that road.
12:58:08 25
And surely by now I've convinced you.
Dublin County Council. Q. 463
What I'm concerned about, Mrs. Coffey, at 7229 leaving aside any abiding
28
passion you might have.
29
had as its only and direct effect the benefiting of a specific landowner,
12:58:31 30
Surely by
now I've really convinced you of my abiding passion about what I was doing in
26 27
So I'm not
Is why you elected to put your name to a motion that
namely, Monarch Properties.
And I really wish, and we might make progress.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:58:36
12:58:51
76 1
If you would for the fifth time would address your mind to answering that
2
simple question; why did you bring a motion before the council that is
3
completely contrary to the way you had voted in May of '92 and benefit a single
4
landowner, Monarch Properties.
5
A.
6
Well I believe I have answered it.
Would you just answer that question, please. I believe I've answered it twice.
It
had -- it might be a long-winded answer but I've answered that question twice.
7 8
MR. FARREN:
Chairman, If I may -- I hasten to interrupt my friend in full
9
flight, as it were but I think the witness has answered that question.
12:59:09 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
Well she has.
She insists that that is the --
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Is the answer.
14 12:59:13 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
16 17
Q. 464
MS. DILLON:
All right.
18
fair to you.
19
house to the acre.
12:59:26 20
21
Well then the position is this then Ms. Coffey to be
The following is the position. In 1992 your position was one No town centre.
Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 465
In 1993 your position is four house to the acre for Monarch Properties and a
22
neighbourhood centre.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 466
Right.
12:59:40 25
And that is as a result of tick tacking or political negotiation on
the floor of the chamber is that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 467
And were you approached or persuade in any way by anybody on behalf of Monarch?
28 29 12:59:51 30
Did Mr. Dunlop approach you for example? A.
No.
Q. 468
How do you know? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
12:59:51
13:00:06
77 1
A.
I know he didn't because I was never aware that he was working for Monarch.
2
Q. 469
Did Mr. Lynn approach you?
3
A.
Oh, several times.
4
Q. 470
And when did you ever indicate to Mr. Lynn that you had changed your position
5 6
I'd several meetings with Richard Lynn.
in relation to Monarch? A.
No.
Because I think that motion was held on the day. Richard Lynn could not
7
have been happy even with that motion.
8
it.
9
wanted a town centre.
13:00:25 10
They wanted 16 to the acre.
Monarch could not have been happy with
They said it was a district centre.
That was a step down motion and -- and Monarch must
have been very disappointed with that motion.
11
Q. 471
Well did he send you flowers after the vote?
12
A.
(laughter) I don't remember.
13
Q. 472
Mr. Lynn?
14
A.
I don't remember.
Q. 473
8566.
13:00:35 15
They
You see there flowers ordered by Richard Lynn for Betty Coffey and Phil
16
Reilly for Michael Keating.
17
he certainly thought enough of you, didn't he, Mrs. Coffey, or what you had
18
done that he was minded enough to send you flowers the day of the vote, isn't
19
that right?
13:00:54 20
A.
21 22
Q. 474
If he did. We got flowers at
Well I'm drawing to your attention first of all the date which is the 11th of November --
A.
13:01:10 25
I see it's the 11th.
Richard Lynn is a gentleman.
He probably knew he had
sort of annoyed me enough seeking enough meetings to get what they wanted which
26 27
Well that was, I mean, I don't remember it.
Do you see that? Well
Christmas always from Monarch.
23 24
11th of November 1993.
they didn't get. Q. 475
Well he certainly seems to have been happy enough with whatever you had done to
28
consider that you were worthy of receiving flowers on the same date as the
29
motion is passed, isn't that right?
13:01:27 30
A.
Oh, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:01:28
13:01:38
78 1
Q. 476
And do you accept now looking back on it, Mrs. Coffey, that there is a radical
2
change in your position between May of 1992 and November 1993 in relation to
3
the Monarch lands?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 477
So you do not see being against a town centre, a neighbourhood centre and being
6
against four houses to the acre and only in favour of one to the acre in May of
7
'92 and being in favour of four to the acre and a neighbourhood centre in
8
November '93 as being a change in position?
9
A.
13:01:59 10
No, I don't.
Four to the acre is low density housing.
16 to the acre was
the norm then.
11
Q. 478
And do you accept --
12
A.
One to the acre would stop any -- any question of any district centre going on
13
the land.
14
thinking.
13:02:11 15
Q. 479
Yes.
Now, I think I've made myself very clear on where, what way I was
And that's my other question to you.
If you had as your stated
16
objective or desire the protection of the business interests in Dun Laoghaire
17
--
18
A.
Uh-huh.
19
Q. 480
-- town.
13:02:26 20
to the acre which would have ensured no neighbourhood development on the
21 22
Cherrywood lands? A.
23 24 13:02:37 25
26
Why then did you not support Mr. Misteil's motion to keep it at one
Because then there would be no development and the people in Loughlinstown Ballybrack would have no hope.
Q. 481
So you had changed your position?
A.
No.
Q. 482
In May of '92 where you were in favour of no neighbourhood centre to a position
27
where in November '93 you were in favour of a reduced size neighbourhood
28
centre?
29 13:02:54 30
A.
No, '92 I was -- I voted against the manager's proposal because I wanted to slow down the whole process. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:02:58
13:03:16
79 1
Q. 483
Sorry, you wanted to slow down what process?
2
A.
The process of reaching, of ensuring that we'd got -- that we slowed down a
3
major development which would be provide -- providing a town centre or district
4
centre on the site.
5
Q. 484
That was it.
But you could have slowed the process down even further by supporting Mr.
6
Barrett to leave it all over to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council couldn't
7
you?
8
A.
9
One to the acre. If you supported one to the acre, which I did on one occasion.
13:03:33 10
I mean, it's just not real and you have to be in the council
chamber to see what's happening.
Anyway there were 11 motions all together.
11
Some of them I wasn't there for.
I must have had to go to some either a
12
family thing or another meeting.
I know I'm clear on it, Ms. Dillon.
13
can't explain to you any more what I did I know was right.
14
Q. 485
13:03:56 15
Monarch lands? When you signed the motion in November '93? A.
Yes well I didn't, you know.
I -- maybe it was discussions on what we were
18
going to achieve.
19
didn't question the one to the acre.
13:04:19 20
Q. 486
That was, you know, a compromise motion
Are you saying that you believed that all of the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley were all owned by Monarch?
A.
13:04:40 25
26
I
represented his thinking on a lot of things.
23 24
I thought all of the lands were the Monarch lands.
and, you know, Donal Marren is a very able councillor and I would have
21 22
Would it be fair to say that you
would have known at least when you signed that motion that they were the
16 17
And when the question of the Monarch lands.
I
I don't -- I didn't question it.
I just -- I didn't think about it one way
or the other. Q. 487
Did you subsequently in 1997 support various motions by or on behalf of Monarch
27
in the review of the plan before Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown to increase the science
28
and technology zoning into the golf course lands?
29 13:04:59 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 488
And -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:05:02
13:05:15
80 1
A.
But I think that the golf course was a very important issue because Larry
2
Butler and myself I know put a motion down to ensure that a golf course could
3
be developed, even though some of us was brought in to accommodate the science
4
and technology park.
5
Q. 489
Yes.
A motion --
6
A.
But we were assured that a golf course could be built.
7
Q. 490
Yes.
You had brought a motion, an amendment to the main motion, in which you
8
sought that the -- moving the science and technology zoning into the golf
9
course lands would be without prejudice to the Council's wish to develop public
13:05:35 10
golf course on the lands, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 491
And because of that amendment that was put forward by you.
13 14 13:05:44 15
It would appear
that the motion itself was passed, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 492
And those -- the lands that were on the map, at 7287.
16
These lands with the
letter three?
17
A.
Uh-huh.
18
Q. 493
They subsequently became zoned for science and technology E1 at that point in
19 13:06:03 20
21
time, isn't that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 494
And did you also support an extension of the development of the town centre
22
into the adjoining lands?
23
A.
The neighbourhood centre?
24
Q. 495
Yes.
A.
Was it a town centre by then?
26
Q. 496
Neighbourhood centre?
27
A.
Yes, I'm sure I did.
28
Q. 497
I think you were present but it's recorded only as a show of hands.
13:06:13 25
29 13:06:29 30
If it's in the minutes I did, yes. But it
would seem likely that you would have supported it? A.
Yes.
If we were going to be successful in developing a science and technology Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:06:34
13:06:53
81 1
park and we were able to maintain the development of a golf course, I would
2
have supported anything that helped the science and technology park.
3
Q. 498
4
And I think the cap on retail development, which had been imposed in 1993, was removed also in 1998, isn't that right?
5
A.
Well ...
6
Q. 499
The cap on the retail element at Cherrywood?
7
A.
That's correct.
8
Q. 500
Isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 501
Because the Manager proposed an alternative amendment, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 502
And that would have allowed for much greater development on the town centre
13:06:58 10
13 14
lands than had been allowed previously? A.
No.
Q. 503
Much greater retail element, isn't that right?
16
A.
District centre then it went up to.
17
Q. 504
Yes?
18
A.
District centre, yes not town centre.
19
Q. 505
And is it your position that by the time that motion came on for hearing you
13:07:10 15
13:07:20 20
21
were in support of a district centre on the Cherrywood lands? A.
By the time '98 came along Dun Laoghaire had developed the Pavilion site.
We
22
were also I think now, I could be wrong but I'm just giving you a history of
23
what happened in Dun Laoghaire.
24
Monarch had invested in the Bloomfield site and built another shopping centre
13:07:43 25
The Pavilion site was being developed.
and Dun Laoghaire was beginning to grow.
The Manager put investment into the
26
redevelopment of the main street itself.
27
district centre would not have effected Dun Laoghaire.
28
stand on its own and is doing quite well.
29 13:08:08 30
Q. 506
And therefore there was no, the Dun Laoghaire can
In view -- in November 1993, Mrs. Coffey, in view of the imminence of the separate local authority of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
Why did
13:08:13
13:08:34
82 1
you not consider yourself bringing a motion that would have left over the
2
entire question to the new council?
3
A.
Well, I did try in debates in the County Council to say that I felt we were
4
doing an impossible task in trying to put together a Development Plan for the
5
whole of Dublin County.
And there were also staffing problems at that time.
6
Q. 507
Will I repeat the question for you, Mrs. Coffey.
7
A.
I'm trying to tell you, Ms. Dillon.
8
Q. 508
We're talking about the zoning of the Carrickmines Valley and the Tribunal is
9
Which is this question --
not interested in the zoning of the rest of Dublin because this Module is
13:08:53 10
concerned, at this moment in time, with the Carrickmines Valley.
And what I'm
11
asking you, and what I'd like you to answer, first before you elaborate.
12
why you didn't elect to transfer the vexed question of the zoning of the
13
Carrickmines Valley into the hands of the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council
14
which was taking up office two months later?
13:09:13 15
A.
Is
Well the zoning that we achieved at the end was going to be carried forward to
16
the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.
17
were quite happy with, the signatories on that motion and the people who voted
18
for it were very happy with what we'd achieved.
19
over.
13:09:39 20
And that was going to carry
And we did I think pass a motion to carry out an area Action Plan for
the Cherrywood area, which was done, took a long time to do it, and it was just
21 22
And what we had achieved in, we
a starting point. Q. 509
And that's it.
Nothing wrong with that.
The area Action Plan was commenced in January of 1994 on the instructions of
23
Mr. Willie Murray and was brought before the Council in April 1994. And I
24
suggest to you, Mrs. Coffey, that is not a very long time.
13:10:05 25
at a Draft Action Area Plan by April 1994 and were considering it?
26
A.
Mrs. Dillon.
27
Q. 510
So why are you suggesting -- ?
28
A.
You have the documentation there.
29 13:10:14 30
You were looking
'94.
ago. Q. 511
Why -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
This is 2006.
This is 12 years
13:10:15
13:10:32
83 1
A.
Now, I want to tell you.
This is -- it's very unfair of you, if you don't
2
mind my saying so, and with all respect to you, to say to me to remember
3
exactly how everything happened.
4
here.
I hadn't studied all of that until I came
It's --
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
way.
8
better to leave over questions relating to the rezoning of this area until the
9
new Councils were created and a more focused approach by local Councillors
13:10:59 10
Well do you remember, Mrs. Coffey.
If the question was put this
Do you remember considering at the time, in '93, whether it might be
would then take on the task? I mean, did you consider whether that might be a
11
better way forward, or what were your views at that time as to whether the
12
decisions should be taken there or should be delayed for what, presumably,
13
couldn't have been more than a few months?
14
A.
13:11:25 15
Absolutely.
I agree with you.
And I regret now I didn't put down a motion
to that effect and try and push it through.
16
route.
But no everyone wanted to go that
People wanted to participate in the Development Plan then.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
But there was a motion --
And '92.
13:11:38 20
21 22
MS. DILLON: A.
There were two --
Sorry.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
13:11:44 25
council.
There were two motions seeking to achieve that before the
One was Mr. Barrett's and then --
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
plate, so to speak.
29
A.
Yes.
So that opportunity, if you like, was presented to you on a
Yes.
13:11:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:11:52
13:12:10
84 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
And we're just wondering where why ...
I didn't vote for it.
I should have probably.
Well 46 voted against it.
3
So in the debate there was probably not support for it.
4
were saying, were we're not going to go along with this.
And probably my group
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
or discussing it amongst yourselves at the time, should we wait or should we
8
deal with it now?
9
A.
Well do you have any recollection, in any event, of considering it
No, I've no memory of that.
Not.
I really don't.
13:12:26 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
13
All right.
You know, hindsight is a great thing but the motion didn't get support, generally across the board it didn't get support.
14 13:12:37 15
CHAIRMAN:
16
Ms. Dillon, it's now one o'clock.
Now, if your nearly finished
...
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
an opportunity to put her position in relation to the record really I have to
13:12:50 20
I'm almost finished.
ask you this, Ms. Coffey.
In fairness to Ms. Coffey just to give her
Did the payment of 1,000 pounds in November 1992,
21
was that a factor you took into account in November 1993 when you came to
22
consider the Monarch position again?
23
A.
Absolutely not.
24
Q. 512
Thank you very much, Ms. Coffey.
13:13:07 25
If you would answer any questions anybody
else might have for you.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask a question?
28 29
MR. SANFEY: No, Chairman.
13:13:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:13:12
13:13:22
85 1
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Farren, do you want to ask a couple of questions?
2 3
MR. FARREN:
4
matters.
Just a couple of brief questions, Chairman, just for clarifying
5 6
THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. FARREN AS FOLLOWS:
7 8
Q. 513
9
At the very beginning of Ms. Dillon's questioning.
Sorry Chairman, Would You
prefer to ask questions first?
13:13:27 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: Q. 514
No, no, no you're okay.
MR. FARREN:
Ms. Dillon asked you whether you wanted to change any of your
13
evidence already given to the Tribunal and you indicated no.
14
did explain in your answers to her subsequent questions that you saw a
13:13:42 15
And I think you
difference between what was being termed "personal" donations and political
16
donations in the sense of donations to a political General Election campaign?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 515
Isn't that right?
19
A.
That's correct.
Q. 516
And it was on that basis that you were making that distinction.
21
A.
Yes, yes.
22
Q. 517
And as far as you're concerned, when you use the term "personal" as you have to
13:13:55 20
23
the Tribunal know a number of occasions, you are quite clear that you have
24
received no "personal" donations of any sort?
13:14:13 25
A.
I have never received a personal donation for anything in my life.
And
26
anything that came -- any money that ever were paid, the process under the
27
Constitution as to the way political fundraising was carried out and elections
28
are funded.
29 13:14:43 30
Q. 518
And in the context of the contributions that have subsequently become clear from Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Dunlop's evidence as to his contributions.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
I think
13:14:57
13:15:01
86 1
when that issue arose you did try to obtain clarification yourself from Mr.
2
Dunlop as to what he was referring to?
3
A.
Yes, I did.
4
Q. 519
And you've I think fairly described to Ms. Dillon now how since Mr. Dunlop's
5
evidence to the Tribunal and the somewhat unclear aspects of that itself, you
6
are clear that in 1992, a contribution to your General Election campaign in
7
that year was made only on the basis of Mr. Dunlop's production of that letter
8
from you, isn't that correct?
9 13:15:23 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 520
And whereas Mr. Dunlop makes reference to an earlier payment in relation to the
11
1991 Local Elections.
You don't have any personal recollection of that?
12
A.
I don't.
13
Q. 521
And equally, you don't have any recollection if there's a different payment in
14 13:15:43 15
16
I genuinely don't.
relation to the payment from Mr. Dunne or Berland Homes? A.
I don't remember that.
Q. 522
But obviously again today we've been given a letter from Sean Dunne which
17
indicates that he did, he says he did, either through Berland Homes either
18
through Mr. Dunlop or direct to you, give you that payment.
19
willing to accept that but you don't have any recollection of it?
13:16:00 20
21
And you are
A.
Yes, I accept that.
Q. 523
Now, coming on to the very briefly on to the questions which Ms. Dillon was
22
posing about how you supported the motion, Mr. Marren's motion.
23
understand it, that motion was passed by, I think by a substantial majority I
24
think at the time.
13:16:34 25
26
As I
It's 43 to 27, isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 524
And does that reflect the recognition, as it were, in the cauldron of the
27
council, how the compromise had been reached to the majority's satisfaction?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 525
And equally, when there was the opportunity that the Chairman has referred to,
13:16:53 30
to as it were, to pass the ball back to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown when it had been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:16:59
13:17:21
87 1 2
established. A.
Yes.
The motion was rejected by 43 to 27?
I think everyone had felt that they'd done so much work that at that
3
stage and they had attended I'd say 1,000 meetings all together from all of the
4
different groups.
5
could go forward to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown.
6
Q. 526
That they felt that they had reached a point that they
And that majority is similar to the majority in relation to the earlier motion
7
which, is it fair to say, again reflects the political reality of the
8
recognition of the compromise?
9 13:17:38 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 527
And finally, Mrs. Coffey, Ms. Dillon made reference to a bunch of flowers being
11
delivered from Mr. Lynn I think.
12
have you received flowers on other occasions?
13
A.
14
Well you receive flowers and mass cards and a bottle of wine now and then and a box of chocolates.
13:18:13 15
In your capacity as member of the council,
into envelopes.
An old lady often came around and helped me put things
That's people.
It's a wonderful profession to be in and I
16
enjoyed my 20 years.
17
believe that the people there understand my commitment and my honesty.
18
have who say that in the Tribunal today because it is a very difficult
19
situation to be in.
13:18:35 20
21
Q. 528
Thank you, Mrs. Coffey.
A.
Thank you.
I'm retired now and I'm very glad of that.
I really And I
No further questions.
22 23
JUDGE FAHERTY:
24
from what I gather from what you've told us.
13:18:52 25
26
Can I just ask you, Mrs. Coffey.
On the 11th of November,
The -- your approach was
obviously dictated by your concern for Dun Laoghaire. A.
Uh-huh.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
time when, as you said, things were needed in Dun Laoghaire.
13:19:08 30
And that it wouldn't loose out, we're now back in 1993, at a We know from the
record, that the records show on the 11th of November that actually the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:19:12
13:19:21
88 1
limiting of the district centre to neighbourhood centre motion was in fact, as
2
I understand it, the last motion put.
3
A.
Yes.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Regarding the Carrickmines lands
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
didn't you put that motion first? Because to some extent it would have been,
13:19:39 10
Isn't that -- I think that's the way it was.
Did you -- why
if you like, for what you say you wanted to achieve, a safety valve if you
11
like, because the other motions, as I understand it, that are voted on,
12
including the motion that you co-signed and proposed, extending up, if you
13
like, the residential housing to four houses to the acre.
14
A.
Um.
13:20:00 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Was first
Well I'm even confused myself about it.
I actually -- when I was discussing
18
with Donal Marren, Larry Lohan and others, whether it was a mistake the motion
19
was put second or not.
13:20:20 20
My understanding was that by putting in that motion we
were going to have a neighbourhood centre.
So I'm confused as to why that
21
happened and I cannot answer that question.
22
trust among the leaders of the group you know, if you say you're going to do a
23
thing you do it.
24
that, that motion.
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see.
All right.
Thanks.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
But there is great
And they informed me that it was a neighbourhood centre plus
13:20:36 25
26
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
Thank you.
13:20:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
13:20:41
13:20:44
89 1
CHAIRMAN:
Thank you very much, Ms. Coffey.
2 3
THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW:
4 5
MS. DILLON:
Thank you, Mrs. Coffey.
6
propose sitting on Tuesday.
Tuesday.
I don't know what time you
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Half ten.
9 13:20:48 10
Ms. Dillon: May it please you, Sir.
11 12
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY,
13
27TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.
14 13:24:32 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 658
10:17:40
10:34:13
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY, 27TH JUNE 2006
2
AT 10.30 A.M:
3 4
MS. DILLON:
Good morning. Mr. Paul Monahan please.
5 6
MR. PAUL MONAHAN, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
7
BY MS. FOLEY:
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:34:48 10
A
11
Q
Good morning. 1
12
MS. FOLEY:
Good morning, Mr. Monahan. I think you are the current managing
director of Monarch Properties Limited, is that correct?
13
A
14
Q
10:34:59 15
A
16
Q
That's correct. 2
And when did you take on that role? I started in May 2002, 2001.
3
17
And prior to that, did you have a role as, you were a director of -- other than managing director?
18
A
19
Q
10:35:13 20
A
21
Q
22 23
Good morning, Mr. Monahan.
I wasn't managing director. 4
Had you a role within the company? No.
5
Could you give just a general background of your training and when you started to work with the Monarch Group?
A
24
Basically I started to work in the Monarch Group in May 2001, that's when I started my employment with the Monarch Group.
10:35:31 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
closer to you, yeah.
28
A
Sorry, Mr. Monahan, I wonder could you pull the, a little bit
Okay.
29 10:35:38 30
MS. FOLEY:
Prior to that, what were you doing? www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:35:41
10:35:58
2 1
A
Basically I was at school, I studied accountancy, I trained to become a
2
helicopter pilot, I did my own businesses in both property and in leisure. I
3
was self-employed.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
6
They were separate businesses to those of the Monahan group? Yes, separate businesses, yes.
7
You furnished a statement to the Tribunal, your second statement in May 2006,
7
and you say that you had no direct knowledge of the events surrounding
8
Cherrywood?
9 10:36:12 10
A Q
That's correct. 8
And that you tried to get this information based on information from other
11
people and who were the people that assisted you in providing your statement to
12
the Tribunal?
13
A
Basically a letter came from the Tribunal, basically I did my best endeavours
14
to reply to it in as much detail as possible, so that would involve me having
10:36:31 15
to do some research and would have to involve basically previous officers who
16
were in the company and ask what actually happened so I could make as full a
17
reply as possible to the Tribunal.
18
Q
9
19
I wish to draw your attention to Mr. Sweeney's statement, page 2135, on the second paragraph there, Mr. Sweeney says that from 1990, Mr. Phillip Monahan
10:36:54 20
operated most of the time from an annex to his new home in Somerton,
21
Castleknock where he set up a separate team of people, including his personal
22
assistant, Ms. Gosling, Mr. Sherwood and also two of Mr. Monahan's sons, Colm
23
and Paul?
24
A
Basically on the offices there, it was in Wilton House in Dundalk, it is
10:37:13 25
correct, they did have a site office in The Square, they also had offices in
26
Earlsfort Terrace and they also had offices in Somerton and Harcout Street, my
27
brother Colm Monahan is employed by Monarch Properties but not me.
28
Q
29 10:37:33 30
10
You say that Mr. Sweeney is incorrect when he says that from 1990 you moved into the offices in Somerton?
A
He was talking about Monarch Properties moving into the offices and Phil www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:37:36
10:37:48
3 1 2
Monahan and that. Q
11
3 4
fact? A
As you can see if you check my employment details, my employment started in May
5
2001.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:38:04 10
And when he says Colm Monahan and Paul Monahan, meaning yourself, you didn't in
Q
12
Did you live in Somerton in the residential part of the building? Basically, I lived between Dundalk and Dublin.
13
Right. And Dublin being Somerton? Yes.
14
In your statement of April 2002, page 1562 please, you outline some of the
11
other officers of the company and at the second part of paragraph B you name
12
some of the previous senior officers of the company. Could you just briefly
13
outline your understanding of the role of Mr. Glennane within the organisation?
14
A
I understand Mr. Glennane is a qualified accountant and would have been the
10:38:31 15
accountant for the Monarch Group.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
15
I understand Mr. Glennane was also a shareholder in the Monarch Group. 16
closely with Mr. Monahan.
21
Q
22
A
17
What's your understanding of the role of Mr. Sweeney? Mr. Sweeney, as far as I know, was a technical director, that was his
23
experience, I don't know exactly what his qualifications were.
24
Q
10:39:01 25
A
18
And Mr. Noel Murray? Noel Murray was in marketing, he originally started as a manager in Nutgrove
26
Shopping Centre and then progressed onwards from there.
27
Q
28
A
10:39:24 30
He would have worked closely with Mr. Phillip Monahan? I am sure as a fellow director and as an accountant he would have worked
10:38:47 20
29
And would he also have been a shareholder?
19
Mr. Phillip Reilly? Mr. Phillip Reilly, my understanding is that he came in from America and basically his skill is in management and his role is in managing shopping centres. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:39:24
10:39:35
4 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
20
My understanding is he would have been involved in Tallaght. 21
10:39:46 10
Mr. Richard Lynn? He originally worked in Dundalk and then he worked for Monarch.
22
And do you know what function he performed within the Monarch Group? Not a hundred percent, no.
23
8 9
Would he have been particularly involved in Tallaght, do you understand?
Would these be the people that you looked for assistance to when you were preparing your statements for the Tribunal?
A Q
Yes, I would have asked, yes. 24
11
These would have been all the people or would you have also consulted with others?
12
A
13
Q
14
I would also have consulted with others, yes. 25
Briefly about the role of your father, your late father within the group, at your statement you say that he carried a function of director and chairman and
10:40:08 15
was the founder of the group and would have the prime mover in all the
16
developments. Mr. Monahan himself says that he had no direct involvement with
17
day to day running of many issues or indeed the details of the company
18
finances. Whereas at 8038 please in Monaghan's affidavit in 1996, for the
19
litigation against Mr. Sweeney at paragraph B there, Mr. Monahan says that
10:40:35 20
while Mr. Sweeney carried out important work on behalf of the group, he did it
21
at all times under the direct supervision of himself or the second named
22
defendant, Mr. Glennane. The driving force behind the company was at all times
23
Mr. Phillip Monahan and the second named defendant, Mr. Glennane, would that be
24
your understanding of Mr. Monahan's role?
10:40:55 25
A
Primarily my understanding was Mr. Monahan was the founder of the company, he
26
started in the late 70s, he would have taken on board Mr. Glennane and
27
Mr. Sweeney. He was certainly the major shareholder in it. He did have
28
periods where he was sick during his time, he had two triple by-passes, he was
29
sick then after that. But my understanding was he was the chairman of the
10:41:23 30
group. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:41:24
10:41:40
5 1
Q
26
And essentially the other people that we have just outlined would have been
2
acting on his instructions whether with an intermediary level in the hierarchy
3
or directly?
4
A
I don't know exactly, I can't assume exactly how he controlled his business but
5
he was the chairman and he would have employed them originally and Mr. Glennane
6
had a shareholding and Mr. Sweeney had some sort of a shareholding.
7
Q
27
And also in your statement to the Tribunal, you say that if a project was a
8
major, out of courtesy the group would consult with all the major political
9
parties and elected representatives, what's your understanding of who within
10:42:01 10
11
the group would make this contact with the politicians? A
My statement of that was because if you look at all the payments that were
12
made, it's clear that all the payments that were made to all, were to all
13
different types of party and all different --
14
Q
28
10:42:24 15
political representatives and political parties, whose role was it within the
16 17
When you say that out of courtesy the group would consult with the politicians,
organisation to contact the political representatives? A
I don't know whose role it was but my understanding is that they would have --
18
in relation to a project that they would have asked everybody in relation to a
19
project.
10:42:51 20
Q
29
Could I have page 1596 please. This is a letter from your solicitors on behalf
21
of the Monarch Group and the last paragraph of that page you can see that the
22
client, Monarch Properties, has pointed out it doesn't have any records with
23
respect to Monarch Properties Limited and its various subsidiaries before 1991.
24
And subsequently, an order was made on the 18th of April 2002 and you furnished
10:43:25 25
an affidavit to the Tribunal dated -- sorry, 10th of May 2002 and in this
26
affidavit, if I could have page 1574 please, one of the items on the second
27
schedule, which is items that are, that you had but no longer do have is a
28
receipt from 'Shredd it' and then subsequently in May 2002, your solicitors
29
wrote to the Tribunal furnishing them with marketing brochures and also with
10:44:00 30
document at 8897 please, indicating that on the 26th September 2000, 819 kilos www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:44:12
10:44:30
6 1
of confidential waste was destroyed. The Tribunal subsequently wrote and asked
2
what was the nature of the material destroyed but didn't receive a reply.
3
Would you be able to assist the Tribunal?
4
A
Sorry, I wouldn't be able to assist the Tribunal. I wasn't there at the time
5
when --
6
Q
7
A
30
But the document was furnished, it was referred to in your affidavit? Yes. Basically, my understanding on records is that you have to keep records
8
for six years and if you notice from the Tribunal, you have records going back
9
from the company which I personally sent in to you going back 15 years.
10:44:55 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
31
No idea. 32
13
And -- but you found, you knew about this, which is why you were able to refer to it in your affidavit even though you didn't have the certificate?
14
A
10:45:09 15
Q
16
A
Yes. 33
And how did you know about it? We did have the certificate, we didn't have it at the time. I couldn't locate
17
it at the time and that's why --
18
Q
19
A
10:45:16 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
34
But somebody was able to inform you of this? Exactly.
35
Who was the person who provided you with that information? It would have been Mr. Sherwood.
36
23 24
And do you know what was the nature of the documentation that was destroyed?
And the other documents that were furnished on foot of the affidavit, who assisted you in compiling the documents?
A
It would have been Mr. Sherwood and anybody else that I would have asked for
10:45:33 25
information for would have assisted me.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
10:45:41 30
Q
37
That would be Mr. Glennane -Yes, anybody I would have asked.
38
Mr. Murray, Mr. Lynn maybe? Yes.
39
Yes? In May 2006, the Tribunal also wrote to you and asked you about the www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:45:57
10:46:08
7 1
Aynsley Trust and Aynsley Holdings?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 40
4
Could I have 8477 please. This is -- the reply is included in your statement of 2006.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 41
And you say that your understanding is that Aynsley Holding represented the
7
owners of Ansbacher Bank or held shares in Ansbacher and that Monarch
8
Properties borrowed monies from Ansbacher. I am not quite clear on that
9
paragraph, Mr. Monahan, if could clarify it please?
10:46:26 10
A
Well, my understanding is that Ansbacher was a bank and that Monarch Properties
11
borrowed money from the bank.
12
Q
13
A
42
My understanding is that the Aynsley Trust was to do with the owners of the
14 10:46:43 15
Where does Aynsley Trust then fit in to that?
Ansbacher Bank. Q
43
16
Your understanding is Monarch would deal with Aynsley Trust or Aynsley Holdings or Ansbacher or just directly with Ansbacher?
17
A
18
Q
Just with the bank, yes. 44
19
Could I have document 8905 please. This is a note from the discovery of KPMG in respect of Monarch, the Monarch Group and it's the minutes of a meeting of
10:47:12 20
the directors of L&C Properties Limited held on the 31st January 1989. Are you
21
at present a director of L&C Properties or have you ever been a director or L&C
22
properties?
23
A
24
Q
At present I am a director of L&C Properties. 45
10:47:33 25
You see the first paragraph there, Allery limited, the board agreed that steps be taken to acquire a stock company, Allery limited. It was resolved that Paul
26
Monahan, John Sherwood and Patrick O'Shaughnessy should be board members of
27
Allery Limited". Do you recall being nominated to the board?
28
A
29
Q
10:47:49 30
A
I do, yes. 46
Was that around that time? 1989, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:47:49
10:48:03
8 1
Q
47
2 3
Is that the only company that you were a director of that's connected with the Monarch group?
A
As far as I am aware, that's the only company I was a director of. I know
4
there was a company called Pre-kay which was to do with a house which I was
5
made a director of and that's about it.
6
Q
48
7 8
your role within it have in the Monarch Group? A
It was a company that was, as far as I was concerned, was outside the Monarch
9 10:48:30 10
And your role as a director of Allery limited, what role did that company and
Group, it was to do with a gas business in Dundalk which I was involved with. Q
49
Could I have page 1567 please. This is a further extract from your statement
11
Mr. Monahan and in paragraph F you indicated that all payments to any identity
12
would have been supported by invoice or any other documentation such as an
13
invitation to subscribe to a race night, golf outing or such like. From where
14
did you get that information?
10:48:53 15
A
Again, from asking various people who would have been involved in Monarch at
16 17
the time. Q
50
Further documentation furnished to the Tribunal in the context of statements
18
from the Monarch Group indicate that similarly that all of the contributions
19
are believed to have arisen on foot of requests for assistance in relation to
10:49:18 20
the lists of donations that were furnished to the Tribunal. But Mr. Reilly,
21
when he was in giving evidence to the Tribunal last week, indicated that that
22
wasn't entirely his recollection, that he believes that himself and Mr. Lynn
23
worked from a list compiled by Mr. Lynn and contacted people offering political
24
donations in 1991. Were you aware of this?
10:49:42 25
A
Again, basically when a letter came in from the Tribunal I used my best
26
endeavours to reply to it as promptly as possible and with as full information
27
as possible.
28
Q
29
A
10:50:03 30
51
Did you speak to Mr. Reilly? Probably did speak with Mr. Reilly. I am sure I spoke with Mr. Lynn, Mr. Glennane, Mr... www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:50:03
10:50:20
9 1
Q
2
A
52
You spoke with Mr. Lynn on the question of political donations? I would have asked. I would have said I have a letter from the Tribunal and I
3
need to get a reply back to it, I want to make it as full as possible. That
4
was my duty when the letter came in to reply back to it.
5
Q
53
Mr. Lynn has not yet given evidence so we don't know what he will say about
6
this list but he know that Mr. Reilly is of the view that this list was
7
compiled internally.
8
A
Well, again, I just got a letter that came in from the Tribunal of something
9
that I had no hand or involvement in.
10:50:38 10
Q
11
A
54
And I just basely had to reply back to a letter in as full and complete way as
12 13
And you haven't heard anything about this list?
possible. Q
55
14
Is it your understanding that all of the lists of payments furnished to the Tribunal were similarly solicited by various politicians. There's one list
10:50:58 15
referring to a 1997 list and it's not covered in the letter, it doesn't
16
specifically say that these were also on foot of requests from politicians but
17
is it your understanding that all of the donations were on foot for every year?
18
A
Basically I just would have, as I said, I would have got a letter in and I
19 10:51:22 20
would have replied back to it in as full a way as possible. Q
56
Also in your statement you tell the Tribunal that to the best of your late
21
father's recollection, and to the best of your understanding, the company's
22
patterns of donations would have been similar in the period 1973 to 1990 and
23
that the group had a simple rule of treating all political parties alike and
24
you believe this is evident from the submitted records. But I think that
10:51:46 25
including some of the donations that you furnished on foot of your affidavit,
26
that prior to 1991, the documentation that we have received from your companies
27
indicate that there were perhaps not quite a similar pattern. That in 1989
28
there were five donations, all to members of Fianna Fail, including one to
29
Fianna Fail of 16,000 pounds, which significantly larger than donations post
10:52:13 30
1991 and also we have a donation that was made personally by your father in www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:52:21
10:52:41
10 1
February 1991 of 25,000 and I was wondering if it is your understanding that
2
there is missing documentation pre-1991 that indicates further donations?
3
A
Basically all documentation, basically every single piece of information that
4 5
we have has been sent into the Tribunal. Q
57
6
the documentation?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
10:53:01 10
Q
11
A
I have no knowledge, no personal knowledge, no. 58
59
Q
14
A
I don't, he didn't have a role in the Monarch Group, he was not an employee of
60
Did he have some connection with the Monarch Group, did he act in some way? My understanding of Mr. Whelan, he seemed to be a land dealer, he seemed to
10:53:17 15
deal in land. Q
61
17
And is it your understanding that any payments that would have accrued to him would have been in that regard?
A
I have no idea what any payments to him would have been in regard to it but my
19 10:53:32 20
And do you know his role within the Monarch Group?
Monarch Properties.
13
18
Did you know a Mr. Jack Whelan? I did meet a Mr. Jack Whelan, yes.
12
16
And you have no personal knowledge of other donations that are not covered in
understanding was that he was a land dealer. Q
62
Could I have page 8576 please. And beside that 8574 please. The Tribunal
21
wrote to you in May 2006 asking you about this particular, this invoice that
22
will appear on screen there beside you which is dated April 1991 but seems to
23
have been stamped received April 1992 so the date, the actual origin is not
24
certain.
10:54:06 25
A
26
Q
Yes. 63
And it's for Whelan Land Use Specialists and it relates to fee to services in
27
relation to residential consultancy at Cherrywood of 150,000 plus VAT of
28
30,000. You have responded to this query?
29
A
10:54:24 30
Q
That's correct, yes. 64
Advising that Mr. Whelan was used to seek out land opportunities and was a www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:54:28
10:54:47
11 1
self-employed property consultant, that he dealt with your late father,
2
Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Murray, Mr. Glennane and would you tell us from where you got
3
the information contained in this?
4
A
Again, I asked the various different people in Monarch who Mr. Jack Whelan was
5
and what exactly did he do.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
65
Exactly. 66
Can you tell the Tribunal exactly who you asked about the role of Mr. Whelan? I would have asked Dominic Glennane, I would have asked Phil Reilly, I would
10:55:05 10
11
And this was only now about six weeks ago?
have asked Richard Lynn, I would have asked John Sherwood. Q
67
In the course of your inquiries, did you come across any reason why Mr. Whelan
12
would be sending a fee of 150,000 and then subsequently at 5040 please, there's
13
an indication of balances with GRE, this is around April of 1994 and third from
14
the end there, you will see Jack Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan, 121,000. And
10:55:35 15
then could I have page 5180 please. This document is dated 29th June 1994 and
16
indicates, you see there staff success bonus, R Lynn 100,000 and in brackets,
17
similar to J W. You believe that J W, that perhaps would be Jack Whelan?
18
A
19
Q
Well, I wouldn't know if it was Jack Whelan or not. 68
10:56:05 20
So you wouldn't know what services Mr. Whelan would provide that could generate these type of fees and bonuses?
21
A
22
Q
Again I started with Monarch in May 2001. 69
You had met Mr. Whelan prior to that?
23 24 10:56:20 25
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Mr. Monarch, I don't think that's good enough. You are
saying you started in May 2001 with Monarch which may well be the first
26
occasion when you became officially involved with the company but surely you
27
must know a lot more information than you indicate that you know given that you
28
would have had discussions with your late father who, you have an accountancy
29
and business background. I mean listening to your evidence would suggest that
10:56:49 30
you knew absolutely nothing until May 2001 and then your only source of www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:56:54
10:57:09
12 1
information is whatever employees and former employees of the company have
2
decided to tell you. But surely you must know an awful lot more. Surely this
3
is a topic of conversation around the dinner table at home?
4
A
No, sorry, it wasn't a topic of conversation.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
your late father throughout the 1990's?
8
A
9
Are you saying you never discussed the business of Monarch with
It wasn't a topic of conversation around the dinner table. Mr. Monahan did his business, he didn't do business with me, he did it with other people, not me.
10:57:23 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
But you were his son.
Yes, a family of six, I am not an only son.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
10:57:34 15
16
But were there not discussions at home about how the business was
doing and what sort of activities it was involved in? A
17
Well, certainly I would have known what, I would have an idea of what my father was doing, but certainly not talking to him about his business.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
10:57:50 20
the region of a quarter of a million pounds paid to Mr. Whelan, what they were
21 22
And you are saying you have no idea as to what sums, possibly in
connected to? A
That's correct, yes.
23 24 10:58:03 25
CHAIRMAN: A
And is that your evidence that you don't know?
All I have done is done the research to see what Mr. Whelan did, where he came
26
from, what did he do, my understanding is that those invoices weren't paid, I
27
don't know whether they were or not paid, my understanding is they were not
28
paid.
29 10:58:22 30
CHAIRMAN:
Where did you get that information? www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:58:24
10:58:34
13 1
A
2
My understanding from Mr. Glennane that the first invoice that you mentioned was not paid.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A
And do you know why it wasn't paid?
I think it says it in my letter to yourselves.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A
No, you tell us why you understand it wasn't paid
From Mr. Glennane.
9 10:58:43 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A
But why?
I have no idea why.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A
10:58:54 15
And you never asked why it wasn't paid?
Basically I have a letter from the Tribunal and basically I replied back to it with as much information as I could gather and reply back to it.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
different councillors and political parties other than what appears on the --
19
A
And do you know anything about the payments being made to the
No, I don't know what's appeared.
10:59:08 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A
You say it was never discussed between yourself and your father
Yes.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
10:59:16 25
were progressing or about the problems that he had or was experiencing in
26 27
He never gave you any information about Cherrywood or how things
relation to their rezoning? A
I wasn't involved in any dealings in relation to Cherrywood.
28 29 10:59:31 30
CHAIRMAN:
I know you weren't involved but do you have any information, surely
it was something that would have been discussed between yourself and your www.pcr.ie Day 659
10:59:35
10:59:44
14 1 2
father at home? A
3
Certainly, I didn't talk to my father about Cherrywood or what deals he was doing or what deals he wasn't doing.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A
So he never gave you any information?
No.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
And -- but you were involved in L&C Properties as a director
I am a director of L&C Properties now, yes.
10:59:55 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
13
And did you now I anything about their business?
As far as I am aware, I would have to double check, I became a director of L&C in July of 2002.
14 11:00:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: A
But were you not a director before that?
As far as I am aware, no. I will have to check but as far as I am aware, no.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
2001?
11:00:20 20
A
21
Have you any involvement with any of the family businesses before
Well, the family business was the property business. That's what the family business was.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
But had you an involvement in that before 2001?
I had my own businesses, I did my own property, I had my own businesses.
11:00:30 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
Was that part of the family business?
No.
28 29 11:00:36 30
CHAIRMAN: A
That your father was involved in?
No. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:00:36
11:00:45
15 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
dealings in relation to Monarch or any of your father's dealings at all before
4
2001?
5
A
6
You say you had no involvement or no knowledge of any of the
Monarch Properties was Monarch Properties, my father ran Monarch Properties, not me.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A
I know that but did he ever discuss it with you?
No.
11:00:51 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A
Never?
No.
13 14 11:00:56 15
CHAIRMAN: A
And did he discuss it with other members of your family?
Not that I'm aware of.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A
You knew nothing about your father's businesses until 2001?
I had a general idea of what he was doing.
19 11:01:06 20
21
CHAIRMAN: A
Did you qualify as accountant?
No.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
Did you do accountancy?
I did.
11:01:11 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
When do you do accountancy?
I started in 1988.
28 29 11:01:17 30
CHAIRMAN: A
When did you finish studies?
In 1990, 89, 90. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:01:20
11:01:31
16 1 2
CHAIRMAN: So from 1990, even though you were in effect an accountant and
3
businessman, you had no discussion, no detailed discussion with your father
4
about any aspect of his businesses until 2001.
5
A
I lived between Dundalk and Dublin and I was doing my, living my own life.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
informally, at home, or wherever, with your late father between 1990 and 2001?
9
A
Is that your evidence that you had no detailed discussion,
It is, yes.
11:01:54 10
11
Q
70
MS. FOLEY:
Is it not the case that Allery, the company that we referred to
12
earlier on, if I could have 8905 please, the second paragraph there indicates
13
that it was resolved that of the two subscriber shares, one should be
14
registered in the name of this company, ie L&C Properties and one in the name
11:02:11 15
of Mr. Phillip Monahan as the company nominee, so is it not the case that this
16
company is connected with the Monarch Group, if its shareholders are L&C
17
Properties and Mr. Phillip Monahan, it is not an independent company. So in
18
fact this company is connected with the Monarch Group?
19
A
That was to do with a gas business in Dundalk, that's where it operated, It
11:02:33 20
operated a gas business in Dundalk.
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
71
It certainly wasn't owned by me anyway. 72
24
When the Tribunal first contacted Monarch Properties in the year 2000, is it your evidence that between 2000 and 2003, that you did not discuss the
11:02:53 25
26
Yes, connected with and it is a company owned by the Monarch Group?
Cherrywood or the matters before this Tribunal with your father? A
Mr. Monahan was a director and shareholder until he died in August 2003 so any
27
of the --
28
Q
29
A
11:03:12 30
Q
73
And you were also a director from 2001? No, I replaced Ann Gosling as a director when she resigned.
74
You have just told the Tribunal you were a director from 2001? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:03:16
11:03:49
17 1
A
2
Q
I became involved, employed by Monarch in May 2001. 75
3
Could I have 8477 please. This is the first line of your statement there. Please Mr. Monahan, if you could read it out?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
I was appointed managing director of Monarch Properties Limited in 2001. 76
Thank you? I was appointed, I had a management agreement with Monarch Properties signed in
7
May 2001. I did not become a director of the companies until Ann Gosling
8
resigned which was as far as I am aware was in 2002.
9
Q
77
11:04:08 10
Limited in 2001'?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
A management agreement is what I obtained in May 2001. 78
was signed in May 2001 which appointed me as managing director. Q
79
16 17
A
Basically Mr. Monahan was still a director and the principal shareholder of Monarch Properties, so I was I suppose in a way working along with him.
19
Q
11:04:51 20
A
21
Q
80
Would you be sort of managing director in waiting? Kind of, yes.
81
22
During the course of that period, did you discuss Cherrywood and the matters that are before this Tribunal with Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
Basically, Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sherwood and I suppose myself would have been --
24
certainly I was helpful in getting all the information, any information that
11:05:09 25
26
During your tenure in this position as, how would you describe your role at that point?
18
23
You were not appointed managing director then, you are changing your evidence? My directorships began when Ann Gosling resigned but I have an agreement which
14 11:04:31 15
Your statement says 'I was appointed managing director of Monarch Properties
was required and done. Q
82
But you were receiving correspondence from the Tribunal, documents were being
27
furnished on foot of orders from the Tribunal, there must have been some
28
discussion?
29 11:05:23 30
A
Well Mr. Monahan would have dealt with it along with our solicitors, Noel Smyth. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:05:24
11:05:32
18 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
83
Well ... 84
85
A
I would have got whatever information I could glean from people. I would have got whatever information and replied back to the Tribunal.
Q
11:05:47 10
A
11
Q
86
87
Would you please answer the question, would that include discussions with Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I am sure he would have been part of whatever was being sent back, he would
14 11:06:03 15
Wouldn't that include discussions with Mr. Phillip Monahan? I would have asked whoever I would have had to have asked.
12 13
You must have discussed this with fellow directors, in particular Mr. Phillip Monahan?
8 9
Clearly you furnished an affidavit in April 2002? Mmm.
6 7
And yourself?
have been part of whatever was being sent back. Q
88
When you furnished documents and replies and statements to the Tribunal, would
16
you have discussed the documentation that you were furnishing with Mr. Phillip
17
Monahan?
18
A
19
Q
What dates were the replies sent in? 89
11:06:21 20
you also furnished a statement in April 2002.
21
A
22
Q
Yes, at that time, Mr. Monahan was under 24 hour nurse supervision. 90
23 24
Your affidavit is, the order was in April 2002 and your affidavit is May 2002,
And Mr. Monahan subsequently furnished a statement to the Tribunal in 2003, in the intervening period, between 2001 and 2003?
A
Basically in December of 2001, Mr. Monahan had a heart attack in Spain. He was
11:06:50 25
in intensive care, had to be flown home. He was intensive care in St Vincent's
26
and he was under nurse supervision until August of 2002, at that stage I would
27
have --
28 29 11:07:09 30
Q
91
And prior to his illness, when you were managing director in waiting and there was contact with the Tribunal, would you not have discussed Cherrywood and the matters before the Tribunal with Mr. Phillip Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:07:13
11:07:25
19 1
A
Well, the principal of Monarch Properties at that stage and still the major
2
shareholders of Monarch Properties and the man who knew all the information was
3
Mr. Monahan.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:07:48 10
Q
92
You would have discussed it with him? He would have discussed it with our solicitors.
93
And you would have discussed it with him? I would have got whatever information was necessary to make a reply.
94
Could I have page 1599 please. This is the Monarch Group structure, sorry it's not very clear there.
95
There's a company called Pallarang which is held 25 percent Aspentree, 10
11
percent Circimus and 15 percent Isotope. I just want to ask you a little bit
12
about Pallarang. Mr. Sweeney's affidavit of March 1996, he indicates as a
13
result of the success of The Square in Tallaght, the group agreed to pay an
14
aggregate dividend of 1.8 million in a tax efficient manner to himself,
11:08:26 15
Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane. Subsequently in a replying affidavit by the late
16
Mr. Phillip Monahan, he says in 1991 an opportunity arose to purchase a company
17
with substantial exported sales relief and to involve a number of individuals
18
who significantly contributed to the growth of the Monarch Group and this is
19
referring to the company and the payment discussed by Mr. Sweeney in his
11:08:50 20
affidavit and then page 8077, paragraph 15 there. Mr. Sweeney identifies that
21
the exported sales relief company from which he received the dividend was
22
called Pallarang Limited. We believe this company, from your father's
23
affidavit, to have been purchased in 1991, are you a director of Pallarang
24
Limited?
11:09:12 25
A
If it's still in existence, I would be a director, if it's not in existence, I
26
would not be a director.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:09:27 30
A
96
When would you have become a director of Pallarang Limited? I am not a hundred percent sure.
97
Do you believe you would have been a director at the time of its purchase? I don't know. That's to be perfectly honest. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:09:32
11:09:38
20 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
98
No. 99
100
The information that you see there from the affidavits and brief indicating it was to makes payments in a tax efficient manner?
7
A
8
Q
9
A Q
I have read that and I have seen what they are, I understand now. 101
Were you aware of that before receiving the brief? No.
102
11 12
Do you know what the purpose of its acquisition by the Monarch Group was? No.
6
11:09:51 10
Do you know what the purpose of the company was?
So you became a director of the company but you had no idea what the company did?
A
Yes, if the company basically, I would have got directorships of all the
13
companies that were in the Monarch Group. I wouldn't necessarily know exactly
14
what they did, I would certainly know now if they were in existence what they
11:10:11 15
16
did or didn't do. Q
103
17
informed of this? Are you requested to become a director?
18
A
19
Q
11:10:28 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:10:38 25
Q
26 27
When you are a made a director of a company within the Monarch Group, are you
I am sure I would have been requested. 104
You would be aware at the time of becoming a director? I am sure I would be, I am not -- I am sure I would be.
105
You believe that people would have asked you? I am sure.
106
But you weren't certain? I am not sure but I believe I would have been asked.
107
So you think that people may have appointed you as directors of companies and not informed you?
A
I don't honestly know, I don't know.
28 29 11:10:54 30
CHAIRMAN: A
Don't you have to sign documentation to become a director?
My understanding is yes, you would have to sign documentation. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:10:57
11:11:17
21 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
extraordinary and ridiculous that you know so little about your business
4
affairs and about the background to Monarch and what it's engaged in, are you
5
serious that you, that your level of knowledge is as minimal as you suggest it
6
is?
7
A
But surely you know, the level of your knowledge strikes us as both
Well in relation to Pallarang, is the company still in existence?
8 9
Q
108
11:11:45 10
11
MS. FOLEY:
The company, I think was dissolved in August 2003 and incorporated
in 1990. A
Mmm. And it was dissolved in 2003, I would have been made a director then
12
before it was dissolved, that would be my understanding, because I would have
13
taken over all Ann Gosling's directorships.
14
Q
11:12:10 15
A
16
Q
109
So you believe you only became a director in 2002. I don't know, I would have to check back on my own records to see exactly.
110
Could I ask you now about Mr. Liam Lawlor. It seems from both, from
17
Mr. Lawlor's statement that he first became acquainted with your father in the
18
late 60s or early 70s and your father has told the Tribunal in a statement of
19
2003, he met Mr. Lawlor in respect of the lands which are now the lands owned
11:12:35 20
by Jackson Way Properties. He doesn't refer further to Mr. Lawlor. He said he
21
had known him for a number of years and met him on a number of occasions and
22
what is your understanding of the nature of the relationship between Mr. Lawlor
23
and Mr. Phillip Monahan?
24
A
11:12:57 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29 11:13:17 30
Certainly my father knew Mr. Lawlor. Certainly knew him all right. 111
And would you have also met him? Certainly I met Mr. Lawlor, yes.
112
And under what circumstances would you have met Mr. Lawlor? I met him in the house a couple of times, he was there, and certainly I used to see him at Luttrelstown, he was playing golf. I used to go there for my lunch and I used to see him there playing golf. I would say if you asked him my www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:13:22
11:13:32
22 1
name, he wouldn't know my name.
2
Q
3
A
113
Certainly, he was a guy, with all the coverage he has got, he is a guy you
4
would certainly know.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
114
11:13:48 10
Would he have been a frequent visitor to your home? No.
115
8 9
But you met him with your father?
Could I have 7594 please. This is a document dated 29th June 1988 and it's signed, I think, by Mr. Phillip Monahan.
A Q
Mmm. 116
11
And it's basically extending a guarantee for a loan to Advance Protein Limited, of 14,400 for 36 months. And this is in respect of a car lease.
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:14:05 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
Yes. 117
At 7798? Mmm.
118
Would you have been aware of this at the time? No.
119
Would you have been aware that the friendship between your father and
18
Mr. Lawlor in 1988 was that close, that your father was prepared to guarantee a
19
loan for Mr. Lawlor?
11:14:21 20
A
21
Q
No. 120
I see. Could I have 1596 please. This is a letter dated 16th April 2002 from
22
your solicitors and at paragraph 3, it says that with regard to Mr. Lawlor,
23
neither Mr. Phillip Monahan who is now retired or Mr. Paul Monahan have any
24
recollection that Mr. Lawlor received a sum or sums as high as 40,000, as
11:14:49 25
Mr. Lawlor has told the Tribunal over the 70s, 80s and 90s, this is the amount
26
of money he would have received from the Monarch Group. And then the letter
27
goes on to say, "however our client has instructed us that it will again trawl
28
through whatever records it has or make further queries to try and ascertain if
29
any further payments were made."
11:15:16 30
Did you subsequently try to ascertain what
level of payments were made to Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:15:16
11:15:25
23 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 121
3
And other than the documentation furnished in 2000, did you find or anybody who was able to tell you anything more about it?
4
A
5
Q
Well every single piece of document that we have, we sent into the Tribunal. 122
6
And when you consulted with the people that assisted you in providing your statements to the Tribunal, were they able to help you?
7
A
8
Q
Whatever research was done was put into a letter and sent back to the Tribunal. 123
9
Could I have 1255 please. About seven or eight lines from the end, you see there are two cheques there, number 689 and 690, both dated 16th October 1990.
11:16:01 10
The first for 28,000 and the second for 28,300, both made out to Comex Trading
11
Corporation. 1267 please. The top three lines there. These payments and
12
cheque numbers are allocated in the general ledger at strategy planning. Now
13
the Tribunal understands that from Mr. Lawlor that Comex Limited is a company
14
that Mr. Lawlor used to use for creating invoices. And further that the second
11:16:30 15
cheque there of 28,300 was lodged to the account of Economic Reports Limited, a
16
company controlled by Mr. Lawlor. Can you help the Tribunal with any
17
explanation for these payments?
18
A
19
Q
11:16:49 20
A
21
Q
No, I wouldn't have, I wouldn't have known what they were. 124
Did you know that they were made? (shakes head).
125
22
Did you know Mr. Lawlor may have been receiving payments of that level, 56,000 in 1990?
23
A
24
Q
No. 126
11:17:00 25
Have you any idea what services Mr. Lawlor might have provided for these payments.
26
A
27
Q
No. 127
28
Do you have any recollection of Mr. Lawlor at that time in the late 1990s, it would have been around the opening of Tallaght, for example?
29
A
11:17:17 30
Q
Certainly, I was at the opening of Tallaght but no. 128
Sorry I mean the early 1990s. Do you recall the opening of Tallaght? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:17:22
11:17:54
24 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 129
Was that a big event in the company's history? It was a big event, yes.
130
Number 7589 please. This is a letter dated September 2001 from Mr. Phil
5
Monahan to Mr. Liam Lawlor on foot of a request from Mr. Lawlor asking about
6
details of payments made to him and at paragraph 3 the letter indicates that
7
records exist since 1991 and the details I have available pertaining to your
8
good self relate to a payment made 28th July 1994 by cheque to A & L Lawlor in
9
the amount of 3,000 pounds, do you know anything about this payment?
11:18:14 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 131
No. 132
14
Documentation furnished to the Tribunal by your solicitors indicate that it is the company's belief that this cheque to A & L Lawlor was in fact for Mr. Liam
11:18:28 15
Lawlor. Can you assist the Tribunal with how this belief was acquired?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:18:49 20
A
21
Q
No. 133
Did you speak to anybody about this payment? Well Mr. Monahan sent in the reply back to it.
134
But you yourself knew nothing about the payment? No.
135
22
Nor how it came within the Monarch Group to be believed that this payment was to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
11:19:09 25
July 1994?
No. 136
In June 2000, the Tribunal wrote to Mr. Phillip Monahan asking him about, to inform the Tribunal whether he directly or indirectly on his own behalf or on
26
behalf of any other person or company made any payments with regard to any
27
benefits of any kind to any elected representatives. Could I have 1578 please.
28
This is a reply from the solicitors for the Monarch Group dated 14th June 2000,
29
the third paragraph, it says "we would advise that Mr. Monahan did not on his
11:19:35 30
own behalf make any contributions or provide any benefits of any kind to any www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:19:39
11:19:57
25 1
elected representatives or any public officials. However, Monarch Properties
2
Limited and companies within the Monarch Group made certain contributions to
3
certain elected representatives."
4
correspondence at the time Mr. Monahan?
5
A
6
Q
Would you have been aware of this
No. 137
Could I have page 8902, this is the affidavit of Mr. Phillip Monahan made on
7
foot of an order of the Tribunal made 18th April 2002. And if I could have
8
3100, this is a document furnished on foot of the affidavit which is a cheque
9
drawn on the account of Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mary Monahan made payable to
11:20:22 10
Charlie Haughey Party Leaders Fund and signed, I believe, by Mr Philip Monahan,
11
is that your father agency signature?
12
A
13
Q
It looks like it. 138
14
And the payee, does that look like your father's writing to you, Charles Haughey, Party Leaders Fund?
11:20:35 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:20:51 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
It looks like two different types of writing. 139
Were you aware of this payment at the time in February 1991? No.
140
It's a payment made on your parents account for 25,000? I am not aware.
141
Were you aware of the meetings that led to the payment? No.
142
Could I have page 8717 please. This is an entry in your father's diary for
23
February 1991. You will see maybe about halfway down the page, there's S
24
Murphy, 100,000 cash, it looks like it reads. Can you see that entry?
11:21:16 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:21:33 30
Q
I can. 143
Do you see it Mr. Monahan? Yes, I can see exactly, yes.
144
Do you know who S Murphy is? No.
145
And you have no idea why there would be a meeting involving 100,000 pounds in www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:21:38
11:21:54
26 1
cash with an S Murphy and your father?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
No idea. 146
Do you know where Mr. Monahan would have sourced cash at the time in 1991? No idea.
147
Could I have 8156 please?
6 7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Sorry, do you know a D Murphy, Mr. Monahan?
No.
9 11:22:07 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11
Just it looks like an S but there's a line going through it.
It could be a D. Just go back to it for a second. 8717.
12 13
Q
148
14 11:22:41 15
MS. FOLEY:
Is the entry made in your late father's handwriting, Mr. Monahan,
as far as you can identify? A
Could you put the whole diary back there. His handwriting looks similar to the
16
rest of the stuff that's there.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
11:23:04 20
A
21
Q
149
Sorry, Mr. Monahan, I didn't catch what you said? It looks similar to the rest of the writing that's there on it.
150
But you can't assist with the writing? Whether it's an S or a D or even Murphy looks a bit funny.
151
And I believe your father appeared before the Moriarty Tribunal in October 2000
22
with respect to this payment of 25,000 pounds to the Fianna Fail party, would
23
that, would you have discussed that with your father?
24
A
11:23:37 25
Q
26
A
No, but I know he did appear in front of the Moriarty Tribunal. 152
Was it at that point that you became aware of the payment? I wasn't even at, when he was there, I wasn't even at the Tribunal when he was
27
in front of the Tribunal, I wasn't even there.
28
Q
29
A
11:23:51 30
Q
153
But you had no idea until the evidence came out in public? Yes.
154
On that day that your father had made that payment? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:23:54
11:24:08
27 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 155
Prior to his appearance to the Tribunal, it was never discussed? I didn't know what he was --
156
Could I have 8156 please. This is a letter from Noel Smyth & Partners dated
5
12th August 1993 and you will see there on on the second half of the page it
6
refers to a proposed deal with Dun Laoghaire Golf Club. Dun Laoghaire have
7
approximately 70 acres which would be considered prime residential land and the
8
deal with Dun Laoghaire is described as that they are to receive 150 acres of
9
land approximately at Cherrywood which is to be redeveloped into a first class
11:24:31 10
golf course at the cost of the developer. Were you aware of this proposed deal
11
in August 1993?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:24:42 15
Q
No. 157
Only aware that Cosgroves did a deal on the land, that's all. 158
16 A
18
Q
No. 159
19
The second, the last paragraph on the page there indicates that the sum of 500,000 cash would have to be paid to the club on actual hand over. Do you
11:24:59 20
know anything about this proposed payment?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
No. 160
Do you know where 500,000 pounds cash would come from within the group? I don't know how you would define the term cash, whether it's money that you
24
have or money you have in your bank account or I think you referred to cash, it
11:25:14 25
means something else.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
11:25:40 30
But you are not aware of any involvement with the proposed golf club at Cherrywood Lands?
17
29
Were you ever aware of it since?
161
I have -- I don't know what the author intended by that term? Nor do I.
162
Now Ms. Gosling has told the Tribunal that your late father met with politicians on a regular basis and I would just like to ask you your understanding of the nature of his relationship or friendship with various www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:25:44
11:26:08
28 1
politicians based on documentation furnished to the Tribunal which indicates
2
some level of contact. First of all, Mr. Padraig Flynn, your father appears in
3
Mr. Flynn's diaries in 1989 and 1990 and 1991. There seems to have been a
4
record of meetings having taking place, were you aware of any of these
5
meetings?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:26:14 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 163
Had you ever meet Mr. Flynn? No.
164
Were you at the opening of Tallaght? Yes.
165
Did you not see Mr. Flynn there? I saw Mr. Haughey.
166
14
But you never had any direct meeting with him. Do you know of the nature of the relationship your father may have had with Mr. Flynn, was it business,
11:26:26 15
personal?
16
A
17
Q
I have no idea. 167
Could I have 2864 please. This is a letter signed by your father to Mr. Frank
18
Wall of Fianna Fail referring to donations made including a donation to
19
Mr. Dermot Ahern for 3,000 and Mr. Kieran Haughey for Mr. Sean Haughey for a
11:26:56 20
thousand, do you know anything about Mr. Monahan's relationship with Mr. Ahern
21
or Mr. Sean Haughey?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
11:27:14 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
11:27:33 30
No. 168
But you knew he had a relationship with Mr. Charles Haughey, is that correct? I remember Mr. Haughey opening The Square in Tallaght.
169
And was that on foot of a request from your father, would you imagine? I have no idea.
170
Do you remember were they friends? I have no idea, just remember that he was there and he opened it.
171
Ms. Mary Harney has also contacted Mr. Monahan for donations, do you know the nature of any relationship between Mr. Monahan and Ms. Harney? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:27:38
11:27:55
29 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
11:28:07 10
Q
None at all with Ms. Harney. 172
Do you know Mr. Brian Lenihan? Brian lives in Castleknock.
173
And would your father have had any relationship or contact with Mr. Lenihan? I know Brian myself.
174
Mr. Lenihan, Junior? Yes, junior.
175
And Mr. Lenihan senior, do you know if your father had any contact? No idea, I never met Mr. Lenihan, Senior.
176
3687, this is a letter from a company called Travac Limited signed by Sean
11
Clafferty returning a cheque for 5,000 pounds in May 1992 and this appears to
12
have been copied to deputy Brian Lenihan, do you know anything about this
13
payment, this returned payment?
14
A
11:28:24 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
No. 177
Or any reason why it would have been returned? No.
178
18
Mr. Albert Reynolds, do you know is he an acquaintance or contact of your father's?
19
A
11:28:41 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:28:52 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:29:02 30
Q
No. 179
You never recall him? No, never.
180
Mr. Colm Hilliard? Never heard of him.
181
Mr. Noel Dempsey? I know of Noel but no.
182
Senator Liam Cosgrave? (shakes head).
183
Councillor Colm McGrath? No.
184
Do you know, did you ever meet with Mr. Bill O'Herlihy who worked for Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:29:17
11:29:23
30 1
Properties and the Cherrywood Lands?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
No. 185
Were you aware that he was working for Monarch? No, until he was here.
186
Mr. Frank Dunlop? No, never met him.
187
And Ms. Gosling has given evidence to the Tribunal that when requests for
8
monetary support came from politicians, most of them would have come in
9
addressed to somebody and that person would make a recommendation and in the
11:29:40 10
final stages, Mr. Monahan was the one who said yes or no, would that be your
11
understanding of your father's role in the organisation?
12
A
13
Q
I don't know. 188
14
She also said Mr. Monahan wouldn't personally have to clear every single donation but some of the senior staff would have authority to clear political
11:29:56 15
donations?
16
A
17
Q
Again I wouldn't know what way. 189
18
Do you know who the senior staff would be who would have the authority to authorise political donations?
19
A
11:30:05 20
Q
No. 190
Ms. Gosling has also told the Tribunal it is her understanding of the culture
21
that existed within the Monarch Group that a politician would never have been
22
refuse a political donation because it would have been seen as necessary to
23
support financially those politicians who were in turn supporting or dealing
24
with their lands, that would be your understanding also?
11:30:23 25
A
26
Q
I wouldn't understand what the culture was. 191
27
She described it as a necessary evil, political donations were a necessary evil?
28
A
29
Q
That's her description, it's not mine. 192
I have no further questions, thank you Mr. Monahan.
11:30:37 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:30:37
11:30:43
31 1
WITNESS CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR SANFEY
2 3 4
Q
193
5
us in a bit more detail what you were doing in the ten years prior to 2001?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
11:31:01 10
MR. SANFEY: I have a couple of questions, chairman. Mr. Monahan, can you tell
Basically I was at school and then -194
When did you leave school? 1988.
195
A
Could you tell us what you did for a living after that? Basically, I worked in an accountancy office in Dundalk. I worked there for a
11
number of years and then I trained to become a helicopter pilot, which I did
12
and then I had my own businesses, various different types of businesses.
13
Q
14
A
196
I did a cinema magazine, the Big Ticket. I was in leisure business, a thing
11:31:23 15
called Glenhurst, property business, PR Properties, developed my own property.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
11:31:37 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
197
Did your father ever have involvement in any of those businesses? They were things I did myself.
198
Were you work working full-time in those businesses? Yes.
199
Did you live at home during that time? I lived between Dundalk and Dublin, Dundalk is home.
200
Who lived in Dundalk may I ask? The family are in Dundalk, it's home.
201
11:31:53 25
26
Can you tell us in rough outline what those businesses were?
What proportions of your father's time would have been spent between Dundalk and Castleknock?
A
It varied, as work depended on it. I know initially when he moved in, he was
27
just after having his second triple bypass and basically it was Somerton when
28
he was in Dublin, that's when he first stayed in Dublin for a while.
29
Q
11:32:12 30
A
202
Yes. You are a married man, I think? I am, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:32:13
11:32:19
32 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
203
In 2000. 204
11:32:33 10
205
So from 2000, you have been living in your own house? Yes.
206
Right. Can I take it that those businesses that you describe, you worked full-time at those, is that right?
A Q
That's right, yes. 207
11 12
Is that the point at which you moved out of home? Yes.
8 9
When did you get married?
And just to be entirely clear, did you at any time work for Monarch Properties during the 1990s or up to 2001?
A
I had a slight involvement, my father was into cars and he did a thing called
13
Irish National Transport, a BES scheme and he wanted me to be involved in. So
14
I became involved in it.
11:32:52 15
Q
16
A
208
Would you tell us what that project was about and your involvement in it? It was to do with vintage cars, my father was into vintage cars, he was a motor
17
mechanic. That's what he trained at and that's what his passion was, cars.
18
Q
19
A
11:33:10 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
11:33:18 25
A
209
Was it a business with a view to selling cars or acquiring cars? He wanted to do a museum for Dublin, that was his idea.
210
A car museum? A car museum.
211
Where was this to be? In Dublin.
212
In Dublin. And was that carried through? The BES scheme was formed, it went through and the people that invested in it
26
got their return on it. The museum didn't materialise, they did have a
27
temporary museum but his vision was having one beside the toll bridge and it
28
didn't materialise.
29
Q
11:33:35 30
A
213
It didn't work out? He had problems with National Roads Authority trying to get access and he www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:33:39
11:33:51
33 1
wanted to --
2
Q
3
A
214
It was almost, it was a hobby, I have an interest in cars myself so it was kind
4
of a in a way a hobby.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
215
11:34:08 10
It was a shared interest between you and your father? Yes.
216
8 9
How much of your time did you spend working on this?
In general terms, were you aware of what Monarch Properties was doing during that time?
A Q
In general terms, yes, you would be aware of it. 217
11
You would have been aware that the company had a major project going on in Cherrywood?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
11:34:16 15
Q
16
A
Yes. 218
And you would have been aware of Tallaght? Yes.
219
In general outline? For example, the opening of Nutgrove Shopping Centre, I would have been there
17
and the opening of Navan Shopping Centre. I would have been there but that
18
would be my involvement, of being invited to the openings.
19
Q
220
11:34:37 20
that be a fair description of him?
21
A
22
Q
He just worked 24 hours a day, just non-stop. 221
23 24
Was your father somebody who was totally dedicated to Monarch business, would
Do you recall having much contact with him during the 1990s in personal terms, like ships that pass in the night?
A
He was a man that worked very very hard, he just really enjoyed his work and he
11:34:56 25
worked very, very hard to the detriment of his health.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
11:35:13 30
Q
222
Right. In 1990, what age were you? 1990, I was 23. There, thereabouts.
223
So you are now -40.
224
40. During the 1990s, did your father ever ask you your advice in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:35:18
11:35:27
34 1
operational decisions to do with Monarch Properties?
2
A
3
Q
No. 225
4
Did he ever confide in you about problems he might have been having with Monarch Properties?
5
A
6
Q
No. 226
7
Did he ever talk generally about the sort of problems that were facing Monarch Properties over the tea table?
8
A
9
Q
11:35:39 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
No. 227
Was that not his way? That wasn't his way at all, he was his own man, he did his own thing.
228
Of the six children of whom you were one, where do you come in that order? In the middle.
229
14
Would there have been anybody else in the family he would have confided in or anything like that?
11:35:55 15
A
16
Q
No, that wasn't his way. 230
17
That wasn't his way. Did he ever discuss politics or political donations in particular with you?
18
A
19
Q
11:36:11 20
A
No, not at all. 231
What made you decide to join the Monarch Group in the end? I know he wanted somebody to develop out when he wasn't there, he wanted
21
somebody to develop out what was there and keep it in control of whatever was
22
left when he wasn't there.
23
Q
232
24 11:36:35 25
And what did you see as the advantage to you of getting involved in the Monarch Group?
A
Obviously I was going to be getting paid for it and getting incentive for
26
whatever I do well.
27
Q
28
A
233
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Monarch. Thank you.
29 11:36:55 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Monahan, did your late father ever discuss the Tribunal and the www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:36:56
11:37:18
35 1 2
sort of inquiries the Tribunal was making of him an the company before he died A
He would have dealt with the, with his replies, whatever replies.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
was investigating?
6
A
Did he ever discuss with you the sort of issues that the Tribunal
No.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
business in 1991, sorry, 2001.
11:37:33 10
A
Even at the time you effectively took over the running of the
No.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
the Tribunal must have been hanging as a bit of cloud over him and the company.
14
A
And at that time and subsequently when your father was still alive,
Certainly it was something that he had to deal with.
11:37:51 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
the time, he died that there was never any discussion between himself and
18
yourself given that you were effectively taking over the company from him, he
19
never discussed in detail with you the sort of issues which the Tribunal was
11:38:17 20
21
And are you saying that during those years from 2000 or 2001, up to
looking into? A
He dealt with the issues whenever the information and requests were --
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A
No, no --
No, he didn't discuss with me.
11:38:27 25
26 27
CHAIRMAN: A
I mean we know what information Monarch provided the Tribunal so --
They provided massive amounts of information to the Tribunal.
28 29 11:38:42 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, but were there discussions between yourself and your father as
to the issues with which the Tribunal was concerned? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:38:46
11:39:01
36 1
A
2
No. basically when a letter came in from the Tribunal, my father dealt with his letter as quick as possible.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
running of the company was involved, and given that he had a great interest in
6
development of the company and its future presumably, he never sat down and
7
discussed in detail with you any concerns he might have or any information he
8
might have in relation to issues with which the Tribunal was concerned.
9
A
11:39:31 10
So, even though you were his heir, so to speak, insofar as the
Well it's clear from what I can see that he co-operated fully with all the Tribunals.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
I am talking about the discussion, any discussions that you had
13
with him in your capacity, I mean you were sort of a dual capacity, you were a
14
son and a member of his family and you were also the person taking over his
11:39:50 15
business. So in that, in those capacities, in either capacity, did he ever
16
discuss in detail with you the sort of issues with which the Tribunal was
17
concerned?
18
A
No.
19 11:40:06 20
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
document, Mr. Monahan, you have said that it's your belief that this bill
24
wasn't paid, is that correct?
11:40:45 25
A
Could I have 8574 and 8576 up on screen. No, 8574. Just this
Yes, that's correct, yes.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
28
dealer or land agent, is that correct?
29
A
And Mr. Whelan, you have said, you believed him to be a land
Yes.
11:40:55 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:40:55
11:41:11
37 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
3
From whom did you get the information that this wasn't paid?
My recollection is it came from Dominic Glennane, that it wasn't paid and certainly Mr. Glennane is next so he can check, you can check it with him.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Did you make any inquiries independent of Mr. Glennane?
No.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
residential consultancy at Cherrywood, isn't that correct
11:41:27 10
A
11
Because this was, seems to be a fee to services in relation to
I am just giving you my understanding, I am quite prepared to say that I'm wrong, I am just giving you -- that's my understanding.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
obviously he billed Monarch Properties Limited in 1991?
11:41:41 15
A
You would agree with what it says that whatever Mr. Whelan and
Certainly that's what it says on it, yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
Development.
19
A
And it would appear to be somehow connected to the Cherrywood
Certainly it appears that way, yes.
11:41:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
was ever discussed at board meetings or within the group, I know you say you
23
weren't there at the time but did you ask for any information from
24
Mr. Glennane?
11:42:15 25
A
And did you peruse any papers to ascertain whether or not this
In relation to information, basely all the information that was held by Monarch
26
was submitted to the Tribunal. We sent in over 66 boxes of information. We
27
did request to have the information sent back to us and we were told that it
28
would be copied and sent back to us in due course, but we never received it
29
back.
11:42:36 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:42:36
11:42:50
38 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
Could I have 8897. This is a document that you discovered to the Tribunal.
3
A
And what do you say was shredded on the 26th September 2000?
Correct, yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: And what do you say was shredded on the 26th September 2000,
6
Mr. Monahan?
7
A
Just as I said earlier, the documents were normally held for six years, the
8
documents that were sent to the Tribunal go back from 1991, they were very
9
comprehensive documents, all the Tribunal you can see most of the information
11:43:37 10
that you have is from them, I have no idea what --
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY: But what timeframe was shredded, this is a document that's
13
dated but what I'm asking you is what timeframe of documents were shredded on
14
the 26th September 2000?
11:43:53 15
A
I have no idea what timeframe, what was shredded on it, the only thing I can
16
presume, we would presume is that a lot of drawings are produced when you are
17
dealing with properties and they are the sort of things which are bulky and
18
possibly would have been shredded.
19 11:44:09 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY: Well who made the decision to shred the documents? A
22
I have no idea but I presume it would have been Ann Gosling that made the decision on it. She would have been in charge.
23 24
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:44:24 25
26
And whose signature is there on the right hand side and it
says signed for client, do you know whose signature that is? A
It looks like John Sherwood's signature.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY: And this is the 26th September 2000. Now there's a letter, we
29
have a letter and you say that documents were sent to the Tribunal that you
11:44:38 30
have since 1991 because we have the late Mr. Monahan's letter to Mr. Lawlor www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:44:45
11:44:56
39 1
which he said, I think, he was looking for information about a 3,000 cheque
2
that the Monarch Group documents exist from 1991.
3
A
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
6
2000 if documents exist in 1991, why in 2000 are documents being shredded?
7
A
And I am just wondering that that was a letter in 2001, why in
I can only surmise that it would have been drawings or something like that.
8 9 11:45:19 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
But you don't know.
I don't know.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
would have made the decision prior to the 26th September, somebody would have
14
to physically decide what documents within the, if it is the Monarch Group, it
11:45:39 15
is Monarch Properties, it was on the premises in Monarch Properties in Somerton
16 17
I am asking you now, as managing director of the company, who
Road in Castleknock. What properties would or who would have made the decision A
18
My feeling would have been that Ann Gosling possibly in conjunction with John Sherwood, I would say that Ann Gosling would have made the decision.
19 11:46:03 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
21 22
You refer to drawings, as I understand it, the main company
office was in Harcourt Street, was it not? A
Basically in Dundalk, in Wilton House and then it moved to Earlsfort Terrace
23
and then Harcourt Street and some of it went along with Dunloe into its
24
headquarters and other stuff went into Castleknock. There was a number of
11:46:25 25
26
different moves for paperwork, as you understand, it's a lot of paper to be moving.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
documents that were destroyed on the 26th September related to documents held
11:46:39 30
Yes, but this would appear to, are you saying that the
in Somerton only? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:46:41
11:46:55
40 1
A
2
Yes. No, I would, my guess would be it just refers to documents held in Somerton only.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
understand he would have been the technical director of Monarch Group?
6
A
As I understand it, we haven't heard from Mr. Sweeney yet, I
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
we have indeed from Mr. Reilly and others, that Mr. Sweeney was the person, if
11:47:05 10
you like, probably within Monarch on the technical aspect of the development of
11 12
And he would be the person, as I understand from the evidence
the Cherrywood site, is that correct? A
13
Well I am not exactly sure what Mr. Sweeney's role on it was but certainly he was, I don't know exactly what his qualification was.
14 11:47:24 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's my understanding of it. You are only surmising it
16
would appear that Mr. Sweeney, his office was in Harcourt Street as I
17
understand it?
18
A
Yes.
19 11:47:33 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Would it not be more likely that all the technical documents
21
would be -- to be found or most of them, save for whatever the late Mr. Monahan
22
might have had himself, would be found in Harcourt Street?
23 24 11:48:02 25
A
Any of the stuff that would have been there would have been, if there was drawings in Harcourt Street which -- the offices were sold, if drawings that were there on it, Mr. Sweeney I am sure wouldn't have wanted them. I think in
26
2000, whenever information, whenever Harcourt Street would have closed, it was
27
in 1996 as far as I am aware of, Monarch went into Dunloe so at that stage
28
documents would have gone to Dunloe.
29
not there at the time or he was exited at that time, and I am sure that any
11:48:26 30
Mr. Sweeney, as far as I am aware, was
surplus information or drawings or whatever else on it would have been www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:48:30
11:48:44
41 1
transported and stored in Somerton.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
told us that the late Mr. Monahan back in 1986 appeared to be making some
5
provision for, that he wanted a million pounds in cash, do you know anything
6
about that?
7
A
I see. And just one other thing, do you know Ms. Gosling has
Basically Mr. Monahan had two triple by-passes, his latter one was in 1989 and
8
he had another one then in 2001 and he was a man of ill health, he was a
9
diabetic, he was a man coming up at that stage to retirement age, so I'm sure
11:49:11 10
when someone is in their 60s, they are thinking about retirement and not
11
working any more.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
this money back in 1986?
11:49:21 15
A
Was it ever discussed, do you know if Mr. Monahan received
I have no idea if he received it or not.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I see. Thank you.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:49:34 20
21
Mr. Monahan, could I just ask you, are you the only member of the
family who is now involved in the companies run by your father? A
I have another brother who is paid by Monarch Properties.
22 23 24
JUDGE KEYS: Has he a greater involvement in the company than you? A
No.
11:49:48 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
27
heir elect in 2000 when your father became ill?
28
A
Do I take it for all intents and purposes, you were really the
Well --
29 11:49:58 30
JUDGE KEYS:
He was setting you up to be the person to take over? www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:50:01
11:50:11
42 1
A
He wanted somebody to -- yes.
2 3
JUDGE KEYS:
4
and explained even what the company structure was, what companies he had a
5
shareholding in and what assets those companies had?
6
A
Is it your evidence to the Tribunal they never sat down with you
I would have an idea of what was involved.
7 8 9
JUDGE KEYS: A
Did he ever sit down with you and go through his portfolio?
No.
11:50:27 10
11
JUDGE KEYS:
12
of companies, to a very successful businessman who had made quite a lot of
13
money and he never explained to you what the company did, secondly what the
14
structure was, thirdly, who the directors were, what jobs they had in hand, or
11:50:46 15
16
So therefore you were being set up as the heir elect to a group
what lands it even owned or what assets? A
17
That's not the way the he operated, he didn't sit down and tell people what they should be doing or what it was about.
18 19
JUDGE KEYS:
11:51:03 20
I understand immediately that, but let us face it, as his health
deteriorated, surely he became concerned at this stage, while you are the heir
21
elect, you are now going to have to step into his shoes and take over and run
22
it and despite that you are telling me he never explained to you the structure
23
of the company, the assets it had, who were the directors and so forth?
24
A
No, he never sat down and explained to me the whole structure of the company.
11:51:26 25
26 27
JUDGE KEYS: A
And do you know what the structures of the company are now?
I do.
28 29 11:51:32 30
JUDGE KEYS: A
And when did you find that out?
Since I became employed. www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:51:35
11:51:45
43 1 2 3
JUDGE KEYS: A
And who did you consult with to obtain that information?
Advisers or accountants.
4 5 6
JUDGE KEYS: A
Well, what accountants?
KPMG, Sean Mooney, Pascal & Company.
7 8
JUDGE KEYS:
9
affairs, you are saying that he never discussed that with you either?
11:52:02 10
A
And tell me, as the Tribunals became interested in your father's
That's correct.
11 12 13
JUDGE KEYS: A
Never marked your card at all?
That's correct, yes.
14 11:52:09 15
JUDGE KEYS:
Did he ever discuss how, what problems the company may have and
16
what problems may arise when the Tribunals were inquiring into the business
17
arrangements he had?
18
A
No.
19 11:52:31 20
21
JUDGE KEYS: A
Do you know did he tell anybody else?
Pardon?
22 23 24
JUDGE KEYS: A
Do you know did he tell anybody else or inform anybody else?
I don't know if he informed anybody else.
11:52:40 25
26
JUDGE KEYS:
27
what the structures were, he had to have told somebody to pass on the
28
information so the companies could keep going, is that correct?
29
A
Because somebody had to know because you eventually found out
Well accountants knew exactly.
11:52:53 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
11:52:53
11:53:04
44 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
his assets?
3
A
4
Well do you know where his assets were when he died, did you know
Well I wasn't, I am not an executor but certainly I know exactly what all the assets are now.
5 6
JUDGE KEYS:
7
next of kin you would have some interest in it, in the assets he would have
8
had, no? You see you paint a picture as if you know absolutely nothing or
9
close to nothing about his affairs during a time when he was very ill and it
11:53:25 10
I don't want to enquire into personal matters but I take it as
look liked like he may not survive and yet despite that, you come in here as if
11
you know nothing about him, any of the business. From 2000 onwards now, I am
12
not talking about 1991, I am talking about from 2000, from the time the
13
Tribunals started to send correspondence to your father making inquiries and
14
this is a time when you are, as I understand it, were going to take over the
11:53:52 15
reins of the company. And you didn't express any interest and ask your father
16
'well listen, if I am going to take over these companies, you will have to tell
17
me more about them?'
18
A
19
That wasn't the way that he operated. He wasn't the type of person who sat down with somebody and told him --
11:54:05 20
21 22
JUDGE KEYS: A
Did you ever ask him to sit down?
No, I am an owner driver, I do my own thing.
23 24
JUDGE KEYS:
I see, thank you very much.
11:54:15 25
26
MR. RYAN: Excuse me, chairman, may I just make one clarification there.
27
think Judge Faherty said to Mr. Monahan that Ms. Gosling gave evidence that
28
Mr. Monahan senior wished to raise over a million pounds in 1986, just by way
29
of clarification, Ms. Gosling did not say that directly in evidence, I believe
11:54:32 30
it was put to her. www.pcr.ie Day 659
I
11:54:33
11:54:42
45 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I said it arose in the course of Ms. Gosling's evidence and
3
she said I must have been aware of it.
4 5
MR. RYAN: Very good.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I was only trying to ascertain this witness's --
8 9
MR. RYAN: Just by way of clarification, she didn't give evidence.
11:54:53 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I accept she didn't put it.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
We are going to rise for about 15 minutes, we would like
14
Mr. Monahan to be here in the hearing room when we return.
11:55:11 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
17
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
18 19 12:13:38 20
CHAIRMAN:
The Tribunal is not at this time satisfied that Mr. Monahan has
provided it with full and frank information as he is legally supposed to do.
21
It appears to the Tribunal that Mr. Monahan has been evasive in many of his
22
replies to counsel and to the Tribunal. And as a matter of probability has
23
far more detailed relevant information than that which he has given so far. If
24
Mr. Monahan would like a further opportunity in the course of this week to give
12:14:06 25
26
additional evidence to the Tribunal, he will be afforded an opportunity to so do.
27 28
If he does not do so, the Tribunal will in due course critically appraise his
29
evidence and may decide to refer Mr. Monahan to the High Court as provided for
12:14:21 30
in the Tribunals of Inquiry legislation. All right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:14:25
12:14:39
46 1 2
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder if I could reply briefly to that. I obviously
3
want to consider the position with Mr. Monahan and advise him appropriately but
4
I do know from having spoken to him during the break, he stands over the
5
evidence he gave and says that it is truthful evidence. It may be there is
6
some way on reflection he can be of more assistance to the Tribunal, I will
7
investigate that with him.
8 9 12:14:53 10
CHAIRMAN:
If he does and if he wants another opportunity to give evidence or
to give additional information, then that's something you can raise with the
11
Tribunal's legal team and he will be facilitated in order to give that
12
evidence.
13 14
MR. SANFEY: Very good, chairman.
12:15:09 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Dominic Glennane please.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:15:14
12:15:55
47 1
MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS
2
BY MS. DILLON:
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
A
6
Q
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane.
Good afternoon, chairman. 234
7
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane. You were here for the evidence of
Mr. Paul Monahan this morning?
8
A
9
Q
I was, yes. 235
12:16:04 10
And I think that while it's not the case perhaps that you have been here for the entire of the evidence in the Module to date, you have been here for
11
certainly a substantial portion of it?
12
A
13
Q
That's right, yes. 236
14
I think that throughout the critical period that the Tribunal is investigating, you were the senior financial officer in the Monarch Group?
12:16:18 15
A
16
Q
That's right, yes. 237
17
You were in addition a 20 percent shareholder in the Monarch Group effectively, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Yes, that's right, yes. 238
12:16:31 20
And we will come to look at some of those documents, but if we start with some generalities first, Mr. Glennane, if I can do it that way. You would have been
21
the person, who leaving aside the late Mr. Phillip Monahan, would have had
22
ultimate fiscal or financial responsibility within the Monarch group?
23
A
24
Q
12:16:49 25
A
26
Q
In the main, yes. 239
You would have been responsible for signing cheques, is that right? Well, I didn't sign all the cheques but I was one of the cheque signatories.
240
Is that right and in terms of preparing the books of records and making the
27
entries, while some of this work might have been done by other people, you were
28
the person who ultimately had to stand over it all?
29
A
12:17:08 30
Q
I would have been the person that signed off the accounts. 241
Is that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:17:08
12:17:15
48 1
A
2
Q
Yes. 242
3
Now you would also have been a person who worked closely with the late Mr. Phillip Monahan, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
By and large, yes. 243
You heard the evidence this morning of Mr. Paul Monahan, I don't want you to
6
comment on that evidence but would you have described the late Mr. Monahan,
7
that's the late Mr. Phillip Monahan as a secretive man?
8
A
9
Q
12:17:33 10
A
11
Q
12
A
I would think so, yes. 244
And can I ask you -Fairly secretive.
245
Very secretive? Fairly secretive. I think he told you what he wanted you to know was the long
13
and short of it.
14
Q
12:17:44 15
A
16
Q
246
That was the way he operated? Exactly.
247
Would it also be fair to that the late Mr. Phillip Monahan would have had
17
dealings with individuals that may not have been known to the balance of the
18
people with whom he worked?
19
A
12:17:57 20
Q
Yes, that's true, yes. 248
I am going to take you through the documentation in relation to a number of
21
people, Mr. Glennane, but from your experience in dealing with the late
22
Mr. Monahan, was it your, from your knowledge and understanding and having
23
worked so closely with him over the years that he compartmentalised things, if
24
I can put it like that?
12:18:18 25
A
So a certain extent I suppose, certainly since the 1990, he was based in a
26
different location than the rest of the Monarch people effectively other than
27
the small team he had working with him, so we might have no contact with him
28
for several days or you might talk to him a few times a day, he was always out
29
looking for new development opportunities and that was his job.
12:18:40 30
Q
249
And did Mr. Monahan do his own thing in relation to the company as it were? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:18:46
12:19:06
49 1
A
Well to a certain extent I'd say yes but within the legal limits of the sort of
2 3
compliance and that but he didn't answer to anybody on a daily basis. Q
250
4 5
And indeed it would be fair to, Mr. Glennane, that everybody else answered to Mr. Monahan but Mr. Monahan didn't answer to anybody else within the company?
A
Well we would have, if we had disagreements, we would sort them out and that so
6
I don't think, nobody else or certainly none of the senior people would have
7
necessarily just done what he said to do. You would have no problems arguing
8
with him or debating with him.
9
Q
251
12:19:29 10
Mr. Phillip Monahan, so far as he is operated bank accounts, his personal bank
11
accounts for example Mr. Glennane, how was that funded?
12
A
13
Q
Well from the company resources presumably, yes. 252
14 12:19:45 15
A
Well, he was paid a monthly salary the same as everybody else, he was paid expenses. And I mean that was the main source of income so far as I was aware.
Q
253
18 19
Well, you are the financial officer now, you must know if there were drawings from the company to the late Mr. Monahan, isn't that right?
16 17
And insofar as Mr. Monahan, when I say Mr. Monahan, I am talking about the late
Insofar as Mr. Monahan claimed expenses, did he simply indicate a figure or did he have to provide vouching documentation for any expenses?
A
I think he filled in a sheet, in some case there would have been receipts
12:20:13 20
attached to it, other cases not.
21
Q
22
A
254
Did Mr. Monahan get director's loans from the companies? Well actually he had, I suppose as a result of one of the transactions which
23
you have been referring, there was a large director's loan due to him by the
24
company and it was reduced over the years so there was never a situation where
12:20:39 25
there was a director's loan from the company to him.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 12:20:56 30
255
Are you talking about the 1.8 million? Well yes, yes.
256
I will come to deal with that in time, are you saying as a general principle in relation to that transaction, Mr. Glennane, that the company owed that money to Mr. Monahan and as and when Mr. Monahan needed that money, he simply took it www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:21:00
12:21:09
50 1
because he was entitled to it?
2
A
3
Q
Yes, pretty much so. 257
4
of a million pounds, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 258
7 8
Mr. Monahan had access to that million pounds and he didn't have to account to anybody else for what he did, is that the position?
A
He would have had to had to, if he was drawing money from the company, if it
9
was any sort of a substantial sum, obviously it would have been discussed
12:21:24 10
because the company mightn't have the spare cash at the time to pay it for the
11 12
That's insofar as his share of that 1.8 million which was a significant share
spare funds available to pay it. Q
259
But the only discussion that would take place Mr. Glennane, and correct me if I
13
am wrong, whether the company had the money to pay Mr. Monahan, not whether
14
Mr. Monahan was entitled to the money and what he was going to do with the
12:21:46 15
16
money? A
I think it was a courtesy, he would probably would have said I need the money
17 18
to buy something, a deposit, I am buying more cars or whatever. Q
260
19
But the reasons that Mr. Monahan wanted the money would have been irrelevant to the company that was paying the money, isn't that right?
12:22:05 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Well from an accounting point of view. 261
Isn't that right? Yes.
262
24
The only matter that would concern the company whether it was in funds to pay Mr. Monahan the money he wanted?
12:22:09 25
A
26
Q
To an extent, yes, I suppose. 263
And can I ask you about the certificate of wast that we have seen this morning
27
at 8897. And this is the shredded document, now do you know anything about
28
this?
29
A
12:22:26 30
Q
No, I don't, no. 264
Well let's see if we can work out a few things, a few facts in relation to it. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:22:32
12:22:44
51 1
There's 819 kilograms of confidential waste which I work out at being
2
approximately 700 weight, is that right?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
If you say so, I don't know. 265
That's right, yes. 266
7 8
So and this is all being destroyed in Somerton?
Now, what kind of documentation would there have been in Somerton, Mr. Glennane?
A
Well Somerton over the years would have accumulated its own files obviously and
9
then when Monarch was sold in 1997, all the documentation was split up, some of
12:23:04 10
it -- as indeed the staff were, so and any historical documentation was sent to
11
Somerton, anything to do with accounts or anything like that, any documentation
12
which related to the technical end insofar as the jobs were ongoing or insofar
13
as the companies were acquired by Dunloe wanted them in Dunloe's offices and we
14
were very conscious that you had to keep obviously documents for six years
12:23:36 15
under the Companies Act. So we would, on the other hand, at that stage we were
16 17
trying to dispose of as much as we can obviously. Q
267
So the technical documentation that, the plans, the engineers, the architects,
18
of current or jobs or jobs that had been sold to Dunloe Ewart, would have gone
19
to Dunloe Ewart?
12:23:58 20
A
Or gone to Lafferty Design, who was the chief architect who started his own
21
business at the time.
22
Q
23
A
268
I don't think anything relating to Cherrywood, that's probably the only one
24
that wouldn't have gone or say Drogheda, not only, Dun Laoghaire Town Centre,
12:24:15 25
26
But they haven't have gone out to Somerton?
any recent job but there were a lot of other old drawings, if you like. Q
269
And the historical financial documentation, including the old audit working
27
papers and any of your say working papers, they would have gone out to
28
Somerton, is that right?
29
A
12:24:34 30
Q
For the previous six years, yes. 270
And then in addition to that, Somerton would have had its own files anyway, is www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:24:39
12:24:44
52 1
that right?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
That's right, yes. 271
That's right, yes. 272
6 A
8
Q
Not that I'm aware of, no. 273
9
Were you aware, for example, you will see from the document on screen that it's, that -- I think the destruction occurs on the 26th September 2000.
12:25:04 10
A
11
Q
That's right, yes. 274
12
Were you aware that the Tribunal on the 6th June 2000 had written to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I am not sure when I became aware of that, I became aware certainly at some
14 12:25:19 15
So and in, did any event occur in 2000 that precipitated or caused this destruction?
7
13
And they would have been the files that were operated by Mr. Monahan?
stage, yes. Q
275
1576. And this is the first letter that's sent to Mr. Phillip Monahan at
16
Somerton in Castleknock and I want to draw to your attention that what the
17
Tribunal is asking Mr. Monahan about is whether or not he has made any payments
18
directly or indirectly to any elected representative or public official. Do
19
you see that?
12:25:40 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 276
It goes on to say "this request extends to any payments which may have been
22
made or benefits provided to or through Mr. Frank Dunlop or any other
23
intermediary", do you see that?
24
A
12:25:51 25
Q
Yes, I do. 277
So Mr. Monahan when he got this letter, as indeed yourself when you first saw
26
it, would have been aware that the Tribunal was inquiring into political
27
payments made by Mr. Monahan directly, including payments made by Mr. Dunlop,
28
is that right?
29
A
12:26:07 30
Q
To Mr. Dunlop. 278
Through Mr. Dunlop? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:26:08
12:26:18
53 1
A
2
Q
To Mr. Dunlop. 279
If you look at the letter Mr Glennane, it says "this request extends to any
3
payments that may have been made or benefits provided to or through
4
Mr. Dunlop?"
5
A
6
Q
That's right. 280
So Mr. Monahan when he saw this letter would have been aware that the Tribunal
7
were inquiring into political payments, including payments that may have been
8
made by Mr. Frank Dunlop, isn't that right?
9 12:26:31 10
A Q
I assume so, yes. 281
11 12
Mr. Glennane, is that right? A
Well I am not quite sure if I agree with your terminology of an ounce of sense,
13 14
Well anybody with an ounce of sense reading that letter would have known that,
but yes. Q
282
12:26:45 15
When you read it, Mr. Glennane, did you understand what the Tribunal was inquiring into is this?
16
A
17
Q
Yes, I did, yes. 283
And you knew and Mr. Monahan would have known that Mr. Frank Dunlop had been
18
retained by Monarch Group in 1993 in connection with the rezoning of the
19
Cherrywood Lands, isn't that right?
12:26:59 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 284
And that is not a fact that was a secret or unknown within the Monarch Group? Not at all, no.
285
24
So when you received this letter and Mr. Monahan received this letter, you were aware of two things, one, you had had dealings with Mr. Frank Dunlop, and two,
12:27:15 25
the Tribunal was inquiring into those dealings, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
That's right. 286
Now, prior to you receiving this letter in April of 2000, Mr. Frank Dunlop had
28
given evidence in public in this Tribunal that was widely reported in the
29
newspapers, do you remember that?
12:27:30 30
A
I do, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:27:31
12:27:51
54 1
Q
287
And it would have been clear from anybody reading the newspapers at that time
2
that what Mr. Dunlop had told the Tribunal and which he had written on lists
3
were the names of companies for whom he had conducted business, ie seeking the
4
rezoning of their lands in 1992 and 1993 and lists of politicians who
5
Mr. Dunlop said he had paid in order to secure that rezoning, would you have
6
known that in April of 2000?
7
A
I would have been aware of it, I don't remember the exact dates now but I
8
certainly was aware when he came before the Tribunal and his interviews with
9
the Tribunal.
12:28:08 10
Q
288
Would it be fair to say that similarly Mr. Phillip Monahan must also at the
11
time have been aware of that background prior to him receiving the letter of
12
6th June 2000?
13
A
I couldn't say that, I don't know what Mr. Monahan was aware of then, I am not
14 12:28:24 15
sure what his state of health was throughout that period. Q
289
16
Well, when Mr. Monahan received this letter, did he discuss with you, Mr. Glennane?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:28:30 20
Q
I don't think so, no. 290
At that time? No.
291
But certainly, in April 2000, it was well known in this country that Mr. Frank
21
Dunlop had provided two important pieces of information to the Tribunal, though
22
nobody knew the detail of them, one was a list of people for whom he had acted,
23
and who had given him money in the course of the Development Plan, and two, he
24
had provided lists of people whom he said he had paid in order to secure that
12:28:53 25
rezoning, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
I was aware of it certainly, yes. 292
Right, now you also knew at the time that Mr. Dunlop was giving his evidence as
28
did everybody else in Monarch that you, in Monarch, had retained Mr. Dunlop in
29
connection with the Cherrywood Lands, isn't that also right?
12:29:09 30
A
That's right, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:29:09
12:29:28
55 1
Q
293
2 3
So you knew and you must have suspected that your name or Monarch's name was on some list somewhere prepared by Mr. Dunlop?
A
Well, I don't know because I mean as far as we are concerned, it was the
4
services of Frank Dunlop & Associates who are a PR company so -- but if he was
5
giving details of all the clients he had over the years, obviously I would have
6
expected our name to appear on it, yes.
7
Q
294
8 9 12:29:40 10
It couldn't have come as a surprise to you that Mr. Dunlop might have put the Monarch's name on a list, is that right?
A Q
That's right, no. 295
So that when the letter comes of the 6th June 2000, it can't be wholly
11
unexpected within the Monarch Group that such a letter is coming following the
12
public evidence of Mr. Dunlop in April 2000, isn't that right?
13
A
Well I don't know, I don't know what you mean the Monarch Group because that
14 12:29:58 15
is, I had left the Monarch Group. Q
296
16
But certainly you knew that the Monarch Group had retained Mr. Dunlop in connection with the Cherrywood Lands in 1993, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
That's right, yes. 297
19
You knew that you had paid substantial sums to Mr. Dunlop in 1993 for his services, isn't that right?
12:30:11 20
A
21
Q
That's right, for fees, yes. 298
We will come to look at Mr. Dunlop, Frank Dunlop, shortly Mr. Glennane but you
22
would certainly have been aware as would other people in the Monarch Group of
23
the fact that by April 2000 or the end of Mr. Dunlop's first evidence, there
24
was a real risk or likelihood that Monarch's name appeared on a list of
12:30:31 25
Mr. Dunlop's as an employer of Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
26
A
27
Q
Well obviously, yes, there was a -299
Indeed, anybody in the Monarch who had been in the Monarch Group at the time
28
such as Mr. Lynn, or Mr. Reilly or Mr. Sweeney would equally have been aware of
29
the fact that A, Mr. Dunlop was giving very highly quoted public evidence and
12:30:49 30
B, that Mr. Dunlop had previously been retained by Monarch, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:30:54
12:31:10
56 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
Well I can't speak for other people. 300
Right. But you certainly were aware of it? I was certainly aware, yes, that he had given evidence to the Tribunal, yes.
301
And you were also aware, without discussing it with Mr. Phillip Monahan, you
5
yourself had made the connection that it was likely that Monarch's name
6
appeared on some of Mr. Dunlop's lists, isn't that right?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
As clients of his, yes. 302
As a client of his and we will come to look at that? I certainly would not have thought it would appear as somebody who had given
12:31:22 10
him money to give to politicians, we would never have done that.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
303
Leaving aside that? I am not sure of the context of what you are talking about.
304
14
Yes, so that what happens then from Mr. Phillip Monahan's point of view at Somerton is that approximately 700 weight of paper in Somerton is destroyed in
12:31:41 15
September of 2000. Isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
So it appears, yes. 305
Now, looking at it now, Mr. Glennane, in that context and in that sequence, can
18
you think of any reason why someone who has been informed that they are going
19
to be the subject matter of an inquiry by a Tribunal of Inquiry why would such
12:32:04 20
a person elect at that point in time to destroy 819.88 kilograms or 700 weight
21
of newspapers which might, of not newspaper, of paper, which might contain
22
material or relevant information, can you help the Tribunal why that took place
23
in September of 2000?
24
A
It's normal practice in a company to have documents shredded every six to 12
12:32:28 25
months if you can, otherwise it just all builds up. I wouldn't have thought
26
it, I mean as far as I can see, all the documentation relating to Mr. Dunlop is
27
included in the brief. It doesn't appear that any documentation, I assume it
28
was waste piper that was destroyed.
29 12:32:52 30
Q
306
Who was the person who would have carried out that analysis, Mr. Glennane, who would have gone through that documentation before it was shredded to decide www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:32:57
12:33:10
57 1
whether or not, before it was torn up, whether there was anything in it that
2
might assist the Tribunal in its enquiries?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
I don't know. Somebody in Somerton probably. 307
Did I think that? 308
309
Do you think it's in any way significant or indeed sinister that such a shredding operation took place within two months of Mr. Monahan being told he
12:33:25 10
was the subject matter of inquiry by this Tribunal?
11
A
12
Q
I wouldn't think so, no. 310
13
Do you think this is a normal reaction of somebody who is being told they are the subject matter of inquiry by the Tribunal to shred 700 weight of documents?
A
I have no idea what 700 weight of documents is in context but I would have
12:33:48 15
16
Yes? No, I didn't know anything about this shredding documents until I saw it here.
9
14
Do you think such an exercise was in fact carried out?
thought it's a normal process to shred documentation on a regular basis. Q
311
10 hundred weight would be half a ton of documents, 700 weight is almost half a
17
ton of documents and I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that's a very, very, very
18
great deal of documents, isn't that right?
19
A
12:34:09 20
Q
I said I can't visualise it but yes. 312
21 22
And can you think of any other precipitating factor that might have led to this shredded exercise being carried out?
A
No, they might have wanted to clear out space because I know all the
23
documentation was stored in the place where the cars were stored so I think it
24
was very tight for space so I assume that somebody made a decision to dump --
12:34:38 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:34:54 30
313
Who was the person who would have made the decision to dump the documentation? Mr. Monahan or John Sherwood or Ann Gosling or some combination.
314
But it wasn't you anyway because you had left the company? No.
315
Can I ask you Mr. Glennane when you left the company, did you set up another company with Mr. Phillip Reilly? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:34:56
12:35:12
58 1
A
2
Q
Not for about two years after that, yes. 316
And is that the occupation that you are presently engaged in, with Mr. Reilly
3
and if I understood Mr. Reilly correctly, you are providing a similar type of
4
service that had previously been supplied by Monarch Property Services Limited?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
That's right. 317
Yes. 318
9 12:35:21 10
Is that right?
Would you like to tell the Tribunal about it, in a general way, the services that were provided by Monarch Property Services Limited?
A
Well the services that were provided which we are continuing to provide were
11
the management, the overall management of shopping centres on behalf of clients
12
and in Monarch days on behalf of ourselves and really it's to do with the
13
running and administration of shopping centres, the collection of rents,
14
collection of service charges and employing security, cleaning staff and the
12:35:50 15
16
general overall running of the centre. Q
319
And insofar as Monarch Property Services Limited becomes involved in joint
17
venture activities, it became involved in a joint venture activity in Tallaght
18
with GRE?
19
A
12:36:02 20
Q
That's right. 320
21
And then it became involved subsequently in Cabinteely with or Cherrywood with GRE also, is that right?
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 321
24
I will come to deal with that but there's a number of what I call separate issues I want to deal with before we look at the accounting treatment of the
12:36:15 25
payments, Mr. Glennane, an the first matter I want to ask you about is the late
26
Mr. Liam Lawlor and whether you knew him?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:36:32 30
Q
I met him on a few occasions. 322
Where did you meet him? I think I met him certainly in our office on two or three occasions.
323
Which office would that be? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:36:33
12:36:42
59 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
In Harcourt Street. 324
I would say maybe three or four. 325
12:36:57 10
And who would have set up the meetings? I think he just called in, if I remember rightly.
326
Was Mr. Lawlor in the habit of dropping into the offices of Monarch? I don't know if he was in the habit, certainly he dropped in a few times that I
8 9
How many occasions would you have met Mr. Lawlor?
was aware of it. Q
327
A
Did you ever have scheduled or arranged meetings with Mr. Lawlor? I think I might have had one or two in connection with Prague, he was very
11
involved if I recall on the Prague venture which we were involved with for
12
sometime.
13
Q
14
A
12:37:15 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
328
I think it was 1993 I think. 329
Yes. And certainly prior to 1993, would you have occasion to meet Mr. Lawlor? I think I met him in Tallaght on maybe one or two occasions.
330
Who introduced you to him? I think it was either probably -- I think Mr. Monahan probably.
331
12:37:36 20
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Monahan, as a director of Monarch Properties Limited, provided a guarantee to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing in
21
June of 1988 for the benefit of Mr. Lawlor?
22
A
23
Q
I don't think so, no. 332
24
7594, you will have seen this document in the brief. Were you aware of that guarantee, Mr. Glennane?
12:37:55 25
A
26
Q
I don't think so, but. 333
27
Were you aware of the fact that Advance Proteins Limited was a company that was beneficially owned by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
28
A
29
Q
12:38:14 30
Approximately when did the Prague business start, can you remember?
I don't think so. 334
7798. You will see that this is the leasing arrangements with Mr. Liam Lawlor that is the subject matter of the guarantee by Mr. Phillip Monahan on behalf of www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:38:19
12:38:32
60 1 2
Monarch Properties Limited? A
That's right, yes, in fact the company who supplied that vehicle is Dublin Road
3
Motors which was a Monarch company.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:38:43 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
335
That Monarch was guaranteeing it? 336
Yes? Or Phillip Monaghan, no, I don't think so.
337
Does it -- in 1988 what was your position in the company? I was a director, yes.
338
Were you the financial director? I was, yes.
339
13
And if you weren't aware of this transaction, does that mean that Mr. Monahan didn't bring it to your attention?
14
A
12:38:55 15
Q
Presumably, yes. 340
16
As the financial, were you the financial director of Monarch Properties Limited?
17
A
18
Q
I was, yes. 341
19
So you were the person who ultimately, if there was a default by Mr. Liam Lawlor or Advance Proteins Limited, Monarch property were going to have to step
12:39:11 20
into the breach, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
12:39:24 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:39:44 30
Yes, the Monarch -- yes, now were you aware of this arrangement?
I assume I would have taken back the car. 342
So it was a contingent liability? It would have been a contingent liability.
343
You were unaware of the existence of the contingent liability? So far as you can recall, yes.
344
Does that mean Mr. Phillip Monahan kept it a secret from you? If he didn't inform me about it, I don't know if he kept it a secret.
345
Shouldn't he have informed you about it Mr. Glennane? No disrespect but it wasn't any sort of big transaction in our business so, yes, he should have from an accounting point of view I suppose. I don't know www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:39:49
12:40:10
61 1
if it was as a contingent liability in the accounts or not.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:40:29 10
Q
346
Were you the financial director in 1990 of L&C Properties? Well, I was the financial director of Monarch which owned L&C Properties, yes.
347
Were you aware of two payments in October of 1990 to Comex Trading Corporation? I don't recall if I was aware of them or not.
348
1255 please. I see them there.
349
You see the two payments there in October? Yes.
350
Now before we talk about those, I want to show you another document at 1269
11
which is a document that was provided to the Tribunal by Mr. Lawlor and I
12
should explain to you, Mr. Glennane, if fairness to yourself, Mr. Lawlor gave
13
evidence to this Tribunal arising out of a number of invoices that he had
14
produced as a result of which he told the Tribunal that he was in the habit of
12:40:51 15
creating invoices and in creating invoices, he had used a number of names for
16
the purpose of creating invoices and they are listed on that letter of the 1st
17
May 2000 at A to H, do you see that?
18
A
19
Q
Yes, I do. 351
12:41:10 20
Commencing 'Industrial Consultants International' and concluding 'Demographic & Strategic Consultants' and the second name on that is Comex Limited?
21
A
22
Q
I see that. 352
23
In that letter, Mr. Lawlor also told the Tribunal that the entities who may have received such invoices from him included at number C, Monarch Properties?
24
A
12:41:25 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
That's right, yes. 353
Were you aware of that proclivity on the part of Mr. Lawlor? Sorry?
354
28
Were you aware of the fact that Mr. Lawlor used other company's names in order to generate invoices to receive payment?
29
A
12:41:42 30
Q
No, I don't think so, no. 355
Do you understand what Mr. Lawlor was telling the Tribunal he had been in the www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:41:46
12:41:57
62 1 2
habit of doing? A
Well I assume he was saying that he owned a number of companies and they
3 4
invoiced -Q
356
No, what Mr. Lawlor was telling the Tribunal was that he used those names for
5
the purposes of creating false invoices for the purposes of generating revenue
6
for himself.
7
A
8
Q
9
A
12:42:06 10
Q
Okay, well -357
I understand that. 358
11 12
A
Well if it was called Comex Limited, I assume it was a limited company it was owned by somebody.
Q
359
12:42:28 15
At 1255, you will see that in October 1990, two cheques were written to an entity called Comex Trading Corporation in the sum of 28,000 and 28,300?
16
A
17
Q
That's right. 360
18 19
He is not saying and did not say to the Tribunal that he owned a company called Comex?
13 14
Do you understand?
What can you tell the Tribunal about that transaction or those transactions, Mr. Glennane?
A
I don't have any memory going back to that particular time, that was the week
12:42:49 20
before the opening of Tallaght Town Centre, everybody was extremely busy
21
including myself, we were concluding three major investment sales, so I don't,
22
I mean there was an awful lot going on at that time. But I have discovered
23
since there were apparently invoices raised for that during the year, the year
24
1990 and as you can see there, it's been posted to a creditor's ledger of L&C
12:43:18 25
Properties Limited.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:43:30 30
Q
361
And do you have the invoices? I don't have them, no, but I have a reference to them in the brief.
362
Yes, if you just give us the brief page? I am trying to find it.
363
Okay. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:43:34
12:44:06
63 1
A
Page 3021. You will see about halfway up there's a thing called Strategy Plan
2
and there's two invoices, one dated the 21st March 1990 and one dated the 19th
3
September 1990 and one is for 28,300 and one is for 28,000. It appears there
4
were invoices raised in March and September.
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
364
Yes, so I would believe. 365
8 9 12:44:17 10
And those invoices would have been in the name of Comex Trading Corporation?
And that would mean that was a creditor with whom the company was doing business?
A Q
So it would appear, yes. 366
11
What can you tell the Tribunal about the corporate structure behind Comex trading corporation?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
I have no information on it, no. 367
What services did Comex Trading Corporation provide to the company? Well it's described here as strategy plans so I presume that was the reference
12:44:35 15
on the invoice.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:44:51 20
Q
368
What strategy plan? I presume strategy planning.
369
Strategy planning or strategic planning? Yes, either.
370
Could you explain then in those circumstances how one of those cheques was
21
lodged to the bank account of Economic Reports Limited which is beneficially
22
owned by Mr. Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
I have no idea, no. 371
12:45:08 25
If that is the case and it appears to be the case, it means that certainly the cheque for 28,300 pounds made out to Comex Trading Corporation which was paid
26
by L&C Properties Limited was in fact paid to Mr. Lawlor?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:45:25 30
Q
Yes, so it would appear certainly. 372
And you would accept that that that is the case? Yes, I would, yes.
373
If Mr. Lawlor was in the habit of producing false or fictitious invoices in www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:45:30
12:45:46
64 1
order to create an apparent indebtedness to provide a cover for the receiving
2
of funds, that is something that could only have been done, Mr. Glennane, I
3
suggest to you with the agreement of somebody in L&C Properties or Monarch
4
Properties, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
I think the invoice would certainly have been passed by somebody, yes. 374
I would suggest it was Mr. Sweeney but I wouldn't, either Mr. Sweeney or
8 9
Mr. Monahan, certainly I didn't pass it. Q
12:46:00 10
A
11
Q
375
376
And you believe you didn't pass the invoice because you have no memory of or you would have remembered it?
13
A
14
Q
I think I would have remembered it, yes. 377
12:46:17 15
So you say it was either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan and of those --
16
A
17
Q
I would believe so. 378
18
Of those two, Mr. Glennane, who is the more likely candidate to have passed those invoices?
A
I really couldn't say. I would say quite possibly Mr. Sweeney but I
12:46:32 20
21
You didn't pass the invoice? No, I don't think so, no.
12
19
Now, who passed the invoice?
wouldn't -Q
379
If Mr. Sweeney were to tell the Tribunal when he comes here on Thursday that he
22
didn't pass those invoices for payment, would that leave the Tribunal in a
23
position that the only person who could have passed them for payment, seeing as
24
you didn't, was the late Mr. Phillip Monahan must have passed them for payment?
12:46:47 25
A
26
Q
I would suggest so, yes. 380
27
passed by a senior member of the organisation?
28
A
29
Q
12:47:05 30
Would it be fair to say that an invoice or debt of that size would have to be
Yes. 381
And does it not also follow from what is now being revealed, Mr. Glennane, in order for those invoices to be paid, the person who was passing the invoice www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:47:09
12:47:23
65 1
must have known that Mr. Lawlor had generated the invoice for the purpose of
2
securing payment, doesn't that follow?
3
A
4
Q
I would assume so, yes. 382
If there's no such entity as Comex Trading Corporation and no such entity ever
5
provided services to Monarch Properties Limited, isn't what's happening here a
6
vehicle for the provision of money to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?
7
A
Well if Mr. Lawlor was the beneficial owner of Comex Trading Corporation, then
8 9
I presume the money was going to him eventually yes. Q
383
12:47:48 10
What Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal was that another individual with whom he was an owner of Comex and in fact the Tribunal has not been able to identify any
11
company called Comex Trading Corporation, right, and at 1256, can I show you
12
where the money ended up. Mr. Glennane, this is the bank account of Economic
13
Reports Limited's current account and on the 26th October of 1990, there is a
14
lodgment of 28,300, do you see that?
12:48:15 15
A
16
Q
I do, yes. 384
17
That appears to equate from the lodgment of the cheque in favour of Comex Trading Corporation.
18
A
19
Q
12:48:24 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 385
That was drawn by L&C Properties? Yes.
386
Does that follow? There seems to be a gap between the two of about ten days, yes.
387
24
It would follow when one takes into account what Mr. Lawlor told the Tribunal about generating false invoices, about the fact that one of the cheques appears
12:48:39 25
to have been lodged to economic reports, that when these cheques were drawn on
26
the 16th of October 1990 by L&C Properties, they were a mechanism for the
27
provision of a payments to Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
28
A
29
Q
12:49:00 30
A
Well there were payments there but I can't say if he provided services or not. 388
If Comex -For the payments. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:49:00
12:49:13
66 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
389
If Comex trading corporation is a false name -Yes, certainly if it's a false name.
390
As Mr. Lawlor has told the Tribunal it was used falsely by him? Yes.
391
Then this is a mechanism operated by two people, one within Monarch, one within
6
L&C Properties Limited and the other being Mr. Lawlor as a mechanism for
7
funnelling money to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:49:35 10
No, I don't think that's the correct interpretation. 392
A
Well you just tell the Tribunal the correct interpretation? If Mr. Lawlor had provided services through whatever vehicle, whatever name,
11
and he came in and said I want to get paid and will you make the cheque out to
12
Comex Trading Corporation, it's quite normal for people to tell you to make a
13
cheque out to the name of a company or whatever. And they would have paid
14
that. I don't think there's any, I think if you are drawing the inference
12:49:59 15
there was some sort of collusion between somebody in Monarch and Mr. Lawlor, I
16 17
think that's a step too far, if you don't mind me saying so. Q
393
What the tribunal has been told, Mr. Glennane, by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor, is
18
that Comex was a name used by him for the purpose of generating false or
19
untrue invoices?
12:50:21 20
A
If he said false or untrue, I don't think that was regarded as a false or
21 22
untrue invoice. Q
394
23
late Mr. Liam Lawlor was a creditor to the tune of 56,300 pounds?
24
A
12:50:36 25
Q
Certainly by October it was, yes. 395
26
Is that right, what services did Mr. Lawlor provide L&C Properties to the tune of 56,300?
27
A
28
Q
29 12:50:53 30
Are you saying in 1990, L&C Properties felt that -- was of the opinion that the
I don't know, it wasn't done through me so I can't comment on it. 396
But if you are telling the Tribunal, Mr. Glennane, that it wasn't a false invoice and it wasn't a mechanism?
A
I am not saying whether it's a false invoice or not, I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:50:56
12:51:07
67 1 2
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Glennane, was the company in 1990 in the habit of
3
retaining politicians of which Mr. Lawlor was one and a sitting councillor I
4
think in --
5 6
MS. DILLON:
County.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
councillor to provide services to the company?
12:51:12 10
A
County councillor, I beg your pardon, a sitting county
No, I wouldn't have thought so, no, but I do believe Mr. Lawlor, I think, he
11
did a lot of work in the early days in Tallaght -- with explaining how to, if
12
you like, deal with the council. We had a very long saga with Dublin
13
Corporation and Dublin County Council. Negotiating agreement with Tallaght and
14
I do believe he advised on that to Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney.
12:51:43 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A
While he was a councillor?
While he was a councillor, if he was a councillor, yes.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:51:51 20
And certainly the designation that's given to payment in the
books of L&C Properties at 1267 is strategy planning, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, yes. 397
23
So whoever makes that entry, Mr. Glennane, is of the view that the services that are being provided, they are not glazing or construction fees?
24
A
12:52:11 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:52:28 30
A
Obviously that was written on the invoice. 398
So the invoice that's being provided for is for strategic or strategy planning? So it would appear.
399
And the invoice is provided to L&C Properties? That's right.
400
And L&C developed the Tallaght Town Centre? That's right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:52:29
12:52:41
68 1
Q
401
2
is that right?
3
A
4
Q
That's right. 402
5 6
In conjunction with GRE and that was its only function in or around this time,
Would you tell the Tribunal what strategy Mr. Lawlor provided for this shopping centre?
A
I don't know, other than providing general advice on -- I think dealing with
7
the council and dealing with the various local authorities. But it wasn't
8
provided to me. I am just offering an opinion really.
9
Q
12:52:57 10
A
11
Q
403
I don't remember. 404
12 A
14
Q
12:53:11 15
A
16
Q
I am sure I probably was, yes. 405
Were you being paid 100,000 pounds? I wouldn't have thought so.
406
17
In 1990, a sum of 56 thousand pounds, how would that rank generally, was that a very great deal of money?
A
Well not in the context of Tallaght, which probably cost about 50 or 60
19
million.
12:53:29 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
407
Was it a very great deal of money in 1990, 56,000? It was in isolation a good amount but not compared with --
408
Not compared to what? Compared with some of the other charges that were made by architects,
24
solicitors, not compared with the context of the total cost of Tallaght which
12:53:52 25
was about 50 to 60 million.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 12:54:07 30
Well do your best now if you can at all, were you being paid 50,000 pounds, do you think?
13
18
What was your income in 1990, Mr. Glennane, how much were you being paid?
409
In total? Yes.
410
Out of which a sum of 56,300 in 1990 is paid to Mr. Liam Lawlor apparently through a company called Comex, is that right?
A
So it seems, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:54:08
12:54:17
69 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
411
Yes. 412
4
And you can't tell the Tribunal A who made the arrangement with Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
In my opinion, it was probably Mr. Sweeney. 413
7
Or Mr. Monahan I think you said. You can only speculate as to what Mr. Lawlor would have done for the money, is that right?
8
A
9
Q
12:54:35 10
A
11
Q
Well I think, yes. Yes. 414
You didn't record it in the books and accounts of L&C Properties? Certainly it was recorded in the books of account.
415
12
You didn't record it in the books and account of L&C Properties because you have told the Tribunal you didn't pass the invoices, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
But it was recorded in the books of accounts, yes. 416
12:54:55 15
And there's nothing on the face of the documentation that records the payment to indicate that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor had anything good bad or indifferent,
16
political or otherwise, to do with the payments, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
12:55:10 20
Q
What do you mean? 417
There is nothing on the face of the documentation we have just gone through? Yes. Only Comex Trading Corporation.
418
21
There's nothing to indicate that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor had anything to do with this payment, good bad or indifferent?
22
A
23
Q
That's right. 419
24
Can I ask you this, if the Tribunal had not already known that Comex Trading was a name used by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor to generate invoices, would you be
12:55:25 25
sitting in this witness-box answering these questions?
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
12:55:38 30
On foot of an invoice or on foot of two invoices?
Well not about Comex presumably. 420
No, isn't that right? That's right.
421
Because there's nothing in the documentation to connect Mr. Lawlor to the Comex payment if the Tribunal had not already made that connection, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:55:41
12:55:51
70 1
A
2
Q
So it appears, yes. 422
And there was no assistance you could have given the Tribunal to connect
3
Mr. Lawlor to Comex until you were provided with the documentation from the
4
Tribunal, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
That's right, yes. 423
7
financial officer within the Monarch Group, is that right?
8
A
9
Q
I was at that time, yes. 424
12:56:08 10
11
And yet you are the senior financial officer and were at that time the senior
So somebody kept from you the fact that Mr. Lawlor was being paid 56,300 pounds in October of 1990, isn't that right?
A
Well I don't know that they kept it from me, that, they may well have told me
12
it was Mr. Lawlor.
13
Q
14
A
12:56:21 15
Q
425
Well did they? I don't recall.
426
And if somebody had said to you do you think Mr. Glennane, if somebody had said
16
to you by the way that 56,300, we are paying to Comex, that's really a payment
17
to Mr. Liam Lawlor, do you think that might just have lodged somewhere and you
18
might have remembered it?
19
A
12:56:36 20
Q
I don't know. 427
21
But you didn't connect Comex to Mr. Lawlor until such time as the Tribunal did it, is that right?
22
A
23
Q
Yes, that's right, certainly. 428
24
And but you would accept now having reviewed the documentation that such a payment was in fact a payment to Mr. Lawlor?
12:56:51 25
A
26
Q
Yes, so it would appear. 429
And you would tell the Tribunal that the people or the only people that made
27
that arrangement seeing as it wasn't yourself was either Mr. Sweeney or the
28
late Mr. Monahan, is that right?
29
A
12:57:03 30
Q
I would assume that, yes. 430
And do you remember ever having a meeting with Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney at www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:57:08
12:57:20
71 1
which this payment or the mechanism of it was discussed?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
No. 431
I don't remember ever seeing them. 432
Do you believe that you passed them? No, I don't, no.
433
8 9
Do you remember ever seeing the invoices that were passed for payment?
Does it follow from that they must have been passed by Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Monahan?
A
12:57:29 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
I would think so, yes. 434
Why was it done so secretly, Mr. Glennane, can you help? Sorry, what do you mean secretly.
435
Why it was done in such a way the involvement of Mr. Lawlor as the recipient of
13
56,300 in October 1990 is not recorded on the face of any of the documents of
14
L&C Properties?
12:57:51 15
A
It might have been recorded on invoices, I don't know if we had the invoices,
16 17
it might have been on the invoices for all I know. Q
436
18
2000, Mr. Glennane. Do you think that's where they might be?
19
A
12:58:10 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
I don't, no. 437
438
If we don't have them, Mr. Glennane, can you speculate as to where they might be?
A
I think they might well have been shredded in 1997 because a lot of the, as
12:58:25 25
much documentation as could be shredded was shredded.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
12:58:40 30
Because the Tribunal certainly doesn't have them? Yeah well.
23 24
Maybe the invoices are in the shredded box that were destroyed in September of
439
If not shredded in 1997, then perhaps shredded in 2000? Well I don't know.
440
Yes. More likely I would have thought in 1997 because we would have shredded all the old invoices. www.pcr.ie Day 659
12:58:41
12:59:08
72 1
Q
441
2
Can you think what kind of strategic planning Mr. Lawlor might have been involved in that would have been of benefit to L&C Properties?
3
A
4
Q
Other than I have already said, no, I can't, no. 442
I think if I could turn to page 4715 please. In 1993, it would appear
5
Mr. Glennane according to your diary on the 17th November, you have recorded a
6
meeting with Mr. Liam Lawlor at Monarch?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
I recorded that there was to be a meeting, yes. 443
I think it was in connection with Prague, I think there's actually one the next
12:59:29 10
day or two.
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
444
And indeed at 4717 on the 18th? It's my believe now that meeting didn't take place on that day.
445
Why is that your belief? Because I have written below it there was a football match that night, Northern
12:59:42 15
Ireland were playing Republic of Ireland which is a football much I recall very
16 17
Do you know anything about that meeting or why it's recorded in your diary?
well watching in Dundalk. Q
446
18
The meeting was 4 o'clock, I think. In any event on the 18th November 1993, at 4717, you have an entry on the 19th, Liam Lawlor at Cherrywood?
19
A
13:00:03 20
Q
At Monarch, yes. 447
I want to draw to your attention, the other page, at the bottom you have three
21
entries, I think it is Eamon somebody, somebody Gillespie and Liam Lawlor and
22
you see you have three Xs beside them?
23
A
24
Q
13:00:18 25
A
Yes. 448
What do they signify? They signify I would have had to make contact or do something with them and the
26
X would indicate that I had.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
13:00:39 30
A
449
Would it signify for example that you paid a cheque? No. It's just a memory jogger.
450
And it wouldn't mean that you were paying a cheque to Mr. Lawlor? No, that entry wouldn't certainly, no. www.pcr.ie Day 659
13:00:42
13:00:53
73 1
Q
451
2
And the three figures opposite the three names of 31, 30 and 31 totalling 92, do they have anything to do with those entries?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
No. 452
What have they to do with? It looks to me like it was to do with a quarter, I was counting the number of
6
days in some particular quarter.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
453
That's what that's to do with? That's what I suggest, I don't know.
454
13:01:11 10
It wouldn't for example suggest you were going to pay 31,000 or 3,1000 pounds to Mr. Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
13:01:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
I don't think so, no. 455
Do you ever pay Mr. Lawlor money? I think we did sometime after that.
456
Did you? I don't recall ever doing so but --
457
Did you ever pay Mrs. Hazel Lawlor money? I don't recall, I have seen her name appearing all right there in the diaries.
458
Did you meet her, Mrs. Lawlor? I don't think so, no.
13:01:39 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Right, it's gone one o'clock. Two o'clock. Thank you.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
24 13:01:54 25
26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
13:59:20
14:04:00
74 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Good afternoon, sir. Mr. Glennane please.
4 5
CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE
6
BY MS. DILLON:
7 8
Q
459
9
Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane. Just before lunch, I was asking you about the contacts with Mr. Liam Lawlor and we had looked at two entries in your diary
14:04:30 10
and I think we were about to look at a third at 4730 and you will see there
11
it's an entry for the 22nd of November 1993 and at the bottom, you have to ring
12
Kevin Nelson and then beneath that, Liam Lawlor?
13
A
14
Q
14:04:50 15
A
Yes. 460
Was that an entry to meet with or to ring Mr. Lawlor? It was either, certainly his name is on my mind, it wasn't a meeting, it would
16
have been above the line, if it was -- it was either to remember something
17
about, to either ring him or whatever.
18
Q
461
19
Yes and I think in so much four days later on the 26th November 1993 at 4752, you have an entry in your diary for Hazel Lawlor, isn't that right?
14:05:15 20
A
21
Q
That's right, yes. 462
22
Now I think I had asked you earlier on whether you had made any such entries, isn't that right, in relation to Hazel Lawlor, did you meet Ms. Lawlor?
23
A
24
Q
14:05:28 25
A
No, I didn't, no. 463
Did you make a payment to Ms. Lawlor? I am not sure, there seems to be a record of 3,000 pounds with her name after
26
it but I couldn't find it actually in the cheque payments books that were
27
supplied. There is several accountancy references to it.
28
Q
29 14:05:56 30
464
Certainly at 4880, which is an internal Monarch document which deals in the first instance with payments to Mr. Frank Dunlop, isn't that correct?
A
That's right. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:05:57
14:06:12
75 1
Q
465
And then there's the handwritten notation, Prague strategic which becomes
2
patrol us strategic and then beneath that, there's Hazel Lawlor, 26th November,
3
isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
The 23rd actually. 466
3,000 pounds. Yes. And I think that in the general ledger report at 1201 and
6
can I ask you first of all about this document, about the account reference at
7
the top, general promotion, see that at the very top, if we could increase the
8
top?
9
A
14:06:36 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
Yes, sorry, yes. 467
Yes. 468
Can you explain that account numbering system to the Tribunal for us please. Not really I am afraid, there are obviously different account numbers for
14
different accounts but I mean I don't know the source of the numbers or why
14:06:59 15
they, obviously it was to do with the computer system, but obviously it
16 17
And you see there there's account 73510201. General promotion.
recorded on that was a heading general promotions, yes. Q
469
Well, first of all if we establish, if we can go back to see the full of the
18
document please and if we just look at the company that's making the payment is
19
Monarch Property Services, isn't that right?
14:07:16 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 470
That's right. 471
24 A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
14:07:48 30
And I would suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that the 735 designation is a designation in connection with Cherrywood?
14:07:30 25
29
And it's Monarch Property Services that are recording these payments?
Well yes, okay, yeah, it appears so, yes. 472
Isn't that the position? I think so, yes.
473
So that in fact what is happening here is that all of the payments that are recorded under the account designation 73510201 are payments made by Monarch Property Services Limited but they are being attributed in the books of Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:07:51
14:08:02
76 1 2
to Cherrywood, isn't that right? A
That's right, yes, they are not all payments, there's some invoices there and
3 4
journal entries as well. Q
474
Yes but in so far as this account, the general promotions account is concerned
5
and we will come back to look at that in more detail later but at the moment I
6
am focusing on the designation of the account?
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:08:16 10
Q
It's called general promotions, yes. 475
So it seems, yes. 476
11
Because the general promotion attributable to Monarch Property had a designation beginning with 6, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
Yes, so I believe, yes. 477
14
So that the position in fact is that the designation of 73510, where that appears in the accounts of Monarch property, those accounts record payments or
14:08:37 15
transactions made in connection with the Cherrywood Lands.
16
A
17
Q
Well that -- that were coded in connection with Cherrywood, yes. 478
18
They were attributed by the person who made the entry as being transactions or payments in connection with the Cherrywood Lands?
19
A
14:08:53 20
Q
They were attributed by the person who made the entry, yes. 479
21
And payments that were attributed to the coding 66801 were payments or transactions in connection with Monarch Property Services Limited?
22
A
23
Q
Yes. 480
24
So that the system that was operated within Monarch Property Services Limited was that when a payment was made by Monarch Properties on behalf of a
14:09:11 25
development, it was attributed by Monarch Property Services Limited to that
26
development in its own books, isn't that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:09:27 30
But it's general promotions attributable to Cherrywood, is that right?
So far as they could, yes. 481
I beg your pardon? So far as it could be attributed to a particular development, yes, it would be, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:09:27
14:09:43
77 1
Q
482
2
pounds, at page 1201, some four entries from the bottom?
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
Yes. 483
There is a reference re H Lawlor, 3,000 pounds? Yes.
484
Isn't that right? Well there is, it's described here as being a journal entry.
485
Yes. And then there's a reference but below that saying re Prague and there was a
14:09:55 10
11
So that in relation to the particular payment to Ms. Lawlor of the sum of 3,000
credit of 3,000 pounds. Q
486
Yes. So what that appears to suggest on the face of it, Mr. Glennane, subject
12
to any clarification that you may give is that there was an entry in your diary
13
for Hazel Lawlor for the 26th of November 1993?
14
A
14:10:10 15
Q
Yes. 487
There is an accounting entry indicating a sum of 3,000 pounds that was paid to
16
Hazel Lawlor and there is a reversal of that entry attributing a credit in
17
connection with Prague, is that correct?
18
A
19
Q
14:10:30 20
A
Well that's not recording a payment, that's recording a journal entry. 488
A journal entry? I haven't been able to locate a payment going through the sheets which were
21
provided by the Tribunal.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
489
Yes but have you -Obviously, there was some suggestion of the name Hazel Lawlor and 3,000.
490
14:10:51 25
Yes. You will also have seen a lodgment of the 23rd November 1993, the same date as the record of the alleged payment to Hazel Lawlor, to an account of
26
Mrs. Lawlor as in the sum of 3,000 pounds at 1202, you will see there recorded
27
3,000 pounds credit on the 23rd November 1993?
28
A
29
Q
14:11:17 30
Yeah right. 491
And you will also see as you pointed out yourself that the record at 4880, the notation that's made there is of a payment to Hazel Lawlor on the 23rd November www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:11:21
14:11:32
78 1
1993?
2
A
3
Q
Yes, that's right. 492
I would suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, taking all of those documents into
4
account the fact that the actual bank documentation can't be located, doesn't
5
matter very much, that the coincidence of the figures is sufficient in what it
6
probably means and I put it no higher than that, is that there was a payment to
7
Mrs. Lawlor in November of 1993 of 3,000 pounds?
8
A
9
Q
14:11:51 10
It would appear that way, yes. 493
A
Sorry it just seems to have been recorded as Prague just as a matter of
11
interest.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
494
495
Was it possible that at that time I think you have told the Tribunal before lunch that you were involved with Mr. Lawlor in connection with a development
16
or an enquiry into a development at Prague?
17
A
18
Q
That's right. 496
19
Is it possible that what might have been going on, you were making certain payments, by you I mean Monarch, on behalf of either Mr. Liam Lawlor or
14:12:23 20
Mr. Frank Dunlop to Ambrose Kelly in connection with the development? A
Yes, we were paying Ambrose Kelly a monthly amount in connection with Prague,
22 23
Yes. But it would -I don't know if anything hangs on that but it seems to be recorded as Prague.
14:12:07 15
21
Yes. Now you would have met, according to your diary --
yes. Q
497
24
Yes, Monarch were, but what I'm asking you is there any possibility that the payment of 3,000 pounds to Hazel Lawlor or indeed the other two payments that
14:12:44 25
are recorded above that under the heading 'Prague strategic' might have been
26
payments made in connection with Prague for and on on behalf of Mr. Frank
27
Dunlop or Mr. Liam Lawlor?
28
A
Yes, possible, yes, I presume it's on behalf of Mr. Lawlor, if the cheque was
29 14:13:03 30
made out to his wife. Q
498
Which is then lodged as we have seen to her account? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:13:06
14:13:12
79 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
14:13:22 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
To her account, yes. 499
Did you meet Mrs. Lawlor on this occasion? No, I didn't, no.
500
Did you ever give her a cheque? No, I didn't.
501
Who would have given her the cheque? I would assume the cheque was given to Mr. Lawlor.
502
By whom? Either by me or by somebody else.
503
And you remember giving the cheque to Mr. Lawlor? No, I don't, no.
504
But you accept from the paperwork that what appears to have happened is that a
13
cheque for 3,000 pounds was paid in November 1993 to Mr. Lawlor through the --
14
through his wife, Ms. Hazel Lawlor?
14:13:42 15
A
16
Q
It would seem so, yes. 505
And do you think it's also likely that the other two entries on page 4880 in
17
relation to 'Prague Strategic' in the sum of 4,000 and 3,000 might be in
18
relation to payments made to Prague or into Ambrose Kelly in connection with
19
Prague on behalf of Mr. Lawlor or Mr. Dunlop?
14:14:02 20
A
If they were made to Ambrose Kelly, it could have been on behalf of the Prague
21
project.
22
Q
23
A
24 14:14:22 25
506
And what exactly were the payments on behalf of the Prague project? Well, the idea in Prague was that Ambrose Kelly had an office in Prague and he had a full-time representative there. At some stage he approached, I think, Mr. Monahan on a sort of consortium if I can call it that, a loose consortium
26
of people was set up to try to, on behalf of -- Ambrose Kelly was trying to get
27
architectural work for his firm, on our behalf I suppose it was to try to get
28
development opportunities in Prague. There was another engineering company
29
involved called, I think, Rotary Engineering who were trying to get mechanical
14:14:52 30
electrical work and I know at some stage Frank Dunlop was involved on the basis www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:14:57
14:15:18
80 1
that he might be able to get some PR work and the idea was that supposedly all
2
the payments, all the expenses, would be borne by Ambrose Kelly and we would
3
pay a certain amount per month which I think was 6,000.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
507
Yes, I think at 4754, you see on the 26th November 1993, Mr.-Yes, 6,000, that's right.
508
Mr. Noel Murray is making the November contribution? That's right.
509
9
And at 4755, the actual cheques is available which is a cheque drawn on Monarch Properties Limited, signed by yourself, is that right?
14:15:31 10
A
11
Q
That's right, yes. 510
12
And that's then duly debited and dealt with in the bank accounts, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
I presume so, yes. 511
14:15:41 15
So if that payment is a payment by Monarch Properties on behalf of its own obligation in connection with the Prague project, it would follow that the
16
entries referred to at 4880 of 4,000 and 3,000 in connection with Prague
17
strategic don't relate to Monarch's monthly payments, is that right?
18
A
Well I think they may have been subsequently deducted from the 6,000 payment
19
paid to Ambrose Kelly. I suspect they were, certainly I think our view or my
14:16:11 20
view certainly was that the maximum liability if you like we had was 6,000 per
21
month to Ambrose Kelly, and that he would make, he would make all the payments
22
on behalf of --
23
Q
24
A
14:16:40 25
Q
512
I think it's the same thing and our idea was to try to find development. 513
26
Sorry, can we just stop there. When you say it's the same thing, do you mean it's the same place and location you were paying the 6,000 to?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:17:01 30
What exactly was Prague Strategic, do you know?
Well, it's just a heading, I think is Prague, I think if you look at 4763. 514
Yes, 4763? I am looking at it, you will see there's an account there from Prague Strategic Studies. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:17:02
14:17:14
81 1
Q
515
2
Yes and I want to draw to your attention, that Prague Strategic Studies does not record the 6,000 payment in November?
3
A
4
Q
It doesn't. 516
That Prague strategic studies is nothing to do with, on the face of your
5
documentation, with the 6,000 that you pay as your November contribution, isn't
6
that right?
7
A
8
Q
So it would appear, yes. 517
9
So if we put up on screen please 4754 together with the existing document at 4763, and if you look at the second, the third document entry down, Prague
14:17:46 10
Strategic Studies?
11
A
12
Q
Yes. 518
And you will see there recorded there are a number of payments and one invoice
13
I think recorded and some reversal but none of them equate to a sum of 6,000
14
pounds, is that right?
14:18:01 15
A
16
Q
That's right. 519
17
So that, they do refer to a payment of 4,000 and a payment of 3,000, is that right?
18
A
19
Q
That's right, yes. 520
14:18:14 20
Right. Now, we can deduce from that, I think, Mr. Glennane, that the 6,000 payment in November 1993 is not recorded in the Prague Strategic Studies entry
21
at 4762?
22
A
23
Q
I don't think so. 521
24
So it's recorded elsewhere and it probably is recorded under Ambrose Kelly, is that right?
14:18:29 25
A
26
Q
Or professional fees. 522
So now having eliminated the fact that Prague Strategic Studies would have
27
anything to do with Monarch making its' own payments, can you assist the
28
Tribunal as to what exactly Prague Strategic Studies was and who were these
29
payments made for.
14:18:45 30
A
Well, there was only one Prague project if I can call it that. And I suspect www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:18:52
14:19:22
82 1
for instance that if this 3,000 was paid to Mr. Lawlor via Hazel Lawlor, it
2
might well be that one of the 3,000s here was 6,000 minus 3,000 on the basis
3
that we had made a direct payment of 3,000. Certainly my knowledge and
4
recollection of Prague was that it was, the eventual agreement was we will pay
5
6,000 per month to Ambrose Kelly and we did that for a few months and then we
6
decided against the project.
7
Q
523
8 9 14:19:41 10
Ambrose Kelly Partnership, second entry down? A Q
Yes. 524
11 A
13
Q
14
A
14:19:50 15
Q
That's right. 525
Now, so that is one supplier, isn't that right? Yes, that's right.
526
16
And that is Monarch Properties on foot of its agreement with Ambrose Kelly making it's monthly contribution in relation to the Prague project?
A
I think only one amount of 6,000 there that, the amount of 7,965.06, there's
18 19
That I suggest to you records the payments that were made by Monarch Properties in connection with Prague?
12
17
You did that and at 4178 please you will see there the supplier recorded as the
two and one of 5,000. Q
527
14:20:14 20
Yes. But they are the payments made by Monarch to Ambrose Kelly in connection with the Prague project, isn't that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:20:26 25
A
26
Q
That's right, yes. 528
Now the second supplier entry is the one at 4763? That's right.
529
Which is Prague Strategic Studies. That's right, yes.
530
Now, in the first instance, Prague Strategic Studies does not record or relate
27
to the payments made by Monarch itself in connection with its own liability
28
under the Prague project, is that right?
29 14:20:45 30
A
I am not sure about that. I would believe that the two accounts would need to be taken at one effectively, there's only one Prague project in all of that, www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:20:53
14:21:06
83 1
there wasn't two. There wasn't separate payments being made to anybody and
2
payments to Ambrose Kelly. As far as we were concerned, Ambrose Kelly was
3
supposed to make all the payments, any payments had to be made and we were
4
sharing the cost with him.
5
Q
531
Let's just look at Prague Strategic Studies for the moment, the line Prague
6
Strategic Studies on the screen, you might explain a few things that are going
7
on here if you would, Mr. Glennane. First of all, when one talks about a
8
supplier in the context of this report, are you, were you talking about
9
somebody who provides services?
14:21:33 10
A
11
Q
Yes, presumably so, yes. 532
12
Services Limited?
13
A
14
Q
Well it's a heading, yes, used obviously, yes. 533
14:21:48 15
will by Monarch to describe? A
I am saying obviously there was some document that had Prague Strategic Studies
18 19
written on the top of it and it was posted or a new account was opened for it. Q
534
14:22:08 20
that right? A
Obviously there was a payment made and a new account was opened as a result of
23
that, yes.
24
Q
14:22:23 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 14:22:43 30
A new account was opened for it because Monarch Property Services Limited were going to make payments to or in connection with Prague Strategic Studies, is
21 22
When you say it's a heading, let's be precise here now, Mr. Glennane, when you say it's a heading, are you saying that it is something that can be used at
16 17
So Prague Strategic Studies is a supplier of services to Monarch Property
535
So you see the very first entry is 4,000 and there's a little dash beside it? Yes.
536
What does that dash represent? The dash represents, I think, that it's the payment.
537
Okay. Because if you go back to the second column, it says PMT 5301, does that mean payment and remittance slip 5301?
A
One is a debit and one is a credit. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:22:46
14:23:02
84 1
Q
538
2
you see it starts off by saying --
3
A
4
Q
One is an invoice and one is a payment. 539
5
Does the word, where something is an invoice, do you usually get the word I N V beside that?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
14:23:10 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
You would normally expect that. 540
There's one invoice referred to there and it's five down? That's right.
541
So the first four entries are payments? No, they are not.
542
Okay, what are they? Sorry, two of them are payments and two of them are some sort of credits.
543
14
Well now Mr. Glennane, you are a fully qualified accountant and have been for many years, what kind of a description is some sort of a credit?
14:23:26 15
A
16
Q
Well one can sells out the other. 544
17 18
We will move on to the debits and credits, we are still on the first line. And
Fine. So what happens then, are you telling the Tribunal that the first thing that happens is that a payment of 4,000 pounds is made?
A
I am not sure which came first but one of them, yes. The payment for 4,000
19
appears to be the, a payment that was made and then there was some sort of
14:23:47 20
adjustment made that was reducing that to nil. I think one was being offset,
21
there was an invoice. What happened was that the payment on the invoice
22
cancelled out.
23
Q
24
A
14:24:05 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:24:18 30
545
Yes, but you see with respect -They are not both payments. That's the point I'm making.
546
The only invoice that's referred to there -- is an invoice -The balance is then shown as nil.
547
Don't worry about the balance? You have to worry about the balance.
548
When we get to the balance, we will deal with the balance. The only invoice that's recorded there is an invoice dated 30th November 1993 in the sum of www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:24:22
14:24:31
85 1
10,000 pounds. Isn't that right.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
That's the only thing that's described as invoices. 549
On the face of it, it records an invoice? Yes.
550
Immediately following that is a payment, isn't that right? 10,000, yes.
551
Of 10,000. So I would suggest to you, not being in possession of your
8
particular knowledge, that in fact the only invoice that's recorded in the
9
document is then paid by the payment in the equal amount, would that seem
14:24:48 10
logical?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
Well certainly it looks like it, that invoice and that payment, yes. 552
Yes. 553
14:25:00 15
So that means that the 10,000 invoice is paid by the 10,000 pound payment, is that right?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
It would appear so, yes. 554
Now having -There is actually over a year between them.
555
14:25:16 20
I noticed that. Now, there have been two payments, according to your evidence, before that in order, one of 4,000 and one of 3,000, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:25:25 25
A
So it would seem. 556
Now what happens to those? What do you mean what happens to them.
557
They are offset you say? I am saying in the books here, they are off offset. They were payments made
26
obviously to somebody.
27
Q
28
A
558
Yes. That's the point, isn't it? I think so, yes. I am assuming it was through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership, I
29 14:25:39 30
Is that right?
couldn't be sure about that. Q
559
We have already seen your payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership are www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:25:43
14:25:51
86 1
recorded as payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership in the books, is that
2
right?
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 560
So, I think we can take from that as a matter of logic, Mr. Glennane, that
5
Prague Strategic Studies are not payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership,
6
wouldn't that follow?
7
A
8
Q
Not necessarily with all due respects. 561
9 14:26:07 10
Are you telling the Tribunal that that you would have had two methods of paying the Ambrose Kelly Partnership?
A
I am saying there could have been a mistake made on foot of the invoice. I am
11
certainly saying that as far as I recall, any payments to do with Prague were
12
made through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership and if we had paid something as
13
direct, then we would have deducted it from the payment to him.
14
Q
562
14:26:27 15
payment in connection with Prague, isn't that right?
16
A
17
Q
So it seems. 563
18 A
14:26:42 20
Q
I don't think it was, yes, it was around the same time, yes. 564
21
Well in fact the payment to Mrs. Lawlor is the 23rd of November 1993 and the payment of the cheque is the 26th November 1993?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
14:26:54 25
Q
Yes. 565
So it's the same time? Yes.
566
26
Can I ask you this, Mr. Glennane, do you have any idea who was behind Prague Strategic Studies?
27
A
28
Q
14:27:15 30
You make that payment at the same time as you pay your 6,000 monthly payment to the Ambrose Kelly partnership, isn't that right, because we saw the cheque?
19
29
Well, you made a payment to Mrs. Hazel Lawlor in which you speculate was a
I don't, no. 567
Do you think that it is likely, in view of the fact that Mr. Lawlor was involved in the Prague activities, that these might have been a mechanism of funnelling payments to Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:27:18
14:27:42
87 1
A
I think the payments may have been made to Mr. Lawlor. Certainly he was very
2
involved in the Prague project and I know went to Prague on several occasions.
3
So, I mean he would have been quite entitled to charge presumably for it but I
4
would have thought he would have charged through the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
5
Q
568
6
enterprise in which Monarch were jointly involved?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 569
9
You believe that payments were made to some entity called Prague Strategic Studies in connection with the Prague project?
14:28:02 10
A
11
Q
Yes, it would appear so, yes. 570
12 13
You believe that Prague Strategic Studies is something to do with the Prague
It is unlikely to have been a payment to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership because that is separately recorded as payments to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership?
A
I am not sure, there could easily have been a mistake made at the time in the
14
accounts or if there were payments made on behalf of Prague, they would have
14:28:24 15
been deducted from payments made to the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
16
Q
17
A
571
You have no idea who or what was Prague Strategic Studies? No, it looks actually like a wording on an invoice rather than a name, like
18
most of those accounts are actually names of suppliers.
19
Q
14:28:49 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
572
And certainly there's at least one invoice, isn't that right? Yes.
573
But there doesn't seem to be a copy of that invoice available? I don't know.
574
24
The other two people who were involved in the development in Prague or a number of people who were involved directly and indirectly with Monarch in connection
14:29:05 25
with this Prague inquiry, one was the Ambrose Kelly Group, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
That's right. 575
28
And they were being paid directly 6,000 a month or were meant to have been paid 6,000 a month?
29
A
14:29:17 30
Q
Yes. 576
Mr. Frank Dunlop had some peripheral involvement or involvement also, is that www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:29:21
14:29:28
88 1
right?
2
A
3
Q
That's right. 577
4 5
Do you know whether any arrangement was made to pay Mr. Dunlop's share of the project for him?
A
Well, again, if there was any payment made to him, I believe it would have come
6
from the Ambrose Kelly Partnership.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
578
A payment made by Monarch on behalf of Mr. Dunlop? No, it would have been included in the 6,000 per month.
579
14:29:45 10
And do you know whether any payment was made by the Monarch Group on behalf of Mr. Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
On behalf of Mr. Lawlor? 580
Yes. You mean to him?
581
14:29:57 15
No, I mean is it possible that you were paying Mr. Lawlor's share of the activity if Mr. Lawlor had a share?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
Paying it to Mr. Lawlor or do you mean paying it to some other third party? 582
Paying it to some third party on behalf of Mr. Lawlor? I am not aware of that.
583
14:30:15 20
Do you think that it's likely this payment to Prague Strategic Studies might have been a payment to Mr. Lawlor?
21
A
22
Q
It's quite possible, yes. 584
Just think about that then for a moment, Mr. Glennane. What would have been
23
the necessity of directing payments to Mr. Lawlor through a medium of Prague
24
Strategic Studies?
14:30:29 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:30:49 30
Q
Well I presume Mr. Lawlor would have requested it. 585
And if he requested it, Mr. Glennane, did he request it from you? Not that I can recall.
586
Who is the person that he is likely to have requested that from? Again, either myself or Mr. Sweeney. Or I think probably either of us, yes.
587
Or anybody? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:30:50
14:31:04
89 1
A
No, or possibly Mr. Monahan I suppose. They are the only people I can think
2 3
of. Q
588
4
yourself or Mr. Monahan?
5
A
6
Q
Yes, I would think so, yes. 589
7 A
9
Q
Yes. 590
14:31:18 10
Can you tell the Tribunal what you discussed with Mr. Lawlor when you met him on these occasions?
A
I don't believe I met him more than once on these occasions. I presume we
12
discussed this payment, whatever.
13
Q
14
A
591
You presume you would have -I presume well -- after we discussed it, I presume he came in to collect a
14:31:33 15
16
Notwithstanding that these transactions appear to be occurring at the same time as Mr. Lawlor is recorded in your diary as meeting you?
8
11
So, it would have been either Mr. Sweeney, yourself and you don't think it was
cheque if there was a cheques being issued. Q
592
Certainly if there was a payment of to Hazel Lawlor of 3,000 pounds, that was
17
something that would have to be organised with somebody in Monarch by
18
Mr. Lawlor?
19
A
14:31:44 20
Q
That's right. 593
And because Hazel Lawlor is recorded in your diary, it's likely you are the
21
person who in fact made the payment or arranged the payment for Hazel Lawlor,
22
is that right?
23
A
Well it's certainly likely that I knew something about it when I wrote down the
24 14:31:57 25
name, yes. Q
594
26
you the person who made that entry? At 4752?
27
A
28
Q
29 14:32:26 30
And is that your writing in your own diary for Hazel Lawlor, is that you, are
It is, yes. 595
And at 4767 on the 4th of November 1992 or after the 4th of December, Mr. Lawlor is again recorded in your diary and your diary appears to record NN, re, 12 and 3 and number 3 is Mr. Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:32:31
14:32:41
90 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
Well, then that's right, yes. 596
It would appear so. 597
Mr. Lawlor and Ambrose Kelly.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
598
599
A
Was Mr. Murray the person in Monarch most heavily involved with Prague? I think Mr. Sweeney was in the sense of directing it but I know Mr. Murray certainly went to Prague on two or three occasions.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
14:33:11 15
A
16
Q
600
And was Mr. Monahan involved in Prague? Well he was, yes, in a general way, yes.
601
In a general way? Sorry, he was, yes. He was the one that would have introduced it and --
602
17
And if and when Monarch decided it wasn't going to proceed with Prague, who is the person that would have made that decision?
A
Well, I certainly had a strong view that we shouldn't so I don't know whether
19
to take the credit for it or not but certainly -- I certainly would have argued
14:33:33 20
very strongly against it.
21
Q
22
A
603
Good. Well who made the decision? Well, I mean the decision was made between myself and Mr. Monahan presumably
23
and Mr. Sweeney.
24
Q
14:33:46 25
A
26
Q
604
And you agreed not to proceed with Prague? That's right, yes.
605
27
And I think on the 8th of December 1993 at 4793, your diary again records an entry Liam Lawlor at Monarch, do you see that?
28
A
29
Q
14:34:22 30
Was Mr.-- I beg your pardon, sorry? And a few other people, sorry, go on.
11
18
What would you have been talking to Mr. Murray about Mr. Lawlor for? At that time Mr. Murray went to Prague on a few occasions I think with
6
14:32:57 10
Was that a note to yourself to talk to Noel Murray about Liam Lawlor?
I do, yes. 606
And again, on the 14th of December 1993, at 4383, sorry, 4838, your diary again records an entry E.S./Liam Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:34:25
14:34:36
91 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
That's right. 607
Yes. 608
609
A
11
Q
I presume about Prague. 610
Between the 17th November 1993 and the 15th December 1993, Mr. Glennane, there
Yes. 611
12
It appears in that period, at least one payment was made being a sum of 3,000 to Hazel Lawlor, isn't that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's right. 612
14:35:03 15
The furthest you can put the situation to the Tribunal is that the meetings were about Prague and the 3,000 pound payment might have been in connection
16
with Prague, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
14:35:19 20
Q
Well I would say it was in connection with Prague, yes. 613
And do you remember it and do you remember it being in connection with Prague? No, I don't, no.
614
21
Can I ask you whether any other payments might have been routed to Mr. Lawlor indirectly as it were?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
14:35:43 25
Q
Not as far as I am aware or I was aware, no. 615
You weren't aware of the Comex payment, isn't that right? Well, I don't know that I was aware of it or not at the time.
616
26
And now you think that the Prague Strategic Studies might have been a mechanism whereby payments were routed to Mr. Lawlor?
A
I think payments were made to Mr. Lawlor rather than routed, it's not a
28
14:36:06 30
What would that have been about?
are seven entries in your diaries relating to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
14:34:50 10
29
Does that mean you had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lawlor? It would appear so.
9
27
The E.S. I presume is Eddie Sweeney?
terminology we use for paying somebody, routing payments. Q
617
If you weren't routing the payments in a particular way, why wasn't the Comex payment made out to Liam Lawlor? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:36:08
14:36:29
92 1
A
2
Q
3
A
I presume because Mr. Lawlor wanted it paid through Comex. 618
And I suggest to you because Monarch were prepared to facilitate Mr. Lawlor? It's normal with any professional if somebody does work for you and they come
4
in with an invoice, will you pay the company or will you pay whoever, you
5
wouldn't necessarily query it as long as you knew it was due.
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
619
I wouldn't describe it as routing. 620
All right. They were payments made to a company, you would normally assume that it goes to
14:36:40 10
11
What did you --
the company. All our cheques were crossed as a matter of course. Q
621
But certainly insofar as Comex is concerned, you know the following: The
12
payments made out to Comex Trading Corporation ended up in the bank account of
13
Economic Reports Limited, a different company, isn't that right?
14
A
14:36:59 15
Q
So it appears, yes. 622
Mr. Liam Lawlor was the beneficial owner of Economic Reports Limited and I
16
think that is the position. The Tribunal has been unable to trace any company
17
called Comex Trading Corporation?
18
A
19
Q
Yes. 623
14:37:19 20
And if no such company existed, Mr. Glennane, then it was a company that was fabricated or made up by somebody?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:37:28 25
A
I presume yes. 624
For the purpose of preparing an invoice? That's right.
625
And for the purposes of getting money from Monarch? I don't know whether that was the only purpose of the company but presumably,
26
yes.
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:37:46 30
A
626
It would be the purpose of presenting the invoice to Monarch, wouldn't it? Presumably, yes, yes.
627
What did you know about Mr. Lawlor in 1990 and 1993? I knew he was a TD and he was, I don't know -- I don't know if he was a www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:37:52
14:37:56
93 1
councillor or not.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
628
Yeah. 629
You knew that? I probably did, yes.
630
Do you know whether or not Mr. Lawlor held consultancies? Well, certainly he did in the Prague context, he was with us but other than
8 9
He was a councillor up to June of 1991?
that, no, I wouldn't have known. Q
631
14:38:21 10
Would there have been any difficulty in writing a cheque for 56,300 to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
11
A
12
Q
Not if there was a proper invoice produced, no, and he had provided services. 632
13
And does it follow from that that Mr. Liam Lawlor couldn't provide a proper invoice for services rendered?
14
A
14:38:42 15
Q
Well, I can't speculate what Mr. Lawlor could or couldn't do. 633
16
Because what you do know happened or didn't happen is more to the point. Is it that Mr. Lawlor didn't provide an invoice for 56,300?
17
A
18
Q
So it would seem, yes. 634
19
Can I show you a check at 4221 please which is a cheque dated 26th May 1993 and can you confirm for us first of all that's your signature at the bottom of the
14:39:03 20
cheque?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
That's right. 635
This is a cheque made out for 10,000 pounds to Mr. Frank Dunlop? That's right, yes.
636
14:39:14 25
And on the reverse of the cheque, there is a apparently Mr. Dunlop's, there is a signature Frank Dunlop.
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
14:39:24 30
A
That's right. 637
Now Mr. Dunlop has denied that that is his signature? So I gathered, yes.
638
And -I was here for that evidence, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:39:26
14:39:36
94 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
639
Were you here for that evidence? I was, yes.
640
4
And Mr. Dunlop made a number of suggestions as to speculations on his part as to how this cheque might have ended up with Mr. Lawlor.
5
A
6
Q
Yes. 641
7
You will have seen the recent statement from Mr. Patrick Murphy that was furnished to the Tribunal, have you seen that?
8
A
9
Q
No, I haven't. 642
14:39:50 10
Can I show you first of all that on the back of the cheque, the word Cleary's appears?
11
A
12
Q
That's right, I saw it. 643
And can I then show you 8913 and this is a second cheque which is made out by
13
Monarch Properties Limited in the sum of 2,500 pounds dated 5th January 1995 to
14
L Lawlor, do you see that?
14:40:08 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 644
That's right. 645
19
And there's an entry on the reverse of the cheque, P Murphy, lounge bar, Inchicore?
14:40:17 20
A
21
Q
22
That cheque is signed by you, is that right?
Yes, I can see that. 646
The Tribunal made certain inquiries of Mr. Patrick Murphy and Mr. Patrick Murphy has provided a statement to the Tribunal, page 8915.
23 24 14:40:32 25
MR. SANFEY: Chairman we haven't seen this statement, we weren't aware it existed.
26 27
MS. DILLON:
I think the statement was received on the 26th June and it was
28
circulated this morning.
29 14:40:37 30
CHAIRMAN:
They don't have it, Ms. Dillon. Could they be given a copy? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:40:50
14:41:08
95 1 2
MS. DILLON:
Absolutely.
4
MS. DILLON:
8915, I will just print a copy of 8915. We are printing a copy
5
of that, in the meantime I want to draw to your attention, those two cheques
6
were provided to Mr. Murphy who previously traded in Inchicore as Cleary's Bar
7
and Mr. Murphy has provided previous evidence, I think, to the Tribunal of
8
cashing cheques for Mr. Lawlor. Now he says that he cannot specifically recall
9
cashing the two cheques in question but he has no doubt that he did cash them
3
14:41:34 10
and he says the cheque for 10,000 pounds made payable to Frank Dunlop was
11
signed Clearys on the back of the cheque by my wife Catherine. I am certain of
12
the signature of Frank Dunlop is in similar handwriting to that of Mr. Liam
13
Lawlor. Mr. Murphy will be coming to the Tribunal to give evidence about this,
14
Mr. Glennane and what he will tell the Tribunal apparently is the signature
14:41:56 15
'Frank Dunlop' on the back of the cheque for 10,000 pounds is the signature
16
made by Mr. Liam Lawlor. He then goes on to explain Mr. Lawlor often presented
17
cheques in the living quarters over Cleary's and sometimes I would give him
18
cash. On other occasions I would have cheques written against this amount at
19
Mr. Lawlor's direction. Normally he would ring to see if I was at home and
14:42:20 20
sometimes he would ask me to hold back a certain amount of cash from my daily
21
lodgment. In or around 1993, my weekly turnover was in the region of 17,000
22
pounds and I was not troubled about cashing cheques. I felt obligated to
23
assist Mr. Lawlor as I was grazing cattle on his land. I also recall cashing a
24
monthly cheque in the sum of IR 1,000 pounds drawn on an account in Prague
14:42:42 25
which I believe was called Flymo. Now if Mr. Murphy and Mrs. Murphy are
26
correct in what they are going to tell the Tribunal, it would appear to
27
confirm, if we could have page 4221 please, that the signature on the back of
28
the cheque for 10,000 pounds is not that of Mr. Dunlop but rather is that of
29
the late Mr. Liam Lawlor and which was cashed by him in Cleary's pub by
14:43:08 30
Mr. Patrick Murphy, after he received the cheque. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:43:13
14:43:24
96 1 2
Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal he did not give that cheque to Mr. Lawlor.
3
A
4
Q
Yes. 647
5 6
Can you assist the Tribunal as to how Mr. Lawlor might have come into possession of that cheque?
A
Not really, no. No. Certainly we wouldn't have given it to him. As I said
7
already, you can see all our cheques were crossed '& Co'. So that would be a
8
surprise that he was able to cash it but however that's the name on the bank.
9
Normally when a cheque is crossed it can only be used to lodge.
14:43:59 10
Q
648
11
out to Frank Dunlop & Associates and given it to Mr. Lawlor?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:44:15 15
Q
16
A
I don't believe so, no. 649
Who asked you for the cheque? I have no idea, it was probably just drawn in the normal way.
650
There's no -I wouldn't have instructed that a cheque be drawn, I would have signed it. I
17 18
And could somebody in Monarch Properties have asked you for that cheque made
mean there were cheques drawn all the time for signature. Q
651
19
Well, we will come to look at payments to Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Glennane and I think you will be familiar with the fact that certainly for the first two payments to
14:44:34 20
Mr. Dunlop of 15 and 10, there were no invoices, is that right?
21
A
22
Q
Until later on. 652
We will come to look at whether they were in fact retrospective invoices or not
23
but you would agree, I think, notwithstanding what is stated to be the Monarch
24
policy but certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop was concerned, a cheque for 15,000
14:44:53 25
and a cheque for 10 now, were drawn without the benefit of any invoices, is
26
that right?
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:45:05 30
Q
That's right, yes. 653
Now was there an invoice for this cheque? I don't think so, I don't recall.
654
Okay. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:45:06
14:45:22
97 1
A
There was an invoice of over 12,100 which would have been normally 10,000 plus
2 3
VAT, I don't know whether that relates in the same -Q
655
4
1993.
5
A
6
Q
Whatever it was, yes. 656
7 8
A
Not specifically, no, but there were invoices from Mr. Dunlop mainly drawn towards the end of 1993 which actually exceeded the amount paid to him.
14:45:45 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
657
And there was an invoice in April -Actually that was a journal entry put through reversing that.
658
13
There is an invoice from Mr. Dunlop which purports to be dated 10th April 1993 in the sum of 12,100 pounds?
14
A
14:46:02 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
That's right. 659
But there's no payment for 12,100 pounds? Not specifically not, no.
660
18
So, it would appear insofar as this cheque is concerned, Mr. Glennane, the furthest you can assist is that you signed it?
19
A
14:46:17 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
That's right. 661
There doesn't appear to have been an invoice attached to it, is that right? No, but I assume there would have been a remittance advise attached to it.
662
23
Well if there is, I don't think the Tribunal has it. Right, though it has other remittance advices in relation to other cheques?
A
It was certainly the normal practice on any creditor's cheque to send a
14:46:42 25
remittance advice with the cheque so that person receiving it would know what
26 27
But insofar as this payment is concerned, Mr. Glennane, have you found any invoice from Mr. Dunlop in connection with this payment?
9
24
That invoice wasn't paid and I think you are referring to an invoice in April
they were getting paid for. Q
663
And you will have seen where in the statements provided to the Tribunal the
28
Monarch position in relation to the making of payments has been clearly and
29
unambiguously stated to have been that payments were normally only made on foot
14:47:02 30
of invoices, is that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:47:03
14:47:16
98 1
A
2
Q
That's right, normally, yes. 664
3
But certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned, the first two payments and now this cheque did not have attached to them any invoice, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
... 665
That would mean, would it not, Mr. Glennane, the payments to Mr. Dunlop were
6
treated otherwise than those normally treated by Monarch Properties, is that
7
right?
8
A
9
Q
14:47:28 10
In a general way, yes. 666
A
Why was that? Well I -- I assume because they were, they were drawn before the proper
11
documentation was furnished. The first receipts had been drawn a day or two
12
after he was appointed so I assume that was some form of retainer or payment in
13
advance.
14
Q
667
14:47:57 15
right?
16
A
17
Q
That's right, yes. 668
18
And I think Mr. Dunlop says he was appointed around March of 1993 and certainly the first payments are in March, isn't that right?
19
A
14:48:05 20
Q
That's right, yes. 669
21
So by May of 1993, can you think of any reason why Monarch would be paying out 10,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop without an invoice?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Only if they were waiting or expecting the invoice to come in after afterwards. 670
Or if they weren't paying Mr. Dunlop at all and they were paying somebody else? No, that's certainly paid to Frank Dunlop & Associates, it was crossed and we
14:48:32 25
would always rely on the protection of the bank, as I said all our cheques were
26 27
And this cheque that you are looking at is dated 26th May 1993, isn't that is
crossed. Q
671
You may not have been aware of Mr. Lawlor's arrangement with Mr. Murphy whereby
28
Mr. Murphy would cash cheques of quite significant amounts of money for
29
Mr. Lawlor?
14:48:47 30
A
I certainly wasn't, no. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:48:48
14:49:01
99 1
Q
672
But you wouldn't, while you wouldn't necessarily have been aware of that
2
arrangement that Mr. Lawlor had with Mr. Murphy, somebody else in Monarch might
3
have been aware of it?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
I wouldn't think so, no. 673
If Mr. Dunlop -I am absolutely sure.
674
You know that in the documentation that's been provided to the Tribunal,
8
there's no surrounding documentation in connection with this cheque, there's no
9
letter for example sending it to Mr. Dunlop?
14:49:15 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
Yes. 675
Well I presume there was one drawn at the time, yes. 676
14 14:49:28 15
There's to remittance advice.
There's nothing surrounding this document except the copy cheque, isn't that right?
A
So it seems, yes, but I am absolutely sure that that cheque was not made out
16
to Frank Dunlop & Associates and deliberately given to Mr. Lawlor. As I said,
17
we would always rely on the fact that the cheques are crossed and I don't know
18
how Mr. Murphy was able to cash it and lodge it presumably into his own
19
account, that's between him and the bank.
14:49:59 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
677
I don't know. 678
679
If he asked you for a cheque for 10,000 pounds to Frank Dunlop & Associates, would you have given it to him?
26
A
27
Q
28
14:50:28 30
Could you have given it to Mr. Phillip Monahan? Unlikely, I would have thought.
14:50:12 25
29
Who did you have give the cheque to?
We possibly would have, yes. 680
Was there anybody else in Monarch you would have given a cheque to in similar circumstances other than Mr. Phillip Monahan?
A
I mean we would have normally posted out cheques or if people offered to come and collect them, they would be left in reception. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:50:32
14:50:49
100 1
Q
681
2 3
request in such circumstances other than Mr. Phillip Monahan? A
Well I think if Mr. Sweeney was dealing with Mr. Dunlop, I understood he was,
4 5
Was there anybody else in Monarch that you would have written a cheque for on
he might have done it for him. Q
682
6
If Mr. Sweeney had asked you to make out a cheque for 10,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop without any invoice, you would have done so?
7
A
8
Q
I think so, yes. 683
9
And do you say then that this is between, if this cheques was given by somebody in Monarch to Mr. Liam Lawlor, then it rests between Mr. Eddie Sweeney and the
14:51:06 10
late Mr. Phillip Monahan as to who would have done that?
11
A
12
Q
I would think so, yes. 684
Can I show you a payment in July 1994 I think to A & L Lawlor at 5279 you will
13
see there. A & L Lawlor, 3,000 and this has been identified in correspondence
14
to the Tribunal as a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor.
14:51:42 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
If you say so, yes. 685
Do you know anything about that payment? I don't think so, no, I don't recall it.
686
19
And can I show you the 5th of January 1995 at 5522, which is an extract from the cheque payments book and again you will see halfway down the page, L
14:52:04 20
Lawlor, 2,500 pounds?
21
A
22
Q
Yes, I see that, yes. 687
23
And you will have seen the cheque at 5523 which is also a cheque that's cashed by Mr. Murphy at the lounge bar in Inchicore for Mr. Lawlor.
24
A
14:52:19 25
Q
That's right. 688
And I draw to your attention again notwithstanding the fact that as you say
26
it's crossed, the cheque is apparently cashed by Mr. Lawlor with Mr. Murphy in
27
Inchicore?
28
A
29
Q
14:52:34 30
A
So it would appear. 689
So it would appear Mr. Lawlor had that facility? Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:52:34
14:52:50
101 1
Q
690
2
And the question is whether anybody else in Monarch knew whether Mr. Lawlor had that facility?
3
A
4
Q
I wouldn't any so, I don't think so. Certainly I didn't know. 691
5
And at 6050 on the 15th of August 1996, there is a cheque for 1,000 pounds for a golf classic paid to Mr. Lawlor.
6
A
7
Q
I see that, yes. 692
Can I suggest to you now, Mr. Glennane, that the documentation in relation to
8
the late Mr. Liam Lawlor appears to disclose the following: That through a
9
medium called Comex Trading Corporation, a sum of 56,300 pounds was paid to
14:53:11 10
Mr. Lawlor in 1990.
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
14:53:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Yes. 693
Yes, it was. 694
695
Do you think -1990.
696
Do you think those two events are connected? That the payment to Mr. Lawlor of 56,300 was in some way connected to the opening of Tallaght?
A
I would think if he had carried out work in the previous few years, the obvious
21
time to get paid was when the job was just about finished.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
14:53:57 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29 14:54:09 30
When did The Square in Tallaght open? It opened the 23rd October.
19 14:53:38 20
And can I ask you this: That payment was in October of 1990, isn't that right?
697
There is then a payment of 3,000 pounds apparently to Hazel Lawlor? That's right, yes.
698
There's a payment of 2,500 pounds to Mr. Liam Lawlor? That's right.
699
A payment of 1,000 pounds to Mr. Liam Lawlor, is that right? Yes.
700
A payment of 3,000 pounds to A & L Lawlor which is accepted to be a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor, isn't that right?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:54:09
14:54:21
102 1
Q
701
And there's also a payment of 10,000 pounds which is addressed to Mr. Frank
2
Dunlop but the proceeds of which are apparently received by Mr. Lawlor, is that
3
right?
4
A
5
Q
Well, so it appears, yes. 702
6 7
indirectly was 75,800 pounds by Monarch Properties? A
If your figures are right but I am absolutely sure the 10,000 cheque addressed
8 9
That would mean that the total amount paid to Mr. Lawlor directly and
to Frank Dunlop & Associates was not meant for Mr. Lawlor. Q
703
14:54:49 10
And if the 20,000 pounds that was attributed to Prague Strategic Studies was also paid to Mr. Lawlor, that would mean 95,800 pounds was directed to
11
Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
14:55:09 15
Q
If your figures add up, I haven't added them up. 704
It isn't very difficult to add them. I am quite happy that they are accurate? I am sure they are, yes.
705
And insofar as the 10,000 pounds cheque is concerned, what you say is that the
16
cheque was not made out to Mr. Lawlor but you accept that he received the
17
benefit of the cheque?
18
A
19
Q
So it appears, yes. 706
14:55:28 20
relationship with Mr. Lawlor, whatever it was, that I suppose culminated in
21
these payments but that that was the late Mr. Phillip Monahan?
22
A
23
Q
24
A
Certainly he knew him from old, yes. 707
And he was the one with whom Mr. Lawlor had his dealings? Well, he may have had dealings with Mr. Sweeney but certainly with Mr. Monahan,
14:55:51 25
26
And would it be fair to say that the person in Monarch Properties who had the
he lived beside him as well as, as far as I know. Q
708
And if payments of the order of 95,000 pounds were made to the late Mr. Liam
27
Lawlor, either through Comex or through any other vehicle, they were payments,
28
I suggest to you, that could only have been authorised at the highest level in
29
Monarch.
14:56:09 30
A
Well, they are each individuals one but yeah, it was authorised by the same www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:56:16
14:56:26
103 1 2
person or different people at different times, yes. Q
709
3
It's your position they weren't authorised by you, they made the payments insofar as you wrote the cheques but you didn't authorise the payments?
4
A
5
Q
That's right, yes. 710
And according to you, you are one of the two top people in Monarch, if it
6
wasn't you it could only have been either Mr. Eddie Sweeney or the late
7
Mr. Phillip Monahan?
8
A
9
Q
That's right, I think that's actually three people. 711
14:56:43 10
with the late Mr. Liam Lawlor was Mr. Monahan?
11
A
12
Q
That's right, yes. 712
13
Was Mr. Monahan in the habit of routing funds indirectly to people, can you tell us?
14
A
14:56:56 15
Q
No, not as far as I know. 713
16
But if Mr. Monahan authorised the Comex payment to Mr. Lawlor, he would have known that Comex was a front for Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
Well, presumably. Presumably he would have, yes. 714
Because no such company Comex exists or existed in 1990? Well, I mean we didn't -- we don't we don't ask to see the certificate of
14:57:22 20
21
Of those three people, the person who had the longest standing relationship
incorporation of every company that you are dealing with. Q
715
22
Because you know who you are actually dealing with, who is the person behind it?
23
A
24
Q
14:57:30 25
A
26
Q
Exactly. 716
And the face behind Comex was Mr. Liam Lawlor? Yes, so it appears, yes.
717
So, that whoever authorised the Comex payment in Monarch and it wasn't you
27
though you effected the payment, that person had to know that Comex was a front
28
for Mr. Liam Lawlor?
29 14:57:47 30
A
Yes, sorry I am not sure that I effected the payment but however, I don't know if I signed the cheques for not but I prefer to admit I may well have signed www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:57:54
14:58:06
104 1
them, I don't know. They must have known it was Mr. Lawlor, yes, that was
2
behind Comex.
3
Q
718
4
And that would mean that whoever that person was, they had no problem with making payments indirectly, isn't that right?
5
A
6
Q
Well, I think your term indirectly is a bit of a misnomer. 719
Oh really. Well let's just analyse that for a minute, Mr Glennane, and let's
7
talk realities here. Mr. Liam Lawlor was a serving politician in 1990, he was
8
a member of the Dail, he was a member of Dublin County Council, he was well
9
known. Do you agree with all of that?
14:58:25 10
A
11
Q
Yes, absolutely. 720
12
Mr. Phillip Monahan was a very wealthy individual who had headed up a big development company, do you agree with that?
13
A
14
Q
Yes. 721
14:58:40 15
Comex Trading Corporation did not exist as a legal entity or otherwise. And you may take that from me?
16
A
17
Q
Okay I take it now, yeah. 722
Now, if Mr. Lawlor was providing services to Monarch Properties and those
18
services were above board and there was nothing hidden or untoward or improper,
19
then I suggest to you that Mr. Lawlor would have furnished an invoice to
14:59:01 20
21
Mr. Monahan in Mr. Lawlor's own name? A
Not necessarily, it might have suited him. It very often suits people to
22
trade through a company rather than as an individual.
23
Q
24
A
14:59:13 25
Q
723
To trade through a company that doesn't exist? Not one that doesn't exist.
724
26
Because Mr. Lawlor had available to him companies with which he was involved that did exist such as Economic Reports.
27
A
28
Q
29
A
14:59:25 30
Q
Right, well. 725
And he elected not to use those, isn't that right? So it would appear.
726
So what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. Glennane, when one takes those circumstances www.pcr.ie Day 659
14:59:30
14:59:48
105 1
into account and those series of facts into account, it follows logically that
2
what was going on in the Comex payment was a secret hidden payment to
3
Mr. Lawlor that would withstand scrutiny?
4
A
5
Q
I don't -727
6
Corporation?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 728
9
And there are two invoices from Comex Trading Corporation with an address in Clerkinwell in England, let's say for example?
15:00:00 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
I don't know where the address is. 729
Let's just say? Sorry.
730
14
On the face of it it likes like a bona fide invoice, and there's nothing on it to indicate it's a payment of 56,300 to Mr. Lawlor, the auditor is not going to
15:00:22 15
look behind the invoice?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
In general, no. 731
Is that right? No.
732
15:00:27 20
21
Let's say the auditor decided pick up on the payment to Comex Trading
So what is being kept secret here is the fact that the 56,300 is going to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right?
A
Well, yes, well yes, it depends whether it referred on the invoice to Mr.
22
Lawlor or not. I don't know that.
23
Q
24
A
15:00:43 25
Q
733
Let's assume for the moment it didn't? Assuming that it didn't.
734
What is being kept secret from the auditors and everybody else is that the
26
payment of 56,300 is in fact a payment to a then sitting politician, isn't that
27
right?
28
A
Yeah, I am not sure of being a politician precluded people from providing
29 15:01:03 30
consultancy services. Q
735
I am not suggesting that it didn't? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:01:05
15:01:17
106 1
A
2
Q
You are suggesting. 736
3
I am not, I am saying what's being kept secret by using this mechanism is that the payment in in fact a payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor?
4
A
5
Q
Well, a payment for his benefit. 737
If the face of the invoice does not disclose that it's a payment to Mr. Liam
6
Lawlor or that Mr. Liam Lawlor is involved in it, the auditor will not pick up
7
that in fact it's a payment to Mr. Lawlor, is that right?
8
A
That's right, yes, but as a corollary of that, I don't think the auditor would
9
have had any difficulty if it was a payment to Mr. Lawlor, if there's an
15:01:48 10
invoice made by Lawlor Consultancy Services ... it wouldn't have concerned the
11 12
auditors. Q
738
Of course that would mean for that to have happened, Mr. Glennane, there would
13
have to be an invoice from Mr. Lawlor but that didn't happen because the
14
invoice was from Comex?
15:02:05 15
A
I know that but I don't think it was any, I don't -- it's a bit academic, if
16
you don't mind me saying so, the argument we are having, but I don't think it
17
was of any concern of the auditors whether a payment was to made to Mr. Lawlor
18
or anybody else.
19
Q
739
15:02:21 20
I am obviously not making myself clear. What I'm trying to establish from you, Mr. Glennane, is if the auditor had picked up on the payment of 56,300 in
21
October 1990 and checked the invoice in the name of Comex Trading Corporation,
22
there was nothing on that invoice to indicate to the auditor the payment was a
23
payment to Mr. Lawlor, do you understand that question?
24
A
15:02:41 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
I do, yes. 740
If you would answer it now please? Sorry.
741
The question is if there is nothing on the face of the invoice from Comex to
28
show that the recipient of the money is in fact Mr. Lawlor, even if the auditor
29
were to pick up the invoice, that doesn't help him in establishing who the
15:02:56 30
recipient is, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:02:58
15:03:17
107 1
A
2
Q
Well it doesn't tell it was Mr. Lawlor, if that's the point you are making. 742
3
Yes, the point is that the mechanism that is utilised in the Comex payment is a mechanism that hides Mr. Lawlor's involvement, isn't that right?
4
A
5
Q
6
A
It hides it, it doesn't disclose it. 743
What's the difference in doesn't disclose and hide? Well if you get an invoice in the morning from a McCarrick Woods for instance,
7
you are not assuming that it's disclosing who the partners are on that firm or
8
whatever.
9
Q
744
15:03:37 10
And in the normal course, would L&C Properties have had a list of approved suppliers?
11
A
12
Q
No. 745
13
Didn't have it and did Monarch Property Services have a list of approved suppliers?
14
A
15:03:46 15
Q
No. 746
16
So that each supplier's invoice came in and was treated accordingly, is that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
Yes, I presume it was passed by somebody, yes. 747
Did, if I can ask you to deal with the bonus payments that were made first of all briefly in relation to Mr. Sweeney's statement in his affidavit, that at
15:04:09 20
paragraph 8056, that in 1986 it was agreed to pay a sum of 100,000 pounds
21
notionally. It's in paragraph 10, and on the following page at 8057 for which
22
he would receive a cash sum of 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner with a
23
balance of 50,000 pounds being paid to Mr. Monahan as consideration a tranche
24
of his existing shareholding equivalent to 15 percent of the issued share
15:04:42 25
capital. Now, you can correct me if I am wrong, but it would appear from a
26
review of the subsequent Affidavits and documents in the proceedings between
27
Monarch and Mr. Sweeney, that it was not disputed that a sum of 100,000 pounds
28
was to be paid to Mr. Sweeney and that 50,000 pounds of it was to be paid as a
29
cash sum, is that right?
15:05:03 30
A
I think again when you are referring to cash, it doesn't necessarily mean in www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:05:13
15:05:28
108 1
cash as in pounds notes, it means by cheque or by consideration.
2
Q
3
A
748
No, I don't know if it was paid or not and it's described as being a notional
4 5
Do you know how that 50,000 pounds was paid in fact?
payment which I am not quite sure what a notional payment is. Q
749
It was agreed an ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds would be notionally paid
6
to him for which he would receive 50,000 pounds in a tax efficient manner. Do
7
you know whether that sum of money was in fact paid to a sister of
8
Mr. Sweeney's?
9
A
15:05:44 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
I don't know. 750
No. 751
Were you involved in making that payment? I don't think so, no, I have certainly no recollection of it.
752
15:06:01 15
And insofar as the second payment is concerned at 8053, this is the disbursement of the 8058, sorry, the disbursement of the sum of 1.8 million,
16
you were involved in this transaction, isn't that right, Mr. Glennane?
17
A
18
Q
Yes, I was, yes. 753
19
And because I think you were to receive a share of that in the amount of 450,000 pounds, is that right?
15:06:23 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
That's right, yes. 754
And did you take that yourself through some corporate structure? Through a company call Aspentree Company.
755
24 15:06:42 25
You don't know?
And insofar as Mr. Monahan was to receive a share from this transaction, what was Mr. Monahan's share to be?
A
It says 65 percent there, I think that's wrong, it should have been probably
26
like 55 percent. I gather, I think 10 percent was paid to a Circinus Limited
27
which is owned by the late Tom Monahan and Ann Gosling.
28
Q
29
A
15:07:13 30
Q
756
Out of the 1.8 million, approximately what would have been Mr. Monahan's share? I suppose about a million, a bit over half of it.
757
Yes. And how was that money paid to Mr. Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:07:17
15:07:38
109 1
A
Well, what happened at the time was that all that money was, if you like, went
2
round in a circle and was all loaned back to the company by the various people
3
and the various companies involved. And it was then paid out in instalments
4
later on.
5
Q
758
So effectively what was happening was it was admitted that money, people were
6
to receive money, money was being taken through various corporate structures,
7
the corporate structures then lent the money back and as and when the
8
individuals involved needed money, namely Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney,
9
Mr. Glennane, Ms. Gosling and Mr. Tom Monahan, they made demands of the company
15:08:05 10
11
and repayments were made, is that right? A
I would say more as of when the company could afford it rather than less that
12 13
they made demands. Q
759
14
individuals in the amount of the monies they had lent?
15:08:20 15
A
16
Q
That's right, yes. 760
17
And therefore the company was indebted to Mr. Monahan in the sum of one million pounds approximately?
18
A
19
Q
That's right, yes. 761
15:08:34 20
And that money was made available to Mr. Monahan on request from Mr. Monahan provided the company was in a position to pay it?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
I would think so. 762
Is that a fair way of putting it? I think it was probably more adjusted every year through inter-company accounts
24
for directors loan accounts we spoke about earlier.
15:08:49 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
763
Is it fair to that this money became available initially in 1991? No, I think probably a small amount.
764
Sorry? I think just a small amount became available in 1991, do you mean about the
29 15:09:05 30
The effect of it Mr. Glennane was that the company was indebted to each of the
money of Mr. Monahan? Q
765
Let's talk about the 1.8 million that's available for disbursements. When does www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:09:10
15:09:22
110 1
that come into Pallarang?
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
It came in at that time. 766
Whenever this thing was -- I think January 1992, if that was the -767
15:09:41 10
768
A Q
Taken back over the years, not necessarily as and when they needed it. 769
And where are the reconciliation or the accounting of those payments, where is that kept, Mr. Glennane?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
15:10:01 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
It would have been kept with the rest of the Monarch accounts. 770
Would that documentation have been kept in Somerton? Well not before 1997.
771
And before 1997, where would it have been kept? It would have been kept in Monarch House in Harcourt Street.
772
And thereafter it would have gone to Somerton? Any documentation that was left then would have been, yes. Each of those
19
companies would have done accounts on an annual basis. Q
773
21 22
So that the money comes in, the 1.8 million, and is disbursed and is lent back and then taken back by the various individuals as and when they need it?
11
15:10:25 20
In 1991, late 1991, early 1992? Yes.
8 9
What's that time?
But all of these companies would have had as their assets was the money that was owed to them by the Monarch Group?
A
That's right, but they would all have done audited accounts on an annual basis
23
so each party, if you like, would have known how much was still due back to
24
them or whatever.
15:10:45 25
Q
774
Yes. And in July of 1992, Mr. Phillip Monahan wrote to Mr. Martin Baker of GRE
26
Properties a letter seeking extra additional costs in relation to Tallaght
27
including 3781. Are you familiar with this letter, Mr. Glennane?
28
A
29
Q
15:11:18 30
A
Well, I have seen it in the brief. 775
And prior to seeing it in the brief, were you aware of its existence? I am sure I saw it at the time, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:11:21
15:11:29
111 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
776
I might have, yes. 777
15:11:41 10
Because that letter -Probably did, yes.
778
Because that letter is all about financial matters, isn't it? Well a lot of it is, yes.
779
8 9
And would you have assisted in putting together that letter?
Because the main purpose of the letter is seeking extra payments from GRE, isn't that right?
A Q
That's right, yes. 780
And I want to draw to your attention what's said under paragraph 5 of
11
additional marketing costs and Mr. Monahan says "To ensure the success of the
12
joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred. These costs which
13
were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring the tax
14
status and appropriate tenant profile for the Tallaght town centre."
15:12:03 15
Do you
see that?
16
A
17
Q
I do, yes. 781
Now I suggest to you that what Mr. Monahan is saying there is that marketing
18
costs were incurred for two things, one was ensuring the tax status of Tallaght
19
and the second is ensuring an appropriate tenant profile, do you agree with
15:12:24 20
that?
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 782
23 24
costs. A
I don't know what that means but I presume that means he negotiated, certainly
15:12:39 25
26
with the tenants, yes. Q
783
27
Well we are talking about two things. I think we will agree, tax status and tenant profile?
28
A
29
Q
15:12:50 30
The other thing that Mr. Monahan is saying is that he directly supervised those
Yes. 784
And he is saying, what the letter says is key additional marketing costs were incurred, what does that mean? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:12:52
15:13:07
112 1
A
It means that there were, there were key, there were additional marketing costs
2
that were key, particularly the tenant profile business, there were key to
3
getting in the tenants.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
785
What does the word incurred mean, Mr. Glennane? It means incur, means expenses, I suppose, expenses.
786
7
Doesn't that mean that to ensure the success of the joint venture, key additional marketing costs were incurred, the company incurred extra expenses?
8
A
9
Q
15:13:27 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
That's right. 787
Money was spent. That's right, yes.
788
Isn't that what it means? Yes.
789
14
And those costs were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan, isn't that what it means?
15:13:35 15
A
16
Q
That's what that said, yes. 790
And those costs, as spent by Mr. Monahan, were critical to ensuring A the tax
17
status of Tallaght and B the tenant profile of Tallaght, isn't that what that
18
means?
19
A
15:13:49 20
Q
Yes. 791
So what Mr. Monahan is saying there is 'I incurred extra costs in order to
21
ensure the tax status and tenant profile of Tallaght Town Centre and I
22
supervised those costs myself'?
23
A
24
Q
I think he means the company incurred them and not him. 792
15:14:12 25
Where does it say there that the key additional market costs were incurred by the company?
26
A
27
Q
It doesn't say they were incurred -793
28
What it does say is that Mr. Monahan personally supervised the costs, isn't that right?
29
A
15:14:21 30
Q
That's what it says. 794
Well are you suggesting that Mr. Monahan when he wrote this letter was www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:14:25
15:14:45
113 1 2
incorrect? A
No, I am saying there were additional marketing costs incurred and that him
3
saying they were supervised directly by him is just really puffing up the
4
situation to be honest with you, saying he had some, he had huge personal input
5
into it.
6
Q
795
7
Because he goes on to say "The Square was included in a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act.?"
8
A
9
Q
15:15:00 10
A
11
Q
That's right. 796
That has nothing whatever to do with tenant profile, is that right? No, except it's an incentive obviously to get the tenants in.
797
In the first paragraph Mr. Monahan says he "over saw costs in relation to two
12
matters, tax status and tenant profile", he goes on to talk about The Square
13
being included as a designated area in the 1989 Finance Act and I suggest to
14
you that can only relate to tax status.
15:15:27 15
A
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
Sorry, I didn't ... 798
Is that right? Sorry, yes.
799
19
He then says "Significant professional fees were incurred in this area, particularly in relation to obtaining the tax status of Tallaght.?"
15:15:40 20
A
21
Q
Yes. 800
That sentence, I suggest to you, means Mr. Monahan was saying that fees were
22
incurred in order to ensure the tax designation of Tallaght and that is
23
separate from the appropriate tenant profile?
24
A
15:15:53 25
Q
26
A
That's right. 801
What fees were spent in obtaining the tax designation in Tallaght? Well there were, I know we certainly organised local pressure groups to bring
27
pressure to have it designated. We also --
28
Q
29
A
15:16:19 30
Q
802
How much did that cost you? I don't know. Not a lot but --
803
Would it have cost you 2,000? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:16:21
15:16:37
114 1
A
I know it is somewhere in the documents I saw a reference to, it was organised
2
by a man called Liam McParland who used to work for us.
3
Q
4
A
804
5,000? 5,000, that's described as expenses I think and there was also, I think, we
5
prepared accountants' reports to demonstrate I think the, that the benefits of
6
tax designation and --
7
Q
8
A
805
I have no idea. I think the main cost of these figures is really the tenant
9
profile, if I can put it that way. That's described there.
15:17:03 10
Q
11
A
806
When you talk about the cost of the tenant profile, what are you talking about? You are talking about payments being paid to anchor tenants to induce them to
12
come into the scheme. It's quite common in the business, unfortunately.
13
Q
14
A
807
So how do you differentiate ... What you actually do is pay a capital contribution and really what you are
15:17:33 15
16
How much did that cost?
doing is paying for their fitting out costs. Q
808
17
You are saying the majority of the payments to which Mr. Monahan refers in this letter relate to that as opposed to tax designation?
18
A
19
Q
15:17:49 20
A
Certainly in my opinion. 809
Where's the break down between the two? I don't have any break down for the first one but I certainly know we paid
21
Dunnes Stores something like a million pounds to go into Tallaght and we also
22
paid another company called Pricewise 250,000 to go into Tallaght.
23
Q
24
A
15:18:04 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28 29 15:18:29 30
810
That's 1.25 million? Yes.
811
Mr. Monahan says that all that is spent under this heading is 850,000 pounds? That seems like an understatement then.
812
Yes. There's no reconciliation, if I understand you correctly Mr. Glennane, and no break down of this sum of 850,000 pounds?
A
Not that I'm aware of, I am aware of the two figures I am after giving you, which came to 1.25 million. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:18:31
15:18:46
115 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
813
But they are certainly greater than the sum of 850,000 pounds? Yes.
814
And insofar as these payments are directly supervised by Mr. Monahan, do you
4
agree that what that means, Mr. Monahan appears to be the one who is in charge
5
of these payments?
6
A
He certainly would have carried out the negotiations with --
7 8 9 15:18:50 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could I just clarify something, Ms. Dillon, sorry to interrupt
11
you, the reference to 850, this is Mr. Monahan writing to GRE, the joint
12
venture?
13 14
MS. DILLON:
Correct.
15:19:01 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
17
contribution?
Is this letter purporting to look to GRE for their
18 19 15:19:11 20
MS. DILLON:
Yes, for additional money. This letter seeks the additional
money and becomes the subject of correspondence.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Do I take it then that Mr. Monahan, there's a letter on file
23
that Mr. Monahan is seeking from GRE 850, that would have been 50 percent of
24
the contribution to these significant costs?
15:19:26 25
26
MS. DILLON:
I don't, I can't answer that at the moment, it's not clear to me
27
that that in fact is what's being paid.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
Was it a 50/50 venture?
15:19:34 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:19:34
15:19:43
116 1
MS. DILLON:
It was 50/50 venture on some but not all of the -- some costs had
2
to be borne completely by GRE.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
costs here being sought by Mr. Monahan would have been in the realm of the
6
50/50 costs. Do you see what I'm saying, Mr. Glennane?
7
A
Yes, but how does Mr. Glennane know whether or not the sort of
I don't actually know the answer to that.
8 9 15:20:01 10
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
11
Because there could be two things here
I know what you are saying, the 1.7 million or the 850, that's what you are asking, I really don't know.
12 13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY: A
Yes, very well, we don't know yet
I don't know, yeah, no.
15:20:10 15
16
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, I wonder could I just voice general concern, this is a
17
letter written to GRE by Mr. Monahan in relation to the square in Tallaght, it
18
seems to me to have peripheral if any relevance at all to Cherrywood and I am
19
wondering could we have some indication where this is going. Obviously
15:20:30 20
21
Mr. Glennane will have prepared his evidence on the basis he was going to answer questions about Cherrywood rather than The Square.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
basis on which accounts were maintained in relation to Cherrywood. The
15:20:55 25
Well, it's to presumably assist the Tribunal in understanding the
Tallaght Town Centre project pre-dated it by, it was in or around the same
26
time, although it was a couple of years ahead of it but to that extent, it
27
might assist the Tribunal in understanding the basis on which items were
28
charged in relation to the Cherrywood operation. That's my understanding
29
unless Ms. Dillon has a ...
15:21:26 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:21:26
15:21:52
117 1
MS. DILLON:
2
Development and also the Cherrywood Development and also seeking to establish
3
the funds that were available to Mr. Monahan for whatever, any activity that
4
Mr. Monahan wished to involve himself in. Because it is important for the
5
Tribunal to understand the culture that existed in Monarch in order to fully
6
understand the nature of the payments that we will be coming on to quite
7
shortly I hope, to deal with, Mr. Glennane, including political payments. In
8
other words one must look at the entire of the transactions that were involved
9
in Monarch and how they dealt with them because one of the key elements in
15:22:17 10
It will also assist the Tribunal in looking at the Tallaght
looking at the payments that were made in 1991 and 1992, the political payments
11
were the attempts that were made by Monarch Properties to seek recovery of
12
those payments from their joint venture partner notwithstanding that they were
13
political payments. So all of the relationship between GRE and Monarch is
14
important and I am focusing in on this because this appears to be, and I am
15:22:37 15
subject to correction, Mr. Monahan saying I have spent 850,000 pounds under my
16
direct supervision in order to achieve two things, tax designation in Tallaght
17
and appropriate tenant profile and the response to this from GRE is saying they
18
paid a million pounds outside of the joint venture agreement and again that
19
would be a fund and where it was would be of interest to the Tribunal.
15:23:03 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Also this is July 1992, which is smack in the middle of the
22
Cherrywood. Also the documentation to which the witness is being referred is
23
in the brief so presumably he would have seen it. If he has a particular
24
difficulties about aspects of it, obviously you can say that.
15:23:26 25
26
MR. SANFEY: Chairman, it is in the brief certainly and as you are aware, the
27
brief is extremely large and I am slightly concerned that Mr. Glennane should
28
be, I can see how this is relevant to background, I am just a little bit
29
concerned that the focus be on Cherrywood rather than Tallaght though I accept
15:23:42 30
the totality of the relationship with GRE may be relevant. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:23:46
15:24:04
118 1 2
But also Chairman, we are looking at page 7 of a lengthy letter. I wonder if
3
Mr. Glennane would like to see the letter to refresh his memory. It's written
4
on Monarch Properties notepaper. There seems to be some issue about whether
5
Mr. Monarch was talking about funding the expenses himself or Monarch. It
6
seems clear to us that the context of the letter...
7 8
MS. DILLON:
9
will be back in the morning, I am prepared to leave this now and let
15:24:17 10
Could I suggest if the witness has a difficulty, Mr. Glennane
Mr. Glennane overnight look at the correspondence and also the reply from GRE
11
in relation to this and I can pick it up tomorrow morning and move on now
12
without having concluded that matter to allow him, if that's agreeable.
13 14
MR. SANFEY: Very good, chairman.
15:24:30 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
17 18
MS. DILLON:
19
the morning, if that's all right?
15:24:42 20
A
21
Q
If you wish. 815
22 23
Now can I ask you just very briefly, were you aware of any proposal to swap a portion of the Cherrywood lands with any golf club?
A
I was aware there was some discussions with both, I think, Dun Laoghaire and
24
Killiney.
15:24:59 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:25:17 30
Thank you, Mr. Glennane, I will come back to deal with that in
816
Who conducted those discussions on behalf of Monarch Properties? I think Mr. Monahan.
817
Did Mr. Monahan deal with all of those himself? So far as I know, yes.
818
You will have seen in the brief and again if you haven't, we can leave it over until tomorrow a letter at 8516 dated 12th August 1993 in which it is referred www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:25:25
15:25:45
119 1
to and I'm looking at the second last paragraph, all costs of Dun Laoghaire
2
corporation will be the responsibility of the developer and in addition the sum
3
of 500,000 pounds cash would have to be paid to the club on the actual hand
4
over. Were you aware of this correspondence?
5
A
I think it says on the top, I think draft letter actually, if I read it
6
correctly.
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
819
Yes? I don't recall, it seems to be a letter from Noel Smyth to somebody.
820
15:25:58 10
It's only a draft letter but what is being set out is a proposed agreement which never in fact happened?
11
A
12
Q
No, I don't think it was -821
But what I'm drawing to your attention, were you aware of the fact that the
13
proposed agreement provided for a sum of half a million cash to be paid in the
14
event the agreement proceeded?
15:26:10 15
A
No, I mean -- no, again I think that reference to 500,000 pounds cash doesn't
16 17
mean cash, it means a payment. Q
822
And if I could show you 8717, sorry before I leave that, if I could have 8155
18
please. This is a copy letter to Mr. Monahan of the 12th August 1993 relating
19
to the document we have just looked at and in the first sentence he says "I am
15:26:48 20
enclosing a copy letter that I have now sent with your package to an unnamed
21
person who is not part of this" so it would seem certainly the draft letter was
22
sent to Mr. Monahan?
23
A
24
Q
15:27:05 25
A
Yes, I think so. 823
And were you aware of any of this, Mr. Glennane? I don't think I was aware of this letter but I was certainly aware, I thought
26
it was a few years later on about discussions with Dun Laoghaire Golf Club. I
27
think it was after we acquired the Galvin land, I don't see how we could have
28
given 150 acres of the existing -- the first lot of land for a golf course. It
29
wouldn't make any sense to me to be honest with you.
15:27:35 30
Q
824
At 8717, which is an extract from Mr. Phillip Monahan's diary which relates to www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:27:41
15:28:01
120 1
the payment to Mr. Charles Haughey. But what I want to draw to your attention
2
halfway down is a reference P N and it appears either S or D or G Murphy,
3
100,000 pounds cash. And that's on the 6th February 1991.
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
Yes. 825
I read that as being it was each I must say rather than cash. 826
8 9
A
Well if it was each it would be some sort of joint venture he was talking to somebody about, each would put up 100,000.
Q
827
12
If we could just increase PM, S Murphy 100,000, that line. I suggest to you that it's cash?
13
A
14
Q
15:28:47 15
It may be cash. 828
Can you assist the Tribunal as to why Mr. Monahan would have been looking for 100,000 cash or giving 100,000 cash or dealing in 100,000 pounds cash in any
16 17
You read that and what significance do you attach to the 100,000 before that word?
15:28:20 10
11
Now first of all --
way in February of 1991? A
No.
18 19 15:29:02 20
CHAIRMAN: A
Do you know who Mr. Murphy is?
I don't think so.
21 22 23
CHAIRMAN: A
S Murphy?
S or D Murphy.
24 15:29:08 25
26
CHAIRMAN: A
Do you know any?
I know a number of Murphys, quite a common name.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A
Somebody with whom Mr. Monahan might have been dealing at the time?
No. It could have been to do with a car, I could only hazard a guess to that.
15:29:30 30
www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:29:30
15:29:41
121 1
MS. DILLON:
2
A
3
Q
Did you know Mr. Jack Whelan?
Did I, yes. 829
4
And did you know that Mr. Whelan carried out certain work apparently for and on behalf of Monarch Properties?
5
A
6
Q
7
A
That's right, yes. 830
Can you tell the Tribunal first of all what work Mr. Whelan carried out? He was an ex-managing partner of Murphy Buckley & Keogh, the agents that we had
8
used on the dock shopping centre, when I joined the company first. I think he
9
provided advice to Mr. Monahan and indeed to Monarch, he was involved I suppose
15:30:08 10
for three or four years and he was also involved in Prague and he was, I
11
suppose, a land dealer or one of these people that was seeking out deals.
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
15:30:31 15
A
831
I think it was a man called Tom Murphy, I think. 832
Tom Murphy? I think that certainly went out of business a long time ago. It's nothing to
16 17
Who is the Murphy in Murphy Buckley Keogh?
do with the last Mr.-Q
833
18
And Mr. Whelan's function or the services he provided was the finding of land, is that right?
19
A
15:30:48 20
Q
21
A
Well finding of land and general advice I suppose. 834
Who did he give those advices to? Well to Mr. Monahan, I certainly met him on a number of occasions. He was a
22
good property person, put it that way. He seemed to have known everybody in
23
the property business.
24
Q
15:31:11 25
A
835
And did Mr. Monahan not know everybody in the property business? Well he might or mightn't but sometimes people, Jack Whelan was the sort of man
26
probably would have socialised a lot more with people in the property business
27
than Mr. Monahan did.
28
Q
29 15:31:34 30
836
And you will have seen in the brief at 8574, Mr. Glennane, a fee note that was put in by Whelan Land Use Specialists?
A
Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:31:34
15:31:53
122 1
Q
837
Which is dated April 1991 and recorded received April 1992 although it may all
2
have occurred in April 1992 but what I want to draw to your attention is the
3
subject matter of the invoice, which is services in relation to residential
4
consultancy at Cherrywood.
5
A
6
Q
7
A
Yes. 838
I presume it means he was trying to charge a fee for giving consultancy advise
8 9
on the residential land at Cherrywood. Q
15:32:06 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
839
840
Did you ever see any such written advices from Mr. Whelan? They don't have to be written advice to get advice but no.
841
Well in 1991 or 1992, there would have to be fairly substantial advices to generate a fee of 150,000 pounds, would you agree with that?
15:32:27 15
A
16
Q
I would, yes. 842
17
And they would want to relate to a very significant portion of land, isn't that right?
18
A
19
Q
Well, it does tend to relate to value, yes. 843
15:32:44 20
And that invoice when it comes in is recorded as being circulated to Mr. Monahan and yourself?
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
I do. 844
It's not being circulated to Mr. Sweeney or to anybody else? Yes.
845
15:32:54 25
So the two people within the company who are deemed to have an interest in this invoice are Mr. Phillip Monahan and Mr. Dominic Glennane, is that right?
26
A
27
Q
28
15:33:14 30
And where are those advices recorded? I don't know. I don't have any record of them.
14
29
What does that mean?
So it would appear. 846
What do you know about the advices that were given or the services provided by Mr. Whelan in connection with Cherrywood?
A
Certainly, I know he spent a lot of time out at Somerton with Phil and I am sure he was probably advising him on potential buyers of the land and things www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:33:18
15:33:28
123 1
like that.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
847
Did Mr. Whelan deal directly with Mr. Monahan? Yes.
848
5
And would this have been circulated to you, Mr. Glennane, because you are the financial controller and because it's an invoice?
6
A
7
Q
Presumably, yes. 849
And presumably when you received this and you saw the amount of it and you had
8
recovered your breath from the size of it, you went and you spoke to
9
Mr. Monahan about it?
15:33:44 10
A
11
Q
I am sure I did. 850
12 13
this invoice and what it was in connection with? A
No, I don't remember having a specific conversation about that invoice. But I
14 15:34:02 15
Can you outline to the Tribunal that discussion you had with Mr. Monahan about
know that the invoice was never paid. Q
851
That may be, Mr. Glennane, but certainly Mr. Whelan was of the opinion he had
16
done 150,000 pounds worth of work in connection with the residential
17
consultancy at Cherrywood and was moved to put in an invoice for that amount?
18
A
19
Q
So it seems. 852
15:34:29 20
1992 and January of 1993 --
21
A
22
Q
Yes. 853
23
-- included in that approximately a third of the way down is Whelan land, 150,000, is that right?
24
A
15:34:39 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
That's right. 854
So this is a record of invoices that have been received, is that right? Yes.
855
Whose handwriting is that in, that document, do you know? I think it was a man called Ken Lawless I think he was an accountant at the
29 15:34:52 30
And in the schedule of Cherrywood costs at 3916 which are costs between May
time. Q
856
Was he an in-house accountant? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:34:58
15:35:06
124 1
A
2
Q
Yes he was. 857
3
Cherrywood, is that right?
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 858
6
So I suggest to you in the overall figure there is 244,539, do you see that, on the total, do you see that?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 859
9
And therefore the biggest single item on that is Whelan Land Specialists at 150,000?
15:35:22 10
A
11
Q
Yes. 860
12 13
And this is single biggest expense recorded on this document in connection with
I suggest to you arising from that it must have been at some discussion, this invoice and what had been done to it?
A
My honest opinion was that the invoice was probably a try on at the time and
14
certainly it wasn't paid, it accrued in the accounts and then written back.
15:35:42 15
Q
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:35:56 20
A
21
Q
861
It was never paid? No.
862
But it was certainly sent by Mr. Whelan, isn't that right? Absolutely.
863
And the person with whom Mr. Whelan dealt was Mr. Monahan? That's right.
864
22
Were you able to get any information from Mr. Monahan what Mr. Whelan had been doing in connection with Cherrywood?
23
A
24
Q
15:36:09 25
A
26
Q
No, other than giving general advice. 865
To the tune of 150,000 pounds? I said it wasn't paid so it was a grossly overcharged.
866
And at 5040, Mr. Glennane, can I show you a separate amount and this is an
27
internal --5040 -- this is an internal Monarch document which is dealing with a
28
1994 document dealing with balances with GRE and amounts due. Do you see that?
29
A
15:36:36 30
Q
Yes. 867
And you will see third from the end Jack Whelan introducing Dwyer Nolan, www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:36:42
15:36:49
125 1
121,000.
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
Yes. 868
Yes. 869
6 A
8
Q
9
A Q
That's right. 870
Whereas the earlier claim had been for residential consultancy at Cherrywood? That's right.
871
11 12
That would suggest a separate invoice because the subject matter of this claim is introducing Dwyer Nolan, isn't that right?
7
15:37:03 10
That would suggest a figure of 100,000 plus 21,000 pounds VAT?
This would appear to be a separate matter and what this document is suggesting, is that that is is being bought from GRE, is that right?
A
I am not sure if that was ever said to GRE, having read through the brief and
13
documents in the brief, I can't find any record what was sent to GRE. I know
14
the sheet behind it was a smaller figure on it. So I don't think that they
15:37:26 15
were ever sent to GRE but certainly Mr. Whelan had had negotiations with Dwyer
16 17
Nolan the land and had got an offer from them to buy it. Q
872
18
What I would suggest was an invoice from Mr. Whelan in the sum of 100,000 plus 21,000 for VAT?
19
A
15:37:52 20
Q
21
A
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:38:06 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:38:21 30
Q
Well I don't remember ever seeing an invoice for it. 873
Where did the figure of 121,000 come from? I presume he put in some sort of estimate.
874
Who would have put it in at some sort of estimate? I don't know, whoever prepared this document would know the source.
875
Well did it come from you? No, I don't think so.
876
Could it have come from Mr. Sweeney? Well it could have, yes, or a combination of the accounts department and him.
877
Could it have come from Mr. Monahan? I don't think so.
878
And in June of 1994, when information was being provided to GRE in relation to www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:38:34
15:38:47
126 1
future or upcoming costs at 5180, in June of 1994?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 879
You will have seen this in the brief where there's a reference to Mr. Lynn,
4
staff bonus 100,000 similar to J Whelan, which I would suggest is Jack Whelan
5
and what's being predicted here are future costs that will be incurred under
6
the heading zoning costs at Cherrywood, is that right?
7
A
8
Q
Yes. 880
9
So what is being set out here is lobbying and entertaining at 10,000 and then success bonus to certain people and Mr. Lynn's is being equated to Mr. Whelan?
15:39:04 10
A
11
Q
12
A
Yes. 881
Now what had Mr. Whelan to do with lobbying or zoning in Cherrywood? I don't know that he had anything to do with it. All them we are dealing with,
13
Dwyer Nolan and all the rest. This is a letter written to GRE and the fact of
14
the matter is we were always trying to claim extra money off GRE and often
15:39:27 15
there was a constant exchange of correspondence between ourselves and GRE on
16
figures.
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:39:45 20
A
21
Q
882
And Mr. Whelan was involved in Prague, is that right? That's right, yes.
883
And he was involved with Mr. Lawlor in connection with Prague, is that right? He was involved with Ambrose Kelly and whoever else was in Prague, yes.
884
22
And he ultimately instituted proceedings apparently against Monarch Properties for fees due to him?
23
A
24
Q
15:39:58 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:40:08 30
Q
That's right, yes. 885
And were those proceedings settled? As far as I know.
886
Do you know how much money Mr. Whelan was paid? I was a feeling it was the order of 10 or 20,000.
887
Do you know, Mr. Glennane? I don't.
888
Were you involved in the settlement? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:40:09
15:40:25
127 1
A
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
I was, yes. 889
And can you tell the Tribunal how much Mr. Whelan got? To the best of my recollection, it was between 10 and 20,000.
890
5
Would it be fair to describe Mr. Whelan's function as being one that reported directly to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
15:40:38 10
A
11
Q
12
A
13
Q
14
A
He certain had a lot of contact with him, yes. 891
Who else did he have contact with? Myself and Mr. Sweeney.
892
Just in relation to yourself, what did he have contact with you about? About various properties.
893
What properties would they have been? I think probably on Cherrywood, all the properties that we had.
894
Did he advise on all of -I remember him negotiating a letting of a shop in Dundalk for us. There was a
15:41:01 15
period of two or three years where he was fairly involved with the company.
16
Q
17
A
18
Q
19
A
895
And was it -And would have known most of the property that we were dealing with.
896
And was Mr. Whelan paid other monies? Yes, for a period he was paid, I think, 300 pounds per week and he was also
15:41:22 20
paid 3,000 in, if you -- if you actually like to look up 3764, you see it
21
there.
22
Q
23
A
897
This is Whelan Land Specialists. You will see ... it is reversed there, having paid him 3,000 we end up with a
24
credit for 147,000.
15:41:50 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:41:57 30
A
898
That's arising from the invoice for 150,000 plus VAT? Yes.
899
So you paid him 3,000 off that effectively. No not off that, we paid him 3,000.
900
On the documents you credit it off that, is that right? Off his account, yes. If you look at 4896 it's a Monarch Services Trial www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:42:12
15:42:26
128 1
Balance, you see half way down there is a credit note -- a credit balance for
2
147,000. 150 minus the three. So the point I am making the 150 was charged
3
in, I think it was 1991 but actually credited back in 1993.
4
Q
5
A
6
Q
7
A
8
Q
9
A
15:42:39 10
Q
11
A
12
Q
13
A
14
Q
901
It was never paid? Exactly.
902
But the point about it is, is that it was charged? It was attempting to be charged, yes.
903
But you refused to pay Mr. Whelan, is that right? We refused to pay 150.
904
You didn't refuse to pay Mr. Lawlor? It was an awful lot less than 150,000.
905
Oh I see, is it the amount? No, Mr. Whelan provided services, we ended up probably paying him 20 or 30,000.
906
15:42:58 15
Mr. Whelan provided services for which he charged 150,000 pounds out of which you paid 3,000 pounds?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
19
Q
15:43:14 20
A
21
Q
22
A
23
Q
24
A
15:43:34 25
Q
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:43:51 30
A
I don't think the 3,000 relates to the 150,000. 907
If you look at 3764? It's on the same account because that was his account.
908
There's only one invoice, is that right? There seems to be two, 1,000 and 2,000.
909
Are they invoices? I am not sure actually.
910
I suggest to you they are payments, is that right? They are not invoices? Yes, sorry.
911
So there's only one invoice? The 150.
912
That's right. Off which a sum of 3,000 is paid in two portions, two in one? Well, I don't think the two in one related to the 150.
913
What did they relate to then, Mr. Glennane, if they didn't relate to the 150? He was certainly providing services and working with us for a period of two or www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:43:55
15:44:26
129 1
three years. As I said to you, we also paid him a number of payments of, I
2
think, 300 pounds per week at one stage and I mean eventually when I think he
3
stopped doing any work for the company, he then came back and claimed, he
4
claimed a fee relative to the Dwyer Nolan and we refuted it and then we settled
5
it for some small amount.
6
Q
7
A
914
It was normal to pay a bonus at Christmas to the staff if we could afford it,
8 9
Was it the normal practice in Monarch to pay a success fee or a bonus?
yes. Q
915
15:44:44 10
If we look at the bonus at 5180 that's being discussed or being indicated in 1994, this is what GRE are being told by Monarch, these are the staff or
11
success bonuses that might have to be paid or these are the zoning costs that
12
will be incurred, is that right?
13
A
14
Q
That's right, yes. 916
15:45:02 15
And the figure for Mr. Lynn is 100,000 pounds, Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lafferty and then others and we have already seen in relation to the 1.8 million, there's a
16
disbursement among let's say the top echelon in Monarch, isn't that right?
17
A
18
Q
19
A
Well, I wouldn't say the top echelon. 917
Who is higher than yourself, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Monahan? No there wasn't, no I think there people higher than Tom, God rest him, and Ann
15:45:22 20
Gosling.
21
Q
22
A
918
Were there also a purchase of a house for Mr. Lynn? There was a purchase of I think a house by Cherrywood Properties Limited but it
23
was actually purchased originally by Richard Lynn and for some reason
24
Mr. Monahan didn't want him to own the house or whatever so I think the company
15:45:42 25
purchased it and I think either rented it to him or certainly he lived in it.
26
Q
27
A
919
Mmm. At 2753 please. Sorry, just to go back to the GRE, I think I think it's quite clear from GRE's
28
letter they refuted those items.
29
Q
15:46:06 30
A
920
And that, I suggest to you, that's not the point at all? It is the point. 8764, you will see there that it's refuted by them, they say www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:46:14
15:46:37
130 1 2
it's an internal matter for Monarch. Q
921
And we will be coming to deal with all of those in detail, Mr. Glennane, but
3
the important point about it is Monarch were prepared to say that's what zoning
4
would cost?
5
A
6
Q
We were prepared to make a claim for GRE for that sort of money. 922
7
Yes because I think you said a little while ago to the Tribunal members that GRE often made claims -- that Monarch often made claims to GRE?
8
A
9
Q
15:46:46 10
A
11
Q
12
A
That's right, yes. 923
That were in excess of what they really wanted to get? That's right.
924
And was that the habitual practice in Monarch? It's the position with GRE, they were an institution, they always wanted to
13
know, preferably a year in advance what their commitments were going to be and
14
naturally when you are trying to provide commitments to somebody, you tend to
15:47:09 15
overstate it rather than understate it. That document 5180 is dated the 20th
16
June 1994 which is I think after the, after all of the zoning votes as I recall
17
it.
18 19 15:47:33 20
Q
925
I don't think that's precisely accurate but we will be looking at that tomorrow. If we look at Mr. Lynn's house and what, in fact, was said in your disclosure letter to Century Holdings Limited, this is the Cherrywood
21
Properties Limited disclosure letter at 2753 and in looking at the specific
22
disclosures, it's recorded that the assets of the company include a property
23
provided for in the balance sheet, 13 Millstead, Blanchardstown, "It was bought
24
personally by Richard Lynn and acquired from him by the company. The subject
15:47:56 25
is subject to loan and charge payable to the ICC involving monthly repayments
26
of capital and interest by standing order from the company's bank account.
27
Richard Lynn resides in the property and claims equitable ownership on the
28
property on the basis of an alleged agreement with P Monaghan. His property is
29
taken subject to such residence and claim of entitlement by Mr. Lynn if any in
15:48:16 30
respect of and all the furniture is of the property of Mr. Lynn." www.pcr.ie Day 659
Do you see
15:48:20
15:48:27
131 1
that?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 926
4
That suggests there was an arrangement made between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lynn in the first instance, is that right?
5
A
6
Q
I think the arrangement was made about moving into that house, yes. 927
If this is an accurate disclosure, what appears to have occurred is the
7
property was bought by Mr. Lynn and subsequently purchased by Cherrywood
8
Properties?
9 15:48:42 10
A Q
That's right, yes. 928
11
were made to the ICC by Cherrywood Properties, is that right?
12
A
13
Q
That's right. 929
14 A
16
Q
17
A
That's what it records. 930
That would suggest Mr. Lynn had made a separate arrangement with Mr. Monahan? I don't think it was any arrangement, what it means that there was a dispute
18
between him and Mr. Monahan about the property. Q
931
15:49:17 20
21
And Mr. Lynn apparently claimed equitable ownership on the company on the basis of an agreement with Mr. Monahan?
15:48:59 15
19
And then Mr. Lynn was allowed to reside the property report, the repayments
Are you saying Mr. Monahan's position was he had never agreed that Mr. Lynn would continue to have an interest in the property?
A
Yes, that's what it reads to me, would be my understanding of it, yes. It was
22
a matter of some friction, I think, between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Monahan.
23
Q
24
A
932
And what ultimately happened? Well, I understand Mr. Lynn bought the property after some time, some time
15:49:41 25
after this.
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
15:49:58 30
Q
933
Was Mr. Lynn paid a success fee in connection with the zoning of Cherrywood? No. Not that I am aware of, no.
934
He was not paid a success fee? Not that I can recall, no.
935
At 7813 please. This is a letter of February 1994 and you will remember, www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:50:09
15:50:26
132 1
Mr. Glennane, that the critical zoning was the 11th November 1993?
2
A
3
Q
Yes. 936
And Mr. Martin Baker is talking about the bonus arrangement for Mr. Lynn and he
4
says "As you know, we agreed we should pay a bonus of 15,000 to Richard as and
5
when he achieved a successful rezoning on the above land. I understand from
6
Anthony Caplin that while we paid the relevant invoice for our 50 percent of
7
this figure, to date Richard Lynn has only received 3,000 pounds. As we paid
8
our 7,500 pounds on the 23rd December last, I should be grateful for your
9
comments on why this bonus has not been paid."
15:50:46 10
Would that suggest that there
was an agreement about a bonus payment to Mr. Lynn?
11
A
12
Q
It would appear to suggest that, yes. 937
And it would appear from a document that is dated the 1st September 1993 at
13
4347 that GRE agreed, it's noted in handwriting at the bottom of that document,
14
"R Lynn, 15,000" and the total of that amount comes to 70,500 pounds and by
15:51:16 15
letter of the 28th September 1993 at 4392, GRE confirm at paragraph 4 under the
16
heading Monarch Project Management Fee "As per your appendix A attached to your
17
letter of the 22nd September but with the addition of a success fee for R Lynn
18
of 15,000 pounds, this will now give a total of 70,500" and it's noted as
19
billed and paid."
15:51:47 20
And that 70,500 was apparently paid so that would suggest
it was agreed that Mr. Lynn would receive a 15,000 pounds success fee, half of
21
which was to be funded by GRE and which, in fact, their half was paid in
22
December 1993, is that right?
23
A
24
Q
15:52:02 25
A
That's right. 938
So were you aware of that arrangement, Mr. Glennane? I am sure I was. I am sure I would have seen copies of all this correspondence
26
but I don't think there's any commitment on our part to pay half of it, to pay
27
7,500 but obviously we convinced GRE to pay 7,500.
28
Q
29 15:52:32 30
939
Would that not have been on the basis that GRE might have been under the misapprehension you were going to pay the other 7,500?
A
Yes, that's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:52:33
15:52:42
133 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
940
But you weren't going to pay the other 7,500. I certainly don't think we did anyway.
941
And would that have been standard practice in Monarch? What would be standard practice?
942
That kind of carry on, where you tell GRE that the fee is 15,000, and Mr Lynn
6
is going to get 15,000, they pay 7,500 and you keep the other 7,500 for
7
Monarch?
8
A
9
Q
15:52:58 10
We would have sorted it out with Mr. Lynn amicably. 943
A
How did you sort this out with Mr. Lynn? My recollection is at the time Mr. Lynn was spending a lot of time studying law
11
and was missing from the office for long periods. I felt we had covered our
12
share, if you like, by paying his fees in Blackhall Place and continuing to pay
13
his salary while he was out of the office.
14
Q
15:53:23 15
A
16
Q
17
A
944
I think so, yes. 945
And did you make that agreement with Mr. Lynn? I think so, yes, probably, when you say make that agreement, he accepted it, I
18 19
Did you agree that with Mr. Lynn?
think. I'm not necessarily saying he was happy about it but he accepted it. Q
946
15:53:42 20
When you came to make a claim against GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop's fees, did the same apply?
21
A
22
Q
In what sense? 947
23
That you had paid out money to Mr. Dunlop in advance of putting in any invoices to GRE and then when you got paid by GRE, you kept the money?
24
A
15:53:56 25
Q
If we paid it out, yes, we kept the money, of course, yes. 948
Would you have seen, for example, any difficulty with creating an invoice with
26
Mr. Dunlop, let's say for a success fee, for the sole purpose of recovering
27
money from GRE even though you weren't going to pay a success fee to
28
Mr. Dunlop?
29
A
15:54:19 30
Q
My understanding was Mr. Dunlop was paid a success fee. 949
Leaving that aside for a moment. That wasn't what I asked you. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:54:20
15:54:31
134 1
A
I don't think we would have artificially generated an invoice from somebody if
2
that's what you are suggesting.
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
950
You would never have artificially generated an invoice? I don't think so, no.
951
When you say you wouldn't have artificially have generated an invoice, are you
6
saying you wouldn't have prepared an invoice purporting to come from a third
7
party?
8
A
9
Q
Certainly not. 952
15:54:44 10
But you would have had no difficulty in creating a Monarch invoice which would have included, for example, 15,000 pounds success fee to Richard Lynn, being
11
paid half of that and either keeping it or not paying the other half to
12
Mr. Lynn?
13
A
14
Q
15:54:57 15
A
16
Q
Well -953
Is that right? Well I think we'd certainly have paid the half to him that we got from GRE.
954
17
According to the letter from GRE you hadn't, if I am understanding the letter correctly?
18
A
19
Q
In February 1994. 955
15:55:16 20
Yes, in 7813, the letter in February. They said they had paid 7,500 on the 23rd December 1993 and their information was that by February 1994, he had only
21
got 3,000?
22
A
23
Q
That's what they are saying, yes. 956
24
So would that not suggest to you even though Monarch had been paid the 50 percent due to Mr. Lynn in December of 1993, they had only paid Mr. Lynn 3,000
15:55:32 25
pounds?
26
A
27
Q
28
A
29
Q
15:55:44 30
A
That's what it's saying, yes. 957
Would that mean that Monarch would have kept the other 4,500 pounds? Certainly until February, yes.
958
And after that February, did you pay Mr. Lynn? I don't know. www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:55:45
15:56:02
135 1
Q
2
A
3
Q
959
Who was the person in Monarch who was responsible for policing the invoices? What do you mean policing the invoices?
960
4
Well, making sure that all the invoices were in order and everything was ready and could be forwarded on to GRE?
5
A
6
Q
It was a combination of the accounts department and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sweeney. 961
7
And would it be fair to that insofar as third party costs were concerned, GRE would not pay unless they got an invoice with back-up documentation?
8
A
9
Q
That's right. 962
15:56:29 10
And when it came say, for example, to political donations or matters such as that sort, GRE, if there wasn't an invoice or back-up documentation, were
11
likely to balk or refuse to pay?
12
A
13
Q
I would think yes. 963
14
And would it have been well known within Monarch that in order to receive payments from GRE, it was necessary that back-up documentation, including
15:56:39 15
invoices, be available?
16
A
17
Q
18
A
If possible, yes. 964
When was the first time that you met Mr. Dunlop? I think I remember meeting him with Mr. Monahan in Noel Smyth's office some
19
years ago in connection with Blanchardstown actually.
15:57:00 20
Q
21
A
965
And what were you meeting Mr. Dunlop about Blanchardstown for? Well Mr. Monahan was very keen to get involved in Blanchardstown with Green
22
Property Company and Mr. Dunlop I think knew or was friends with John Corcoran
23
who was the MD of Green Properties and I think we had a meeting with him and he
24
said that he would speak to John Corcoran and see could we get together with
15:57:31 25
him.
26
Q
27
A
966
No, I don't think so, no. I think there was bad feeling, certainly on John
28 29 15:57:53 30
And did that happen?
Corcoran's part, I think, towards Mr. Monahan so ... Q
967
And was Mr. Dunlop brought in to try and ease the passage between Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Monahan? www.pcr.ie Day 659
15:57:54
15:58:10
136 1
A
If I remember rightly the meeting was arranged by Noel Smyth on the basis that
2
Mr. Dunlop knew, I think he lived beside Mr. Corcoran.
3
Q
4
A
5
Q
6
A
7
Q
8
A
9
Q
968
Which equation, sorry? 969
970
971
A
I remember myself and Mr. Monahan meeting him, just the three of us, the meeting was, I think, arranged by Noel Smyth.
Q
972
And when Mr. Dunlop was retained by Monarch Properties and when the Tribunal first wrote to Monarch Properties asking the Monarch Properties to provide all
15:58:43 15
the information in connection with Mr. Dunlop's retention and how much money
16
had been paid, what figure did Monarch come up with, can you remember?
17
A
18
Q
I think 52 and a half thousand. 973
19
Can you indicate from what source Monarch Property obtained their information that the amount that it paid to Mr. Dunlop was 52,500 pounds?
A
I think they went through all the cheques payments sheets and tried to make a
21
list of them. And apparently missed three payments, as I understand it.
22
Q
23
A
24
Q
15:59:24 25
A
26
Q
27
A
28
Q
29
A
16:00:21 30
According to your diary it look place at his office but I'm asking who brought Mr. Dunlop to the meeting?
14
15:59:04 20
It was Noel Smyth? I think so, the meeting took place at his office.
12 13
Into that meeting? No, I think it was Noel Smyth.
15:58:22 10
11
Was it Mr. Monahan who brought Mr. Dunlop into the equation?
974
Who actually carried out the exercise, can you remember? I certainly did part of it with one of my assistants.
975
And what payments did you miss? We missed I think the first two, the 15 and 10. And some other one after that.
976
Did you also miss the 10,000 pounds that ultimately Mr. Lawlor received? I am not sure which one I missed now, I will have it here in a second for you.
977
Take your time. I don't seem to have it, sorry. But I, we were 52, I think maybe seven and a half we missed, if I remember correctly. There were two payments of 7 and a www.pcr.ie Day 659
16:00:28
16:00:35
137 1
half.
2
Q
3
A
4
Q
5
978
And you missed one of those? I think so, yes.
979
I propose to start to take you through the payments to Mr. Dunlop, I don't know whether --
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Well it might be a good time to break now this evening.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
I don't mind.
16:00:40 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
We will break until half ten tomorrow.
12 13
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
14 16:00:59 15
16
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, WEDNESDAY, 28TH JUNE 2006 AT 10.30 A.M.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 659
09:49:36
10:36:11
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,
2
28TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:
3 4 5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Ms. Dillon.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Sir.
Mr. Glennane, please.
9 10:36:18 10
CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE AS FOLLOWS:
11 12 13 14 10:36:38 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
Good morning, Mr. Glennane.
Good morning, Chairman.
16 17
MS. DILLON:
Good morning, Mr. Glennane
18
A.
Good morning.
19
Q. 1
I propose to start by taking you through the invoices and the payments to Mr.
10:36:47 20
Dunlop?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 2
If I could have 4051, please and what I propose to do, just so that you're
23
clear about it, I propose first of all to deal separately with the payments by
24
Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
10:37:01 25
26
A.
Right.
Q. 3
And then I propose to deal with Monarch's attempts to seek recovery of those
27
payments from GRE?
28
A.
Okay, yeah.
29
Q. 4
Fine.
A.
Yes.
10:37:12 30
That's fine.
So if we look first of all at 4051.?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:37:13
10:37:28
2 1
Q. 5
2
And this is a remittance advice dated the 11th of March 1993.
Seeking or
enclosing a cheque in the sum of 15,000 pounds for Mr. Frank Dunlop?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 6
Now, do you accept that there's no invoice in relation to that?
5
A.
Yes, I do, yeah, at that stage, yes.
6
Q. 7
Yes.
7
A.
Well not specifically that amount but there are later invoices.
8
Q. 8
And you are aware that the Tribunal has been told that any payments would have
9 10:37:47 10
And do you say then that there is a later invoice that covers this?
been supported by invoice or other documentation? A.
I think I said actually most payments.
11
Q. 9
Okay.
12
A.
Not all payments, no.
13
Q. 10
Right.?
14
A.
Sorry, they were supported afterwards but at the time if you didn't have an
10:38:00 15
invoice and you wanted to pay somebody you'd pay them but the accounts
16 17
But not all payments?
department would then look for the invoice afterwards. Q. 11
And can you identify please for the Tribunal the invoice that was sought
18
afterwards in connection with this payment of 15,000 pounds on the 11th of
19
March 1993?
10:38:14 20
A.
I don't think there was one sought for that particular amount.
There is a
21
reference later on to Pat Caslin who was our financial controller not looking
22
for invoices.
23
Q. 12
24
Yes.
But there is there is no correspondence passing between Monarch
Properties and Mr. Dunlop seeking invoices in connection with this payment,
10:38:32 25
isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 13
I think that the reference to which you make, and we'll come on to it, refers
28 29 10:38:45 30
to Mr. Caslin seeking back up invoices to support a claim to GRE? A.
No, I think at some stage there is a reference to, they are saying that there was a balance on his account of 42,000 or something. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:38:48
10:38:59
3 1
Q. 14
Yes?
2
A.
And we needed invoices.
3
Q. 15
Yes.
4
And I think that that was in connection with an invoice that had been
furnished to GRE?
5
A.
I'm not sure actually.
6
Q. 16
Yes.
At 4390. We'll just be clear about it, Mr. Glennane.
I think the
7
matter to which you refer is contained there beside the reference No. 2068
8
Frank Dunlop on page 4390.
9
Do you see that?
A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 17
And you will note what's being discussed there is invoice 2068?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 18
And invoice 2068 was a claim by Monarch Properties against GRE in respect of a
10:39:16 10
13 14 10:39:28 15
payment against Mr. Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 19
In fact what's being discussed there is looking for backup for an invoice that
16
had been provided to GRE?
17
A.
That's right.
18
Q. 20
In connection with Mr. Dunlop's payments, isn't that right?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 21
And what this document notes is that as of the 27th of September 1993 that
10:39:38 20
21
there was only one invoice for 12,100 pounds although payments of 42,500 had
22
been made?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 22
Isn't that right?
A.
That's right.
Q. 23
So that when you suggested earlier on that that documentation which is
10:39:53 25
26 27
presently on screen at page 4390 might have had something to do with 4091 I
28
suggest that you are probably mistaken?
29 10:40:09 30
A.
I presume that payment is included in the 42,500.
Q. 24
Yes.
But what steps were taken to seek the invoices? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:40:12
10:40:24
4 1
A.
Well that's, that appears to be the first step other than the one for 12,100.
2
Q. 25
Are you aware of any other step that was taken to seek an invoice in connection
3
with the --
4
A.
Not up to then, no.
5
Q. 26
At 4051, please, which is the first payment to Mr. Dunlop, you accept that was
6
a payment that was made without invoice?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 27
And without any supporting documentation?
9
A.
I don't know but there may be some sort of memo with it, I don't know.
Q. 28
Are you aware of the existence of any such document?
11
A.
I'm not, no, but obviously somebody requested that a cheque be drawn.
12
Q. 29
Yes.
13
A.
Not at that stage, no.
14
Q. 30
Who entered into the agreement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop?
A.
I think Mr. Sweeney probably.
16
Q. 31
Right.
17
A.
I had some communication.
18
Q. 32
Right.
19
A.
In '95 I think yes, yeah.
Q. 33
Were you aware of the fact that prior to the introduction of Mr. Dunlop that
10:40:37 10
10:40:58 15
10:41:11 20
Were you privy to the agreement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop?
Did you subsequently have communication with Mr. Dunlop yourself?
And I think that took place later?
21
another PR firm, in fact two other PR firms, had been retained by Monarch
22
Properties.
23
A.
Yes, yes.
24
Q. 34
And that Mr. Bill O'Herlihy had been retained up to May of 1992?
A.
That's right, yes.
26
Q. 35
And he traded as, I think, Public Relations of Ireland, isn't that right?
27
A.
PRI.
28
Q. 36
And I think independently of that you also retained Pembroke PR Limited?
29
A.
Yes, they were our general PR company.
Q. 37
Yes.
10:41:28 25
10:41:42 30
I wanted to ask you about that.
Throughout Mr. Dunlop's tenure with
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:41:47
10:41:59
5 1
Monarch you continued to retain Pembroke PR Limited, isn't that right?
2
A.
Monarch did, yes.
3
Q. 38
Yes, Monarch did.
4 5
Can you explain to the Tribunal the necessity for two
public relations firms? A.
6
Well I think Pembroke PR were, had been our PR company for a few years before that but it wasn't unusual to bring in a second firm or an advertising agency.
7
Q. 39
Uh-huh?
8
A.
We have done that in openings like The Square and Nutgrove and other things
9 10:42:17 10
like that. Q. 40
And you would bring in somebody with specialist experience?
11
A.
Specialist knowledge.
12
Q. 41
What specialist experience or specialist knowledge did Mr. Dunlop have?
13
A.
Well I assumed that he had in -- in relation to Cherrywood.
14
bring him in so I can't say what was his thought at the time.
10:42:37 15
I assume it was
thought he had some, he had some contribution to make to this general, to the
16 17
I mean, I didn't
Cherrywood. Q. 42
The problem that existed since May of 1992 in connection with Cherrywood was
18
the zoning, isn't that right? And the density on the residential density isn't
19
that right?
10:42:54 20
21
A.
Yes, well I don't know, yeah, yes.
Q. 43
Mr. Dunlop was brought in to assist in rectifying what Monarch perceived to be
22
a problem?
23
A.
Well I'm not sure.
24
Q. 44
You're not saying it was?
A.
An unsatisfactory conclusion.
26
Q. 45
You approved payments of 85,000 to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?
27
A.
I approved?
28
Q. 46
Yeah?
29
A.
I don't know.
Q. 47
Well you signed the cheques?
10:43:07 25
10:43:15 30
You're saying it was a problem.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:43:16
10:43:24
6 1
A.
Well I did, I authorised them, yes.
2
Q. 48
Okay.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 49
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I am.
6
Q. 50
And you have a responsibility to the shareholders including yourself and to the
7 8
auditors, isn't that right? A.
9 10:43:36 10
Q. 51
10:43:55 15
16
And I presume in that position, you would know why somebody was being retained and somebody was being paid such significant amounts of money?
A.
13 14
Well I don't have responsibility to the auditors but yes I have responsibility for the company.
11 12
You are the chief financial controller of the company?
Well I would know that they were doing some work in a general sort of a way. There was a lot of consultants employed in various projects over the years.
Q. 52
Uh-huh?
A.
You wouldn't necessarily know exactly what they were all doing.
Q. 53
You would have known that you had a public relations firm and as you have
17
already told the Tribunal Mr. Dunlop would have been brought in because of some
18
added value or added expertise that he was bringing to the situation?
19 10:44:13 20
A.
The same with Mr. O'Herlihy, yes.
Q. 54
Would you like to outline to the Tribunal what was the belief in Monarch that
21 22
Mr. Dunlop could bring? What special expertise did Mr. Dunlop have? A.
Well I presume he had -- he knew his way around the political system, if that's
23
the right way to put it.
24
taken by any group of people to employ him.
10:44:34 25
10:44:52 30
And I
presume it was felt he could make some contribution. Q. 55
28 29
My recollection is that I was
actually -- I think Mr. Monahan arranged for him to meet Eddie Sweeney.
26 27
That's the only -- I don't remember a decision being
And do you know who recommended to Mr. Monahan that Mr. Dunlop should be retained?
A.
I don't, no.
Q. 56
Do you know whether the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor had any input into recommending Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:44:56
10:45:07
7 1
that Mr. Dunlop's services be retained?
2
A.
I don't know that, no.
3
Q. 57
What special expertise could Mr. Dunlop have brought to increasing the density
4 5
or assisting in the rezoning of the Monarch Lands at Cherrywood? A.
Well I assume he would have -- he would have known other councillors and had
6
some, would have known the best way to put forward the case.
7
PR firm is doing.
8
Q. 58
And what was the other PR firm doing that you had retained?
9
A.
Well they were just general.
10:45:32 10
Cherrywood.
That's what any
They weren't doing anything probably in
They were a general PR retainer, which you have all of the time.
11
Q. 59
Yes?
12
A.
If you wanted something put into the papers you rang them.
Or if there was
13
adverse stories about you you rang them or they were actually a buffer between
14
journalists and ourselves.
10:45:46 15
16
If journalists -- instead of ringing you they'd
ring the PR firm. Q. 60
So may the Tribunal take it then Monarch in deciding to retain Mr. Dunlop were
17
satisfied in the first instance that their then existing public relations
18
company didn't have the special expertise needed to assist them in the rezoning
19
and density changes in the Cherrywood Lands?
10:46:03 20
21
A.
Yeah, I think would with think so, yes.
Q. 61
And equally, Monarch were satisfied either through Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney
22
that Mr. Frank Dunlop did have that expertise?
23
A.
Yeah, obviously, yes.
Yes, he had some expertise relevant.
24
Q. 62
If we could have page 4133.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Could I have 4062, please.
10:46:32 25
26
This is the second payment Mr. Glennane, that was made to Mr. Dunlop.
27
sum of 10,000 pounds on the 12th of March 1993.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 63
And you agree that there's no invoice in connection with that payment?
A.
That's right, yes.
10:46:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
In the
10:46:46
10:46:59
8 1
Q. 64
2
Right so there are two payments totalling 25,000 pounds that are paid to Mr. Dunlop without any invoice?
3
A.
Well I'm not sure of that invoice that flashed up there a minute ago.
4
Q. 65
I'm coming to that next.
5
these payments?
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q. 66
It's not if I say so.
8 9 10:47:11 10
It's not an invoice in connection with either of
Well if you say so, yeah. Are you aware from the documentation that Monarch has
supplied to the Tribunal whether there in fact exists an invoice -A.
No, I'm not, no.
Q. 67
That would mean that that's the second payment that was made to Mr. Dunlop
11
without the benefit of an invoice?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 68
There is -- so that by the 12th of March '93 Mr. Dunlop has been paid 25,000
14 10:47:25 15
16
pounds? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 69
And know the 10th of April 1993 there is an invoice from Mr. Dunlop.
17
At 4133.
Now, this invoice is not in fact paid, isn't that the position?
18
A.
Well it seems to say on it that it's paid the 1st of June but ...
19
Q. 70
The 1st of June 1993.
A.
Yes, yeah.
21
Q. 71
Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 72
To Mr. Dunlop dated the 1st of June 1993 that's been provided to the Tribunal,
10:47:51 20
24 10:48:00 25
26
There's no payment, isn't that right?
isn't that right? A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 73
And this is a document you will see, and I'll come to deal with it again
27
later, but it is a document that is certified by Mr. Pat Caslin?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 74
To GRE as being a true copy of the original?
A.
That's right, yeah.
10:48:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:48:15
10:48:30
9 1
Q. 75
2
And it's stamped paid 1st of June 1993.
And it's sent to GRE in support of a
claim for payment of Mr. Dunlop's invoices isn't that right?
3
A.
So I believe, yeah.
4
Q. 76
But there is in fact no evidence that the invoice was in fact paid by Monarch
5
Properties, isn't that right?
6
A.
Well not in that specific sum.
7
Q. 77
There is no evidence that a payment of 12,100 pounds was paid by Monarch
8 9 10:48:46 10
Properties Limited to Mr. Dunlop. A.
Yeah, in that specific sum, yes.
Q. 78
Yes.
Isn't that the position?
And I'll come back to deal with that when I come to deal with the GRE
11
matter.
12
invoice dated 19th of May 1993 apparently. 4204.
13
the sum of 15,000 pounds.
14 10:49:11 15
The third payment that was made to Mr. Dunlop was on foot of an Now, this is an invoice in
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
And I draw to your attention that the invoice is marked paid with thanks for
16
VAT purposes only.
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yeah, I do, yes.
18
Q. 80
Is that the invoice that would issue after receipt of payment?
19
A.
Well it looks like it says paid with thanks, presumably it had been paid.
Q. 81
So this is a retrospective invoice, if I can put it like that, Mr. Glennane?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 82
Yes?
23
A.
And 17th of September.
24
Q. 83
And we'll come to those payments in a moment.
10:49:32 20
10:49:50 25
It says somebody's written on it paid 19th of May.
Dunlop on the document.
26
That's a note made by Mr.
What I'm drawing your attention to are the words
"paid with thanks for VAT purposes only?"
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 84
And I'm suggesting to you that this was an invoice that was raised after the
29 10:50:02 30
payments had been made? A.
That's right, yeah.
Well that was normal procedure.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Normally people would
10:50:14
10:50:24
10 1
say this is not a VAT invoice it's a request for payment.
2
issuing that VAT invoice until after they are paid.
3
Q. 85
4
They tried to avoid
And would you agree that Monarch that Monarch had not discovered any other invoice in connection this payment other than the invoice at page 4204?
5
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
6
Q. 86
If that is correct, it follows does it not, Mr. Glennane , that this is a third
7
payment that's made to Mr. Dunlop without the benefit of any invoice?
8
A.
Sorry, which payment are you talking about?
9
Q. 87
The one that's on screen.
A.
I don't know if that relates to the first payment of the 15,000 in March.
Q. 88
Are you suggesting that this invoice dated the 19th of May 1993 relates to a
10:50:42 10
11 12
At 4204.
The one for 15,000 pounds?
payment made by Monarch Properties in March of 1993?
13
A.
It could have presumably, yes.
14
Q. 89
Well I suggest to you that you are completely incorrect because you will see at
10:51:06 15
page 4277 a cheque in the sum of 7,500 pounds on the 1st of the 7th '93.
16
Do
you see that?
17
A.
I do, yes.
18
Q. 90
And do you see also a second remittance slip at 4366? Dated the 17th of the
19 10:51:32 20
21
9th '93 in the sum of 7,500 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 91
And do you see behind that at 4367.
22
A cheque for 7,500 pounds to Mr. Dunlop
signed by yourself?
23
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
24
Q. 92
And bearing in mind both of those dates.
10:51:49 25
4204.
26
If you go back to the invoice at
And I draw to your attention Mr. Dunlop's note at the top paid "19th of
the 5th, 17th of the 9th" do you see that?
27
A.
I do, yes.
28
Q. 93
And what apparently is the position and what I understand you through your
29 10:52:13 30
solicitors have agreed.
Is that this invoice -- or sorry, this sum of 15,000
pounds was paid in two payments, each of 7,500 pounds? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:52:19
10:52:27
11 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 94
Isn't that the position?
3
A.
Well I don't understand then why it would say on the 19th of May 'paid with
4 5
thanks' if it hadn't been paid. Q. 95
The logical explanation for it is that the invoice did not issue on the 19th of
6
May, '93, Mr. Glennane, as you well know.
It's an invoice issued only after
7
Mr. Dunlop had been paid the 15,000 pounds?
8
A.
Oh, I see.
9
Q. 96
Isn't that the logical answer?
A.
It's an answer, yes.
11
Q. 97
Well what is --
12
A.
A logical answer, yes.
13
Q. 98
Would you like to suggest any other answer Mr. Glennane?
14
A.
No, no.
Q. 99
That then would be the third payment to Mr. Dunlop without the benefit of any
10:52:44 10
10:52:55 15
16
But I'd -- go on anyway, yeah.
invoice, isn't that the position?
17
A.
Sorry, which payment are you talking about?
18
Q. 100
The one of 15,000 pounds that's paid by way of two cheques of 7,500 pounds
19 10:53:09 20
each? A.
There was one paid on the 26th of May for 10,000 pounds as well.
21
Q. 101
We're going to come to that?
22
A.
That's before July.
23
Q. 102
This invoice, Mr. Glennane, as you well know, is dated the 19th of May 1993.?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 103
And the payments that are made in connection with that invoice are the payment
10:53:23 25
26
of the 1st of the 7th '93.
At 4277.
27 28
And the payment of the 17th of the 9th '93 at 4366.
29 10:53:48 30
Do you see that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:53:49
10:54:04
12 1
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
2
Q. 104
And they are the two payments that are made that deal with the invoice that is
3 4
dated the 19th of May 1993. A.
5 6
Yes.
Isn't that right?
Well I -- it's only right because you're telling me so.
I don't know if it's
right or not or according to Mr. Dunlop's annotation that's what we paid. Q. 105
7
Can I -- on the 14th of September 1993. entry in your diary for Mr. Dunlop.
At 4364, Mr. Glennane.
You have an
Do you see that?
8
A.
Sorry, ...
9
Q. 106
Do you see the 14th of September 1993 E S re Cherrywood Dunlop?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
11
Q. 107
Now, did you have a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 14th of September 1993?
12
A.
I don't recall if I had or not.
10:54:44 10
13 14
It doesn't sound like I had.
It sounds more
like I had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney about Mr. Dunlop. Q. 108
10:55:04 15
And isn't it likely and I suggest to you that that meeting might have been about Mr. Dunlop's fees?
16
A.
It might have been, yes.
17
Q. 109
Because on the 17th of September 1993, at 4366., a cheque is requisitioned in
18 19
the sum of 17, 500 pounds, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 110
That cheque at 4367 is signed by you?
21
A.
That's right, yeah.
22
Q. 111
And that cheque is attributed by Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Dunlop's auditors as being
10:55:22 20
23
half the payment in connection with the 15,000 pounds on the invoice of the
24
19th of May 1993?
10:55:41 25
26
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 112
Yes.
Well that's, yeah, that's up to him to do that, yes.
Now, according to your solicitors, if I could have page 8581.
27 28
Just so that there is no ambiguity about this, Mr. Glennane.
29
you will remember that yesterday we looked initially at the payments that
10:56:03 30
Monarch admitted to making to Mr. Dunlop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
At 8581.
And
And the amount that Monarch
10:56:07
10:56:19
13 1
admitted to making was 52,500 pounds, isn't that right?
2
A.
That's correct, yes.
3
Q. 113
You will recollect that when this Module opened it was indicated from the
4
Tribunal's enquiries that the Tribunal believed the documentation showed that
5
Mr. Dunlop had been paid at least 85,000 pounds, isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 114
And this letter of the, at 8581, of the 30th of May 2006 states as follows.
8
We refer to previous correspondence and in particular our client's previous
9
indications with respect to payments made to Mr. Frank Dunlop.
10:56:39 10
It appears
from a further perusal of the information it has now received from the Tribunal
11
that it should correct the total amount it believes was paid to Mr. Dunlop as
12
it would appear that same amounts to 85,000 pounds broken down as per the
13
attached sheet and our client would be grateful if you would bring this matter
14
to the attention of the Tribunal and hope that this clarifies this particular
10:56:57 15
matter?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 115
And at 8582.
18 19 10:57:05 20
21
A schedule is provided to the Tribunal. A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 116
Including two payments of the 1st of the 7th '93, 7,500 and the 17th of the 9th
22
'93, 7,500 pounds?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 117
Right.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 118
Is it the position then that when the first inquiry was made or when you were
10:57:20 25
26
Now, and that amount comes to 85,000 pounds?
27
preparing the information for the Tribunal that the documentation you looked at
28
showed only 52,500 pounds?
29 10:57:37 30
A.
Yeah, yes, yeah, obviously, yes, yeah.
Q. 119
Yes.
But you would now accept that the full amount of the payments is 85,000 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:57:41
10:57:52
14 1
pounds?
2
A.
Yes, that's right.
I prepared this document that's on the screen.
3
Q. 120
Yes.
4
A.
Well, I certainly assisted in it, yes, but, yeah.
5
Q. 121
So how did you get it so terribly wrong, Mr. Glennane?
6
A.
Well obviously the cheques payments sheet that had the 15 and the 10 on it
And you prepared the earlier document of 52,500 pounds?
7
wasn't looked at or wasn't seen or wasn't available.
8
on the one sheet.
9
Q. 122
10:58:17 10
Two of the payments were
And it appears that one of the 7,500's got missed.
So the first payment that you missed were the two payments for which there's no invoices?
11
A.
That's right, yeah, yeah.
12
Q. 123
Totalling 25,000 pounds?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 124
And then you missed one of the payments of 7,500 pounds, isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 125
And what is your explanation to the Tribunal for that?
17
A.
Well, the list at the time was prepared from the cheques payments sheets but
10:58:27 15
18
myself and another colleague, we went through all of the cheque payments sheets
19
that we could find listing all of the payments.
10:58:44 20
all of the -- any other sort of relevant payments that we were being asked
21
about.
22
Q. 126
Uh-huh?
23
A.
And obviously that sheet was missed.
24 10:59:03 25
Not just to Mr. Dunlop but
Certainly, there was no intention to
under state what Mr. Dunlop was paid or anything like that. Q. 127
And there was no intention, is that what you are saying?
26
A.
Absolutely not.
27
Q. 128
Not to disclose the fact that there were no invoices or records --
28
A.
There were invoices eventually. If you look through his account you will see
29 10:59:15 30
invoices. Q. 129
You didn't listen to the question Mr. Glennane? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
10:59:17
10:59:27
15 1
A.
I did, yes.
2
Q. 130
Was it an attempt to hide the fact that the first two payments to Mr. Dunlop
3
were not supported by invoices?
4
A.
No, it certainly was not no.
5
Q. 131
So far the payments to Mr. Dunlop by September 1993 amount to 40,000 pounds,
6
isn't that right?
7
A.
I think actually 50.
8
Q. 132
I think of the three payments we've looked at so far.
9 10:59:45 10
15,000.
The first payment was
The second payment was ten?
A.
Yeah, well you're excluding the one on the 26th of May for some reason.
11
Q. 133
No, I'm coming to deal with that payment next?
12
A.
All right.
13
Q. 134
I'm just saying insofar as we've dealt with these payments now?
14
A.
Okay, 40,000.
Q. 135
It's 40,000.
10:59:58 15
16
1993.
The next apparent payment to Mr. Dunlop is on the 26th of May
At 4219.
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 136
And at 4221.
19 11:00:22 20
Isn't that right?
This cheque is again signed by you, Mr. Glennane, isn't that
right? A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 137
In the sum of 10,000 pounds?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 138
And this is the payment to Mr. Dunlop, apparently, that ends up in the hands of
24 11:00:31 25
26
Mr. Liam Lawlor? A.
Yes, so it appears, yes.
Q. 139
And we looked at the documentation surrounding that yesterday.
And I think
27
subject to any correction that you appeared to accept that by virtue of what is
28
set out in the statement of Mr. and Mrs. Murphy.
29
cheque went to the benefit of Mr. Lawlor?
11:00:50 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
That the proceeds of this
11:00:51
11:01:04
16 1
Q. 140
2 3
that might have occurred? A.
4 5
But you're not in a position to understand or give any explanation as to how
It certainly wasn't given to Mr. Lawlor by Monarch.
I'm absolutely 100
percent sure of that. Q. 141
6
Well do you know whether the late Mr. Monahan might have given it to Mr. Lawlor?
7
A.
I don't believe he did.
8
Q. 142
Did you ever discuss this with Mr. Monahan?
9
A.
Sorry, discuss what?
Q. 143
This cheque?
11
A.
No, I didn't, no.
12
Q. 144
This payment?
13
A.
No, I didn't.
14
Q. 145
So how do you know whether Mr. Monahan might or might not have given it to
11:01:13 10
11:01:22 15
16
Mr. Lawlor? A.
There is absolutely no reason in the world why he would have.
If you wanted
17
to give a cheque for 10,000 to Mr. Lawlor he'd have just given it out and given
18
it to him.
19 11:01:36 20
21
Q. 146
He didn't do that in the context of the Comex cheque.
A.
That's presumably because Mr. Lawlor would have asked for it.
Q. 147
What do you presume that Mr. Lawlor would have asked for the Comex cheque.
22 23
What evidence have you that Mr. Lawlor would have asked for the Comex cheque? A.
24 11:01:52 25
Well I don't think anybody else other than him knew about Comex, from what you're talking about so.
Q. 148
26
Certainly somebody in Monarch knew about Comex, I thought we agreed that yesterday?
27
A.
Sorry, they knew about it from Mr. Lawlor presumably.
28
Q. 149
Yes.
29
A.
No, no.
Q. 150
So that person was somebody else.
11:02:03 30
But that person wasn't you?
And I think you told the Tribunal it was
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:02:06
11:02:17
17 1
either Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney?
2
A.
Yeah, I would think so, yes.
3
Q. 151
And if Mr. Sweeney were to deny it was him that leaves Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
It would seem so, yes.
5
Q. 152
And here again can I ask, other than your personal opinion of what the late
6
Mr. Monahan might or might not have done, can you offer the Tribunal any reason
7
as to why this cheque might have been made out to Mr. Dunlop but might have
8
been given to Mr. Lawlor?
9
A.
Can I offer any?
Q. 153
Yeah?
11
A.
Why or why not sorry?
12
Q. 154
Other than why it is your view that Mr. Monahan wouldn't have given this
11:02:33 10
13 14
cheque? A.
11:02:44 15
crossed cheque to somebody that it has to end up in that person's account.
16 17
Certainly that was my view then and now. Q. 155
18 19 11:03:03 20
21
I believe if he would have asked anybody or he would know that if you gave a
Do you see the signature at the bottom of the --.
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 156
Do you know whose initial that is?
A.
I think it might be somebody, somebody in the account's department, I'm not sure now.
23
advice.
11:03:19 25
26
4219, please.
The signature at the bottom of the remittance advice?
22
24
Sorry.
The initial, yes.
It's not mine anyway but it's whoever made out the remittance
Q. 157
So by this stage, according to the --
A.
Normal.
Q. 158
So at this stage by the 26th of May 1993.
27
It would have been the same signature as on the ones before that. The total amount paid to Mr. Dunlop
is 50,000 pounds, is that right?
28
A.
Sorry, by what stage?
29
Q. 159
By with when this payment was made?
A.
This is the third payment that was paid before the two seven and a halves.
11:03:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:03:40
11:03:54
18 1
Q. 160
2
The two seven and a halves are paid apparently on foot of an invoice that purports to be dated 19th of May 1993?
3
A.
But they were paid in July and September.
4
Q. 161
Very good. By September 1993 Mr. Dunlop had been paid 50,000 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 162
And there is one invoice?
7
A.
Um, yes.
8
Q. 163
That is paid, isn't that right?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 164
The invoice dated the 19th of May 1993, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 165
Would -- from your knowledge of the way that Monarch conducted its business,
11:04:00 10
13
would you regard it as unusual that so much money would have been paid out in
14
the name of Mr. Dunlop without supporting invoices?
11:04:23 15
A.
Well if the payment was requested by somebody, it would always be the aim to
16
have invoices.
17
reconciliation, what would have ended up then would have been apparently an
18
overpayment.
19
being done it would show that there was -- that there were invoices missing or
11:04:54 20
Because when -- whatever you were doing a creditor's
So it wasn't unusual.
When a creditor's reconciliation was
short or short and that they would always be looked for.
21
Q. 166
Yes?
22
A.
It's all shown on his account in the creditor's ledger if you want to look at
23 24
that. Q. 167
11:05:07 25
Yes, we'll come to the creditor's ledger in a moment.
Whether it was unusual
to pay out to make payments of this order and this size without the benefit of
26
a supporting invoice?
27
A.
It was -- it was slightly unusual but not completely unusual.
28
Q. 168
And I think there's an invoice dated the 2nd --
29
A.
We had a habit of making round sum payments to, say, professional people which
11:05:30 30
meant that it made it more difficult really to reconcile then afterwards. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We
11:05:35
11:05:48
19 1
did the same with our solicitors, we did the same with architects and people
2
like that.
3
Q. 169
4
And in making these round sum payments, was it intended that there would ultimately be a balancing or a reconciliation?
5
A.
That's exactly it, yes.
6
Q. 170
And the endeavour for which Mr. Dunlop was hired was the Cherrywood Lands,
7
isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
9
Q. 171
And you would have known, as would have everybody in the accounting department
11:06:00 10
of Monarch, that in order to claim back 50% of the fees paid to Mr. Dunlop
11
you'd have to have invoices for GRE?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 172
Because I think you agreed yesterday that GRE would not pay third party
14 11:06:16 15
invoices unless they were supported? A.
Third party costs unless they were supported by invoices.
16
Q. 173
Isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 174
And the next invoice is dated the 2nd of November 1993.
19
invoice, Mr. Glennane, is 15,000 pounds.
11:06:38 20
At 4633.
Now, this
And there's no element of VAT, isn't
that right?
21
A.
Yes, that's right, yes.
22
Q. 175
Why would that be?
23
A.
I don't know you'd have to -- it seems to say it refers to the provision of
24
media communications training.
11:06:51 25
I presume that that training is VAT exempt, I
don't know.
26
Q. 176
What media and communications training did Mr. Dunlop provide to Mr. Monarch?
27
A.
I don't know, I'm not aware of any that he did.
28
Q. 177
And isn't that the point?
29
A.
Yeah well, well, the point is that the onus is on the person raising an invoice
11:07:08 30
to charge VAT or not. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:07:09
11:07:30
20 1
Q. 178
2 3
received VAT inclusive invoices to conduct any query where its VAT exempt? A.
4 5
And there's no onus on the person receiving the invoice who has previously
Well not if the person making it has listed there something which is apparently regarded as VAT exempt.
Q. 179
6
Because in the recent correspondence from your solicitors they have described this sum as VAT inclusive?
7
A.
That's wrong obviously, yes.
8
Q. 180
That's wrong?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 181
That's the invoice now that you prepared at 8582.
11:07:39 10
11
You told the Tribunal a few
moments ago that you prepared this schedule?
12
A.
The schedule, yes.
13
Q. 182
And you note at the top "all amounts are VAT inclusive?"
14
A.
Well they are VAT inclusive, yes.
Q. 183
And include in that is a sum of 15,000 pounds on the 2nd of November 1993.
11:07:54 15
16
And if I could have on screen 4633 beside 8582.?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 184
Now, Mr. Glennane, which is it? VAT inclusive or VAT exempt?
19
A.
Sorry.
Q. 185
Oh, I see.
21
A.
I don't see any contradiction.
22
Q. 186
So where do you indicate on your schedule to the Tribunal that the payment of
11:08:24 20
23 24
It includes -- it included VAT but the VAT was nil. I see?
the 2nd of November 1993 is zero rated for VAT? A.
11:08:45 25
Well, we haven't indicated anything about the VAT other than that they were VAT inclusive.
26
Q. 187
I see?
27
A.
That that was the total payments made.
28
Q. 188
Included VAT?
29
A.
Yeah, yeah, included VAT, yeah, where appropriate, yeah.
Q. 189
Sorry where appropriate?
11:08:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:08:57
11:09:17
21 1
A.
Well obviously if his invoice is nil then it includes nil VAT.
2
Q. 190
It's not nil.
3
A.
Yes, well it's the same thing as far as I'm concerned.
4
Q. 191
Was this invoice ever accrued in the books as a creditor?
5
A.
Yes, it was posted to the books, yes.
6
Q. 192
No, no, I didn't ask you that.
7
It's exempt.
I asked you was it accrued in the books as a
creditor. I don't know.
8
A.
I don't think so.
9
Q. 193
Right.
A.
Well because you would only accrue a creditor at the end of the year.
11:09:30 10
Why not? And if
11
this is November '93 whatever, the year would have been May '93 to 30th of
12
April '94.
13
Q. 194
14 11:09:55 15
So it's, it falls within the year.
Are you saying that this was accrued in the books of -- was accrued as a creditor?
A.
No, I'm saying it wasn't accrued as a creditor as far as I know.
16
Q. 195
Were the others accrued as creditors, the other payments?
17
A.
Of the 30th of April? I don't know.
18
Q. 196
Was this treated as a Cherrywood cost?
19
A.
This 15,000?
Q. 197
Yes?
21
A.
Yes, as far as I know, yes.
22
Q. 198
Yeah.
23
A.
No, well no other than whatever else he was doing for all of the money.
24
Q. 199
Right?
A.
But nothing specifically different.
Q. 200
You signed the cheque at 4634.
11:10:13 20
11:10:28 25
26 27
And you don't know what Mr. Dunlop did for this particular money?
So by this stage the cheque, I just want to
point out to you is dated the same date as the invoice?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 201
And the -- by this stage Mr. Dunlop has been paid 65,000 pounds?
A.
That's right, yes.
11:10:55 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:10:55
11:11:27
22 1
Q. 202
2
And I'd suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that what's happening here is this is a payment effectively of 15,000 pounds cashed to Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
The cheque, at that stage.
4
Q. 203
It's a cheque that's going to be written up in the books of Monarch.
What in
5
fact is happening by virtue of the invoice that is produced is you know when
6
you receive this invoice it's a straight payment of 15,000 pounds that there's
7
no VAT element, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes, so it seems, yes.
9
Q. 204
Let's just look at the two invoices to see if we can distinguish any difference
11:11:44 10
between the earlier payment, at 4204, please.
11
Together, please.
12
Monarch; isn't that right?
13
A.
14 11:12:19 15
4633 and 4204.
And can we have 4633.
This is the same service provider to
Um, the one on the left actually has no name on it.
Assuming it's Frank
Dunlop's. Q. 205
16
Well do you want to actually go through with page 4204 whether that relates to Mr. Dunlop or not Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
Well it actually was never posted to our accounts.
18
Q. 206
The?
19
A.
The one on the left.
Q. 207
Which page No, 4204?
21
A.
Yes, 4204, yes.
22
Q. 208
Was never posted to your accounts?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 209
But looking at that invoice and looking at the second invoice, which is dated
11:12:33 20
11:12:45 25
the 2nd of November 1993.
26 27
that right? A.
28 29 11:13:01 30
They are both invoices from Mr. Frank Dunlop; is
Well so it seems.
Looking at it now, I'd have to question if we ever got that
invoice on the left, the document. Q. 210
The one page 4204?
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:13:02
11:13:14
23 1
Q. 211
You don't know whether you ever got that?
2
A.
I don't know, no.
It certainly doesn't appear in any records.
3
been signed by anybody.
4
Mr. Sweeney.
5
Q. 212
6
Yes.
It hasn't
You see the one on the right is signed yes,
That's a copy from build Dunlop.
The page at 4204 is provided to the
Tribunal by Mr. Dunlop?
7
A.
Yes, that's what I said.
8
Q. 213
Right.
9
A.
I have no record of it.
Q. 214
But you did get a document, I think, just look at the earlier invoice.
11:13:29 10
11
4133.
I have my doubts if we ever got that document.
Well so --
So if we have 4133 and we have 4633 together.?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 215
Now, this is an invoice that you accept was -- the invoice at 4133.
14 11:14:04 15
Of
You
accept was not in fact paid? A.
Sorry? 4133.
16
Q. 216
Isn't that right?
17
A.
Well it was posted to our account.
18
Q. 217
No, no, do you understand the word "paid" Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
I do. I understand when you pay things and then you get invoices you are
11:14:17 20
automatically paying, you are getting invoiced for payments you've already made
21
if that's the case.
22
& Associates.
23
Q. 218
24 11:14:35 25
26
There was no cheque ever drawn for 12,100 to Frank Dunlop
Now, what I want to draw to your attention here are Monarch retained Frank Dunlop isn't that right to carry out a job in connection with Cherrywood?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 219
Okay.
You have two invoices that are received by Monarch from Mr. Dunlop.
27
The first is an agreed fee re public affairs strategy and its implementations,
28
10,000 plus VAT 12,100?
29 11:14:52 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 220
You have a second invoice for the provision of media and communications Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:14:56
11:15:08
24 1
training of 15,000 pounds that's VAT exempt?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 221
Now, is it normal practice that the one supplier would be invoicing you on some
4
occasions inclusive of VAT and on other occasions VAT exempt?
5
A.
I presume it could be, yes, if they were carrying out different activities.
6
Q. 222
Well would you give me an example of another supplier of services to Monarch
7
who on some occasions claimed VAT and on other occasions did not claim VAT for
8
the same services.
9
A.
I can't think of any offhand but.
11:15:25 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
earlier that it could be training that Mr. Dunlop was affording Monarch.
13
invoice is dated the 2nd of November 1993.
14
A.
Mr. Glennane can I just ask you.
On that point you said That
Yes.
11:15:36 15
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Which is nine days short of the confirmation vote?
Yes.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
11:15:45 20
If that were the case would it not be more likely that the
April invoice had, had Mr. Dunlop been retained for training, surely the
21
training was coming, if that were the case, very late in the day.
22
confirmation vote --
23
A.
Yes.
Well if it had been for training.
The
Presuming it is.
24 11:16:03 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Assuming.
With Retrospect there would have been work training carried out or whatever but I don't think there was that.
28 29 11:16:13 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Dunlop I don't think has ever suggested that he ever
carried out any training Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:16:13
11:16:19
25 1
A.
I'm not aware of any training that he did.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
knowledge?
5
A.
So that really doesn't seem to have been the case.
To your
No.
6 7 8
A.
9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You don't recall
No, I don't recall.
But the point I'm trying to make is that the onus is on
the person issuing an invoice to charge VAT or not to charge VAT.
11:16:31 10
11
MS. DILLON:
12
hands of Mr. Dunlop was to give him 15,000 pounds for which there was no VAT
13
liability.
14
isn't that right
11:16:48 15
A.
16
The effect of the payment on the 2nd of November 1993 in the
And therefore, in his hands could effectively be treated as cash,
I don't know why you say it could be treated as cash.
It is the same as any
other receipt.
17
Q. 223
Uh-huh?
18
A.
I mean, I don't know how you'd treat a cheque for 15,000 as cash.
19 11:17:00 20
But I
didn't. Q. 224
You cash it, Mr. Glennane, and you don't put it through your books?
21
A.
Well ...
22
Q. 225
That's how you do it?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 226
Right?
A.
But I'm in the aware of that.
Q. 227
We'll come to look at the Monarch cash payments in a few moments and that might
11:17:08 25
26
Thanks for telling me.
That's ...
27
assist you.
28
are dealt with by Monarch in relation to Mr. Dunlop.
29
1993 for whatever reason Monarch are complicit in issuing a cheque to Mr.
11:17:28 30
For the moment just looking at the two mechanisms of payment that On the 2nd of November
Dunlop for 15,000 pounds which has zero VAT element in it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that the
11:17:34
11:17:41
26 1
position?
2
A.
They issued a cheque. I wouldn't use the word complicit.
3
Q. 228
You I issued the cheque, Mr. Glennane?
4
A.
Yeah, well I signed it anyway, yes.
5
Q. 229
Well you're happy that you signed it?
6
A.
Yeah, I think I did -- I don't know if I saw the cheque or not.
7
Q. 230
There's the cheque.
8
A.
Yeah well ... yes, that's certainly my signature, yes.
9
Q. 231
And you give a cheque to Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 15,000 pounds where you have
11:18:02 10
4634.?
previously paid him VAT.
11
And on this cheque you're not paying him any VAT,
isn't that the position?
12
A.
So it seems, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 232
Notwithstanding that Mr. Dunlop is doing the same job for Monarch.
14 11:18:16 15
16
Isn't that
right? He's only hired do one thing? A.
Well he's hired to do general PR work, which covers a multitude.
Q. 233
Yes.
17
And what Mr. Dunlop is facing into is a vote in Dublin County Council on
the 11th of November 1993.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Well if you say so.
19
Q. 234
No, no, now, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Well I believe that now, yes.
Q. 235
Isn't the 11th of November 1993 the critical date for the zoning in density
11:18:32 20
21 22
changes on Monarch?
23
A.
It was one of the dates apparently, yes.
24
Q. 236
And the previous May 1992, the density on the Monarch lands had been reduced to
11:18:50 25
one house per acre?
26
A.
That's right.
27
Q. 237
Isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 238
And in November 1993 the job facing Monarch and its PR man, Mr. Dunlop, was to
11:19:01 30
change that position in Dublin County Council, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:19:05
11:19:13
27 1
A.
Um, that's right, yes.
2
Q. 239
And that was Mr. Dunlop's job?
3
A.
Well it was part of his job, yes, yeah.
4
Q. 240
What was the rest of his job?
5
A.
Well it was to create the circumstances I suppose where people would look
6
favourably on it and in general highlight the good points and that.
7
Q. 241
To who?
8
A.
I presume to councillors and that.
9
Q. 242
Right?
A.
And I don't know who else, yes.
11
Q. 243
Who else was going to make a decision?
12
A.
Advisors to councillors or whoever else.
13
Q. 244
Who else? Who were the people, Mr. Glennane, who were going to make a decision
11:19:25 10
14 11:19:40 15
16
about the Cherrywood lands on the 11th of November 1993? A.
I assume the councillors.
Q. 245
Right.
17 18
element to Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 15,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
19 11:20:01 20
And on the 2nd of November 1993 Monarch wrote a cheque with no VAT
Yeah, well on the basis that it was VAT exempt apparently, yes.
I don't know
which came first on the day, the cheque or the invoice. Q. 246
But what is clear is that the invoice --
21
A.
What's clear is that Monarch paid 15,000 to Mr. Dunlop on the 2nd of November.
22
Q. 247
On the 2nd of November 1993?
23
A.
Put it through its books in the normal way.
24
drawing is that Monarch gave 15,000 in some under hand method to Mr. Dunlop to
11:20:21 25
26
So if the inference that you're
distribute to councillors, it's totally untrue. Q. 248
27
You say that was not a payment of 15,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop for the purpose of making payments to councillors or to anybody else?
28
A.
Absolutely, yes.
29
Q. 249
And can you afford any explanation to the Tribunal as to why Monarch would have
11:20:38 30
had no difficulty with Mr. Dunlop providing invoices, some of which are VAT Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:20:43
11:21:02
28 1 2
inclusive. A.
3 4
And this one, at page 4633, which is VAT rated at zero?
Yeah, yes, yeah.
As I said to you, the onus is on the party raising the
invoice to charge VAT or not. Q. 250
Do you accept that the effect of making the cheque out on foot of such an
5
invoice could have been to give Mr. Dunlop 15,000 pounds in cash, if he had
6
cashed the cheque?
7
A.
Well it could have been.
8
Q. 251
Uh-huh?
9
A.
But the same thing could have happened to any other cheque.
11:21:15 10
11
cash or somebody cashed the one for 10,000 so. Q. 252
12 13
If the cheques were inclusive of VAT that would create an obligation on the recipient to account for the VAT, isn't that right?
A.
14 11:21:30 15
Apparently he did
Well I assume.
There's an obligation to account for all of your invoices,
that include VAT are or not. Q. 253
16
And there is an obligation to account for all payments out that are being attributed as an expense, isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yeah.
18
Q. 254
So that for each payment or deduction or debit that's attributed to cash, one
19 11:21:48 20
21
would expect to find back up, is that right? A.
In the normal course, yeah.
Q. 255
In the normal course.
Insofar as this payment is concerned, the reality of
22
the matter is on the 2nd of November 1993 a cheque with no VAT element was made
23
out by Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
24 11:22:02 25
A.
Yes, so it seems, yes.
Q. 256
And you say that had no connection as far as you believe in the upcoming
26
meeting of Dublin County Council on the 11th of November 1993?
27
A.
Certainly it had no connection in terms of giving him money to give anybody.
28
Q. 257
Was there any other --
29
A.
He may well have used it as a good time to look for a cheque.
Q. 258
A cheque with no VAT?
11:22:20 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:22:22
11:22:32
29 1
A.
No, with or without VAT.
2
Q. 259
Was there any other invoice that Mr. Dunlop provided to Monarch that was VAT
3
exempt?
4
A.
Not as far as I know, no.
5
Q. 260
Do you think any, attach any significance to the fact that the only zero rated
6 7
invoice of Mr. Dunlop's is the one dated the 2nd of November 1993? A.
8 9
Q. 261
When you say there was no significance in Monarch's.
Lynn and the late Mr. Monahan? A.
Well, I don't think Mr. Lynn or Mr. Monahan might have known anything about it.
13
Mr. Sweeney okayed the invoice.
14
whether it included VAT or not.
11:23:10 15
I don't think he'd have been concerned In the normal course you'd expect if there
was VAT it would be 18,000 or something, it would be 15 plus VAT. Q. 262
17
Now, in December of 1993 a number of invoices were raised by Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 263
And we'll go through them briefly.
11:23:28 20
21
Because they relate, I suggest to you,
primarily to seeking to recoup money from GRE? A.
22
Well obviously we at that stage were A, keen to recoup the money from GRE and B, keen to sort out his account.
23
Q. 264
Sort out Mr. Dunlop's account?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 265
If we just look at the invoices in any event.
11:23:42 25
Do you mean there was no
significance in your mind or are you speaking on behalf of Mr. Sweeney, Mr.
11
16
But certainly
there was no significance from Monarch's.
11:22:52 10
12
Well unless there was some significance in Mr. Dunlop's mind.
If we could have 4768 and 4722
26
together, please.
Now, these invoices are both dated the 6th of September --
27
December 1993.
That's after the successful vote on the 11th of November.
28
just want to draw to your attention.
29
right, they include VAT?
11:24:21 30
A.
They are all VAT inclusive isn't that
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
I
11:24:21
11:24:26
30 1
Q. 266
And yet they are both for different amounts?
2
A.
That's right, they both have the same number for some reason or other.
3
Q. 267
They have both the same invoice number?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 268
But they are for different amounts?
6
A.
That's right, yeah.
7
Q. 269
We'll come back to look at those in more detail when they come to look at the
8 9
... A.
11:24:39 10
11
It suggests to me the one on the right was superseded by the one on the left or ...
Q. 270
And there was also a success fee invoice of the 14th of December 1993.
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 271
And I'll come back to deal with that in a minute.
4839.
12
11:24:55 15
16
On the 21st of December 1993.
17
Mr. Dunlop.
You have an entry in your diary.
At 4875, for
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q. 272
What was that about?
A.
Well I know from the records we gave him a cheque for 15,000 that day.
11:25:05 20
21 22
So it
may have been to give him the cheque. Q. 273
Do you remember I asked you yesterday whether that tick beside somebody's name
23
at the bottom of your diary meant that you had issued or paid a cheque to
24
somebody and you said no?
11:25:23 25
A.
No, it meant that it was on my mind.
I might not have met him, sorry.
I was
26
looking at the wrong part of the diary.
27
mind so it may have been that I was, I had been requested to get a cheque for
28
him.
29 11:25:39 30
What it meant was that he was in my
Q. 274
And it would appear that on the 21st of December --
A.
That's not a meeting, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:25:41
11:25:50
31 1
Q. 275
2
Of December.
At 4865 a payment of 15,000 pounds on account was made to Mr.
Dunlop?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 276
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yeah.
6
Q. 277
Bringing the total at this stage to 80, 000 pounds that has been paid to Mr.
7
Dunlop?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 278
Now, there isn't an invoice for that 15,000 pounds, isn't that right?
A.
Not a specific invoice, no.
11
Q. 279
There had been the earlier December invoices?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 280
Which hadn't been paid and this is described on the remittance advice as a
11:26:01 10
14 11:26:11 15
payment on account? A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 281
And at 4868.
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 282
Isn't that right?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 283
So that would suggest that when you made the entry in your diary of the 21st of
11:26:18 20
It appears that you signed the cheque?
21
December 1993 it was probably in connection with making a cheque out or getting
22
a payment to Mr. Dunlop of 15,000 pounds?
23
A.
I would think so, yes.
24
Q. 284
Right.
11:26:37 25
Do you know whether that 15,000 pounds was zero rated for VAT or VAT
inclusive or what the situation with it was?
26
A.
Well it was just a payment on account.
27
Q. 285
It was just a payment on account?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 286
And the balancing exercise that was carried out in connection with that payment
11:26:48 30
happened in May of '94, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:26:51
11:27:07
32 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 287
And at 8729.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 288
Mr. Glennane, from a Mr. Philip Connolly from Frank Dunlop's office looking
There is a fax to you?
5
forward to an early payment and enclosing, at 8730.
6
of December 1993 invoices?
A copy of one of the 6th
7
A.
That's right, yeah.
8
Q. 289
And that invoice totals 22,296?
9
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 290
And it acknowledges at the side that 15,000 pounds has been paid.
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 291
And that 15,000 pounds I suggest was your payment in December of 1993?
13
A.
Yes, that's right, I would think so, yeah.
14
Q. 292
And that left a balance, according to Mr. Dunlop's records of 7,296.94
11:27:22 10
11:27:38 15
outstanding?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 293
And I think on -- that wasn't paid at that time, is that right?
18
A.
That's right, no.
19
Q. 294
I think that was subsequently paid --
A.
I think it was only actually 5,000 of it was paid sometime in '95.
21
Q. 295
In August of '95?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 296
It would appear in January of 1995 that you again have entries in your diary
11:27:52 20
24 11:28:06 25
for Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right? A.
I don't know.
26
Q. 297
5539?
27
A.
Yes, his name is in it, yeah.
28
Q. 298
And you see immediately beneath that the name O'Shea, Walsh, Rory O' Connor and
29 11:28:23 30
If you show it to me I ...
then FD, I think? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:28:24
11:28:33
33 1
Q. 299
Is that Mr. Dunlop?
2
A.
No, it's not, no.
3
Q. 300
And why would Mr.--
4
A.
Builders.
5
Q. 301
Right.
6
A.
I presume he might have rung looking for his cheque or something.
O'Shea Walsh, I'm not sure what they were actually.
They were builders.
And why would Mr. Dunlop be in your diary in January 1999?
7
obviously something in my mind.
8
know.
9
There was
I suspect to do with the cheque but I don't
Q. 302
In Mr. Noel Murray's diary for 27th of January 1995 at 5540.?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 303
There is an entry Frank Dunlop (DG) I presume the DG is yourself?
12
A.
Yeah, I assume that, yes.
13
Q. 304
And did you meet Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I don't recall.
Q. 305
Because Mr. Dunlop has in his diary for the same date, 27th of January 1995 at
11:28:57 10
11:29:09 15
16
7929, has an entry, Dominic, Monarch?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 306
Now, that would suggest, Mr. Glennane, that you are the Dominic?
19
A.
I would think so, yes.
Q. 307
According to Mr. Murray's diary.
11:29:26 20
21
He's meeting Mr. Frank Dunlop and he
includes you in the meeting?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 308
And according to Mr. Dunlop's diary he's having a meeting at Monarch with
24 11:29:38 25
26
Dominic? A.
So it would suggest, yes.
Q. 309
So it would suggest very strongly on 27th of January 1995 you met with Mr.
27
Dunlop?
28
A.
Yes, it appears so, yes.
29
Q. 310
What was that about?
A.
I would assume he was still looking for his cheque for the balance of his
11:29:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:29:53
11:29:57
34 1
account.
2
Q. 311
Do you know?
3
A.
No, I don't know, no.
4
Q. 312
Right?
5
A.
I don't remember having any other meeting with him.
6
meeting.
7
him.
8
Q. 313
9 11:30:15 10
But I don't remember, any other reason why I would have been meeting
And on the 30th of January.
At 5542.
Mr. Noel Murray has an entry in his
diary DG phone Frank Dunlop? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 314
Do you know what that was about?
12
A.
No.
I think analysing it now looking at it all, I would, I would believe that
13
I probably passed the meeting on to Noel Murray.
14
it were.
11:30:38 15
11:30:58 20
But that's pure, that's not supposition but
it's, it's the most likely explanation of it, of those entries. Q. 315
18 19
Sort of passing the book, as
And he may have met him and he probably arranged with him that I
would ring him about his cheque.
16 17
I don't remember that
And on the 23rd of March 1995 at 5563. meeting with Mr. Dunlop at Monarch.
A.
Yes.
Q. 316
Ten o'clock, Frank Dunlop at Monarch.
Your diary apparently records a
Do you see that?
And Mr. Murray's diary at 5564, has an
21
entry for ten o'clock, Frank Dunlop see Norma DG which I assume is yourself
22
Dominic Glennane; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 317
And Mr. Dunlop's diary.
A.
Yes.
Q. 318
So now that's another meeting in 1995 between yourself and Mr. Dunlop that's
11:31:20 25
26 27
At 5562.
Records Dominic Glennane, Monarch?
recorded in three separate diaries; isn't that right?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 319
What was that about?
A.
I'd imagine again it was about his accounts but I ....
11:31:30 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:31:34
11:31:47
35 1
Q. 320
Do you know?
2
A.
I don't, no.
3
Q. 321
Yes?
4
A.
And again reading it, it would appear to me as if Noel Murray met him and that
5 6
I can't think of any other reason for it.
I didn't meet him but ... Q. 322
7
Oh, sorry.
How are you deducing from those documents, Mr. Glennane, that you
didn't meet Mr. Dunlop?
8
A.
Obviously Mr. Dunlop expected to meet me.
9
Q. 323
And you expected to meet him because you've recorded him in your diary; isn't
11:32:00 10
that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 324
At 5563?
13
A.
If you turn back to the entry in Noel Murray's ...
14
Q. 325
Let's deal with the diary entry in your diary?
A.
There was a meeting arranged by somebody.
16
Q. 326
That was for Frank Dunlop in Monarch?
17
A.
Yeah.
18
Q. 327
And you have Mr. Dunlop in your diary and Mr Dunlop has Dominic Glennane in his
11:32:08 15
19 11:32:18 20
21
If you turn back to ...
diary? A.
Yes.
Q. 328
So, certainly in so far as there is an independent record at that point in time
22
both of you expect to meet each other at that stage, on the 23rd of March?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 329
Mr. Murray's diary at 5564 records Frank Dunlop and then in brackets DG?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 330
Which would suggest, Mr. Glennane, that Mr. Murray was expecting to have a
11:32:34 25
26 27 28
meeting with both yourself and Mr. Dunlop? A.
29 11:32:50 30
Well I'm not sure.
You'd better ask Mr. Murray.
It looks to me like he was
meeting him on my behalf, if I can put it that way. Q. 331
Why would he, why would you have been delegating Mr. Murray to meet Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:32:56
11:33:15
36 1
A.
I presume -- I presume as a stalling device really over his cheque at that
2
stage.
3
him or if I did meet him.
4
Q. 332
5
I can only guess now.
I don't remember any other reason for meeting
And you have an entry in your diary at April.
At 5579 for a Frank Dunlop
cheque?
6
A.
Yeah. That's right, yes.
7
Q. 333
In April of '95?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 334
But the Tribunal hasn't been furnished with any cheque made out to Mr. Dunlop
11:33:25 10
in April of 1995?
11
A.
There wasn't one, no.
12
Q. 335
Right.
13
A.
It was probably just to remind me that I was due to send him a cheque.
14
Q. 336
Because you also have an entry in your diary for the following week in April
11:33:42 15
So can you explain the significance of that entry?
for 5583, for Frank Dunlop again?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 337
Do you see that at the bottom?
18
A.
Yes, yeah.
19
Q. 338
Right.
11:33:52 20
So in January, February, March, and April you have a number of entries
in your diary and in Mr. Murray's diary and indeed Mr. Dunlop's diary for
21
meetings or contact between yourself and Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
That's right, yeah.
23
Q. 339
And you don't really know what it's about, Mr. Glennane, is that right?
24
A.
Well I think it was about the balance of his accounts but ...
Q. 340
Do you know what it's about?
26
A.
I'm pretty sure it was about the balance of his accounts, yes.
27
Q. 341
And --
28
A.
Which was eventually made on the 13th of August.
29
Q. 342
It's actually paid on the 1st of August?
A.
All right, the 13th I have down here.
11:34:08 25
11:34:21 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:34:23
11:34:35
37 1
Q. 343
The records that you provided may be incorrect.
2
A.
Yeah, may have been drawn.
3
Q. 344
On the 1st of August?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 345
And that's a cheque in the sum of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 346
But according to the documentation that Mr. Dunlop had furnished to you in May
8 9
of 1994.
5689?
The balance outstanding according to him was 7,296.94?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 347
So he is now being paid 5,000 pounds leaving a shortfall, is that right?
11
A.
So it appears, yes, yeah.
12
Q. 348
And that shortfall was eventually written out in the books of Monarch?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 349
It was written off.
11:34:51 10
11:35:15 15
Isn't that right? I think at 5825.
That 2,296.64,
that's one-third of a way down the page?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 350
WO, does that mean written off?
18
A.
Written off, yes, sorry.
19
Q. 351
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 352
So that you -- out of the balance that was owed to Mr. Dunlop, according to
11:35:24 20
21 22
what Mr. Dunlop was looking for, you paid him 5,000 pounds in 19 -- in August
23
1995 and you wrote off the balance of 2,296.00?
24 11:35:39 25
26
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 353
Now, if we just look at the creditor's listing for Mr. Dunlop. At 7433, please.
27 28
Let me just try and work-out this document, if we can at all.
29
because the Tribunal would be anxious that you could assist it as best you can
11:35:58 30
in relation to this. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Mr. Glennane,
11:35:59
11:36:13
38 1 2
If we could highlight supplier Frank Dunlop & Company, please.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 354
And this is a 31st of May 1995 document; isn't that right?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 355
And this is the creditor's account between Frank Dunlop and Monarch?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 356
And the first matters that are listed, the first six matters that are listed
9 11:36:28 10
are payments, isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
11
Q. 357
So the first is the payment of 15,000 pounds?
12
A.
That's right, yeah.
13
Q. 358
And the 10,000 pounds that were paid in March of 1993?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 359
And then there is the 10,000 pounds that disappears to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that
11:36:36 15
16
right? The third payment?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 360
Then there are the two payments of 7,500 pounds which take out the invoice of
19 11:36:52 20
the 19th of May 1993, isn't that right? A.
Yes, that's right, yeah.
21
Q. 361
And then there is the December on account payment of 15,000 pounds?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 362
So then we come to look at the invoices?
24
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 363
Now, just to be clear about this, if we can.
11:37:03 25
26
PMT means payment and invoice
INV in the second column means?
27
A.
Invoice.
28
Q. 364
All right?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 365
Now, the invoices that are set against those payments?
11:37:15 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:37:19
11:37:32
39 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 366
Invoice 9320 is an invoice for 12,100 pounds?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 367
That's not in fact ever actually paid, isn't that right? A sum of 12,100?
5
A.
Sorry it's included in the account, yeah.
6 7
11:37:49 10
And
that's why that account is the way it is. Q. 368
8 9
It's not specifically paid.
Okay.
Well let's do the following then if we can, Mr. Glennane.
Why don't
we add up all of the invoices, the four invoices that are listed there? A.
I don't need to.
Q. 369
Fine.
11
I mean, it is self-explanatory there.
If we add up the four invoice that are recorded there.
There is an
invoice of the 10th of April '93 in the sum of 12,100?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 370
There is an invoice of the 14th of December '93 in the sum of 60,500?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 371
There is an invoice of the 14th December '93 in the sum of 31,371.94?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 372
And invoice on the 6th of December '93 in the sum of 22, 296.94?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 373
And they aggregate £126,268.88, isn't that right?
A.
I haven't added them if you say so, yeah.
Q. 374
That means the invoices that Mr. Dunlop raised that are recorded in the this
11:38:04 15
11:38:26 20
21 22
document?
23
A.
That's right, in this document, yes.
24
Q. 375
In this document?
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 376
Amount to 126,000?
27
A.
Right, yes, yeah.
28
Q. 377
And the payments that are made according to Monarch against those invoices are
11:38:36 25
29 11:38:49 30
payments totalling 80,000 pounds, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yeah, if -- yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:38:51
11:39:03
40 1
Q. 378
It's equal to. 65.
2
A.
Sorry?
3
Q. 379
65,000?
4
A.
60,000.
5
Q. 380
65,000 payments recorded, isn't that right?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 381
15, 10, 10, 15 and 15?
8
A.
65, yes.
9
Q. 382
65,000?
A.
Yeah.
11
Q. 383
Now, where on that do you record the invoice in November of '93?
12
A.
Well if you turn to page 4055 you'll see it.
13
Q. 384
Yeah.
14
A.
I see it says account there Frank Dunlop & Company, yeah.
Q. 385
Uh-huh?
A.
Because if you look at the last two entries they're both the 2nd of November.
11:39:20 10
11:39:42 15
16
Sorry, I beg your pardon?
65 or 75.
Sorry, I haven't added them.
4055, please.?
17
One is the invoice and one is the payment.
18
they cancel out.
19 11:39:55 20
Because they are the exact same
That's the point I was trying to make to you earlier on.
Q. 386
Uh-huh?
A.
This balance is only carried because there's unallocated payments against
21
unallocated invoices.
22
Q. 387
If we go back to the document at 7374, Mr. Glennane?
23
A.
It's the extended there, you'll see it is naught.
24
Q. 388
The total amount of the invoices that are recorded from Mr. Dunlop amount to
11:40:16 25
126,268 --
26
A.
No, this 15,000 is recorded as well.
27
Q. 389
Yes.
28
A.
No it's an invoice 15,000.
29
Q. 390
No at 57392 -- 972?
A.
If you look at the sheet I suggested, 4055.
11:40:31 30
No, that's an adjustment?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:40:38
11:40:44
41 1
Q. 391
7343, please.
2
A.
If you look at 4055 first, I suggest.
3
Q. 392
7343 please, thank you.
4 5
We'll just deal with the first document first,
Mr. Glennane? A.
Well because on the document which I have referred to, the 15,000 invoice and
6
the 15,000 payment were for the same amount on the same date, they haven't been
7
carried forward to this sheet.
8
Q. 393
They cancelled each other?
9
A.
Exactly, yeah.
Q. 394
So they are not carried forward on to this document?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 395
So on this document what you have got are payments of 65,000 against invoices
11:41:00 10
13 14 11:41:15 15
of 126, 268; isn't that right? A.
Well if your figures are right, yes.
Q. 396
And that leaves a net deficit or an under payment to Mr. Dunlop, according to
16
this record; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes, of 60,000, yes.
18
Q. 397
Of 60,000?
19
A.
Odd, yeah.
Q. 398
Yeah.
21
A.
Well as you can see there there's an adjustment.
22
Q. 399
Uh-huh?
23
A.
Of 53, 972.24.
24
Q. 400
And how was that figure selected?
A.
Because at that stage the balance had been agreed with him at 7296.
Q. 401
Did you tell Mr. Dunlop that according to your records you owed him -- you owed
11:41:27 20
11:41:37 25
26 27
Now, what happened to that?
him 61,268?
28
A.
I'm sure we did, uh-huh.
29
Q. 402
So what you did was your records showed that you were indebted to Mr. Dunlop in
11:41:57 30
the sum -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:41:58
11:42:09
42 1
A.
2
No, no, there were invoices -- our records.
I mean, our records didn't show.
That was the balance on the account.
3
Q. 403
Yes?
4
A.
But we obviously then established the balance on the account with him.
5
Q. 404
No, you, Mr. Dunlop was asked, is that right, how much Monarch owed him?
6
A.
I'm not sure if he was or not but however.
7
Q. 405
And he came back in May of '94 saying a sum of 7,296.64, isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yeah.
9
Q. 406
And that is the figure that is at the bottom of that column as the figure that
11:42:29 10
is being owed to Mr. Dunlop?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 407
So you have written off or adjusted 53,972 pounds?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 408
But your own records with Mr. Dunlop show that you owed him 61,000?
A.
Well, if you want to take that interpretation.
11:42:41 15
16
That was the balance on the
account, yes.
17
Q. 409
The balance of?
18
A.
The invoices had been over posted.
19
Q. 410
They had been over posted.
A.
Well I mean it's too many -- as I said to you already it looks to me that that
11:42:54 20
How do you mean they had been over posted?
21
31 was actually a substitution for the 22 but they both seem to have been
22
posted.
23
Q. 411
So we're --
24
A.
I'm saying earlier at a time you get a statement from your creditor, you
11:43:13 25
reconcile the statement and you reconcile your own books with that statement.
26
Q. 412
And did you get a statement from Mr. Dunlop?
27
A.
Other than the one showing the 15,000, I would regard that as a statement, the
28 29 11:43:30 30
document 8730. Q. 413
That's the fax from Mr. Dunlop in May of '94?
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:43:30
11:43:44
43 1
Q. 414
2
According to Mr. Dunlop's records he says you owe him 7,296.64 and you make an adjustment so your books reflect that matter?
3
A.
Exactly, yes.
4
Q. 415
So up to the time Mr. Dunlop came back to you in May 1994.
Your books showed
5
that Mr. Dunlop -- that the full figure that should have been paid to Mr.
6
Dunlop was 126,268 and that he had been paid 65,000 pounds of that; is that
7
correct?
8
A.
No, no, that's not right.
9
Q. 416
That's not right?
A.
Once again, if I can ask to have that sheet put up.
11
Q. 417
It may be simply that I'm just not understanding the point that you are making?
12
A.
The point I am making is that there was a payment -- again if I could have that
11:43:55 10
13
sheet shown up.
4055.
Is that too much to ask?
14 11:44:10 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
4055.
4055?
If you highlight Frank Dunlop account, that one there.
You see on the
17
last two items the 2nd of November invoice 15,000. The 2nd of November payment
18
50,000 and that's extended out then as nil.
19
forward on the statement that you had a few minutes ago.
11:44:35 20
The rest of the figures carry
Q. 418
Yes, but what year end is that can I ask you?
21
A.
It's not any year end.
22
Q. 419
What's the date at the top of the document?
23
A.
It says as of 30th of November '93.
24
Q. 420
And as of the 30th of November '93?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 421
As of the 30th November '93, does that document accurately record all of the
11:44:48 25
26 27
invoices that Mr. Dunlop had furnished up to that point in time?
28
A.
It would certainly record all of the one that were posted, yeah.
29
Q. 422
That were posted?
A.
The 12,100 and the 15.
11:45:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:45:03
11:45:16
44 1
Q. 423
2 3
And then one moves onto the next document dated 31st of May '95; isn't that right?
A.
4
Yes. All of the same figures are carried forward except those two 15's because they have been netted off.
5
Q. 424
That's the one for which there was a zero VAT?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 425
That one has been eliminated?
8
A.
Not eliminated.
9 11:45:28 10
It's been paid and the computer has offset one against the
other. Q. 426
And when one comes to look at the document at 7343.
Then what one is looking
11
at here are invoices that have now been received by Monarch for Mr. Dunlop and
12
the record of payments that have been made by Monarch to Mr. Dunlop?
13
A.
Yes.
And they don't match.
14
Q. 427
Yes.
That's why you make the inquiry of Mr. Dunlop as to what he says he's
11:45:47 15
That's why they're carried forward.
owed?
16
A.
Well I'm not sure if we made the inquiry or if the inquiry came from him, yes.
17
Q. 428
And that shows a substantial difference in your books as to what you believe
18 19
Mr. Dunlop was owed and what Mr. Dunlop believe he was owed. A.
11:46:06 20
Is that right?
Well I don't think we believed he was owed anything at that stage other than what was left on that invoice.
21
the accounts department.
22
at it.
Certainly it was -- mistakes had been made in
There's a reconciliation on 7340 if you want to look
23
Q. 429
What mistakes were made in the accounts department?
24
A.
Well too many invoices were posted.
Q. 430
Was there an --
A.
Because Of the system of making payments on account, round sum payments on
11:46:24 25
26 27
account, which would then -- normally you would end up with a balancing figure.
28
Q. 431
Uh-huh?
29
A.
Due to the supplier or the creditor.
Q. 432
Is it possible that what happened here was you looked for invoices from Mr.
11:46:41 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:46:44
11:47:05
45 1
Dunlop in December 1993 to back a claim you were making against GRE in respect
2
of money you had already paid to Mr. Dunlop.
3
A.
And you posted those to this?
Well there would be no connection between backing them and looking for them
4
from GRE and posting them.
They would have just gone into the accounts
5
department system and they would have been posted.
6
Q. 433
The success fee invoice, Mr. Glennane?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 434
For 60,500 pounds?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 435
That's generated for the first time in December 1993?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 436
What's done with that?
13
A.
Well it's posted to our account and it's also -- sorry our books.
11:47:12 10
14 11:47:27 15
16
certified as an invoice and sent to GRE. Q. 437
And what else was certified as an invoice and sent to GRE?
A.
There's a list of them here somewhere.
17
I can't quite lay my hand on it but
there is a reference there of a cheque from GRE of 52,000.
18
Q. 438
And it deals with four invoices?
19
A.
52,030, that's 4815.
Q. 439
But that's the end result, isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 440
Let's step it back from that, Mr. Glennane, to December of '93?
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q. 441
And let's go back and look at the invoices.
11:48:06 20
11:48:18 25
And let's look at 4772 for
example?
26
A.
Yeah.
27
Q. 442
That's an invoice from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 32,371.
28 29 11:48:33 30
And it was
And it is certified
to be a true copy, isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 443
And at 4773.
There's a further certificate from Mr. Sweeney?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:48:39
11:48:56
46 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 444
And that is certifying to Monarch -- by Monarch Properties to GRE that this
3
money is due to Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's the same document, yes.
5
Q. 445
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
6
A.
Well, sorry, could you put the last back up again.
7
Q. 446
Certainly.
8
A.
Yeah, that's Mr. Sweeney certifying that invoice.
9
Q. 447
Uh-huh.
11:49:24 10
Yes, because the invoice, yes ...
How --
4772, please and 4773 together.?
And what's happening there, I suggest to you, is that that invoice is
being sent to GRE to back up a claim for third party costs in connection with
11
Mr. Dunlop?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 448
And if we look at 4839.
14
A.
Yes, that's it, yeah, same thing.
Q. 449
That's the invoice for 60,500?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 450
We saw on the creditor's listing dated 14th of December.
11:49:57 15
And 4846 together, please.
That again --
It's being
18
forwarded, certified by Mr. Sweeney and it's being forwarded to GRE seeking to
19
recover the 50,000 pounds?
11:50:12 20
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 451
Because apparently, according to the documentation --
22
A.
Half the 50,000.
23
Q. 452
Half the 50,000.
24
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 453
Did you ever pay it?
26
A.
Well it's included in all of those payments we made to him.
27
Q. 454
Okay.
11:50:24 25
GRE and Monarch had agreed a success fee for Mr. Dunlop?
The 85,000.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
Ms. Dillon, we might just stop there for ten minutes.
11:50:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
11:50:35
11:50:45
47 1
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
2 3 4 5 6
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
7 8 9 12:11:56 10
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Glennane, please.
11 12 13
Q. 455
14
Mr. Glennane, if I can take you to deal with the dealings between Monarch and GRE in connection with the payments to Mr. Frank Dunlop and the first invoice
12:12:21 15
in time is 4819.
16 17
And this is an invoice dated the 29th of June 1993 and the person involved is
18
Frank Dunlop & Company and the amount that's being sought is half of 25,000
19
pounds; isn't that right?
12:12:42 20
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 456
Now, the -- this is in June of 1993?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 457
And there's no back up invoice from Mr. Dunlop with this invoice; isn't that
24 12:12:54 25
26
right? A.
So it would seem, yes.
Q. 458
And it would have been the agreement, as I understand it, between GRE and
27
Monarch in connection with third party costs, that back up invoices would be
28
required?
29 12:13:08 30
A.
Well in most cases yes, certainly, yes.
Q. 459
And third party invoices would be payments made by Monarch on behalf of GRE and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:13:15
12:13:36
48 1
Monarch in connection with Cherrywood insofar as the matters we're looking at
2
are concerned.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 460
Now, I think that GRE wrote in connection with that invoice.
At 4822.
And
5
they said insofar as invoice 2064 is concerned that at their meeting in May he
6
agreed the appointment of Frank Dunlop and this was on the basis of 4,000
7
pounds per month with no success fee.
8
invoice for 25,000 pounds which would imply over six months work when Mr.
9
Dunlop was only appointed in May.
12:13:58 10
11
I find it difficult to understand an
A.
Right
Q. 461
Now, if I could just pause there for a second.
GRE appeared to be under the
12
misapprehension or the belief that Mr. Dunlop was to be paid 4,000 pounds per
13
month?
14 12:14:10 15
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 462
There was no agreement, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong,
16
between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop that he be paid 4,000 pounds per month.
17
that correct?
18 19
A.
Is
Well insofar as I know now, I can't remember from the time it appears to me that there was agreement, yeah, that he be paid 4,000 per month.
12:14:32 20
21
MR SANFEY:
Chairman, I think the evidence to date has been that Mr. Sweeney
22
is the one who negotiated with Mr. Dunlop.
23
evidence.
Mr. Sweeney hasn't yet given
24 12:14:40 25
26
I don't understand it to be Monarch's evidence that there was no agreement with Mr. Dunlop in relation to what he was to be paid.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
I think Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal and denied that there
29
was any agreement with Monarch that he would be paid 4,000 pounds per month.
12:14:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:14:56
12:15:07
49 1
And I understand Mr. Dunlop's evidence to the Tribunal in relation to his
2
payment to have been that he agreed lump sums or sought lump sums but he that
3
he had no agreement for a monetary retainer.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I think these issues are going to have be to be probed with all of
6
the Monarch witnesses.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
Indeed.
9 12:15:14 10
MR SANFEY: Indeed but I just don't want it to be put to this witness that
11
Monarch accept that there was no arrangement for 4,000 pounds per month when I
12
understand the evidence to be that it was Mr. Sweeney who did any negotiations
13
with Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Sweeney hasn't yet given evidence.
14 12:15:30 15
CHAIRMAN:
That's fine.
16 17
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
18 19
MS. DILLON:
12:15:36 20
In any event, the document records insofar as invoice 2064 was
concerned that certainly according to GRE Mr. Dunlop was to be paid 4,000
21
pounds per month with no success fee
22
A.
That's right.
23
Q. 463
They are querying how 25,000 pounds could have been accrued by June; isn't that
24 12:15:48 25
26
right? A.
That's right.
Q. 464
I think that following receipt of that letter at 4553.
In reference to
27
invoice 2064 Frank Dunlop, the Monarch note notes that it's not agreed and I
28
presume that means not agreed with GRE?
29 12:16:07 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 465
And MB, that's Martin Baker, says he agreed 4,000 pounds from May. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Eddie
12:16:14
12:16:24
50 1
Sweeney replied that he would be willing to cancel the invoice and invoice
2
monthly?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 466
And then if we go to the bottom of the page where it says 2064, Frank Dunlop 50
5
percent by May to August at 4,000 pounds per month 9,680. Do you see that?
6
A.
Yes, I do, yes.
7
Q. 467
So what appears to be suggested there is that they were going to re invoice
8 9 12:16:44 10
Monarch -- they were going to reinvoice GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 468
And at 4825.
On the 13th of July 1993.
And the last paragraph.
Your item
11
No. 4 invoice 2064.
12
4,000 pounds per month for April, May, June and July if you feel you should pay
13
only on a monthly basis?
14 12:17:10 15
I am prepared to cancel 2064 and re issue invoice 2068 at
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. 469
And it goes on to say please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were engaged
16
from April and requested part of their payment to be up front before they would
17
take on the assignment.
18
pounds to date?
19 12:17:23 20
That is the reason for the payment by us of 25,000
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 470
And then invoice 2068 is issued to Guardian at 4827.
And effectively, what
21
has happened here is invoice 2064 is cancelled and invoice 2068 is issued and
22
it's claiming 4,000 pounds per month April, May, June and July and seeking half
23
of that amount from GRE?
24
A.
12:17:54 25
That's right, yes.
Obviously in the first case we tried to claim 50% of the
25,000 that we had paid up front.
26
Q. 471
And GRE weren't having any of that, isn't that fair to say?
27
A.
That's right, absolutely, yes.
28
Q. 472
They say they agreed 4,000 pounds per month and Mr. Dunlop had only been
29 12:18:07 30
employed from a certain date? A.
Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:18:08
12:18:19
51 1
Q. 473
And they weren't going to pay.
2
A.
Accepted that position.
3
Q. 474
Accepted that position and re issued an invoice in the sum of 9,680 -- that's
4
And Mr. Sweeney?
invoice 2068?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 475
And Mr. Sweeney's letter is July 1993 and in September of 1993, at 4390, this
7
document notes that the following invoices had been passed to Mr. Beng for
8
payment by Mr. Baker; isn't that correct?
9 12:18:41 10
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 476
And there is a list of invoices that had been passed for payment.
11
In the
centre is 2068 Frank Dunlop 9,680?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 477
At the top is headed 'issues outstanding before payment will be made'. Do you
14 12:18:55 15
16
see that? A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 478
And under that heading there is "copy of Dunlop's invoice.
We only have one
17
invoice for 12,100 pounds even though we have made payments of 42,500.
18
must get invoices?"
19 12:19:09 20
A.
That's right.
Q. 479
And you have been referring to this document earlier on this morning, isn't
21
that right, Mr. Glennane?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 480
Now what, this document appears to suggest, if it's correct, that by the 27th
24
of September 1993 the only invoice Monarch had in its possession was the April
12:19:29 25
invoice for 12,100 pounds?
26
A.
So it would seem, yes.
27
Q. 481
Which invoice was never in fact paid in the sum of 12,100 pounds; isn't that
28 29 12:19:35 30
Eddie
right? A.
In that sum, yes.
Q. 482
Right.
Now, and they had paid out or Monarch had paid out 42,500 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
So
12:19:42
12:19:57
52 1
they need to get invoices in order to shore up their claim against GRE; isn't
2
that right? They have to back up the claim?
3
A.
4
They have to back up on invoices, yes, even though GRE were only going to pay on the basis of 4,000 pounds.
5
Q. 483
They still wanted invoices?
6
A.
Exactly.
7
Q. 484
The issues outstanding before payment will be made was what was required was a
8 9 12:20:05 10
copy of Mr. Dunlop's invoice? A.
Yeah.
Q. 485
And there's also an invoice 2094 which dealt with the later payment to Mr.
11
Dunlop and the position was the same for that; isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
13
Q. 486
So that would mean, would it not, that if you had had an agreement with Mr.
14 12:20:23 15
16
Dunlop for an agreed payment of 4,000 pounds per month; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 487
If you had had -- you would be seeking an invoice from Mr. Dunlop showing an
17
invoice for 4,000 pounds per month?
18
A.
Yes, yes.
19
Q. 488
Is there any such invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
A.
For 4,000 per month?
21
Q. 489
Uh-huh?
22
A.
No, not as far as I can recall.
23
Q. 490
How can that be, Mr. Glennane?
24
A.
I mean, obviously the payments were made, if you like, the fact that the 25,000
12:20:38 20
12:20:56 25
was paid in advance or as a retainer, effectively it would cover the first six
26
months of -- obviously then I don't know what date this document is obviously.
27
Obviously we started looking for invoices off him after that, after this.
28
Q. 491
29 12:21:25 30
Is it your position, Mr. Glennane, that what was agreed with Mr. Dunlop was a retainer of 4,000 pounds per month.
A.
Yeah, as far as I know, yes.
All of the correspondence points to that.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:21:29
12:21:45
53 1
Q. 492
The correspondence with GRE?
2
A.
Yes, exactly, yes, yeah.
3
Q. 493
But insofar as your agreement with Mr. Dunlop is concerned, do any of the
Discussions with them, yeah.
4
invoices from Mr. Dunlop to Monarch record or refer to a payment of 4,000
5
pounds per month?
6
A.
I don't recall any of them, I don't recall any of them.
7
Q. 494
And how could that be, Mr. Glennane, if you are correct in telling the Tribunal
8 9 12:22:08 10
that the agreement with Mr. Dunlop was for 4,000 pounds per month? A.
Well maybe Mr. Dunlop misinterpreted the agreement or something about ...
Q. 495
And assuming that Mr. Dunlop misinterpreted the agreement on receipt of the
11
invoices from Mr. Dunlop did Monarch take any step to alert Mr. Dunlop to the
12
mistake that he had made?
13
A.
I think apparently not.
14
Q. 496
And did Monarch ever seek an invoice from Mr. Dunlop in the amount of 4,000 per
12:22:28 15
Just looking for more invoices, yes.
month?
16
A.
Not so far as I can see.
17
Q. 497
Now, I think in September of 1993, at page 4817.
18 19
This is a letter from GRE to Mr. Sweeney.
12:22:50 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
That last document is a document from GRE.
22 23
MS. DILLON:
The document at --.
24 12:22:58 25
CHAIRMAN:
To Monarch.
MS. DILLON:
At 439 --
26 27 28
A.
Yes.
29 12:23:02 30
MS. DILLON:
Sorry.
43 --.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:23:06
12:23:10
54 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
It was dealing with queries raised by ...
GRE, yes.
4 5
MS. DILLON:
4390.
Is this the document, Sir? .
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
8 9
MS. DILLON:
12:23:20 10
That document is an internal memorandum from Eddie Sweeney to
Mr. Glennane
11
A.
It's actually from Pat Caslin to Eddie Sweeney.
12
Q. 498
And it's cc'd to Mr. Glennane.
It schedules the invoices.
If one reads
13
across the top it gives you the invoice number.
14
document is claimed, the amount and the issues outstanding before payment will
12:23:35 15
be made.
The heading under which the
And what that document suggests and I think Mr. Glennane agrees,
16
that by the 27th of September 1993 Ms -- they only had in Monarch one invoice
17
from Mr. Dunlop in the sum of 12,100 pounds.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
12:23:57 20
But they weren't purporting -- at least they didn't appear to be
seeking invoices of 4,000 from Mr. Dunlop.
21 22
MS DILLON: That is what Mr. Glennane has just told you, Sir.
23
nothing to indicate that they sought invoices in the sum of 4,000 pounds per
24
month from Mr. Dunlop but that it is also his understanding that the
12:24:11 25
arrangement between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop was for 4,000 pounds per month, if I
26 27
There is
understand Mr. Glennane correctly. A.
Is that?
That's correct, yes.
28 29 12:24:27 30
CHAIRMAN:
But would it have mattered to, I'm just wondering from an
accounting point of view.
Would it have mattered to Monarch whether they were
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:24:28
12:24:47
55 1
getting invoices for 4,000 a month or for larger sums so long as the total
2
didn't exceed?
3
A.
No, the only reason would have been really to submit them to GRE, that would
4
have been the only reason why we'd have required invoices showing that short of
5
figure.
Because ...
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
invoices for 4,000 a month, but invoices to equal the total of the claim?
9
A.
But what you'd have been submitting to GRE, not necessarily
Exactly, yes, yes.
12:25:04 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
But we issued our own invoices showing 4,000 per month.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Okay.
12:25:13 15
16
MS. DILLON:
But what was required from Mr. Dunlop was an invoice or invoices
17
to back up the amount that Monarch were claiming from GRE?
18
A.
Um, yes, sorry, yes, yeah.
19
Q. 499
And if -- sorry?
A.
Original invoice from him, yes.
Q. 500
And according to what Monarch had agreed with GRE, that was for 4,000 pounds
12:25:38 20
21 22
per month?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 501
Yes?
A.
But we did submit Mr. Dunlop's invoices to GRE in December.
12:25:49 25
26 27
4,000 per month but they were accepted by GRE and paid. Q. 502
28 29 12:26:32 30
They didn't show
The invoices that were paid by GRE were invoices, there were four invoices that were paid; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 503
So if we -- the first invoice was invoice No. 2068. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And that is at 4827.
12:26:45
12:27:01
56 1
Isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, sorry, yes.
3
Q. 504
The second invoice that was paid was 2111.
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 505
The third invoice that was paid was 2186.?
6
A.
2179 actually I think.
7
Q. 506
2186.
8
A.
Sorry.
9
Q. 507
2186.
A.
That's right, yes.
11
Q. 508
And the last one is 2179?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 509
And 2179 is the invoice at 4829.?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 510
Now, they were the invoices from Monarch to GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop;
12:27:25 10
12:27:38 15
16
At 4828.
Isn't that right?
Isn't that right?
I'll just find 2186 for you.
Yes, is 4832.
Is that right?
isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 511
Now, they are paid, and the only payment from GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop
19 12:27:58 20
21
is made in January of '94, at 4815.? A.
That's actually December actually, yes.
Q. 512
Yes.
22
It's received on the 5th of January.
It's stamped "received" on the
5th of January; isn't that right?
23
A.
I --
24
Q. 513
By 57?
A.
The letter is.
26
Q. 514
Yes.
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 515
And the letter says "we have pleasure in enclosing cheque in the sum of 52,030
12:28:09 25
29 12:28:31 30
The funds had been received before that.
The cheque is a cheque in the sum of 52,030 pounds; isn't that right?
pounds in payment of invoice number 2011, 2068, 2186 and 2179, in respect of attached copy invoices". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:28:33
12:28:44
57 1 2
And they are the invoices we have just seen; isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 516
Now, each of those invoices with the exception of the one for 50,000 pounds are
5
in respect of a claim for 4,000 pounds per month; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 517
Okay.
8 9 12:28:56 10
Now, GRE were not happy to pay; isn't that right? Until it was backed
by documentation from Mr. Dunlop? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 518
Okay.
So, now, if we look at the documentation that was supplied by Monarch
11
in support of this claim.
And at 4848.
Mr. Pat Caslin sends to GRE
12
certified copies of the invoices of Frank Dunlop as requested in your fax?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 519
Okay.
A.
Right.
16
Q. 520
Now, firstly, does this document say anything about 4,000 pounds per month?
17
A.
No, it doesn't, no.
18
Q. 521
And that document contains a certificate on the face of it, certified to be a
12:29:32 15
19 12:29:49 20
The first invoice is dated the 10th of April 1993.
At 4133.
true copy of the original; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 522
And Mr. Pat Caslin's signature comes above it?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 523
And with that document goes a certificate from Mr. Eddie Sweeney at 4142,
24
please.
And if we leave the two on screen together.
12:30:03 25
26
Now, Mr. Sweeney in his payment certificate certifies that the amount of the
27
quotation is 4,000 a month?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 524
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
12:30:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:30:28
12:30:39
58 1
Q. 525
Right.
And he includes -- he refers to the invoice in the sum of 10,000
2
pounds plus VAT.
And that it's dated the 10th of April, '93.
3
is certifying the first invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
So Mr. Sweeney
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 526
But it is Mr. Sweeney who it telling GRE that the amount of the quotation is
6
4,000 pounds per month?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 527
Because there is nothing on the face of Mr. Dunlop's document to indicate any
9 12:30:51 10
11
such agreement; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 528
The second invoice from Mr. Dunlop that's forwarded to GRE is at 4772.
12
dated the 6th of December.
13
expenses?
14
And is
And is in the sum of 25,000 pounds plus VAT plus
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 529
And that is certified by Mr. Sweeney.
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 530
And that is forwarded to GRE?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 531
And Mr. Sweeney's certificate refers to 4K per month; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 532
And Mr. Dunlop's document does not refer to any monthly retainer; isn't that
12:31:07 15
12:31:25 20
21 22
At 4773.
Isn't that right?
right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 533
And the third invoice for Mr. Dunlop that's forwarded is at 4839.
12:31:40 25
success fee of 50,000 vis-a-vis public affairs strategy and its implementation
26
totalling 60,500 pounds?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 534
And that is certified by Mr. Eddie Sweeney at 4846.
29 12:32:01 30
And is a
50,000 pounds? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
At being a claim for
12:32:04
12:32:30
59 1
Q. 535
So the three certificates and the three invoices that are sent by Monarch to
2
GRE in connection with Mr. Dunlop are an invoice for 12,100, an invoice for
3
32,371.94 and an invoice for 60,500; is that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 536
What is being sought from GRE is 50% of that sum; is that right?
6
A.
No, what we sought was the invoice at 50% of the invoices.
7
Q. 537
Yes.
8
A.
That's right.
9
Q. 538
Yes.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 539
So you have sent invoices, four invoices, that refer to, with the exception of
12:32:48 10
11 12
No, no.
We had sent them.
Sorry? This is back up to that documentation.
To support the claim that you had made?
one for 50,000 pounds, 4,000 per month to GRE; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 540
And you don't have invoices to that effect from Mr. Dunlop?
A.
That's right.
Q. 541
But you have other invoices for round sum payments and you have copied those
12:33:03 15
16 17
certified them and forwarded those to GRE?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 542
And GRE, on foot of those make the payment of 52,030; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 543
Now, who was the person that dealt with GRE in relation to Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
Well it was Mr. Sweeney I'd say, supported by the cash department.
23
Q. 544
Yes.
12:33:17 20
24
Would you accept that certainly insofar as Mr. Dunlop provided invoices
to GRE, there seems to be no reference to any agreement to 4,000 pounds per
12:33:46 25
month?
26
A.
I don't think he supplied any invoices to GRE.
27
Q. 545
Sorry, I beg your pardon.
28 29 12:33:57 30
Insofar as he supplied invoices to Monarch
Properties there's no references to 4,000 pounds per month? A.
That's right.
Q. 546
And in the documentation up to December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
There is no claim for a success
12:34:02
12:34:18
60 1
fee from Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 547
There's no documentation and no payment from Monarch to Mr. Dunlop prior to the
4
end of December 1993 that reflects payment by Monarch of a success fee; isn't
5
that right?
6
A.
Not specifically, yes.
7
Q. 548
Well, sorry.
8 9
If you say it's contained in some document generally would you
just indicate the document? A.
It was 80, 000 paid to him at that stage.
Q. 549
I beg your pardon?
11
A.
Sorry, there was 80,000 pounds had been paid to him at that stage.
12
Q. 550
Be that as it may, Mr. Glennane.
12:34:32 10
What we're talking about now is the
13
existence or otherwise of a document within Monarch prior to December 1993 that
14
passed between Monarch and Mr. Dunlop indicating an agreement about a success
12:34:53 15
fee?
16
A.
No, other than the invoice from myself, yes.
17
Q. 551
That is the invoice from Mr. Dunlop?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 552
And are you saying that that invoice for the success fee was paid by Monarch?
A.
Well I'm saying it was paid or it was paid in part of, I presume, of the
12:35:04 20
21
80,000.
22
Q. 553
Which part?
23
A.
Well any -- in different dribs and drags.
24
Q. 554
Would you identify the payment that you say that Mr. Monarch paid to Mr. Dunlop
12:35:20 25
26
in connection with the success fee? A.
27 28
I think we paid him 50,000 pounds in December on the 21st
of December. Q. 555
29 12:35:37 30
Not specifically.
Which was a payment on account in respect of an invoice for a greater amount dated, I think, the 14th of December; isn't that right?
A.
That was a payment on account, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:35:38
12:35:51
61 1
Q. 556
But it wasn't a payment on account of the success fee, Mr. Glennane?
2
A.
Well I don't know that.
3
Q. 557
Well let's go back and look at that then.
Because you made your position
4
clear in relation to that prior to lunch.
But if there is any ambiguity we
5
can go back over it again.
6
is Mr. Dunlop's invoice about the success fee?
Can I show you while we're doing that 4832, which
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 558
I just want to draw to your attention there the notation, "this is not an
9
invoice for VAT purposes.
12:36:10 10
A VAT invoice will issue on receipt of payment" do
you see that?
11
A.
I do, yes.
12
Q. 559
Would that indicate to you as an accountant that by 10th December 1993 Mr.
13 14
Dunlop had not been paid his success fee? A.
No, it wouldn't.
Q. 560
It wouldn't indicate that?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 561
Would it indicate to you as an accountant that he had in fact been paid his
12:36:21 15
18 19
No, no.
success fee? A.
12:36:31 20
No, it wouldn't have anything to do with Mr. Dunlop.
What it indicated was
that we didn't want to have to account for the VAT until we got paid.
21
Q. 562
Until you got paid?
22
A.
Yeah, it's the sort of notation that you would get on solicitors invoices and
23
all sort of professional invoices saying this is not an invoice for VAT
24
purposes.
12:36:47 25
Q. 563
26
4839, which is Mr. Dunlop's claim for the success fee.
Where do you say Mr.
Dunlop was paid this?
27
A.
Sorry.
28
Q. 564
Do you know whether or not to your own knowledge, any part of the payment of
29 12:37:07 30
I know he was paid a total of 85,000.
80,000 pounds was in connection with the success fee? A.
Well I assume in the heel of the hunt .... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:37:11
12:37:41
62 1
Q. 565
2
Do you know of your own knowledge, whether any part of the payments made to Monarch related to the success fee?
3
A.
No, I can't specifically identify a cheque for 30,250 or for 60,500.
4
Q. 566
So if there wasn't any such payment, what exactly was going on, Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
I don't know what you mean what was going on.
6
Q. 567
Well if there was no, if there was no pavement to Mr. Dunlop in connection with
7
the success fee but you were sending the invoice on to GRE and seeking payment
8
on foot of it, what exactly is going on?
9
A.
12:38:00 10
Well the arrangement with GRE obviously that they were happy that he be paid 4,000 per month and that he be paid -- and that he be paid a success fee, which
11
came in sometime after the start, if you like.
12
that to GRE and we were assuming, we were trying to pay Mr. Dunlop on much the
13
same, on much the same basis. I think you'd have to ask Mr. Sweeney what fee
14
he negotiated with Mr. Dunlop.
12:38:29 15
16
And that we were reflecting
To the best of my knowledge, it was 4,000 per
month. Q. 568
17
Yes.
And the 15,000 pounds payment that you referred to, I think, in
December; isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 569
Yes.
12:38:43 20
That in fact was a payment in respect of a separate invoice.
7030, please.
We went through this this morning, Mr. Glennane.?
21
A.
If it was a payment on account.
22
Q. 570
Yes.
23
A.
No, no, the payment on account of the general account.
The payment on account was that --
24
posted.
12:39:05 25
invoice.
26
Q. 571
27
That invoice was
At the end of it Mr. Dunlop is advocating 15,000 against that
The payment in December.
What date in December was the payment made? The
payment on account is 4865.?
28
A.
The 21st of December I think.
29
Q. 572
Is the requisition; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
12:39:25 30
9558.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:39:26
12:39:39
63 1
Q. 573
Which is after I think you have an entry in your diary of the same date?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 574
Isn't that the position? And are you saying that that was a payment on account
4
in connection with the invoices of the 6th of December and the invoice for the
5
success fee?
6
A.
No, well I'm saying it was -- a payment on account of his general account.
7
Q. 575
Of his general account?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 576
Including a success fee?
A.
Exactly, yes, yeah.
Q. 577
And where is the documentation to indicate that when you were paying that
12:39:50 10
11 12
15,000 pounds to Mr. Dunlop that it included or was part of a success fee?
13
A.
There's no specific documentation.
14
Q. 578
So I'll ask you again Mr. Glennane, to explain to the Tribunal.
12:40:08 15
and dealing on the one hand with GRE and on the other hand with Mr. Dunlop? A.
18 19 12:40:28 20
What
precisely was going on with all of these invoices and all of this negotiation
16 17
It's just ...
Well, I mean, there was -- the position with GRE is quite clear.
That they
approved and were happy to pay for 4,000 per month. Q. 579
Yes?
A.
Plus the success fee.
21
And what Monarch was paying Mr. Dunlop was the agreed
rate we seem to have under paid him, if anything.
22
Q. 580
You seem to have under paid Mr. Dunlop?
23
A.
If we use the GRE figures we have there, yes.
24
Q. 581
You were looking for more from GRE than you'd paid Mr. Dunlop; isn't that
12:40:56 25
26
right? A.
Well we were looking for more, I don't know if we knew at that stage what the
27
final account would be with Mr. Dunlop.
28
with -- GRE were the sort of people that wanted to close off their books on the
29
31st of December and they wanted to make sure that all of the payments were
12:41:18 30
I was saying, what happened there
made in that year. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:41:20
12:41:34
64 1
Q. 582
If we just --
2
A.
They actually made out a request, very unusual, in my experience, to please
3
lodge the cheque as soon as possible.
Nobody's ever written to me nor I've
4
never written to anybody asking them to lodge the cheque as soon as possible.
5
Q. 583
Did you pay Mr. Dunlop any money out of that cheque?
6
A.
Yeah, well the 15,000, yes.
7
Q. 584
That was paid in December?
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 585
That you -- and you got the cheque from GRE in January.
A.
I'm not sure when we got the cheque.
12:41:46 10
11 12
I have a feeling it went into our
account, before, before Christmas. Q. 586
13
Can I just summarise a few matters for you, Mr. Glennane, to give you an opportunity to comment on them.
14 12:41:58 15
When the Tribunal first contacted Monarch Properties about the payments to Mr.
16
Dunlop.
The figure you came up with was 52,500 pounds?
17
A.
That's right.
18
Q. 587
That figure's wrong?
19
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 588
You had available to you the documentation that enabled you to check to see
12:42:10 20
It is wrong, yes.
21
what payments had in fact been made to Mr. Dunlop but you omitted the first two
22
payments that had been made to Mr. Dunlop that had been not supported by
23
invoices?
24
A.
12:42:31 25
12:42:45 30
We mustn't
recorded those two payments. Q. 589
28 29
I'm not sure we had.
have had available to us the documentation of March '93 or we would have
26 27
No, no, it's nothing to do with invoices.
But you weren't able to advise the Tribunal of the correct position; isn't that right?
A.
At that time, yes, at that time, no.
Q. 590
The Tribunal then conducts its inquiries and establishes what appears to be the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:42:50
12:43:06
65 1
correct amount that's paid to Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
2
A.
Based on the information supplied by Monarch.
3
Q. 591
Yes.
And the position appears to be, and correct me if I am wrong, that
4
contrary to what is stated to be the Monarch position about payments in
5
general, Mr. Dunlop's payments are unusual in that payments are made to Mr.
6
Dunlop unsupported by invoices from Mr. Dunlop; is that right?
7
A.
At the time of payment, yes.
8
Q. 592
And you contend now to the Tribunal that you had a monthly retainer agreement
9 12:43:26 10
with Mr. Dunlop, which is denied by Mr. Dunlop? A.
Sorry, that's my understanding of the position.
11
Q. 593
From whom did you get that understanding from?
12
A.
Mr. Sweeney.
13
Q. 594
And did he tell you that he had agreed 4,000 pounds per month with Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
I can't recall the exact wording, but, I mean, from the time but that's my --
12:43:42 15
looking back now at it years later all the evidence I see supports that, that
16 17
that was the arrangement. Q. 595
Yes.
But he'll have to speak for himself.
Insofar as the 15,000 pounds paid without any VAT to Mr. Dunlop is
18
concerned.
19
immediately; isn't that right?
12:44:02 20
That figure is netted off in the books of Monarch almost
A.
It's not netted off.
21
Q. 596
Yes?
22
A.
I don't understand how it works but because the invoice and the payment
23 24
I mean, it's automatically done by the computer.
coincide. Q. 597
Yes?
A.
For the same amount they are netted off.
26
Q. 598
And they don't carry?
27
A.
In the other cases all the payments because there is no exact invoices are
12:44:13 25
28 29 12:44:25 30
carried forward. Q. 599
So what happens is --
A.
That is quite a normal procedure and the accounts were reconciled then Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:44:29
12:44:51
66 1
certainly every year or more often than every year before the end of the year.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
4
that's paid.
5
A.
Mr. Glennane, sorry, Ms. Dillon. Just on that.
That invoice
And you say it was paid on the day it was received?
Yes.
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
8
while shortly, to Mr. Caslin having sent certified copies of invoices to GRE?
9
A.
And that's fair enough.
Ms. Dillon referred us shortly,
Yes.
12:44:56 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12
Dunlop's invoices
13
A.
And these are certified copies, as I understand it, of Mr.
That's right, yes.
14 12:45:03 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
16 17
One dated 10th of April and one dated 6th of December and then
the success fee one A.
That's right, yes.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:45:17 20
of Mr. Caslin's letter is but was the certified copy of the 2nd of November
21 22
And she did mention, I'm not sure the reference number of what
'93 invoice sent to GRE? A.
I don't think so, no.
23 24 12:45:27 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And why not?
Well I think the invoices sent to GRE I think actually came to more than the
26
amount that we were claiming so there was no need, if you like, to put in more
27
invoices.
28 29 12:45:43 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
But Mr. Glennane it seems from the correspondence and indeed
the internal documentation of Monarch that GRE were particularly sticky. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
That
12:45:49
12:46:07
67 1
every piece of paper that Monarch had that could support a claim should be
2
sent.
3
like.
4
December but an invoice for 15,000 pounds was sought and indeed paid by Monarch
5
on the 2nd of November.
6
books is not certified by Mr. Sweeney nor sent to the personnel in GRE and I'm
7
asking why that could be since you actually have that, as I understand the
8
evidence, actual document in your possession by December.
9
why ...
12:46:32 10
A.
Why not? Because that one came -- that was the second in time if you If you take the 10th of April.
Sorry, I don't know.
The next one sent is the 6th of
Yet that payment that you have presumably on your
I'm just asking him
Maybe if we could show the invoice.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
14
4633, I think.
Certified by Mr. Sweeney, yes.
I mean, I can't explain why that particular
one wasn't sent and the one for say the 25 or the 32 was sent.
12:46:52 15
I think we
were trying to substantiate that the amount we were claiming from GRE, which
16
was the 4,000 per month, was the success fee, that we had invoices for more,
17
for more than that from Mr. Dunlop.
18 19
JUDGE FAHERTY:
12:47:10 20
questions to you, Mr. Glennane, that GRE might query why there was no VAT on
21 22
I mean, looking at it there. and I know Ms. Dillon has put
it? A.
23
I don't think they would have, no, because the invoices we sent them were for fees and we added on the VAT to it.
24 12:47:23 25
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
So it wouldn't have been, our VAT inputs wouldn't have been any concern of theirs.
28 29 12:47:33 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
For some reason the decision was made when Monarch were
looking for back up and obviously had to because of the letters that they were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:47:36
12:47:54
68 1
getting from GRE.
2
include this particular document as back up for the monies you had paid Mr.
3
Dunlop by December 1993?
4
A.
For some reason a decision must have been taken not to
Well it wasn't just monies we had paid.
We also had back up for monies we
5
intended to pay in the future.
There was a claim for payment.
6
said, we ended up with too many invoices from Mr. Dunlop.
7
crediting them later on.
Yes, as I
So we ended up
8 9
MS. DILLON:
12:48:10 10
And insofar as that invoice is concerned and the payment was made
on the same day, you say that what happened was the computer netted them off
11
and therefore they weren't carried forward because they cancelled each other
12
out ?
13
A.
Exactly, yes.
14
Q. 600
So when one came to look at the creditor's listing for Mr. Dunlop in '95 that
12:48:26 15
invoice and payment does not appear; isn't that right?
16
A.
Well it doesn't appear in the creditor's listing, yes.
17
Q. 601
Isn't that right?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 602
Because they have already cancelled each other out?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 603
And they haven't been carried forward?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 604
It just disappears off the books?
24
A.
No, it's doesn't disappear. It's recorded in the books as an invoice.
12:48:36 20
12:48:45 25
invoices are recorded in the books.
All
The reason for doing a creditors
26
reconciliation is to ensure that you have documents to reconcile the balance
27
you are showing you owe any particular creditor with an independent
28
verification which would also be verified by the auditors.
29
peculiar in any situation if you appear to have overpaid somebody.
12:49:10 30
It would look So the
auditors and ourselves would be concerned about any account that was actually Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:49:14
12:49:29
69 1 2
in debit. Q. 605
It would obviously suggest that there were invoices missing.
So the significant features then about this payment of 15,000 pounds in
3
November of 1993 is the invoice and the cheque are dated the same day; is that
4
right?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 606
The payment is made on the date it's demanded; isn't that right?
7
A.
Well I'm not sure which came first, as I said to you already.
8
Q. 607
All right.
9 12:49:44 10
11
It is never sent to GRE.
And it's never claimed back in that
format from GRE? A.
Not in that format, no.
Q. 608
It doesn't appear to be subsumed into any later invoice from Mr. Dunlop; isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
Sorry?
14
Q. 609
It doesn't seem to be included in any later invoices, in the December invoices
12:49:56 15
from Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?
16
A.
Of this 15,000?
17
Q. 610
Yeah?
18
A.
It wouldn't be if it had been paid.
19
Q. 611
And reimbursement of this payment does not appear to have been sought by
12:50:09 20
Monarch from GRE on foot of this invoice; isn't that right?
21
A.
On foot of this specific invoice, yes, yes.
22
Q. 612
Isn't that the position?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 613
Right.
12:50:22 25
26
it from GRE? A.
27 28
Because as I said, there were more than enough invoices had come in from him, if you like, to use up the total figure that we had agreed with them.
Q. 614
29 12:50:43 30
Now, why wouldn't you have relied upon that invoice and sought 50% of
Why didn't you send a letter to GRE on the 3rd of November and look for your 7,500 back?
A.
Because we were in communication with them, say, on a monthly basis. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We
12:50:47
12:50:55
70 1
didn't submit a letter every day saying we paid this invoice yesterday or
2
tomorrow.
3
Q. 615
You waited until December?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 616
And you waited until Mr. Dunlop had furnished a number of other invoices which
6
you did send on to GRE, isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 617
But you never sent on this one?
9
A.
Apparently not.
Q. 618
There could be a very good reason why it wasn't sent on in that that could be a
12:51:11 10
But I don't -- there's no reason why this wasn't sent.
11
provision of cash to Mr. Dunlop to deal with the difficulty on the 11th of
12
November 1993 that Monarch had in Dublin County Council?
13
A.
No, it certainly was not.
14
Q. 619
Couldn't have been?
A.
No.
16
Q. 620
Why do you say that?
17
A.
Because it was paid by cheque.
18
Q. 621
No VAT?
19
A.
No -- whether there's VAT or not doesn't matter.
Q. 622
How can you say that when Mr. Dunlop is a vatable individual?
A.
Well that activity, if that activity doesn't attract VAT. I don't know what
12:51:26 15
12:51:36 20
21
It couldn't have been.
22
motivation Mr. Dunlop had in raising that invoice on that day but I do know it
23
was just treated as a normal invoice in Monarch's books and when it went
24
through it was paid by cheque.
12:51:57 25
It certainly wasn't paid in cash or anything
like that. It was quite clear that it was paid by cheque.
It went through
26
the books and was available for scrutiny by the auditors and by everybody else
27
and it was included in the creditors reconciliation.
28
Q. 623
But it was never claimed back from GRE; isn't that right?
29
A.
Well the amount we claimed back from GRE was the agreed amount.
12:52:29 30
than enough invoices, invoices in that letter. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
We had more
I think obviously that letter
12:52:33
12:52:49
71 1
was written in a bit of a hurry in December to try to get the cheque from them
2
before Christmas.
3
need to sort this out before Christmas or before the 31st of December, which
4
were their end of year.
Because, again, they would have been certainly saying we
5
Q. 624
Uh-huh.
6
A.
So I think it was probably a matter of make sure we have enough invoices to
7 8
cover the amount we're claiming. Q. 625
9
Would you explain to the Tribunal the circumstances of the allocation of payments against certain accounts in the books of Monarch, and Monarch
12:53:09 10
Properties Services Limited?
11
A.
Sorry in, what sense?
12
Q. 626
If, for example, Monarch Properties Services Limited pays 1,000 pounds on
13
behalf of Cherrywood Limited or on behalf of the Cherrywood Development what
14
happens?
12:53:22 15
A.
It's coded then as a Cherrywood payment.
16
Q. 627
What's the code for a Cherrywood payment?
17
A.
I don't know offhand.
18
Q. 628
Were they the 735 codes?
19
A.
So it appears, yes.
Q. 629
Can I show you an analysis that has been carried out by the Tribunal.
12:53:37 20
Or they were allocated against Cherrywood, yes.
21 22
At 8199.
And see if you can assist in making sense of what happened.
23 24 12:53:53 25
If we can turn this document around. consider that document.
Let me show you before we come to
3241.
26 27
This is a schedule of political payments, according to Monarch Properties,
28
totalling 23,450 pounds, which is made in May and June of 1991.
29
documentation has been furnished to the Tribunal.
12:54:12 30
preparing these schedules? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And this
And I think you assisted in
12:54:13
12:54:33
72 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 630
Now, the Tribunal analysed how these payments were treated in the books of
3
Monarch Properties Services Limited, Mr. Glennane, and prepared a document that
4
you've been furnished with., at 8199, and we might get you a hard copy of
5
8199.
6
A.
I got this last night.
7
Q. 631
You got this last night.
And if we just look first of all at the, under the
8
heading "original and change".
9
just increase that first of all.
12:54:56 10
To the left-hand side of the document.
So that we can possibly read that.
we look under the heading "original".
We see 66802201.
11
A.
Yes, yes.
12
Q. 632
Now, you can explain this, if I'm incorrect.
If we
And if
Do you see that?
But in its simplest form.
What
13
that is, is a posting in the books of MPSL indicating the account to which the
14
payment is charged.
12:55:17 15
Is that right?
A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 633
Isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 634
And that posting of 66802201 is a Monarch Properties Services Limited posting?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 635
Okay.
21
A.
Right, yes.
22
Q. 636
Isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, so it would seem, yes.
12:55:30 20
24 12:55:44 25
So it appears so, yes.
That is then changed to an account with the number 7351021?
If this document is correct.
I'm not disputing
it. Q. 637
Yes.
26
A.
It's not my document.
27
Q. 638
The underlying documents are probably your documents?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 639
The 7351021 accounts are Cherrywood accounts; isn't that right?
A.
In Monarch services, yes.
12:55:58 30
I mean, we'll come to look at the actual document?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:56:00
12:56:13
73 1
Q. 640
In Monarch Properties Services Limited?
2
A.
I think so, yeah, sorry.
3
Q. 641
So what happens, leaving aside accountancy terms for the moment.
4
all understand what's going on.
5
pounds is written to the late Mr. Tom Hand?
A cheque for in this case let's say 5,000
6
A.
Right, yes.
7
Q. 642
That cheque is written on the 30th of May 1991.
8 9 12:56:39 10
Just so we
And it's initially attributed
in the books of Monarch to Monarch Properties Services Limited; is that right? A.
I'm not sure about that but however I won't dispute it however.
Q. 643
If we look at 3988.
11 12
Now, this you will be familiar with, Mr. Glennane, because this is one of your
13
own documents.
14
you will see it's headed account 66802201 promotions.
12:57:01 15
And I want you to look at the second half of that page.
And
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
16
Q. 644
And do you see coming down that the third entry is 5,000 pounds T Hand's FG?
17
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
18
Q. 645
Are you you satisfied now that initially the payment of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Tom
19 12:57:20 20
21
Hand in May of 1991 is posted to account number 66802201? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 646
The total amount of the payments.
If we just look at the payments immediately
22
beneath that of 1,000, 500, 300, 300 and 1,000.
23
political payments?
24
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 647
And they total 8,1000; isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 648
And if we go to 3989.
12:57:33 25
Do you see all of those
28 29 12:57:51 30
And we look at the bottom of the first documents. part - the top part of the document, please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And it -- no, the first
And I want to draw to your
12:57:57
12:58:09
74 1
attention "transferred to -- the last entry" transferred to Cherrywood
2
promotion 8,100 pounds"
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 649
And then I want to draw to your attention, 3990.
5 6
Which is headed at the bottom of the page "account 73510201 General Promotion
7
Cherrywood".
Do you see that? General promotion
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 650
And you see at the very bottom 'transfer 15,350 promotion and 8,100
12:58:29 10
sponsorship', do you see that?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 651
And the total is 23,450?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 652
Now, what is happening there, Mr. Glennane, as I understand it, subject to any
12:58:40 15
correction that you're making, is that when the cheque for 5,000 pounds
16
political donation is written to Mr. Tom Hand, it is initially put into an
17
account called promotions?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 653
In MPSL; is that right?
A.
Yes, so, yes.
Q. 654
It is then transferred in April of 1992 into an account called 'General
12:58:59 20
21 22
Promotions Cherrywood; isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 655
And that means, as I understand it, that it was considered in MPSL that the
12:59:11 25
payment of 5,000 pounds to Mr. Hand was an expense in connection with
26
Cherrywood.
Is that right?
27
A.
I don't think -- not an expense, no.
28
Q. 656
Okay.
29
A.
Well the fact is it's the opposite of an expense.
12:59:27 30
Well what is it?
forward as a work in progress.
Because it was then carried
If that stayed in the first account it would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
12:59:31
12:59:41
75 1 2
have been written off as an expense. Q. 657
3
Well leaving aside the Cherrywood stock and what ultimately happened with that. And we'll come to deal with that, Mr. Glennane?
4
A.
Yes well --
5
Q. 658
We're dealing first of all in what's happening in the books at the time?
6
A.
Yeah, if it had been left in promotions it would have been written off as a
7
Monarch expense, a reference there to Christmas party and things.
8
Q. 659
Yes?
9
A.
Which were regarded as normal expenses.
Q. 660
Can you write off political contributions?
A.
Not as far as I know, no.
12:59:58 10
11 12
Sorry, not for tax purposes. I don't think you can
write them off for ...
13
Q. 661
Can you write them off as an expense?
14
A.
Well not for tax purposes.
Q. 662
How should political contributions be treated?
16
A.
You mean? You mean for tax purposes?.
17
Q. 663
No.
18
A.
Well if, if they were being written off they should be written off as an
13:00:11 15
19
expense that's not allowable for tax.
13:00:34 20
21
I'm talking about in the books and accounts of a company.?
They either call them donations or
promotions or ... Q. 664
22
Well let's start with the word "donations".
What's listed in the schedule
you've provided to the Tribunal in May of 1991.
At 3241.
23 24
There is a schedule of political donations totalling 23,450 pounds; isn't that
13:00:53 25
right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 665
Now, can you indicate to the Tribunal the account within Monarch Properties
28 29 13:01:04 30
Services Limited headed political donations? A.
Into --
Q. 666
Into which these donations were posted? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
13:01:07
13:01:21
76 1
A.
There wasn't one obviously.
2
Q. 667
Well, why wasn't there one?
3
A.
Because it wouldn't be a normal heading in your books.
And this was probably
4
I think probably the first time we had ever made political donations other than
5
very occasional ones.
6
Q. 668
Well certainly --
7
A.
But it wouldn't be regarded as just a normal heading so ...
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Ms. Dillon it's after one o'clock.
13:01:31 10
11
MS. DILLON:
May it please you, Sir.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
So we'll stop until two o'clock.
14 13:01:35 15
16 17 18
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
19 13:01:57 20
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
21 22 23 24 14:06:41 25
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Glennane, please.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Now Mr. Glennane.
29 14:07:01 30
MS. DILLON:
I think before lunch, if I could have page 8191, Mr. Glennane
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:07:13
14:07:26
77 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 669
And I think you had some concern as to the accuracy of the document?
3
A.
No, I'm just pointing out it was your document, yes.
4
Q. 670
Yes.
5
And the document as we saw was based upon the documents supplied by
Monarch Properties; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes, certainly, yeah.
7
Q. 671
And are you prepared to accept now that based on Monarch Properties documents
8
that each of those payments was initially recorded in an account of MPSL and
9
then subsequently transferred in April 1992 to an account of Cherrywood
14:07:46 10
Properties?
11
A.
In Monarch Services, yes.
12
Q. 672
Monarch services?
13
A.
Accounts, yeah.
14
Q. 673
So that everybody understands what was happening.
14:07:56 15
16
In Monarch Properties
Services Limited was a company that had funds; isn't that right? A.
17
Sorry, it wasn't funds.
It was generally a holding company where everything
was channelled through.
18
Q. 674
Yes?
19
A.
From various companies in the group, if you like, an umbrella company, to put
14:08:12 20
it that way.
21
Q. 675
And it would make payments on behalf of certain companies?
22
A.
Exactly, yes.
23
Q. 676
And it made payments on behalf of Cherrywood Properties Limited?
24
A.
In some cases, yes.
Q. 677
And it made payments on behalf of other companies?
26
A.
Exactly, yes.
27
Q. 678
And when it wrote a cheque it would allocate that cheque against an account
14:08:21 25
28 29 14:08:32 30
within Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 679
Would that be a fair way of describing it in its simplest? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:08:36
14:08:52
78 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 680
What initially happened with the schedule of payments that were made to
3
politicians in May and June of 1991 is those payments were initially allocated
4
against Monarch Properties Services Limited?
5
A.
Well they were allocated against promotions yeah, apparently, yeah.
6
Q. 681
Within Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 682
And in April of 1992 they were transferred?
9
A.
Yeah, an internal transfer.
Q. 683
An internal transfer from general promotions and sponsorship in Monarch
14:09:00 10
11
Properties Services limited and they were transferred to Cherrywood promotions;
12
isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 684
So that effectively, whilst initially they had been regarded as being a cost of
14:09:17 15
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
16
In April 1992 they were being regarded
as a cost of Cherrywood?
17
A.
Well they were being regarded as some concerns to do with Cherrywood, yes.
18
Q. 685
Well let's just see --
19
A.
I think in fairness, I think the original coding would have been done by
14:09:35 20
somebody fairly Junior.
And I don't think they placed great emphasis on the
21
coding of them.
22
they should be carried forward and they should be carried forward under the
23
heading of general promotions and allocated as Cherrywood, yes.
24
Q. 686
14:09:58 25
It was certainly felt presumably at the end of the year that
So that the expenses which are regarded as political expenses which total 23,450 pounds were initially coded or charged or allocated to Monarch
26
Properties Services Limited Sponsorship and Promotion, but in April 1992 were
27
transferred into Cherrywood general promotions?
28
A.
29 14:10:22 30
Well, yes, but it's wrong terminology to say that they were regarded as political expenses.
Q. 687
They weren't political expenses? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:10:24
14:10:37
79 1
A.
No, they were political donations.
2
Q. 688
Okay.
3
A.
But they were transferred from the Monarch -- in other words if they hadn't
We'll start again?
4
been transferred they would have been written off that year in Monarch services
5
Limited under the heading promotion.
6
Q. 689
Yeah, but they would have been written off; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yeah.
8
Q. 690
Through the P&L?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 691
They would have been deducted as an expense and the tax added back?
11
A.
Well, presumably, that was up to the auditors.
12
Q. 692
If that happened?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 693
But that didn't happen; isn't that right?
A.
No.
16
Q. 694
Because they were charged in April 1992 to Cherrywood?
17
A.
Well, they were allocated to Cherrywood.
18
Q. 695
Okay.
19
A.
As stock in Cherrywood, yes.
14:10:45 10
14:10:57 15
14:11:13 20
Were they allocated to Cherrywood as a cost of Cherrywood? So something, as I said, to do with Cherrywood,
yes.
21
Q. 696
Okay.
What had they to do with Cherrywood?
22
A.
Well, I mean, I suppose the short answer to it is that they had to be allocated
23
somewhere.
24
Cherrywood and that was probably a convenient home for them, it was the most
14:11:31 25
At the time there was a lot of payments going through relating to
likely thing, the most likely place that they would have been allocated to.
26
Plus we would have analysed anything showing Cherrywood and tried to recover
27
50% of it from GRE.
28
Q. 697
29 14:11:54 30
They were already allocated when they were made to promotions and sponsorship in Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
A.
Well they were, yeah, they were allocated as something that was a Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:12:00
14:12:09
80 1 2
expense to be written off. Q. 698
3
They could have stayed in Monarch Properties Services Limited and been dealt with through the profit and loss; isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
5
Q. 699
And they could have been written down as an expense and then added back, isn't
6
that right, because it wasn't a deductible expense?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 700
That didn't happen?
9
A.
No, that's right, yes.
Q. 701
So now it's not an expense of Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that
14:12:19 10
11
right?
12
A.
It's carried forward.
13
Q. 702
But it's carried forward as Cherrywood stock?
14
A.
They were actually written off in Monarch Services at the end of the day.
Q. 703
In 1996?
16
A.
Exactly, yeah.
17
Q. 704
Yes.
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 705
But in 1992?
A.
So they were sort of, if you like, in a holding situation throughout the years
14:12:36 15
14:12:48 20
21 22
To be decided on at some future date.
I think it's fair to say that.
That's what the documentation shows?
'92, '93, '94 and '95. Q. 706
We'll come to look at the auditors treatment and what the audit working papers
23
look at but for the moment let's just look at what happened when the cheques
24
were written.
14:13:06 25
26
a cost to MPSL, Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
27 28
Well when you say they weren't necessarily allocated at the same day the cheque was written.
Q. 707
29 14:13:33 30
When the cheques were written they were initially allocated as
They would have been allocated maybe six or eight weeks later.
Six or eight weeks after the payment was made they were allocated to Monarch Properties Services Limited either sponsorship or promotion?
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:13:33
14:13:38
81 1
Q. 708
In April of 1992 they were transferred out of Monarch Properties Services
2
Limited Promotion and Sponsorship and transferred into Cherrywood General
3
Promotions?
4
A.
That's right, yeah.
5
Q. 709
Isn't that right?
6
A.
I would assume in consultation with the auditors or --
7
Q. 710
In consultation with the?
8
A.
With the auditors.
9
Q. 711
Is there any documentation to indicate it was in consultation with the
14:13:50 10
11
auditors? A.
12
There's certainly documentation indicating that the auditors, there is a document explaining the treatment of them prepared by the auditors.
13
Q. 712
That's the 1995 and 1996 documents?
14
A.
7378.
Q. 713
Uh-huh.
14:14:08 15
16 17
And when this was transferred on the 30th of April 1992 to Cherrywood
Promotion. A.
18 19
It explains it all actually very well, if I may say so.
Who made that decision?
I would assume it was made by the financial controller in consultation with the auditors.
Q. 714
Who was the financial controller?
A.
At that stage it was a man called Pat Caslin.
21
Q. 715
Who was the person with ultimate responsibility for this?
22
A.
Oh, me, yes.
23
Q. 716
So would you've proved this transfer?
24
A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 717
So that in April 1992 was it the position that it was considered within the
14:14:21 20
14:14:31 25
26
Monarch Group that these expenses or costs or cheques that had been written
27
were attributable to Cherrywood as opposed to being attributable to Monarch
28
Properties Services Limited?
29 14:14:47 30
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 718
Okay.
How did the political payments of 23,450 pounds become considered to be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:14:58
14:15:15
82 1
attributable to Cherrywood?
2
A.
Well, I assume at the time Cherrywood was the only development that we had on.
3
Q. 719
Is that the position?
4
A.
Well, I think so.
Active.
I mean, we were still involved in Tallaght.
We
5
were still involved in Ongar and Somerton were a bit later on I think, we had
6
several small developments.
7
you like, on Cherrywood.
But sure the main sort of light was shining, if
8
Q. 720
They could have been left in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
9
A.
They could have been and written off, yes.
Q. 721
But they weren't?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 722
So somebody made a decision to treat these expenses or costs or cheques that
14:15:33 10
13
had been written as an expense or a cost or, as you say yourself, something to
14
do with Cherrywood isn't that right?
14:15:45 15
A.
That's correct, yes.
16
Q. 723
Who was that person?
17
A.
I have already said, in my opinion, it was either Pat Caslin in consultation
18 19 14:15:58 20
21
with the auditors or myself. Q. 724
And you would have approved of this, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 725
So what had the payments that were made in May and June of 1991 to politicians
22 23
I'm not disowning it in any way.
to do with the Cherrywood development? A.
24
They were obviously the contributions which had been sought for the elections in that year and they were, the decision was made, the most likely, the correct
14:16:19 25
place, job to put them against really was Cherrywood.
26
It was the most active
job that was on at the time.
27
Q. 726
Are you saying it was a convenient place to put them?
28
A.
Exactly, yes.
29
Q. 727
How was it more convenient to put them against Cherrywood than against Monarch
14:16:35 30
Properties Services Limited? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:16:36
14:16:53
83 1
A.
2
Because we didn't presumably want to write them off and be -- if they were put in Cherrywood there would be a prospect of recovering 50% of them from GRE.
3
Q. 728
Why would you have wanted to leave them in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
4
A.
Sorry?
5
Q. 729
If you had left them there what would have happened to them?
6
A.
They would have just got written off.
7
Q. 730
Because they weren't tax deductible.
8
A.
It will show a higher revenue deficiency.
9
Q. 731
But you would have added back the tax; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yeah.
11
Q. 732
And that would have been the end of them; isn't that right?
12
A.
Exactly, yeah.
13
Q. 733
They would have been finished then forever and more?
14
A.
Well unless the Tribunal would be looking at them again presumably.
Q. 734
Yes?
16
A.
But in the normal course, yes.
17
Q. 735
Yes.
14:17:08 10
14:17:21 15
And if you claim them as an expense --
That's what would have happened if they had been treated as a political
18
donation and deducted as an expense, the tax would have been calculated on them
19
and the tax would have been added back and that would have been the end of them
14:17:34 20
in the following year when the following year's accounts were done in Monarch
21
Property Services Limited, isn't that right?
22
A.
In the normal course, yes.
23
Q. 736
In April 1992 the normal course didn't prevail; isn't that right?
24
A.
In what sense do you mean?
Q. 737
Because you didn't write them out of Monarch Properties Services Limited, you
14:17:47 25
26
transferred them to Cherrywood?
27
A.
Well, yeah, we transferred them, yeah, to, yeah.
28
Q. 738
And in transferring them to Cherrywood you are saying and I think what --
29 14:18:05 30
correct me if I'm not quoting you correctly, because they had something to do with Cherrywood? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:18:06
14:18:21
84 1
A.
I would think so, yeah.
2
Q. 739
Now, what was the something that they had to do with Cherrywood?
3
A.
Well I presume we believed that the reason that they were sought was because
4
the council would have known that we were involved in Cherrywood and would have
5
presumably believed that we'd be looking for some support off them at some
6
stage.
7
Q. 740
So are you --
8
A.
That's the basis that they were sought on.
9 14:18:31 10
That would be my interpretation of
it. Q. 741
That's your?
11
A.
Interpretation of it.
12
Q. 742
Sorry, just to be clear on it.
Your interpretation is that the councillors
13
would have sought these payments because they knew you were involved in
14
Cherrywood?
14:18:41 15
A.
Yeah, presumably or involved in development, yes.
16
Q. 743
And you would be looking for their support?
17
A.
Asking for their support.
18
Q. 744
In connection with Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes, yes, yes.
Q. 745
On that basis and based on that understanding or belief within Monarch, these
14:18:51 20
21
political donations were attributed to Cherrywood?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 746
And they were attributed to Cherrywood as a cost; is that right?
24
A.
Well, when I say a cost.
14:19:08 25
as stock.
26 27
14:19:28 30
If you carried forward something as stock you don't regard it as a
cost until it is eventually charged in. Q. 747
28 29
They were -- they were -- they were carried forward
Yes.
And if you could just explain that whole concept of the stock, the build
up of the stock, Mr. Glennane? A.
Well, there's the heading 'stock and work in progress', which is really the same thing.
In a normal company stock is still something that you still have
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:19:34
14:19:48
85 1
at the end of the year.
2
Q. 748
Uh-huh?
3
A.
And which you are going to deal with next year.
4 5
So it's not written off in a
property company it's, if you still had -- say your land was shown as stock. Q. 749
6
MPSL wouldn't have been showing the Cherrywood Land as its stock; isn't that right?
7
A.
Not the Cherrywood, no.
8
Q. 750
Because it didn't own the Cherrywood Land; isn't that right?
9
A.
That's right.
Q. 751
So when it's talking about Cherrywood stock it's talking about when Monarch
14:19:57 10
11
Properties Services Limited is talking about a build up of Cherrywood stock
12
it's talking about a build up of money it has paid out on behalf of Cherrywood?
13
A.
Which is allocated against Cherrywood.
14
Q. 752
Against Cherrywood stock.
14:20:18 15
Services Limited is an asset called Cherrywood stock which ultimately will be
16 17
bought by Cherrywood when it comes into funds? A.
18 19 14:20:35 20
21
So what is being created in Monarch Properties
Not necessarily, no.
It's just being carried forward as a, the last part
doesn't necessarily follow. Q. 753
Yes?
A.
Rather than written off.
Q. 754
Yes.
22
It's being carried forward as an asset.
So what happens is that Monarch Properties Services Limited makes
payments on behalf of Cherrywood and it accumulates --
23
A.
Makes payments, yes.
24
Q. 755
Which it attributes in its books to being payments on behalf of Cherrywood; is
14:20:50 25
that right?
26
A.
Well, which are the best allocation of them is against Cherrywood.
27
Q. 756
The factual position on Monarch's records is all of these expenses are
28 29 14:21:05 30
attributed to the 73 reference; isn't that right? A.
All of these costs, yes.
Q. 757
All of these costs are attributed to the 73 reference? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:21:08
14:21:15
86 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 758
The 73 reference is the reference for Cherrywood in Monarch Properties Services
3
Limited?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 759
So the build up of the Cherrywood stock happens when Monarch Properties
6
Services Limited, in the first instance, makes a payment which it attributes to
7
Cherrywood?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 760
That's the first thing that happens; isn't that right?
A.
Well attributes at the end of the year.
Q. 761
At the end of the year.
14:21:28 10
11 12
Cherrywood can't pay that or doesn't pay that; isn't
that right?
13
A.
Well it could have paid it if it had been asked.
14
Q. 762
But it's not paid no. The situation is that it's not paid?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 763
Over the years that debt builds up and it's called stock in its simplest terms;
14:21:42 15
16 17
isn't that right?
18
A.
It's not a debt.
19
Q. 764
It's money that is paid out by Monarch Properties Services Limited for and on
14:21:58 20
It's built up as stock, yes.
behalf of Cherrywood Properties Limited; is that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 765
And what is, in its simplest terms and it may not be a proper accountancy term
23
Mr. Glennane, what's happening is that Cherrywood Properties Limited owes a
24
large amount of money to Monarch Properties Services Limited and Monarch
14:22:15 25
Properties Services Limited carries a large debt which is due to it by
26
Cherrywood Properties Limited which ultimately it will sell to Cherrywood
27
Properties Limited?
28
A.
No, I don't think that's right.
29
Q. 766
You don't think that's right.
14:22:30 30
Do you want to explain then the concept of
Cherrywood stock? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:22:30
14:22:45
87 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 767
Uh-huh?
3
A.
It's not reflected in the Cherrywood accounts at all.
4
Q. 768
Yes, I didn't suggest it was.
5
A.
You did. You said it was reflected as a debt in Cherrywood.
6
Q. 769
I beg your pardon.
7
A.
No, it was carried forward as stock/work in progress in Monarch Services.
8
Q. 770
And what is contained within that figure are costs that have been paid by
9 14:23:01 10
11
The only accounts where it's reflected is Monarch services Limited.
Other than that?
Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 771
And included within the figure of costs that have been paid on behalf of
12
Cherrywood Properties Limited are the political expenses?
13
A.
They are political donations. Yes.
14
Q. 772
And included also were other matters such as Mr. Frank Dunlop's fees?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 773
And architects' fees?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 774
And matters such as that sort?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 775
But one element?
A.
I'm not sure if they were charged or whether they were charged indirectly to
14:23:18 15
14:23:23 20
21 22
Cherrywood.
Yes, they could be carried forward as work in progress.
23
Q. 776
An accumulation of costs going on?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 777
Included in the accumulation of costs are political contributions?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 778
And the political contributions that are made in later years, in 1992 and some
14:23:36 25
28
of the political contributions that are made in 1993, are also attributed to
29
Cherrywood; isn't that right?
14:23:50 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:23:51
14:24:12
88 1
Q. 779
So that there is a process ongoing effectively in Monarch whereby when certain
2
political expenses are paid, they are being attributed as payments, if I use
3
your phraseology, in connection with Cherrywood?
4
A.
Well, that's the most likely place to put them at the time.
I mean, it
5
changed later on, a lot of them were put through Dun Laoghaire or Dun Laoghaire
6
Town Centre or something like that.
7
through as, I say, Tallaght.
8
I can put it that way.
9
Q. 780
14:24:33 10
Previously they would have been put
So Cherrywood was the main kid on the block, if
And the decision is made to attribute these expenses to Cherrywood because of the knowledge or belief or understanding in Monarch that these monies are being
11
sought from Monarch by the councillors or the politicians because they know
12
that you are going to be developing in Cherrywood and because you will be
13
seeking their assistance in connection with Cherrywood, if I understand you
14
correctly?
14:24:50 15
A.
Well it's a huge -- because the decision would have been made in the accounts
16
department in Monarch rather than made by, I don't think Mr. Monahan would have
17
known anything about it, accounting treatment or indeed Mr. Sweeney.
18
Q. 781
But the accounts --
19
A.
The people from the accounts department, they were looking for a home for
14:25:06 20
these.
21
You had two alternatives; either write them off as an expense that
year.
22
Q. 782
Uh-huh?
23
A.
Or carry them forward.
24
Q. 783
That decision that was made to carry them forward was made in April 1992?
A.
It would appear so, yes, that was the end of the year, yes.
26
Q. 784
When they were transferred into Cherrywood?
27
A.
Yes, well, whenever they were transferred in, yes.
28
Q. 785
I think that was April.
14:25:23 25
29 14:25:40 30
And so a decision was made to carry them forward.
And I think then attempts were made to recover those
funds from GRE; is that right? A.
I think so, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:25:43
14:26:11
89 1
Q. 786
And I think that in March of 1992 I think Mr. Richard Lynn wrote at 8767 to GRE
2
Properties and he enclosed in the second sentence a complete statement in
3
cashflow in relation to the draft Development Plans submission as requested by
4
Brian Gillies.
Do you see that?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 787
And the cashflow projection is at page 8769.
7
Now, I want to draw to your
attention, you'll be familiar with this document, Mr. Glennane?
8
A.
I've seen it before, yes.
9
Q. 788
I want to draw to your attention two headings.
14:26:30 10
One is the second last
heading which is called Strategy Consultancy Fees?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 789
And then the one ahead of it, Community Contributions and Courtesy Personnel,
13 14 14:26:40 15
that's three in fact? A.
Right.
Q. 790
Now, the document is divided into paid and there is -- divided into -- there
16
are payments that have been made up to the 31st of January '92 which is
17
underneath the column entitled total in the centre of the page; isn't that
18
right?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 791
And then there are projections?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 792
For March, April, May and June?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 793
With a projected total.
14:26:55 20
14:27:13 25
And there is a projected total for strategy
consultancy fees of 75,000 being three payments of 25,000; isn't that right?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 794
But there's no actual cost in incurred under the heading of Strategy
28 29 14:27:19 30
Consultancy Fees at this stage; isn't that right? A.
On that sheet, yes.
Q. 795
Isn't that the position? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:27:20
14:27:40
90 1
A.
Yes, on that, yes.
2
Q. 796
Now, that letter is sent on the 16th of March 1992.
And on the 27th of April
3
1992, at 2736.
There is a second version of that document.
And it contains
4
a notation at the bottom.
5
And it says "Richard, I can't find the 25,000 in respect of Strategy
6
Consultancy Fees.
7
Personnel' as follows.
Now, the document is dated the 27th of April 1992.
Can you be specific and then increase 'Consultants Courtesy March '92, 5,000 and April '92, 5,000".
8 9
So it would appear that somebody was looking for a Strategy Consultancy Fee of
14:28:01 10
11
25,000; isn't that right? A.
Well I don't know what -- it says I can't find it.
This is a projection I
12
think.
13
find -- it wouldn't be an invoice or anything it was just a projection.
14
I mean, you wouldn't -- I don't know how you wouldn't be able to
Q. 797
If it was in costs paid to date you'd expect to find it wouldn't you?
A.
Sorry?
16
Q. 798
If it had been in costs paid to date, the first half of the document?
17
A.
If it had been paid, yes.
18
Q. 799
In fact there's nothing under the heading of Strategy Consultancy Fees paid to
14:28:24 15
19 14:28:37 20
date; isn't that right. A.
That's right, yes.
21
Q. 800
Who is the Richard to whom this query is being addressed?
22
A.
I presume it's Richard Lynn.
23
Q. 801
And do you know who is the person making the query?
24
A.
It's obviously somebody in our accounts department, I think, maybe a man called
14:28:51 25
Ken Lawless, I wouldn't be a hundred percent sure of that.
26
Q. 802
On the 28th of April 1992, on the following day, at 3992?
27
A.
Yeah?
28
Q. 803
Under the heading "Strategy Consultancy Fees" a sum of 22,150 pounds has been
29 14:29:08 30
allocated? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:29:09
14:29:13
91 1
Q. 804
Under April 1992?
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 805
Isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 806
So this is under the heading of money that is paid; isn't that right?
6
A.
Has been paid, yes.
7
Q. 807
Has been paid.
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 808
So now the document is saying by April 1992, 22,150 pounds was paid under the
14:29:28 10
heading 'Strategy Consultancy Fees'?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 809
Okay.
13 14 14:29:37 15
As opposed to the projection?
And this is the first time the sum of 22,150 pounds arises; isn't that
right? A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 810
And the total amount that is deemed to have been paid to date is the sum of
16
382,424 pounds; isn't that right?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 811
And included in that sum is the sum of 22,150 pounds for strategy consultancy?
19
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 812
Now, if I could have 3991, please.
14:29:52 20
Now, this is a document between Monarch ,
21
an account with GRE Properties Limited entitled Third Parties Costs.
22
to your attention first that the total expenditure is 382,424 pounds?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 813
And included therefore in that figure is 22,150 pounds for strategy
14:30:18 25
consultancy?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 814
Isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 815
And what is being sought here is 50% of that figure from GRE?
A.
That's right, yes.
14:30:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
I draw
14:30:25
14:30:40
92 1
Q. 816
Less a payment of 71,463 pounds?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 817
Which is lodged to the bank account of Monarch at 7364 on 26th of February '92?
4
A.
Sorry which figure?
5
Q. 818
Sorry, 7346.?
6
A.
Sorry, I'm lost.
7
Q. 819
Sorry.
8
A.
71453, yes.
9
Q. 820
Yes, and that's lodged to the bank account?
A.
Yes, yes.
11
Q. 821
It says 26th of February GRE?
12
A.
Woodchester Bank heading was confusing me. It's GRE, yes.
13
Q. 822
So if we go back to -- 3991.
14:30:55 10
14
You see that there was an amount paid by GRE on account?
It says -- sorry, yes.
What this document is saying effectively is that
there is due to Monarch between Monarch and GRE a sum of 382,424. Included
14:31:19 15
within that is a figure of 22,150 for strategy consultancy; is that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 823
And that half of that is due by GRE and they have already paid 71,463?
18
A.
Well not half of it, yeah, well of the total, yes.
19
Q. 824
Of the total of 382,424 , half of that is being sought from GRE?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 825
Less a sum of 71,463 already paid?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 826
The calculation of the sum of 22,150 is at 8579.
14:31:41 20
24 14:31:53 25
This is the strategy consultancy fee back up; isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes, yes.
27
Q. 827
So that in calculating the sum of 22,150 pounds under the heading of strategy
28
consultancy, what's being added together are various political donations made
29
by Monarch Properties in May and June of 1991?
14:32:17 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:32:17
14:32:31
93 1
Q. 828
The total amount that in fact had been paid by Monarch Properties in May or
2
June of 1991 was a figure of 23,450 pounds.
3
document?
We saw that on the original
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 829
Isn't that right? And now what's being claimed under the heading of strategy
6
consultancy is 22,150; isn't that right?
7
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 830
Now, on the 28th of April 1992, at 3668.
9 14:32:45 10
Again, under the heading Cherrywood Village, because this document I should
11
have pointed out to you, is a document that is headed Cherrywood Village.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 831
And I draw your attention again to the Strategy Consultancy Fees of 22,150 ?
14
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 832
And there is a note at the bottom of the document "next Thursday cheque for
14:33:05 15
16
everything except rings" do you see that?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 833
It's handwritten at the bottom?
19
A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 834
Everything except rings refers to the items on the list that have an asterisk
14:33:19 20
21
or a circle beside them?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 835
One of the items that is circled is the strategy consultancy fees of 22,150 ?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 836
And I suggest that means that GRE had agreed to pay everything except the fees
14:33:33 25
26
that are marked with a black asterisk including the strategy consultancy?
27
A.
About eight or ten different items.
28
Q. 837
There's a number of items?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 838
And the total amount of the items in dispute is 103,271 but the total amount
14:33:45 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:33:53
14:34:10
94 1 2
being sought by Monarch was 382,424? A.
3 4
Yeah well, I don't think it's a correct thing to say that they were in dispute but they may have needed more information or something.
Q. 839
Right.
Well included in that figure, included in that list as one looks at
5
it, Mr. Glennane, is a list of matters that are, that have asterisks or little
6
black ticks beside them?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 840
It starts with MPSL Ledger accounts; Sundry ; administration; stationary,
9
valuations; materials; Pembroke PR; Audio Services; RSI, weekend promotions;
14:34:33 10
payments; then petty cash; wages; courtesy personnel and strategy consultancy
11
fees.
Isn't that right?
12
A.
That's right, yes.
13
Q. 841
And in May of '92, at 3666.
14 14:34:54 15
16
Mr. Noel Murray sends a memo to Mr. Philip
Monahan which is cc'd to yourself and Mr. Eddie Sweeney; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 842
And he records that he met Brian Gillies in Monarch House on Tuesday 7th of May
17
and went through the schedule of costs incurred to the 30th of April '92.
18
That's the schedule we've just been looking at?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 843
He says he attaches a list of the queries raised by Brian?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 844
And I go down to the next paragraph, "I can also advise that Brian is quite
14:35:07 20
23
adamant that GRE will not contribute towards the strategic consultancy fee
24
element of the cash flow projections?
14:35:22 25
A.
Right.
26
Q. 845
So they're not going to pay it, according to this document?
27
A.
According to Brian Gillies, yes.
28
Q. 846
They are baulking at paying the 22,150 ?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 847
The 22,150 is comprised we know of political contributions paid by Monarch in
14:35:32 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:35:39
14:35:51
95 1
May and June of 1991?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 848
The list of queries raised by Brian Gillies are at 3667.
And this list
4
reflects those marks that had been made by way of an asterisk or a circle in
5
the projected cost list; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 849
And the last two on that list are courtesy personnel and strategy consultancy
8 9
fees? A.
Yes.
Q. 850
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes, that's right, yes.
12
Q. 851
Now, on the 8th of May 1992.
14:36:00 10
At 8445.
Mr. Ken Lawless sends to GRE
13
Properties copies of the March and April invoices and sets out that the sum due
14
to Monarch amounts to 146,473 pounds?
14:36:35 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 852
And he encloses with that a schedule of third party cost.
17
At 8846.
And he
sets out the total expenditure to February as 311, 642?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 853
There's additional expenditure in March '92.
14:36:49 20
expenditure in April '92.
Schedule two.
Schedule one.
There's
And there's expenditure in
21
March/April '92, schedule three.
And the figure for schedule 1, is £8,801
22
schedule 2, £61,981 and schedule 3 £53,448.
Is that right?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 854
The total comes to £435,872?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 855
He's looking for 50% of that from GRE less credit for the 71,000 pounds; isn't
14:37:09 25
26 27
that right?
28
A.
That's right.
29
Q. 856
And the total he's looking for is £146,473?
A.
That's right.
14:37:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:37:23
14:37:41
96 1
Q. 857
Attached to that document at page 3998, is another copy of the schedule of
2
costs entitled Cherrywood Village and at the top of it it has one, two and
3
three.
Do you see that?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 858
At the bottom, I want to draw to your attention, at the bottom of the column
6
headed one the figure is 8,801, do you see that?
7
A.
Sorry, where is that.
8
Q. 859
Under the words "Cherrywood Village?"
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 860
Do you see handwritten at the top one and a circle?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 861
If you follow that to the very bottom and the total?
13
A.
Oh, yes, 8101, yes.
14
Q. 862
That was total referred to in schedule one in Mr. Lawless' document at page
14:37:54 10
14:38:09 15
8846; isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah.
17
Q. 863
If you look at column two, 61,981; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 864
And that was attributed to schedule two in Mr. Lawless' document at 8846?
A.
Yeah.
Q. 865
Under column three, 53,447 and that was the amount attributed to schedule three
14:38:20 20
21 22
under Mr. Lawless' document at 8846?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 866
Right.
14:38:38 25
Included in column two is a sum of 22,150 pounds for strategy
consultancy fees?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 867
So, notwithstanding GRE saying that they weren't going to pay them; isn't that
28 29 14:38:44 30
right? A.
Yeah.
Q. 868
Monarch come again in May of 1992 with this document including the strategy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:38:51
14:39:02
97 1
consultancy fees; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 869
So it would appear that by the 14th of the 6th 1992 Monarch are still
4
maintaining that they are entitled to be paid half these costs?
5
A.
Yes, I think so, yes.
6
Q. 870
And can you explain to the Tribunal how it was that political donations
7 8
totalling 22,150 pounds came to be described as strategy consultancy fees? A.
9 14:39:24 10
11
It's quite clear from one of the earlier documents that GRE
knew what they were. Q. 871
That's not my question.?
A.
No, well, I mean.
12 13
I don't know, no.
Maybe GRE asked us to call them that or something, I don't
know. Q. 872
14
Well insofar as GRE are concerned, they are adamant, according to Mr. Noel Murray, that they will not contribute towards the strategic consultancy
14:39:44 15
element?
16
A.
Mr. Gillies, was.
17
Q. 873
Yes?
18
A.
He wouldn't have carried much authority as far as we were concerned in GRE.
19
Q. 874
Right.
14:39:53 20
But leaving that aside for the moment.
Someone has designated
£22,150 of political donations that are made in May and June of 1991 by
21
Monarch Properties Services Limited as strategy consultancy fees?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 875
First of all, is that right?
24
A.
Sorry, yeah, it is right, yes.
Q. 876
And then can I ask you.
26
A.
Well, it's as good a way as any I suppose, if I'm being honest about it.
27
Q. 877
How can a political donation be described as a fee?
28
A.
Well, it doesn't be described as a fee obviously, yes.
29
Q. 878
And what strategic consultancy was involved in the sum of 22,150 pounds paid
14:40:11 25
14:40:35 30
Is that a correct way to describe them?
to local councillors and politicians in May and June of 1991? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:40:40
14:40:52
98 1
A.
2
I don't know -- there was no consultancy fee, no. It was obviously a convenient heading more than anything else.
3
Q. 879
And who came up with the convenient heading?
4
A.
I don't know.
5
Q. 880
How could this --
6
A.
Maybe GRE.
7
Q. 881
This document, I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, as you well know, is a document
8 9 14:41:06 10
I'm not saying that it was.
generated by Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right? A.
Absolutely.
Q. 882
And the creation of this document is created for the purpose of advising GRE of
11
the expenses that have been incurred by Monarch Properties Services Limited in
12
connection with Cherrywood Village; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 883
And so is the document headed that.
14:41:21 15
That is for the purpose of retaining
repayment; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right.
17
Q. 884
And I would suggest to you that if you accept that, it follows that somebody
18
within Monarch decided to describe strategy consultancy fees as an appropriate
19
way to describe 22,150 pounds worth of political donations; isn't that right?
14:41:36 20
21
A.
Well, it's a convenient way or whatever, yes.
Q. 885
All right.
22
Well, who was the person who was able to conveniently describe
political donations in that way?
23
A.
I don't know.
24
Q. 886
Well can you think of any reason as to why somebody would do that?
A.
Well, I mean, I don't know.
14:41:49 25
Again, as I said, unless it was bounced off GRE
26
first and they wanted it described as that.
27
documents that you had earlier.
28
from GRE.
29 14:42:08 30
If you go back to one of those
There was certainly no attempt to conceal it
Q. 887
I beg your pardon?
A.
If you go back to one of the documents that you had earlier. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
There was no
14:42:12
14:42:24
99 1
attempt to conceal it from GRE.
2
political parties after them.
You had a document earlier with a list of
3
Q. 888
I'm not worried about GRE?
4
A.
This document is solely prepared for GRE.
5
Q. 889
What I'm asking you about?
6
A.
You have to be worried about GRE.
7 8
seeking reimbursement from GRE. Q. 890
9 14:42:43 10
11
Somebody decided to describe 22,150 pounds worth of political donations as strategy consultancy fees, doesn't that follow?
A.
Yes.
Q. 891
Now, I want you to explain to the Tribunal A you who believe that person to be
12
and what the reason for doing that was?
13
A.
Well A, I don't know.
14
Q. 892
Well was it you?
A.
I don't think so.
14:42:55 15
It was solely prepared for the purposes of
But I don't recall doing it.
I -- I could speculate if
16
you want me to on who might have done it, I don't know if you want me to.
17
certainly appears that it was a document prepared in consultation with GRE.
18
There was certainly no attempt to conceal what they were.
19
somebody in GRE said this will look better coming to our people if it's
14:43:22 20
21
And perhaps
described as that, but that's mere speculation. Q. 893
Can that really be so, Mr. Glennane, if one looks at the very first version of
22
this document entitled Cherrywood Projections at 8769 before it ever goes to
23
GRE.
24
that?
14:43:43 25
26
You will see there a designation 'strategy consultancy fees', do you see
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 894
And this is before it's ever sent off on the first instance to GRE; isn't that
27
right? Because you see there is nothing included as having been spent under
28
the heading; isn't that right?
29 14:43:55 30
It
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 895
So it's unlikely in those circumstances to have been a designation requested by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:44:01
14:44:17
100 1 2
GRE; isn't that right? A.
Well, I don't think that necessarily follows.
I'm sure there was
3
communication on the phone and we were saying we wanted to try to recover half
4
of these costs and the GRE personnel may well have said put them in there.
5
Q. 896
Are you sure --
6
A.
Political contribution.
7
Q. 897
Is that speculation on your part?
8
A.
It is, yes.
9
Q. 898
Are you aware of any such conversation, Mr. Glennane?
A.
Not specifically, no but there was certainly constant communication with GRE.
Q. 899
Certainly insofar as the documents in the first version is created within
14:44:29 10
11
It might not be acceptable to somebody in GRE.
12
Monarch, the document at 8769 has already a Designation Strategy Consultancy
13
Fees and records nothing having been paid under that heading to the 31st of
14
January '92; isn't that right?
14:44:50 15
16
A.
That's right.
Q. 900
And then when one comes to look at a later version which is the 14th of June
17
'92 at 3998.
You see that, and we've seen it already?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 901
The sum of 22,150 which you agree is the list of political donations made by
14:45:07 20
Monarch in May and June of '91?
21
A.
Can I see the list again, please?
22
Q. 902
Certainly.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 903
Now, it's not the full list of the payments that were actually ...
A.
I think it's worth emphasising that there is no attempt to conceal what that
14:45:31 25
3122?
26
is.
27
somebody.
28
names or initials.
29 14:46:02 30
Q. 904
It says if FG, FF, FF.
So it's obvious that it was discussed with
It wasn't just sent out of the blue saying this is a whole list of So it wouldn't have been sent just out of the blue.
Two things have happened by June of 1992.
At 3998.
Somebody has decided
that strategy consultancy means political payments of the order of 21,500 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:46:07
14:46:14
101 1
pounds?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 905
And somebody has located them as having been paid by April '92; isn't that
4
right?
5
A.
That's right.
6
Q. 906
In fact those payments had been made in May and June of '91; isn't that right?
7
A.
So I believe, yes.
8
Q. 907
In the very first version of this document there is no record of them having
9
been allocated as having been paid before May and June of '91; isn't that
14:46:31 10
right? Sorry, before April of '92; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right.
12
Q. 908
So somebody made a second decision to include them; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 909
No, who did that?
A.
Um, whoever prepared that document, which may have been either Ken Lawless or
14:46:41 15
16
Mr. Lynn or certainly it wouldn't have been done in isolation.
17
probably a combination of people.
18
Q. 910
19
And did anything happen around this time in May or June of 1992, that would have caused somebody to include the sum of 22,150 pounds as being part of
14:47:08 20
21
So it was
strategy consultancy fees? A.
No, well my belief is that it would probably have been discussed.
They said
22
we'd like to recoup half of these costs.
23
this way by GRE because certainly if you look back to that list just on
24
initials there's no way that would have been sent sort of cold to somebody. It
14:47:34 25
26
And we were asked to designate it
wouldn't mean anything. Q. 911
On the 27th of April 1992.
At 3736.
And I just want to draw to your
27
attention, Mr. Glennane, it might help, the date at the bottom of this
28
document, which is the 22nd of April?
29 14:47:49 30
A.
'92.
Q. 912
' 92.
You see under the heading 'strategy consultancy fees' nothing has been Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:47:55
14:48:00
102 1
entered?
2
A.
That's right, yeah.
3
Q. 913
There is a query to Richard Lynn about where is the 25,000?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 914
On the following day 28th of April 1992.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 915
The 22,150 is allocated to 'strategy consultancy fees' for the first time;
8 9 14:48:13 10
At 3992?
isn't that right? A.
I see that yeah.
Q. 916
Did that allocation have anything to do with the transfer of the fees out of
11
Monarch Properties Services Limited into the Cherrywood General Promotion
12
Account which occurred at the same time?
13
A.
I don't think so, no.
14
Q. 917
So you say that these matters are not related?
A.
No, I wouldn't think so, no.
Q. 918
When the calculation of the list of 22,150 was done, would somebody have had
14:48:28 15
16 17
to go back to the books and records of Monarch to find out where those payments
18
were?
19 14:48:42 20
A.
I assume so, yes, yeah.
Q. 919
And when they went back.
21
the first half of that page.
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 920
And in April of '92.
24
If we could have 3987.
Political donations; Isn't that right?
If somebody went looking for the back up of that list
they would have realised that where those payments had been posted was not to
14:49:07 25
Cherrywood but to Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right?
26
A.
Possibly, yes.
27
Q. 921
Well that's where they're posted; isn't it?
28
A.
Can't see the heading on it.
29 14:49:24 30
And if you look at really
it is. Q. 922
I don't know if that's a trial balance or what
Sorry, General Ledger Report.
If you look at 3928? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:49:27
14:49:46
103 1
A.
That would normally be done well after the end of the year.
2
Q. 923
If you look at -- I'm just looking at the allocation now, Mr. Glennane.
3
look at 3986.
At the bottom of that page.
4
matter is sponsorship 66801201?
5
A.
That's right, yeah.
6
Q. 924
If we look at the following page, 3987.
If we
You will see that the very last
You will see that all of those
7
political payments are attributed to that account within MPSL; isn't that
8
right?
9
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 925
And that account is not a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
11
A.
Yeah, that's right, yes.
12
Q. 926
It's a 6682101; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's what we have on this, yes.
14
Q. 927
And the political donations on that page amount to 15,350 pounds.
14:50:00 10
14:50:17 15
go to 3988.
16
At the very bottom of the first half of the document.
And if we I draw to
your attention 30 April '92 transfer to Cherrywood promotion 15,350 pounds.?
17
A.
I see that, yeah.
18
Q. 928
Now, two things are happening simultaneously in Monarch.
19
One is, a claim is
being made for 21,250 pounds 'strategy consultancy fees', which are comprised
14:50:52 20
of political donations; isn't that right?
21
A.
That's right, yes.
22
Q. 929
And those political donations are up to April 1992 recorded as being posted not
23 24 14:50:57 25
26
to Cherrywood but to Monarch Properties Services Limited; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 930
And in April of 1992 they are taken out of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
A.
Sorry, not necessarily in April.
27
which could be most likely after April.
28
Q. 931
Do you see transaction date?
29
A.
Well.
Q. 932
At the top of the document.
14:51:14 30
They are taken out of the end of the year,
TRX date?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:51:17
14:51:25
104 1
A.
Yeah.
2
Q. 933
And go down to the very bottom what's?
3
A.
12, '92.
4
Q. 934
What does it say.
5
A.
That was the end of the year, yes.
6
Q. 935
So the transfer is taking place at the 30th of April '92; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes, but that's the end of the year, yeah.
8
Q. 936
Yes.
9
It says the 30th of April '92?
But what is happening is that these political expenses are being cut out
of the promotions account in Monarch Properties Services Limited and are being
14:51:42 10
transferred over to the Cherrywood Promotion Account; isn't that right?
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 937
And this is happening at the same time as somebody has decided to allocate
13 14
these costs as being Strategy Consultancy Fees; isn't that right? A.
14:52:02 15
No, I'm saying that I would believe that that entry there was probably made sometime well after April '92.
16
Q. 938
Notwithstanding that it's dated April' 29?
17
A.
No, because the end of the year was April.
18
off until the following January.
19
entry would have been made.
14:52:20 20
Q. 939
21
So the accounts were never signed
So sometime between April and January that
And if you look at the second half of that list.
Sorry, if we could have the
full page back?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 940
And you see account 66802201 promotions.
24
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
Q. 941
And that is the promotions account in Monarch Properties Services Limited?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 942
And do you see four payments T Hand, FG, J. Fahy FF, JD, JH, SH, OH.
14:52:32 25
28 29 14:52:46 30
see that? A.
I do, yeah.
Q. 943
They are all political payments aren't they? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that account?
Do you
14:52:49
14:53:07
105 1
A.
2
I don't know about the JD and JH, they don't have any political party named after them.
So I don't know. But certainly the T Hand's and the J Fahy are.
3
Q. 944
And OH.
4
A.
I don't know, I have no idea.
5
Q. 945
You've no idea no, but they total 8,100 pounds those payments; isn't that
6
Would that be Owen Hammond?
right?
7
A.
I think so, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 946
And if you move to the next page.
9 14:53:29 10
11
3989.
And at the bottom of the first
entry you see transfer to Cherrywood Promotions 8,100 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 947
So two things have happened.
The political payments that have been made by
12
Monarch Properties Services Limited are being carved or taken out of the
13
general promotions and sponsorship account of Monarch Properties Services
14
Limited and being placed into a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
14:53:46 15
A.
That's right, yes.
16
Q. 948
And they total 23,450; isn't that right?
17
A.
Well I don't know.
18
Q. 949
Well if we look at 3990.
19
I believe, yes. And this account at the bottom of the page is
account 73510201. And the 73 accounts were Cherrywood accounts; isn't that
14:54:08 20
right?
21
A.
Um, yes, well, yes.
22
Q. 950
And that's the general promotion account?
23
A.
That's right, yes.
24
Q. 951
And at the very bottom of that transfer 15,350 promotion and 8,100, 23,450
14:54:23 25
pounds do you see that?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 952
So that is the other side of the transaction.
We saw it coming out of the
28
Monarch Properties Services Limited two accounts and it's now coming into the
29
Cherrywood account, isn't that right?
14:54:34 30
A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:54:34
14:54:53
106 1
Q. 953
2
And that figure of 23,450 is the same list of political donations provided to the Tribunal by you at 3241.
Do you see that?
3
A.
Provided by Monarch, yes.
4
Q. 954
Yes.
5
A.
I helped prepare, it, yes.
6
Q. 955
That list totals 23,450 pounds?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 956
The amount that had been attributed to Strategy Consultancy Fees was a sum of
9 14:55:10 10
And I think you helped prepare that list?
21,500 pounds; isn't that right? A.
I thought it was 22,150 or something but maybe I'm wrong.
11
Q. 957
Maybe you're correct.?
12
A.
There was --
13
Q. 958
22,150?
14
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 959
And I think at 3996.?
16
A.
There appears to be a difference of about 1,300, Ms. Dillon.
17
Q. 960
Well there's slightly more than that but certainly at the first instance.
14:55:19 15
18
the document dated the 8th of June 1992.
19
consultancy fees across, the 22,150, you will see beside it just slightly
14:55:42 20
above it in handwritten plus 2,700.
If you follow the strategy
Do you see that?
21
A.
Sorry, where is that again?
22
Q. 961
If you could increase the portion dealing with the bottom third of the
23
document, please.
24
the side.
14:55:59 25
Yes.
On
And if you just look at the handwritten notation at
Do you see that?
A.
Sorry, plus 2,700. I see that.
26
Q. 962
Do you see that?
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 963
And that is the difference, Mr. Glennane, between the 22,150 and the 23,450?
29
A.
No, I wouldn't think that's the difference.
Q. 964
You don't think that.
14:56:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:56:15
14:56:36
107 1
A.
2
Q. 965
3
If you subtract 22 from 23 you don't get 2,700. Sorry, I beg your pardon.
It's the difference, sorry, I think between the.
It should be 24,850; is that right?
4
A.
I am not counting but it is certainly not 23,000.
5
Q. 966
24, 850 it should be, Mr.-- and on the following version of the document on the
6
14th of June, at 3998.
Do you see there is added in a figure of 3,000 pounds
7
under the heading strategy consultancy fees?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 967
Do you know what that relates to?
A.
Interim lay or something.
11
Q. 968
1700 not 2,700.
12
A.
I do, yes.
13
Q. 969
Do you know what that relates to?
14
A.
No, it's interim at the top, I'm not quite sure what that means.
Q. 970
Okay.
14:57:04 10
14:57:22 15
16
I'll come back to that.
Can I show you 7380, please.
Do you see the figure of 3,000?
And do you see the first entry across is
a cheque made out to cash?
17
A.
Cherrywood, yes.
18
Q. 971
And it's attributable to Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes, yeah.
Q. 972
And you see at 7381.
21
A.
I do, yeah.
22
Q. 973
From the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 974
And the cheque at 8544 I think is signed by yourself.
A.
That's right, yes.
26
Q. 975
And it's made out to cash?
27
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
28
Q. 976
And that appears to be at 3707.
14:57:40 20
14:58:03 25
29 14:58:19 30
It's deducted.
Do you see that? From the account of?
The second item on this list headed cash
3,000 pounds and strategy beside it? A.
Is that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
14:58:19
14:58:48
108 1
Q. 977
And I suggest that explains how it's now being included in the list at 3998.
2
So the first figure is 22,150 is made up of the list of political payments.
3
And the second sum of 3,000 pounds is a cash payment that's made on foot of a
4
cheque signed by you in May of 1992.
5
what that cash payment was about?
Now, can you assist the Tribunal as to
6
A.
No, I can't, no.
7
Q. 978
Well what we do know is that the 22,150 is comprised of political payments;
8 9
Not at this stage, no.
isn't that right? A.
Political contributions, yes.
Q. 979
Political contributions?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 980
So it would follow, would it not, that the payment of 3,000 pounds is equally
14:59:02 10
13 14 14:59:13 15
paid to a politician? A.
Not necessarily.
I don't know that I would reach that conclusion.
Q. 981
Let's just analyse that for a little bit so.
We know for a fact that the
16
22,150 is comprised solely and absolutely of political contribution; isn't
17
that right?
18
A.
There's a figure put in April '92 apparently, yes.
19
Q. 982
But we know that it's political contributions; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 983
That it has no other matter or payment included in it other than political
14:59:32 20
21 22
contributions?
23
A.
From that list, yes.
24
Q. 984
And therefore, we know that somebody in Monarch decided that political
14:59:45 25
contributions should be described as strategy consultancy fees although we do
26
not know who that person is; isn't that right?
27
A.
Or somebody within GRE.
28
Q. 985
Or somebody in GRE?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 986
Although you agree that the document was created by Monarch?
14:59:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:00:00
15:00:11
109 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 987
It would follow from that, I suggest, that a payment of 3,000 pounds must
3
similarly be a political contribution which is now being described as strategy
4
consultancy fees.
5
A.
Not necessarily, no.
6
multitude.
7
the two.
8
Q. 988
9 15:00:34 10
Would you agree with that?
Uh-huh.
I mean, strategy consultancy fees could cover a
I mean, it's, I don't see any necessary connection really between
Do you know what was happening with the planning in May of 1992? The
planning and the zoning of Cherrywood in May of 1992? A.
Yes, yes.
11
Q. 989
What was happening?
12
A.
Well there was a meeting at some stage in May or towards the end of May to --
13
Q. 990
You know that on the 4th of May 1992.
14 15:00:53 15
7144, please.
A motion seeking the
rezoning of these lands was received by Dublin County Council? A.
Well, I didn't know that, but, yes.
16
Q. 991
Do you think these matters, these two matters might in some way be connected?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 992
But you have no idea what the 3,000 pounds was paid for?
19
A.
No, no.
Q. 993
Who decided to allocate the word "strategy" to the 3,000 pounds?
21
A.
I don't know.
22
Q. 994
Was it you?
23
A.
No, it certainly wasn't, I don't think, no.
24
Q. 995
Do you know where the sum of 3,000 pounds was attributed in the books of
15:01:11 20
15:01:28 25
26
Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.
27
Well I would have assumed if Cherrywood is written after it, it went into this promotions account we were talking about earlier.
28
Q. 996
It went into 7382?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 997
7382, please.
15:01:41 30
It seems ...
You will see there account 73571 promotion open days.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Now,
15:01:50
15:02:03
110 1
the 73 means that's a Cherrywood account; isn't that right?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 998
But this is another Cherrywood account.
4
postage and telephone.
And some four items down between
You have cash cheque, isn't that right, 3,000 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 999
So this is being attributed as being a payment in connection with or associated
7
with Cherrywood; isn't that right?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 1000
And it is further being attributed as being a strategic payment; isn't that
15:02:18 10
right?
11
A.
Well not necessarily by the same person, yes.
12
Q. 1001
But it is being so attributed?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 1002
Right.
And it finally finds its association in strategy consultancy fees at
3998.
Because --
15:02:30 15
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 1003
They are described in association with the 22,150 as strategy consultancy?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1004
And can you assist the Tribunal at all as to how that 3,000 pounds could either
15:02:48 20
have been a strategic payment or a consultancy payment or a political payment?
21
A.
No, could you go back to the cheque payments sheets, please.
22
Q. 1005
I can. The actual cheque?
23
A.
No, the actual cheque payments sheet where somebody has written Cherrywood.
24
Q. 1006
73 --
A.
In the margin.
26
Q. 1007
Sorry the cheque payments book?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1008
Sorry.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 1009
And if you could increase the second or third line of that please.?
15:03:11 25
15:03:19 30
7380.?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:03:25
15:03:44
111 1
A.
I'm just trying to figure who that handwriting is.
2
transactions would have followed from that.
3
is or who wrote "Cherrywood" there.
4
Q. 1010
Well certainly somebody --
5
A.
Somebody wrote Cherrywood.
6
have.
7
Cherrywood account.
Because the rest of the
I don't know whose writing that
As I said, the rest of the transactions would
When somebody came to post it they would have posted it to the
8
Q. 1011
And if somebody?
9
A.
If somebody included in that other list, not necessarily the same person,
15:03:59 10
11
that's the point I'm making. Q. 1012
12
At 3707.
Someone has written the word "strategy" beside the cash of 3,000;
isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1013
And then it appears -- it appears in the --
A.
The sheets.
16
Q. 1014
In the sheets, yeah.
17
A.
That's what I'm saying.
15:04:14 15
18 19 15:04:27 20
21
At 3998 isn't that right? I think the rest of it flowed from that entry on the
cheques payments sheet. Q. 1015
That because it's being attributed to Cherrywood?
A.
Exactly, yes.
Q. 1016
So why would that be so? Why couldn't it have gone into Cherrywood supplies,
22
for example? Why would simply attributing it to Cherrywood mean that it would
23
end up as a strategy consultancy payment?
24 15:04:46 25
26
A.
I don't know.
I'm just saying if it went into promotions I don't know why.
Obviously if it was described as cash it would be difficult for somebody to ascertain afterwards what it was for.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
Sorry, Ms. Dillon.
29 15:04:53 30
MS. DILLON: Sorry, Sir. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:04:54
15:04:59
112 1 2 3 4
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Glennane, you signed the cheque for 3,000?
That's right.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
feature, I take it?
8
A.
And a cheque made payable to cash would have been an unusual
Well not that unusual, no, no.
9 15:05:06 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
12
No, no.
No.
For that size of? I mean, there was -- I mean, you'd often -- certainly there are
several reasons why you draw cheques for cash.
13 14 15:05:24 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
But presumably if you were signing it you'd have asked?
I'd have known at the time I think, yes.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
cash?
19
A.
No, no, no.
Yes.
So would that have been an unusually large sum to write for
I wouldn't think so, no.
15:05:48 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
23
Well, I mean, do you -- was it something that you did every day?
Certainly not every day, no.
Once a month or once every three or four months
or whatever.
24 15:05:48 25
CHAIRMAN:
26 27
So you must know -- you must have some idea as to what it was used
for? A.
I'm saying generally they were cheques drawn for cash by Mr. Monahan to buy
28
cars.
29
in the habit of buying old cars.
15:06:13 30
I'm not a hundred percent sure if it was to buy his own cars.
He was
I can't remember that particular one at that
time, it was 13 years ago. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:06:15
15:06:29
113 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
"Cherrywood" would have provided you with similar information if it wasn't your
4
decision to record it under those headings?
5
A.
6
Well, no.
But presumably the person who allocated it to "strategy" and to
As I said, somebody, and I don't know whose writing it is, has
written in "Cherrywood" after it.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Having asked you to sign the cheque?
No, sorry, that was written after the cheque was signed it was written on it.
15:06:42 10
11 12
CHAIRMAN: A.
So --
I don't know if it's the same handwriting even as the actual entry.
13 14 15:06:53 15
CHAIRMAN: A.
16
And it goes into -- it goes into a --
It could be a month, two months, three months later somebody is going into, analysing these things, looking for a home for it.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
me, 100 percent of political payments.
15:07:13 20
21
It's allocated to a capital which includes, as I can, it appears to It doesn't include any other type of
payment? A.
Well, just one, this.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
appears only to refer to payments to politicians.
15:07:27 25
A.
Yes.
But the strategy payments only include -- it's a term which
Well, on that particular list, yes, that's right, yes.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
because you say you can't be certain, as a matter of probability that the
29
3,000, given that it was given this similar designation, was also intended for
15:07:51 30
Yes.
So can we take it then that as a matter of probability,
politicians? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:07:52
15:08:05
114 1
A.
I wouldn't, no.
I wouldn't reach that conclusion, myself, no.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
you really haven't a clue what was written
5
A.
But I don't understand why you can -- why on the one hand you say
No.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
You don't know who designated it.
8
when it's proposed that it be treated by the Tribunal on the balance of
9
probability as being the same as all of the other payments under that
15:08:19 10
designation.
11
proposition.
12
A.
You seem quite firm to reject that as being the reasonable
Well I think it's -- I think that in my memory there was never any attempt to
13
draw money for cash to give to politicians.
14
occurring.
15:08:44 15
for cash.
16
But yet you seem quite firm
I don't recall any -- that ever
And to me what's happened here is somebody has written a cheque Somebody else at some stage, possibly later, has written
"Cherrywood" against it.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well you you wrote the cheque for cash?
I didn't, no.
15:08:55 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
Well you signed the cheque?
I signed the cheque, yes.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
15:09:03 25
Well, is it your proposal then to the Tribunal.
Is it your
proposal then that we should assume that when all of the other payments
26
designated under this particular designation are payments to politicians.
27
This should be definitely decided by the Tribunal as not being such a payment?
28
A.
Well --.
29 15:09:21 30
CHAIRMAN:
You seem quite firm.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:09:22
15:09:34
115 1
A.
2
Well in my opinion it's not.
I think there's a huge quantum leap to make to
assume that.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
5
for?
6
A.
7
But you can't give us any idea as to what it might have been used
Well it could have been.
It was quite common for Mr. Monahan to come in and
draw cash if he was going off to buy an old car or draw cash.
8 9 15:09:47 10
CHAIRMAN: A.
But it would hardly go into this particular designation
I'm just saying somebody wrote Cherrywood after it.
11 12 13
CHAIRMAN: A.
14
Uh-huh.
And it followed from that trail somebody else coming in would have, it would have got posted to the general promotions account.
15:10:03 15
And somebody, not
necessarily the same person, they would have gone through the cheques payments
16
sheets and said there is something for Cherrywood so add it on to this.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Presumably when you signed the cheque, the payee is cash is there
Yeah.
15:10:16 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
And do you recognise the writing of?
Show it again there.
23 24
CHAIRMAN:
Put it back up again, please.
15:10:23 25
26
MS. DILLON:
4544.
.
27 28
CHAIRMAN:
29
you're ...
15:10:39 30
A.
There's a fair bit of handwriting there to, that should I think if
If it was up to me, probably a man called Pat Cooney. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:10:45
15:10:57
116 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
Sorry?
It was probably a chap called Pat Cooney.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
And what was his?
He worked in the cash department.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: A.
Mr. Monahan presumably ...
Can I see the cheque payments again?
15:10:58 10
11
MS. DILLON:
7380.
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN: A.
15:11:19 15
Sorry?
I wanted to check -- these cheques were written on sort of carbon and the actual payment was made at the same time.
16
I just wanted to make sure it was
the same handwriting, you know.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
buy a car, is it likely that he would have been have gone to somebody, a
15:11:34 20
21
If it was a case of Mr. Monahan looking for this amount of money to
relatively junior person to get a cheque made out to cash? A.
Oh, yes.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
position?
15:11:42 25
A.
Or is it more likely that he would go to somebody in a more Senior
He'd have gone to the person who had the cheque book.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
department in effect?
29
A.
And do you know from your -- because you were head of this
Yeah.
15:11:50 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:11:50
15:12:13
117 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
normally be a fairly accurate designation of the reason for the cheque made out
3
by whatever staff member?
4
A.
Was it the practice if Mr. Monahan made such a request, would there
No, if he came in and said I want a cheque for cash, we'd make it out for cash.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
7
designation for the payment?
8
A.
9
But would -- would he not designate or give the person a
Not necessarily, maybe he might, maybe he mightn't.
He might just well say to
them or whatever.
15:12:31 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
cheques made payment to cash.
13
wouldn't have provided the staff member?
14
A.
So does that mean within the accounts in Monarch you would have Without any designation because Mr. Monahan
Certainly, that could happen, did happen, yes.
15:12:49 15
16 17
CHAIRMAN: A.
And did they remain blank then?
No, they were made out to cash.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
15:12:59 20
21
Yes but do they remain blank or are they assigned to some activity.
As in this case it was assigned to Cherrywood? A.
Yes, I think it was, yes.
22 23 24 15:13:09 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
So --
I mean, they would have been assigned to some, something like Cherrywood or sundries or something.
I think it's a different handwriting there than
26
Cherrywood.
So somebody else assigned it to Cherrywood at a different time
27
than when the cheque was drawn.
In my opinion anyway.
28 29
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
15:13:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:13:28
15:13:43
118 1
MR SANFEY: Before Ms. Dillon resumes, there was a document put up on the
2
screen a moment ago. We didn't catch the number but it had the cheque for
3
3,000 allocated among a number of different, what appeared to be entertainment
4
expenses under the heading promotion.
5
that.
I wonder if Ms. Dillon could locate
I want to have a look at it again.
6 7
MS. DILLON:
7382.
Is that the document?
MR SANFEY:
Perhaps the bottom portion could be increased.
8 9 15:14:01 10
It's just it
struck us that there were a number of matters referred to there which seemed to
11
relate to a typical sort of promotion type of activities.
12
chocolates, privilege.
Classic hits, wine,
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
15:14:25 15
Yes.
They are all, much smaller sums.
But this doesn't -- this
is just dealt with as a cash cheque.
16 17
MR SANFEY: I was just wondering whether it might assist Mr. Glennane in any
18
way.
19
A.
No, I don't think so, no.
15:14:40 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
22
MR SANFEY: Thank you, Chairman.
23 24
MS. DILLON:
15:14:59 25
Mr. Glennane, on the 6th of July 1992.
At 3997.
increase the bottom third of that and this again is headed Cherrywood Village.
26
A.
Right.
27
Q. 1017
Isn't that right? Again, if we look at strategy consultancy fees?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 1018
There's a figure of 22,150 .
15:15:16 30
If we could
Then the 3,000, which is the cheque made out to
cash? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:15:17
15:15:29
119 1
A.
Right.
2
Q. 1019
And then it has increased to 27,850; isn't that right?
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 1020
So that there is an additional 2,700 pounds?
5
A.
That's right, yes.
6
Q. 1021
So that the total amount now claimed for strategy consultancy fees is 27,850?
7
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
8
Q. 1022
I think that the documentation shows that GRE were unhappy to pay this strategy
9 15:15:52 10
consultancy fees; isn't that right? A.
They were.
11
Q. 1023
And certainly as of June 16th '92.
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1024
There was a meeting between Mr. Beng, Mr. Murray and Mr. Lynn?
14
A.
All right.
Q. 1025
And on the following page at 8842.
15:16:09 15
They were certainly unhappy originally about the 22,150.
16
1992.
17
invoices had not been forwarded.
18
that right.
19 15:16:40 20
At 8841?
Dealing with the second schedule of April
The strategy consultancy fees of 22,150 and courtesy personnel
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1026
Now, that refers back to 3998.
And the total was reduced to 34,381; isn't
We'd looked at this schedule earlier.
21
under the column headed April 1992.
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes, I think so, yeah.
24
Q. 1027
61,981.
15:16:59 25
And
You will see that the total is 61,981;
And it appears that deducted from that figure by GRE was the sum of
22,150 and 5,000 because no invoices had been forwarded; isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 1028
And it was also agreed at that meeting at 8843, in the centre, it was agreed
28
that RML, that's Mr. Lynn, would re cast the schedules and show only the
29
amounts which had been agreed and the outstanding invoices would feature in an
15:17:22 30
additional schedule? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:17:23
15:17:30
120 1
A.
Right.
2
Q. 1029
Isn't that right?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 1030
So what appears to have been agreed between GRE was in relation to the items
5
that they were in dispute with Monarch is that Mr. Lynn was going to prepare a
6
schedule showing what had been agreed and what was in dispute?
7
A.
Yes, that would be probably be right, yes.
8
Q. 1031
And it appears he did so because in July of '92 at 3770, at the third
9
paragraph.
15:17:54 10
He encloses a schedule No. 8 in the sum of 99,858 and he says
subject to variations which will emerge from your computer sheet the sum
11
outstanding by GRE properties to Monarch Properties amounts to 206,681 and he
12
asks him to agree the figures in schedule eight; isn't that right? In the next
13
paragraph?
14 15:18:11 15
A.
Sorry, yes, yeah.
Q. 1032
And the schedule that's enclosed with that is at 8777.
16
schedules one through to eight; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 1033
And schedule eight comes to 99,858.
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1034
According to this.
15:18:29 20
And that refers to
21
Isn't that right?
And the total due from GRE, as per Mr. Lynn's letter is
recorded as 206,681 pounds?
22
A.
That's right, yes.
23
Q. 1035
And the schedules that are attached are at 8778 and the continuation of that,
24
at 8779.
15:19:02 25
And if we could increase the bottom half of schedule eight, please.
The bottom half of the page.
Now, the second last column.
26
to the full so that we can see.
27
schedule eight; isn't that right?
To go just back
The top of the page the second last column is
28
A.
Sorry, yes.
29
Q. 1036
And schedule eight according to Mr. Lynn's letter, was the schedule he was
15:19:20 30
asking them to agree and it totalled 99,858. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
And they were the matters in
15:19:26
15:19:37
121 1
dispute.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, yes.
3
Q. 1037
And if we go down to the bottom half of schedule eight please at 8779.
4
And
you see first of all the total is 99,858?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 1038
And included under the heading of strategy consultancy fees is a sum of 27,850?
7
A.
That's right, yes.
8
Q. 1039
So what is happening here is Mr. Lynn has included under this heading the same
9 15:19:56 10
fees that have already been disputed by GRE; isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes, yeah.
11
Q. 1040
And that figure of 27,850 is the 22,150 of political donations?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1041
Plus the cheque for 3,000?
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1042
Plus the difference of 2,700; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
17
Q. 1043
And GRE are seeking to recover these; isn't that right?
18
A.
Sorry?
19
Q. 1044
Sorry.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1045
On the 27th of July '92.
15:20:07 15
15:20:23 20
21
Monarch are seeking to recover these from GRE, 50% of them?
At 3789.
Mr. Eddie Sweeney wrote to Mr. Martin
22
Baker, under the heading 'costs'. He notes that Mr. Baker has approved
23
payments of 149,898 and are presently checking further invoices per schedule
24
eight which amounts to 99,858 and not 56,784 as mentioned in yours?
15:20:52 25
A.
Right, yes.
26
Q. 1046
That figure of 99,858 is the total of schedule eight; isn't that right?
27
A.
I think so, yes.
28
Q. 1047
Include in the that is the figure of 27,850 for strategy consultancy fees?
29
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1048
Include in the that figure of 27,850, is a figure of 22,150 political
15:21:05 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:21:10
15:21:35
122 1
donations and a 3,000 pounds cheque to cash; isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes, yeah.
3
Q. 1049
Now, the --
4
A.
Sorry.
5
Just on that.
I mean, obviously, we provided details to GRE at the
time of that 3,000.
6
Q. 1050
Yes.
7
A.
Sorry, they approved the figure 149, yes.
8
Q. 1051
But that doesn't include the figure of 99,858.?
9
A.
Well.
Q. 1052
They include the other figure; isn't that right.
11
A.
Sorry, I can't see where you're going.
12
Q. 1053
I'm sorry.
13
A.
It's quite hard to follow all of this.
14
Q. 1054
If you see the heading Cabinteely at 3827 and you see paragraph 12,
15:21:50 10
15:22:03 15
And GRE subsequently agree the figure of 149,898.
At 3827.?
It's?
sub-paragraph 1?
16
A.
Yes, 50% is due to GRE, yes.
17
Q. 1055
Yes?
18
A.
Checking further invoices submitted and confirm that in principle they accept
19
they will be responsible for 50% of these costs but are not willing to make any
15:22:21 20
payments until such time as the majority of the matters in respect of Tallaght
21 22
have been settled. Q. 1056
23 24
Yes, I think the situation was with GRE was that they agreed that they would pay figures but that it was subject to production of invoices?
A.
15:22:41 25
Well, it makes reference there to Tallaght, checking the further invoices submitted so ....
26
Q. 1057
Yes but the 149,898 is agreed; isn't that right?
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 1058
But the other figure that had been included in the letter has not yet been
29 15:22:56 30
agreed, the figure of 99,858; isn't that right? A.
Well I'm not sure if paragraph two is referring to that or not, I don't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:23:01
15:23:22
123 1
It says that in principle they accept they would be responsible.
2
if that refers to the 99,000 or not.
3
Q. 1059
But that could include the 99,858.
4
A.
Presumably, yes.
5
Q. 1060
But I think --
6
A.
The point I was making though.
It could include it?
That's the point I'm making, yes.
Obviously that 3,000 has something to do with
7
Cherrywood.
8
do with Cherrywood.
9
elicit payments or anything like that.
15:23:44 10
Q. 1061
11
But that was, that was demonstrated to GRE, it was something to And I don't think GRE would have been involved in any
And certainly by October of 1992 at 3837. recoupment.
I don't know
Mr. Eddie Sweeney is seeking
3837, please.
12 13
At item No. 2.
14
sum of 556,288; isn't that right?
15:24:14 15
16
Of third party outlay from September '89 to June of 1992.
A.
Yes, that is correct, yes.
Q. 1062
And that figure, at 8785, is the total on the first schedule.
17
A
Do you see the
bottom of that page? If we could increase the bottom of that, please?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1063
Do you see the figure of 556,287?
A.
I do, yes.
21
Q. 1064
And if you move back up to strategy consultancy fees you see the figure?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 1065
It's still included?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 1066
So when Mr. Sweeney writes in October of 1992 he's looking for 556,288 and in a
15:24:37 20
15:24:44 25
26
letter of the 6th of October from Richard Lynn at 8783.
27
paragraph he is also seeking acceptance of the end figure on the attached
28
document?
29 15:25:11 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 1067
And the attached document is 8784.
In the second last
And this again includes the schedule of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:25:20
15:25:31
124 1
99,858?
2
A.
Right.
3
Q. 1068
So there are two strands of correspondence going on with GRE.
One with Mr.
4
Lynn and one with Mr. Sweeney and both of them are seeking to recover the same
5
figure of strategy consultancy fees but I'm not suggesting they were seeking to
6
recover it on the double?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1069
Do you know what I mean?
9
A.
Mr. Beng was the accountant in GRE.
Q. 1070
Yes.
11
A.
That's right, yes.
12
Q. 1071
And Mr. Lynn appears to be dealing with Mr. Beng?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1072
They are both seeking to recover the figure including the strategy consultancy
15:25:42 10
15:25:54 15
So that Mr. Sweeney appears to be dealing with Mr. Baker?
fees of 27,850; isn't that right?
16
A.
That's right, yes.
17
Q. 1073
So by this date, which is October 1992, Monarch are still maintaining that they
18 19 15:26:09 20
are entitled to be repaid half of those fees; isn't that right? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1074
I think that Monarch confirmed -- sorry, GRE confirmed, at 8345.
That they
21
had agreed 556,288 which was the figure put forward, isn't that right, by
22
Mr. Sweeney in his letter?
23
A.
Right, yes.
24
Q. 1075
Right.
A.
It included the 90, did it.
26
Q. 1076
It includes the 90, yes.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 1077
Do you see the second item, No. 2, is third party outlay 556,288? Do you see
15:26:45 25
29 15:27:05 30
If we just look at --
At 3837?
that figure? A.
No, sorry, where is it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:27:05
15:27:16
125 1
Q. 1078
Item No. 2?
2
A.
Oh, yes, yeah.
3
Q. 1079
And if you see then what GRE say in appendix one, at 3845.
4
Under the heading
'agreed fee', 556,288?
5
A.
Right, yes, yeah.
6
Q. 1080
And they are going to pay that 50/50?
7
A.
Right.
8
Q. 1081
And they further say at 3850.?
9
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1082
Do you see the heading 'third party costs'?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 1083
GRE confirmed that they would be responsible for 50% of 556,288?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 1084
This is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable
15:27:28 10
15:27:41 15
and in this respect I would refer to the recent correspondence between Monarch
16
and G Beng?
17
A.
Right.
18
Q. 1085
And secondly, they confirm that they would pay 50% of future third parties
19 15:27:55 20
21
costs amounting to 18,500 on the receipt of proper invoices? A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1086
They are saying two things.
22 23
are proper invoices; isn't that right? A.
24 15:28:13 25
One is, we will pay half of the 556,288 if there
No, they're saying that the invoices are properly payable.
So it would
suggest that they got invoices at this stage. Q. 1087
26
It says this is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable; isn't that right?
27
A.
They're not looking for invoices.
28
Q. 1088
And they are also saying in item No. 2 that they'll only pay future third party
29 15:28:30 30
They have invoices presumably.
costs up to a limit of 18,500? A.
Unless they got proper invoices, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:28:32
15:28:44
126 1
Q. 1089
That would be 50%.
2
A.
That was putting a maximum figure on it, yes.
3
Q. 1090
So they're putting a ceiling on third party costs?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1091
And invoices then raised.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 1092
Which includes all those costs.
8 9
So in other words the most they will pay is 18,500 pounds?
At 3955.
In the sum of 550,978; isn't that right?
But that invoice is not paid.
right? There's never a payment of 550,978? A.
Oh, well they might have requested those at 261 I think.
Q. 1093
That figure.
11
A.
Included in which figure now?
12
Q. 1094
In the 550,978?
13
A.
Yes, yes.
14
Q. 1095
That includes?
A.
The 29 or whatever it is.
16
Q. 1096
Yes.
17
A.
Well I think so, yes.
18
Q. 1097
Well if we look at?
19
A.
I'm finding it very hard to keep up with you, however.
Q. 1098
Sorry.
15:29:12 10
15:29:26 15
15:29:38 20
21
But included in that figure is the 27,000; isn't that right?
That includes the figure of 27,850; isn't that right?
At 8785 if we just finish this point.
I don't want to mislead you in
any way?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 1099
If we could increase the bottom half of 8785.
24 15:29:58 25
26
totals.
You see that there are two totals.
What we want to look at are the
And 550977.
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1100
The first total is the total of schedule five and eight.
27
is a sum of 5,310 giving a final total; isn't that right?
28
A.
Right.
29
Q. 1101
Included in both figures is 27,850?
A.
Yes.
15:30:14 30
Isn't that
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that?
And what's deducted
15:30:14
15:30:30
127 1
Q. 1102
For strategy consultancy fees?
2
A.
That's right, yes.
3
Q. 1103
In the invoice that is put in, following these negotiations, at 3955.?
4
A.
Yes, that's the 550, yes.
5
Q. 1104
Therefore, included in the figure of 55,978 is the figure of 27,850?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 1105
And that figure includes political donations of at least 21,500?
8
A.
That's right, yes.
9
Q. 1106
Isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1107
And what is being sought from Guardian by Monarch is 50% of that; isn't that
15:30:43 10
11 12
right?
13
A.
That's right, yes.
14
Q. 1108
Do you know whether that was in fact paid?
A.
No, I was hoping that you were going to tell me, to be honest, because I don't.
15:30:55 15
16
I presume it was but I don't know.
17
Q. 1109
In a schedule of outstanding costs which I think is dated approximately um...?
18
A.
There's two figures on that.
19
They add up to the 261,678. I don't know if they were two different payments
15:31:20 20
21
216 and 45 and I don't know what they refer to.
made at different times. Q. 1110
I don't know really.
But what is clear from this documentation, is it not, Mr. Glennane , that
22
throughout 1992 that Monarch were seeking to recover from GRE a number of third
23
party costs?
24 15:31:34 25
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1111
Included in that third party costs were costs described as strategic
26
consultancy fees or strategy consultancy fees; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1112
The substantial portion of that strategy consultancy fees are comprised of
29 15:31:54 30
political donations which were made in May and June of 1991? A.
That's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:31:54
15:32:12
128 1
Q. 1113
You don't know who described them as strategy consultancy fees?
2
A.
No, I don't, no.
3
Q. 1114
But you would agree that that's not a correct description?
4
A.
Well it's -- yeah, it's certainly not.
5 6
It's certainly -- they weren't fees,
yes. Q. 1115
Yes.
And we saw yesterday, Mr. Glennane, when we looked at the description
7
that was applied to the payments that were made to the late Mr. Liam Lawlor
8
through Comex that they were described as strategy plan or strategy planning?
9
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1116
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1117
And they were described in the books of L&C Properties as strategy planning?
13
A.
Based on his invoice, yes.
14
Q. 1118
Which the Tribunal has never seen?
A.
No, no.
16
Q. 1119
But leave that aside?
17
A.
Obviously.
18
Q. 1120
The description that is given?
19
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1121
Is strategy plan?
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 1122
And the description that is given in this case is strategy consultancy fees?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 1123
In 1992; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1124
Can you conceive of any reason as to why somebody would be minded to describe a
15:32:29 10
15:32:39 15
15:32:43 20
15:32:53 25
26 27 28
genuine political donation as a strategy consultancy fee? A.
29 15:33:18 30
Not particularly, no, no.
Unless you wanted to make the leap to say that it
was a strategy, to make political contributions when asked. Q. 1125
Pardon? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:33:20
15:33:46
129 1
A.
Unless, as I say. They wanted -- you wanted to make the leap to say that it
2
could be believed to make strategy, political contributions.
3
is that a good strategy you'd probably have said yes.
4
that was thrown around an awful lot in those days.
5
quite happy with that description.
If somebody said
Strategies was a word
And obviously, GRE were
6
Q. 1126
We'll leave GRE out of it for the moment.?
7
A.
This is all based on GRE.
8
Q. 1127
Well did you seek to --
9
A.
This is all between ourselves and GRE.
Q. 1128
Did you seek to recover the 56,000 paid to Mr. Lawlor from GRE?
11
A.
I don't think so, no.
12
Q. 1129
Yet that is described as strategy plan; isn't that right?
13
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
14
Q. 1130
And we don't know who decided to describe it in that fashion also; isn't that
15:33:58 10
15:34:17 15
16
I don't think so.
right? A.
Well I know from reading the ledger that all the persons posting that would
17
have just taken the description off the invoice.
18
invoice.
19 15:34:33 20
21
Q. 1131
That the invoice from Comex was in connection with strategy plan?
A.
Yes, that wording was on the invoice obviously, yes.
Q. 1132
And when it comes time to describe the 21,500 political payments that are made
22
in May and June of 1991.
23
strategy consultancy fees?
24
So it was obviously on the
Yes, obviously.
It's described -- it is decided to describe them as
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 1133
Now, whatever else they are, Mr. Glennane, they're not fees; isn't that right?
26
A.
Absolutely, yes.
27
Q. 1134
They might be a strategic payment but they certainly can't be fees; isn't that
15:34:56 25
28 29 15:35:09 30
right? A.
Absolutely, yes.
Q. 1135
As you've said yourself it might be strategic to think? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:35:14
15:35:21
130 1
A.
In their term, yes.
2
Q. 1136
It might have been in Cherrywood's best interest to pay the money; isn't that
3
right?
4
A.
If they were asked for it, yes.
5
Q. 1137
And is it your belief that only when Monarch were asked that Monarch paid?
6
A.
Yes, that's my belief, yes.
7
Q. 1138
Can you think of any other reason as to why one would describe political
8 9 15:35:41 10
payments as strategy consultancy? A.
No, no.
Q. 1139
So it would appear from the books and records of Monarch that in 1992 a number
11
of things happened to the political payments made in '91, they were transferred
12
from Monarch Properties services limited and attributed to Cherrywood isn't
13
that right?
14
A.
Sorry, they were transferred internally in Monarch Properties services, yes.
Q. 1140
Because you --
16
A.
They weren't transferred from Monarch Properties.
17
Q. 1141
As you said yourself because they had an association with Cherrywood?
18
A.
So it seems, yes.
19
Q. 1142
Following on that, they are then described as strategy consultancy fees in
15:36:00 15
15:36:13 20
internal working documents within Monarch; isn't that right?
21
A.
With GRE.
22
Q. 1143
Which are then sent to GRE?
23
A.
That's right, yeah.
24 15:36:26 25
Are purely -- are purely produced for the sake of dealing
with GRE. Q. 1144
26
But seeing as you didn't produce them, did you, you didn't decide to call them strategy consultancy fees; isn't that right?
27
A.
No, I don't think so, no.
28
Q. 1145
And what would have been the difficulty with calling them political donations
29 15:36:43 30
and asking GRE to pay half of them? A.
Well as I said a while ago, it would be my opinion that somebody discussed it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:36:49
15:37:00
131 1
with GRE and they didn't want them described as that.
2
that they knew what they were.
But it's quite clear
And it's also quite clear that --
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
But isn't it unlikely that GRE ...
Sorry.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
them?
15:37:06 10
A.
Gave them that designation, because they then objected to paying
Well they objected to paying the amounts.
But they knew what they were and
11
that, yes.
I mean, it's -- I'm not -- I'm not clear on and I was hoping that
12
if -- if they did pay this 27 or not, I'm not clear on that.
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
15:37:29 15
16
Well possibly they may have at the end of the day.
They certainly
had a payment about paying them. A.
Mr. Gillies.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
19
suggested this designation and then having so suggested it then turned around
15:37:41 20
21
Yeah, for a long time.
So it's unlikely that they would have
and said we're still objecting to paying for it. A.
22
Well, we are dealing with different people at different times, you know.
So
one of them may have suggested it and somebody mightn't.
23 24 15:37:53 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
But isn't it --
It ended up that Mr. Baker, the MD ...
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
asked that they should have been called such and such would then turn around
29
and say no, we still have a problem about paying them.
15:38:12 30
A.
But isn't it improbable that whoever in GRE having decided, were
Well ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that unlikely?
15:38:12
15:38:16
132 1 2 3
CHAIRMAN: A.
If you had chosen ...
If you knew the personnel involved, no.
4 5 6
CHAIRMAN: A.
If they had chosen it?
It might have been discussed with them and said they'd agreed.
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
9
difficulty about paying it?
15:38:30 10
A.
11
Wouldn't you then expect them to pay it or not to raise any
Well, I don't know.
Again, you're dealing with different individuals at
different times:
12 13 14
MS. DILLON: A.
15:38:43 15
Can I ask you about --
Sorry, a point I think should be made. included in these so they were.
That at all times this 3,000 was
It was certainly scrutinised closely by GRE,
16
as you can see, there's five or six different references to these figures so
17
....
18 19
MS. DILLON:
15:39:01 20
Can we have a look maybe and it might help if we look at what
happened to the payments to Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Bruton and how they were dealt
21
with?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 1146
I think the position is that in -- there was a General Election in November
24 15:39:11 25
26
1992; isn't that right? A.
If you say so, yes.
Q. 1147
And a payment was made to Mr. John Bruton.
27
3905.
Now this is payment by
Monarch Properties Limited of 2,500 pounds?
28
A.
That's right, yes.
29
Q. 1148
And there's a payment to Mr. Albert Reynolds by Mr. Monarch Properties Limited.
15:39:33 30
At 3894.
Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:39:34
15:39:46
133 1
A.
Well I haven't seen it yet.
2
Q. 1149
And at 3895.
3
A.
That's right, yes.
4
Q. 1150
Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 1151
Now, when these payments are made initially where are they attributed?
7
A.
I don't know.
8 9
Yes.
I think we can see that your signature is on the cheque?
Well, yes.
They're actually written by Monarch Properties Limited, which
is a different company. Q. 1152
15:40:09 10
Yes.
And they are attributed.
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
11
They are Monarch Properties.
A.
That's right, so it seems, yes.
13
Q. 1153
And they are then transferred.
14
And they are attributed to sponsorship;
3900.
Do you see the heading Cherrywood
Properties Limited? Do you see AR, FF 5,000 J B, F G, 2,500? A.
Yes, yeah.
16
Q. 1154
And you see that's an account called Cherrywood Properties Limited?
17
A.
That's right, yes.
18
Q. 1155
And then at 4904.
19 15:40:59 20
21
Not
isn't that right?
12
15:40:35 15
3902:
Do you see where it says the last transaction there is
transfer sponsorship FF, FG 7,500 pounds? A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1156
And I suggest to you that is the transfer of the money to Mr. Reynolds and
22
Mr. Bruton?
23
A.
Yeah, yeah, so it appears, yes.
24
Q. 1157
And that is being transferred into account number 7359201 into a Cherrywood
15:41:13 25
account isn't that right? It's a 73 account?
26
A.
That's right, yes.
27
Q. 1158
So a decision is made in effect to do very much the same as happened with the
28 29 15:41:31 30
Yes, sorry, yeah.
1991 payments with these payments in November 1992? A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1159
And these payments then find themselves now on a list called third party costs Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:41:47
15:41:53
134 1
in June of '93.
2
third party cost.
3
pounds?
At 4317.
And you will see there a list of expenses called
And included is Fine Gael 2,500.
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1160
And that then is included at an invoice at 4302.
Fianna Fail 5,000
And sorry.
6
drawn to your attention that third party costs at 4317.
7
and 4302 together, please.
8
party costs by June of '93 come to 20,370 pounds?
9
I should have
If I could have 4317
Now, you will see that the total of the third
A.
Right, yes.
Q. 1161
And that includes 2,500 to Fine Gael and 5,000 to Fianna Fail?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1162
That appears to be included in an invoice at 4302.
15:42:34 10
13
miscellaneous fee third party costs 20,370.
14
is 50% of that figure; isn't that right?
15:42:54 15
16
That's invoice 2066 as
And what's being sought from GRE
A.
That's right, yes.
Q. 1163
So what is being sought here are third party costs including half of the
17
payment to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael?
18
A.
That's right, yes.
19
Q. 1164
And that's the payment made in November' 29 to Mr. Albert Reynolds and Mr. John
15:43:08 20
Bruton?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 1165
Isn't that right?
23
A.
That's right, yeah.
24
Q. 1166
Now, we saw earlier on that the agreed balance or the maximum that GRE would
15:43:15 25
agree to pay for third party costs going forward was 18,500 pounds; isn't that
26
right?
27
A.
That's right, yes.
28
Q. 1167
That's referred to at the invoice at 2066?
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 1168
There is there is also at 2062.
15:43:24 30
A management claim.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Sorry.
At 4299.
I
15:43:32
15:43:54
135 1
beg your pardon.
At 4299.
2
management fee.?
An invoice No. 2062.
For 30,000 pounds for a
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1169
Isn't that right? Now, I think that what happened was that GRE refused to pay
5
the invoice 2062.
And invoice 2062 was the invoice in -- invoice 2066 they
6
refused to pay.
7
say to Mr. Sweeney?
If we have 4303.
And under the heading invoice 2062, GRE
8
A.
Yeah.
9
Q. 1170
"This matter relates to the additional management fee.
15:44:19 10
And should therefore
include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds included in invoice 2066.
11
If you would confirm this I will arrange for invoice 2062 to be passed for
12
payment".?
13
A.
All right.
14
Q. 1171
Now, invoice 2062 was a management fee of 30,000 pounds; isn't that right?
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
Q. 1172
And what GRE are saying.
15:44:40 15
16 17 18
should have been included in the management fee; isn't that right? A.
19 15:45:06 20
Is that the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds
Um, um, yes, I'm not sure whether it means added on to the management fee or included in the management fee.
Q. 1173
21
Yes, one or the other.
Should include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds included in invoice 2066?
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q. 1174
Now, if we just pause there for a second.
24 15:45:23 25
The contributions of 2,500 and the
5,000 pounds are the payments in November 1992 to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael? A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 1175
They have been included on invoice 2066 under the heading third party costs?
27
A.
All right.
28
Q. 1176
GRE say on receipt of that they should not have been included under invoice
29 15:45:41 30
2066 as third party costs but they should have been included under 2062. Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:45:43
15:45:53
136 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1177
And therefore, it follows from that, that there must have been some agreement
3
between Monarch and GRE, that political payments would have been included in
4
the management fee?
5
A.
So it would seem, yes, yeah.
6
Q. 1178
And that would be borne out by the response from Mr. Sweeney, because
7 8
Mr. Sweeney says at 4314 ... A.
9 15:46:09 10
I think they are -- they are asking us there to include it in the management fee.
Q. 1179
Yes.
But Mr. Sweeney replies to Mr. Baker.
And he says.
"As regards
11
invoice 2062 and your reference to the two payments of 2,500 and 5,000, you
12
will note that these sums were paid bona fide to the parties concerned".
13
you see that?
14 15:46:26 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 1180
And he goes on to say.
Do
"They therefore would not rank within the payments
16
envisaged which had been disbursed through the additional management fee.
17
I therefore feel they could not be written out in the way that you suggest".?
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 1181
Now, that exchange of correspondence, Mr. Glennane, appears to suggest that
15:46:50 20
there was an agreement of some sort between Monarch and GRE to include
21
political payments in a management fee.
22
A.
It would appear so, yes.
23
Q. 1182
Right.
24
A.
Well I don't recall that arrangement.
15:47:06 25
Would you agree with that?
Now, what can you tell the Tribunal about that arrangement? It seems clear to me that as I heard
that, that agreeing that GRE were quite prepared to pay these, they wanted them
26 27
described as management fees. Q. 1183
Mr. Sweeney in his letter is making the point to GRE that the 2,500 and the
28
5,000 were paid bona fides and therefore should be included as third party
29
costs.
15:47:27 30
And
A.
Do you see that?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:47:27
15:47:43
137 1
Q. 1184
And he then goes on to say "they would not rank within the payments envisaged
2
which had been disbursed through the additional management fee".
3
suggest to you, would be payments which were not bona fide.
And that I
Is that right?
4
A.
No, I wouldn't think so, no.
5
Q. 1185
Well just look at it there now?
6
A.
I think he's saying that the additional management would fee was to be 30,000
7
and he didn't think that the 7,500 should be included in the 30,000.
8
should be 30,000 plus 7,500.
9
Q. 1186
15:48:06 10
It
What Mr. Sweeney is saying is that the 2,500 and the 5,000 were bona fides payments and therefore should be include in the third party costs; isn't that
11
right?
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 1187
He then goes on to say "that because they are paid bone fide they would not
14
rank within the payments envisaged which had been dispursed through the
15:48:16 15
additional management fee".
16
So what are the payments that were disbursed
through the additional management fee, Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
I don't know.
18
Q. 1188
What costs?
19
A.
Well ordinary management costs.
15:48:37 20
running up huge costs.
21 22
I presume he just means costs.
costs. Q. 1189
I don't know.
I mean, we were running -- Monarch was
That's why they were getting management fees.
Staff
Various other costs.
What Mr.-- what GRE are saying is that they'll pay it provided it's included in
23
the management fee.
24
therefore it's third party costs and therefore doesn't go into the management
15:49:05 25
26
fee; isn't that right? A.
27 28
Well I think it's more to me an argument whether the management fee included that 7,500 or not.
Q. 1190
29 15:49:23 30
What Mr. Sweeney is saying is it was paid bona fide and
And what arrangement was there between GRE and Monarch about including political donations in the management fee?
A.
I don't know.
I wasn't aware of any arrangement.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
But it appears to me that
15:49:28
15:49:48
138 1
as I said before, the suggestion came from them.
2
were an insurance company.
3
political contributions, I don't know.
4
that the initiative to do all of this came from them.
It may have been that they
They may well have not been allowed to make But it appears to me from all of that,
5
Q. 1191
And the use of the --
6
A.
But that they were fully accepted as being bona fide.
7
Q. 1192
And the use of the word "bona fide" appears to have come from Mr. Monahan in
8 9 15:50:05 10
Monarch Properties; isn't that right? A.
I think he means that they are third party costs.
Q. 1193
He says that they were paid bona fide to the parties concerned; isn't that
11
right?
12
A.
Well, yes, okay.
13
Q. 1194
He then goes on to say "they wouldn't rank within the payments envisaged which
14
had been disbursed through the additional management fee" now what payments
15:50:19 15
could Mr. Sweeney --
16
A.
I think he means costs but I don't know.
17
Q. 1195
Well what could he have been talking about, Mr. Glennane?
18
A.
Well obviously we made a claim for additional management fees.
19
the basis we'd taken on more staff and it was costing us more than we
15:50:36 20
21
It could be on
envisaged. Q. 1196
22
Well did you make an arrangement with Monarch or between Monarch and GRE that political payments would be included in a management fee for example?
23
A.
Not that I can recall, no.
24
Q. 1197
Well what other interpretation could you take from the correspondence other
15:50:54 25
than there was such an arrangement. If you look at what Mr. Baker says at
26 27
4303. Because what Mr. Baker is saying -A.
28 29 15:51:16 30
"This matter relates to an additional management fee and should therefore include the contribution included in the invoice (reading to himself).
Q. 1198
Yes.
And invoice 2062 is an invoice in relation to a management fee, isn't
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:51:17
15:51:35
139 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1199
At 4400.
So for whatever reason, Mr. Baker appears to be under the
3
misapprehension that the political payment of 2,500 and 5,000 made in November
4
1992 should have been included in the claim for the management fee and not
5
included as third party costs, isn't that right?
6
A.
7
Yes.
Well there was ongoing negotiations going on with GRE.
And there was
different deals struck at different times and --
8
Q. 1200
Sorry.?
9
A.
It he might well have said to me -- and looked at me and said we were obviously
15:51:53 10
claiming for more management fees and we were also claiming for these third
11
party costs and he may -- it appears to me that he was saying -- he had agreed
12
a fee of, an extra fee of 30,000 on the basis that these third party costs
13
would not arise.
14
wouldn't have agreed the extra 30,000 if I realised that I was going to have to
15:52:20 15
pay these.
And now he's being billed for both and is really saying I
That's my interpretation of what it says.
16
Q. 1201
It doesn't say that, you see Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
It doesn't.
18
Q. 1202
If you look at what Mr. Baker actually says "this matter relates to the
19
additional management fee and should include the contributions of 2,500 and
15:52:35 20
5,000 included in the invoice 2066". In simple terms what Mr. Baker is telling
21
Monarch is the invoice that includes the 2,500 and 5,000 figures should be
22
included in the management fee and not under the heading of third party costs;
23
isn't this right?
24 15:52:54 25
A.
So it seems, yes.
Q. 1203
That would suggest that there was some arrangement between Monarch and GRE,
26
that political payments or contributions or Mr. Baker certainly believed that
27
they had some arrangement, that they would be included under the heading of
28
management fee as opposed to third party costs; isn't that right?
29 15:53:17 30
A.
No, as I said, I can certainly read a different interpretation into it. That he had agreed to pay the additional management fees, but he didn't want to pay Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:53:24
15:53:33
140 1
additional management fees and pay these contributions.
He was of the opinion
2
that the additional management fees would cover these, would cover their share
3
of these contributions.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
I assume Mr. Sweeney will be able to throw a lot of light on that
6
particular issue.
7 8
MS. DILLON:
I --
9 15:53:43 10
CHAIRMAN:
At least his evidence?
11 12
MS. DILLON:
I assume so.
13 14 15:53:46 15
Q. 1204
Because certainly in the documentation that passed between Monarch and GRE, in
16
the correspondence between Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Baker, Mr. Sweeney makes the
17
argument that because these payments were paid bona fide they should be
18
included as third party cost and not included as management fee?
19
A.
15:54:11 20
I think the word bona fides is a little bit of a mute point.
You can take it
out of context.
21
Q. 1205
Okay?
22
A.
I mean, if the inference is that there's some other payments that weren't bona
23
fide.
24
he said is they are bona fide third party costs.
15:54:29 25
26
Again, I think that -- I don't think that that follows.
weren't to our benefit.
I think what
In other words, that they
So it was a matter of either paying 22,500, which
would come to Monarch.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
29
GRE by Monarch.
15:54:56 30
And I think ultimately the figure, second invoice, was sent in to That's invoice at 4311.
And you will see that that invoice
is in the sum of 16,270 pounds; isn't that right Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:55:01
15:55:12
141 1
A.
That's right, yes.
2
Q. 1206
And there's within a reduction of 4,100 pounds on the earlier invoice; isn't
3
that right? Because the earlier invoice is for third party costs?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 1207
Sorry?
6
A.
I would again sorry.
7 8
Obviously, we were trying to circumvent this limit that
he had put of 18,500 on third party costs. Q. 1208
9
And I think that invoice, at 2069 makes a deduction for fees due to Noel Smyth & Partners in the sum of 4,100 pounds.
15:55:48 10
That was the original invoice.
pounds is a sum of 4,100 pounds.
12
understand the point I'm making? A.
I don't see it anywhere.
14
Q. 1209
They are third party costs.
15:56:12 15
Which were fees due to Noel Smyth. Do you
The document on screen is third party costs. One
of the very first documents that I showed you.
16
please.
Yes.
And the difference between that and the 16,270
11
13
If we look at 4302, please.
If we could look at 4317
This is the combination of the invoice?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 1210
For 20,370 pounds Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 1211
You see there a figure for 4,100 pounds to Noel Smyth & Partners?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 1212
That made up the first invoice put in for third party costs at 4302 in the sum
15:56:36 20
23 24 15:56:40 25
of 20,370 pounds.
Do you see that?
A.
I do, yes.
Q. 1213
Following the exchange of correspondence a second invoice is sent in by -- for
26
third party costs at 4311.
27
16,270 pounds.?
Invoice No. 2069.
And the figure now sought is
28
A.
Right, yes.
29
Q. 1214
And the difference between the two are the costs due to Noel Smyth?
A.
Right.
15:57:02 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:57:02
15:57:21
142 1
Q. 1215
2
So what is still included on invoice 2069, are the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 pounds made to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.
Do you understand?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1216
And those were the subject of correspondence and ultimately were confirmed that
5
that invoice, 2069 at 4211.
This is a letter dated the 28th of September '93.
6
And in it Mr. Baker confirms he has authorised invoices for payment and the
7
second invoices, 2069.
Do you see that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 1217
And above it is the no. 2; do you see that?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 1218
And No. 2 means back up required?
12
A.
Right.
13
Q. 1219
Do you see that written at the very bottom?
14
A.
Yes, I do, yes.
Q. 1220
That would have meant that Mr. Baker was agreeing to pay invoice 2069 including
15:57:45 10
15:57:52 15
16
the 5,000 pounds to Fianna Fail and the 2,500 to Fine Gael provided back up was
17
provided; isn't that right?
18
A.
So it seems, yeah.
19
Q. 1221
Now, was such back up provided?
A.
I don't know.
15:58:07 20
21
But I presume all the back up it means was receipts from Fianna
Fail and from Fine Gael.
22
Q. 1222
And were such back up obtained?
23
A.
Well I don't know but I'm sure there would have been.
24
difference between getting half of 7,500 back and not getting it I'm sure it
15:58:29 25
26
would have been easy enough to get them presumably. Q. 1223
27 28 29 15:58:49 30
If it was the
Can I ask you how the decision was arrived at to attribute those political payments as costs in connection with Cherrywood?
A.
Well on the same basis as we said earlier.
Because we were again -- we seem
to have worn down GRE at this stage, that they agreed to pay them, to pay 50% of them.
So if we were able to get 50% back that was great as far as I was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
15:58:54
15:59:08
143 1 2
concerned for everybody else in the company. Q. 1224
Certainly in deciding to attribute the costs to Cherrywood, did you take into
3
account in the company what Mr. Monahan had said to Mr. Reynolds when he made
4
the payment?
5
A.
I have no idea what Mr. Monahan said to Mr. Reynolds.
6
Q. 1225
3891, please. In the letter that was sent with the payment to 5,000 pounds to
7
Mr. Reynolds, you will see in the second paragraph that Mr. Monahan says "as
8
you are aware, we in Monarch together with our partners Guardian Royal
9
Exchange, are in a position to begin a major development in Loughlinstown,
15:59:31 10
County Dublin, but are caught in the throes of the review of the County Dublin
11
Development Plan which is holding up developments. We have been greatly
12
assisted by your party members on Dublin County Council without whom it is fair
13
to say we would not have achieved the part zoning which now obtains on the
14
lands".
15:59:47 15
16 17
Do you know what he meant by that? A.
18 19
I assume he meant that, sorry, um, well I presume he meant that if party members hadn't voted in favour of it, it wouldn't have gone through.
Q. 1226
16:00:08 20
Your members have been to the fore in encouraging good development based on proper planning criteria endorsed by the council's own professional staff. In
21
so doing your party shows an admirable stance for a common sense approach to
22
development and for being positive towards job creation.
23
parties who have been against all proposed developments during the review of
24
the Draft Development Plan now appear to take the High Road on job creation
16:00:28 25
Unfortunately other
possibilities during the course of the General Election".
26 27
That is the letter that Mr. Monahan sent to Mr. Reynolds for the cheque for
28
5,000 pounds.
29 16:00:40 30
A.
Yes.
Nice waffle, if I may say so, yes.
Q. 1227
But it's waffle in connection with the zoning of the Cherrywood lands isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:00:44
16:01:01
144 1 2
that correct? A.
No, it's waffle in connection with job opportunities and the Fianna Fail party.
3
It's just saying that -- I don't know.
4
letter to Mr. Bruton, for all I know.
He might have well written the same For all I know.
5
Q. 1228
How many developments had Monarch going into 1992?
6
A.
I couldn't say.
7
Q. 1229
Well Somerton was before the council; isn't that right?
8
A.
I don't know.
9
Q. 1230
Ongar Stud?
A.
They were all certainly somewhere.
Q. 1231
And some of them were pending before the council in the Development Plan,
16:01:26 10
11 12
I don't know what was before the council.
weren't they?
13
A.
If the Development Plan was covering the whole county I would assume so, yes.
14
Q. 1232
But the only matter that's discussed by Mr. Monahan or mentioned by Mr. Monahan
16:01:34 15
to Mr. Reynolds when he writes this letter are the lands at Loughlinstown,
16
which are the Cherrywood lands; isn't that right?
17
A.
He mentioned his partners, GRE, yes.
18
Q. 1233
Would that view as held by Mr. Monahan have anything to do with the decision to
19
attribute the payment to Fianna Fail and Fine Gael in '92 as being a cost of
16:01:53 20
21
Cherrywood? A.
Well as I said to you, really all of the costs were attributed.
22
when he mentions, he mentions GRE as well.
23
to get 50% of it back from GRE.
24 16:02:12 25
Uh-huh.
A.
I don't think in general it mattered much where costs were attributed.
16:02:27 30
Can I ask you to assist the Tribunal with -They
were all sorted out at the end of the year, at the end of each year. Q. 1235
28 29
It would have made it a lot easier
Q. 1234
26 27
Obviously
That's not in fact the case, Mr. Glennane because these costs were allowed to accumulate?
A.
Yes.
Q. 1236
And they weren't in fact written out every year? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:02:29
16:02:52
145 1
A.
2 3
No, I didn't say that they were written out every year.
They were carried
forward and they were discussed every year. Q. 1237
With a number of cash payments in November of 1992.
4
please.
If you just look half way down that page.
5
17th of November 1992.
6
that?
If we could have 3875,
And you will see on the
Allied Irish Bank plc 10,000 pounds.
Do you see
7
A.
Yes, I do, yeah.
8
Q. 1238
And that is debited I think to the account of Monarch Properties Services
9
Limited.
16:03:18 10
It's quite faint.
But it is at 4719.
Do you see very faintly
there?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 1239
It's the second last entry?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 1240
And there is a second cheque.
16:03:30 15
At 3917.
And it's the sixth entry down.
And
it's 5,000 pounds to Allied Irish Bank.?
16
A.
That's right, yes, yeah.
17
Q. 1241
And that's debited at 3920 on the 23rd of November '92.
18
A.
Yeah.
19
Q. 1242
And that is on foot of a cheque which I think is signed by yourself at 8456.
16:03:55 20
Isn't that correct?
21
A.
That's correct, yes.
22
Q. 1243
A cheque made out to Allied Irish Bank.
That is attributed to the same
23
donations in the books of Monarch as Cherrywood.
24
3877.
16:04:16 25
3819, please.
Sorry.
Now, I want to draw to your attention there approximately to half way
down the page.
26
Both of those payments, AIB 10,000 pounds cash.
Do you see
that?
27
A.
I do, yes.
28
Q. 1244
And one beneath that.
29 16:04:27 30
Do you see that?
After S Barrett FG, AIB 5,000 pounds cash.
that? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see
16:04:28
16:04:39
146 1
Q. 1245
And most or a lot of the other payments that are listed on that schedule are
2
political payments that were made in connection the General Election of
3
November 1992.
Isn't that right?
4
A.
That's right, yes.
5
Q. 1246
So you can see Mr. Keating, Mr. Flood, Mr. O'Connor, Therese Ridge, Mr. Hannon,
6
Ms. Harney, Sean Haughey, Anne Ormond, Ms. McGuinness, Mr. Lenihan, Mr Lyons
7
Keogh, Mr. Boland, Mr. McGrath, Ms. Flaherty, Mr. Taylor, Ms. Coffey, Mr. GV
8
Wright, Mrs. Owens and then AIB 10,000 cash.
9
Nora Owen, do you see that?
16:05:03 10
Sean Barrett, AIB 5,000 cash and
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 1247
Isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 1248
Now, would you tell the Tribunal what that payment of 10,000 pounds and 5,000
14 16:05:19 15
pounds that was a cost of Cherrywood that was made in November 1992? A.
Bank statements.
16
Q. 1249
The first?
17
A.
Sorry, the cheque payments book, yes.
18
Q. 1250
The check payments book is at 3917 for the 5,000 pounds payment and it's the
19 16:05:43 20
21
sixth entry down.? A.
Sorry, I can't see that.
Q. 1251
Sorry.
22
it.
It's the entry that has Allied Irish bank plc.
If we could highlight
It's now in yellow?
23
A.
5,000 pounds, that's correct.
24
Q. 1252
Do you want the 10,000 pounds cheque payments?
A.
I'm just looking to see what difference that, that's more than likely I would
16:05:58 25
26
have thought a bank draft.
27
in that.
28
Q. 1253
No -- the cash appears --
29
A.
In the ledger.
Q. 1254
Yes.
16:06:10 30
However.
There's no reference to cash anywhere
It's after Sean Barrett and before Nora Owen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Do you see that?
16:06:16
16:06:31
147 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 1255
Do you want to see the other cheque payments?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 1256
That is at 3875, and it's in the centre of the page.
5
A.
Yeah, again, no reference to cash in it.
6
Q. 1257
No.
7
But the reference to cash is from the extract for the general ledger, at
3877.
And if we go back to that.
That might assist you.
8
A.
No well, this is the source document.
9
Q. 1258
Yes.
16:06:55 10
11 12 13
The one before that. You will see it records AIB 10,000
Sean Barrett and the AIB 5,000 pounds cash?
I don't think it's right to mention names in the same breath as cash. However, I don't -- they might well have been bank drafts for various things.
Q. 1259
14 16:07:19 15
If we look at the centre of that.
pounds cash. A.
10,000 pounds.?
Well let's look at where they are allocated.
They are allocated as a cost of
Cherrywood; isn't that right? A.
Well they are included in the Cherrywood account.
I've already explained that
16
might well have happened two or three months afterwards when somebody said that
17
where will we post this to and the answer I don't know, post it to Cherrywood
18
and we'll sort it out at the end of the year.
19
accounts were scrutinised completely by the company's auditors KPMG and they
16:07:43 20
were at the end of each year.
21
I mean, all of these books and
So they would have, they would have, they would
have been, as I said, scrutinised completely at the end of the year.
22
Q. 1260
That figure of 65696 goes into Cherrywood stock?
23
A.
At that stage, yes.
24
Q. 1261
And it contributes to the build up of the Cherrywood stock?
A.
Yes.
Q. 1262
So now let's look at what the payment might have been for, Mr. Glennane.
16:08:00 25
26 27
Every -- or most of the other payments are rounded, are political payments;
28
isn't that right?
29 16:08:14 30
A.
That's right, yeah.
Q. 1263
They are payments that are made in November 1992; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:08:19
16:08:32
148 1
A.
Yes, yeah.
2
Q. 1264
And there's a General Election in November 1992?
3
A.
That's right, yeah.
4
Q. 1265
And on that list, on that list of payments with the exception of the third last
5
item of 19,500, they are the two biggest payments; isn't that right?
6
A.
That's right, yes.
7
Q. 1266
Now, does any of that assist you in trying to help the Tribunal in determining
8 9 16:08:52 10
what those payments would have been for? A.
No, not really, no.
Q. 1267
But it would have been a payment, as you described yourself this morning, in
11
association with Cherrywood?
12
A.
Well it would have been a payment that was allocated to Cherrywood.
13
Q. 1268
Okay.
So somebody when they make the payment of 10,000 --
14
A.
Sorry.
Whenever they come to post those entries, which could have been two or
16:09:11 15
three months later.
They then raise the query where will I post this to.
16
And they decide, for whatever reason, to post it to the promotions account and
17
it was presumably on the basis that it can be sorted out at the end of the
18
year.
19 16:09:28 20
21
Q. 1269
Is that speculation on your part?
A.
No, it's what I would have expected to happen, yes.
Q. 1270
These are two cheques made out to AIB, which according to your document being
22 23 24
Monarch's document, are cashed; isn't that right? A.
Well I don't, other than saying that on seeing it on this ledger I don't see anything that suggests that they were cash as against getting bank drafts.
16:09:52 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well if you go back to 3875 I think.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
That's the 10,000.
29 16:09:58 30
CHAIRMAN:
If you look at the -- do you see the one above the 10,000?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:10:03
16:10:16
149 1 2
There's -- I would think that probably is a bank draft. A.
Yeah, or something.
3 4 5
CHAIRMAN: A.
Because the identity of the recipient is there.
All right?
That's a Sterling draft.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN:
So wouldn't it be absolutely amazing if the 10,000 was a draft and
8 9 16:10:24 10
no one identified who the payee was.
I mean, that wouldn't make the remotest
11
accounting sense; isn't that right? I mean, sure, wouldn't there have to be an
12
entry.
13
sure, wouldn't it be crazy accounting not to include some item?
14
A.
If it was a bank draft to be paid to some individual or to a company,
Well certainly it should have been at the time.
That's the point I'm making.
16:10:55 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
17
get specific direct detailed evidence about specific issues.
18
and decide what was probably the case.
19
that it is probable that it wasn't a bank draft because there's no identity of
16:11:16 20
21
Well isn't it much more likely.
We have to deal.
If we can't
We have to try
Isn't it probable or would you agree
the recipient? A.
Well it's -- I don't know is the short answer.
22 23
CHAIRMAN:
24
mean, these are effectively your responsibility.
16:11:40 25
A.
Well you're the -- you're the Chief Financial Officer.
So would you not agree?
I would certainly have expected to see written after it some explanation.
26 27 28
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
Or written across in the columns.
29 16:11:57 30
And, I
CHAIRMAN:
And we have the reference elsewhere to cash?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:11:57
16:12:00
150 1
A.
Yes.
2 3
CHAIRMAN:
4
were cash taken directly from Allied Irish Bank?
5
A.
So isn't it probable that these were not bank drafts but that they
Well I can't say they were, Chairman.
6 7 8
CHAIRMAN: A.
9
I don't know.
Well what do you think is likely? I don't know.
It's between the two.
speculate between the two as to one or the other.
16:12:15 10
accounting or whatever.
11
I mean I could It could be just careless
They could, they could well have been a cash.
But I
would have expected them to have been made out to cash.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
14
amounts it would have been detected and corrected.
16:12:32 15
A.
16
In the strictest of accounting, surely given the size of the
Well it would have been.
Is that not probable?
It would have been scrutinised at the end of the
year.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yes.
I mean --
16:12:38 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN: A.
23
And --
I know they are big amounts.
In the overall context of the Monarch Group they
weren't huge amounts.
24 16:12:44 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well they were significant enough.
I mean, if you look at all the
26
other figures they are the biggest item on that list there or it is the biggest
27
item.
28
A.
Yes.
29 16:12:54 30
CHAIRMAN:
In in relation to their designation into Cherrywood.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
Isn't that a
16:12:59
16:13:20
151 1
decision that was unlikely to have been taken by a junior person in the
2
accounts? It would have been -- isn't it likely that it was taken, a decision
3
made by somebody, somebody with some seniority?
4
A.
5
They would probably have asked somebody more senior.
The actual posting would
have been done by a junior person.
6 7
CHAIRMAN:
8
say that you are not certain.
9
designation of these sums or these items were made on the direction of somebody
16:13:35 10
11
Well can we take it then as a matter of probability, because you But as a matter of probability, that the
in a senior position in the accounts or financial division of the company? A.
More than likely, yes, yeah.
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
Now, Ms. Dillon, it's now a quarter past four ....
14 16:13:51 15
16
MS. DILLON:
Yes.
Well I certainly.
I mean, I will do my very best but it
will take me another hour and a half.
17 18
CHAIRMAN:
Well, then it will have to wait until tomorrow.
19 16:13:59 20
MS. DILLON:
It can't be taken tomorrow, with respect, Sir, because Mr.
21
Dunlop is being cross-examined by Mr. Shipsey at nine o'clock.
And I don't
22
think anything can interfere with tomorrow or Friday. I think Mr. Sweeney is
23
only available to the Tribunal then.
24 16:14:13 25
CHAIRMAN:
Well --
26 27
MS. DILLON:
So it would be Tuesday week.
28 29 16:14:22 30
CHAIRMAN:
Tuesday week.
Well all right.
Well if you talk to Mr. Sanfey
and see if we can make arrangements for Mr. Glennane to come back on a day that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
16:14:27
16:14:29
152 1
suits him.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
4 5
CHAIRMAN:
And suits the Tribunal.
And we'll sit tomorrow at nine o'clock?
6 7
MS. DILLON:
Nine o'clock, yes.
That's for Mr. Dunlop.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
And then Mr. Sweeney?
16:14:39 10
11
MS. DILLON:
Mr. Sweeney is going to commence his evidence at the conclusion
12
of Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination by Mr. Shipsey. Only, I think, tomorrow Mr.
13
Shipsey's cross-examination and then Mr. Sweeney.
14 16:14:48 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well, will we say not before half ten for Mr. Sweeney?
16 17
MS. DILLON:
I think that -- it really depends on Mr. Shipsey and Mr. Dunlop.
18 19 16:15:01 20
CHAIRMAN:
It's a guess at this stage.
So we'll say not before half ten for
Mr. Sweeney.
21 22
MR SANFEY: Chairman, you did say that I could ask questions of Mr. Dunlop.
23
don't anticipate that I'll have anything much but ...
I
24 16:15:10 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
Well, we will still say Mr. Dunlop at nine o'clock and Mr. Sweeney
not before half ten.
27 28
MS. DILLON:
Yes, Sir.
29 16:15:20 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Glennane won't be unhappy about not being here tomorrow.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
You
16:15:25
16:16:58
153 1
can make an arrangement with him for some other date.
2 3
MS. DILLON:
Most obliged to you, Sir.
4 5 6 7
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
8
THURSDAY, 29TH OF JUNE, 2006, AT 9:00 A.M..
9 16:17:13 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 660
1 08:24:22 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON
2
THURSDAY 29TH JUNE 2006 AT 9 AM:
3 4
CHAIRMAN: Good morning.
09:04:13 5
6
MS. DILLON: Morning sir. Mr. Dunlop is to be cross examined by Mr. Shipsey.
7 8
CHAIRMAN: All right.
9 09:04:20 10
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman can I first express my gratitude to the Tribunal for
11
facilitating me and Mr. Sweeney in relation to the early sitting.
12 13
CHAIRMAN: All right. That's fine. I hope it won't become common practice.
14 09:04:36 15
FRANK DUNLOP, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, CONTINUED TO BE CROSS EXAMINED
16
BY MR. SHIPSEY:
17 18
Q. 1
19
Mr. Dunlop, my name is Bill Shipsey, I appear for Mr. Eddie Sweeney, and as I think you probably know, Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Sweeney has not had any prior
09:04:59 20
involvement with this Tribunal, so I just want to begin by asking you if his
21
understanding and my understanding is correct, in that prior to April of 2000
22
you, Mr. Dunlop, had denied on oath, that you had made any corrupt payments to
23
politicians?
24 09:05:24 25
A.
Correct.
Q. 2
And that some time in April of 2000, you had what I might characterise as a
26
type of Pauline conversion and decided that you would tell the truth in
27
relation to your personal involvement in making corrupt payments to
28
politicians, is that correct?
29 09:05:56 30
A.
That is correct and the phrase we have come to use Mr. Shipsey is crossing the rubicon, not to a Pauline conversion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
2 09:05:58 1
Q. 3
And therefore, it follows that insofar as you gave evidence on oath prior to
2
April of 2000, prior to what I've described as your Pauline conversion what you
3
have described as crossing the rubicon, you lied to this Tribunal on oath.
4 09:06:22 5
A.
Correct.
Q. 4
And what you want this Tribunal and the members of this Tribunal to believe is
6
that having decided to cross the rubicon, everything that you are now saying to
7
the Tribunal, if I can move from your Roman analogy to my Christian one, has
8
the ring of gospel about it.
9 09:06:54 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 5
And after April of 2000 you made a number of allegations in which you pointed
11
the finger at other companies who were involved in development in South County
12
Dublin, who knowingly participated along with you in enabling you, or
13
requesting you, to make corrupt payments to politicians?
14 09:07:42 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 6
And again I hope I am not spending too much time dwelling on Christian
16
analogies, but in terms of you betraying your former clients, you did this by
17
way of an asterisk on a list that you had provided to the Tribunal.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 7
There were a large list of developers and if they had an asterisk beside them
09:08:18 20
the Tribunal was to understand from that, that these companies had participated
21
to a greater or lesser extent with you in corruption of politicians for their
22
own benefit?
23
A.
To a greater or lesser extent, yes.
24
Q. 8
So that we are clear, you at this stage after crossing your rubicon in April of
09:08:48 25
2000 were putting your hands up, and were admitting to your own corruption and
26
presumably and I don't want to pry too much into it, Mr. Dunlop, but presumably
27
at great personal and professional expense to you?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 9
Because prior to April of 2000 and certainly if we go back to April or March of
09:09:19 30
1993, Frank Dunlop was a respected, much sought after and to all the world an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
3 09:09:39 1
upstanding professional person?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 10
Frank Dunlop was a man who had the ear of not only councillors and TDs, but the
4 09:09:55 5
6
ear of ministers and prime ministers. A.
Yes.
Q. 11
And in fact I will be coming on to a telephone attendance book from the 8th
7
March, I think maintained by your personal assistant or secretary, I will be
8
coming to it in a moment it's age 4041 in the Tribunal's Book of Evidence, but
9
if you look in fact, one page in terms of the persons who are calling, or
09:10:21 10
looking to speak with or meet with Frank Dunlop, it is a virtual whose who of
11
Irish business and politics, isn't that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 12
You have Bernie Cahill, you have Dan McGing, you have Brian Cowan and you have
14
at the end of the day Bertie Ahern to name just four of those who are listed
09:10:49 15
there.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 13
And to use a somewhat slang analogy, at that time in terms of public relations
18
and in terms of companies or politicians communicating their message and trying
19
to persuade people, Frank Dunlop was the man?
09:11:14 20
21
A.
Well there were others but I was one of them, yes.
Q. 14
But in terms of the others, there were few if none others who had the level of
22 23
access that you had to, for example Mr. Ahern or Mr. Cowan at that time ? A.
24 09:11:42 25
There probably were but I might not have been aware of them, but certainly I had the access that you are describing.
Q. 15
And certainly in 1993 and indeed probably up to April of 2000, other than those
26
persons whom you allege you received corrupt payments from you and those whom
27
you say knew you were making those corrupt payments, the world at large did not
28
know, and could not have known and you would not have wanted the world at large
29
to know about this.
09:12:21 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
4 09:12:23 1
Q. 16
And when you cross your rubicon in April of 2000 it is largely the end of the
2
professional role for Frank Dunlop in terms of your professional calling as a
3
public relations communicator and consultant?
4
A.
Finito.
Q. 17
Now Mr. Dunlop, in -- now you are giving evidence on oath, isn't that correct?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 18
And you were giving evidence on oath prior to April of 2000?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 19
So nothing about the oath has changed but Frank Dunlop has changed since April
09:12:48 5
09:13:12 10
of 2000.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 20
And obviously other persons who come to this Tribunal including Mr. Sweeney
13
will have to give evidence on oath, and clearly that has implications for the
14
person swearing to tell the truth, insofar as if you are a believer in an after
09:13:37 15
life you have got to face your maker in relation to that, who presumably knows
16
if you are or are not telling the truth, it has that implication for you.
17
A.
Undoubtedly and that is a matter for me, not for anybody else Mr. Shipsey.
18
Q. 21
Absolutely it's a matter for you and your maker and it will be a matter for
19 09:13:58 20
21
Mr. Sweeney and his maker. A.
Correct.
Q. 22
But insofar as the temporal world is concerned, if you knowingly tell untruths
22
to this Tribunal or Mr. Sweeney knowingly tells untruths to this Tribunal there
23
are sanctions here on Earth, before you ever have to face your maker, isn't
24
that correct?
09:14:19 25
26
A.
Correct, correct.
Q. 23
And one of those principle sanctions or ultimate sanctions would be the
27
sanction of being prosecuted for perjury.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 24
And what I'd like to know Mr. Dunlop, is whether you have any agreement or
09:14:39 30
arrangement or understanding with the Tribunal or anyone else, which means that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
5 09:14:49 1
you will not or cannot be prosecuted for perjury in return for your cooperation
2
and your willingness to continue to give oath to give Tribunal?
3
A.
There is no such arrangement.
4
Q. 25
And therefore whatever you say to this Tribunal, if it turns out that it is
09:15:18 5
knowingly false, Frank Dunlop can go to jail for that?
6
A.
Correct.
7
Q. 26
I'd like to see if we can get some measure of agreement Mr. Dunlop, in relation
8
to you and my client, Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Sweeney will say, and I think you
9
accept, that prior to the month of March of 1993 you never had any dealings
09:15:57 10
with him?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 27
Now, could I also just as I see you reaching for what I apprehend might be
13
Mr. Sweeney's statement given in private to the Tribunal, I think back in 2000,
14
can I just ask you to do me a favour Mr. Dunlop? And that favour is that when
09:16:21 15
I suggest to you that Mr. Sweeney is going to say something or give evidence
16
that contradicts the evidence that you have given, that you will answer that
17
question or that suggestion and not refer to what Mr. Sweeney may or may not
18
have said on a prior occasion to the Tribunal, I think back in 2000, do you
19
follow me ?
09:16:48 20
A.
I follow you, but just for clarification you are wrong, it was not
21
Mr. Sweeney's statement I was looking up, it was my diary of March 1993, so
22
let's get that clear first, so that was a wrong supposition on your part.
23 24
And secondly I have no difficulty, if you are going to suggest to me that
09:17:06 25
Mr. Sweeney will say something contrary to what I am giving evidence of I will
26 27
listen to what you have to say. Q. 28
Yes but my point is this though, insofar as it may be in contradiction with
28
some thing that Mr. Sweeney said to the Tribunal which you have seen, I would
29
ask that you would not say, but Mr. Sweeney said to the Tribunal. Mr. Sweeney
09:17:29 30
will have to explain any contradiction or change in his position to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
6 09:17:35 1
2
Tribunal subsequently, do you follow me ? A.
3 4
Yes, I follow you, yeah. So I'm not to refer to any statement that Mr. Sweeney has made when you are asking me a question.
Q. 29
09:17:51 5
No, you take Mr. Sweeney's gospel as coming from me. You take it that whatever I say Mr. Sweeney is going to say he is going to back me up on it?
6
A.
Grand, okay.
7
Q. 30
And if I can then just suggest to you that prior to March of 1993, Mr. Sweeney
8 9 09:18:12 10
will say he had no dealings with Frank Dunlop? A.
Yes.
Q. 31
He will say that prior to March of 1993 he did not know very much about Frank
11
Dunlop and in terms of his involvement in business, did not have much cause for
12
knowing much about Frank Dunlop. And Mr. Sweeney was, you may or may not have
13
known it at the time, an executive director of Monarch, but was not a
14
shareholder in Monarch at the time, did you know or not know that?
09:18:57 15
16
A.
I did not know whether he was a shareholder or not.
Q. 32
And he is a chartered quantity surveyor by training, you probably learned from
17
the first meeting that he is Scottish by birth if Irish by decent, and he is a
18
very pronounced Scottish accent, you'll remember that, won't you?
19 09:19:19 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 33
Insofar as we are here today, Mr. Dunlop, it's because you put an asterisk
21
along side the name of Monarch in relation to Cherrywood and you followed that
22
up subsequently with a short statement in October of 2000, and then a further
23
statement, a much more detailed one in September of 2003, isn't that correct?
24 09:19:54 25
A.
Correct.
Q. 34
And we'll be coming to those statements and obviously I will be asking you some
26
questions in relation to those statements insofar as they are inconsistent and
27
also insofar as they don't tally with the sworn statement that you have given
28
on this module to the Tribunal I think starting on 13th June. But what is
29
clear, Mr. Dunlop, from your sworn evidence and obviously it is your sworn
09:20:34 30
evidence that the Tribunal and that we have to take as being the version of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
7 09:20:40 1
truth that you want the Tribunal to believe and for us to accept, that on the
2
basis of your sworn testimony given on principally the 13th and 14th of June,
3
we are here today because you allege that Mr. Sweeney said something to you in
4
the course of a meeting with you on the 8th March in Monarch's offices, which
09:21:18 5
lead you to understand that Mr. Sweeney knew that in carrying out the role that
6
you were to carry out for Monarch you would be involved in bribing politicians?
7
A.
Broadly, yes.
8
Q. 35
And but for that statement by Mr. Sweeney, the precise words you can't
9
understandably remember, you would not have a basis for your understanding or
09:22:08 10
belief that Monarch knew that you were going to bribe politicians?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 36
And therefore it logically follows and having watched you give evidence over a
13
number of days now, Mr. Dunlop, you are a person that believes in a logical
14
sequence in general, would that be unfair to suggest to you?
09:22:51 15
16
A.
Yes, I like logical, rational thought processes.
Q. 37
The logic of that therefore is that if the Tribunal was to disbelieve you in
17
relation to your evidence that Mr. Sweeney said something to you, the words of
18
which were not clear but which lead you to believe that Monarch knew that you
19
were to bribe politicians, there would be no basis for any finding that Monarch
09:23:35 20
were involved in corruption and the entire substructure of this module would
21 22
crumble, isn't that right? A.
Well I can't -- I can't attest to what the Tribunal would or would not do, in
23
logical consequence to the question you asked me, the penultimate question
24
which you asked me in relation to if I had not put the asterisk in front of
09:24:04 25
Monarch's name, then logic might be that Monarch might not be in the Tribunal
26
or they might not be such a module.
27
Q. 38
Sure.
28
A.
What happens after that I cannot either speculate about or attest to.
29
Q. 39
Yes, but an asterisk alone does not condemn a man or a company.
A.
Absolutely not.
09:24:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
8 09:24:27 1
Q. 40
And what condemns Monarch in your eyes is the statement or the words used by
2
Mr. Sweeney on the 8th March 1993 which lead you to understand that he knew
3
that you were going to bribe politicians?
4 09:24:46 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 41
And you may have misunderstood my question. If that is disbelieved, if the
6
Tribunal obviously, and you would not want them to do so, but if they come to
7
the conclusion that Mr. Sweeney either did not make that statement or any like
8
statement, or came to the conclusion that insofar as Mr. Sweeney made any
9
statement it was not on the balance of probabilities open to that construction,
09:25:21 10
then there would be no basis for a finding that Monarch were involved with you
11 12
in making corrupt payments to politicians, in logic. A.
Well I don't think I could accept that. But -- the premise of this question,
13
Mr. Shipsey is what the Tribunal will or will not do on foot of the evidence
14
that has been given to them, both by me and representatives of Monarch.
09:25:57 15
16
Q. 42
Yes.
A.
Now, that's not for me, may I suggest with the greatest respect, for you
17
either, to infer or suggest what the Tribunal might or might not do in certain
18
consequences. I can only say that I put an asterisk in front of Monarch on
19
foot of the meeting I had with Mr. Sweeney in March of 1993, consequent to the
09:26:19 20
21
comment that was made to me . Q. 43
Mr. Dunlop, if you don't want to answer my question that is fine, I think my
22
question was clear. I am not saying what the Tribunal will or will not do, I
23
am putting a hypothetical question.
24 09:26:40 25
A.
Hypothetical yes, it's hypothetical.
Q. 44
If hypothetically you are disbelieved in relation to what Mr. Sweeney is
26
alleged to have said to you on the 8th March, you say the 8th March, then there
27
is no basis for a finding that Monarch was engaged with you in corrupt
28
payments, isn't that right?
29 09:27:11 30
A.
Hypothetically, yes.
Q. 45
Now, can we then perhaps come on to the 8th of March of 1993, and I just want Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
9 09:27:27 1
to put to you firstly that insofar as Mr. Sweeney is concerned, his evidence
2
will be that the meeting that was to take place around five o'clock on Monday
3
the 8th March was postponed to around 11.30 on the 9th March, and I take it
4
from your sworn evidence that you don't accept that?
09:27:56 5
6
A.
No.
Q. 46
It is however the case that when you made your statement to the Tribunal in
7
September of 2003 that the date that you gave on that occasion was you
8
believed, the 9th March?
9
A.
Yes, yes it's at the bottom of a page, yes the 9th March.
Q. 47
Trust me on that.
11
A.
Yes, no you are quite right.
12
Q. 48
And that was a mistake?
13
A.
Yes, correct.
14
Q. 49
Because the meeting took place on the 8th March at around five and it took
09:28:23 10
09:28:35 15
place in Monarch's offices, isn't that right?
16
A.
(nods).
17
Q. 50
Now Mr. Sweeney's evidence as will be no, it was meant to be on the 8th but was
18
postponed to the 9th, so there we have our first conflict of evidence between
19
you and Mr. Sweeney.
09:28:51 20
21
Secondly you say that at the meeting on the 8th March it was you and
22
Mr. Sweeney and that Mr. Liam Lawlor was not present, isn't that correct?
23
A.
Correct, not at the first meeting.
24
Q. 51
And you are agreed however, that in relation to your first meeting with
09:29:12 25
Mr. Sweeney that there was but one meeting, and that subsequent to that meeting
26
you met, believe, with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 52
And you think it was on the next day at around four or five o'clock, is that
29 09:29:29 30
right? A.
That is correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
10 09:29:37 1
Q. 53
Now can I ask you to, could I ask the Tribunal to put up on the monitor page
2
4041? Sorry it's up already, and this, if I understand it correctly is the
3
Frank Dunlop & Associates telephone memorandum.
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 54
Or memoranda pad.
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 55
Your secretary, receptionist or PA receives calls and notes them down?
8
A.
Correct.
9
Q. 56
Not done by you but done by somebody in your office.
A.
Correct.
11
Q. 57
Is it the same person does them or --
12
A.
Well it was at the time you the secretary.
13
Q. 58
And who was that?
14
A.
The secretary.
Q. 59
Who was that, what was that person's name ?
16
A.
Norma , I think was her name .
17
Q. 60
So Norma takes all your calls, fields your calls or passes them on to you at
09:30:06 5
09:30:18 10
09:30:24 15
18 19 09:30:42 20
the time or notes them down, isn't that right? A.
Either in my absence or my unavailability.
Q. 61
Yes. Now the first on this page, we will come back to it, you will see there
21
is a reference to "Paul Walls 11 o'clock meeting here tomorrow".
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 62
That's a reference to a meeting with Mr. Paul Walls whoever he is, in your
24 09:31:00 25
26
offices and your offices are in Mount Street, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 63
And just to be precise in relation to that, your offices were then 25 Upper
27
Mount Street?
28
A.
Are now 25 upper Mount Street.
29
Q. 64
Are now and were then?
A.
Yes.
09:31:25 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
11 09:31:25 1
2
Q. 65
And Norma was your secretary then?
A.
I have had a number of secretary Mrs. Shipsey, I'm just saying Norma was one of
3 4
them, I cannot absolutely attest that she was the secretary at the time . Q. 66
09:31:42 5
No in fact I didn't know that, Mr. Dunlop, and I will come to a diary, Mr. Sweeney's diary, because he has in brackets the word (NORMA). So it looks
6
as if you are right and he is right in relation to that in fact.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 67
But you are going to meet Mr. Walls at 11 o'clock in your offices in Mount
9 09:32:07 10
11
Street on the following day, that would be the 9th, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 68
If you just go down to 9.55 there is a reference "Ann, Liam has arranged a
12
meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch House at five o'clock today". And we are
13
under no doubt but the Liam there is Liam Lawlor?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 69
And Ann is Liam Lawlor's secretary?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 70
And it's making it clear that Liam had arranged a meeting for you with Ed
09:32:28 15
18 19 09:32:38 20
Sweeney in Monarch house? A.
That's what the implication of the reference is.
Q. 71
Yes. And therefore we can be under no doubt, because there seemed to be some
21
doubt in your evidence maybe I misunderstood this, that Mr. Lawlor was the one
22
who arranged your introduction to Mr. Sweeney in 1993?
23
A.
The -- I don't think there is doubt in my mind about it Mr. Shipsey, as I said
24
in my recent statement, I went to meet Mr. Sweeney at Mr. Sweeney's request,
09:33:07 25
Mr. Lawlor subsequently alluded to the meeting in telling me that he knew that
26
I had met Ed Sweeney and I met Mr. Sweeney and Liam Lawlor together on a number
27
of other occasions subsequently.
28
Q. 72
But we are not talking about subsequently.
29
A.
Correct.
Q. 73
Before you ever meet Mr. Sweeney you say at five o'clock on the 8th, Liam
09:33:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
12 09:33:29 1
Lawlor's secretary rings you and says Liam, so we are not talking about
2
subsequent, we are talking about prior to it?
3
A.
Mm-hmm.
4
Q. 74
Liam Lawlor is your procurer of this meeting.
A.
That would, that message would suggest that, yes.
6
Q. 75
Yes and you would accept that that is the case?
7
A.
Well I have to accept that that is a message that has come from Ann Urell,
09:33:39 5
8 9
Liam's secretary, saying Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney, yes. Q. 76
09:34:08 10
Now if you go down to, after Mr. Cowan phoning you at 10.45 and Mr. Cahill phoning you at 10.50, down to 11.35 you will see the reference to Tim Collins.
11
I think Mr. Collins' name has come up before, in that Mr. Collins was also a
12
person who, if I can use a neutral term, procured introductions for you to
13
clients and including property developers?
14 09:34:29 15
A.
Yes, arranged introductions.
Q. 77
And if I understood the position clearly and I don't obviously pretend to know
16
it to the level that you know it, Mr. Dunlop, but Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Collins
17
were your, if I can move to an analogy with barristers, they were your best
18
solicitors?
19 09:34:56 20
A.
I accept the legal analogy, yes.
Q. 78
And at 11.35 Mr. Collins rings and says a meeting has to happen tomorrow with
21
Godfrey Higgins, Nasser Taher, FD Frank Dunlop and Tim Collins as Nasser is
22
going away, and there is a number for Mr. Higgins any time from 10 o'clock on,
23
do you see that?
24 09:35:16 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 79
And Mr. Taher was at that time or had been prominent in the me at trade in
26
Ireland, he was of Jordanian, Palistinian origin and Mr. Higgins worked for
27
him, isn't that correct?
28
A.
That's correct.
29
Q. 80
And they were involved in fairly high profile litigation with Mr. Phelan around
09:35:39 30
this time, you may or may not -- Mr. Pascal Phelan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
13 09:35:43 1
A.
I --
2
Q. 81
You don't know?
3
A.
Vaguely yes, vaguely.
4
Q. 82
If you just turn, the Tribunal turn over the page to 4042? You see at 4.45
09:36:01 5
after Mr. Dan McGing rings awe at 4.25, there is another message from Ann to
6
say Liam won't be able to make the meeting until 5.30.
7
Now that suggests that as of 4.45, 15 minutes before the meeting that's due to
8
take place with Mr. Sweeney at Monarch House, Mr. Lawlor is saying he is coming
9
to it but he's running late?
09:36:32 10
11
A.
That would appear to be the suggestion.
Q. 83
And then finally just on that day there is Mr. Ahern, Mr. Bertie Ahern is
12
returning your call at 5.05.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 84
You see that?
A.
Yes.
Q. 85
Now can I ask the Tribunal to bring up page 4045, which is an extract from your
09:36:50 15
16 17
diary? And would I be correct in inferring that your evidence in 2006 to this
18
Tribunal that you had a meeting on the 8th of March of 1993, some, in excess of
19
13 years ago, is based upon the entry for Monday 8th March at 5 o'clock, E
09:37:32 20
Sweeney?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 86
You don't have an independent recollection of the precise date or time ?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 87
Now could I ask you just to help us, Mr. Dunlop, is this diary in your hand, is
09:37:48 25
this in your own personal diary, do you make the entries here?
26
A.
Yes it is.
27
Q. 88
And it's your -- exclusively your handwriting?
28
A.
Yes it is.
29
Q. 89
Can I ask you to go to Tuesday 9th March and there is an 11 o'clock Paul Walls,
09:38:06 30
isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
14 09:38:08 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 90
And presumably that's the same Paul Walls that's referred to in the telephone
3 4 09:38:19 5
attendance at page 4041, 11 o'clock meeting here tomorrow? A.
Yes.
Q. 91
And it's probably safe to assume that meeting took place with Mr. Walls as
6
scheduled at 11 in your office?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 92
And then under that there is something not very clear but seems to be 11.30 and
9
it looks to be E Sweeney, it's not anything as clear because it's been squeezed
09:38:41 10
in at 11.30 but would you just see if you can assist me because you know your
11 12
writing, 11.30 appears to be E Sweeney? A.
Yes it is and it's squeezed in there, Mr. Shipsey, on the basis that there was
13
a meeting to have taken place as you alluded, as you referred to with Tim
14
Collins and the Taher people which is deleted because obviously that meeting
09:39:14 15
16
didn't occur. Q. 93
T Collins, Godfrey Higgins and Nasser at that her, just for completeness if you
17
go on to March 10th, 2 pm you see Nasser Taher, Godfrey and T Collins, re:
18
Taher, so that meeting and again, I don't know if it was due to take place at
19
whatever time 12 or 11.30 was cancelled or put off, isn't that right?
09:39:39 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 94
Now you see what I am going to have to suggest to you is that the evidence of
22
Mr. Sweeney will be that the meeting on Monday 8th was cancelled and
23
rescheduled for Tuesday the 9th and that that rescheduled meeting took place in
24
your office on Tuesday 9th and that's what Mr. Sweeney will say?
09:39:58 25
A.
In following along what you have said at the outset of your cross-examination
26
in relation to what Mr. Sweeney will say, well if Mr. Sweeney says that
27
Mr. Sweeney will say that.
28
Q. 95
But you don't agree?
29
A.
I don't agree.
Q. 96
Yes. And you see Mr. Sweeney will say that meeting took place in your office
09:40:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
15 09:40:18 1
it was a brief meeting --
2
A.
In my office.
3
Q. 97
In your office in Mount Street and it was a brief meeting for no more than ten
4
or 15 minutes and it was only you and he, there was no other person, Liam
09:40:32 5
Lawlor or any other person. So you agree at least that Mr. Lawlor was not at
6
the first meeting with you where he disagrees with you is in relation to the
7
date firstly and in relation to the venue?
8
A.
Okay.
9
Q. 98
You both agree that there is only one meeting between --
A.
The two us.
11
Q. 99
The it would have you before you meet with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 100
So one of you is right in relation to this if you are both right that there was
09:40:51 10
14 09:41:06 15
16
only one meeting, isn't that correct? A.
Correct.
Q. 101
Now in circumstances where on Monday the 8th a meeting is being set up urgently
17
for Mr. Taher, Mr. Higgins and Mr. Collins on the 9th and where your
18
contemporaneous diary crosses that out and inserts Mr. Sweeney's name, is that
19
not suggestive, not determinative but suggestive on a balance of probabilities
09:41:44 20
that the meeting with Mr. Sweeney took place or a meeting took place with
21 22
Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th? A.
23 24
place with Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th. Q. 102
09:42:08 25
26
A.
Yes. No I am not saying that now, I would disagree with the words now. My diary shows two references to Mr. Sweeney, one on the 8th and one on the 9th.
Q. 103
29 09:42:25 30
And now you are saying that that means that there were two meetings between you and Mr. Sweeney?
27 28
Oh I think it's determinative of one thing Mr. Shipsey that a meeting did take
But listen if we assume for the moment that there is only one meeting, it's either the 8th or 9th?
A.
But that is your assumption. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
16 09:42:26 1
Q. 104
No sorry --
2
A.
An assumption you are making.
3
Q. 105
Let's back up a little bit, I hope it's not an assumption. My understanding of
4
your evidence is that there was one meeting before you met with Mr. Lynn and
09:42:37 5
6
Mr. Reilly, that's not my assumption that's your evidence? A.
7
Yes. There was a meeting with Mr. Sweeney before I met Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
8
Q. 106
One meeting?
9
A.
I had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney on the 8th and on the 9th, both are in the
09:42:52 10
11
diary. Q. 107
You see I might be wrong, Mr. Dunlop, but I understood your clear sworn
12
evidence was to the effect that there was one meeting and it took place on the
13
8th, you are of course free to change that now, but my recollection from your
14
evidence was that there was one meeting and it took place on the 8th.
09:43:15 15
A.
No the diary --
16
Q. 108
Sorry forget the diary for a moment?
17
A.
No, no.
18
Q. 109
Sorry, Mr. Dunlop, yes?
19
A.
No no.
Q. 110
Mr. Dunlop, I am here to ask the questions.
21
A.
Fine.
22
Q. 111
That's my job, you are here to answer the questions.
23
A.
Fine.
24
Q. 112
If there is anything inappropriate about my questions the Tribunal will tell me
09:43:22 20
09:43:34 25
26
and stop me . A.
I accept that, I have been here for a long time , Mr. Shipsey, I know the rules.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Well I think Mr. Dunlop it's my recollection, subject to
29
correction, that you said there was one meeting, so Mr. Shipsey is asking you
09:43:50 30
now is that still your evidence or are you changing your evidence? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
17 09:43:54 1
A.
No it's not a question, Chairman, in my view of changing evidence. My diary
2
shows I had two meeting with Mr. Sweeney after Mr. Richard Lynn's telephone
3
number is on the top of the page on Tuesday 9th, I had a meeting with Richard
4
Lynn and Phil Reilly at 5.15 on the 9th.
09:44:12 5
Q. 113
Yes well can I ask you then why in your sworn evidence on I think the 13th or
6
14th, you did not tell Mr. Murphy that you had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney on
7
the 9th of March?
8
A.
9 09:44:35 10
Because Mr. Murphy's questions were solely related to the meeting on the 8th of March and how it was established.
Q. 114
I am suggesting to you, Mr. Dunlop, that there was, and the evidence of
11
Mr. Sweeney will be that the meeting on the 8th was cancelled, just -- I am not
12
asking you to agree with me, I am saying that that's what Mr. Sweeney will say.
13
Mr. Sweeney had a dental appointment with a Dr. Wolf on Monday 8th March, that
14
the meeting that was due to take place in Monarch's premises at five o'clock
09:45:15 15
with you and Mr. Lawlor was cancelled or postponed and that you, Mr. Dunlop,
16
facilitated Mr. Sweeney with the meeting the following day at 11.30 but it was
17
in your offices?
18
A.
19
question you asked me previously in relation to what Mr. Sweeney will say, that
09:45:44 20
will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence. Let me just add one point, I have no
21 22
Well you are saying Mr. Sweeney will say that, well again in answer to the
recollection whatsoever of Mr. Sweeney ever being in my office. Q. 115
Can I ask you to just have a look at a document and it was provided by
23
Mr. Sweeney to the Tribunal, I am not sure if you have seen it or was made
24
available to you, but -- and I am not sure Chairman how best to get it up,
09:46:12 25
because it doesn't appear in the numbering system, I don't know if you have a
26
scanning --
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: What's the document? Q. 116
An extract from Mr. Sweeney's diary for the 8th and 9th of March of --
09:46:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
18 09:46:22 1
CHAIRMAN: We should be able to --
2 3
MS. DILLON: We don't have this document so Mr. Shipsey may not be aware of the
4
previous ruling of the Tribunal, that documentation that hasn't been discovered
09:46:35 5
to the Tribunal and hasn't been circulated can't be introduced without notice,
6
it can be put up on screen there's no difficulties, it's a matter for the
7
Tribunal but we don't have this document and it hasn't been circulated and it's
8
not part of the brief.
9 09:46:47 10
CHAIRMAN: All right. Is this -- this is an extract from Mr. Sweeney's diary.
11 12
MR. SHIPSEY: It is and was made available in Mr. Sweeney's Affidavit of
13
Discovery which he was required to swear for the Tribunal. I don't know why
14
it's not in the circulated documents, but --
09:47:06 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Well are there a number of, will you be making a number of
17
references to Mr. Sweeney's diary?
18 19 09:47:18 20
MR. SHIPSEY: No it's actually just the one and fortunately I don't think there are other persons named or --
21 22
CHAIRMAN: All right, well then, we can -- if I just give a copy.
23 24 09:47:28 25
CHAIRMAN: If you can produce hard copies for the moment and we'll put it into the system later.
26 27
MR. SHIPSEY: Very good.
28
Chairman I will certainly, it's certainly possible that I am mistaken but my
29
instructions are that it was included in our Affidavit of Discovery, I will try
09:47:52 30
and get the reference for that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
19 09:47:54 1
CHAIRMAN: All right we'll be able to put it up now on the screen.
2 3
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman I also have the original of the diary I don't know if
4
Mr. Dunlop or the Tribunal would like to see in case the copy is poor because
09:48:23 5
some of the entries are in different coloured pen. If anyone want to see the
6 7
original I have it here. Q. 117
If you just look at 8th of March, this Mr. Sweeney's diary, although it's not
8
very clear, 3.45 there is a reference to Dr. Wolf and then 5 pm Liam
9
Lawlor/Frank Dunlop.
09:48:46 10
A.
Mm-hmm.
11
Q. 118
Then if you go to Tuesday 9th.
12
A.
Mm-hmm.
13
Q. 119
You will see the words 15 minutes, you see that?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 120
11.30 and then 25 upper Mount Street.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 121
And then in brackets (NORMA).
18
A.
Mm-hmm.
19
Q. 122
And above the upper Mount Street, what looks to be obviously the same person,
09:48:54 15
09:49:11 20
but written in different sort of in capitals are the words "Frank Dunlop".
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 123
And what Mr. Sweeney will say in relation to that is that 11.30, 25 upper Mount
23
Street and Norma and 15 minutes were written contemporaneously and subsequently
24
he put Frank Dunlop in to identify the 25 upper Mount Street was the office of
09:49:39 25
Frank Dunlop.
26
And what Mr. Sweeney will say so that you are clear is that he had a brief 15
27
minute meeting with you in your offices at 11.30 on the 9th and no meeting at 5
28
pm on the 8th, and I take it although you are nodding to me you hear that but
29
you don't agree with it?
09:50:10 30
A.
As I keep saying that will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
20 09:50:13 1
Q. 124
2
But I am putting it to you and giving you an opportunity to say whether you think he is right or wrong?
3
A.
No I don't think he is right.
4
Q. 125
And if there was a meeting on Tuesday 9th as I now understand you to accept,
09:50:28 5
based on your own diary, am I right in that understanding?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 126
And if you met Mr. Paul Walls in your office at 11 on the 9th, isn't the
8
probability, forgetting for a moment Mr. Sweeney's diary entry suggesting that
9
the meeting takes place at 25 upper Mount Street, forgetting that for a moment,
09:50:51 10
isn't the probability that if you met Mr. Sweeney at 11.30 on the 9th,
11
following on from a meeting in your office with Mr. Walls at 11 o'clock, that
12
that meeting took place in Upper Mount Street?
13
A.
There is logic to that, yes.
14
Q. 127
And the fact that you both agree that Mr. Lawlor wasn't at the meeting that
09:51:30 15
took place between you initially, coupled with the fact that at 4.45 on the 8th
16
Mr. Lawlor is making his way to Monarch House for a meeting, he believes is
17
taking place, is that not also suggestive that the Monday the 8th meeting was
18
cancelled or postponed because otherwise you'd both recall that Mr. Lawlor was
19
at the meeting, do you follow me ?
09:52:09 20
A.
No I don't and that is eminently illogical, Mr. Shipsey.
21
Q. 128
Well sorry we have a note at 4.45 on the 8th.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 129
Just let's take in baby steps, because I may be illogical but we'll take it in
24
smaller baby steps. 4.45 Ann phones your office to say that Mr. Lawlor won't
09:52:31 25
be able to make the five o'clock meeting in Monarch until 5.30.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 130
That certainly is suggestive that Mr. Lawlor is going to the meeting but is
28
ringing 15 minutes before it's due to start to say that he is going to be a
29
half hour late?
09:52:49 30
A.
Yes, it is suggestive that a meeting is taking place in Monarch House with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
21 09:52:53 1
2
Mr. Sweeney. Q. 131
3 4 09:53:01 5
Yes, well at this stage going to because it's a five o'clock meeting and this is 15 minutes before that?
A.
Correct.
Q. 132
And since both you and Mr. Sweeney are clear that the first meeting, where ever
6
it took place, did not have Mr. Lawlor, and you couldn't miss Mr. Lawlor in a
7
room isn't that fair to say?
8
A.
Certainly not.
9
Q. 133
Does that not suggest that that meeting on the 8th did not take place and was
09:53:25 10
cancelled or postponed based upon this entry in relation to Mr. Lawlor running
11
late for the meeting?
12
A.
Taking it in baby steps, Mr. Shipsey, my answer is no, it is not suggestive.
13
Q. 134
You see because if the meeting on the 8th did take place there is no reason for
14 09:53:52 15
Mr. Lawlor not showing up? A.
Well we don't know whether Mr. Lawlor did show up or not to meet Mr. Sweeney,
16
he certainly wasn't at the first meeting between Mr. Sweeney and myself
17
Mr. Sweeney and I agreed to that.
18
Q. 135
But we know at 4.45 he is on his way there?
19
A.
According to the telephone message.
Q. 136
And therefore it would follow that, seem to follow that he showed up and I am
09:54:08 20
21
trying to get an explanation for -- neither of you remembering him being there
22
if there was a meeting on the 8th, I have lost you?
23
A.
That escapes me, that does escape me, sorry, Mr. Shipsey, that does escape me .
24
Q. 137
Sorry. Now on the 9th and the meeting that took place on the 9th, Mr. Sweeney
09:54:38 25
will say that Mr. Phillip Monahan, that it was Mr. Phillip Monahan who
26 27
requested him, Mr. Sweeney, to meet with you? A.
28 29 09:55:16 30
Well my answer to that is I don't know. I have no knowledge of whose, of what Mr. Phil Monahan might or might not have said to Eddie.
Q. 138
But Mr. Monahan requested some time, either on the 8th or prior to the 8th, him to attend a meeting with you, that it was postponed, and that it took place on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
22 09:55:24 1
the 9th in your offices. He will say that insofar as there was a discussion
2
with you, it was a brief and general discussion about Cherrywood and that he
3
explained to you that he would leave the detail of the project to Mr. Lynn and
4
Mr. Reilly who you were to meet, or he was arranging for you to meet later that
09:55:58 5
day, does that sound about right?
6
A.
No, it doesn't.
7
Q. 139
Well we know you were to meet with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly?
8
A.
I met with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, yes.
9
Q. 140
And that was about the Cherrywood project?
A.
Nothing else.
Q. 141
And they were the ones, they were the team within Monarch who were the hands on
09:56:12 10
11 12
people involved in the lobbying exercise to secure an improvement in the zoning
13
for Cherrywood?
14 09:56:33 15
A.
Broadly, yes that is correct.
Q. 142
And therefore it would not be surprising that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly would be
16
the ones to provide you with the detail or the micro level detail about their
17
involvement in lobbying, which you were going and being asked to assist in?
18
A.
That would not be surprising, no.
19
Q. 143
And therefore when Mr. Sweeney says he provided you with a macro level picture
09:57:01 20
at the meeting he says took place on the 9th, that would not be surprising
21
either?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 144
Mr. Sweeney will say that you were being retained for your public relations or
24
he understood you were being retained by Mr. Monahan who was his boss, had
09:57:30 25
instructed him that you were to be retained for your public relations, and
26
lobbying professionalism or experience.
27
A.
Lobbying
28
Q. 145
Yes. And public relations?
29
A.
No public relations involved.
Q. 146
All right. Well we may be sort of engaged in sort of semantics, but in terms
09:57:48 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
23 09:57:57 1
of presenting Monarch to politicians and in terms of lobbying them, you are
2
trying to present Monarch and Monarch's position in a favourable light, you are
3
engaged in a form of it's a communications exercise you are engaged in, and
4
that is what, I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding of
09:58:24 5
what is certainly within the umbrella of public relations?
6
A.
Communications and persuasion.
7
Q. 147
Yes. So it is in the very broad sense a public relations, something public
8 9 09:58:43 10
relations consultants do in a general sense, but specifically it is lobbying? A.
Yes, specifically lobbying.
Q. 148
So your firm which is a public relations firm, you don't have on your letter
11
head lobbyists, that's a part of your public relations consultancy?
12
A.
I can't imagine anybody putting the word lobbyist on their headed notepaper.
13
Q. 149
Not now, Mr. Dunlop?
14
A.
Not now, not after May 2000.
Q. 150
No but maybe before?
16
A.
Oh yeah.
17
Q. 151
Before May 2020?
18
A.
I don't think public affairs was the colloquial moniker everybody talked about
09:59:01 15
19 09:59:12 20
public affairs. Q. 152
21
Yes, you wouldn't put lobbyist now, you wouldn't put spin doctor or anything like that now, isn't that correct, Mr. Dunlop?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 153
And when you attribute that to May of 2000 you have had a large part in that
24 09:59:31 25
26
situation? A.
Yes directly contributed to that, yes.
Q. 154
So, as it were, not to praise you too much in relation to it, but you are the
27
one that is largely responsible for that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 155
And Mr. Sweeney will say as I have said, that he had a brief discussion
09:59:53 30
outlining the position to you, that there had been a zoning decision I think in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
24 10:00:06 1
May of 1992 which was a one house per acre plus a district centre that was
2
Mr. Barrett's motion, isn't that correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 156
You will, he will say that he explained to you that one of your competitors had
10:00:25 5
been involved with Monarch back in 1992, Mr. O'Herlihy, and that Monarch were
6
to put it mildly, not happy or disappointed with the resolution from May of
7
1992?
8
A.
Certainly with the outcome of the resolution.
9
Q. 157
And he will say that what they were trying to achieve and the aim of Monarch
10:00:52 10
was to get to a situation where instead of it being one house per acre they
11
wanted to, you show me your four fingers I was getting the queue from the
12
solicitor and I had it from you, you are right to go to four houses per acre
13
plus this district centre?
14
A.
10:01:17 15
Correct and there were some discussion, I cannot specifically say that it was at that stage, but there was some discussion either then or subsequently about
16
an IDA sponsored science park.
17
Q. 158
Yes which I think was Mr. Sweeney's baby as it were?
18
A.
He certainly was very enthusiastic about it, and certainly subsequently I
19 10:01:34 20
remember him speaking to me in the end about it. Q. 159
And Mr. Sweeney will say that having outlined the generality of the project and
21
having set up a meeting for you with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly who were the
22
people you were going to be most closely liaising with, that there was a
23
discussion between the two of you in relation to the terms of your retainer.
24
And Mr. Sweeney will say that a fee of 4,000 a month was agreed with you and
10:02:15 25
that you requested or, yes requested I suppose, mentioned to him the
26
possibility of a success fee and Mr. Sweeney informed you that that is not
27
something that he could agree and that you would have to take that up with
28
Mr. Monahan.
29 10:02:41 30
Now there is three parts to that, there's obviously Mr. Sweeney says it was to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
25 10:02:47 1
be 4,000 a month, do you agree or disagree?
2
A.
No I don't agree with that.
3
Q. 160
That you raised the issue of success fee?
4
A.
There was no discussion of success fee at the outset.
Q. 161
And thirdly that you would have to take up with Mr. Monahan?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 162
So he is wrong in relation to those three points. And what you say is, before
10:02:57 5
8
we get on to other things that were said at that meeting, what you say is that
9
the agreed fee was 25,000 not sure whether it was with or without VAT or
10:03:20 10
inclusive of VAT, is that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 163
Is it just for my curiosity, was the 25,000 inclusive or VAT fee was it, or was
13 14 10:03:35 15
16
VAT to be paid on top of that? A.
A straight 25,000.
Q. 164
So VAT was to be included and you would account for the VAT?
A.
There are no invoices extant in relation to the 25,000 so I cannot absolutely
17 18
say that there was a discussion about VAT. Q. 165
19 10:03:51 20
the 25,000 was VAT inclusive? A.
21 22
10:04:13 25
Just 25,000, I am not saying whether VAT was discussed or not, but 25 was agreed, that was the agreed fee.
Q. 166
23 24
No sorry I hadn't asked you about invoices, I am asking you what was agreed so
Yes. And as a professional person that would carry with it, either 21 per cent plus VAT or have it included in it?
A.
Correct.
Q. 167
Mr. Sweeney will also say that you asked for 25,000 payment up front before you
26
commenced on the assignment that you were being asked to carry out?
27
A.
Yes, there was a discussion about fees and 25 was agreed.
28
Q. 168
No I know that, Mr. Dunlop, did you understand my question?
29
A.
Yes I did.
Q. 169
Yes. Well perhaps you'd now like to answer the question or what I put to you?
10:04:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
26 10:04:53 1
2
A.
There was a discussion about fees --
Q. 170
No sorry Mr. Dunlop, can I stop you again. Maybe I will put it to you again.
3
Mr. Sweeney will say that you requested a payment of 25,000 up front before you
4
started your assignment?
10:05:11 5
6
A.
I disagree.
Q. 171
And after that, and having set up a meeting with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly,
7
Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that insofar as he was concerned with you, there
8
was no further discussion about fees, apart from the agreement in relation to
9
the 4,000 per month and the fact that you would take up the question of a
10:06:05 10
success fee with Mr. Monahan?
11
A.
I disagree.
12
Q. 172
Now you, in fairness to you in your evidence, can't assist the Tribunal as to
13
when precisely you had your alleged further discussion with Mr. Sweeney about
14
fees, isn't that correct?
10:06:29 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 173
Insofar as Mr. Sweeney suggests that you look for 25,000 up front, could I ask
17
you, Mr. Dunlop, as a professional person, have you ever asked for an up front
18
payment?
19
A.
Yes, I think I have.
Q. 174
In respect of fees?
21
A.
Sorry.
22
Q. 175
And could I ask you, without wanting to pry too much, is that something that
10:06:52 20
23
you did do and often did, I'm not attaching sort of criticism to you for that,
24
but again it may be sort of wearing my own profession, it's not unheard of
10:07:18 25
professional persons who agree a fee to say well here is to be my fee, it be my
26
brief fee or monthly retainer but I'd like an up front payment of X pounds or
27
now X euro not unusual at all.
28
A.
In your profession or mine.
29
Q. 176
Well you probably wouldn't know mine?
A.
I know certainly that it is not unusual in your profession for a briefing fee
10:07:37 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
27 10:07:41 1
but certainly I could not definitively say I never asked for an up front
2
payment, I would have to say to you that yes that I probably did on a number of
3
occasions, depending on the client.
4
Q. 177
10:08:04 5
Yes. So for Mr. Sweeney to suggest that you asked for it in this case is not completely outrageous in terms of your prior practice?
6
A.
Or subsequent.
7
Q. 178
Or subsequent.
8
A.
It's not outrageous, no it is not.
9
Q. 179
You are just saying it didn't happen in this case.
A.
Correct.
Q. 180
Okay. Now the other, and obviously most fundamental part of what is meant to
10:08:15 10
11 12
have taken place at this meeting that took place on your evidence on, as I
13
understood coming in today on the 8th, now I think on your evidence on the 8th
14
or the 9th but on Mr. Sweeney's evidence the 9th, was Mr. Sweeney said
10:08:44 15
something to you I'm not sure if it's as a parting shot or during the meeting
16
or whenever it took place, but so far as your sworn evidence is concerned on
17
page 122 of the transcript for day one of this module, you said in response to
18
question 953 "Mr. Sweeney indicated to me that he knew of my relationship with
19
Dublin County Council and that I had been successful in other matters" and
10:09:24 20
here's the important part, because up to that point you will agree there is
21
nothing sinister or untoward about saying that he knew of your relationship
22
with Dublin County Council and your success in other matters but he used the
23
words to the effect that, this is your words "You know, you have to do what you
24
have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council". And on that phrase
10:10:00 25
Mr. Dunlop, you are seeking to hang Mr. Sweeney and hang Monarch, isn't that
26 27
correct? Well hang in the sense of implicate them in your corruption? A.
I have given evidence to the effect in response to a direct question from the
28
Chairman as to the interpretation of those words used by Mr. Sweeney and I have
29
given my interpretation of the words at the time .
10:10:30 30
Q. 181
Mr. Dunlop, I just want to come back to my question to you, my question to you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
28 10:10:36 1
was on the basis of those words you want, and maybe you don't like the word
2
hang, but you want to, the Tribunal to conclude that Mr. Sweeney knew and was
3
recruiting you to engage in the corruption of politicians?
4
A.
10:11:05 5
No again Mr. Shipsey, I do not want the Tribunal to conclude anything. I am giving evidence in, to -- in relation to my relationship with Monarch and
6
particularly with Mr. Sweeney and I have given evidence to the effect that a
7
phrase of that nature was said, it was used, and on that basis, I in direct
8
answer to the question by the Chairman, I said that that was my interpretation
9
of Mr. Sweeney's understanding of what I was about.
10:11:30 10
Q. 182
And where Mr. Sweeney doesn't say to you "Frank, I want you to go out and bribe
11
politicians for Monarch to get us our zoning" you may not want, but in terms of
12
us being here, we are here because of the --
13
A.
Asterisk.
14
Q. 183
Now, understanding that you took from what Mr. Sweeney said, which was "You
10:12:22 15
have to do what you have to do to get things done in Dublin County Council" and
16
would you agree with me , Mr. Dunlop, before we come to the fact that you put
17
this in other ways at other times, let's park that for a moment. But would you
18
agree with me and indeed with an intervention from the Chairperson when you
19
gave this evidence, that that expression is capable of an interpretation which
10:13:02 20
does not involve or implicate Mr. Sweeney in any knowledge of corruption?
21
A.
I agree and I have already attested to that fact.
22
Q. 184
Well that's fair of you Mr. Dunlop. So what we are then down to, if
23
Mr. Sweeney comes here as a God fearing man like yourself, father of nine
24
children, chartered quantity surveyor, executive director but not shareholder
10:13:41 25
in Monarch, and says on oath to this Tribunal that he never intended in
26
engaging you at the direction of Mr. Monahan, for you to engage in making
27
corrupt payments, you wouldn't dispute that, would you?
28
A.
That is his interpretation and I would not dispute it.
29
Q. 185
No, no it's not his interpretation because he is the person that was at the
10:14:24 30
meeting and it is his words and now we know not just his words because you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
29 10:14:30 1
accept that his words are open to an innocent interpretation, we now know it is
2
your interpretation of his words that has us here?
3
A.
I have already attested to that fact.
4
Q. 186
And if he says, and will say, Mr. Dunlop, that there was no intention,
10:15:00 5
knowledge on his part to have you engage in corruption of politicians, that
6
would presumably, if you accept that, and if that evidence is accepted, and
7
that's a matter for the Tribunal, but insofar as you are concerned, that must
8
make you question the interpretation that you placed on it?
9 10:15:36 10
A.
No.
Q. 187
Well let me put it another way and just take Mr. Sweeney out of the equation.
11
If I say to Frank Dunlop or a Frank Dunlop who is my client and coming to give
12
evidence to a court, "Frank, you've got to do what you've got to do" and you
13
interpret that as meaning that as meaning that Bill Shipsey wants you to go and
14
lie to protect Bill Shipsey to the Tribunal, that is maybe an interpretation
10:16:21 15
that's open to you, but let's say that you ask for clarification from Bill
16
Shipsey and he says, you ask for example "Do you want me to lie?" and Bill
17
Shipsey says "Absolutely not, you have got to go Frank and tell the truth, do
18
what you have to do, is tell the truth" now where in that hypothetical
19
situation I tell you that, that must have a bearing on your original sinister
10:16:51 20
interpretation you put on what Bill Shipsey said, does that follow?
21
A.
It does, yes.
22
Q. 188
And therefore just to move it to Mr. Sweeney for a moment, if Mr. Sweeney, who
23
didn't say anything directly asking you to corrupt politicians, says that you
24
have got it so incredibly wrong, I have no knowledge, no intention and any
10:17:18 25
interpretation that you put on that Frank is incorrect, I'm suggesting to you
26
that that at least ought to make you question the interpretation you are now
27
placing upon it?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 189
And why, Mr. Dunlop, can you not accept that you may have got it wrong in terms
10:18:00 30
of your interpretation of what Mr. Sweeney said? Why are you so certain that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
30 10:18:08 1
your interpretation of these words which are open to a number of
2
interpretations is correct, why is that?
3
A.
That is my, was my interpretation and continues to be my interpretation.
4
Q. 190
No, no. I know that Mr. Dunlop, why? Why are you maintaining in the face of
10:18:34 5
what I put to you, that position?
6
A.
That is my position and has always been my position.
7
Q. 191
No but could you answer me Mr. Sweeney and the Tribunal as to why that is?
8 9
Telling me it is doesn't explain why? A.
10:19:02 10
Well that may be a difficulty for you and Mr. Sweeney and indeed the Tribunal, but it is not something that I interpreted from Mr. Sweeney lightly as
11
inferring or meaning, that was my interpretation and continues to be my
12
interpretation.
13 14
CHAIRMAN: But Mr. Dunlop given that we have evidence from you that a
10:19:18 15
16
particular expression -A.
Yes.
17 18
CHAIRMAN: -- was used by Mr. Sweeney, you interpreted it in a particular way
19
which would implicate Mr. Sweeney and Monarch in wrongdoing?
10:19:33 20
A.
Yes.
21 22
CHAIRMAN: Or in the knowledge of wrongdoing or that there was to be
23
wrongdoing, you then accepted I think in response to the question from me, that
24
it was capable, that the particular expression that you say was used was
10:19:52 25
capable of both a, an innocent and a not so innocent meaning, you elected to
26
interpret it in the not innocent or not so innocent way, and Mr. Shipsey is
27
asking you and it seems to me to be a reasonable question, to explain why you
28
are so certain in your own mind that the not so innocent interpretation is the
29
correct one, given that it's capable of both, if you like, to an observer, it's
10:20:27 30
capable of both, so what was it that brought you in the direction of a not so Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
31 10:20:36 1
2
innocent interpretation? A.
Well I agree Chairman I, and in response to Mr. Shipsey I did point out that I,
3
in response to a question from you I did say yes it was capable of another
4
interpretation, I fully accept that and have repeated that here this morning.
10:20:53 5
But the whole and I think it was in relation to Mr. Murphy, though Mr. Murphy
6
didn't seem to understand what I was saying when I used the word culture, the
7
whole culture of the meeting in relation to what was happening for Monarch and
8
what had happened to Monarch and what Monarch wanted and I was being brought
9
in, if you take Mr. Shipsey's words for my expertise in relation to the
10:21:16 10
knowledge of how the system worked or relationship with councillors or
11
politicians, that was my interpretation of the phrase that was used to me .
12 13
CHAIRMAN: But that has to be put into the context of the meeting that was
14
taking place at the time ?
10:21:30 15
A.
Yes.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: But at the start of the meeting and as we understand this is your
18
first meeting in relation to Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes.
10:21:41 20
21
CHAIRMAN: So at the start of the meeting, if you were asked at the moment the
22
meeting starts what was your view, was Mr. Sweeney coming to suggest or to --
23
that some wrongdoing be undertaken or was he coming to suggest that a
24
legitimate PR exercise would be undertaken? I mean at that stage you don't
10:22:15 25
26
know, you never met Mr. Sweeney? A.
Correct.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: So you don't know anything about him or -- so I mean what, at that
29
point you don't know what exactly he is going to suggest or do you?
10:22:27 30
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
32 10:22:28 1
CHAIRMAN: No. He then comes in and he talks to you, and the words that you
2
suggested, give or take the words that you suggest, which based on your
3
evidence would implicate Mr. Sweeney, these were just spoken words, I mean
4
why -- it seems to me to be a reasonable question to put to you, what about
10:22:54 5
those words or what about the way they were said indicated to you that
6 7
Mr. Sweeney had a knowledge of the bribing of councillors? A.
Well Mr. Sweeney I think as I have said in my statement, Mr. Sweeney outlined
8
the problems that existed, that they were facing in relation to Monarch, in
9
relation to Cherrywood in relation to what had happened, in relation to what
10:23:17 10
had occurred in Dublin County Council, in relation to the dependabilty or
11
otherwise of politicians, and that he knew of my "expertise" in relation to
12
lobbying politicians, and the phrase was used in that context and I interpreted
13
it in that fashion.
14 10:23:40 15
16
CHAIRMAN: But you accept that it is capable of another -A.
Oh I absolutely, I have said that on a number of occasions.
Q. 192
MR. SHIPSEY: Mr. Dunlop, can I suggest something to you, something I won't say
17 18 19
a little unkind, probably very unkind? Can I suggest to you that the reason
10:24:08 20
that you want the Tribunal to accept the interpretation that you have placed on
21
the words that Mr. Sweeney used, and the reason you can't accept or agree that
22
another interpretation is as likely or more likely is because to do so would
23
involve you in admitting that having crossed the rubicon and fingered Monarch
24
with an asterisk, you have either made a mistake in relation to Monarch or you
10:25:04 25
have told a lie in relation to Monarch?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 193
Because if we are to believe your evidence that you are as amenable to perjury
28
as anyone who comes before this Tribunal, for to you do so having sworn
29
evidence to the contrary would obviously render you liable to that isn't
10:25:30 30
that -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
33 10:25:30 1
A.
Yes.
2
MS. DILLON: I wonder would it be possible to break for a few moments I think
3
Mr. Dunlop just needs a break.
4 10:25:49 5
CHAIRMAN: All right. We'll break for ten minutes.
6 7
THE TRIBUNAL ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED
8
AGAIN AS FOLLOWS:
9 10:26:12 10
MS. DILLON: I wonder sir, before Mr. Dunlop resumes the box might this be an
11
opportune time to indicate that Mr. Shipsey will continue to his
12
cross-examination it might take up to lunchtime , but it is unlikely anybody
13
else will be able to cross examine Mr. Dunlop because of the necessity of
14
commencing the evidence of Mr. Sweeney who is only available for a very limited
10:43:16 15
period.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: All right. Well we will have to make arrangements then for --
18 19 10:43:19 20
21
MS. DILLON: The return of Mr. Dunlop for the cross examination by other parties but in case other parties who is are here to cross examine Mr. Dunlop might like to leave that it's not going to happen. Thank you sir.
22 23
MR GORDON: I appear on behalf of Mr. Tony Fox and I understood that Mr. Fox's
24
position would be accommodated today directly after Mr. Shipsey's examination
10:43:39 25
and I just wish to inform the Tribunal --
26 27
CHAIRMAN: Well we are doing our best to try and ensure that we don't have
28
gaps in the evidence, we have a difficulty in relation to Mr. Sweeney after
29
this week, how long would your cross-examination be?
10:43:59 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
34 10:43:59 1
2
MR GORDON: I can't imagine Chairman that I would take any more than two hours with Mr. Dunlop.
3 4 10:44:09 5
CHAIRMAN: There is no question of that arising then today, if you said you only had a couple of questions we would certainly facilitated you but what
6
we'll have to do is make arrangements and your solicitor can talk to the
7
solicitor for the Tribunal and see at some other arrangements can be made
8
suitable to yourselves and to Mr. Fox.
9 10:44:26 10
MR GORDON: I am very grateful I am just anxious to point out that we were
11
prepared today and in fact I had to adjourn another matter to, because I didn't
12
want to discommode the Tribunal but --
13 14 10:44:44 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Well that's unfortunate, we understood that we would have a little bit more time this morning but we are not going to have it now, so we'll have to make some other arrangements.
17 18
MR GORDON: Is if Mr. Costello my instructing solicitor will liaise perhaps.
19 10:44:54 20
21
CHAIRMAN: Yes and we'll endeavour to facilitate yourself, your solicitor and Mr. Fox.
22 23
MR GORDON: I am very grateful.
24 10:45:01 25
CHAIRMAN: Now sorry Mr. Shipsey.
26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
35 10:45:03 1
FRANK DUNLOP RETURNS TO THE WITNESS BOX AND CONTINUES
2
IN CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. SHIPSEY:
3 4
Q. 194
10:45:55 5
Mr. Dunlop, your interpretation of the words that you say that Mr. Sweeney used was and is of course conditioned or influenced by what you know and what you
6
knew about the modus operandi of Frank Dunlop?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 195
You knew on the 8th or 9th and 8th -- or alternatively 8th and 9th of March of
9 10:46:29 10
11
1993, that Frank Dunlop was a corrupt man who bribed politicians? A.
Yes.
Q. 196
Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that not only did he not know this, but had no
12
basis whatsoever in March of 1993 to know or believe or suspect that Frank
13
Dunlop confidante of the Taoiseach and government ministers was a corrupt
14
person who bribed politicians, and I'd have to suggest to you that there was
10:47:16 15
nothing known or that could have been known by Mr. Sweeney at that time to
16
support that?
17
A.
Well I don't know that.
18
Q. 197
And certainly, prior to April of 2000, the public picture of Frank Dunlop was
19 10:47:52 20
upstanding, upright, professional man, isn't that right? A.
You are saying that Mr. Shipsey.
21
Q. 198
Yes. I thought you'd agreed with me earlier?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 199
And that's the Frank Dunlop that Eddie Sweeney was coming to meet in March of
24
1993, so I am suggesting to you that whatever interpretation you put on it is
10:48:11 25
based upon your knowledge of the corruption of Frank Dunlop, but that that
26
knowledge has in a sense blighted or clouded your judgement in relation to your
27
ability to interpret the words that other people use.
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 200
Because it enables you either because it is what you believe or because what
10:48:46 30
you want to believe, to somehow suggest that "Well I may have been a corrupt Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
36 10:49:02 1
man, but there were others who were the recipients of my corruption and there
2
were others who were the procurers of my corruption and therefore although
3
Frank Dunlop may be a bad man, I'm really only a pawn in their game" didn't it
4
enable you to do that?
10:49:22 5
A.
Oh no.
6
Q. 201
It doesn't?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 202
Now after this meeting on the 8th or 9th or 8th and 9th of March, within a
9 10:49:46 10
11
couple of days you received two cheques totalling 25,000. A.
Correct.
Q. 203
Now that is consistent, both with your version of events which is that your fee
12
was 25,000, and it's also consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version of events which
13
is that you asked for 25,000 up front. So up until this point you both can be
14
right, isn't that correct?
10:50:14 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 204
However prior to December of 1993 you don't issue any invoice claiming an
17
amount of 25,000 in respect of fees, isn't that right? I think on the 6th
18
December you issue an invoice which includes a fee for 25,000 plus VAT, it's
19
page 4772. Will you trust me on this for a moment Mr. Dunlop, if I'm wrong I
10:51:19 20
will stand corrected, but for the moment would you agree with me that you don't
21
issue any invoice for 25,000 prior to the 6th December 1993?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 205
And the invoice that you issue on the, on the 6th December 1993 is for 25,000
24 10:51:42 25
26
plus VAT? A.
Correct.
Q. 206
Which is different than what you understood had been agreed in March of 1993,
27 28
namely that it was 25,000 inclusive of VAT? A.
29 10:52:08 30
The 25,000 straight. Either inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the VAT issue did not arise, it was a 25,000 pound payment.
Q. 207
Yes. So we know that between March of '93 and the 6th December of 1993, Frank Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
37 10:52:17 1
Dunlop does not have any documentary evidence to support his contention of any
2
fee agreed at 25,000?
3
A.
I don't have documentary evidence, I have remittance notices from Monarch.
4
Q. 208
I know yes, but you never got 25,000?
A.
In a 25,000 pound amount, in that amount. No, two cheques 15 and ten.
Q. 209
Yes, so that doesn't tell you that you agreed a fee of 25,000 as your
10:52:37 5
6 7
professional fee, isn't that right?
8
A.
I don't understand your --
9
Q. 210
Well the fact that you get a cheque for 10,000 and 15,000 a couple of days
10:53:03 10
after your meeting in March doesn't assist the Tribunal or you in determining
11
that it was payment on foot of an agreed 25,000 or a payment on account of
12
25,000?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 211
And indeed in relation to your invoice of the 6th December which is 4772, there
10:53:26 15
are two invoices of that date or two documents that appear as invoices on that
16
date, one of which puts in an agreed fee of 17,500 and the other at 25,000.
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 212
And my recollection was you weren't able to explain why you had those two
19 10:53:50 20
documents. A.
Correct.
21
Q. 213
And still aren't?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q. 214
It is at best confusing, and perhaps at worst misleading, isn't that correct?
24
A.
They both have the same number, Mr. Shipsey.
Q. 215
Yes. But just in response, both have the same number, different amounts?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 216
They can't both be right and they are at best confusing, at worst misleading.
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 217
Mr. Dunlop, what I am going to do now, obviously the major issue for the
10:54:06 25
10:54:35 30
Tribunal is to determine whether you are telling the truth in relation to -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
38 10:54:45 1
well two things, actually a little more nuanced now, because it's not really
2
just whether Mr. Sweeney said the words that he said, but really whether the
3
Tribunal accepts that the interpretation you placed upon the words that
4
Mr. Sweeney said are correct or, sorry is correct, isn't that right?
10:55:10 5
6
A.
Yes, it's a matter for the Tribunal.
Q. 218
And what I want to do now obviously is really just so that you are aware of
7
where I'm coming from on behalf of Mr. Sweeney, I am now setting out and trying
8
to set out to, to be under no illusion, discredit your evidence so that it is
9
easier for the Tribunal to believe Mr. Sweeney and to disbelieve Frank Dunlop
10:55:43 10
and we start from this position that it is accepted that Frank Dunlop acted
11
corruptly by Frank Dunlop.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 219
It is accepted by Frank Dunlop that he lied under oath to this Tribunal?
14
A.
Correct.
Q. 220
And when we come on then to consider Frank Dunlop's evidence as to what was or
10:56:06 15
16
was not agreed or was not, was or was not done, it's in that context and for
17
the Tribunal to believe you they have to believe that in crossing the rubicon
18
if I can mix my metaphors, you also under went in that river crossing some type
19
of Pauline conversion if that's not too convoluted, as you are crossing the
10:56:58 20
river you decided I once was lost and a liar, I am now found and I tell the
21
truth, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 221
And we are now going to, as it were, test that position that you are
24
maintaining here, by reference to contemporaneous documents which I am going to
10:57:21 25
be suggesting to you suggest that no such conversion took place and the river
26
crossing was just a river crossing, do you follow?
27
A.
I follow.
28
Q. 222
On the 10th April 1993 document 4133, an invoice is raised by Frank Dunlop &
29 10:57:55 30
Associates, isn't that correct? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
39 10:57:55 1
Q. 223
And indeed all of the invoices that are raised by Frank Dunlop & Associates are
2
generated within Frank Dunlop & Associates, I mean it's pretty obvious but it
3
follows, these aren't Monarch dictating your invoices and you putting it on
4
your letter head and sending it out?
10:58:24 5
6
A.
No.
Q. 224
You tell, be it Norma, or whoever it is that is doing it, "Would you have take
7
a fee note" whether you do it on a dictaphone for do it by hand, "take a fee
8
note to Monarch Properties Services Limited to agreed fee Republic affair
9
strategy and it's implementation, 10,000 plus VAT", Norma does that and it's
10:58:50 10
generated and sent out, that's how it works isn't it?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 225
So on the 10th April when you sent out a fee note for 10,000 plus VAT, that's
13 14
on your direction? A.
It would be.
Q. 226
It would be on your direction. Was on your direction?
16
A.
Logically yes.
17
Q. 227
And when we see the reference there "CW/south" could we take it that "CW" is
10:59:02 15
18 19 10:59:28 20
Cherrywood and "south" is Dublin, South County Dublin, is that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 228
And that doesn't relate at all to the 25,000 fee that you have agreed, when I
21
say it doesn't relate, it doesn't correspond with the agreed fee?
22
A.
Correct yes.
23
Q. 229
Isn't that right.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 230
Because if you are right the fee that ought to have gone out after March of
10:59:44 25
26
1993 was to agree fee public affairs strategy and it's implementation 25,000,
27
either with or without VAT, probably with VAT because it's not a VAT exempt
28
service, isn't that right?
29 11:00:03 30
A.
Right.
Q. 231
And we know that didn't happen until the 6th of December 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
40 11:00:07 1
2
A.
Correct.
Q. 232
So here you are sending out what is a, again at best confusing at worst
3
misleading invoice, suggestive of an agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT, isn't that
4
right?
11:00:21 5
6
A.
It's an invoice for 10,000 plus VAT.
Q. 233
No but it is misleading or confusing, whichever you like to take it, because
7
there is no agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT which you have agreed with --
8
A.
Oh there is no agreed fee exactly.
9
Q. 234
At 10,000.
A.
Yes.
Q. 235
To that extent it is. And you generate this and send it off to Monarch and on
11:00:37 10
11 12
it's face it purports to say we have an agreed fee of 10,000 plus VAT, please
13
pay it?
14 11:00:50 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 236
And that's marked certified true copy and paid on 1st of June 1993 is that
16
right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 237
Now if you go over the page to 4142 please? That's the payment certificate in
19
respect of this invoice because it's referring to an invoice dated the 10th of
11:01:17 20
April 1993 from Frank Dunlop & Associates, description of the work PR strategy
21
and insofar as the paid on, go down to the bottom left hand corner, 1st of June
22
1993 that corresponds with what's stamped on your document at 4133, isn't that
23
right?
24 11:01:40 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 238
And it also has marked as payment one, the first payment they are making to
26
you, or suggests that it is, isn't that right?
27
A.
It's marked here as number one, yes.
28
Q. 239
And amount of quotation it says 4K or four K a month. Now insofar as that is
29 11:02:10 30
concerned or so far as that is entered, I think while Mr. Caslin's writing, Mr. Sweeney will say obviously he provided Mr. Caslin with the information Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
41 11:02:14 1
because you never spoke to Mr. Caslin?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 240
And Mr. Sweeney will say that he told Mr. Caslin what he had agreed with you
4
was 4,000 a month. And in him telling that to Mr. Caslin it may not be the
11:02:26 5
truth and can't be the truth if you are right, but it's consistent at least in
6
May of 1993 with what Mr. Sweeney says he had agreed with you in relation to
7
your retainer?
8
A.
Yes it would appear to be.
9
Q. 241
And it's not appear, it be?
A.
Nothing wrong in my view.
11
Q. 242
We know not what sees only what is?
12
A.
Well thank you for the classic --
13
Q. 243
But you agree with that?
14
A.
I don't agree at all that there was an arrangement between Mr. Sweeney and
11:02:41 10
11:02:55 15
myself for 4,000.
16
Q. 244
No no, my point was on the face of this it is consistent?
17
A.
On the face it have yes.
18
Q. 245
On the face of this it is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version and certainly
19 11:03:09 20
21
inconsistent with your version of 25,000? A.
On the face it, yes.
Q. 246
If you are right Mr. Sweeney ought to have put down amount of quotation 25,000
22
whether it was with or without VAT. So here we have what I might describe as a
23
straw in the wind, obviously not determinative against you because you don't
24
write it, but at least insofar as Mr. Sweeney is concerned, if he tells
11:03:33 25
Mr. Caslin this, he is either lying to Mr. Caslin, mistaken but he has to be
26
wrong because that's not what you agreed?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 247
And there obviously had to be some inquiry as to why Mr. Sweeney who doesn't
29 11:03:59 30
know you from Adam prior to March of 1993, who is, no reason to suspect he will say why, that you were involved in any corruption, we'll have to inquire as to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
42 11:04:04 1
what possible interest he could have in putting it down, maybe your counsel and
2
the Tribunal will inquire, but at least it's consistent with his version and
3
inconsistent with yours, isn't that right?
4 11:04:16 5
A.
My counsel will inquire into that.
Q. 248
Yes. If you just go over to, sorry over in my book because I have taken my out
6
but 4202, sorry 4204 I'm very sorry. This is an invoice from you or from Frank
7
Dunlop & Associates, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 249
It's dated the 19th of May?
A.
Yes.
Q. 250
Five weeks after the first one and this is for 12,396.69 pounds plus VAT. Now
11:04:39 10
11 12
I think we can take it you have never agreed a fee with somebody of 12,396.69
13
pounds?
14
A.
No, correct.
Q. 251
And what this is an invoice to reflect either a fee or a payment of 15,000?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 252
Could be either?
18
A.
Either.
19
Q. 253
Yes, if you get a cheque for 15,000 in and you are going to account for it
11:05:06 15
11:05:21 20
properly you will deduct, you'll calculate what the VAT is, isn't that right?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 254
So again just on the face of this document it's described as an invoice number
23 24
834, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 255
And then at the bottom it has paid with thanks, for VAT purposes only?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 256
That's typed in Frank Dunlop & Associates offices.
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 257
Isn't that right? So here on the 19th May a document which purports to be an
11:05:34 25
11:05:49 30
invoice is issued, which is in fact a receipt? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
43 11:05:54 1
A.
Paid with VAT yes, paid with thanks for VAT purposes only.
2
Q. 258
So firstly the invoice is a misnomer, it's a receipt?
3
A.
It's a receipt yes.
4
Q. 259
And it's a receipt for a payment that has already been made?
A.
Yes.
Q. 260
And the only payment that has been made at this stage of 15,000 pounds is a
11:06:07 5
6 7
payment of 15,000 that is paid on the 11th of March 1993?
8
A.
That is the only payment of 15,000, yes.
9
Q. 261
Therefore this receipt mis-called invoice logically must relate to the 15,000?
A.
Logically it would appear to.
Q. 262
And although it was suggested and I was just a little bit confused about this,
11:06:28 10
11 12
but that's going to be a recurring theme in my cross-examination, Mr. Dunlop,
13
and you will have to clarify matters for me, but my recollection of your
14
evidence in relation to this invoice, which you now accept is a receipt, was
11:07:14 15
that this was in fact an invoice and that it was paid in two tranches of 7,500
16
each in July of 1993 and September of 1993?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 263
And that must be wrong now, isn't that correct?
19
A.
No I draw your attention to the hand written note on the top of it.
Q. 264
Yes.
21
A.
That's not my handwriting, that's an officer in the company.
22
Q. 265
Officer in whose company?
23
A.
My company.
24
Q. 266
Yes. So where it says 19/5 and whatever it is 19/9 --
A.
17 or 19.
Q. 267
17 or 19, yes, what you have interpreted from that is since there was a payment
11:07:33 20
11:07:53 25
26 27
of 7,500 on the 9th, somebody in your offers made the assumption that this
28
actually relates at least partially to that payment because it was of 7,500?
29 11:08:24 30
A.
Well I wouldn't necessarily suggest to you, Mr. Shipsey, that he made the assumption, he was the person who is responsible for keeping the records. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
44 11:08:26 1
Q. 268
2
I know but Mr. Dunlop, that couldn't be right if this is a receipt, isn't that right?
3
A.
Well logically no.
4
Q. 269
I mean logically impossible, it's not even, we are not in the in the realm of
11:08:40 5
balances of probabilities or beyond a reasonable doubt, if this is paid with
6
thanks --
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 270
-- on the 19th of May --
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 271
-- it can have nothing to do with the payment in September or July?
A.
Well as I pointed out to you, that note in handwriting on the top of the
11:08:47 10
11 12
invoice or payment or receipt, whatever you like to call it, is not in my
13
handwriting it's in someone else's handwriting.
14 11:09:05 15
Q. 272
So you are disowning it?
A.
No, no I am not disowning it, I am just pointing out to you that that notation
16 17
is not in my writing. Q. 273
18 19
it? A.
11:09:21 20
Well I can't be responsible for somebody putting down paid on 19th of the 5th and 17 or the 19 of the 9th '93 I can't be responsible for that, that's not in
21 22
No. But that is not disowning it, it is not yours you can't be responsible for
my handwriting. Q. 274
I am not trying to make you responsible for it, but what I am suggesting to you
23
is that the suggestion you gave in evidence, that this invoice was paid in July
24
and September in two tranches is a nonsense.
11:09:40 25
A.
No. I am suggesting to you that what I am saying to you is that as a record
26
out of my company with a notation on it by the officer who had responsibility
27
for keeping the books, this was written by him, and on foot of that he put down
28
"paid" on these two dates.
29 11:10:01 30
Q. 275
Yes. But you --
A.
And that was, that is my evidence. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
45 11:10:03 1
Q. 276
But you got no payment on the 19th of the 5th?
2
A.
Well he has put down --
3
Q. 277
No but sorry, you know Mr. Dunlop you got no payment on the 19th of the 5th?
4
A.
Correct.
Q. 278
And insofar as you got a payment on the 17th or 19th of the 9th it was 7,500?
6
A.
Yes, I think that was established later.
7
Q. 279
But the fact that this notation is there and presumably put on subsequently, it
11:10:14 5
8 9 11:10:30 10
wouldn't have been put on at the time . A.
I don't know when it was put on.
Q. 280
No. If this letter, invoice, statement goes out on the 19th of May 1993, you
11
couldn't put it on paid on the 17th or 19th of September?
12
A.
Correct well it's, correct absolutely.
13
Q. 281
So I am suggesting to you that any suggestion that I took from your evidence
14 11:10:56 15
that this related to payments in July and September is a nonsense? A.
No, I keep coming back to the point the only explanation I can give you is in
16
relation to the notation on the top of the page. I did not write that, it was
17
written by the officer in the company responsible for the receipts of money and
18
in fact the issuing of the invoices.
19
Q. 282
11:11:18 20
21
July and September? A.
22 23
And you are sticking to your version of events therefore that this relates to
I cannot do otherwise, in the context of the person who made this note and in the context of my knowledge of him.
Q. 283
24
Well can I suggest that there is another interpretation that I thought you had perhaps come around to agreeing with, which is inconsistent with that. If this
11:11:33 25
is in fact a receipt as of the 19th of May?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 284
For 15,000, the only payment it can relate to is the one you got on the 11th of
28
March because that's the only payment of 15,000 that you had received up until
29
the 19th of May 1995?
11:11:52 30
A.
No I don't accept that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
46 11:11:53 1
Q. 285
Well sorry which part of it don't you accept --
2
A.
First of all --
3
Q. 286
Let's do -- you don't accept it then I am asking you the questions Mr. Dunlop?
4
A.
Did you ask me what I didn't understand I went to reply and you interrupted me .
Q. 287
Well I'm sorry for interrupting you Mr. Dunlop, but I am going to try hopefully
11:12:09 5
6
to make it easier. You accept that you only got one payment of 15,000 prior to
7
the 19th of May of 1993?
8
A.
Yes in March.
9
Q. 288
You accept that this document which is your document insofar as there is typing
11:12:29 10
on it, reflects the fact that as of the date of this document you had already
11
been paid that 15,000?
12
A.
No. This is dated 19th of May and I received 15,000 in March.
13
Q. 289
Yes, sorry you received it, but by the 19th of May you have received it?
14
A.
I have received 15,000 pounds in March, yes.
Q. 290
And this document which reflects the receipt of a payment for 15,000 can only
11:13:00 15
16
refer to the payment you received in March because you received no other
17
payment for 15,000?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 291
Apart from the March one?
A.
Correct.
Q. 292
And you see therefore Mr. Dunlop, because I am trying to be logical and you are
11:13:09 20
21 22
logical, if that logically follows, this cannot be a receipt for a payment of
23
15,000 on the 9th of March or sorry 11th of March?
24 11:13:30 25
A.
11th.
Q. 293
11th of March and a receipt for two payments in July and September of 1993, do
26
you agree with me so far?
27
A.
I see the logic yes.
28
Q. 294
And you agree with it?
29
A.
Well I agree with the logic, yes.
Q. 295
And just taking these two invoices, one of which isn't an invoice, the 10th
11:13:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
47 11:13:54 1
April for 10,000 and VAT and one of the 19th of May of 1993 for 15,000, they in
2
fact could both relate logically, to the two payments you had received in March
3
of 1993, save in the case of the one for 10,000 plus VAT and in the one of the
4
15,000 it's inclusive.
11:14:29 5
6
A.
Yes, logically.
Q. 296
And we also know you got no payment on the first of June of 1993, isn't that
7
right?
8
A.
Well I am taking your word for it.
9
Q. 297
Well we can go to it, if you go to 4205?
A.
Yes.
Q. 298
No payment on the first of June and the only payment or the only two payments
11:14:45 10
11 12
that you had received up to that point in time are the 10,000 on the 12th March
13
and the 10,000 on the 26th of May?
14
A.
11:15:26 15
Yes. Sorry, sorry can you repeat that again, Mr. Shipsey, the only payments I got?
16
Q. 299
Only payments you received?
17
A.
Prior to the first of June.
18
Q. 300
Prior to the first of June, in an amount of 10,000.
19
A.
Oh in an amount of 10,000, yes but there was the 15,000.
Q. 301
But Mr. Dunlop we've dealt with that, we are talking about 10,000, you know
11:15:38 20
21
that?
22
A.
You have made it clear now you are talking about 10,000.
23
Q. 302
So the only payments you received prior to the 1st of June of 10,000 were on
24 11:15:54 25
26
the 12th of March and 26th of May? A.
Yes.
Q. 303
And we know that the payment that you received on the 26th of May is the
27
payment that finds it's way to Mr. Lawlor?
28
A.
Correct.
29
Q. 304
And your evidence in relation to that will obviously come to it, is that
11:16:19 30
however it got to Mr. Lawlor it was not Frank Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
48 11:16:23 1
2
A.
Correct.
Q. 305
So insofar as the invoice of the 10th of April 1993 relates to an amount paid
3
up to the first of June of 1993, the only one that is could come close to
4
approximating is the one of the 12th March?
11:16:52 5
6
A.
Yes.
Q. 306
So again Tribunals being Tribunals, like courts being courts, on the balance of
7
probabilities it is connected or probably connected to that payment rather than
8
any other one?
9 11:17:09 10
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 307
And it is confusing and misleading to repeat what's becoming my mantra, in that
11
it has 10,000 plus VAT when you have only been paid a sum of 10,000?
12
A.
The cheque is for 10,000.
13
Q. 308
And it is confusing and misleading in relation to the invoice which is in fact
14 11:17:46 15
16
a receipt for 15,000 in that that is a 15,000 inclusive of VAT? A.
Yes.
Q. 309
So at the very least an accounts department receiving these is going to be
17
somewhat confused, that's an accounts department in Monarch, would have to ask
18
some questions in relation to this, isn't that right?
19 11:18:05 20
A.
Well logically, yes.
Q. 310
Could I ask just to put up 4219 and that's the remittance advice for the cheque
21
for 10,000, which finds it's way to Mr. Lawlor?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 311
And unlike the other remittance advices, it's actually to Frank Dunlop as
24
opposed to Frank Dunlop & Company or Frank Dunlop & Associates, there is a
11:18:54 25
Monarch document --
26
A.
It's not my document.
27
Q. 312
You can't be responsible for that but the cheque that's actually drawn is made
28 29 11:19:07 30
out to Frank Dunlop & Associates? A.
Correct.
Q. 313
Consistent with the other cheques that were drawn and the other payments made. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
49 11:19:12 1
So that person who is preparing this within Monarch is preparing it with the
2
intention that it is to go to Frank Dunlop & Associates and it is a crossed
3
cheque which ought to make it difficult to negotiate other than by Frank Dunlop
4
& Associates?
11:19:29 5
A.
Correct.
6
Q. 314
It should go nowhere other than into a Frank Dunlop & Associates account?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q. 315
And if it does something has gone wrong in the banking process at least, isn't
9 11:19:40 10
11
that right? A.
Something has gone wrong somewhere.
Q. 316
Yes. Now whilst we have a remittance advice for this on the 26th of May, there
12
is according to you some mystery shrouding this cheque, Frank Dunlop's attitude
13
to this is not my signature on the back, not clear whether you are saying
14
whether you ever got it or not or it ever arrived in your office, but it's just
11:20:19 15
one of these mysteries, would that be an unfair characterisation of your view
16 17
in relation to this cheque? A.
Yeah well I mean I wouldn't characterise it simply as such I gave evidence to
18
the effect that one it is not my signature on the back of the cheque, I did not
19
give this cheque to any third party including Mr. Lawlor, and we now have
11:20:50 20
evidence to the effect as to how this cheque was negotiated.
21
Q. 317
Well --
22
A.
Sorry I shouldn't say that we haven't evidence as to --
23
Q. 318
It suggests it --
24
A.
We have a statement from a party.
Q. 319
Yes. There is just a few questions I have. I mean obviously Mr. Lawlor is not
11:21:01 25
26
going to be able to contradict that for obvious reasons, your evidence, so you
27
are home and dry in relation to that particular evidence that you didn't give
28
it to Mr. Lawlor, isn't that right? Mr. Monahan is not going to be able to
29
throw any light on any involvement he might have had in relation to it?
11:21:24 30
A.
Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
50 11:21:25 1
Q. 320
However, you also accept, this is where I am just a little bit mystified, you
2
accept that Frank Dunlop & Associates received payments to the value of 85,000
3
from Monarch?
4 11:21:45 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 321
And included in that is the 10,000 that Mr. Lawlor seems to have been able to
6
negotiate?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 322
And I don't understand how you can on the one hand say I accept Tribunal, and
9
you are to find, Monarch paid me 85,000, but in fact 10,000 of that was stolen
11:22:07 10
11
from me, directed to somebody else, fell into other hands and I didn't get it? A.
Well the cheque is made out to my company and we have an invoice, a remittance
12
notice from Monarch, this was the copy of the cheque, Mr. Shipsey. I think you
13
are aware of this, and if you are stop me, or if you think it's irrelevant stop
14
me, this cheque was produced some 12 hours before I gave evidence here one
11:22:38 15
morning and there was always an argument as to a payment of 10,000. This
16
cheque was produced to me at about, copy of this cheque, a photocopy of this
17
cheque was produced to me at about 8 o'clock of a morning before I came down
18
here and I instructed my solicitors if they had the cheque, if they have
19
evidence of a cheque made payable to Frank Dunlop & Associates we accept, and
11:23:03 20
that instruction was carried out and given to Mr. Murphy by my counsel.
21
Subsequently in evidence when it was put up on the screen in relation to the
22
signature or the endorsement on the back of the cheque I realised it was not my
23
signature.
24
Q. 323
Was that for the first time ?
A.
Yes and I, we had this discussion with Mr. Murphy.
26
Q. 324
I know I was here for it.
27
A.
Yes. Bearing in mind that this copy of this cheque was produced to me that
11:23:23 25
28
morning in my solicitor's office, my solicitor produced the cheque and said we
29
have had this overnight, faxed communication from the Tribunal.
11:23:42 30
Q. 325
And you say that's the morning? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
51 11:23:44 1
A.
I gave evidence on --
2
Q. 326
In June. A number of hours before, are you saying you didn't look at the back?
3
A.
I didn't pay particular attention to it.
4
Q. 327
Oh no Mr. Dunlop.
A.
There was a cheque made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates.
Q. 328
Mr. Dunlop can I stop you here. I didn't ask you whether you paid particular
11:23:57 5
6 7
notice or attention, so would you please if you can answer the questions that I
8
am asking, and listen to the questions I am asking, and I asked you prior to
9
coming to give evidence, did you look at the back of the cheque?
11:24:26 10
A.
11 12
I looked at the documentation that was produced to me by my solicitor, which included a photocopy of the back of the cheque.
Q. 329
And if that is the case and I infer from that that's a yes you did look at the
13
back of the cheque, you must have realised looking at the back of the cheque
14
that that was not your signature?
11:24:49 15
A.
Well it's certainly -- well I cannot absolutely categorically tell you that at
16
the very moment I realised that that was not my signature. Yes, I looked at
17
the documentation that was produced to me by my solicitor my main, the main
18
orientation here was that there was a question about a payment of 10,000. My
19
solicitor told me that the Tribunal had produced a cheque of a payment of
11:25:14 20
10,000 to Frank Dunlop & Associates I said fine, if they have the cheque we got
21
the money. That was my immediate reaction.
22
Q. 330
But that's what you also said in evidence, isn't that right?
23
A.
Mm-hmm.
24
Q. 331
Actually just going to be a little bit persistent now in relation to the back
11:25:33 25
of the cheque because my understanding of your evidence now is that you did
26
look at the back of the cheque when you got the document in your solicitor's
27
office?
28
A.
I looked at the documentation.
29
Q. 332
Sorry, sorry could you -- Mr. Dunlop, just listen carefully please to my
11:25:51 30
question. Correct me if I am wrong, you did look at the back of the cheque for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
52 11:26:01 1
10,000, made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates, dated 26th of May of 1993 in
2 3
your solicitor's office? A.
4
I looked at the photocopied documentation including the front and the back of the cheque. The front of the cheque was the most important aspect as far as I
11:26:22 5
was concerned.
6
Q. 333
So it's a yes to the back?
7
A.
Yes I looked at the documentation.
8
Q. 334
And I would have to suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that if you looked at the back
9
of the cheque in the context of there being some controversy over this cheque
11:26:41 10
and whether it was paid or whether it was received, that you could not have
11 12
failed immediately to recognise that it was not your signature? A.
13 14
No I don't accept that, in the context of the presentation of the documentation.
Q. 335
11:27:07 15
And you want the Tribunal to accept that you looked at the back of the cheque, you saw what was written there and it didn't register with you immediately that
16
that was not your signature?
17
A.
I looked at the documentation.
18
Q. 336
No sorry, Mr. Dunlop.
19
A.
I looked at the documentation and it did not register immediately.
Q. 337
And it only registered some hours later when Mr. Murphy is asking you to look
11:27:22 20
21
at it?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 338
And you want the Tribunal to, and you want me and everyone to believe that?
24
A.
Well --
Q. 339
You do.
26
A.
I can only tell you what occurred.
27
Q. 340
And you accepted and you still accept that -- this is where I am not clear,
11:27:40 25
28 29 11:28:02 30
that your company got this cheque? A.
The cheque is made payable to Frank Dunlop & Associates.
Q. 341
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
53 11:28:04 1
A.
2
There is a remittance note from Monarch in evidence made payable to Frank Dunlop.
3
Q. 342
Yes.
4
A.
The history of this cheque was in dispute, the history of this payment was in
11:28:15 5
dispute. My main orientation in coming down here on that day was having been
6
given a photocopy of what the Tribunal sent to my solicitors overnight was if
7
they have a cheque made payable to me I accept that we got it, that was my
8
statement to my solicitor.
9
Q. 343
11:28:38 10
So the answer to my question is yes, you accept that Frank Dunlop & Associates received this cheque?
11
A.
The documentary evidence is to suggest that, yes.
12
Q. 344
And therefore any suggestion that it was sent by Monarch to anyone other than
13 14 11:28:56 15
Frank Dunlop & Associates can be disregarded? A.
No I don't accept that.
Q. 345
Mr. Dunlop, in relation to this cheque for 10,000, the person who is drawing
16
the cheque which is Monarch Properties Services, was drawing it in favour of
17
Frank Dunlop, that's who it's for?
18
A.
Frank Dunlop & Associates.
19
Q. 346
And associates, yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 347
And absent to any other evidence or suggestion, the probability is that this
11:29:38 20
21 22
was for Frank Dunlop & Associates and was sent to Frank Dunlop & Associates?
23
A.
The probability and logical conclusion would accord with that.
24
Q. 348
And if that is the case, unless something went wrong in the post or something
11:29:58 25
was intercepted in the post, the logic is that it was received in 25 Upper
26
Mount Street?
27
A.
The logic is, yes.
28
Q. 349
And therefore if it was received in 25 Upper Mount Street, somebody in Frank
29 11:30:29 30
Dunlop & Associates must have either directly or through an intermediary conveyed it to Mr. Lawlor? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
54 11:30:32 1
2
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 350
And it would be surprising you would agree, in a logical sense, that the
3
Tribunal concluded -- sorry it would be surprising if they did not conclude
4
that this cheque made it's way to Frank Lawlor, sorry Frank Dunlop -- from Liam
11:31:06 5
Lawlor from somebody in Frank Dunlop & Associates?
6
A.
It would be logical to suggest --
7
Q. 351
We have had --
8
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon sorry, Mr. Shipsey, I don't -- I'm just got lost in
9 11:31:24 10
your question. Q. 352
11
Well I understood we had logically got to the position that it had left Monarch and arrived in Upper Mount Street?
12
A.
Logically, yes.
13
Q. 353
And again I am just following it logically.
14
A.
Yes right.
Q. 354
If it makes it's way to Liam Lawlor then it must logically follow that it's
11:31:34 15
16
made it's way to Mr. Lawlor either directly or through an intermediary from
17
somebody in your offers?
18
A.
That would appear logical.
19
Q. 355
And again if we are talking about probabilities here, again logical
11:31:52 20
probabilities I don't know how many people are in your office, but you are the
21
principal in the office?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 356
And if there was an instruction to give it to Mr. Lawlor, logically it would
24 11:32:05 25
have come from you? A.
Correct.
26
Q. 357
Now you are saying it didn't?
27
A.
Correct.
28
Q. 358
But the logic on my analysis points to that?
29
A.
The logic on your analysis, yes certainly.
Q. 359
Logic doesn't obviously always, isn't obviously borne out in reality we all
11:32:18 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
55 11:32:20 1
know that Mr. Dunlop but that's the logic of it. And again in terms of looking
2
for a rational, because I was going to say Tribunals are funny places but
3
Tribunals being operating on a basis similar to courts that they try to look
4
for the probabilities and they try to look for the motivation for this, but if
11:32:44 5
they came to the logical conclusion that this 10,000 got to Liam Lawlor at the
6
direction of Frank Dunlop that this was Mr. Dunlop paying Liam Lawlor for the
7
courtesy and kindness of the introduction to Mr. Monahan and Monarch Properties
8
on this assignment?
9 11:33:09 10
A.
Logically.
Q. 360
But again on your evidence we have got to ignore logic because that didn't
11
happen. And however Liam Lawlor gets this cheque he doesn't get it from Frank
12
Dunlop and Frank Dunlop had no hand, act or part in getting the cheque made out
13
to Mr. Dunlop's company to Mr. Lawlor?
14 11:33:34 15
A.
Correct.
Q. 361
And again the fact that we know from contemporary evidence that Mr. Lawlor is
16
the one that's setting up the meeting with Monarch, and we have that in your --
17
Norma's telephone attendance book, Liam has arrange as meeting with Ed Sweeney
18
in Monarch House that he was to be at the first meeting, the Tribunal would be
19
at least forgiven for assuming, assuming may be too strong, for suspecting at
11:34:11 20
21
least that this is Frank Dunlop paying Liam Lawlor's introduction fee? A.
22
There is a certain logic to that, yes. Can you assist me here, Mr. Shipsey? Could I ask you to put the invoice for the 10,000 back on screen.
23 24 11:34:43 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Do we have the page number? Q. 362
MR. SHIPSEY: 4133.
A.
I'd ask you, Mr. Shipsey, to compare and contrast the type face on that invoice
27
with other invoices that I have prepared in my office or were prepared in my
28
office.
29 11:35:09 30
CHAIRMAN: Well is it your evidence Mr. Dunlop that that is not a type face Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
56 11:35:17 1
2
that was used in your office at that time ? A.
3 4
I don't think that type face is a type face that was used in my office at that time .
Q. 363
And who produced this document?
A.
Produced it to Monarch?
6
Q. 364
Where was this document generated?
7
A.
I don't know where it was -- it could have come from us, I don't know.
11:35:29 5
8 9
CHAIRMAN: It came from Monarch, from Monarch discovery, so it came from -- it
11:35:49 10
was in the possession of Monarch.
11
Q. 365
MR. SHIPSEY: I take it that if you send out an invoice you keep copies?
12
A.
We would, yes.
13
Q. 366
Are you saying that this was not in the, this invoice was unknown to Frank
14 11:36:10 15
16
Dunlop & Associates or there was no copy in the office? A.
I think that is a logical conclusion.
Q. 367
Oh no not so much a logical conclusion, are you saying that this invoice dated
17
the 10th of April 1993 is a forgery and was forged by somebody outside of Frank
18
Dunlop & Associates?
19
A.
11:36:32 20
to look at the type face and in response to the Chairman's question, I do not
21 22
think that was a type face used by my office. Q. 368
23 24
A.
Q. 369
And what we have had for the last couple of minutes then would be some type of merry dance?
A.
29 11:37:08 30
Oh -- (nods). If a copy of was in my files I would have to suggest, I would have to say directly that it was generated in my office.
27 28
But if we found that that invoice or a copy it have was in the possession of your office?
11:36:53 25
26
I am not saying anything other than I am asking you to look at the invoice and
No no it's not a merry dance, you are the one asking me the questions you keep reminding me this, Mr. Shipsey.
Q. 370
Mr. Dunlop, you took us to this I didn't take you to it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
57 11:37:11 1
A.
Yes, deliberately.
2
Q. 371
So I didn't ask you any questions for the record?
3
A.
I need you to look at this invoice because you opened your cross-examination
4 11:37:19 5
after the break with this invoice. Q. 372
6
But you took me to this invoice to suggest to the Chairman that this did not emanate from your office.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 373
And we have agreed that if a copy is found in your office then that would be
9 11:37:31 10
wrong? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 374
And therefore if that is wrong you have led us on a merry dance?
12
A.
No because you were questioning me in relation to how a cheque made out to
13
Frank Dunlop & Associates could get into the possession of a third party.
14 11:37:46 15
CHAIRMAN: But Mr. Dunlop the only suggestion that this might be a fraudulent
16 17
document has come from you? A.
Yes.
18 19
CHAIRMAN: So it is your suggestion that this is a fraudulent document
11:38:01 20
21
prepared by somebody else without your authority? A.
Yes. I am trying to assist Mr. Shipsey, Chairman, in relation to both the
22
generation of the cheque for 10,000 and the payment of it and the evidence that
23
I have given that I did not authorise the payment.
24 11:38:16 25
26
CHAIRMAN: Yes but you have said, you have asked the question? A.
Yes.
27 28
CHAIRMAN: Compare this to other invoices but you have to answer that question
29
as well?
11:38:29 30
A.
Yes well -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
58 11:38:29 1
2
CHAIRMAN: I mean is it your evidence that this document is a forgery,
3
prepared by somebody else without your authority?
4
A.
11:38:45 5
It is certainly not in the format or the type face that was used by Frank Dunlop & Associates at the time .
6 7
CHAIRMAN: But is there anything else about it other than the type face which
8
would suggest that it's not, that it didn't emerge from your office?
9
A.
11:39:05 10
I just in relation to what Mr. Shipsey brought my attention to, reference to CW south, I think any invoice that was issued by Frank Dunlop & Associates related
11
to public affairs in relation to public affairs, provision of public affairs
12
services in relation to Cherrywood or to Monarch directly or along those lines
13
I can't be exactly --
14 11:39:24 15
16
CHAIRMAN: Could you put up 4204 beside this one? A.
Yes.
17 18 19
CHAIRMAN: There is no invoice number on the -A.
Correct.
11:39:50 20
21
CHAIRMAN: -- on the one on the left. Do you know Mr, or can you say
22
Mr. Dunlop if there was always an invoice number on your invoice?
23 24 11:40:09 25
A.
Yes, generated by the officer that I mentioned to Mr. Shipsey earlier on, he kept a record of the invoices and to -- in 99 cases out of a hundred there was an invoice number.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY: Could I ask, sorry Mr. Shipsey, just perhaps Ms. Dillon if I
28
could address something to her, the invoice 4204 the one on the right,
29
Ms. Dillon, the one that's marked 834 that came , it would appear from
11:40:57 30
Mr. Dunlop's discovery? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
59 11:40:59 1
2
MS. DILLON: That's correct. The one with FD 34 at the top, yes that came
3
from Mr. Dunlop's discovery.
4 11:41:04 5
JUDGE FAHERTY: Yes I am wondering do we have a match of that by way of original
6
from any Monarch discovery, just as a matter of interest?
7 8
MS. DILLON: I don't know if you just allow me to check that for a moment I
9
don't think so but I can't answer.
11:41:17 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: Because obviously if everything tallied and people had records
12
subject to people having kept records, both any copy retained by Mr. Dunlop and
13
indeed the original sent to Monarch should be discovered obviously, had they,
14
if they were retained thanks, you might just in due course do it. Sorry to
11:41:36 15
have interrupted you.
16 17
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman can I proceed?
18 19 11:41:42 20
CHAIRMAN: Oh, yes, sorry. Q. 375
MR. SHIPSEY: Mr. Dunlop I want you to look at document 4268? And this is an
21
invoice from Monarch to their joint venture partners GRE, dated the 29th of
22
June of 1993?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 376
And you will see insofar as Frank Dunlop and company is concerned, there is a
11:42:15 25
reference to paid on account, IM number 1, 25,000?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 377
And again, Mr. Dunlop, that is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's recollection of
28 29 11:42:42 30
the agreement insofar as he said you looked for a payment on account of 25,000? A.
Yes and it is consistent with the statement that I made and the evidence that I gave, that I got the 25,000. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
60 11:42:44 1
Q. 378
2 3
the agreement was a fee of 25,000? A.
4 11:43:00 5
Yes, but it is a payment on account, it's not as consistent with a view that
Well I can't account -- sorry I can't account for Mr. Sweeney putting in on account, I am just telling you what the agreement was.
Q. 379
6
No but you see if the agreement was as you suggest a fee of 25,000, you wouldn't have the words on account.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 380
It would just be Frank Dunlop fee 25,000, isn't that right?
9
A.
Mr. Sweeney would have to be, to give evidence to this effect.
Q. 381
Sorry not that Mr. Sweeney, I am suggesting to you.
11
A.
I don't accept that.
12
Q. 382
This is inconsistent with your version the reason I am suggesting that to you
11:43:17 10
13
is, that if it was a flat fee of 25,000 that you had agreed as you suggest
14
there is no reason to put on account?
11:43:34 15
16
A.
Oh there wouldn't appear to be logically, no.
Q. 383
That's my point. I would ask you to go to 4303 Mr. Dunlop, and this again is a
17
letter to Mr. Sweeney from GRE properties and if you go down to paragraph four
18
which is referring to that last invoice that I mentioned and it says "Although
19
at our meeting in May" and Mr. Sweeney will say that there was a meeting with
11:44:06 20
Mr. Baker I think on the 9th May of 1993, "I agreed the appointment of Frank
21
Dunlop, this was on the basis of 4,000 per month with no success fee."
22 23
Now again that on it's face suggests that Mr. Baker and Mr. Sweeney had a
24
discussion on what I am telling you is the 9th of May at which Mr. Sweeney and
11:44:36 25
Mr. Baker agreed that you would be retained on the basis of 4,000 per month but
26
that no agreement was reached in relation to a success fee?
27
A.
That's what the document implies.
28
Q. 384
And that, Mr. Dunlop, is consistent with Mr. Sweeney's recollection and
29 11:45:02 30
evidence, that the arrangement with you was 4,000 per month and also it's consistent but not conclusive with there being some discussion about a success Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
61 11:45:07 1
2
fee? A.
3 4 11:45:14 5
He not appointing me at all or having any recollection of my appointment. Sorry I have broken the rule.
Q. 385
Yes you have.
A.
Sorry I beg your pardon, Mr. Shipsey, I did make an agreement with you, sorry I
6
apologise.
7
Q. 386
I appreciate that.
8
A.
Yes it is consistent with what Mr. Sweeney has said.
9
Q. 387
And conversely inconsistent with your version?
A.
Well logically it would appear so but I don't accept that.
Q. 388
And it is either that Mr. Sweeney is right and you are wrong or alternatively
11:45:29 10
11 12
Mr. Sweeney is less than truthful with his joint venture partner?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q. 389
And it is at least a contemporaneous record which suggests, doesn't prove
11:45:55 15
Mr. Sweeney is telling the truth, but it's a contemporaneous or near
16
contemporaneous record as to what was agreed between you and he. Not as it
17
binds you but his recording of it or what his understanding was?
18
A.
With his colleague in GRE.
19
Q. 390
Yes. I think I say the 9th of May the diary I think is the 7th of May the
11:46:20 20
Friday was the 7th May. If you go to 4308 Mr. Dunlop? That's from Mr. Caslin
21
to Mr. Sweeney, Glennane and Lynn and item number six and it's referring to the
22
GRE invoice looking for the 15,125 which would be, just to be clear, it's 50
23
per cent of the payment on account plus VAT, that's how it comes to 15,125, I
24
think it's 12,500 --
11:46:58 25
A.
Sorry, Mr. Shipsey, which number are you referring to.
26
Q. 391
Six.
27
A.
Number six.
28
Q. 392
4308 item number six.
29
A.
Yes right.
Q. 393
This is Mr. Caslin writing to Sweeney, Glennane and Lynn and just making the
11:47:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
62 11:47:13 1
point that this item of 15,125 which they are seeking to recover from GRE is
2
not agreed on GRE's part because what Mr. Baker, that's MB agreed, was 4,000 a
3
month from May?
4
A.
On foot of the arrangement that Mr. Sweeney and he agreed.
Q. 394
Yes.
6
A.
Yes, without my knowledge, I know nothing about that.
7
Q. 395
No but Mr. Sweeney telling him that that's what was agreed?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 396
So here is another pointer as it were to -- because obviously no dispute has
11:47:32 5
11:47:51 10
arisen between you and Mr. Sweeney in fact, Mr. Sweeney doesn't know what you
11
are saying until April of this year.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 397
So here we have something back in 2003 which I say points to Mr. Sweeney being
14 11:48:03 15
right and you being wrong. A.
Well that's your point, that's your suggestion.
16
Q. 398
And logically there is some logic to that?
17
A.
There is a certain logic to it, yes.
18
Q. 399
If you go to 4310, this is subsequent to this July 1993 internal Monarch
19
document and subsequent to Mr. Baker's letter of the 7th July, but on the 12th
11:48:39 20
July a fresh invoice is issued to GRE, number 2068 and in which there is a fee
21
of 4,000 a month for the months of April, May, June and July and they are
22
looking for half of that from GRE, again consistent with Mr. Sweeney's version?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 400
And if you go to 4314? This is from Mr. Sweeney to Mr. Baker, Mr. Sweeney is
11:49:19 25
responding to the letter of the 7th July and the last paragraph there he says
26
he "is prepared to cancel invoice number 2064", that's where he looked for
27
25 -- where he looked for half of the 25,000 on account, and "reissue invoice
28
number 2068 at 4,000 per month for April, May June and July if you feel that
29
you should pay only on a monthly basis." So he is not saying that they didn't
11:49:49 30
make a payment on account, but he is saying well we made a payment on account, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
63 11:49:55 1
it's 4,000 a month and if you only want to pay us on that basis that's fine,
2
isn't that what is clear from that?
3
A.
That's what that is saying, yes, or would appear to be saying I should stress.
4
Q. 401
It also says "Please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were engaged from
11:50:12 5
April and requested that part of their payment would be up front before they
6
would take on the assignment that is the reason for the payment by us of 25,000
7
to date."
8 9
And again that's wholly consistent with Mr. Sweeney's evidence that what you
11:50:26 10
agreed was at least insofar as the up front payment, 25,000.
11
A.
I agree, wholly consistent with Mr. Sweeney's construction of matters.
12
Q. 402
And again up to this point in time, can you think of any reason why Mr. Sweeney
13 14
would be suggesting this to GRE, did he offer any explanation? A.
11:50:56 15
16
No, I have no idea what the relationship between Mr. Sweeney or Monarch and GRE was at the time or subsequently in relation to payments to anybody.
Q. 403
If it was, there was nothing wrong with Mr. Sweeney having agreed a fee of
17
25,000 with you, so again there would be nothing wrong with him saying I have
18
done a great deal with this Frank Dunlop, we could have him for two years and I
19
have agreed a fee of 25,000?
11:51:18 20
21
A.
Nothing wrong.
Q. 404
Nothing wrong and if that was what was agreed, you'd expect Mr. Sweeney to have
22
said that to his joint venture partners?
23
A.
Logically, yes.
24
Q. 405
Document 4861? Invoice to GRE dated 31st of August, so we have the fifth month
11:51:59 25
at 4,000 and they are looking for half of that?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 406
Can I ask the Tribunal to just put up 4392? That says "With reference to your
28
letter of the 2nd September and our meeting on the 27th September, I would
29
confirm our approval to the following additional costs. All of these costs are
11:52:59 30
in Irish pounds and will be payable 50/50" and then it sets out a number and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
64 11:53:04 1
the first on the list is Frank Dunlop "A retainer of 4,000 per month from April
2
to December 1993 inclusive plus a success fee of 50,000."
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 407
Now, that agreement to pay you a success fee as of the 28th September 1993 is
11:53:25 5
prior to you saying that you asked for it of Monarch, which was after the vote
6
on the 9th or 11th of November of 1993?
7
A.
I issued an invoice, yes.
8
Q. 408
No sorry we know you issued an invoice but the invoice was issued you say at
9
the request of either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane, put it in and see how you
11:53:47 10
get on.
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 409
So there is a degree of prescience on the part of Mr. Baker in London in
13
September of 1993, because not only is he anticipating your success fee invoice
14
in December of 1993, but he is anticipating that after the vote in November of
11:54:11 15
1993 you are going to ask for it and you are going to ask for it in an amount
16
of 50,000?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q. 410
Pretty impressive.
19
A.
Very.
Q. 411
On Mr. Baker's part.
21
A.
Very.
22
Q. 412
Now the letter, two things that's referred to in the first paragraph of that a
11:54:20 20
23
letter of the 2nd of September and our meeting on the 27th of September, if you
24
accept from me at the moment that there is nothing in Mr. Sweeney's letter of
11:54:41 25
the 2nd of September referring to a success fee, that it can only have been
26
discussed between them on the 27th of September?
27
A.
I accept that, Mr. Shipsey.
28
Q. 413
And Mr. Sweeney's evidence in relation to this will be that subsequent to your
29 11:55:08 30
discussion back in March, he was informed by Mr. Monahan that a success fee in an amount of 50,000 pounds had been agreed by Mr. Monahan with you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
65 11:55:12 1
2
A.
No, I never discussed such an amount with Mr. Monahan.
Q. 414
It's certainly the case that you never discussed a success fee with Mr. Sweeney
3 4 11:55:27 5
prior to November of 1993, according to your evidence? A.
Yes.
Q. 415
And therefore, for Mr. Sweeney to have that information he must have got it
6
from somebody else, not you, he says Mr. Monahan, but it really can't be
7
Mr. Monahan because you never had that discussion with him?
8
A.
9 11:55:46 10
No I never had any discussion with Mr. Monahan in relation to fees, success fees or otherwise.
Q. 416
Well again when we are looking for straws in the wind as to who is telling the
11
truth about whether there had been a discussion back in March about a success
12
fee and Mr. Sweeney says there was, you say that there wasn't and that it only
13
arose after the vote in November, this letter evidencing a discussion about a
14
success fee of 50,000 in September would suggest that Mr. Sweeney is right and
11:56:21 15
you are wrong?
16
A.
Logically, yes.
17
Q. 417
And can I just ask you in relation to success fees, I'm not saying it's unheard
18
of in the legal world, obviously we operate in more on a what are called briefs
19
and refreshers as you know, but in terms of a success fee, would it not be more
11:56:47 20
usual than unusual that if you are looking for agreement in relation to a
21
success fee that you would ask the person who you are hopeful of getting
22
agreement to pay that success fee to agree it prior to you actually carrying
23
out that which will give rise to the success fee?
24 11:57:21 25
A.
Logically, yes.
Q. 418
It's a bit like the horse bolting the stable, in other words once the horse is
26
gone it's a little bit late to be looking for a success fee.
27
A.
It's a bit late to catch him, yes.
28
Q. 419
And whatever hold you have over the horse or the client for the success fee,
29 11:57:42 30
you are far better getting agreement in relation to it before you have done your magic or succeeded in getting what the client wants, than afterwards? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
66 11:57:47 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 420
I have to suggest to you it makes no sense or at least very little sense to
3 4
suggest that you would look for a success fee after the event? A.
11:58:08 5
6
No, I don't think it does make normal sense but then nothing is normal in the context of the way I and some of my clients were operating.
Q. 421
7
Yes, but you see in terms of you Frank Dunlop wanting a success fee and your evidence is you didn't get it, your evidence is --
8
A.
Oh no, let me be absolutely categoric, I did not get it. A success fee.
9
Q. 422
No sorry your evidence is that you did not get it?
A.
Correct, I thought you suggested that I mean I had -- I did not get a success
11:58:33 10
11
fee.
12
Q. 423
No I think unless my diction is very imprecise it's --
13
A.
Well just for clarity yes.
14
Q. 424
Your evidence is you did not get a success fee?
A.
Corrects, correct.
Q. 425
And what I want to suggest to you is that firstly when you put in your request
11:58:49 15
16 17
or you had your discussion for it, I take it you raised it with Mr. Sweeney or
18
Mr. Glennane?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 426
After, I forget whether it was the 9th of November, after the vote?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q. 427
So this is your initiative, nobody in Monarch is coming to say great job Frank,
11:59:07 20
23 24 11:59:19 25
50 grand is on it's way to you? A.
Correct.
Q. 428
You went and said Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane, "I done a great job, I'd like
26
you to pay 50,000."
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 429
And your evidence is that they said "Bang an invoice in and we'll see what
29 11:59:38 30
we'll do for you." A.
See how far you'll get. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
67 11:59:40 1
Q. 430
2
Yes. You see I have to suggest to you, Mr. Dunlop, that that is so unlikely and implausible, almost to be farcical?
3
A.
Many things are farcical, Mr. Shipsey.
4
Q. 431
But I am suggesting to you that this is and I want to know whether you agree
12:00:10 5
with me that that's a farcical, if not fanciful suggestion?
6
A.
No, I don't agree.
7
Q. 432
Did you meet with the GRE people at any stage?
8
A.
Never.
9
Q. 433
Can I ask for 4587, here we have your telephone book, if you just go down to
12:01:11 10
2.07 it's a call from Richard Lynn, isn't that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q. 434
"Monarch would Frank Dunlop be available for a meeting tomorrow with Anthony
13
Pathfield a director of GRE in Royal Dublin at 11 o'clock or 12 o'clock." Then
14
something "will confirm 12 o'clock with Richard Lynn when he calls back this
12:01:28 15
afternoon."
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q. 435
That's obviously an instruction that you gave. Then at 3.45 Richard Lynn comes
18
back and he, it is confirmed with him that a meeting for 12 o'clock in the
19
Royal Dublin tomorrow.
12:01:40 20
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 436
And did that meeting take place?
22
A.
I have no recollection of ever meeting Mr. Pathfield or Mr -- Pathfield, yes.
23
Q. 437
I might be able to assist you in that regard, if you go to your diary which is
24 12:02:25 25
26
4589? If you look at the 14th of October at 12 o'clock. A.
Mm-hmm.
Q. 438
And there is something crossed out which I think is Richard Lynn and Royal
27
Dublin and then M Green, Frank Fagan or something.
28
A.
You've lost me .
29
Q. 439
Frank Fagan?
A.
12 o'clock, yes something is crossed out -- oh, yes sorry I beg your pardon
12:02:39 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
68 12:02:44 1
yes.
2
Q. 440
And then E Sweeney above it.
3
A.
E Sweeney yes, circled yes.
4
Q. 441
And then sorry lunch I don't know whether you had lunch with M Green, Jack
12:02:58 5
Fagan or whether you crossed out the meeting with Mr. Lynn in the Royal Dublin
6 7
and slotted in Mr. Green and Mr. Fagan instead? A.
8 9
name, the other name refers to a journalist. Q. 442
12:03:21 10
11
I suggest that that is the explanation, Mr. Green represented a client and the
So when you cross something out that suggests you have cancelled the meeting and put something else in instead?
A.
Well if I could just suggest to you while you are staying on that, Mr. Shipsey,
12
if you look it's 12 o'clock and whatever is there is crossed out, E Sweeney is
13
circled and there is an arrow coming from circle on E Sweeney down to where the
14
cancellation takes place, do you see that?
12:03:40 15
16
Q. 443
Yes.
A.
And then Michael Green and Jack Fagan are included afterwards, but the logic
17
would appear to be that I met Michael Green and Jack Fagan in or around 12
18
o'clock instead of whatever it was referred to in the crossed out section.
19
Q. 444
12:04:07 20
Can I ask the Tribunal to go to 4633? Now, this also comes from the Monarch discovery, I want you to perhaps maybe look at this and see do you recognise
21
the type face on this invoice?
22
A.
Yes, I think that's the type face out of my office.
23
Q. 445
It has an invoice number on it and it says "For the provision of media and
24 12:04:33 25
communications training for 1993/94." A.
Yes yes.
26
Q. 446
15,000. What media and communications training did you provide for Monarch?
27
A.
None.
28
Q. 447
None. And can you just explain then why you described it in this manner?
29
A.
Obviously by agreement with Monarch for the payment of, or for an invoice of
12:04:50 30
15,000 and for the VAT exemptions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
69 12:04:52 1
Q. 448
2
Yes. So you are looking for a payment of 15,000 and you want it zero rated for VAT and you describe it in that manner?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 449
Are you suggesting that that description there was requested by Monarch?
A.
No no I am not suggesting who requested it, I am suggesting to issue an invoice
12:05:11 5
6
of that nature in that format, it would have been discussed in advance and
7
agreed.
8
Q. 450
It would have or it was?
9
A.
I am not suggesting that Monarch suggested it, I am not making that suggestion
12:05:27 10
11
at all. Q. 451
No but what possible benefit would there be for Monarch, I mean Monarch is
12
registered for VAT, VAT is neutral, there might be a cashflow implication but
13
it matters not a wit to Monarch whether they are charging that because they
14
will be able to recover it, isn't that right?
12:05:44 15
16
A.
Correct.
Q. 452
So the only person that benefits here in relation to a payment of 15,000 is
17
Frank Dunlop & Associates?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q. 453
So to suggest that it was discussed and agreed with Monarch I suggest to you is
12:05:56 20
a nonsense, this is?
21
A.
No it's not.
22
Q. 454
This is an invoice generated by Frank Dunlop & Associates for the benefit of
23 24
Frank Dunlop. A.
12:06:10 25
Well the first question as you referred to earlier on, an hour ago, some body in the accounts department of Monarch could immediately ask why this was VAT
26
exempt if an invoice came unsolicited without any pre knowledge.
27
Q. 455
So the onus would be on Monarch --
28
A.
No it would be a joint onus, maybe an agreement in advance.
29
Q. 456
And who did you have that agreement with?
A.
The only person I ever discussed fees with were Mr. Sweeney.
12:06:31 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
70 12:06:35 1
Q. 457
2
So we can assume therefore that you met with Mr. Sweeney on or about the 2nd of November 1993 and had such a discussion?
3
A.
Or before the 2nd of November 1993.
4
Q. 458
On or before?
A.
On or before or by telephone.
Q. 459
And you are saying that you and Mr. Sweeney agreed that you would invoice for
12:06:48 5
6 7 8
media and communications training for 1993? A.
9
invoice of that nature, VAT exempted unforewarned to somebody like a company
12:07:08 10
like Monarch, they could, they would legitimately come back and say why is this
11 12
not VAT inclusive or why is VAT not included. Q. 460
13 14
No what I am suggesting, Mr. Shipsey, is quite simple that for me to issue an
We know they could but I am talking about what agreement you allege or discussion you allege having with Mr. Sweeney?
A.
12:07:33 15
No I am not alleging any -- all I am saying is that to issue an invoice of that nature without VAT, without any pre notification that an invoice was going to
16
issue without VAT would be extraordinary, it would be the subject of a
17
discussion in advance because logically people would come back and say why is
18
this invoice not VAT inclusive.
19 12:07:54 20
Q. 461
I don't necessarily follow your logic there?
A.
No, we are sticking with logic, Mr. Shipsey, we are been at it all morning, so
21
if we stick with logic that is a logical explanation.
22
Q. 462
Yeah. But are you saying or not saying that you had a discussion?
23
A.
No I am not saying.
24
Q. 463
You are saying you must have had a discussion because of your invoice?
A.
Correct.
Q. 464
I suggest to you Mr. Sweeney's evidence will be that there was no discussion in
12:08:09 25
26 27
relation to description of an invoice or having you describe it in such a
28
manner?
29 12:08:27 30
A.
That is will be Mr. Sweeney's evidence.
Q. 465
I will to come on then to the two invoices in December of 1993, both with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
71 12:08:37 1
same number and in different amounts. One is, in fact the four -- if you put
2
up 4845 along side 5697. Why are these two invoices, Mr. Dunlop, same day,
3
same invoice number but different amounts?
4
A.
12:09:37 5
That I cannot tell you, Mr. Shipsey, I'd like to be able to tell you but obviously if we are going to stick with logic and if my recollection is
6
correct -- sorry I cannot, I cannot tell you why the two invoices have the same
7
number issued on the same day, in different amounts, but only one of them was
8
paid.
9 12:10:09 10
Now, the one that was sent I cannot absolutely attest to this but I suspect the
11
one that was sent, actually sent, was the one on the left, the one on the right
12
appears to me to be a copy.
13
Q. 466
But not of the one that was sent?
14
A.
Not of the one that was sent, no no sorry, I agree with that. But I cannot
12:10:40 15
give you an explanation as to, unless as there was a discussion in relation to
16
a fee note being issued and the one was prepared and it was agreed that there
17
would be changes, I cannot give you a rational logical explanation, I would
18
like to.
19 12:10:59 20
Q. 467
There isn't one really is there?
A.
There is not, I mean as we look at the screen I cannot give it to you unless
21 22
some accountancy expert can come along and say why it was done in that fashion. Q. 468
23 24 12:11:47 25
Mr. Dunlop, you issue your invoice for the success fee on the 14th December 1993.
A.
Yes, I think that's correct, yes.
Q. 469
And some four days prior to that, if we can have 4832 up? Monarch are looking
26
for 50 per cent of that which you have not yet invoiced from GRE.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 470
And again I would have to suggest to you that the only logical explanation and
29 12:12:16 30
what's referred to there is referring back to the discussions in September, is that the success fee had been agreed by September with you and Monarch were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
72 12:12:22 1
looking for their joint venture partner now to pay half of that?
2
A.
That would appear logical.
3
Q. 471
And that your invoice on the 14th December 1993 is really playing catch up with
4 12:12:38 5
6
what has already been agreed? A.
That again is logical.
Q. 472
And if you are right, Mr. Dunlop, there is a sum of 50,000 pounds plus VAT
7
outstanding on at least was outstanding until the statute ran out after six
8
years?
9 12:13:08 10
A.
Correct.
Q. 473
And that's a 50,000 that having sent in the invoice you never sent a reminder
11
for.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q. 474
That you never chased up on the phone.
14
A.
Correct.
Q. 475
And also that you never mentioned in the course of your earlier statements to
12:13:21 15
16
the Tribunal, you denied that there was ever a question as I understood, of a
17
success fee?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 476
Now that might have been partially true in terms of you getting paid, but it
12:13:46 20
couldn't have been true that to state that there was no question or no
21
discussion of a success fee?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 477
That was untrue, if you said that?
24
A.
Correct, if I said that.
Q. 478
And why would you have said that, because you didn't remember it, because --
26
A.
Well I certainly didn't get it. If I knew then what I know now.
27
Q. 479
But you knew you had your invoice of the 14th of December --
28
A.
No if you knew then what I know now as to Monarch's modus operandi in relation
12:13:55 25
29 12:14:25 30
to getting the success fee from GRE I would certainly are followed it up. Q. 480
Yeah well you see that is not the answer to the question? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
73 12:14:30 1
2
A.
No but in my mind it is extremely relevant.
Q. 481
All right. Because what you are aggrieved about is A you putting a success fee
3
as you were questioned to do and these, forgive me, these ungrateful so and
4
so's in Monarch having achieved the great result for them, didn't pay it and
12:14:49 5
not only did they not pay it, but they recovered half of it from their joint
6
venture partners and didn't even pass that on to you, isn't that what you are
7
saying?
8
A.
Correct, as we now know.
9
Q. 482
Yes. However you see if Mr. Sweeney is correct, again that it was 4,000 a
12:15:10 10
month and a success fee of 50,000, the 85,000 that you were ultimately paid is
11
there or thereabouts in relation to what is owed to you and Frank Dunlop or
12
Frank Dunlop & Associates could have no sense of grievance or no entitlement to
13
look for further payment or to whinge about not getting a success fee, isn't
14
that right?
12:15:38 15
16
A.
Well I didn't whinge.
Q. 483
No but the reason you wouldn't whinge is that if you are paid 85,000 and the
17
agreement was that you got 4,000 a month for nine months, that comes to 36, and
18
you get a success fee of 50, and you add those together it's 86 and you are
19
paid 85, so you mightn't whinge over a grand?
12:15:59 20
21
A.
Oh you wouldn't whinge over a grand.
Q. 484
No, so if Mr. Sweeney is correct, Monarch in fact paid all you were entitled to
22
and on top of that, were perfectly entitled to go to their joint venture
23
partner to say we have paid this great PR consultant Frank Dunlop who helped us
24
get this great success and along the lines of all the others we want 50 per
12:16:33 25
cent, that would follow wouldn't it?
26
A.
It seems eminently logical as you put it, Mr. Shipsey.
27
Q. 485
It just according to your evidence, didn't happen that way, because you didn't
28
have that agreement or even request for a success fee prior to the vote and you
29
didn't get the payment of the success fee and you never did anything about it.
12:16:53 30
Now, I just want to know, you're a professional person, when you send out Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
74 12:17:03 1
2
invoices, do you have a reminder system? A.
There are two types of invoices, Mr. Shipsey. One is on a monthly regular
3
basis, where they are automatically paid on a retainer monthly basis and then
4
there is the client who pays on the receipt of an invoice. If the, there is
12:17:27 5
any break down in the system in relation to the retainer system obviously there
6
would be a telephone call but if you stick with me in relation to the
7
retainers, you agree a fee with a client for five grand a month, ten grand a
8
month plus VAT, that goes out automatically on the last day of every month and
9
payment is received normally within a week or ten days.
12:17:51 10
11
There is the other client where you do a job for them and you agree a fee and
12
the fee is paid and the work is more than anticipated, you go back and you talk
13
about extra fees, you send out the invoices and if there is a delay you make a
14
telephone call and say where is the payment.
12:18:10 15
Q. 486
Now, the success fee falls into the second category?
16
A.
Yes it does.
17
Q. 487
And I want to know is, what I want to know is, does, does Frank Dunlop &
18
Associates, or sorry did Frank Dunlop & Associates not have is system whereby
19
if that invoice isn't paid after a month or three months or whatever your
12:18:32 20
credit terms are, that you send out a reminder and you say this invoice is
21
outstanding because your accountants get it, and it stays there as a debt and I
22
am just wondering if you sent out the invoice why and you say you weren't paid,
23
why you never sent a reminder?
24
A.
12:19:02 25
sent a reminder and I would just posit it in the context of what was said to me
26 27
Well I have no recollection of sending a reminder, there is no evidence that I
at the time of the invoice being sent it, send it in and see how far you get. Q. 488
So presumably when somebody in your accounts department says to you Mr. Dunlop
28
Monarch owe us 50,000 for this unpaid invoice, you say don't worry about it
29
that's a wing and a prayer invoice, don't know if I'm going to get it, don't
12:19:38 30
worry about it, is that what you are saying? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
75 12:19:40 1
A.
It could well be.
2
Q. 489
Mr. Dunlop I have to say, to suggest to you that this is completely untrue?
3
A.
Well the invoice was sent.
4
Q. 490
I know but your evidence in relation to the circumstances surrounding the
12:19:58 5
success fee and not being concerned about it not being paid, it's completely
6 7
untrue? A.
Well again just to, for clarification, Mr. Shipsey, I sent out the invoice in
8
the circumstances that I did, I am quite straightforwardly said to you I have
9
no recollection of sending a reminder, if somebody was to suggest to you or
12:20:19 10
produce a piece of paper that I sent them a reminder fine, I will gradually
11
accept that is correct, I have no recollection of doing so, and I have no
12
recollection of anybody in Monarch ever saying to me you are not going to get
13
paid.
14 12:20:33 15
I have no recollection of having any discussion in relation to whether or not I
16
was going to get paid, I have the documentary proof that the invoice was sent
17
and we now have the documentary evidence in relation to what happened
18
subsequent to that in relation to the GRE and Monarch.
19 12:20:49 20
Q. 491
Yes.
A.
But I, in relation to what actually occurred, I cannot say to you that I have a
21
recollection of sending out a reminder or that I had discussions saying where
22
is the 50 grand. I accept in ease of your argument, I accept that if you sent
23
out an invoice for 50,000, based on success, which was a success and Monarch
24
were pleased with the success, that not to follow it up would appear illogical,
12:21:27 25
but the only explanation I can give you is in the context of the conversation I
26
had with either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane in relation to sending the invoice,
27
send it in and see how far you get, so I obviously didn't get very far.
28
Q. 492
29 12:21:52 30
Now insofar as that success fee or those discussions are concerned you never said anything in your private discussions with the Tribunal about that?
A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
76 12:21:52 1
Q. 493
2
That's something you either recollected or the first time in the witness box or as I would suggest, made up for the first time in the witness box?
3
A.
No because they have documentary evidence of the sending of the invoice.
4
Q. 494
Oh no but that doesn't tell you whether you had that discussion about sending
12:22:10 5
6
it and anything like that? A.
Sorry I do beg your pardon. No I recollected that that was a discussion. I
7
cannot say to you with whom exactly that discussion took place, but it was with
8
an officer of Monarch, either Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Glennane.
9
Q. 495
But in the course of your very extensive private interviews with the Tribunal
12:22:28 10
where you are asked for to say that you are asked for chapter and verse is to
11
do chapter and verse a disservice Mr. Dunlop. You never mentioned this at all,
12
I would have to suggest to you is both extraordinary and incredible?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 496
Now finally or penultimately, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the words or words to
12:23:02 15
the effect that you took an interpretation out of that are at the core of this
16
module, because if they weren't said the edifice crumbles, if some words were
17
said and they have an innocent explanation the edifice similarly crumbles, you
18
can't but be unaware of the significance of that portion of your evidence in
19
relation to what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have stated to you and which he
12:23:46 20
denies?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 497
And your realisation of the significance of that is not hitting you like a bolt
23 24 12:24:02 25
from the blue here today or last week? A.
No.
Q. 498
Because what I might describe as the betrayal of Monarch with an asterisk was
26
based upon what Mr. Sweeney said in his first meeting to you?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 499
And therefore I'd like to know why in October of 2000 having as I have perhaps
29 12:24:43 30
to colourfully characterised it as betrayed Monarch with an asterisk you are asked to explain this, and you do send in something in writing, you make no Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
77 12:24:52 1
mention whatsoever of Mr. Sweeney having said or said anything to the effect
2
along the lines of the evidence that you are now giving?
3
A.
Correct.
4
Q. 500
Sorry we know it's correct because we have the documents, why is that,
12:25:12 5
Mr. Dunlop, why knowing the significance of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have
6
said or the effect of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have said, when you are
7
asked to say why it is that Monarch are a corrupt partner of yours in securing
8
a rezoning of their lands at Cherrywood, you put this down in writing, the one
9
thing you don't say is Eddie Sweeney said do what you have to do during the
12:25:46 10
11
course of that meeting, why Mr. Dunlop? A.
Because, Mr. Shipsey, the Tribunal as you now know seek extensive narrative
12
statements in relation to the detail that were given in broad outline
13
initially, here in the witness box subsequently in a statement in October, on
14
the 9th October 2000 and subsequently again in relation to the module or
12:26:16 15
structure, they seek narrative statements in relation to details about
16
payments, with whom, who was met, the dates, what was said. These are all of
17
the details that are provided.
18
Q. 501
19 12:26:34 20
21
No, Mr. Dunlop, I don't profess to have anything like the understanding of the workings of the Tribunal that you have?
A.
No no -- I don't --
Q. 502
Just, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to the first statement that you make, in October
22
of 2000 you mention nothing about Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Yes, correct.
24
Q. 503
And I am asking you for an explanation, I mean it's not a question of giving a
12:26:49 25
suggestion of it and then fleshing out the detail later. If you are correct,
26
Mr. Dunlop, if your interpretation of what Mr. Sweeney is alleged to have said
27
is correct, all you needed to tell the Tribunal in October 2000 was on the 8th
28
March 1993 I met their development director and he said to me, or words to the
29
effect "Do what you have to do" I understood that to mean that they understood
12:27:20 30
that I was going to bum politicians to use an inelegant phrase, full stop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
78 12:27:28 1
That's all you needed to say, and my point, Mr. Dunlop, is when you are asked
2
to put it down in writing in October of 2000, the most important point, the
3
elephant in the room, Mr. Dunlop, is not identified by you, and I want to know
4
why that is?
12:27:49 5
A.
Well I have given you an explanation in relation to the statements required by
6
the Tribunal in October 2000, sorry 9th of October 2000 and subsequently in
7
relation to requests from the Tribunal vis-a-vis individuals with whom I dealt,
8
in companies, among clients, conversations that took place, telephone calls
9
that took place, meetings that took place and what was said and done. In that
12:28:19 10
11
detail, that is the request of the Tribunal. Q. 504
Mr. Dunlop, without being unfair to you, are you telling me and telling the
12
Tribunal you can't explain why you didn't mention Mr. Sweeney saying words or
13
words to the effect that you have now suggested?
14
A.
12:28:41 15
No I'm not suggesting that I can't explain. What I am saying to you is the progression that took place in relation to matters vis-a-vis the Tribunal. I
16
am in this witness box in May, April or May of 2000, identified that I had
17
received monies from various people, including Monarch. I was asked to make,
18
after the private sessions, I was asked to make a narrative statement, I made a
19
narrative statement, I was subsequently asked to make hundreds of narrative
12:29:11 20
statements, expansionary narrative statements in relation to all of the detail
21 22
that I have just suggested to you. Q. 505
Mr. Dunlop, I am suggesting to you emphatically that the reason you didn't say
23
it when it was fresher in your mind at the time when you were first asked about
24
it, is because Mr. Sweeney did not say to you what you are now suggesting he
12:29:37 25
said, and that's the explanation, because back in 2000 you were insofar as your
26
recollection of what happened with Mr. Sweeney, telling the truth, and no such
27
discussion took place?
28
A.
I don't accept that.
29
Q. 506
And then subsequently, Mr. Dunlop, because in the October 2000 statement you
12:30:03 30
only referred to Mr. Lynn having said anything, but subsequently in September Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
79 12:30:12 1
of 2003 when you do your long narrative statement and I am not going to take
2
you through the details or the inconsistencies in relation to it and it's
3
detail, but at page 425 you say at the bottom of the first main paragraph:
4 12:30:42 5
"The only discussions with regard to payment to politicians was with
6
Mr. Sweeney who at my original meeting with him indicated that he knew that I
7
would have to make payments to councillors to achieve success. He said that he
8
knew that this was the only way that things could get done" and that was not in
9
your first statement, was in this statement and now in fact Mr. Dunlop, insofar
12:31:06 10
as your sworn evidence is concerned, you are not saying that Mr. Sweeney said
11
that to you, because earlier I read to you what you did say, which was words
12
that were open to the implication, whereas what you told the Tribunal in
13
September 2003 was that he indicated that he knew that I would have to make
14
payments to councillors to achieve success.
12:31:31 15
16
And you are certainly resiling from any implication from what you said in
17
September 2003, that Mr. Sweeney said that?
18
A.
19 12:31:50 20
I have told you what, I have given evidence to the effect of what Mr. Sweeney said and my interpretation of it.
Q. 507
21
Yes. And that is not consistent with what you told the Tribunal in September 2003?
22
A.
Well I don't accept that, but --
23
Q. 508
And we can, because when you are speaking to the Tribunal, be it in October of
24
2000 or September of 2003, you are not under oath, isn't that right, you are in
12:32:20 25
to provide assistance to them, I am not sure whether you are actually sworn at
26
this stage?
27
A.
Is this in private session?
28
Q. 509
Yes.
29
CHAIRMAN: Well he was not speaking to the Tribunal in October or September.
12:32:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
80 12:32:33 1
2
JUDGE FAHERTY: He is making a statement. Q. 510
3 4
MR. SHIPSEY: Sorry, this, my mistake, but this statement is not a sworn statement?
A.
This is a narrative statement submitted to the Tribunal.
Q. 511
But it's not an affidavit, it's not sworn?
6
A.
No it's not.
7
Q. 512
And therefore we can take it that when you are here now, having put your hand
12:32:44 5
8
on the Bible and sworn to tell the truth to this Tribunal, that what you are
9
saying now is true and insofar as it is inconsistent with what you said in a
12:33:03 10
11
statement in September 2003, that should be ignored? A.
I am saying there is consistency in relation to my relationship with
12
Mr. Sweeney of Monarch, on foot of meeting that I had with them and the
13
statement that was made, that to me is consistent.
14
Q. 513
12:33:25 15
And I am putting maybe a hypothetical, if it's inconsistent, if it is inconsistent, Mr. Dunlop, it is your sworn statement that you wish the Tribunal
16
to accept and not anything you have said in an unsworn statement?
17
A.
Hypothetically, yes.
18
Q. 514
Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
19 12:33:38 20
CHAIRMAN: All right. Thank you Mr. Shipsey. Just before we go any further
21
there are a couple of matters which I want to comment upon lest it be taken
22
that silence on the part of the Tribunal might be interpreted as agreement by
23
the Tribunal that certain, that two particular contentions put by Mr. Shipsey
24
are accurate.
12:34:06 25
26
Firstly, early in Mr. Shipsey's cross-examination of Mr. Dunlop and I think to
27
some extent more recently, he asked a question of Mr. Dunlop which in part
28
appeared to suggest that in the event of the Tribunal rejecting Mr. Dunlop's
29
evidence to the effect that in his view, that's Mr. Dunlop's view, Mr. Sweeney
12:34:30 30
knew of the practice and necessity of bribing councillors, that it would follow Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
81 12:34:35 1
that there could then be no adverse finding against Mr. Sweeney and/or Monarch.
2 3
While this contention can of course be properly made by way of a submission to
4
the Tribunal, it should be borne in mind that it does not necessarily follow
12:34:53 5
that any finding involving Mr. Sweeney or Monarch will depend on the acceptance
6
or rejection of Mr. Dunlop's evidence solely. In due course the Tribunal will
7
consider all the evidence, both that given to date and yet to be given before
8
making any findings involving those parties or any other parties.
9 12:35:15 10
Secondly, insofar as Mr. Shipsey has suggested, as I think he did, that the
11
placing of an asterisk by Mr. Dunlop opposite the name of Monarch was the only
12
determinant in the Tribunal's decision to publicly investigate this module was
13
not entirely or necessarily accurate. Other factors and evidence other than
14
that of Mr. Dunlop, contributed to the decision to conduct this particular
12:35:44 15
module, as has been stated often a number of occasions by the Tribunal, a
16
decision to investigate any particular issue is not dependant on an allegation
17
of wrongdoing being made either in advance of or during the investigation.
18 19 12:36:05 20
Just to clarify that. All right? That concludes Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination for today.
21 22
MS. DILLON: That's correct I hope possibly by the close of business, we might
23
have agreed a date for the conclusion of Mr. Dunlop's cross-examination.
24 12:36:14 25
CHAIRMAN: All right. Thank you Mr. Dunlop.
26 27
THE WITNESS WITHDREW.
28 29
MR. QUINN: Mr. Edward Sweeney.
12:36:34 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
82 12:36:34 1
EDWARD SWEENEY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS.
2
QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:
3 4 12:37:27 5
CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon Mr. Sweeney? A.
Afternoon.
6
Q. 515
MR. QUINN: Good afternoon Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
Good afternoon.
8
Q. 516
Mr. Sweeney my name is Pat Quinn and I am counsel with the Tribunal and I will
9
be taking you through your evidence, is that okay.
12:37:41 10
11
Mr. Sweeney your involvement with the Tribunal to date I think includes
12
attending for interview with the Tribunal legal team on the 13th of June 2000,
13
isn't that right?
14 12:37:55 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 517
And then I think you were written to and you provided a statement through your
16
solicitors at, which is to be found at page 2078, that was a statement provided
17
on the 19th June 2000, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 518
And enclosed with that letter are 2079 I think was a list of political
12:38:21 20
contributions made by the Pavilion Leisure Complex Limited, is that correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 519
And then I think there was further correspondence between the Tribunal and your
23
solicitor and particularly Mr. Sowman on the 22nd of April 2002 which is at
24
2085?
12:38:40 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 520
And you recall that letter and that was responded to by Mr. Sowman on the 7 May
27
2002 and that response is at 2087 and 2088, isn't that right? And then you
28
were again written to I think on the 16th of May 2002 and there was a further
29
correspondence from your solicitors on the 24th of May 2002 and that's to be
12:39:14 30
found at 2091 and 2092 of the brief. Then I think there were orders made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
83 12:39:20 1
against you, but in any event the correspondence culminated in a statement from
2
you Mr. Sweeney, which was received by the Tribunal on the 18th of February
3
2003 and that's at page number 2096 and succeeding pages and I think that that
4
statement ran to over a hundred pages, isn't that right?
12:39:40 5
6
A.
Excuse me, am I supposed to be seeing these things.
Q. 521
Yes.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: There is a screen there beside you? A.
Yes, but I haven't been getting them.
12:39:49 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Sweeney is saying as you are mentioning documents they are
12
not coming up on the screen. So --
13
A.
I have got that one now.
14 12:40:01 15
16
CHAIRMAN: All right. Q. 522
17
MR. QUINN: Sorry about that Mr. Sweeney. But yes for your assistance it's intended that you should be able to read the documents I refer to.
18
A.
As you say that.
19
Q. 523
As I call them?
A.
Okay.
Q. 524
Now, I think that statement commences at 2097 by setting out a biographical
12:40:13 20
21 22
history with particular reference to your employment history, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 525
And since you are only available to the Tribunal I understand Mr. Sweeney this
12:40:34 25
week I don't intend to read the over a hundred pages of statement unless you
26
require me to do so, or your counsel requires me to do so, I will from time to
27
time refer to particular parts of the statement but unless you --
28
A.
I have no objections to that.
29
Q. 526
If you or your counsel insist, I don't intend to. You were born in Scotland I
12:40:58 30
think Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
84 12:40:58 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 527
And I think you went to third level college and your academic record is to be
3
found at 2098 in that you qualified with a Scottish certificate of education in
4
1963 and you have set out there the fellowships with which you were associated,
12:41:19 5
isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 528
And that's more or lesson a technical side on the quantity surveying Institute
8 9
of Chartered Surveyors. A.
Yes.
Q. 529
Profession.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 530
And then I think you went on in your statement to deal with your employment
12:41:30 10
13
history from your graduation in 1966, right through to the present day, isn't
14
that right and we can see that at 2099 and succeeding pages, isn't that right?
12:41:51 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 531
But suffice to say that prior to joining Monarch in 1974, you were employed
17
with a construction firm here in the city, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 532
PJ Walls and company.
A.
Yes.
Q. 533
And I think you have told the Tribunal that you were effectively head hunted by
12:42:03 20
21 22
Mr. Monahan, is that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 534
And I think you have told the Tribunal that you had, if we look at 2111 that
12:42:17 25
you joined Monarch Properties Limited as a chief surveyor in May 1974, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 535
And your employment ended I think in December 1996 and although the Tribunal
29 12:42:35 30
will not be going into it, it will be fair to say that the relationship between yourself and Mr. Monahan and other members of the Monarch team broke down Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
85 12:42:40 1
sometime in or about '95 or '96?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 536
Maybe even earlier I think would that be fair to say?
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 537
I think you have advised the Tribunal as we see there , that your initial
12:42:48 5
6
function and position was under the supervision of the Chairman and managing
7
director Mr. Phillip Monahan and the financial director Mr. Dominic Glennane,
8
isn't that right?
9 12:43:02 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 538
Now at 2132, you deal with your relationship, relative to the role of other
11
employees and members of the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 539
And I think you there tell the Tribunal that Mr. Monahan was the dominant force
14
behind the group and that Mr. Dominic Glennane, a chartered accountant, was the
12:43:27 15
financial director and you say that as chartered surveyor and, that you were
16
the chartered surveyor and the technical support director and generally worked
17
under the direction of both Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, is that correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 540
And is that your evidence to the Tribunal that over the 22 year period you were
12:43:46 20
with the company, that you effectively worked to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 541
In other words, both Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan had seniority over you within
23 24 12:44:02 25
the company and could direct you as to what you did? A.
Yes.
Q. 542
Now, again on that page I think you go on to say that Mr. Monahan dealt with
26
the core development issues including site acquisition, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 543
You say that he was, had entrepreneurial aspects of these acquisitions
29 12:44:31 30
specifically in dealing with securing of development opportunities, is that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
86 12:44:31 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 544
You say you dealt with all technical aspects of matters concerning development
3 4 12:44:38 5
and construction, is that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 545
And I think at 2134 you set out more or less the position within the company as
6
of 1990, isn't that right? And we see there that Mr. Monahan is the Chairman
7
and managing director, he is entrepreneurial site acquisitions, isn't that
8
right? You see that grid produced by your solicitors. And the financial
9
director is Mr. Glennane and you are seen as the development director, would it
12:45:06 10
be fair to say that apart from the fact that you have told the Tribunal that
11
you would have worked to Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, that it would appear
12
that other than yourself, there was no more senior person within Monarch that
13
is to say other than yourself, Mr. Monahan or Mr. Glennane?
14 12:45:23 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 546
At 2135 I think you go on to say that from 1990 onwards Phillip Monahan
16
operated most of the time if an annex to his new home in Somerton, Castleknock,
17
where he set up a separate team of people including personal assistant, Ann
18
Gosling, John Sherwood, as well as two of Phillip Monahan's sons Colm and Paul,
19
is that correct?
12:45:51 20
A.
That's correct from 1990.
21
Q. 547
That appears to be what the statement says Mr. Sweeney.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 548
So would you tell the Tribunal what the setup was in Somerton from 1990 onwards
24
and what was, what were the individual roles played by Mr. Monahan,
12:46:15 25
Mr. Sherwood and Ms. Gosling and both Phillip and Paul, sorry Colm and Paul
26 27
Monahan? A.
I don't think the setup in Monarch actually changed, just because Mr. Monahan
28
went to live in Somerton. He had set up an office there from 1990 but I am not
29
entirely clear when it actually functioned as a complete office, because he was
12:46:43 30
back and forward a lot in, while there was the lack of communication, that I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
87 12:46:52 1
have mentioned there, communications were still good, he did come in, he was on
2
the phone often and the communication between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane and
3
myself really didn't change.
4
Q. 549
12:47:17 5
Yes. I am more concerned at this stage, Mr. Sweeney, with evidence that you might be able to give the Tribunal concerning the setup in Somerton from 1990
6
forwards. You are I think dealing with Mr. Monahan's involvement with yourself
7
and Mr. Glennane in your offices in Harcourt Street I suspect, is that correct?
8
A.
I don't quite understand that.
9
Q. 550
I understood, Mr. Sweeney, that the Monarch Group had offices in Harcourt
12:47:42 10
11
Street, is that correct? A.
Yes the Monarch Group was in Harcourt Street. Phil had moved out to Somerton
12
and had set up an office there, but the main office was still in Harcourt
13
Street.
14
Q. 551
12:48:04 15
Ms. Gosling, Mr. Sherwood and his two sons Colm and Paul Monahan, if what you
16 17
But the office he set up in Somerton was an office staffed by himself,
have said in this statement is correct? A.
Well let me put it into context. The office was run from Harcourt Street,
18
Mr. Monahan had moved to Somerton and his secretary also moved out with him.
19
John Sherwood that you mentioned was an assistant to Mr. Monahan, the two sons
12:48:43 20
were coming back and forward all the time, but I am not very clear at this
21 22
stage whether they had anything to do with the business. Q. 552
23 24 12:49:02 25
Mr. Sweeney, what I have put to you and what's on the screen is a statement that you have supplied to the Tribunal in 2003?
A.
Yes.
Q. 553
Do you understand that. I am not putting to you hypothetical situation or
26
something I am dreaming up do you understand?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 554
And I take it when you prepare this comprehensive statement in 2003 you were
29 12:49:21 30
anxious to be of as much assistance as possible to the Tribunal, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
88 12:49:21 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 555
And you were anxious to be truthful to the Tribunal, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 556
And in that statement we can see there it's on screen and I can get you a hard
12:49:29 5
copy if you wish you say the followings "At this time Philip Monahan" sorry
6
"Also from 1990 onwards Phillip Monahan operated most the time from an annex to
7
his new home in Somerton, Castleknock, where he set up a separate team of
8
people including his personal assistant Ann Gosling and John Sherwood, as well
9
as two of Phillip Monahan's sons, Colm and Paul."
12:49:50 10
11
Now would you agree with me Mr. Sweeney that any reasonable interpretation of
12
that statement would lead one to believe that there was a separate team of
13
people operating out of Somerton, headed up by Mr. Monahan and included, which
14
included his two sons Colm and Paul?
12:50:09 15
16
A.
Well the answer is yes but you've got to take --
Q. 557
If I could just stop you there for a moment. Presumably that was the evidence
17
you wished to convey to the Tribunal in, or the information you wished to
18
convey to the Tribunal in 2003, isn't that right?
19 12:50:27 20
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman he did say yes but and I'd just like --
21 22
CHAIRMAN: Perhaps it would shorten matters considerably if Mr. Sweeney was to
23
tell us the extent to which, if you want to, you want to qualify what was said
24
in that statement read out by Mr. Quinn, so if you want to give us some more
12:50:51 25
26
detail then we'll take that from you now. A.
Well Chairman I am a bit confused about what you do want. I have said --
27 28
CHAIRMAN: No, no it's just that if the impression given as Mr. Quinn has
29
indicated from the statement is that from around 1990, Mr. Phillip Monahan
12:51:10 30
effectively set up a separate office of his own, if you like, personal staff, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
89 12:51:15 1
which included his two sons, Ms. Gosling and Mr. Sherwood, now your evidence is
2
that the main office as it were, for the company, was in Harcourt Street, so we
3
just need to know some information as to what the different roles were of the
4
people in Somerton on the one hand and the people in Harcourt, were they
12:51:45 5
effectively separate operations or to what extent was there contact or
6 7
interaction between the two? A.
Okay. I can understand that a bit better now. What you have to do here is
8
split up what the different roles are for Monarch Properties Limited and what
9
Mr. Monahan's other businesses might have been. For example, he was involved
12:52:08 10
in vintage cars which had nothing to do with the property and various other
11
things, so John Sherwood assisted him on that, as did his sons. It had really
12
nothing to do with me in Monarch. I was concentrating on development and, it
13
was only in his role as Chief Executive and Chairman of the development company
14
that I was talking about.
12:52:35 15
Q. 558
16 17
So other than the business of acquiring vintage cars, what other business was conducted by Mr. Monahan from Somerton?
A.
Well that's a good question. Mr. Monahan was involved in now -- I don't like
18
to say everything, but he was. He was out there looking for business
19
opportunities, not only in property but in other things and that was his job
12:53:10 20
21
really, but he was the primary mover in Monarch. Q. 559
22
When you say he was a prime mover in Monarch what do you mean by that Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
He was the guy that got the jobs.
24
Q. 560
And I think your statement goes on to say Mr. Sweeney, again at 2135 and I can
12:53:33 25
give you now a hard copy of your statement it might be easier to follow, and if
26
you, on the top right hand corner you should see a numbering system and
27
Mr. Sweeney if I could direct your attention to page number 2135.
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 561
You say that "At this time Phillip Monahan also employed Richard Lynn whose
12:54:04 30
initial role in the company and his terms of employment were at first unclear Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
90 12:54:08 1
to me. It later became clear that his role was as project coordinator for
2
various projects at first working directly for Mr. Phillip Monahan. What my
3
understanding as to what this entailed was the coordinating and interfacing of
4
projects with the relevant local authorities."
12:54:23 5
6
Now first of all, you were the third most senior person within the company,
7
isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 562
Did you know that Mr. Monahan had a vacancy within the company for a project
12:54:37 10
coordinator with local authorities?
11
A.
In advance of his employment?
12
Q. 563
In advance of Mr. Lynn's employment?
13
A.
Not in advance of it.
14
Q. 564
Was --
A.
Mr. Monahan didn't consult me on that.
Q. 565
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn's appointment by Mr. Monahan came as a
12:54:47 15
16 17
surprise to you?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 566
Yes. And you say that his role within the company together with the terms of
12:55:05 20
his employment were at first, unclear to you. What did you mean to convey by
21
that Mr. Sweeney, to the Tribunal?
22
A.
What I meant by that was that his role was unclear to me .
23
Q. 567
But you were the third most senior person within the company, isn't that right?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 568
Mr. Glennane was looking after the financial end of the company, isn't that
12:55:23 25
26
right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 569
Mr. Monahan was the Chairman and apart from his entrepreneurial skills and his
29 12:55:39 30
skills in acquiring projects for the company, he from what I can gather from your evidence took no greater interest in the day to day management of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
91 12:55:44 1
company, isn't that right?
2
A.
Sorry. Could you repeat the last bit.
3
Q. 570
It's a little convoluted I agree. Mr. Monahan's role, his day to day role was
4 12:55:56 5
6
that of acquiring and sourcing projects for the company? A.
Yes.
Q. 571
But the day to day technical aspect of the company was under your control,
7
isn't that right, apart from the financial aspects?
8
A.
Yeah in terms of projects, yes.
9
Q. 572
Yes. So if somebody was retained by Mr. Monahan as Mr. Lynn was, then it's
12:56:13 10
11
almost certain that he would be working to you, isn't that right? A.
Not necessarily. The process that happened in Monarch up until that time was
12
that anyone who was brought on to the technical team as I would call it, went
13
through a process of interview with myself and with other senior members of
14
staff and after that they joined the team. Mr. Lynn was an exception to that.
12:56:47 15
Q. 573
16
There was no vacancy, no interview and he was appointed by Mr. Monahan without reference to you, the most senior technical person within the company?
17
A.
There was no reference to me .
18
Q. 574
Yes. And even though he was employed by the company, his terms of employment
19 12:57:10 20
21
were unclear to you initially, isn't that right? A.
They were unknown to me .
Q. 575
There were unknown to you and his role within the company was also unknown to
22
you, isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 576
And at some stage did Mr. Lynn's role become apparent to you?
A.
Yes.
26
Q. 577
And at what stage did Mr. Lynn's role become apparent to you?
27
A.
Well it would have been sometime later.
28
Q. 578
When you say later, it was it weeks, months, years?
29
A.
What year are we talking about again?
Q. 579
It would appear from your statement that we are talking about from 1990
12:57:24 25
12:57:40 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
92 12:57:44 1
2
onwards? A.
Yeah well in 1990 I was based in The Square in Tallaght in a set of offices
3
there because I was responsibility for ultimately getting Tallaght finished on
4
time and on budget. And I believe that Mr. Lynn paralleled at that time with
12:58:09 5
Mr. Monahan and in what was then the Earlsfort Terrace office, now I was pretty
6
well tied up in this massive Square project, so the time that I would have
7
realised what Mr. Lynn was doing would have been subsequent to Tallaght and I
8
did recollect, I do recollect that he did work on legal things relating to
9
Tallaght in terms of leases, and at that time Cherrywood came into the frame
12:58:52 10
exactly when I just don't --
11
Q. 580
Yes. I think Cherrywood was aye acquired in June 1989?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 581
And I think Tallaght was being constructed in 1989 and was opened in October
14 12:59:08 15
16
1990, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 582
When you talk about Mr. Lynn's terms of employment being unclear to you, are
17
you talking about that period or a period prior to that?
18
A.
I am talking about that period.
19
Q. 583
Now, you say in your statement that he subsequently became a project
12:59:31 20
coordinator for various projects at first working directly for Phillip Monahan,
21
when you say at first working directly for Philip Monahan, do I understand by
22
that that he was reporting to Mr. Phillip Monahan?
23
A.
Yeah, that would be more accurate.
24
Q. 584
And in what sense would he be reporting to Mr. Monahan?
A.
As I recall he was reporting to him on a number of projects other than Tallaght
12:59:48 25
26 27
and other than Cherrywood. Q. 585
28 29 13:00:15 30
So would it be fair to say that insofar as Tallaght and Cherrywood were concerned Mr. Lynn was reporting to you and not Mr. Monahan directly?
A.
At some point, exactly when I don't know, but at some point he did report to me on Cherrywood. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
93 13:00:16 1
2
CHAIRMAN: It's now one o'clock, Mr. Quinn, so we'll adjourn until two
3
o'clock.
4 13:00:21 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
94 13:00:34 1
2 3
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
4
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney.
14:06:13 5
6
CHAIRMAN: Now, good afternoon.
7
Good afternoon.
8 9
CHAIRMAN: If during the afternoon you want a break, we normally don't take a
14:06:37 10
break in the afternoon. But if you want a break, say so.
11
Okay. Thank you.
12 13
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Sweeney.
14 14:06:44 15
Mr. Sweeney, before lunch we were talking about the terms of engagement of
16
Mr. Lynn by Mr. Monahan.
17 18
And if I could have 1384, the document coming on screen now, Mr. Sweeney, is
19
Mr. Lynn's statement to the Tribunal. And if I could just. It's a statement
14:07:02 20
dated 24th of April 2002. And just if you see the third paragraph there.
21 22
He says "I was engaged by MPSL", do you see that? "I was engaged by MPSL to
23
coordinate the team selected to the develop the Cherrywood site of 234 acres
24
which had been acquired by Monarch Properties in 1989." Now, prior to that he
14:07:25 25
had also said that he had actually applied to Monahan for the position.
26 27
Now, your recollection is, as I understand it, that Mr. Lynn was employed
28
directly by Mr. Monahan, without reference to you.
29 14:07:44 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 586
If I could have 2135 please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
95 14:07:50 1
I'm going back for a moment now to your statement, Mr. Sweeney. And at the
2
bottom of that page you say, "Mr. Lynn in his previous employment had been a
3
town Clerk, in Dundalk. And this background and his understanding of local
4
authority structures, were in my opinion, obviously key to his appointment by
14:08:10 5
Phil Monahan, as his brief extended to coordinating the dealings with local
6
authorities,s generally and specifically the Cherrywood project in Cabinteely,
7
for which Mr. Richard Lynn took on the role as project co-ordinator."
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 587
You had no vacancy for someone within the team, who would liaise with local
14:08:33 10
authority representatives; isn't that right?
11
A.
I had no vacancy within the technical development team.
12
Q. 588
But for some reason, Mr. Monahan retained Mr. Lynn and it was your belief that
13
he retained him because of Mr. Lynn's experience as a local authority employee;
14
is that right?
14:08:58 15
16
A.
Well it was certainly I think part of it.
Q. 589
Now, just in relation to Mr. Monahan himself, I think you have earlier given
17
evidence that Mr. Monahan was the entrepreneur and the and the Chairman within
18
the group; isn't that right?
19 14:09:18 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 590
Were there instances when Mr. Monahan himself spearheaded his own projects and
21 22
did his own thing, separate from the group? A.
23 24
Within development, very rarely, but out with development, he had a lot of different interests.
Q. 591
14:09:41 25
Yes. But were there instances of Mr. Monahan spearheading developments without consultations with the other directors?
26
A.
May I ask. Am I referring to this again?
27
Q. 592
No, I'm asking you to give evidence, Mr. Sweeney.
28 29 14:09:58 30
CHAIRMAN: I think it's just a general question. A.
Well, I can't pinpoint anything like that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
96 14:10:03 1
2 3
Q. 593
MR. QUINN: You think that that would be an unfair criticism of Mr. Monahan?
4
A.
Well certainly I wouldn't think it would be a fair criticism at all.
Q. 594
Yes. And you would say that there weren't separate instances where
14:10:11 5
6
Mr. Monahan might have spearheaded developments without consulting his fellow
7
directors?
8
A.
Mr. Chairman, I have difficulty with this word "spearheaded".
Q. 595
CHAIRMAN: Well I suppose, did he go off on frolics of his own in the business
9 14:10:25 10
11
world, without necessarily, initially, bringing with him his directors and
12
others -- did he do things on his own, unannounced, in relation to property
13
development and so on? Would he arrive in, for example into work and say I've
14
just bought, I've just agreed to buy some property here, there, or wherever?
14:10:58 15
A.
The answer to that Chairman, is yes. Very, very often he would be quiet for a
16
while and then suddenly you'd find something on your desk, that he had done.
17
And if that's what you mean by spearheading, certainly.
18
Q. 596
19
MR. QUINN: If I could have 8079. Mr. Sweeney, what I'm putting up on screen is an extract from an affidavit
14:11:22 20
sworn by you, in your proceedings, against Monarch.
Do you understand?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 597
And would you look at paragraph 20 of the affidavit that you swore.
23 24
This is your second affidavit. And you say "I think that in view of the
14:11:36 25
attack which Mr. Monahan has made upon my role as a director of the group, I
26
should point out that several instances where Mr. Monahan has spearheaded
27
developments, without consulting his fellow directors, or against our advice,
28
having caused serious difficulties."
29 14:11:54 30
A.
Well I can understand --
Q. 598
So what I'm putting to you, Mr. Sweeney, are your own sworn statements to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
97 14:11:59 1
High Court.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
To the High Court. Do you understand?
4
A.
Yes.
Q. 600
And I've difficulty -- I've difficulty understanding how you have difficulty in
14:12:02 5
6 7
confirming that to be the case. A.
Yes. Well it all goes down to this word "spearheaded". What you meant by it
8
and what I would mean by it. What you're talking about here are two
9
developments that have already been on the Monarch portfolio, for a
14:12:27 10
considerable length of time. And by spearheading, in these instances, I mean
11
that he went on his own to get planning permission. That was without
12
consultation to his own in-house experts.
13
Q. 601
14
Monarch Group? Was it the case that Mr. Monahan of his own volition did things
14:13:02 15
16
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, was there a difficulty of communication within the
independently of the other directors? A.
Certainly Mr. Monahan did things independently. And I regarded -- I do regard
17
that, in retrospect, as being one of his strong points. That when he did go
18
for something, he went for it. And then he brought it back to the office to
19
us, to sort it out for him.
14:13:29 20
Q. 602
21
Mr. Sweeney, was Mr. Monahan surrounded in the Somerton by his own advisors, independent of the group?
22
A.
Well, he certainly had advisors in Somerton.
23
Q. 603
Yes?
24
A.
He wasn't surrounded by them.
Q. 604
Okay. Who were his advisors in Somerton?
A.
Well, within the Monarch organisation, they would have been John Sherwood. It
14:13:51 25
26 27 28 29
would have been Ann Gosling, and that's it. Q. 605
Could I have 2138. Again, Mr. Sweeney, I'm putting up on screen extracts from your own statement.
Do you understand?
14:14:16 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
98 14:14:16 1
And you give is there a schedule of Somerton. Do you see that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 606
And you see you identify Mr. Monahan underneath Mr. Monahan we have John
4
Sherwood, personal assistant. Underneath Mr. Sherwood you have entered for
14:14:31 5
personal assistant Ms. Gosling and then you put in Colm Monaghan and Paul
6
Monahan?
7
A.
They were both his sons. They had both a very junior role.
8
Q. 607
And you've already told us that they were involved in Somerton from the 1990s
9 14:14:46 10
11
forward; isn't that right? A.
Well they were living in the house.
Q. 608
I was putting to you, Mr. Sweeney, what you yourself had told the Tribunal in
12
your statement, do you understand?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 609
I don't want to be unfair to you.
A.
Yes.
Q. 610
I can bring back up that portion of your statement where you dealt with his
14:14:57 15
16 17 18
team. A.
19 14:15:10 20
21
those two guys were young and inexperienced at that time . Q. 611
And was he visited in Somerton by very close associates?
A.
Well when you say surrounded by experts. He did have a number of auctioneers,
22 23
valuers, who came . Q. 612
24 14:15:37 25
26
I don't think in Chairman we're in conflict here at all. I just reckoned that
Yes. And did you identify in your statement to the Tribunal a Mr. Jack Whelan and a Mr. Richard Lynn, as numbering among those close associates in Somerton?
A.
Yes.
Q. 613
And you said in your statement I think that they spent much of their time at
27
his offices in Somerton, isn't that right?
28
A.
If I did, I did, yes. They certainly spent a lot of time there.
29
Q. 614
You went on to say that while these people would not have been regarded as
14:15:54 30
being advisors to the Monarch Group. They would not in my opinion have gone Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
99 14:15:58 1
through the normal strict interview process of Monarch. Rather their
2
appointment, renumeration and job specifications, would have been made by
3
Mr. Philip Monahan personally. Isn't that right?
4 14:16:08 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 615
And you say that you would from time to time be summoned to meetings by
6
Mr. Monahan to Somerton. Is that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 616
Now, can I ask you about Mr. Jack Whelan. Who was Mr. Whelan?
9
A.
Jack Whelan was an agent. An agent being a property agent, who brought
14:16:29 10
11
opportunities to various people, including Mr. Monahan. Q. 617
12
Can we have 8574. Do you know of any of the projects that Mr. Whelan was involved in with the Monarch Group?
13
A.
I can think offhand of two. One of them was Prague.
14
Q. 618
Yes.
A.
He was deeply involved in that.
16
Q. 619
We'll be getting to Prague later.
17
A.
Okay. The other one was one he interfaced very directly with me. And that
14:16:54 15
18
was the possible take over, or purchase, of a number of supermarkets/shopping
19
centres in Spain, which had been owned by a French company and were trying to
14:17:30 20
get out of it, I visited those in Spain.
21
Q. 620
When was that, Mr. Sweeney?
22
A.
When?
23
Q. 621
When, yeah.
24
A.
Oh, when was the last World Cup? It was the same day that Ireland beat Italy
14:17:45 25
one nil, in New York.
26 27
CHAIRMAN: That was a long time ago.
28
Q. 622
MR. QUINN: 1994 I think.
29
A.
That was 1994.
Q. 623
You were the project Manager of the Cherrywood site; isn't that right?
14:17:52 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
100 14:17:55 1
A.
Well, no. I would say that the term "project manager" really only came into
2
it when a site developed to the point of having planning and construction
3
happening. I would have been the director in charge.
4
Q. 624
The most senior person in charge, after Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 625
In respect of the Cherrywood site?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 626
So almost anything that went on in relation to the Cherrywood site, something
14:18:20 5
9
that would have been known, or ought to have been known, by you; isn't that
14:18:32 10
right?
11
A.
Yes, I certainly ought to have known it.
12
Q. 627
On screen, Mr. Sweeney, is an invoice dated the 16th of April 1991. Headed
13
Whelan land use specialists. And it's a fee in respect of services in
14
relation to residential consultancy at Cherrywood, for 150,000 plus VAT of
14:18:53 15
30,000. Do you see that?
16
A.
Was that in the brief?
17
Q. 628
Yes. Now, I wonder could you tell the Tribunal, as the most -- third most
18
senior person within Monarch, what services were provided by Mr. Whelan, that
19
entitled him to command a fee, in 1991 of 180, 000 pounds?
14:19:15 20
21
A.
I have absolutely no idea.
Q. 629
Who within the Monarch Group would be able to answer that question,
22 23
Mr. Sweeney, in your view? A.
24
Well, I would presume if it was an invoice it would be presented to the accounts and I would have suggested that the accounts personnel would have a
14:19:47 25
view on that.
26
Q. 630
And who would be in charge of the accounts personnel?
27
A.
Mr. Glennane.
28
Q. 631
Is it conceivable, Mr. Sweeney, that in relation to the Cherrywood project,
29 14:20:07 30
that there would be a -- an agent retained by Monarch, who could carry out services to the tune of 180, 000 pounds and you wouldn't be aware of his Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
101 14:20:12 1
2
existence, or to what those expenses related? A.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I've just recalled another instance of Mr. Whelan.
3
And that was that at some point he introduced a housing development company
4
called --
14:20:27 5
Q. 632
Dwyer Nolan?
6
A.
Dwyer Nolan.
7
Q. 633
Yes, we'll come to those in a moment. If we could just concentrate on this
8 9 14:20:38 10
invoice for 1991, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Yes.
Q. 634
And I want you to help the Tribunal in understanding how a company could be
11
retained to provide 180, 000 pounds worth of services, without any reference to
12
you, either in their retention by someone within Monarch, or indeed in relation
13
to the works which they would have done.
14
A.
14:21:12 15
have upset me had I seen it at the time. And it would have doubly upset me if
16 17
I knew that it had been paid without me knowing. Q. 635
18 19 14:21:31 20
Well, Mr. Chairman, I have to say I know nothing about this invoice. It would
Now, I can't tell you that it was paid, Mr. Sweeney. And in fact, the paper trail would seem to suggest that it wasn't paid.
A.
Oh.
Q. 636
But it was claimed. For the moment, I'm merely concerned about the contract
21
which would have given rise to the claim. Do you understand?
22
A.
Yes, I do.
23
Q. 637
Was Mr. Whelan involved in relation to the residential development in
24 14:21:46 25
Cherrywood? A.
Insofar as Dwyer Nolan was concerned?
26
Q. 638
No. Other than Dwyer Nolan, was he involved?
27
A.
Certainly I have no recollection of that at all.
28
Q. 639
In 1991, when this invoice was raised, was Mr. Whelan retained by the Monarch
29 14:22:10 30
Group, in relation to the Cherrywood site? A.
Certainly not to my knowledge. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
102 14:22:12 1
Q. 640
What services could Mr. Whelan have provided to Mr. Monahan or the Monarch
2
Group, or indeed you, in 1991, in April 1991, in relation to the Cherrywood
3
site?
4 14:22:29 5
6
A.
Well, I could only speculate.
Q. 641
Yes.
A.
That he might have been finding a purchaser for part of it, or something like
7
that.
8
Q. 642
And were you --
9
A.
I don't have any --
Q. 643
Seeking a purchaser in April 1991 for Cherrywood?
11
A.
Why would he be doing that?
12
Q. 644
No, I'm saying were the Monarch Group seeking a purchaser in April 1991?
13
A.
Not obviously, but in property development everything is always for sale.
14
Q. 645
Who do you think retained Mr. Whelan?
A.
Mr. Monahan would have.
Q. 646
And just in relation to the Dwyer Nolan involvement. If I could have 5040.
14:22:41 10
14:23:08 15
16 17 18
Mr.-- a summary of accounts due in relation to GRE was prepared. And sometime
19
after 1994. Sorry, if I could 5040, please.
14:23:41 20
21
And you will see there the third last entry Jack Whelan (introducing Dwyer
22
Nolan) 121,000 pounds. Is that the reference that you're making to, in
23
relation to Mr. Whelan and Dwyer Nolan?
24 14:24:01 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 647
Did you know that Mr. Whelan had instituted proceedings against the Monarch
26
Group claiming fees that is were due to him for various works?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 648
If I could have 4731.
29 14:24:18 30
This is a memorandum of Anglo Irish Bank. And it follows on a meeting between Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
103 14:24:27 1
Mr. Beery and Mr. Murray. And it refers to Mr. Noel Murray of Monarch
2
updating the bank on issues. Do you understand?
3
A.
Yes
4
Q. 649
In December 1993. And just under the heading Dwyer Nolan do you see the first
14:47:04 5
paragraph last sentence Noel Murray confirmed that Phil Monahan had been
6
carrying out all the negotiations with Eddie Dwyer directly and that the other
7
Monaghan direct Monarch directors were not fully informed of the arrangement.
8
Do you see that? That's at 4731. That Mr. Noel Murray was advising the bank
9
that Mr. Phil Monahan had been carrying out the negotiations in relation to
14:47:05 10
Dwyer Nolan's directly himself.
11
A.
I see that but I wouldn't agree with it.
12
Q. 650
Yeah. Is there any reason why Mr. Murray would tell the bank something that
13 14
was untrue in December 1993? A.
14:47:06 15
I presume, Chairman, that that must have been Mr. Murray's opinion at the time. From whatever source he was told that.
16
Q. 651
What was Mr. Murray's position in 1993?
17
A.
He was marketing director.
18
Q. 652
A very Senior position within the Monarch Group?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 653
And I think he was, in fact on your nomination, ultimately to be appointed to
14:47:06 20
21
the boar of directors of Monarch?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 654
And in fact I think at one stage you reported to him; isn't that right?
24
A.
At the very end, yes.
Q. 655
Now, just in relation to Monarch Properties Services Limited. Would you tell
14:47:07 25
26 27
the Tribunal what Monarch Properties Services Limited. What its function was? A.
Yes. Monarch Properties Limited, was the parent company, which had a number
28
of other companies under it. The actual service company, the one that was
29
used to employ all of the staff and the development and the accountancy and the
14:47:08 30
marketing ends were employed under Wilton House Limited, which was the initial Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
104 14:47:08 1
2
name which eventually was changed to MPSL. Q. 656
In your statement. If I could have 2113, please.
3 4
I think you do give and set out a narrative in relation to the Monarch
14:47:09 5
Properties Services. And you set out the contracts with which it was
6
involved; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 657
And I think you give a heading of the contract type. And a historical,
9
approximate historical value, of the works. Does that mean that in present
14:47:09 10
day values that the works carried out would have been 700,000, as in the case
11
of the Harcourt Street business, or at the time it was carried out it was
12
700,000?
13
A.
14 14:47:10 15
Well, when I was doing these things I tried to make them at the same time as the report. So it would have been the same date as you were reading.
Q. 658
Yes. So in 2003 values, values as of 2003 there was 700,000 pounds worth of
16
work carried out on the Harcourt Street property, if you look at the very first
17
one?
18
A.
No, that's a different office block.
19
Q. 659
Okay. An office block in Harcourt Street?
A.
Yes.
Q. 660
Okay. Well, I don't want to go through them. If I could have 2116. Just
14:47:11 20
21 22
if you look at No. 60, that is the refurbishment of the Somerton House in
23
Castleknock, which is described as residential. Construction planning
24
project. You said there was a million pounds worth of work carried out on
14:47:11 25
that Somerton House at present day values. Isn't that right?
26
A.
I'm trying to see that.
27
Q. 661
No. 60, Mr. Sweeney.?
28
A.
Oh, yes. Yes.
29
Q. 662
Now, I think you yourself then, throughout this period, had your own company,
14:47:12 30
Edward Sweeney and associates. Isn't that right? Which was a quantity Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
105 14:47:12 1
surveying company. And we can see that at 2118?
2
A.
No, that was much earlier on, Chairman.
3
Q. 663
Yes, yes. It operated for an eight year period, between 1976 and 1983; is
4 14:47:17 5
that correct? A.
Yes.
6
Q. 664
And you set out the works that it was engaged in?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 665
At 2118 to 2100. I think in October 1993 to the present day you operated a
9 14:47:18 10
11
company Pavilion Leisure Complex. At 2121 isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 666
And at 2123 you set out your introduction to the Monarch Group. And you
12
advised the Tribunal that you'd been previously employed by Walls and
13
headhunted by Mr. Monahan and you've given that evidence, isn't that right?
14 14:47:19 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 667
And between 1974 and 1986, I think you had been with the Monarch Group. And
16
it would appear that around 1984 you were appointed a director. Would that be
17
fair to say?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 668
I think you were appointed a director of the Monarch Properties on the 29th of
14:47:20 20
July 1983. And appointed a director of Monarch Properties Holdings Limited,
21
on the 20th of October 1984. Would that be?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 669
Now, could I just refer you to two meetings which appear to have taken place on
24
the 28th and 29th of May 1986. If I could have 8105, please.
14:47:21 25
26
Was it the case that in 1986, Mr. Sweeney, as a result of a Texaco -- a Tesco
27
transaction, sorry
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 670
That quite a substantial amount of profits were made by the Monarch Group?
A.
Yes.
14:47:22 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
106 14:47:22 1
Q. 671
2
And I think arising out of that, Mr. Monahan was anxious to settle his affairs. Isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 672
At that time. And if we look at the document on screen, which is a memo of a
14:47:22 5
meeting, of the 28th of May 1986. Which was attended at a later stage by
6
yourself and Mr. Glennane. It would appear that Mr. Monahan was there telling
7
his accountant, Mr. Mooney, that he wished to give you 150,000 pounds out of
8
the deal; isn't that right?
9 14:47:23 10
A.
I'm trying to read this.
Q. 673
Well if you look at paragraph No. 1 I'll read it you to, Mr. Sweeney. It says
11
"Monarch is in funds because of the completion of the Tesco transaction and PM"
12
which is presumably Mr. Monahan "now wants to make disbursements to Dominic
13
Glennane, Eddie Sweeney and to himself." In relation to Eddie Sweeney. I'm
14
reading from the third paragraph?
14:47:24 15
16
A.
I can understand.
Q. 674
Phil Monahan proposes 100,000 pounds by the company and that in addition a
17
previous advance of 15,000 be written off?
18
A.
I thought you had said 150.
19
Q. 675
Sorry, I should have said 115. I think you did in fact get monies out of that
14:47:25 20
project; isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 676
And I think if we could have 8056.
23 24 14:47:25 25
26
This again is your affidavit to the High Court, Mr. Sweeney. Looking at paragraph No. 10. And I'm deliberately jumping ahead. But if you wish for me to do so, I'll read the earlier paragraphs.
27 28
You say "I requested that any such agreement would be implemented on a
29
professional basis accordingly it was agreed accountants Stokes Kennedy Crowley
14:47:26 30
could be asked to make the necessary arrangements. Meetings were held between Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
107 14:47:27 1
Mr. Monahan and myself discussed a mechanism for the implementation of this
2
agreement. And it was agreed that an ex gratia payment of 100,000 pounds
3
would notionally be made to me , for which I would receive a cash sum of 50,000
4
pounds in a tax efficient manner, with the balance of 50,000 being paid to
14:47:27 5
Mr. Monahan as consideration for the acquisition of a tranche of his existing
6
share holding equivalent to 15 percent of the issued share capital of Monarch.
7
" Isn't that right
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 677
You say at paragraph 12, that the cash sum of 50,000 was duly paid to you,
14:47:28 10
isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 678
At that time or in October of that year. If I could have 2767, these are
13
documents, Mr. Sweeney. The document coming on screen is a document disclosed
14
to the Tribunal by Mr. Monahan. It says 50,000 was paid to Bridie Sweeney on
14:47:29 15
the 31st of October 1986. Do you see that?
16
A.
I do.
17
Q. 679
Had that anything to do with the 50,000 that we've just referred to?
18
A.
Yeah, that's the same 50,000.
19
Q. 680
Now, if I could go back to 8105. I think Mr.-- as appears -- have you read
14:47:30 20
this document before, Mr. Sweeney. This is the document of the 28th of May
21
1986?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 681
And you will see that Mr. Monahan was anxious that a cash fund would be
24 14:47:30 25
available to him; isn't that right? At paragraph No. 2. From his own viewpoint, Mr. Monahan wants to ensure that there is sufficient cash available
26
to him and to his wife in the event of his death. And that this cash is free
27
and not tied up with Monarch. Philip Monahan would like to withdraw between 1
28
and 1.5 million from Monarch's tax free. This money would not be required all
29
at once, but it would be available on loan account to Phil Monahan as and when
14:47:32 30
he required it. Do you recollect Mr. Monahan discussing that with you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
108 14:47:32 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 682
And I think when you joined the meeting. And if we look at 8106. Yourself
3
and Mr. Glennane joined the meeting. And I think Mr. Glennane raised the
4
issue as to whether or not the company could make the disbursements at that
14:47:33 5
time , isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 683
And I think on the following day the company having been valued. If we look
8
at the bottom of the memo. We see that the valuation of the company was
9
somewhere between nine and ten million, isn't that right? There were
14:47:33 10
borrowings of about 16 and an asset value of about 25, isn't that correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 684
Now, I think that subsequently you were paid another tranche of money by
13 14 14:47:34 15
Mr. Monahan, or out of the Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
Are you talking about the same time, Mr. Chairman?
Q. 685
No, I'm talking about January 1992, when the Tallaght town centre came on line.
16 17
If we could have 8058, please.
18 19
Again, this is from your affidavit, Mr. Sweeney. This is paragraph 17. I
14:47:35 20
don't want to read it. I'm anxious, Mr. Sweeney, that you might recollect
21
matters rather than referring to the documents if you can at all.
22
A.
I understand.
23
Q. 686
I would understand for detail that you would have to refer to the documents.
24
This is a situation where I think 270, 000 came under your control, isn't that
14:47:36 25
right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 687
That's the type of thing, I suggest, that you would remember without having to
28 29 14:47:37 30
refer to a document. Do you remember in 1992 having received 270, 000? A.
In '92? No, I didn't receive 200 --
Q. 688
Did a company Isotope Limited, on your behalf? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
109 14:47:37 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 689
Receive --
3
A.
On behalf of my wife and myself, entered into an export credit relief, I don't
4 14:47:37 5
know what the word is, scheme . Q. 690
Yes.
6
A.
That enabled 270,000 to pass to us, over a number of years.
7
Q. 691
Yes. But it related -- the agreement that you would receive the 270, 000
8 9
stemmed from a 1.8 million disbursement in 1992, isn't that right? A.
Yes, yes.
Q. 692
It was your share of that; isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 693
And are you saying that the monies came to you from Isotope limited. Or were
14:47:38 10
13 14
you -- were yourself and your wife the shareholders of Isotope? A.
14:47:39 15
16
Isotope was a company which was, of which my wife and myself were the shareholders.
Q. 694
17
And was it Isotope that was involved in an export sales relief business, or was to the Monarch Group?
18
A.
It was a group of companies within the Monarch Group.
19
Q. 695
Yes.
A.
Isotope is the one that dealt with the money that I was to receive.
Q. 696
Now, in relation to payments generally. If I could 2139. You set out the
14:47:39 20
21 22
system for dealing with payments; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 697
I take it that it would be fair to say that a company. And when I say
14:47:40 25
"company" I'm referring to the Monarch Group of companies obviously. That a
26
company like Monarch would have a fairly detailed system in operation for the
27
payments of invoices and the payment out of its funds?
28
A.
Yes, certainly on the development end.
29
Q. 698
But not just at the development end. At every end; isn't that right?
A.
Um, it should have but.
14:47:42 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
110 14:47:42 1
Q. 699
Yes. I think you took credit for putting in place a certification process at
2
some stage in relation to the payment of contractors and subcontractor's; isn't
3
that right?
4 14:47:43 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 700
And you set out there the procedure for the making of payments and the payments
6
on foot of instituted of chartered builders -- sorry. Royal Institute of
7
Architects and Ireland's building contracts and other payments; isn't that
8
right?
9 14:47:44 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 701
And I think you, at 2140. You advised that the procedures were strict and
11
required the following. Checking of the accounts or invoices by a particular
12
staff involved. A final check by the surveyor in charge. Signature of the
13
chief surveyor and a signature of Eddie Sweeney chief surveyor/director, isn't
14
that right?
14:47:46 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 702
You want on to say that cheques were normally signed by Phil Monahan or Dominic
17
Glennane and in the rare absence that I counter signed any cheques exceptions
18
to the above strict procedures were rare. Is that correct?
19 14:47:47 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 703
Quite a substantial amount of the cheques we have seen on screen and we'll be
21
dealing with some of them Mr. Sweeney, have two signatures. Was there a
22
situation where two signatures were sometimes required on cheques? One of
23
which was either Mr. Glennane, Mr. Monahan or yourself?
24
A.
That was my understanding of the system required.
Q. 704
Two signatures?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 705
But one of the signatures had to be Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, or in their
14:47:48 25
28 29 14:47:49 30
absence yourself? A.
It would depend on the particular circumstance.
Q. 706
Would it depend on the amount? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
111 14:47:49 1
2
A.
Not particularly the amount. But I suppose the particular company.
Q. 707
Yes. Now, at 2198. Under the heading political parties you deal with the
3
system for the payments to political parties and the democratic process.
4 14:47:50 5
You say before any local general or European election it would have been a
6
general policy in Monarch to give donations to those parties or politicians
7
that made representations for help with their political expenses. And you
8
named the various parties there. You say I believe that representations would
9
have been made to Monarch personnel from many of the members of the various
14:47:50 10
political parties, Monarch would also have presented Christmas gifts to many
11
politicians and councillors and local authority officials, usually a bottle of
12
whiskey, brandy or something, or flowers or sponsorship for golf outings and
13
dinner. Is that right?
14 14:47:51 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 708
That implies, Mr. Sweeney, that the donations for political parties were only
16
made at election time; isn't that right?
17
A.
That it implies that?
18
Q. 709
Yes.
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 710
Well was that the position? Were donations given other than at election time ?
A.
I'm just trying to think now, Chairman. I suppose at any time if anybody
14:47:51 20
21 22
wrote in, it wouldn't necessarily need to be an election time. I just don't
23
want you to pull something out that is not an election time. That might be
24
quite correct: But you are quite correct. It would be normally at election
14:47:53 25
26
times. Q. 711
27
But are you saying that at any time you received a request for a political contribution you would have made it, Monarch would have made it?
28
A.
I would say in most cases.
29
Q. 712
Can you recall of any instance when a request for a political contribution was
14:47:54 30
received and that the group refused to sanction the payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
112 14:47:54 1
2
A.
No, I can't recall any.
Q. 713
If I go back to 2140 again. You say that, I do recall on several occasions
3
receiving letters from political parties or local representatives seeking
4
donations towards party political expenses. What I have done would have been
14:47:55 5
to pass these letters onto the council department with either a recommendation
6
to make a donation or not.
7 8
Did you ever pass on a request with the recommendation that the payment not be
9
made?
14:47:55 10
11
A.
No.
Q. 714
You say you recall recommending payments to councillor Mary Flaherty Mervyn
12
Taylor and Jim Barry at some stage, although the dates of such are unclear. I
13
cannot also recall the actual amounts recommended by me , but believe them to
14
have been nominal and in each case the monies were paid by Monarch, letters of
14:47:56 15
receipts and thanks would have been received by each of the recipients. Is
16
that correct?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 715
At 2191. I think you set out a list of personnel, namely, politicians, with
19
whom you would have had dealings; isn't that right? And the list is quite
14:47:57 20
extensive. It's at 2191 and 2192; isn't that correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 716
And then I think you -- just in relation to the political contributions. If I
23
could have 2866. Did you know, for example, that Mr. Monahan had made a
24
contribution to Mr.-- through Mr. Dermot Ahern to the Fianna Fail condalau,
14:47:58 25
General Election fund, in June 1989?
26
A.
No, not that I can recall.
27
Q. 717
Did you know -- if I could have 2864. That Mr. Monahan on the 9th of June
28
1989, had forwarded a cheque for 16,000 pounds, being a donation to the General
29
Election, to Mr. Frank Wall of Fianna Fail?
14:48:00 30
A.
No, but I did see these. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
113 14:48:00 1
Q. 718
You'd have seen these documents in the brief?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 719
And you'd have seen also I think the payment of 1,000 to Mr. Ciaran Haughey on
4
9th of June 1989, in relation to the election campaign of Sean Haughey, isn't
14:48:00 5
that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 720
And you'd have seen the remittance on 15th of June 1989 of 500 pounds to Mr.
8
Kitt. And I think there was a a payment to Mr. Chris Flood on 25th of July
9
1989 of 1,000 also. Is that correct?
14:48:01 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 721
Now, if I could have 2136, please.
12 13
I think the single biggest project after the Nutgrove Shopping Centre, in the
14
late 1980s, was the Tallaght town centre; isn't that right
14:48:01 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 722
And I think at 2136 of your statement, you set out the technical and project
17
management team which was assembled for that scheme; isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 723
And we see there an array of well known architects, mechanical and electrical
14:48:02 20
engineers, interior designers, landscape architects and planning consultants,
21
isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 724
You advised the Tribunal in the last paragraph of that statement that the site
24 14:48:03 25
set up was run very efficiently and had full catering facilities, capable of putting silver service lunches numerous politicians and businessmen from all
26
over the country as well as abroad. As Tallaght was at the forefront in terms
27
of the property development in Ireland at this particular time , from a public
28
relations and employment point of view. Many commercial and political people
29
visited the site, some of them arriving in Phil Monahan's helicopter and were
14:48:03 30
shown around the development as part of the marketing exercise to raise the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
114 14:48:03 1
profile of Tallaght which was seriously in need of such treatment, isn't that
2
correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 725
Do you recollect of any the political people you recollected there who visited
14:48:05 5
6
the site in Mr. Monahan's helicopter? A.
My recollection isn't perfect here now. But I have it in my mind that Padraig
7
Flynn arrived at some stage and that Tom Barry. They're the only two
8
political ones that I can recall. But I think there might have been more.
9
Q. 726
You think Mr. Flynn arrived in a helicopter at some stage?
A.
At some stage, yes.
11
Q. 727
I think the site was opened by Mr. Haughey in October 1990?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 728
But prior to that I think there had been a topping out ceremony at some stage?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 729
And was that done by Mr. Flynn?
16
A.
I just can't recall that.
17
Q. 730
Now, at 2165, under the heading, management team The Square, town centre
14:48:06 10
14:48:06 15
18 19 14:48:07 20
Tallaght, you set out the management structure there; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 731
And I think you're the development director, project Manager. And you have a
21
series of architects, engineers under your control; isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 732
And similarly on his side, Mr. Glennane has Mr. Murray and Mr. Reilly, the
24 14:48:07 25
shopping centre management? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 733
No mention of Mr. Lynn at this time; isn't that right?
27
A.
No mention of Mr. Lynn.
28
Q. 734
Now, if I could have 2194, please.
29 14:48:08 30
It would be -- would it be fair to say that the Monarch got involved in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
115 14:48:08 1
Tallaght after an English company, London and Clyde Property. London
2
Clydeside Limited had been unsuccessful in developing the site; isn't that
3
right
4 14:48:09 5
A.
Yes, that's correct, it was a Scottish company.
Q. 735
Yes. And I think at 2194 you've advised the Tribunal that the site had been
6
up for public tender and had been won by London and Clydeside Limited a
7
Scottish public company in 1986. And you set out the negatives of both the
8
existing planning permission and legal agreement between London and Clydeside
9
and Dublin Corporation, isn't that right?
14:48:10 10
11
A.
Yes.
Q. 736
I'm just going to summarise this, if I may. You, that is to say Monarch,
12
acquired the London and Clydeside interest in the contract. And one of the
13
stumbling blocks was the insistence by Dublin Corporation because the entire
14
site was their's as I understand it, to hold on to the site, or to have some
14:48:11 15
say in the development of the site?
16
A.
Well, it was very complex.
17
Q. 737
Yes?
18
A.
Chairman. If you like I'll give you a summary of it.
19
Q. 738
If you can give a quick summary of it, Mr. Sweeney.
A.
Okay. When the site was acquired it was in an unusual situation that it was
14:48:18 20
21
own owned by a Dublin Corporation, that was situated geographically within
22
Dublin County Council. Which means that both authorities had a hand in it.
23
And there was a type of tug of war between the two. That coupled with 33%
24
shareholding, made it all very difficult. And that really is it. It was
14:48:57 25
26
very complex. Q. 739
27
Yes. Complex from the point of view of acquiring the full interest in the site; isn't that right?
28
A.
Not only that, but complex in terms of trying to reshape the development.
29
Q. 740
Yes?
A.
Or the details into something that was saleable, to third parties.
14:49:13 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
116 14:49:18 1
Q. 741
If I could have 2195 please, you say that the local politicians and councillors
2
in particular were also end pressure from the community to get the project
3
under with a way and provide the many jobs which would hopefully result from a
4
successful development, it was in these circumstances in 1984 85 that Monarch
14:49:36 5
Properties entered into the picture from L & C Limited. Monarch was suddenly
6
in the driving seat and faced with the same serious development difficulties.
7
I was given the responsibility of project managing the eventual development and
8
with a great deal of preparatory work on legal and acquisition end spearheaded
9
by Mr. Smith's solicitor, was needed to get the project into shape to enable
14:49:58 10
the procurement of finance. These needed serious negotiations with the local
11
authority. You say that local politicians and councillors entered into the
12
scene sensing that at last something was going to be done and the possibility
13
to seek political credit for any progress that possibly helped to optimise
14
their chances in future election within the community?
14:50:17 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 742
You go on to say, at around this point Philip Monahan, chairman and managing
17
director of Monarch introduced Liam Lawlor to the Tallaght scene, as someone
18
who could advice with the strategy of getting through the tangle of red tape
19
with Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation. Liam Lawlor was
14:50:48 20
subsequently asked by Phil Monahan to advise Monarch on contacts and protocol
21
to try to get the Tallaght project into shape, to encourage eventual
22
performance.
23
Liam Lawlor, who advised on who in the various departments in Dublin County
24
Council and Dublin Corporation and indeed Dail Eireann, who could help to sort
14:50:59 25
There were several meetings between Philip Monahan myself and
out the various problems in Tallaght. I was very impressed with Liam's grasp
26
of the complicated structures that existed in national and local government and
27
his advice was very helpful.
28 29 14:51:09 30
And you there then set out a series of examples of negotiations that were conducted by yourself Mr. Monaghan and Mr. Glennane; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
117 14:51:14 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 743
You had several meetings with Mr. Lawlor, as identified there, isn't that
3 4 14:51:23 5
right? A.
Yes.
Q. 744
And Mr. Lawlor was introduced to you and to the Monarch Group by Mr. Phil
6
Monahan; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 745
And he was introduced in the context of somebody who could be of assistance to
9 14:51:35 10
the Monarch Group; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 746
In their development of the shopping centre in Tallaght?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 747
Tallaght I think was one of the three designated towns in the Miles/Wright
14
Report and was identified as the shopping centre in the 1983 plan; isn't that
14:51:49 15
right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 748
And you set out there the assistance being provided to you by Mr. Lawlor; isn't
18 19 14:51:55 20
that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 749
And I think that assistance included being introduced -- first of all, included
21
in him identifying for you people within both the corporation and the County
22
Council who could be of assistance?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 750
Am I right in thinking that you're saying there that he would have identified
14:52:15 25
key personnel that would be of assistance?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 751
Did he ever introduce you to any of that personnel, or set up meetings with you
28 29 14:52:33 30
and the various personnel identified by him? A.
No, there were no introductions, Chairman, just indications of where to go.
Q. 752
You had, I think we have seen earlier, the array of experts available to you in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
118 14:52:42 1
relation to the Monarch site; isn't that right? If I could have 2136.
2 3
You had architects, mechanical and electrical engineers, quantity surveyors,
4
structural engineers, designers, landscape architects, planning consultants,
14:52:57 5
contract management advisors, solicitors and your own in-house professional
6
staff; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 753
And are you saying that but for the assistance of Mr. Lawlor, you would not
9
have been able to identify who within either the Corporation or the Council you
14:53:15 10
should negotiation with in relation to the development of the site?
11
A.
Yes, it short-circuited it dramatically.
12
Q. 754
And I think you also said that he identified people within Dail Eireann who
13 14 14:53:30 15
could be of assistance to you; is that correct? A.
Yes.
Q. 755
Did Mr. Lawlor ever set up any meetings with you with any of the
16
representatives of the Council or the Corporation?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 756
You did I think and when I say you did, Monarch did. It would appear from the
19
diary entries for Mr. Redmond. Have meetings with Mr. Redmond in 1988; isn't
14:53:58 20
that right?
21
A.
Yeah, I did.
22
Q. 757
You did?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 758
And I'm sure you had meetings with other officials within the Council and the
14:54:02 25
Corporation in '88 and '89?
26
A.
Yeah, many of them.
27
Q. 759
Now, at 2196. You say that, I was not aware at any time of any agreement
28
between Phil Monahan and Liam Lawlor, or the fees, if any, he was being paid
29
for his assistance. You say that the negotiations with the local authorities
14:54:21 30
over the next few years were extremely extensive and involved Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
119 14:54:25 1
personnel, their solicitors and hundreds of meetings with the many and varied
2
personnel and departments in both the Corporation and the Council. At the
3
same time Monarch had made a request to the Government to allow Tallaght to
4
avail of a tax allowance which had already been given to other needy areas, or
14:54:42 5
towns around Ireland, isn't that right.
6
A.
7
Q. 760
8 9 14:54:58 10
A.
Well I certainly wasn't aware of that.
Q. 761
Are you saying that he assisted in the every other respect, save for the extension of the tax designation to the site?
A.
13 14 14:55:18 15
Did Mr. Lawlor's assistance to Monarch extend to assistance in lobbying or having the tax designation extended to Tallaght?
11 12
Yes.
I'm not aware if he did assist on that. But the assistance that came to me was of a technical nature.
Q. 762
When you say a technical nature. What do you mean by that Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Um, I'm talking about the roads departments, the sewers, lighting, the various
16
property departments.
17
Q. 763
And --
18
A.
And at that time Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council were all over the
19
place, literally all over the place. You would need a map to explain it. It
14:55:46 20
21
was tortuous, to say the least. Q. 764
And are you saying that of all the many experts available to Monarch, you could
22
not progress matters in relation to Tallaght without the assistance of
23
Mr. Lawlor?
24
A.
14:56:07 25
it. It short-circuited it, which was very, very helpful and I was very
26 27
Certainly it could have been done without his assistance. But it quickened
grateful for it. Q. 765
If we could have 2198, please.
28 29 14:56:21 30
You say having repeated what I've just said in relation to Mr. Lawlor and his assistance in getting the project off the ground, which you say was deeply Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
120 14:56:25 1
imbedded in local authority red tape. You say that Mr. Lawlor advised Monarch
2
on how to interface with two local authorities at the many different levels
3
required to achieve progress in some of the following areas. Acquisition,
4
legal, property, Valuation services for foul and surface water and community
14:56:42 5
relations. You say that I believe Mr. Lawlor's occasional input was very
6
helpful in the ultimate sorting out of some of the problems , at all the various
7
levels. I interfaced mainly on the technical and property aspects with the
8
rest of Monarch's technical team had numerous meetings and consultation with
9
local authority and personnel. While it took long period of negotiations
14:57:01 10
eventually all the problems were solved, to pave the way for the start of
11
construction in 1988. Eventually opening on time and on budget, in October
12
1990
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 766
So would it be fair to say that Mr. Lawlor's involvement in relation to the
14:57:13 15
Tallaght site extended at least from 1988 to 1990?
16
A.
I would say even earlier.
17
Q. 767
Even earlier. Maybe 1986, '87 to 1990.
18
A.
19
Q. 768
So he had an almost constant involvement with the site for at least four years?
A.
Yes, on and off.
Q. 769
Now, one of the major achievements for the site I think was the tax designation
14:57:35 20
21 22
Yes, yes.
status, which was given to the site; isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 770
Now, Mr. Lawlor advised the Tribunal.
14:57:55 25
26
If I could have 7583, please.
27 28
That Monarch Properties with an address care of Phil Monahan in Somerton, was
29
one of the individuals, or entities, that had made contributions to him by way
14:58:12 30
of political payments. And he advised the Tribunal that a sum of 40,000 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
121 14:58:16 1
pounds in his estimation, had been contributed towards his election campaigns
2
and running costs of his constituency.
3
Do you see that?
4 14:58:26 5
A.
I saw that.
Q. 771
Now, when asked or in response to the request as to the name and address of the
6
individuals who actually made the payments, Mr. Lawlor said Mr. Phil
7
Monahan/Edward Sweeney of Monarch Properties. And you have seen that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 772
And you were written to I think on the 22nd of April 2002.
14:58:50 10
If I could have 2085.
11
Your solicitors were written to. And if you look at the third paragraph of
12
that letter, Mr. Sweeney. It says, as your clients may be aware, Mr. Liam
13
Lawlor TD has informed the Tribunal of monies received by him from Monarch
14
Properties limited. He has named your client and Philip Monahan as having
14:59:06 15
been involved in the payments. Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 773
And you were asked the Sole Member considers it necessary to investigate fully
18
any dealings with Mr. Lawlor and it would be necessary to consider similar
19
dealings between such persons and other public representatives. And you were
14:59:22 20
asked for a narrative statement isn't that right? Can I just show you your
21
solicitor's response, presumably written on your instructions. A letter from
22
Messrs. Fries on the 7th of May 2002.
23 24
And do you see the third paragraph of that letter, Mr. Sweeney? And just about
14:59:43 25
half ways down it says we note that you assert that Mr. Liam Lawlor has named
26
our client as someone he would have dealings within connection with the affairs
27
of Monarch Properties Limited. Do you see that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 774
That is in response to a direct advice given to you in the earlier letter. At
15:00:06 30
2085. That in fact he was not advising the Tribunal of just an involvement or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
122 15:00:11 1
a connection with him. He was advising the Tribunal of someone who was --
2 3
from whom he had received money, isn't that right? A.
4
Tribunal wrote to me , saying that Mr. Lawlor had paid money to
15:00:36 5
Mr. Monahan/Mr. Sweeney. And that my solicitors responded by saying well what
6 7
Yeah, I'm getting a bit lost here. Because I do accept that Mr.-- or that the
did he say. And there was no response to that. Q. 775
No. You were -- if you look at the letter on screen Mr. Sweeney, that's a
8
letter of the 22nd of April, 2002. And I'm not going to dwell on this very
9
much. But if you look at the third paragraph of that letter. The letter
15:00:57 10
says, as your client may be aware Mr. Liam Lawlor TD has Monarch Properties
11
Limited, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 776
He has named your client and Philip Monahan as having been involved in the
14 15:01:08 15
payments? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 777
So that's a letter about payments, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 778
Now, if we look at your response. At 2087?
19
A.
If I may say.
Q. 779
Yes?
A.
That my response to that, through William Fries, was what was Mr. Lawlor saying
15:01:16 20
21 22
about payments?
23
Q. 780
Yes.
24
A.
Because there was no response to that. And I still can't see.
Q. 781
Yes.
26
A.
Mr. Lawlor saying anything.
27
Q. 782
Yes.
28
A.
That he gave any payments.
29
Q. 783
Did I not put on screen a moment ago, Mr.--
15:01:29 25
15:01:38 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
123 15:01:38 1
CHAIRMAN: That he received payments. Not gave payments
2
Sorry.
3 4
CHAIRMAN: That he received payments. And Mr. Lawlor had told the Tribunal
15:01:45 5
that he received payments. And he named Mr. Monahan and yourself
6
Yes.
7 8 9
CHAIRMAN: As the provider of those funds. A.
15:01:58 10
Yes, Chairman. But I asked after that time what payments. And I didn't get any response. And I still haven't got a response.
11 12
Q. 784
MR. QUINN: Well we'll deal with the payments now, Mr. Sweeney.
13 14
But before I do just to deal and finish on this matter. Your initial response
15:02:09 15
was a suggestion that you noted, or we noted, your solicitors noted, that the
16
Tribunal had asserted that Mr. Lawlor had named you, that is you, Mr. Sweeney,
17
as someone he would have had dealings with, in connection with the affairs of
18
Monaghan Properties
19 15:02:26 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 785
You said, other than the political contributions made by our client subsequent
21
to his departure from Monarch Properties, of which he has already informed you
22
in full and furnished you with all of the documentation in relation to same.
23
No payments were ever made by our client either personally or on behalf of
24
Monarch, to any politician or elected official, isn't that right? That was
15:02:46 25
your response?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 786
That you never made a payment to a politician or an elected official, other
28
than the payments that you had identified in the earlier statement that we've
29
seen this morning?
15:02:55 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
124 15:02:55 1
Q. 787
And those payments were made after you left Monarch. So effectively what you
2
are suggesting there. is in response to an allegation that you had paid
3
Mr. Lawlor, through your solicitors, you were advising the Tribunal that no
4
payments were ever made by you, personally, or on behalf of Monarch, to any
15:03:12 5
politician?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 788
Or elected officials?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 789
Now, if we could have 7797.
15:03:21 10
11
This is a letter Mr. Sweeney. You'll have seen it in the brief. It's dated
12
the 29th of June 1988. And it's directed to Woodchester Hamilton Leasing.
13
And it would appear to amount to a guarantee of sorts, by the Monarch Group in
14
relation to advances to a company Advanced Proteins Limited, which he we
15:03:42 15
understand to be a Mr. Lawlor related company. Did you know that Mr. Monahan
16
had given that security in 1988?
17
A.
No, I hadn't seen this before the brief.
18
Q. 790
This would have been at a time when Mr. Lawlor was providing the assistance
19 15:03:59 20
21
that you have just referred to in relation to Tallaght; isn't that right? A.
1988?
Q. 791
Yes. And if we look at 7798. We see the actual leasing agreement itself;
22
isn't that right? Now, Mr. Lawlor in his lifetime wrote to Mr. Monahan.
23 24
If we could have 7875. Advising that he had a recollection, of receiving from
15:04:28 25
the company, Sincentering Public Life, in 1977, a sum of 40,000 pounds. Did
26
you know that Mr. Lawlor was alleging in August of 2001 that Monarch had given
27
him political contributions amounting to 40,000 pounds in August -- since he
28
entered public life in June 1977?
29 15:04:53 30
A.
Are we talking about 2001?
Q. 792
Yes. That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
125 15:04:55 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 793
You didn't know that he was make that claim in 2001?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 794
When did you discover that any monies had been paid to Mr. Lawlor?
A.
When I saw the brief.
6
Q. 795
Does that surprise you Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
That any monies had been paid?
8
Q. 796
Yes.
9
A.
A bit, yeah.
Q. 797
Does it surprise you that monies having been paid that you didn't know they
15:05:02 5
15:05:12 10
11
were paid?
12
A.
Well that wouldn't surprise me .
13
Q. 798
Why would that not surprise you?
14
A.
Um, well because I -- I was aware that Liam Lawlor had done a lot of work and
15:05:32 15
put in a lot of time and effort into helping us out in The Square in Tallaght.
16
So it did surprise me that he wasn't remunerated in some way for that.
17
Q. 799
Did you understand at the time that he was likely to have been remunerated?
18
A.
He never came into any of the conversations.
19
Q. 800
Did you ever mention to Mr. Monahan how he was going to -- proposing to look
15:05:55 20
after Mr. Lawlor for all of his assistance?
21
A.
No, never.
22
Q. 801
Was it ever discussed between yourself, Mr. Monahan, or indeed Mr. Glennane the
23 24
financial director of the company? A.
15:06:11 25
26
No, never. The dealings with Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Monahan were all very informal.
Q. 802
If we look at 1249.
27 28
This is a letter from Mr. Monahan's solicitors. Of the 16th of April, 2002.
29 15:06:30 30
If we look at the third paragraph of that. It says with regard to Mr. Lawlor. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
126 15:06:35 1
Our client notes what he says but neither Mr. Philip Monahan, who is now
2
retired, or Paul Monahan the managing director of Monarch Properties Limited,
3
have any recollection that Mr. Liam Lawlor received a sum or any sum as high as
4
40,000 pounds. However our clients have instructed us that they will again
15:06:51 5
trawl through whatever records it may have, or make further queries to try and
6
ascertain if any further payments were made.
7 8 9 15:07:02 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 803
Did anybody contact you in 2001 or 2002 querying what monies, if any, had been
11
paid to Mr. Lawlor?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 804
Who contacted you?
14
A.
Mr. Monahan phoned me .
Q. 805
And what --
A.
At night one night. And he said, did you give 40,000 pounds to Mr. Lawlor?
15:07:16 15
16 17
And I said no.
18
Q. 806
Did you ask him why he was asking you that question?
19
A.
I couldn't figure it at all. I hadn't heard a word from him since 1996 before
15:07:39 20
21
that. Q. 807
22
And was he -- did you think that he was surprised at a suggestion that 40,000 had been paid to Mr. Lawlor?
23
A.
That was the tone.
24
Q. 808
Yes. Well did a discussion develop between you and as to?
A.
It was a short call.
Q. 809
That would imply that whoever paid monies to Mr. Lawlor, it certainly wasn't
15:07:52 25
26 27
Mr. Phil Monahan?
28
A.
Well I -- I don't know if that would imply that or not.
29
Q. 810
Well if he had paid the monies, he presumably would have remembered them; isn't
15:08:13 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
127 15:08:13 1
2
A.
Presumably.
Q. 811
And it came as a surprise to him that Mr. Lawlor was making this claim; isn't
3 4 15:08:27 5
that right? A.
That was the tone of the call.
Q. 812
Who else within the Monarch Group would have authority to pay Mr. Lawlor monies
6
at this time ?
7
A.
I can think of no one other than Mr. Monahan.
8
Q. 813
So you don't believe that any monies were disbursed towards Mr. Lawlor at this
9 15:08:47 10
11
time ? A.
I have no knowledge of that.
Q. 814
But certainly from what you say Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Monahan was amazed to the
12
extent that he rang you to know if you had paid Mr. Lawlor 40,000 pounds at
13
this time; isn't that right?
14 15:09:10 15
A.
I beg your pardon?
Q. 815
Mr. Monahan was -- had taken the unusual step of ringing you in 2001 or 2002,
16
to see if you had made a payment of 40,000 to Mr. Lawlor; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 816
That would have been a difficult phone call for Mr. Monahan to have made,
19
having regard to the nature of the relationship between you at that time; isn't
15:09:31 20
that right?
21
A.
I don't know if it would be difficult for him or not.
22
Q. 817
You had left the company in 1996?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 818
As a result of litigation; isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 819
Had you spoken much to Mr. Monahan between 1996 and the receipt of that phone
15:09:39 25
26 27
call?
28
A.
No, very, very little, if at all.
29
Q. 820
So this phone call would have been a phone call out of the blue from a former
15:09:54 30
colleague, work mate and possibly adversary; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
128 15:10:00 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 821
So if monies were sanctioned for Mr. Lawlor, then would you agree with me, that
3 4 15:10:17 5
it's unlikely that Mr. Philip Monahan sanctioned them? A.
I wouldn't agree with that. I have no idea.
Q. 822
Now, you, as project co-ordinator, for the Tallaght site, would have been
6
responsible for the budget on the site; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 823
And there would be regular budgetary meetings. And you would discuss the
9 15:10:35 10
various contracts for the development of the site; isn't that right? A.
The Square.
11
Q. 824
The Square.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 825
And I'm talking now about that period between 1987 and 1990 when the site was
14 15:10:44 15
coming on line and was -A.
Yes.
16
Q. 826
Being developed; isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 827
And would there have been regular meetings where yourself and possibly
19
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray or Mr. Reilly would get together and discuss the
15:10:55 20
budgets?
21
A.
Yes. And the banks.
22
Q. 828
And the banks?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q. 829
Particularly the banks perhaps?
A.
Yes.
Q. 830
So there was a fairly a tight budgetary control at this time in relation to the
15:10:59 25
26 27
site. And I think you've told us that through your efforts and perhaps that
28
of your staff, you brought the site on board on time and on cost; is that
29
right?
15:11:13 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
129 15:11:13 1
Q. 831
2
And all outgoings in relation to the site would be -- would be checked and kept under control; isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 832
And you would be reasonably familiar with the major project or project
15:11:30 5
contributors to the site, the -- Sisk I think were the contractors?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 833
Did you have, for example, if we could have 1254, please. This is a document,
8
Mr. Sweeney, that's included in the brief. It's headed L & C payments by
9
accounts. Do you see that? It would appear to be up to perhaps the 29th of
15:11:59 10
June 1992. If you look across the top?
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q. 834
You would have seen a document like this in your time during these projects
13 14
isn't that right? A.
Not necessarily. I don't recognise that one.
Q. 835
You don't recognise that document?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 836
I see. Well maybe I'll put up a document that you might recognise. Could I
15:12:10 15
18
have 1255, please. This is an extract from the cash payments book and it
19
refers to cheque payments. Do you recognise that document, Mr. Sweeney?
15:12:27 20
A.
I wouldn't have seen that document.
21
Q. 837
You wouldn't have seen that document?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 838
Well would you have seen a document which would show outgoings of about 58,000
24 15:12:42 25
26
pounds at this time, Mr. Sweeney? A.
No, at this time I was concentrating only on the construction payments.
Q. 839
You've a agreed with me that you would have attended regularly at financial
27
meetings in relation to the budget on the site, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah but that was the budget for the construction.
29
Q. 840
And you would have been dealing with the outgoings; isn't that right?
A.
For construction.
15:13:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
130 15:13:01 1
Q. 841
Yeah?
2
A.
And for the professional team.
3
Q. 842
Yes. And we see on the document on screen. About two-thirds of the way
4
down. Two payments on the 16th of October 1990 to an entity entitled Comex
15:13:13 5
Trading Corporation. Do you see those payments?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 843
They are about two down from Monarch Properties Services payroll account. Do
8 9 15:13:22 10
11
you see that? A.
Yes.
Q. 844
Can I ask you, what services did Comex Trading Corporation provide on the site?
A.
Yeah. I've no idea now because I -- I haven't seen this before. Definitely
12 13
it wasn't construction, because I would have remembered it. Q. 845
14
This document Mr. Sweeney, was included in the circulated book of documents. Do you understand? And it's a payment, two substantial payments in October
15:13:58 15
1990 to an entity, Comex Trading Corporation. Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 846
Do you see the very last entry. Modern display artists 25,860 pounds? Do you
18 19 15:14:08 20
see that, for the 18th of October? A.
25,000?
Q. 847
Yes. Each of those Comex payments on that document, Mr. Sweeney, represent
21
the highest payments on that page from the 15th of October to the 18th of
22
October 1990?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 848
Which would have been about a week off the opening; isn't that right? Can you
15:14:28 25
tell the Tribunal what contribution Comex Trading Corporation made to the
26
development of the site in Tallaght?
27
A.
I've no idea.
28
Q. 849
Did you ever retain Comex Trading Corporation?
29
A.
No, never.
Q. 850
Did you know that Comex Limited, was an entity Mr. Lawlor has advised the
15:14:44 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
131 15:14:50 1
Tribunal was used by him for the purpose of raising invoices?
2
A.
Not until I saw it coming up in the Tribunal.
3
Q. 851
If we could have 1269, please.
4 15:15:00 5
This is a letter to the Tribunal, on the 1st of May, 2002. From Mr. Lawlor's
6
then solicitors, Messrs. Coins. Do you see that? And it says we are advised
7
by Mr. Lawlor that the following is a list of names used by him for the
8
purposes of creating invoices. And the second entity identified there is
9
Comex Limited. Do you see that? And then in the second part of that that
15:15:25 10
letter it says Mr. Lawlor advises that the following entities received or may
11
have received invoices under the above titles. And item C, Monarch
12
Properties.
Do you see that?
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 852
Would you agree with me, that based on that letter, and having regard to what
15:15:39 15
you've had to say about your lack of knowledge of this company, that it is
16
almost certain that the two payments to Comex Trading Corporation were payments
17
made to Mr. Lawlor?
18
A.
Well that is the way it seems to pan out, yes.
19
Q. 853
In fact, one of those payments was lodged to an account of Economics Reports
15:15:58 20
Limited.
21 22
If I could have 1256, please.
23 24
There's a lodgement on the 26th of October 1990 of 28,300 to the current
15:16:08 25
account number 63551061, of Economic Reports Limited.
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 854
Does it surprise you that Monarch paid Mr. Lawlor 56, 300 pounds in October
28 29 15:16:36 30
1990, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Well it seems a lot.
Q. 855
Why do you think Monarch paid Mr. Lawlor 56, 300 pounds in October 1990? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
132 15:16:42 1
A.
2 3
No, the only inference I can come to is that it's a payment for the services that he provided over a number of years.
Q. 856
4
If we could have 1267. This is a document complied on the 5th of February 1992. And it's an L & C property year end general ledger report, fiscal year
15:17:06 5
'91. Do you see that? Would you be familiar with these documents,
6
Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
I wouldn't. But I've definitely seen them in the brief.
8
Q. 857
Yeah but other than seeing them in the brief?
9
A.
I would find it very difficult to read them.
Q. 858
I see. In your time in Tallaght and in your involvement with L & C Properties
15:17:19 10
11
would you have seen this type of documentation?
12
A.
No, they wouldn't have come across my desk.
13
Q. 859
And what sort of documentation from a financial point of view in relation to
14
the outgoings of L & C Properties would have come across your desk,
15:17:36 15
16
Mr. Sweeney? A.
Well when we were meeting in relations to budgets. The budgets would be split
17
into various sections. One of which was construction. Of which I was
18
responsible. The other one would be marketing. The other one would be
19
legal. And possibly legal and accountancy.
15:17:55 20
21
Q. 860
And strategic planning, which one would that fall into Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Sorry. I have to say, in my own technical end, I knew every single thing that
22
was happening. But when it came to the other ends, I always had a difficulty
23
with there being open ended agreements, particularly in accountancy and in
24
legal.
15:18:22 25
Q. 861
Yes. Accountancy and legal --
26
A.
I could never get to grips with how that can be controlled so ....
27
Q. 862
Yes. But I take it that you were involved in, as you've described it, in the
28 29 15:18:37 30
development and in the construction; isn't that right? A.
In the construction.
Q. 863
But you would also have been involved in the planning; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
133 15:18:40 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 864
And strategic planning is something that would fall under your charge, isn't
3 4 15:18:57 5
that right? A.
No, I would say town and country planning.
Q. 865
Well the designation given to these payments, see you can see on screen. If
6
we look at the second and third entry there, Mr. Sweeney. Is strategic
7
planning. Do you see that?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 866
And which category or whose responsibility was strategic planning in 1990 in
15:19:05 10
Tallaght?
11
A.
There was no such thing as strategic, responsibility for strategic planning.
12
Q. 867
Well of the various sub-headings that you've given us, legal and accounting and
13
planning and development. Would you agree with me that strategic plan is more
14
likely to fall under development than it is under either legal or accountancy?
15:19:28 15
16
A.
No, I don't agree with that.
Q. 868
Well what strategic plan was there in operation in relation to the accountancy
17
end of L & C Limited in 1990, Mr. Sweeney?
18
A.
I've no idea, if any.
19
Q. 869
Would you, for example, be concerned with the professional consultancy fees
15:19:52 20
21
generally? A.
Most certainly when they were related to construction. But my bone of
22
contention always with the Board was that I never found the same constraint
23
being on the other ends of the development.
24
Q. 870
15:20:15 25
Is it credible, Mr. Sweeney, that there would be 56,300 pounds of the development budget paid out on foot of a strategic plan that wouldn't have been
26
brought to your attention or that wouldn't come to your attention?
27
A.
Yes, it certainly could have been done without coming to my attention.
28
Q. 871
How could that possibly have happened, Mr. Sweeney?
29
A.
That could have happened because it didn't come within the ambit of the
15:20:39 30
development end to which I was responsible. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
134 15:20:43 1
Q. 872
2
But you were responsible for the planning, you were responsible for the construction; isn't that right?
3
A.
Exactly.
4
Q. 873
So a strategic plan?
A.
Strategic planning, if I may say, is nothing to do with town and country
15:20:52 5
6
planning. Town and country planning is to do with the planning or buildings on
7
site.
8 9
CHAIRMAN: Yes. You understand, Mr. Sweeney, what the term strategy plan or
15:21:07 10
11
strategic planning means in the development world. Does it mean anything? A.
I don't think it does.
Q. 874
MR. QUINN: Who within Monarch would have responsibility for checking that
12 13 14 15:21:22 15
16
outgoing, those outings, Mr. Sweeney? A.
17
As I said before, if an invoice went to accounts, it would be looked at by accounts.
18
Q. 875
Well what does that mean, Mr. Sweeney?
19
A.
Well what I'm trying to say is that the accountancy side of the business would
15:21:50 20
21
have looked at that. Q. 876
Well assuming I'm a junior clerk in the accounts department of Monarch,
22
Mr. Sweeney. And I receive on my desk an invoice for a strategy plan for a
23
company, Comex, for 28,300 pounds on the 21st of March 1990. Do I
24
automatically pay it?
15:22:14 25
A.
Well you wouldn't bring it to my attention. Because I was out in Tallaght.
26
Q. 877
Well -- ?
27
A.
Trying to get the --
28
Q. 878
Had you no phones in Tallaght?
29
A.
Yes, there were phones in Tallaght.
Q. 879
And if I didn't know what services were provided by Comex Corporation, surely
15:22:26 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
135 15:22:31 1
in the first instance I would have to find out what services had been provided
2
by this company; isn't that right?
3
A.
You would, if you were.
4
Q. 880
Yes?
A.
A junior in the accounts department.
Q. 881
And I'd have to ring somebody and say well what services did this company
15:22:40 5
6 7
provide and --
8
A.
Well you wouldn't ask me, with all due respect.
9
Q. 882
And who would I ask?
A.
You would ask the accounts department.
11
Q. 883
But I'm in accounts, Mr. Sweeney.
12
A.
You're a junior in accounts. You would ask a senior person within accounts.
13
Q. 884
And who is the most senior person within accounts?
14
A.
Mr. Glennane would be.
Q. 885
So therefore Mr. Glennane, in the first instance, would have to know that Comex
15:22:51 10
15:23:04 15
16
Corporation had provided some services for the L & C Properties; isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
I'm not saying it did. But I would presume he would.
19
Q. 886
As a matter of probability, he should have known; isn't that right? And if he
15:23:24 20
didn't know somebody else would have to provide the information?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 887
Now, Mr. Glennane has told the Tribunal he knows nothing of these payments.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 888
Does that surprise you?
A.
Yes.
Q. 889
In any event, you're telling the Tribunal you did not know that these payments
15:23:34 25
26 27
had been made at this time; isn't that right? But it doesn't surprise you that
28
some payments would have been made, having regard to the level of input of
29
Mr. Lawlor at the time. Is that correct?
15:23:53 30
A.
That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
136 15:23:53 1
Q. 890
Now, I think you have advised the Tribunal.
2 3
If I could have 4536.
4 15:24:03 5
That in September I think 1993. Mr. Lawlor got involved with the Monarch
6
interest in relation to a project in Prague; is that correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 891
And we see there a memo to you from Mr. Philip Monahan. That is to say you,
9
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray; isn't that right? Enclosing information received
15:24:30 10
from Ambrose Kelly, via Liam Lawlor, for your information. Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 892
And was that a request that Monarch might get involved in Prague?
13
A.
I can't surmise from that what information he's providing.
14
Q. 893
Yes?
A.
But the answer is around about that time we did get involved in Prague.
16
Q. 894
And you got involved in Prague at Mr. Lawlor's invitation; is that right?
17
A.
I personally had been to Prague.
18
Q. 895
Sorry?
19
A.
I personally had been to Prague.
Q. 896
Had you been to Prague by September '93?
A.
Yes, I'd been there several times. And I'd looked at the property scene
15:24:49 15
15:25:10 20
21 22
myself. And I'd suggested it at some stage to the Board as being a
23
possibility, along with, if I may say, other areas in the world. So Prague
24
when it did come up, it wasn't a surprise to me. And I was very enthused by
15:25:38 25
26
it. Q. 897
27
And who else was involved in that consortium other than Mr. Lawlor, Mr. Kelly and the Monarch Group? Was --
28
A.
Um, we're talking about the space of a good few months now, so ....
29
Q. 898
Yes?
A.
You definitely had Jack Whelan. And you had Frank Dunlop. Noel Murray.
15:25:54 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
137 15:26:02 1
Phil Monahan. Connor McElligott, who worked for, he was an architect who
2 3
worked for Liam Lawlor. Q. 899
4 15:26:21 5
6
He worked for Mr. Lawlor in Prague or did he work for Mr. Lawlor here, can you remember?
A.
In Prague.
Q. 900
Right. And I think the arrangement was that a sum of 6,000 a month would be
7
paid by Monarch; isn't that right? As a contribution. And at least one
8
payment was made.
9 15:26:31 10
If we could have 5754, please.
11 12
Mr. Murray forwards 6,000, being the November contribution
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 901
And we see that cheque at 4755?
A.
Yes.
Q. 902
How long did the Monarch Group remain committed to the Ambrose Kelly
15:26:43 15
16 17 18
partnership and the Prague venture, Mr. Sweeney? A.
19
It wasn't long. I recall being out there in '93. I think it was November '93. And with a bunch of them. And they all went off and looked at millions
15:27:14 20
of jobs. Whereas, I concentrated on the one job in -- called the Alpha
21
Building, which is the one that enthused me. And I wanted really to get
22
involved in that, because I saw great possibilities. When I got back I
23
instructed the in-house development team to prepare, in conjunction with
24
Ambrose Kelly and a Swedish company, an outline scheme for which we could do
15:27:47 25
feasibility studies and stackups. The result of that still looked good. And
26
on the opposite end, the legal end was coming along nicely. And for some
27
reason, I think in early '94, March maybe '94, the whole thing fizzled out.
28
Much to my disappointment.
29
Q. 903
Yes.
15:28:10 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
138 15:28:10 1
If we could have 5402, please.
2 3
Mr. Monahan was written to by Rotary who I think were also involved in the
4
project, referring to a meeting of the 20th, where Mr. Monahan had advised that
15:28:22 5
he no longer wished to be an investor in the Alfa project. Isn't that right?
6
A.
That's correct.
7
Q. 904
That slightly post dates?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 905
The period referred to by you. Do you recall any payment to Ms. Hazel Lawlor
15:28:38 10
in November 1993 by the Monarch Group?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 906
If we could have, please, 4880.
13 14
You see in the bottom left hand corner a reference to Hazel Lawlor, 3,000
15:29:01 15
pounds.
Do you see that?
16
A.
No, I don't.
17
Q. 907
And if we could have 1201, please. And again, the bottom. Third from the
18
end, there appears to be a Hazel Lawlor payment on the 30th of April '94 of
19
3,000 pounds. Do you see that?
15:29:19 20
21
A.
Is that the same payment?
Q. 908
The earlier payment is November '93. This payment appears to be dated April
22
'94 but may in fact have been reversed out in later in April '94.
23
A.
No, I have no knowledge of those.
24
Q. 909
Yes. If we could have 1202.
15:29:43 25
26
This shows a lodgement on the 23rd of November '93 of 3,000 pounds to a bank
27
account. Do you see that? Do you have any knowledge of any such payment to
28
Mr. or Mrs. Lawlor?
29 15:30:01 30
A.
Not at all.
Q. 910
Now, there were further meetings I think throughout late '93 with Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
139 15:30:15 1
and I will in time be coming to deal with the payments to Mr. Dunlop. And
2
you've heard Mr. Dunlop's evidence this morning. I'm not just going to deal
3
with that just now. But on the 28th of July 1994.
4 15:30:19 5
If we could have 1641.
6 7
There appears to be a 199 -- 28th of July 1994 payment to a Lawlor A and L.
8 9
And again if we could have 5279, please.
15:30:35 10
11
Do you see that? A 3,000 pounds payment. That appears to have been a payment
12
to Mr. Lawlor. Do you know anything about that?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 911
On the 5th of January 1995.
15:30:47 15
16
If I could have 5522, please.
17 18
There's a payment of 2,500 to Mr. Liam Lawlor. Do you see that? And if I
19
could get the cheque up, please. 5523.
15:31:07 20
Do you see the cheque made payable to L Lawlor? You see that, do you?
21
A.
I see that.
22
Q. 912
Did you have anything to do with that payment?
23
A.
No, nothing at all.
24
Q. 913
You see Mr. Glennane's signature I think on the cheque. And then I think
15:31:27 25
there's another signature on the cheque. Whose is the other signature?
26
A.
I can recognise Mr. Glennane's but I'm not sure about the other one.
27
Q. 914
And that cheque seems to have been negotiated at P Murphy, Lounge Bar,
28 29 15:31:45 30
Inchicore but you know nothing about the cheque? A.
I heard all about this in the Tribunal.
Q. 915
At 6050. There's a further cheque of 1,000 pounds. Do you know anything Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
140 15:31:51 1
about that cheque to Mr. Liam Lawlor, golf classic?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 916
Did you ever attend any of Mr. Lawlor's fundraising golf classics?
4
A.
No, none at all.
Q. 917
Now, there are a series of entries in Monarch Properties Services accounts.
15:32:02 5
6
If I could have 4763. In relation to Prauge. You see Prague strategic
7
studies. Do you know anything about those payments, Mr. Sweeney?
8
A.
Prague strategic studies. 1293. No, they don't mean anything to me .
9
Q. 918
Who would be the best person within the Monarch Group to advise the Tribunal in
15:32:44 10
11
relation to those entries? A.
12 13
that, you know. Q. 919
14 15:33:02 15
A.
Well I suppose anyone Senior in the accountancy department would be able to understand those.
Q. 920
18 19
Who was the expert within the Monarch Group in relation to those sheets and suppliers?
16 17
In fact, I'm quite confused about the particular sheets, suppliers and all
Certainly it's not within the realm of my expertise.
Yes. Now, in 1980 -- in June of 1989, Mr. Sweeney, the Cherrywood lands were acquired; isn't is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 921
Did you know that Mr. Monahan was interested in acquiring those lands?
21
A.
No, it came as a surprise to us when it eventually was ...
22
Q. 922
It surprised you that he had acquired them, or was interested?
23
A.
Yes, it was bought by tender.
24
Q. 923
Yes?
A.
So we kind of knew.
26
Q. 924
You knew that they were for sale; is that right?
27
A.
Um.
28
Q. 925
You knew that they were for sale by tender?
29
A.
Certainly.
Q. 926
Did you discuss it, did Mr. Monahan discuss it with you the prospect of the
15:33:27 20
15:33:41 25
15:33:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
141 15:33:56 1
Monarch Group buying these lands?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 927
Does that surprise you?
4
A.
No, because this had happened before.
Q. 928
Who would Mr. Monahan have discussed the purchase of these lands with, within
15:34:01 5
6
the company?
7
A.
Within the company I -- maybe nobody within the company.
8
Q. 929
Who outside of the company might he -- might he have discussed the lands, the
9 15:34:17 10
acquisition with? A.
11
Well in this case, I know from reading the files that he was dealing with a gentleman called McCarthy.
12
Q. 930
Who was Mr. McCarthy?
13
A.
He was a -- I didn't hear of him until then. He was also a developer and it
14 15:34:42 15
looked as if he was also interested in the lands in a joint venture capacity. Q. 931
16 17
Mr. Monahan in Somerton? A.
18 19
Was he one of the people like Mr. Whelan and Mr. Lynn who would meet up with
Well he certainly would have been in Somerton. But he wouldn't have been an agent, he was more like a developer.
Q. 932
15:35:08 20
Yes. Now, I think just at the outset, in relation to the Cherrywood lands, you take credit for convincing the Council to rezone the lands; isn't that
21
right?
22
A.
Well, no.
23
Q. 933
You don't?
24
A.
No, I don't.
Q. 934
I'm -- could I have 8063. I'm surprised that you say that, Mr. Sweeney.
15:35:18 25
26
Because again I'm going to quote to you extracts from your affidavit to the
27
High Court.
28 29 15:35:38 30
You say, by way of background. I say that Cherrywood Limited is involved in a commercial and residential property development at Cherrywood County Dublin. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
142 15:35:51 1
The development itself only became possible after "I" succeed in the convincing
2
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council to rezone the property in question for
3
industrial commercial and residential purposes. Residential uses
4
A.
15:36:01 5
Certainly no one can take personal control or credit for that. But I did. And what I meant by that was that I did put forward very strongly the Science
6
and Technology Park ethos which eventually resulted in the zoning of the
7
non-residential bit.
8
Q. 935
9
And we'll get to that, Mr. Sweeney. But what I had put to you and what you denied and I'm not sure whether you still deny it. That you take
15:36:21 10
responsibility for having succeeded in convincing Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County
11
Council to rezone the property in question for industrial commercial and
12
residential use.
13
A.
14
Yeah, I don't think that is exactly what I meant. What I meant was that I was responsible for the science and technology end. And that's not to say that I
15:36:46 15
wasn't very instrumental in the residential end also. Because we did present
16
a very, very good case. But I couldn't take personal control or personal
17
credit for it.
18
Q. 936
19 15:37:11 20
Mr. Sweeney, this development and the rezoning of these lands reflected a significant added a value to the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
A.
May I say, Mr. Chairman. When we're talking about rezoning. I've noticed
21
this point coming up before. In terms of increased density, I was very much a
22
team effort. But in terms of the rezoning of the agricultural to industrial,
23
I did feel that I had an enormous input into that. Excuse me .
24
Q. 937
15:37:39 25
Thank you, Mr. Sweeney. The question I put to you, Mr. Sweeney, was that the rezoning and the development of these lands represented a significant added
26
value to the Monarch Group; isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 938
Were you happy with the initial purchase or acquisition of the lands?
29
A.
Um, I wouldn't say happiness would come into it.
Q. 939
Well were you critical of the decision to buy the lands?
15:38:01 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
143 15:38:05 1
A.
Um, I looked at it as a very difficult challenge.
2
Q. 940
For example, the price paid for the lands, I understand was nine/10 million?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 941
In 1989?
A.
Yes, roughly 50,000 pounds an acre.
6
Q. 942
I think agricultural land was five or six thousand an acre at this time ?
7
A.
This wasn't agricultural land.
8
Q. 943
Slightly better than agricultural land from a zoning point of view, isn't that
15:38:16 5
9 15:38:30 10
right? A.
No, I think the price didn't deter me , or didn't put me off.
11
Q. 944
Was the price unjustifiably high at the time ?
12
A.
No, I don't believe so. It was a high price but someone's always going to pay
13 14 15:38:47 15
16
a high price. Q. 945
You wouldn't say it was an unjustifiably high price?
A.
No, because it was zoned. And it had a great potential.
Q. 946
If I could have 8081.
17 18
This again is an extract from an affidavit sworn by you. And it's in the
19
brief Mr. Sweeney.
15:38:59 20
21
Paragraph 27. By way of background, I say that the price of 10 million
22
pounds, paid for the Cherrywood lands which was negotiated by Mr. Monahan was
23
at the time an unjustifiably high price. And I would be the first to agree
24
that this undoubtedly placed financial constraints upon the group.
15:39:18 25
26 27
I put to you, Mr. Sweeney, your very own sworn statement. A.
28 29 15:39:36 30
Well possibly at the time it could have been that. But certainly in looking back it wasn't. It's now two million an acre.
Q. 947
And you went on to say, that the purchase of the lands at such a high price with no appreciable zoning left me with an enormous task to accomplish. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
144 15:39:42 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 948
It didn't leave the company, it left you Mr. Sweeney with the task?
3
A.
Sorry for being so objective.
4
Q. 949
Over the next six years however together with the development team I succeeded
15:39:50 5
in having the zoning for the property changed, so as to significantly enhance
6
the value of the group; isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 950
If we revert to 8063, please.
9 15:40:03 10
I think you say in that affidavit that, the development was without doubt the
11
single most valuable and significant asset within the Monarch Group. Upon
12
which you worked diligently for over six years to become the main Monarch
13
development, with a net value of approximately 12 million. If retained the
14
development should yield to the Monarch Group a fee income over the next seven
15:40:30 15
years of approximately five million, in respect of the group's total project
16
management, marketing and letting input, excluding a provision for property
17
management income , estimated at 130, 000 pounds per annum, together with a
18
potential development profit for the Monarch Group of 20 million,
19
approximately. They are the type of figures we're talking about isn't that
15:40:54 20
21 22
right? A.
Yes. Now, when the lands were --
23 24
MR. SHIPSEY: Chairman, I'm just wondering in relation to this.
15:40:58 25
26
I'm not critical of Mr. Quinn at all. He is quoting from this affidavit which
27
is sworn in 1996. I just don't know if it's come out yet. That that's when
28
this affidavit was actually sworn.
29 15:41:10 30
CHAIRMAN: We're aware that this is a '96 document. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
145 15:41:14 1
2
Q. 951
MR. QUINN: If I could have 2128, please.
3 4
You set out in your statement the works that the Monarch Group would have been
15:41:32 5
involved in in 1989, isn't that right? And we see there the submission for the
6
development of the Tallaght Hospital, completion of the west link industrial
7
estate, Navan shopping centre, phase two, reverse take over of Europe Green,
8
development of Phoenix Park Race Course, Blackrock Business Park, Somerton,
9
Castleknock House refurbishment, purchase of Cherrywood, Cabinteely, Tallaght
15:41:54 10
civic offices and the Tallaght swimming pool/leisure centre. They are all of
11
the activities that the group were involved in in 199; isn't that right? Did
12
you know that when the lands were acquired that they had the zoning
13
difficulties that you had to overcome over the succeeding years?
14 15:42:21 15
A.
When the lands were acquired? No, I didn't know the full extent of them.
Q. 952
Did you know, for example, that Mr. Monahan had visited the Minister not long
16
after the acquisition of the lands, on the 24th of May '89. At 7661.
17 18 19 15:42:42 20
It's a diary entry for Mr. Flynn for 5 p.m. meeting on the 24th. A.
No, I didn't know at the time.
Q. 953
Mr. Monahan never discussed with you the fact that he was going to meet the
21
Minister at this time ?
22
A.
No, not that I recall.
23
Q. 954
Did Mr. Monahan ever discuss with you his meetings with Ministers or
24 15:42:57 25
politicians? A.
26
Um, I suppose yes, but I don't recall too many of them. In fact, I don't recall any of them hardly.
27
Q. 955
You don't recall any of the discussions?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 956
But such discussions would have taken place, is that fair to say?
A.
I can't recall. At the moment I can't recall a single instance of him talking
15:43:19 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
146 15:43:23 1
to me about visiting a politician.
2
Q. 957
Either proposing to visit a politician or having visited a politician?
3
A.
Yeah.
4
Q. 958
And it's not just any politician. He's visiting the Minister for the
15:43:35 5
Environment; isn't that right?
6
A.
Yeah.
7
Q. 959
Do you know why Mr. Monahan visited the Minister for the Environment, on the
8 9
24th of May 1989? A.
No.
Q. 960
You can't?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 961
Could it have been in the context of the Cherrywood lands which he had just
15:43:50 10
13 14 15:44:04 15
acquired? A.
It could have been.
Q. 962
Now, I think that you asked or Mr. Monahan in the first instance asked Mr.
16
McCabe. Mr. McCabe is the planner that used by the Monarch Group, isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 963
And we see that request. Sorry, the advices given by Mr. McCabe on 16th of
15:44:21 20
May '89. At 2846.
21 22
And I think Mr. McCabe was to subsequently write to you on the 7th of June '89.
23
At 2852. In relation to the development possibility. And at that stage the
24
Development Plan was under review by the Council, isn't that right?
15:44:51 25
A.
In 1989?
26
Q. 964
In 1989.
27
A.
Yeah.
28
Q. 965
He's writing to Mr. Monahan and he's writing to you, presumably.
29
A.
Yeah.
Q. 966
Yeah. You had a meeting with him on the 1st of June. You don't recall that?
15:45:00 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
147 15:45:04 1
2
A.
Sorry, I really don't know.
Q. 967
Yes. Well this letter of the 7th of June, it's on screen, refers to a meeting
3
on the 1st of June. And it wouldn't be unusual presumably that you would meet
4
with the planner, consultant planner, being employed by you at that time , to
15:45:20 5
discuss the --
6
A.
It's like 16 years ago.
7
Q. 968
I appreciate that, Mr. Sweeney. But it wouldn't be unusual that as having
8 9 15:45:29 10
regard to the position within the company? A.
No.
Q. 969
And having regard to the fact that your company and with regard to the fact
11
that your company had just spent 10 million on a site acquisition that you
12
would speak with a planner in relation to its potential?
13
A.
Well what I see there is what would normally happen.
14
Q. 970
Yes.
A.
A planning consultant would have been brought in.
16
Q. 971
Yes.
17
A.
Albeit after.
18
Q. 972
Yes.
19
A.
The purchase.
Q. 973
Yes.
21
A.
Possibly before the purchase.
22
Q. 974
Yes.
23
A.
But after the purchase. And he would have given his overview when work was,
15:45:42 15
15:45:50 20
24 15:46:02 25
the potential of the site that. Would then have passed over to me . Q. 975
Yes.
26
A.
And then I would have then passed it over to others.
27
Q. 976
Yes. You see, Mr. McCabe, when he gave evidence, has given evidence of all of
28 29 15:46:18 30
these advices? A.
Yes.
Q. 977
But he felt it unusual. And I think it's -- I suspect that you're saying that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
148 15:46:18 1
it's also unusual that you would go to Mr. McCabe after you had bought the
2
lands?
3
A.
Most certainly.
4
Q. 978
Yes. Now, Mr. McCabe's advice at the time then that it would be better that
15:46:28 5
the zoning could be secured in the initial draft plan. Wasn't that his
6
immediate advice to you? That if it came on the draft plan, that was the best
7
way to proceed?
8
A.
9
Well, the one thing I would say there, Mr. Chairman isn't that all of this terminology about draft plans and motions and this and that, weren't familiar
15:46:51 10
to me at the time. I was more into the construction end of it. I had to
11
become familiar, and I did become familiar. But at that time I wasn't clear
12
at all about what a draft plan was even.
13
Q. 979
This is in 1989?
14
A.
In 1989.
Q. 980
So would it be fair to say that you had no real familiarity with the zoning
15:47:10 15
16
process?
17
A.
No, I'm a quantity surveyor. Not a planning surveyor.
18
Q. 981
Of course Mr. Lynn, because of his employment with the local authority, he
19 15:47:26 20
21
would have quite extensive knowledge of the process? A.
Yes, this is true.
Q. 982
And Mr.-- we see as I say, that on the 7th of June, '89. You got advices in
22
relation to the potential. And I think there were a series of meetings and at
23
which the development of the site were considered; isn't that right? And if we
24
look at 2992. This is a meeting on the 18th of August '89. And it's
15:47:54 25
attended by Fergal McCabe, Dr. Brian Meehan, who I think was another planner.
26
Your associates I think were a firm of well represented engineers. And then
27
yourself and Mr. Cassidy and Mr. Lynn also attended; isn't that right?
28
A.
Yeah.
29
Q. 983
Would you agree with me, Mr. Sweeney, that from here on this in, that is to say
15:48:12 30
from June 1989 forward. That the objective from Monarch's point of view is to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
149 15:48:18 1
improve the development potential of these lands by improving their zoning
2
and/or getting planning on the lands; isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 984
And in order to do that, from time to time strategies have to be devised as to
15:48:34 5
6
how best to achieve those objectives; isn't that right? A.
7
Well, again, to use the word strategy. There's nothing wrong with the word strategy.
8
Q. 985
I'm not suggesting there is, Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
Yes, certainly, strategy.
Q. 986
In a commercial sense you have an objective. You device a strategy to achieve
15:48:51 10
11
that objective isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes. You try to plan your way out of it.
13
Q. 987
Yes. And the strategy is devised by you at this meeting in August '89. And
14
we see you there in the centre of the memo of that meeting was to move the
15:49:11 15
roadway, increase the density of housing, provide for a retail shopping centre
16
and provide for a business park. They were the objectives and the strategy
17
was to achieve those objectives; isn't that right?
18
A.
Those are the objectives that are laid down.
19
Q. 988
And again, nothing at all wrong with that. It was a --
A.
No.
Q. 989
And again, I think that on the 11th of August '89 Mr. McCabe wrote again to
15:49:33 20
21 22
you. If we look at 2894. And I don't propose to go in in any detail to his
23
advises to you but he was more or less advising you on how a case might be made
24
to achieve some of those objectives; isn't that right?
15:49:56 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 990
And amongst the strategies that you would have to devise, or one of the
27
strategies, I suggest to you, apart from retaining experts, both in-house and
28
outhouse, so to speak, would be to develop some sort of rapore with the
29
planners and find out how they were, what their views were on the site and its
15:50:18 30
development; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
150 15:50:19 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 991
And one obvious way of doing that would be to set up a meeting with the
3 4 15:50:25 5
planners; isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 992
And such a meeting did take place I think on the 29th of August 1989. If I
6
could have 2902.
7 8
Did Mr. McCabe or Mr. Lynn advise you that they had difficulty setting up a
9
meeting with the planners in August 1989?
15:50:42 10
A.
11 12
setting up meeting with planners. Q. 993
13 14 15:51:07 15
Um, I can't imagine that they did. Because there's never been any difficulty
Yes. You see, when you were dealing with Tallaght and Mr. Lawlor's involvement. I got the impression, and maybe wrongly, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Yes.
Q. 994
That Mr. Lawlor was necessary in order to advise you who to meet and where you
16
should go, despite the fact that you had all of these experts; isn't that
17
right?
18
A.
Yes, but not on the planning end.
19
Q. 995
Not on the planning end?
A.
No, no.
21
Q. 996
What about the Roads Department?
22
A.
Yes, certainly, the roads, the sewers.
23
Q. 997
One of the difficulties with this site was a roads difficulty; isn't that
15:51:11 20
24 15:51:22 25
right? A.
Yes, there were three main difficulties. One was roads. One was --
26
Q. 998
Sewage?
27
A.
One was access and one was sewage.
28
Q. 999
And one was zoning?
29
A.
Well the zoning was there.
Q. 1000
Yes. But not for a --
15:51:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
151 15:51:35 1
A.
Just to clarify, Mr. Chairman. The zoning was there. And the zoning had an
2
arbitrary line down it, which meant that the zoning -- you see, I find it hard
3
to explain this. But if you imagine a field with a line down it and one side
4
of it is housing and the other side of it is agriculture. It's a pretty well
15:52:00 5
established fact and principle, that if you go for planning with a business on
6
the other side of the line. Then the planners are quite open to that, as
7
would be An Bord Pleanala. Because it's kind of an overlap. And there's no
8
logic to making one half of a field agriculture and the other half housing.
9
So I was quite comfortable with that from a planning point of view.
15:52:32 10
Q. 1001
At 2177, you set out your dealings with local authorities concerning re zoning,
11
planning permission, acquisitions, disposal of lands. Again, from your
12
statement. I think throughout that page, 2177 and for at least half the
13
following page, at 2178. You set out various people and personnel that you
14
would have had contact with and within outside local authorities, isn't that
15:52:55 15
right? In relation to rezonings?
16
A.
No, in relation to planning.
17
Q. 1002
Planning. And in relation to the Cherrywood rezoning. If I could have 2181
18
and in fairness to you, Mr. Sweeney. I better put to you what you -- just to
19
develop what you were telling the Tribunal. You set it out there.
15:53:17 20
21
I think that the -- your view was -- you say that when Monarch bought the lands
22
in 1989 by tender, the majority of the zoning was for one house per acre on
23
septic tanks. On the face of this seemed to be a ludicrous and elitist zoning
24
density, but the reality was very different. And it was generally known and
15:53:36 25
crystal clear from advice from planning consultants and indeed the planners
26
themselves the that the professional planners did not intend such a
27
zoning/planning to be performed or executed in practice, rather the
28
planners/officials fully intended and in fact had themselves recommended normal
29
density since the 1983 Development Plan and indeed in previous history back to
15:53:55 30
1972, the one house per acre was in fact an artificial density Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
152 15:53:59 1
2
A.
Yes.
Q. 1003
You go on to say that the real reason for the zoning of one house per acre on
3
septic tank was to avoid the strong possibility of a compensation claim for
4
developers further to refusal permission non-availability of services, such as
15:54:11 5
sewers water etc...In the case of Cherrywood the foul sewer has not yet been
6
completed and the lack of the sewer could have been used by a developer to
7
claim substantial compensation from the local authority as has been the case in
8
several other circumstances in the past.
9 15:54:26 10
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 1004
And you go on to say that, in your view, to suggest that the increase of
13
existing density on septic tanks from one house to four houses per acre indeed
14
six-hours per acre, was in any way against the policy of the planning
15:54:39 15
department or officials is very misleading and is wrong. This is very clearly
16
reflected in the recommendations of planning officials and planners in Dublin
17
County Council and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, throughout the past
18
12 years in all of the Development Plans.
19 15:54:52 20
A.
Yes.
Q. 1005
We spoke about difficulties that you had with meeting representatives or
21
officials in the Council. And you say that there were no difficulties meeting
22
the Planning Department. What about the Roads Department?
23
A.
24 15:55:15 25
There was no difficulties in meeting with them. The difficulties were in trying to get some result out of a meeting with them.
Q. 1006
And that's where Mr. Lawlor came in; is it?
26
A.
In Cherrywood?
27
Q. 1007
No, generally.
28
A.
In generally, no. The difficulties in The Square in Tallaght, were much
29 15:55:34 30
different, in that it was exacerbated by the fact that Dublin County Council owned the land and Dublin Corporation had the site inside it. And that meant Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
153 15:55:41 1
that you were dealing with all of them. And that was very, very tortuous, but
2 3
in Cherrywood that didn't happen at all. Q. 1008
4
Now, I think on the -- I think on the 4th of September '89. At 8799 we see the transfer and conveyance of the property to Perivale Limited, which became
15:56:04 5
Cherrywood Properties Limited, isn't that right? By Mr. Galvin?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 1009
And I think by October 1989 although they had not yet been involved at an
8
official level. GRE Properties at 8798.
9 15:56:24 10
Referred to previous meetings and discussions and conversations regarding a
11
possible involvement in relation to the site, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 1010
And I think that that letter was to lead on to a more formal agreement in 1990.
14 15:56:41 15
16
December 1990 between Monarch and GRE, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 1011
And I can if necessary open all of those agreements. But in a nutshell would
17
you agree with me ?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 1012
That it more or less resulted in an agreement to be jointly involved in the
15:56:52 20
development of the lands that Monarch Properties Services Limited were going to
21
provide the development services for the lands and that the fees would be
22
shared 50/50; is that correct?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 1013
And I think it was also intended, as appears from the very last sentence of
15:57:15 25
that letter. That Monarch would be prepared to pay a million pounds once
26
Cherrywood had achieved sales or pre planning sales of 10 million, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
Could you repeat that again.
29
Q. 1014
Sorry. The last sentence of the second last paragraph. It says, however as I
15:57:29 30
feel we should have perhaps moved more quickly to make the monies for this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
154 15:57:35 1
transaction available. We would be willing to make an extra 1 million once
2
Cherrywood had achieved sales or pre planning permission sales of 10 million to
3
the joint venture. Isn't that right?
4 15:57:53 5
A.
Yes.
Q. 1015
Now, I think in time the submissions prepared by Mr. McCabe and Mr. Meehan and
6
you were submitted isn't that right? To the planners.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1016
In fact, they were initially advised in the July of Monarch's interest in the
9
lands. I think at 2192, on the 20th of October '89, following on meetings
15:58:19 10
with Mr. Davin, draft structural plans were forwarded, isn't that right? And
11
then ultimately I think on the 27th of November '89 a draft plans were sent
12
forward for consideration. And they are at 2898. Again, I don't propose to
13
go into those unless you require me to do so, isn't that right?
14 15:58:41 15
A.
No, that's fine.
Q. 1017
But on the 22nd of November '89 I think Mr. Monahan had a second meeting with
16
the Minister, isn't that right? At 7663. We see the Department of the
17
Minister is -- did Mr. Monahan discuss that meeting with the Minister with you?
18
Do you see 4:15 P Monaghan?
19 15:59:00 20
A.
I have no recollection of that.
Q. 1018
You have no recollection of the meeting, or you have no recollection of a
21
discussion concerning the meeting?
22
A.
Of the discussion or of the meeting.
23
Q. 1019
Yes. And then I think at 2128 you set out in your statement the developments
24
that you were involved in. And the various interests that you had throughout
15:59:21 25
1990; isn't that right? And they included development in Wales, there were at
26
least four of them, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 1020
Science and Technology Park. Proposals for the Cherrywood Science Park,
29 15:59:36 30
American Movie Corporation, negotiations conducted in the relation to Tallaght town centre, Malahide Road neighbourhood centres, Jervis shopping Street Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
155 15:59:41 1
centre, developments of a shopping centre in Madrid, Glasgow 17 million
2
comprising an 8 acre site bordering on the Forth of Clyde canal. Gobles
3
shopping centre Glasgow, Waterford shopping centre, Dundalk town centre,
4
Bachelor's Walk development. In October 1990 the opening of The Square in
15:59:59 5
Tallaght. They were all projects being undertaken by the Monarch Group in
6
1990, isn't that right?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 1021
I think on the 24th of January 1990 you had a further meeting in relation to
9
the Cherrywood lands. And we see those at 2954.
16:00:16 10
11
And one of the issues at this stage that you were considering was a possible
12
application for outline permission on the site, isn't that right
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 1022
And the advice of Mr. McCabe. And I think advice that you took on board at
16:00:27 15
the time. Was that such an application was premature?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 1023
Since the planners themselves hadn't worked out a strategy for the site, isn't
18 19
that right? A.
Well mainly because of the access to sewers etc...
16:00:39 20
21
CHAIRMAN: All right, Mr. Quinn, it's four o'clock. So we'll rise.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Ten o'clock tomorrow morning?
24 16:00:59 25
CHAIRMAN: Yes. Will Mr. Sweeney finish tomorrow do you anticipate or?
26 27
MR. QUINN: There's a possibility that he may not finish tomorrow. I don't
28
know who has -- I don't know who is proposing to cross-examine him and for how
29
long.
16:01:03 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
156 16:01:03 1
2
CHAIRMAN: I'm sure there will be some cross-examination. Because we may. There is a suggestion that we might sit next week for a day even.
3 4 16:01:18 5
MR. QUINN: I understand that Mr. Sweeney is available on Monday and Tuesday of next week but isn't available thereafter, for the rest of the month.
6 7
MR. SHIPSEY: Sorry, Mr. Sweeney leaves first thing on Wednesday morning.
8
And obviously he will make himself available. Preference would be for Monday.
9
But ...
16:01:32 10
11
CHAIRMAN: Well we'll see. Perhaps there could be some discussion between
12
the legal teams tomorrow to make a decision. We'll sit, there is a slight
13
preference for Tuesday. It doesn't really make an awful lot of difference.
14 16:01:49 15
MR. SHIPSEY: Thank you.
16 17
CHAIRMAN: All right?
18 19
MR. SHIPSEY: Thank you.
16:02:04 20
21 22 23 24 16:03:57 25
26
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, FRIDAY, 30TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.
27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 661
09:43:13
10:08:25
1 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,
2
30TH JUNE, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.:
3 4
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Sir.
5 6
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning.
7 8
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
9 10:08:28 10
MR. EDWARD SWEENEY, ALREADY SWORN, CONTINUED TO BE QUESTIONED
11
BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS
12 13 14
CHAIRMAN:
Good morning, Mr. Sweeney.
A.
Good morning.
Q. 1
MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. Sweeney.
16
A.
Good morning.
17
Q. 2
Mr. Sweeney, yesterday we were speaking about the period 1990, and the position
10:08:42 15
18
of the Monarch Group vis-a-vis the Carrickmines lands.
19
to say that as you went into the early 1990s you were in a position where Mr.
10:09:04 20
And would it be fair
McCabe on your behalf had made submissions to the planners in relation to the
21
possible zoning for these lands? Isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 3
And I think one of the issues in addition to the zoning issue in relation to
24
the lands was the question of where the Southeastern Motorway might be sited in
10:09:23 25
relation to the lands.
Isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 4
And there were a number of different proposed lines for the road at that stage,
28
isn't that right? Some of which would have been advantageous to the
29
development of the site others of which would have been disastrous.
10:09:43 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't
10:09:43
10:10:07
2 1
A.
2 3
Q. 5
A.
10:10:25 10
Maybe I'm a bit excessive in disaster but certainly would have been less
Well if I may say so, Chairman, the object or the desire of Monarch was to get all of the lands within the cartilage of the new motorway.
Q. 6
8 9
I mean, the
advantageous from development or a rezoning point of view from the lands?
6 7
I don't quite agree that it would have been disastrous.
road was a moveable object.
4 5
No.
But one of the issues from your point of view, was where might the road be aligned, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 7
And you were anxious to find out what alignment might be put for -- on the
11
lands for the roadway, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 8
And if we could have 2956, on the 24th of January 1990, in a memo recording a
14
meeting at Monarch Properties, you, Mr. Sweeney, are recorded there under
10:10:46 15
heading paragraph No. 4.
As having stated that the political decision had
16
been made to align the motorway on the western edge of the site.
Although the
17
forward planners in roads and the planners were continuing meeting/discussions
18
options.
19 10:11:01 20
MR. SHIPSEY:
I don't think it's come up.
21 22
Q. 9
23
MR. QUINN: Sorry.
That's 2956.
If we go to paragraph No. 4, Mr. Sweeney.
24 10:11:10 25
Do you see under paragraph No. 4.
Do you see the middle paragraph? It was
26
stated by ES, who presumably you.
That the political decision had been made
27
to align the motorway on the western edge of the site.
Do you see that?
28
A.
I do see that.
29
Q. 10
That's a record of what you are reported to have said at that meeting, isn't
10:11:34 30
that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:11:36
10:11:54
3 1
A.
Is the rest of that meeting there?
2
Q. 11
Yes.
If we could have the full document, please.
It's a document supplied
3
to the Tribunal by Muir Associates, who were, I understand, consultants
4
employed by Monarch, isn't that right?
5
A.
Is the second page there?
6
Q. 12
Yes.
7
A.
Yes, I don't recall making that statement.
If I could have 2957, please? And I find it perplexing,
8
Chairman, to think that anyone could have made a statement of that nature at
9
that time because my understanding is that the roadway was eventually decided
10:12:21 10
11
by an EIS prepared by the NRA, the National Roads Authority. Q. 13
And that was I think in 1997.
If we could have 2956 again, please.
Let's
12
look, Mr. Sweeney, at the other matters that are recorded on that memo and see
13
if they are correct.
14 10:12:43 15
Firstly it says "An extension has been requested by Dublin County Council to
16
the Minister for delay to presentation of the Draft Development Plan.
17
expected that it will now not go on the wall before October/November 1990."
18
In fact, I think it didn't go on the wall until September 1991, isn't that
19
right?
10:13:01 20
21
A.
I don't really have a memory of that.
Q. 14
Yes.
"Consideration was given to the submission to an outline planning
22
application now as the further delays are expensive."
23
given in the early 1990s to an outline planning application?
24
A.
10:13:22 25
26
It is
Yes, I recall that, Chairman.
Was there consideration
And the upshot of that was that it was
considered to be ... Q. 15
Premature.
We dealt with that yesterday, isn't that the right? Mr. McCabe's
27
advice to you was that an outlining planning application at this time would be
28
premature since the planners hadn't formulated a view as the zoning of the
29
lands, isn't that right?
10:13:44 30
A.
That's true. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:13:44
10:13:45
4 1
Q. 16
So that portion of the memo is correct, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 17
So it's possible that was said at a meeting in January 1990, isn't that
4
correct?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 18
And it's also possible -- sorry.
It was also the case that the Development
7
Plan was out of date at that stage and that the five year period would have to
8
be extended, isn't that right? I think we're dealing with the 1983 plan.
9
A.
10:14:03 10
I have to say I wasn't really up to all the Draft Development Plan stuff at that the stage.
11
Q. 19
Yeah.
12
A.
I was up to my neck in The Square in Tallaght.
13
Q. 20
"It was agreed that we would wait the publication of the Draft Development Plan
14 10:14:17 15
or at least an indication of the final structure of it." A.
I really can't recall that.
16
Q. 21
Yeah.
17
A.
It says it was agreed so ...
18
Q. 22
So it's probably true.
19
If we go to 2957, please:
sewer appears to be slipping backwards.
10:14:37 20
prioritised.
22
discussion on the sewer at this time?
McDaid has advised Richard Lynn that
This sewer does not fall into this category." Do you recall a
23
A.
Yes, I recall several discussions on the sewer.
24
Q. 23
Yeah.
10:14:54 25
The contract documents I think were being prepared within the council
at this stage.
26
The go ahead having been given on the 1st of May '89, isn't
that right by the department?
27
A.
If you say so.
28
Q. 24
Paragraph No. 6.
10:15:13 30
"The programme for the
there are sections of the county with overloaded systems that require to be
21
29
Was that agreed?
I don't have any memory of that. "A discussion took place in regard to the IDA's stated need
for a significant industrial land in the southeast of the city.
They have
about 40 acres in Carrickmines although no sewer and we have planned some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:15:18
10:15:30
5 1
industrial.
F McCabe discussed the option of mobilizing the IDA's support in
2
order to expedite the construction of the sewer."
3 4
Was there discussion about expediting the sewer by involvement of the IDA and
5
the possible zoning or proposed zoning of these lands for industrial purposes?
6
A.
7 8
Yes, Chairman.
May I say that all of these things are recorded in a meeting.
It's obvious that they were discussed. Q. 25
9
No.
But the reason I'm going through them, Mr. Sweeney, is that the one issue
that's recorded concerning you, you don't agree with.
If we could have 2956.
10:15:55 10
11
"It was stated by ES", who presumably is you.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 26
"That the political decision had been made to align the motorway on the western
14
edge of the site."
10:16:09 15
That's the one statement in that memo that you don't agree
with, Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah, I don't recall that.
17
Q. 27
Yeah.
18
A.
And I must say, how would I have known that?
19
Q. 28
Unless somebody in political circles told you, isn't that right?
A.
Well certainly no one in political circles told me anyway.
Q. 29
But certainly whoever wrote this memo had a recollection at this time of you
10:16:21 20
21 22
having said this Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
23
A.
The only thing I can say is that it's possibly not me that said it.
24
Q. 30
Well, were you present at a meeting in early 1990 when somebody at the meeting
10:16:41 25
advised the meeting that the political decision had been made to align the
26
motorway on the western edge of the site?
27
A.
Again, I note it there but I have no recollection of it.
28
Q. 31
No.
29 10:17:01 30
I know it's said here and it is stated here that you said it but you say
you didn't say it.
But what I'm asking you, Mr. Sweeney, is have you a
recollection of being at a meeting when somebody else might have said that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:17:04
10:17:19
6 1
A.
I don't have a recollection.
2
Q. 32
And can you proffer any explanation to the Tribunal as to why somebody within
3
Muir Associates would record that as having been said in the first instance and
4
that as having been said by you in particular?
5
A.
Could you go to the second page again?
6
Q. 33
2957, please.
7
A.
I'm not sure this is Muir Associates.
8
I wouldn't be sure that this is Muir
Associates minutes.
9 10:17:32 10
11
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
They've got my name wrong for a start ...
12 13
CHAIRMAN:
At the top of the first --
14 10:17:41 15
MR. QUINN: 2956 please.
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
Sweeney.
19
A.
At the top of the first page, if it is you, you are down as G
Yes.
10:17:47 20
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Is that likely to be you or was there a G Sweeney
A.
It would definitely be me.
There's no other Sweeney as around.
Q. 34
MR. QUINN: Was there anybody else within the Monarch group that the had the
23 24 10:18:01 25
initials ES, that is somebody at a Senior level within Monarch?
26
A.
No, Chairman
27
Q. 35
In any event you have no recollection of stating this to the meeting or having
28 29 10:18:12 30
heard anybody else state it to that meeting? A.
No.
Q. 36
Now, I think that Mr. McCabe was able to say in March of 1990 that the western Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:18:23
10:18:45
7 1
most line was the option being considered.
If we have 2970.
He advised Mr.
2
Lynn I think in correspondence on the 2nd of March 1990 "That he now believed
3
for good reason that the motorway option selected by the planner road section
4
was the western most line." Isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 37
And one of the problems for Monarch at this stage was the Carrickmines sewer
7
and having it come on line, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 38
And you were anxious to expedite the construction of the sewer, isn't that
10:19:01 10
correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 39
It was one of the key features of developing this site.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 40
In the services and Carrickmines sewer was probably one of the most important
10:19:12 15
necessary developments to facilitate housing or industrial development on the
16 17
site, isn't that right? A.
18 19
Q. 41
One was the
So therefore, a strategy would have to be designed to expedite the construction of the sewer, isn't that right?
A.
22
Strategy.
I think what had to happen there was, as much pressure had to be
put on to the local authority.
23
Q. 42
Yes.
24
A.
To do it.
Q. 43
Yes.
10:19:45 25
There were three criteria that were essential.
access, one was the road location and one was the sewer.
10:19:31 20
21
Yes, Chairman.
And one would be the strategy.
And one of the points of pressure being considered.
If we could have
26
2976.
27
Mr. Sweeney, and if we go to the second page, at 2977.
28
last paragraph.
29
be in a position to get a letter from Ikea requiring 100,000 square foot
10:20:12 30
This is a note of a meeting held on the 16th of March 1990.
It says ES, which is presumably you.
With you,
And if we look at the "Indicated that he may
development on the retail park, which could be used with the IDA to speed up Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:20:16
10:20:29
8 1
the drainage contracts or ML", whom I presume is Mr. Lynn "to make contact with
2
the IDA and ascertain whether they would back Ikea in their application."
3
you recall that type of discussion going on between yourself and Mr. Lynn?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 44
And that's a strategy discussion, isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes, that's an attempt to ...
7
Q. 45
To expedite the sewage system?
8
A.
To accelerated the sewer.
9
Q. 46
Yes.
10:20:45 10
Do
And if we go to 2980, this is a meeting on the 3rd of May 1990, attended
by Dr. Meehan, who was the planner, Fergal McCabe planner yourself and Mr.
11
Lynn.
And again, under the heading "Carrickmines Valley sewage system".
12
you look at the last paragraph.
If
13 14
"It was agreed that a political input was required to ensure that the
10:20:59 15
Carrickmines sewerage scheme went ahead as soon as possible and F McCabe
16
indicated that -- and reference to another developer "would accompany ES", who
17
is presumably you, Mr. Sweeney.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 47
"to see Minister Flynn to indicate an overall need in the area."
10:21:14 20
right?
21
A.
That's right.
22
Q. 48
So this was another strategy at this stage, that is May 1990.
23 24
Isn't that
Namely, that
yourself and another developer would approach Minister Flynn, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 49
And did you approach Minister Flynn?
26
A.
No, I didn't.
27
Q. 50
And why not?
28
A.
Well, that appeared in a meeting.
29
Q. 51
But it was being considered in May 1990 that you would approach the Minister to
10:21:23 25
10:21:38 30
There was no action ever taken on it.
expedite the construction of the sewer.
Isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:21:40
10:22:07
9 1
A.
Yes, my understanding of, that Chairman, is that Fergal McCabe acted for a
2
number of landowners in the area.
3
effected by the progress of this sewer.
4
us should get together to go and see Minister Flynn.
5
That certainly didn't happen.
6
Q. 52
7
One of whom his land was also very deeply And he suggested really that both of Now, that didn't happen.
You didn't go to Minister Flynn. Did Mr. Monahan go to Minister Flynn at this time?
8
A.
That I'm not sure of.
9
Q. 53
We know that he did visit Minister Flynn twice in '89 June and again in
10:22:22 10
November and we saw those meetings yesterday, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 54
Now, another difficulty that you were having with the site at this time was the
13 14
access to the site, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 55
And we discussed the motorway and the alignment of the motorway?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 56
But I think that by July 1990 you had come to the conclusion that in fact not
10:22:30 15
18
just the line of the motorway required to be fixed but that the motorway itself
19
ought to be constructed, isn't that right?
10:22:45 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 57
And if we look at a meeting then on the 5th of July 1990, at 2985.
It's a
22
meeting between yourself and Mr. Lynn.
And if we go to 2986, under the
23
heading "access to the site".
24
"indicated that it was not alone necessary to have the line of the motorway
10:23:08 25
established but to have it actually constructed to facilitate the development
We see "RML" which presumably is Mr. Lynn
26
and recommended that contact be made at highest level i.e. ministerial level to
27
ascertain the position."
Do you see that, Mr. Sweeney?
28
A.
I do, yes.
29
Q. 58
This is yourself and Mr. Lynn now trying to devise a strategy in relation to
10:23:26 30
the construction of the motorway line, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:23:28
10:23:37
10 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 59
And the strategy that's being recommended to you by Mr. Lynn is another visit
3
to ministerial level, isn't that right, in relation to the matter?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 60
Did such a meeting take place?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 61
Why not?
8
A.
Well I was -- it didn't happen because I wasn't in the habit of going to see
9 10:23:57 10
ministers about roads and I would have no access. Q. 62
But there was discussion between yourself and Mr. Lynn in relation to the
11
possibility of meeting with ministers on two key issues which concerned the
12
development of the site, isn't that right?
13
A.
14
The whole purpose of trying to accelerated the three
obstacles was to reach into the air and see what could be done anywhere to
10:24:20 15
16
Certainly, yes.
accelerated them. Q. 63
And I think that we know that a memo was prepared within the Department of the
17
Environment in relation to an upcoming meeting between the minister and
18
Mr. Monahan on the 6th of December 1990.
19
This is an internal department memo which says:
If we could have 8511, please.
10:24:45 20
21
"We are awaiting the submission of contracts documents -- CD -- by Dublin
22
County Council for the Carrickmines Valley sewer scheme. The work on these is
23
substantially complete and the CD -- which presumably refers to contract
24
documents -- should be examined at the latest by sorry -- should be received at
10:25:02 25
the latest by January 1991.
A branch sewer to service the Cabinteely area
26
will service the something lands acquired by Monarch Properties.
This will
27
be -- will link the Shanganagh treatment works which is currently working at 25
28
percent capacity."
29 10:25:20 30
That's a memo being prepared within the department. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Would you agree with me
10:25:24
10:25:55
11 1
that by December 1990, it was anticipated that Mr. Monahan would meet with
2
Minister Flynn in relation to the Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme?
3
A.
I can't say that.
I can't say that at all.
4
Q. 64
Now, I think the planners presented their report to the council, isn't that
5
right? In November and December -- October and November 1990.
6
matters came to a head on the 6th of December 1990, isn't that correct?
7
A.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean.
8
Q. 65
Okay.
9
On the 6th -- could I have 3068, please.
And it came --
This is a letter,
Mr. Sweeney, written to you by Mr. McCabe following on a meeting he attended in
10:26:18 10
his capacity as a representative of the Planning Institute.
And a meeting
11
held with three politicians.
12
other and he wasn't sure but he thought that Mr. Wright was the third.
13
was on the eve of the vote on the 6th of December.
14
advising you of the outcome of that meeting.
10:26:46 15
He felt Mr. Lawlor was one, Mr. McGrath was the
And he's writing to you
Do you recall receiving that
letter, Mr. Sweeney?
16
A.
I don't recall it specifically, no.
17
Q. 66
Do you recall discussing the letter with Mr. McCabe?
18
A.
It's um, may I read it.
19
Q. 67
Yes.
10:27:00 20
21
And it
Certainly.
I'll get you a hard copy of it if it would be more
convenient. A.
Therefore our support is tenuous .... irritated? I can understand the context
22
of this now.
23
from whatever discussions he had (document handed to witness).
24
the councillors were a bit fed up that the council officials had gone ahead and
10:27:36 25
This is Fergal McCabe, planner, saying that he had understood
done a particular plan without consulting them.
26
That some of
I believe that's the context
of that.
27
Q. 68
And did you discuss the matter with Mr. McCabe?
28
A.
No, he's reporting to me.
29
Q. 69
I accept that but having received the letter did you speak with him concerning
10:27:51 30
its contents? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:27:52
10:28:06
12 1
A.
No, I don't think I did.
2
Q. 70
Yes.
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 71
Now, I think the agreements then were entered into between Cherrywood
Did you ever discuss the matter with Mr. Lawlor, for example?
5
Development Limited and Cherrywood Properties Limited, at 8808.
6
don't intend to go into those unless you require me to do so.
7
the joint development of the lands.
8
effectively in essence, it meant that you were going to share the costs of
9
development 50/50 and you were going to share the rewards on the development
10:28:32 10
And again, I
In relation to
It was a complex structure set up but
50/50, isn't that right?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q. 72
And I think there was a 1 million pounds bonus that we discussed yesterday when
13 14
planning came through, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I saw that yesterday.
Q. 73
Did you not know about that until yesterday?
16
A.
I did, I knew that.
17
Q. 74
So as we head into 1991, if I could have 2128, please.
10:28:41 15
You set out in your
18
statement the projects being developed at that time.
19
Russia, Moscow, Air Rianta shopping centre, St Petersburg bar and restaurant,
10:29:01 20
Developments of sites in
Clonskeagh Business Park, Singapore science park, isn't that right?
21
A.
Which year are you on?
22
Q. 75
I'm on 2128 the very bottom of the page, 1991.
23
A.
Oh, yes, yes.
24
Q. 76
You knew that the manager's proposals had been unsuccessful as of the 6th of
10:29:20 25
December 1990.
Isn't that right, Mr. Sweeney? The Manager had proposed wide
26
sweeping changes for the zoning of these lands in his map DP90/123, isn't that
27
right?
28
A.
I don't recall that.
29
Q. 77
You don't recall that?
A.
No.
10:29:35 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:29:35
10:29:51
13 1
Q. 78
2
Did you not know the planning status of the lands or the zoning status of the lands in early 1991?
3
A.
I did.
4
Q. 79
You see, I would have understood, Mr. Sweeney, as the head of the project team
5
dealing with the -- and with overall responsibility for the site in Cabinteely,
6
that you would have been aware at every stage of the zoning status of these
7
lands and the proposed zoning options from the planners point of view in
8
relation to the lands?
9
A.
Yes, I was totally aware of the planning status of the --
10:30:12 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
12
effect that he didn't know the precise detail that you were putting to him in
13
relation, say, to the map.
14
I'm wrong, that you knew in general?
10:30:28 15
A.
Yeah.
I think, I understood Mr. Sweeney's reply to be to the
But I assume, and Mr. Sweeney can correct me if
Yes.
16 17 18
CHAIRMAN: A.
What happened, what the sort of zoning history was?
Yes.
19 10:30:35 20
CHAIRMAN:
21 22
Although you mightn't now be in a position to say it was in
November of a particular year or December of a particular year. A.
Yes.
23 24 10:30:43 25
CHAIRMAN: A.
Is that fair or?
Yes, Chairman.
26 27
CHAIRMAN:
28
happening on such and such a date in relation to such and such a map, for
29
example.
10:30:53 30
A.
It's just that when Mr. Quinn put something to you about something
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:30:53
10:31:09
14 1 2
CHAIRMAN:
3
that you really don't know in even in general what's being, or that you're not
4
aware in general of what is being put to you or are you saying that you don't
5
know the precise detail, which is a slightly different thing?
6
A.
And you say well I'm not quite certain.
Do you mean to indicate
Well the only thing that I'm sure of is I did know that the zoning status of
7
the land in 1991 was one house per acre on septic tanks on two-thirds of the
8
land and one-third agricultural.
That is the extent of my knowledge.
9 10:31:31 10
11
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
A.
Of it.
Q. 80
MR. QUINN: And are you saying, are you telling the Tribunal, Mr. Sweeney, that
12 13 14
you did not know that the manager had proposed a comprehensive rezoning of the
10:31:42 15
lands in October and November 1990?
16
A.
1990?
17
Q. 81
Yes.
18
A.
No, I don't --
19
Q. 82
If we could have 6936.
10:31:54 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
you recall that there was a Planning Institute meeting.
23
A.
Just on that, Mr. Sweeney.
A few moments ago you said that
Yes.
24 10:32:00 25
26
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
That Mr. McCabe reported on.
Yes.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
And where you understood the situation to be that the politicians, the
10:32:13 30
Between Mr. Lawlor and Mr. McGrath and perhaps another person.
councillors were complaining that the planning department had proposed plans Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:32:19
10:32:31
15 1 2
without consultation at that early stage with the councillors. A.
Yes, Chairman, that's what the letter says.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
have had some idea of what caused the concern to the councillors or the
6
disquiet amongst the councillors at the time.
7
zoned one house to the acre on septic tank.
8
A.
Yes.
But I took it from that, maybe I'm wrong, that he must
You knew that the lands were
Yes.
9 10:32:43 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
And that's the way it was from 1983, isn't that correct?
Yes.
12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
14
Internally.
10:32:55 15
A.
And we know that a review had commenced in '89 of the plan.
But you were meeting, certainly Mr. McCabe is reporting to you.
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
council.
19
A.
Having met some councillors and they are complaining about the
Yes.
10:33:00 20
21
JUDGE FAHERTY:
22
gone on and made plan without consulting them
23
A.
And what they are complaining about is that the council had
Yes.
24 10:33:09 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: And were you not aware at all of the sort of plans that were
26
envisaged by the council back in -- when -- I think that's where Mr. Quinn is
27
coming from.
28
A.
In 1990.
29 10:33:21 30
MR. QUINN: In October/November 1990. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:33:23
10:33:34
16 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
2
progress the matter and put it out to the public at is some point.
3
A.
These were the council's plans Mr. Sweeney.
They had to
I explained yesterday that this was all pretty new territory to me.
4 5 6
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
I understand that you were employed in Monarch from the 1970s.
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
for example.
10:33:44 10
A.
And would you not have had any idea, there was a plan in 1983,
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
house per acre on septic tank perhaps earlier.
14
Monarch.
10:33:56 15
A.
Would you not have had -- I know the lands were zoned from one Certainly in your time within
Yes.
16 17
JUDGE FAHERTY:
18
at the time and I appreciate that, particular lands.
19
have had input into, not input but knowledge of the making of what happens
10:34:07 20
21
If Monarch had lands and obviously they didn't own the lands But Monarch may well
within the County Council when a plan is made for a particular area. A.
22
No, it went back as far as 1983 I would have been completely oblivious to a Development Plan.
23 24 10:34:18 25
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
Yes.
I became very educated in it, at the end.
But at the beginning, I was ....
26 27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
All right.
And we didn't have any land that came within that category.
29 10:34:33 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:34:34
10:34:54
17 1
Q. 83
MR. QUINN: So you, did you ever see that map on screen, Mr. Sweeney, the
2
Monarch lands would have been in the bottom right hand corner of that map.
3
The blue line represented a notional line for the Southeastern Motorway.
4
purple area that you see there, is a proposed industrial zoning.
5
area is a town centre.
6
The green area open spaces.
7
Mr. Sweeney
8
A.
9 10:35:18 10
The
And the red
And the yellow area would be residential development. You were unaware of that, is that your evidence,
May I say, Mr. Chairman, that I would have replied on the planning professional consultants to absorb that type of detail.
Q. 84
But leaving aside the detail, Mr. Sweeney, the proposal in 1990, if it had been
11
successful, would have resulted in the manager recommending to the councillors
12
that they develop these lands for industrial, residential and town centre
13
development.
14
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 85
Which would have been the ideal development from Monarch's point of view?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 86
And are you saying that in late 1990 you had no idea that the manager was
10:35:38 15
18 19
recommending that these lands be so developed? A.
10:36:00 20
pro-development for those lands, which included the shopping element of it,
21 22
Well I was always aware that the officials, including the management, were
which was our major concern. Q. 87
But, Mr. Sweeney, all of your efforts since the lands were required, through
23
Mr. McCabe and the various meetings both in relation to the road department and
24
planning department and the various submissions put in, were to try and
10:36:20 25
convince the planners that they would recommend development on these lands,
26
isn't that right?
27
A.
No, the planners themselves in my opinion were already convinced.
28
Q. 88
But do you accept, Mr. Sweeney, that Monarch were paying Mr. McCabe to put in
29 10:36:38 30
plans or sorry to put in submissions to the planners to have the lands zoned for residential, industrial and town centre development? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:36:40
10:36:51
18 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 89
And are you telling the Tribunal that the manager could produce proposals in
3
October and November 1990 recommending that the lands be so developed and you
4
wouldn't have known about it?
5
A.
I would have found out about that subsequently.
I have to repeat again, that
6
I was up to my neck at that time in Tallaght, which was opening around about
7
then.
8
anyone coming to me to interrupt my flow and trying to get the project
9
completed on time.
10:37:13 10
Q. 90
And it was a 24 hour a day job.
And I kind of internally resented
Mr. McCabe was telling you tittle tattle that kind of a meeting he had with
11
Mr. Lawlor and Mr. McGrath in relation to the manager's plan, isn't that right
12
and their dissatisfaction of consultation with them as councillors by the
13
managers, isn't that right? On the eve of the vote concerning the manager's
14
proposals and we saw that letter a moment ago on the screen and you recalled
10:37:38 15
receiving the letter?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 91
And are you saying that he would have told you that and you would have known of
18
that but you wouldn't have known of the manager's proposals as published that
19
the lands, the Cherrywood lands, for which your company had spent 10 million
10:37:53 20
the previous year to have those developed for residential, industrial purposes?
21
A.
I knew that the manager and the officials and the planners were all for it.
22
Q. 92
And therefore, you must have known that it had, the manager's objectives for
23
the lands had suffered a setback at the meeting in December 1990.
24
right?
10:38:12 25
Isn't that
A.
That's what I'm a bit unclear about.
26
Q. 93
I see.
27
A.
I would like, if possible, to find out what that setback was.
28
Q. 94
Well I can bring up for you, if you wish, the motion of the 6th of December
29
1990, which was successful.
10:38:28 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:38:28
10:38:50
19 1
CHAIRMAN:
2
it mightn't have been while you mightn't have been familiar of the detail of
3
what was going on at council, that you would have been made aware in general
4
terms by Mr. McCabe or other colleagues, as to developments.
5
developments in the sense of the matter winding its way through the council
6
which either benefited or were to the detriment of Monarch.
7
A.
Well is it likely, Mr. Sweeney, that during this period, that while
I mean
Yes, certainly people would have kept me up-to-date.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
10:39:12 10
So if something happened, such as Mr. Quinn is going to give you
the detail of now, without knowing or without necessarily being informed of the
11
precise detail.
12
what happened at the council and the different stages that the resulting from
13
council meetings and so on, council votes.
14
general terms, what was going on surely.
10:39:40 15
A.
You would have been told as a matter of probability as to
You'd have been aware of, in
Well certainly in general terms, but specifically at that time I don't think --
16 17
CHAIRMAN:
18
you'd have been told or if they had a good day or a good outcome you'd have
19
been told?
10:39:55 20
A.
Yes.
So if you had a bad day, if Monarch had a bad day at the council,
The key figure that would have emerged for me but would been what the
21
status at that present time would have been in terms of zoning.
22
have recognised that as being what I described earlier.
And I would
23 24 10:40:14 25
Q. 95
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, I'm going to put on screen.
I'm going to give you a
hard copy and put on screen document No. 6952, which is the minutes of the
26
meeting of the 2nd of December 1990.
27
on this but since it might help to revive your memory on the issue.
28
see on the document that I'm going to give you A motion which was proposed at
29
the meeting by Councillor Coffey.
10:40:42 30
And I don't want to spend too much time
If we could have 6953, please.
handed to witness) Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
You will
(document
10:40:44
10:41:06
20 1
Now, at the bottom of 6953, you will see a motion proposed by councillor
2
McDonald and seconded by Councillor Coffey.
3
the net effect of that motion, if we could have 6953, was that there would be
4
no development south of the proposed Southeastern Motorway line.
5
6954, please.
And you can read the motion but
Could I have
6 7
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just for clarification, Mr. Quinn.
I think you should advise
8
the witness that it was the 1983 Southeastern Motorway line.
9 10:41:19 10
MR. QUINN: That's correct.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Which you I understand was a dissection of the Monarch lands.
A.
Yeah, I can recall that now.
Q. 96
MR. QUINN: I see.
A.
I thought in fact, Chairman, that you were talking about zoning, in terms of
14 10:41:28 15
16 17
density but in fact you're talking about the geographical location of the line
18
of the motorway.
19
Q. 97
10:41:47 20
No, we're talking about the zoning being limited to an area east of the line, isn't that right?
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 98
Which was -- the manager has given evidence, Mr. Sweeney, more or less to the
23
effect that he regarded that motion as a water shed.
24
stopped his proposals as we saw them in DP90/123 which would have opened up the
10:42:03 25
In other words, it
entire area for development?
26
A.
Yes, yes, I understand that.
27
Q. 99
That's something you would have recollected, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes, I understand that.
29
Q. 100
And you would have known about it.
A.
And that correspondence is my understanding from the zoning status at that
10:42:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:42:16
10:42:22
21 1 2
time. Q. 101
3
And it was back to the drawing boards for you at that stage and indeed for the manager, isn't that right, after the motion?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 102
And if we look at 3089.
On the 22nd of January 1991, Mr. McCabe and
6
Mr. Meehan were being now asked to urgently prepare um, a -- plans at that
7
meeting on the 22nd and more particularly at the meeting on the 23rd.
8
is at 3094.
9 10:43:00 10
Which
Fergal McCabe tabled two zoning structure maps.
A.
Yes.
Q. 103
And at this stage, you were looking for new zonings to include town centre,
11
isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 104
You hadn't been looking for town centre.
14
You are now looking for town center.
You had to go back and revise your submissions in relation to the matter, isn't
10:43:16 15
that right?
16
A.
Well, I'm not entirely sure of the mechanics at that time.
17
Q. 105
Yes.
18
A.
But I can tell you that our major ambition was town centre.
19
Q. 106
So in early 1991, as you went into early 1991, the manager's proposals, which
10:43:31 20
would have benefited the site, had been rejected by the councillors, isn't that
21
right? And Mr. McCabe was being asked to prepare maps and plans in relation to
22
an alternative zoning, isn't that right?
23
A.
The -- is this the line you're talking about again?
24
Q. 107
No, I'm still talking about zoning but I'm talking about zoning now --
A.
Yeah.
26
Q. 108
-- up to the line?
27
A.
Up to the line. Yes, that's correct.
28
Q. 109
And the line at that stage, as I understood it, divided the land, the Monarch
10:43:52 25
29 10:43:59 30
lands? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:43:59
10:44:19
22 1
Q. 110
The '83 map?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 111
And in early 1991 I think, if I could have 8716.
Mr. Monahan made a
4
contribution I think to the -- Mr. Haughey and the party leaders fund.
5
see that at 3100 on the 6th of February '91.
6
contribution, Mr. Sweeney?
And we
What do you know about that
7
A.
I knew nothing about that contribution until I saw it in the brief.
8
Q. 112
You did not know in 1991 that Mr. Monahan had made that contribution?
9
A.
I did not.
Q. 113
And you say that you did not know that that contribution had been made until
10:44:44 10
11
this year, when you received the brief?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 114
But Mr. Monahan gave evidence at another Tribunal on the 31st of October 2000
14
in relation to the contribution, and that's at 7814.
10:45:01 15
Are you saying you you
didn't know in 2000 that Mr. Monahan had made that contribution?
16
A.
I didn't read up or pay any attention to --
17
Q. 115
So Mr. Monahan came and gave evidence at another Tribunal in relation to this
18
contribution given during your time with the Monarch Group and you didn't know
19
that he had given that evidence?
10:45:15 20
A.
Sorry.
21
Q. 116
On the 31st of October 2000.
22
A.
Well I wasn't at the Monarch Group at that time.
23
Q. 117
No, no, the contribution was given whilst you were with the Monarch Group.
24
A.
Um, I understand, Chairman, that that was a personal --
Q. 118
Albeit a personal contribution, Mr. Sweeney, are you saying that in October
10:45:32 25
May I ask you when he gave it?
26
2000 Mr. Monahan could give evidence in public in relation to the contribution
27
and you wouldn't have known about it?
28
A.
Absolutely.
29
Q. 119
Okay.
10:45:49 30
I didn't keep track of that at all.
Now, I think a number of motions then were tabled, which would have
assisted the Monarch Group.
If we could have 6972, on the 6th of February
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:45:54
10:46:09
23 1
1991.
This is a motion by Councillor McDonald.
"That the council agreed to
2
provide for a district shopping centre in the rezoning of the lands."
3
know anything about how Councillor McDonald came to table that motion?
4
A.
Um, no.
5
Q. 120
And there was a subsequent motion I think at 6974.
Do you
And there were other
6
motions by Councillor Brady and Coffey, at 6976, which appear to have been
7
lodged on the 13th of February '91 and a motion by Councillor Carroll and
8
Mitchell on the 14th of February, '91.
9
At 6978?
A.
No, I didn't know anything.
Q. 121
You don't know how those motions came to be tabled?
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 122
I think on the 12th of February, '91, Mr. Monahan met with Minister Flynn, at
10:46:31 10
13 14 10:46:54 15
7664.
Did you know anything about that meeting, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Um, no.
Q. 123
So this is the third time that Mr. Monahan has met Minister Flynn and you
16
haven't been told by him that that meeting was taking place or what was
17
discussed?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 124
And there's been no discussion amongst you as to what he might discuss with the
10:47:09 20
Minister if and when he met him?
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 125
But there had been discussion between yourself and Mr. Lynn about possibly
23
meeting a minister to make representations in relation to the construction of
24
the roadway and the expedition of the construction of this Carrickmines sewer?
10:47:23 25
26
A.
Well I could speculate that the connection was there but that would be ...
Q. 126
Now, I think there was a meeting on 7th of May 1991.
If we could have 3664,
27
Mr. Sweeney, attended by Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane, you, Mr. Lafferty,
28
Mr. Murray and Mr. Lynn.
29
intended to submit a planning application by the 1st of September 1991 which
10:47:52 30
And you tabled a master plan and advised that it was
would include for circa 250 square foot retail industrial business park and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:47:57
10:48:02
24 1
residential development.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 127
That was your -- that was your proposal at that stage?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 128
And I think if we look at 3665, under the heading "project management
6
agreement.
7
project management agreement was to cover management costs only and not to
8
cover design input made by MPSL.
9
raised at an upcoming meeting with GRE."
10:48:27 10
11
Mr. Glennane indicated that the 100,000 pounds included in the
It was agreed that the matter would be Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 129
Now, later that month I think on the 24th of May 1991, there was a council
12
meeting which was going to determine the status of the lands in the draft 1991
13
Development Plan, isn't that right?
14 10:48:43 15
A.
Can you say that again?
Q. 130
I said on the 24th of May, later that very same month, that is the 24th of May
16
1991, there was to be a special meeting of the County Council which would
17
determine the proposed zoning status for these lands in the 1991 draft plan.
18
Do you recall?
19 10:49:02 20
A.
Well I don't recall it but I accept that.
Q. 131
And at 7006, the manager put forward three possible proposals in relation to
21
these lands.
22
is to be found at 7019.
23
zoned for residential purposes on piped sewage.
24 10:49:30 25
The first of which was accepted, which is DP90/A -- 129A, which And that effectively proposed that the lands would be Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 132
That was something that would be of benefit to the Monarch interest in that it
26
increased the zoning status of the lands, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes, and it also established the -- that the sewer was going to go in.
28
Q. 133
Yes.
29 10:49:56 30
Do you recall any discussion within Monarch in relation to the -- to
that upcoming meeting and the possibility of asking councillors to vote in support of a proposal that the lands be so zoned? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:50:01
10:50:19
25 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 134
I think the next thing that happened was that the council fell and that there
3
was a Local Election in June 1991, isn't that right? If I could have 3241.
4
Between the 30th of May and the 3rd of October I think 23,450 pounds had been
5
disbursed in political contributions by the Monarch Group, isn't that right, in
6
respect of that election campaign?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 135
Were you aware that those contributions had been made or given?
9
A.
Not specifically but I knew generally.
Q. 136
Well what did you know, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
I knew, to repeat what I have said earlier.
10:50:34 10
11
That if anyone applied for help
12
in the -- in their election campaigns, that it was pretty certain that they
13
would get it.
14 10:50:57 15
16
Q. 137
Was there any discussion on the level of contribution that might be made?
A.
No.
Q. 138
We know, for example, if you look at that page.
The very second name on the
17
page, that is to say Mr. Hand, was given a sum of 5,000 pounds.
18
right?
19
Isn't that
A.
Yes.
Q. 139
That was the single largest contribution at that time?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 140
Can you assist the Tribunal as to how it was decided within Monarch that
10:51:08 20
23
Mr. Hand would receive such a generous contribution for his Local Election
24
campaign?
10:51:21 25
A.
26 27
10:51:44 30
And I've -- I've also noticed later that that might
not have been for Mr. Hand but have been for the Fine Gael Party. Q. 141
28 29
Well, it seems enormous.
Was there any discussion within Monarch concerning the question of payment of -- payment of political contributions for this election?
A.
Could you repeat that again?
Q. 142
Was there any discussion at board level or otherwise, within the Monarch Group, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:51:48
10:51:54
26 1
concerning the possibility of contributing to that Local Election?
2
A.
Most certainly.
3
Q. 143
There was?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 144
And were you privy to that discussion?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 145
And who else would have been involved in that discussion?
8
A.
I think the board would have been.
9
Q. 146
The board at that time would have been you, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 147
Well were there other board members?
12
A.
Um ...
13
Q. 148
At that time, that is 1991, June 1991?
14
A.
No, that was the board.
Q. 149
Would it be fair to say that when you refer to board decisions, Mr. Sweeney,
10:52:08 10
10:52:16 15
16
you are referring to a decision of yourself, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 150
And there was a board decision as to how you might approach a situation of
19 10:52:40 20
requests for political contributions during this election campaign? A.
Well I wouldn't go so far as to say there was a board decision.
But I would
21
have repeated what you said at the beginning, that the board was aware of these
22
things were happening.
23
Q. 151
But --
24
A.
There wouldn't have been --
Q. 152
Were they aware that it had happened or were they aware that it was likely to
10:52:51 25
26 27
happen, Mr. Sweeney? A.
Um, just to get away from the fact that it's a board meeting and the board
28
meeting would not have had something on the agenda that said councillors are
29
going to apply for -- but the board would have been aware that this was
10:53:17 30
happening. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:53:18
10:53:42
27 1
Q. 153
Uh-huh.
2
A.
Well the board should be aware of everything.
3
Q. 154
Well who would advise the board that this was actually happening?
4
A.
I would say Mr. Lynn would have been.
5
Q. 155
Did Mr. Lawlor have any input into the selection of persons who might receive
6
And how would the board be aware that this was happening?
political contributions in 1991?
7
A.
No.
8
Q. 156
Did you know who had received money in 1991 in that election, in a general way?
9
A.
In a general way but not certainly specific.
Q. 157
Yes
11
A.
I wouldn't have known that list, for example.
12
Q. 158
Yes.
13
A.
And I wouldn't known the extent of it.
14
Q. 159
Yes.
10:54:01 10
10:54:14 15
Looking at that list, Mr. Sweeney, the one name missing from the list
and he was I understand a candidate, I understand in June 1991, was Mr. Lawlor.
16
Does that surprise you, having regard to your evidence yesterday in relation to
17
his assistance to the Monarch Group in the Tallaght context?
18
A.
Again, the fact that he's not on that list, does that surprise me?
19
Q. 160
Yes.
A.
And was he going for election?
21
Q. 161
Yes.
22
A.
Then it does surprise me.
23
Q. 162
Now, 3122.
10:54:37 20
24
Is a list prepared of initials and parties and contributions.
And again, it's -- whilst it amounts to 22,150, the actual amount paid out,
10:55:00 25
Mr. Sweeney, was 23,450.
But again, I'm not going to take you through the
26
financial detail necessarily unless you wish me to do so, but I'm going to ask
27
you to accept as I go forward now that the documents establish a particular
28
pattern.
29 10:55:23 30
Do you understand?
A.
Yes.
Q. 163
Was there any discussion within Monarch as to, and certainly discussion with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:55:29
10:55:53
28 1
GRE, as to the headings of expenses in relation to Cherrywood that might be
2
recoverable by the Monarch Group?
3
A.
I really don't understand that question.
4
Q. 164
Okay.
It might be better, therefore, if I were to put up 8769.
This is a
5
schedule which accompanied a letter dated the 16th of March 1992.
6
accounts department of GRE Properties.
7
projections, Cherrywood Properties Limited Draft Development Plan cashflow
8
projections.
9
accountancy level between GRE and Monarch in relation to the development costs
10:56:21 10
To the
And it's headed Cherrywood project --
Would it be fair to say that there was ongoing contact at some
for Cherrywood?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 165
And in fact, we'll come to see your involvement in recovering some of those
13 14 10:56:31 15
costs -- or the GRE contribution for some of those costs, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 166
And there were negotiations and GRE were refusing to pay some of the costs,
16
isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 167
And you had to negotiate the recovery of some of those costs yourself, directly
19 10:56:43 20
21
with Mr. Baker, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 168
And you spearheaded those discussions.
You were the highest person within
22
Monarch to deal with the recovery of the costs.
23
speaking to Mr. Baker you were speaking at the highest level within GRE in
24
relation to the matter?
10:56:58 25
Presumably when you were
A.
Certainly but there were several strands and layers.
26
Q. 169
I accept that but they were lower strands and layers, isn't that right?
27
A.
There was accountant to accountant.
28 29 10:57:14 30
There was Richard Lynn to some other
executive and there was myself and Martin Baker I think. Q. 170
Mr. Beele, I think also. But yourself and Martin Baker did the final balancing, isn't that right? You were the two most senior people to deal with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
10:57:18
10:57:34
29 1
the matter.
2
discussions between yourself and Mr. Baker?
3
A.
4 5
Yes.
Any issues that arose and other discussions were left over to
When an impasse reached and I had to come in with Mr. Baker to sort it
out. Q. 171
Now, this letter, the letter accompanying this schedule is at 8767 and it's
6
dated the 16th of March 1992.
7
shows the monies, it proposes to show the monies paid to the 31st of January
8
1992, isn't that right? And that's the first column on the left?
9
And if we go back to the schedule at 8769.
A.
May I ask you to see the second page of the letter.
Q. 172
Of the letter, yes.
11
A.
Uh-huh.
12
Q. 173
And it attaches a breakdown of the invoices now claimed and it asks that if
10:58:06 10
It's at 8768.
Yes, thank you.
13
there are any queries perhaps Mr. Mullen would make contact with the under
14
signed, who was Mr. Lynn, or Ken Lawless.
10:58:29 15
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 174
What position did Mr. Lawless hold within the company?
17
A.
Mr. Lawless was an accountant.
18
Q. 175
Yes.
19 10:58:43 20
Now, I think a further projection was prepared, if we could have 3736,
please, on the 27th of April, '92. A.
Sorry, I missed that.
21
Q. 176
Sorry.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 177
-- being prepared on the 27th of April 1992.
24 10:58:57 25
This is a second similar type of projection --
Do you understand? You are
getting familiar, I take it now, Mr. Sweeney, with the format? A.
Yes.
26
Q. 178
Isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 179
And at the bottom of that list prepared on the 27th of April '92, there is a
29 10:59:10 30
It
handwritten note to Richard, who is presumably Mr. Lynn.
Which says "I can't
find the 25,000 pounds in respect of strategy consultancy fees. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Can you be
10:59:15
10:59:26
30 1
specific."
Do you see that note? Do you recognise that handwriting
2
Mr. Sweeney?
3
A.
I don't.
4
Q. 180
Mr. Glennane thought it might be the handwriting Mr. Lawless , that we saw
5
referred to in the March letter a moment ago.
6
A.
No, definitely not.
7
Q. 181
If we had 3992.
But it's not your handwriting?
This is a list prepared on the 28th of April.
That's the
8
following day, Mr. Sweeney.
9
manuscript instruction contained in the statement of the 27th of April '92.
10:59:56 10
And it takes account of the instruction, the
And it includes, as you will see there, four from the bottom under the heading
11
"strategy consultancy fees.
12
you to accept this for the moment, Mr. Sweeney, that that figure in fact should
13
be higher, but for the moment, do you see the 22,150?
14 11:00:16 15
April '92.
22,150."
A.
Yes.
Q. 182
That corresponds with, if we could have 8579.
Now, as I say and I ask
This is an internal document
16
produced, I understand, by Mr. Glennane.
17
the politicians in June '91.
18
moment, Mr. Sweeney, but in fact the 22,150 is shy of the actual amount paid.
19
Do you understand?
11:00:39 20
21
And it relates to the payments to
Now, you have to take my word for it, for the
A.
Yes.
Q. 183
But if we could go back to 3992.
When we're talking about strategy
22
consultancy fees, Mr. Sweeney, we're talking about payments to politicians
23
during this election, isn't that right?
24
A.
If that amount --
Q. 184
Yes.
26
A.
-- relates to that list.
27
Q. 185
Yes
28
A.
Then that is the case.
29
Q. 186
Yes.
11:00:57 25
11:01:06 30
Do you recall yesterday you were talking about being involved in the
preparation of budgets and projections for site development costs? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:01:13
11:01:27
31 1
A.
Um.
2
Q. 187
That you would have an involvement and you recall being involved in Tallaght
3 4
and in particular in relation to the construction costs? A.
5 6
Certainly in Tallaght.
When it came to construction cost, yes, certainly, I
would have been involved. Q. 188
Now, looking at that list, at 3992, there is a claim being submitted to GRE and
7
we'll see in a moment as we go through, how you negotiated 50 per cent of that
8
claim on behalf of Monarch.
9
fee of 22,150.
11:01:53 10
And indeed, in time when we add in a further 3,000 pounds
which was paid in May 1991.
11
But the claim attributes a strategy consultancy
figure comes to 27,850.
And we take account of an adjustment.
The
So if you for the moment, Mr. Sweeney --
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 189
-- and just bear with me on this, Mr. Glennane has dealt with this in evidence.
14
When we look at 22,150 we're really looking at 27,150 as having been paid by
11:02:14 15
May 1991.
16
A.
That's an additional 5,000?
17
Q. 190
It's 27,850.
18 19
It includes 3,000 and it includes an adjustment to bring the
21,000 -- the 22,150 up to the 23,450 that it should have been. A.
Yes.
Q. 191
That's terribly confusing I know.
21
A.
Uh-huh.
22
Q. 192
If I could have 8579.
11:02:32 20
Whoever did up the list of political contributions in
23
June '91 and prepared the list that we see on screen, they came to a figure of
24
22,150.
11:02:55 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 193
In fact, they should have come to a figure of 23,450.
27
there was a further 3,000 pounds made payable to cash.
28
A.
Does that mean that that adds up wrong?
29
Q. 194
Yes.
A.
Yeah.
11:03:03 30
And then in May '91
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:03:03
11:03:22
32 1
Q. 195
That should in fact be a higher figure is what I'm saying.
2
A.
And then?
3
Q. 196
You add-on a figure of 3,000 pounds cash, cheque made payable to cash in May
4
1991.
And that takes you up, Mr. Sweeney, to a figure of 27,850.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 197
Under the headings "strategic consultancy fees".
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 198
And 24,850 of that is attributable to the payments to politicians in June 1991?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 199
And we call that strategy consultancy fees?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 200
And we see it in that list there and we see it as being submitted to the GRE
11:03:38 10
13
company for the purpose of establishing a claim, 50 percent of which they're
14
liable to Monarch, isn't that right?
11:03:59 15
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 201
Did you know that such a claim was being made?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 202
Did you have input into a claim or an attribution for these figures to the
19 11:04:22 20
strategy consultancy fees? A.
Where are the -- where the actual heading came from I'm not entirely sure.
21
Q. 203
Yes.
22
A.
It sounds a pretty typical heading.
23
Q. 204
Yes.
24
A.
Well you have to call it something.
Q. 205
Well you could call it political contributions, presumably?
26
A.
Yes, you could have.
27
Q. 206
Now, I think that the agreement between yourselves and GRE were for the payment
11:04:39 25
28 29 11:04:55 30
Well what do you mean by "typical heading" Mr. Sweeney?
of third party 50 percent of third party costs, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 207
And the claim in relation to the strategy consultancy fees fell under a claim Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:05:02
11:05:10
33 1
for third party costs?
2
A.
Um, they did.
3
Q. 208
Yes.
4
A.
Right.
5
Q. 209
I can -- I'll take you through the correspondence.
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 210
I'm anxious not to get weighed down too much on the correspondence.
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 211
I will take you through it.
11:05:24 10
And perhaps I should in fairness to you, to show
you how you came to argue for it, Mr. Sweeney.
As you say, and if I could
11
start at 3987.
12
financial records of the Monarch Group.
13
fourth down.
14
of Monarch Properties Services, of those payments totalling 15,350.
11:05:55 15
This is the entry in the records of the Monarch Group, the And you will see there just third or
A whole series of entries in the sponsorship account of GRE --
see those?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 212
And they were transferred across to the promotions account.
18
promotions account together with a further 8,100 pounds.
19
3988.
11:06:16 20
Do you
A.
21
You see further entries there?
The Cherrywood
If we could have
Again third or fourth down "J Hand."
Mr. Chairman, I have seen these documents in the brief.
And it may short
circuit things a little bit to know that I have read most of them.
22 23 24
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
And --
11:06:27 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
That will speed up things.
27 28 29 11:06:40 30
Q. 213
MR. QUINN: And those documents, and those payments, came into the general promotions, Cherrywood promotions account. expenses.
They were queried.
They were included as third party
We have correspondence in relation to the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:06:46
11:07:08
34 1
querying of them.
2
1992 to Mr. Baker.
3
matter? And then he wrote back to you on the 24th of August in relation to the
4
expenses.
5
a letter of the 2nd of October 1992, at 3837.
6
on that letter, Mr. Sweeney? That's a letter signed by you to Mr. Baker and it
7
sets out the position of your claim for your share.
8
management fees for the period September '89 to June '92 and from July '92 to
9
March '93.
11:07:39 10
'92.
And then you got involved I think and you wrote in July We have that at 3789, isn't that right, in relation to the
There was further correspondence.
And I think it culminated with
And do you see item No. 2 there
And you're claiming
You're claiming costs, Monarch costs for September '89 to June
And then you're making a claim for third party outlay from September '89
11
to June '92 of 556,288.
12
less whatever has been paid to date.
13
up a moment ago, which related to the payments, are included in that figure of
14
556.
11:08:11 15
They are entitled to, you claim 50 percent of that The strategy management fees that we had
A.
I don't see the figure 556.
16
Q. 214
You see No. 2? Third party outlay from September '89 to June '92?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 215
If you take it from me, that that strategy management fee is in there?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 216
And you're seeking that?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 217
And you're seeking that and you're justifying your claim in the context of the
11:08:14 20
23 24 11:08:26 25
agreement which you had, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 218
And you're setting out a strategy.
And you're talking about what you have
26
done to date in relation to the lands.
If we look at 3838, which is the
27
second page of that letter, just to put it in context.
28
the recent meeting.
And you referred to
Do you see that?
29 11:08:45 30
"Where I told you at a recent meeting that we'd been asked -- we had asked some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:08:50
11:08:59
35 1
representatives to request Dublin County management that the Dun
2
Laoghaire/Rathdown portion of the Draft Development Plan be finalised ahead of
3
the other two areas comprising Fingal and south Dublin."
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 219
That was a strategy that you had embarked upon, isn't that right? Who had
6
made, come up with that strategy or that suggestion, Mr. Sweeney?
7
A.
Could I have the date of that letter again?
8
Q. 220
That's October '92?
9
A.
October '92.
Q. 221
Yes.
11
A.
Regarding strategy.
12
Q. 222
Yes.
13
A.
And they would have developed from one of those meetings.
14
Q. 223
Okay.
11:09:19 10
11:09:29 15
Well there would have been numerous meetings in-house.
Somebody, but you can't say who, had come up with this suggestion; that
you would expedite matters if the council were just to approve the plan in
16
relation to the area where these lands were situated, isn't that right?
17
A.
Oh, absolutely.
18
Q. 224
And you advised there that there were upcomings meeting on the 29th and 30th of
19
The expedition was the key word.
September in relation to the written statement, isn't that right, and how they
11:09:51 20
might effect the lands?
21 22
And you said "In order to achieve these results it was and is necessary to
23
continue contacts with those representatives favourable to our side.
24
Unfortunately, there is still a strong core of members opposed to any
11:10:01 25
development and we'll take every opportunity to limit development of the lands.
26
We must continue to hold our support and recent discussions with other parties
27
suggest that additional support has been attracted to our side."
28
right?
29 11:10:13 30
Isn't that
A.
Yes.
Q. 225
Now, you've set up another strategy. You go on to say "That unemployment is a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:10:17
11:10:38
36 1
big issue here at the moment and will be the main feature in the next General
2
Election which will take place in mid '93.
3
fore as a source of creating employment and it may be that we should add an
4
additional 5/20 acres to the business park element to make the scheme even more
5
employment friendly.
6
and we see the attached map as a possible lay out to achieve this end.
7
would like you to make yourself available to meet with senior politicians to
8
emphasis your concern about the delay in bringing this project to a
9
commencement date."
We have taken Cherrywood to the
We are sounding this out with a few of the politicians I
11:10:53 10
11
You were seeking the support of GRE in making themselves available to so that
12
he that they could meet with senior politicians?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 226
Because of the delay in the implementation of the Development Plan?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 227
Did any such meetings take place, Mr. Sweeney?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 228
What politicians, what senior politicians had you in mind when you wrote this
11:11:03 15
19 11:11:11 20
letter? A.
21 22
Just anyone who might have had the power to
influence. Q. 229
23 24
Um, I can't recall specifically.
I think the Minister for the Environment in 1992 might have been Mr. Flynn. Isn't that right?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 230
You don't know, but in any event, you say no such meetings took place?
26
A.
With?
27
Q. 231
Politicians?
28
A.
With GRE, no.
29
Q. 232
You say that I am also enclosing the planning construction programme for the
11:11:33 25
11:11:44 30
project. This is based on a Draft Development Plan being finalised in April Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:11:48
11:11:59
37 1
1993 or at least we knowing that at that stage that it will -- what it will
2
contain.
3
with only holding four meetings per month, it is frustratingly slow."
The progress of the review of the Development PLan is torturous and
4 5
You said that "I am also enclosing a background memo as to the input of the
6
Monarch technical team and also the political input made to date which you may
7
find useful."
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
Can we have the next page?
11:12:10 10
11
Q. 233
MR. QUINN: That's at 3839.
Now, first of all, can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
12
And I have to tell you that unfortunately Monarch have been unable to discover
13
to the Tribunal, the schedules that accompanied this letter.
14
what was the political input background that you were able to advise Mr. Baker
11:12:31 15
of in that letter?
16
A.
Can I see that?
17
Q. 234
Yes, it's at the very top.
18 19 11:12:49 20
Can I ask you,
"I am enclosing a background memo."
Do you see
that? A.
Yes.
Q. 235
"As to the input of the Monarch technical team and also the political input
21
made to date which you may find useful."
22
think the Tribunal is anxious to establish from you as the author of this
23
letter.
24
date?
11:13:06 25
So what I'm anxious to know and I
What did that memo contain in relation to political input made to
A.
The answer is I don't know what I meant there.
26
Q. 236
This is October 1992, Mr. Sweeney, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 237
You were writing in the context of seeking to recover the GRE share of the
29 11:13:22 30
outlay -A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:13:22
11:13:39
38 1
Q. 238
2
-- incurred.
That claim includes 556,000 for third party outlay, isn't that
right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 239
As we see.
5
Included in that 556,000 is the 27,000 odd payments under
strategy, which had been paid to councillors.
Isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 240
You are putting forward a case, you're setting out the strategy for the future,
8 9 11:13:48 10
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 241
And you're setting out a memo which shows the input of the Monarch technical
11
team to date.
But also you're setting out a memo which includes the political
12
input to date, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes, I'm trying to figure that out but I really can't put anything around it.
14
Q. 242
Well doing the best you can, Mr. Sweeney, what do you think it might have
11:14:09 15
included? What was the political input to date other than the contributions
16 17
made to the political system in June 1991? A.
Well that's what I would have thought.
I would have thought that the
18
political input would have been what you just mentioned, for the strategy
19
payments.
11:14:33 20
Other than that, I can wrack my mind about it but I really can't
get anything that would fit in.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn, can I ask just when the discovery.
I know you say
23
that Monarch have been unable to discover the political input memo.
24
about the other background memo?
What
11:14:48 25
26
MR. QUINN: No, no.
27
But --
It might all in fact have been the one memo I think.
28 29
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Maybe one document.
11:14:56 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:14:56
11:15:01
39 1
MR. QUINN: One document.
In any event it hasn't been discovered.
2 3
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
4 5
Q. 243
6
MR. QUINN: And Mr. Sweeney, you can't assist the Tribunal in relation to what that memo might contain in relation to the political input to date?
7
A.
No but I'll certainly wrack my mind about it.
8
Q. 244
Yes.
9
A.
It's possible that it could be just a phrase.
11:15:20 10
11
You know, to mention what had
been mentioned before but it doesn't look like that. Q. 245
12
Well can I approach it another way Mr. Sweeney.
I can't recall it.
You had meetings with GRE,
isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 246
And you said that the board were aware that there were going to be payments
11:15:35 15
made in June '91 for that Local Election, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 247
Were GRE aware that contributions were made in advance of them being made in
18 19 11:15:47 20
June '91? A.
They certainly were.
Q. 248
And was it a source of discussion between the -- yourselves, Monarch and GRE in
21
relation to your approach that that Local Election?
22
A.
Was it a source of?
23
Q. 249
Of discussion or agreement as to what would happen in relation to requests for
24 11:16:06 25
26
contributions for that Local Election? A.
Yes, everything to do with the project was discussed.
Q. 250
And those payments were strategy payments, isn't that right? They were
27
described as such --
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 251
-- in the document.
11:16:20 30
"Strategy consultancy fees."
please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
If we could have 3992,
11:16:21
11:16:33
40 1
A.
2
Yeah, what I'm finding it difficult to understand, Chairman, is was there a thing called political payments on that list?
3
Q. 252
Not -- no.
4
A.
So it's just a summary of what the --
5
Q. 253
They come in under the heading strategy consultancy fees.
6
A.
So that last paragraph you were talking about was really to indicate a summary
7
Not on the list, no.
of what the political input had been to date?
8
Q. 254
I suspect so, Mr. Sweeney.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 255
No, the money -- the political contributions are in under "third party costs"
11:16:49 10
11
But there's certainly no money attached to it?
and they're in a sub-heading called "strategy consultancy fees".
12
A.
Yeah.
13
Q. 256
On the 15th of October 1992, at 3842, there was simultaneous correspondence I
14
Well it doesn't help me remember but ...
think in relation to outstanding monies on the Tallaght project, isn't that
11:17:26 15
right written bring Mr. Monahan?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 257
But in any any event, I think that Mr. Baker wrote to Mr. Monahan on the 15th
18
of October 1992.
19
comments in appendix two in relation to the claim.
11:17:49 20
And we see it, as I say, 3842.
see at the very bottom of 3843.
21
And he sets out his Now, that's at 3843.
You
You would have got a copy of that letter
yourself and Mr. Glennane, isn't that right?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 258
And if we look at the accompanying.
24
If we could get to 3845, please.
And
you see there heading "agrees fees to be paid" and under item 14 heading
11:18:10 25
"Cabinteely outstanding development costs."
26
And there's our figure; 556
again?
27
A.
Right.
28
Q. 259
And just to confuse matters somewhat, Mr. Sweeney, in fact, that figure shut be
29 11:18:29 30
netted back to 550,977, but I'm not going to go into that detail. A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:18:29
11:18:47
41 1
Q. 260
You can take it that GRE are prepared at that stage to make that payment.
And
2
if we go to 3850.
Under the heading "third parties costs" it says "GRE
3
confirmed that they would be responsible for 50 percent of 556,288.
4
this is subject to confirmation from GRE that the invoices are properly payable
5
and in this respect I would refer to the recent correspondence between Monarch
6
and G Beng."
However,
7 8
Paragraph 2.
9
third party costs amounting to 18,500 pounds on the receipt of proper
11:19:01 10
"GRE confirmed that they would agree to pay 50 percent of future
invoices."
11 12
So subject to proper invoices, that figure has been agreed, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 261
And when I say proper invoices, that is to say an invoice between the third
11:19:12 15
party and Monarch rather than an invoice between Monarch and GRE?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 262
But of course the recipients of that money wouldn't be providing invoices, I
18 19
take it? A.
This is the political contributions?
Q. 263
Yes.
21
A.
No.
22
Q. 264
And I think an invoice was indeed raised between Monarch and GRE.
11:19:29 20
They might be sending letters acknowledging receipt. And we see
23
that at 3955, that's an invoice No. 1932 raised on the 15th of December 1992.
24
And the figure, you see the figure 55,978? That's the revised figure?
11:19:54 25
26
A.
Yes.
Q. 265
The 50 percent contribution is 275,489.
And a payment had already been made
27
by them of 71,463 leaving a balance outstanding of 261,878 allowing for VAT,
28
isn't that right?
29 11:20:08 30
A.
Yes.
Q. 266
Do you know if that figure or sum was ever paid by GRE? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:20:19
11:20:28
42 1
A.
Which figure?
2
Q. 267
That is the amount outstanding on that invoice.
3
A.
Like 261?
4
Q. 268
261.
5
A.
I would think it would have been paid.
6
Q. 269
Yes.
7
A.
But I -- yep.
8
Q. 270
But there is no doubt, Mr. Sweeney, that the payments to the politicians --
9
sorry.
11:20:51 10
11
in connection with the Cherrywood lands? A.
12 13
The payments made in 1991 Local Elections were considered as payments
Yes, in so far as the Cherrywood lands was the only big job that was going on at the time.
Q. 271
14
Yes.
There were payments in connection with the Cherrywood lands and the
Cherrywood lands were being -- were in the process of being rezoned at that
11:21:12 15
time, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 272
And the councillors would have to vote on the rezoning of the lands and the
18
upcoming meetings of the council after the publication of the Draft Development
19
Plan?
11:21:25 20
21
A.
Yes.
Q. 273
And the monies paid were described as strategy consultancy fees, isn't that
22
right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 274
And GRE, a claim was made on GRE for the recovery of 50 percent of those fees?
A.
Yes.
Q. 275
And GRE agreed to make the contributions in relation to the fees but that any
11:21:36 25
26 27
third party outlay in the future was limited as per that letter at 3850 to 50
28
percent of 18,500 pounds and only on receipt of proper invoices, isn't that
29
right?
11:21:55 30
A.
Yes, that was the position at that time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:21:57
11:22:14
43 1
Q. 276
Yes.
Therefore, we can take it, Mr. Sweeney, that when we see the reference
2
to strategy consultancy fees, we're looking at a reference to payments to the
3
political system, isn't that right?
4
A.
In this particular case, yes.
5
Q. 277
Now, yesterday we spoke about projected payments, isn't that right? And the
6
possibility of budgets.
I mean, large organisations operate on budgets and
7
coming in, setting themselves targets, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 278
And presumably joint ventures, as this was, would also involve itself in
11:22:39 10
projections.
11
Your partners would want to know, as you did, what the likely
projection for the future was?
12
A.
Yes, that would be normal.
13
Q. 279
And you would try and seek agreement in advance in relation to upcoming
14 11:22:45 15
16
payments? A.
Yes, if possible.
Q. 280
Yeah.
17
And you try and project insofar as you could, the outlays that you
would make in a particular area, isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 281
And if we go back now to the schedule at 3992 for the 28th of April 1992.
11:23:07 20
see the claim for the 22,150 as having been paid in April '92.
In fact, it
21
had been paid in May June '91, but the claim is coming in here in April '92,
22
isn't that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 282
Under the heading "strategy consultancy fee".
A.
Yes.
Q. 283
For the Cherrywood village.
11:23:25 25
26
We
And we have agreed that that figure in fact is
27
27,850.
28
strategy consultancy fee.
29
words, these are the projections for payments under this heading for April and
11:23:46 30
But leaving that figure aside for the moment and just looking at the
May -- sorry.
Just look to the figures to the right.
In other
May and June 1992, a sum of 10,000 and a sum of 50,000.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't
11:23:53
11:24:13
44 1
it fair to say that it was anticipated in April '92 that under this heading
2
strategy consultancy fee, which is a payment to the political system, it was
3
projected that the payments for May and June of 1992 would be 60,000?
4
A.
Yes, that looks like that.
5
Q. 284
And can I ask you, who would have projected that level of payment at that time?
6
A.
I don't know.
7
Q. 285
Well, as one of the three board members, Mr. Sweeney, who within Monarch would
8 9
have been projecting that level of payment at that time? A.
I can only speculate on that.
Q. 286
Well, I think it's probably best that you should, Mr. Sweeney.
11
A.
Well I would think Mr. Lynn would have provided those figures.
12
Q. 287
So Mr. Lynn was figuring that it was going to -- he was going to layout 60,000
11:24:35 10
13
pounds in May and June 1992 as of April '92, he was anticipating an expenditure
14
for the political contributions for May and June of 60,000?
11:24:59 15
16
A.
Well provided my speculation is right, yes.
Q. 288
Yes.
17
And that would have to receive approval from somebody within Monarch, I
presume?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 289
At a senior level?
A.
Yes.
Q. 290
And who was the most senior person within Monarch who had responsibility to
11:25:09 20
21 22
sanction payments?
23
A.
Well ...
24
Q. 291
Or expenditure?
A.
Payments of this type?
26
Q. 292
Yes.
27
A.
Um, it would be a mixture of the individual members of the board, myself,
11:25:20 25
28 29 11:25:39 30
Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan. Q. 293
And that was the projected expenditure at that time, isn't that right? Now, if I move forward then to July 1992.
If we could have 3789, please.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Now, this
11:25:46
11:26:08
45 1
is your letter to Mr. Baker in July of 1992.
And it again relates to the
2
outlay claim that we referred to earlier, which seems to have been resolved
3
around October 1992.
4
in relation to the second paragraph there.
But if I could refer you to the heading "costs" and just You say:
5 6
"I attach an estimate of future costs which may be incurred on the Draft
7
Development Plan amounting to 63,500 exclusive of project management fee".
8
Do you see that?
9 11:26:20 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 294
Now, that's -- you are advising.
11
You are seeking recovery of costs to date
and you are now giving a projection of costs into the future, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 295
And you accompany that document with a schedule, isn't that right, making up
14
that 63,500?
11:26:42 15
And if we could have 8753, please.
Do you see the figure of
63,500?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 296
These are projected expenditures for August to December '92.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 297
"Irish Productivity Centre 1,500 pounds" and Mr Gilmore has given evidence,
11:26:55 20
Mr. Sweeney, which you may or may not be familiar with, to the effect, that he
21
had asked or challenged figures that were being produced in relation to the job
22
creation prospects of a science park and the Irish Productivity Centre I think
23
had been asked?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 298
And that figure presumably would relate to that element of costs.
26
A.
Yes, I remember that.
27
Q. 299
Yes.
11:27:12 25
28 29 11:27:31 30
Legal fees -- legal of 7,000.
MPSL staff costs 35,000 and then
strategy consultancy 10,000. A.
Yes.
Q. 300
Now, what payments did you envisage amounting to 10,000 pounds for strategy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:27:35
11:27:48
46 1
consultancy were likely to take place between August and December '92?
2
A.
I don't know.
3
Q. 301
Who would have provided you with the schedule accompanying your letter,
4
Mr. Sweeney?
5
A.
The schedule accompanied that letter and parts of the letter themselves --
6
Q. 302
Yes.
7
A.
-- would have been as a result of me asking various executives for their input.
8
Q. 303
And who --
9
A.
Into that letter.
Q. 304
And who would have given you the figure strategy consultancy 10,000, do you
11:28:01 10
11
think?
12
A.
It would have been the same as I said before.
13
Q. 305
Mr. Lynn.
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 306
And I think also accompanying that letter was a projection for planning costs.
11:28:09 15
16
If we could have 3791.
17
relation to Cherrywood Properties Limited.
18
item there.
19
third month."
11:28:37 20
This is a planning application cashflow projection in
"Strategy consultancy fees.
And if we look at the second last Total 40,000.
Payable on the
Presumably the third month after planning application had been
lodged?
21
A.
Okay.
22
Q. 307
Yes.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 308
And perhaps it might have been fairer to you had I done it from the outset.
A.
Yes.
Q. 309
It's at 3789. And I can get you a hard copy of it.
11:28:55 25
26
Can I see the context of that letter? In fact, I should open I think in total the letter to you, Mr. Sweeney.
And you say:
27 28
It's written by you.
29
letter of the 16th of July 1992.
11:29:12 30
It's to Martin Baker.
It says "Many thanks for your
And at the outset I wish to keep the
Cabinteely project separate to Tallaght and in this letter will address those Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:29:16
11:29:30
47 1
issues relevant to Cabinteely. I understand a separate communication will
2
issue in relation to the position on Tallaght.
3
regarding the zoning position and it accurately reflects the position.
4
dates for the particular meetings have not as yet been set but prior to the
5
summer recess, the council was meeting on a weekly basis to deal with the Draft
6
Development Plan.
7
behalf.
I have noted your note The
Richard Lynn has attended most of these meetings on our
And will let you have the dates of the said meetings in due course."
8 9
Just to stop there, Mr. Sweeney. Would it be fair to say that Mr. Lynn was the
11:29:46 10
representative of Monarch at the cold face in relation to the Development Plan
11
review?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 310
Now, then you go on to say under the heading 'costs'.
14 11:29:58 15
"I note that you've approved payments of 149,898 pounds and are presently
16
checking the further invoices per schedule eight which amount to 99,858 pounds
17
and not 56,784 pounds as mentioned in yours.
18
costs which may be incurred on the draft development plan amounting to 63,500
19
exclusive of project management fee.
11:30:22 20
21
I attach an estimate of future
You will appreciate that this is an
estimate only and depending upon the outcome of the September meeting this sum could vary either up or down.
22 23
however, as costs are incurred we will continue to forward same to you. In
24
this connection, Richard Lynn has indicated that your Mr. Geoff Beng was to
11:30:38 25
clarify queries he had previously raised.
As far as we can ascertain you are
26
in receipt of all of the relevant invoices and should be in a position to deal
27
with these."
28 29 11:30:47 30
Under the head "planning application cashflow". "I enclose as requested a schedule of projected costs associated with the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:30:51
11:31:00
48 1
planning application.
The schedule is based on our overall application but
2
does not include for a planning appeal."
3 4
Fees to Monarch.
5
forwarded to Brian Gillies, a breakdown of the staff costs involved by MPSL of
6
the Draft Development Plan submission and result in lobbying.
7
will talk to Brian about this sum as no queries have been raised to date.
8
in complete agreement with you that it is essential that the matter be resolved
9
as quickly as possible and in that you may have the schedule to hand since the
11:31:20 10
14th of July '92.
By letter of letter of 14th July '93 Richard Lynn had
Perhaps you I'm
Perhaps we could hear from you."
11 12
Joint venture agreement: "We agreed at our meeting that you would instruct Ian
13
Scott to prepare a new agreement to take us through the completion of the
14
zoning/planning and we look forward to receiving this in due course which will
11:31:32 15
have our earlier attention.
I would like to conclude by saying that you in
16
recognition must be given to what has been achieved in obtaining commercial
17
zoning on 25 acres of land.
18
assisted by the fact that Monarch had engaged in the Dun Laoghaire project.
19
We were able to convince the councillors that the Cherrywood project would not
11:31:53 20
21
This decision we have, we belive was greatly
have an adverse impact on Dun Laoghaire and demonstrated our confidence in Dun Laoghaire in going ahead simultaneously with that development.
22 23
We are of the opinion that four houses to the acre will be achieved and the
24
residue of the lands and we continue to keep contact with the vital public
11:32:12 25
representatives to ensure that this objective is met.
There have been total
26
commitment given by the Monarch staff and management to the Cherrywood project.
27
And it would be greatly appreciated if due recognition was given to this by the
28
release of the monies due on Cherrywood by your good selves.
29
that a meeting between us would be beneficial to progress to matters, I am of
11:32:24 30
course available.
Yours sincerely."
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
If you may feel
11:32:28
11:32:35
49 1
It might have been fairer in a way had I read that letter to you.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 311
But I don't think that it greatly alters matters.
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 312
The schedule if we put it back up at 3791, is your schedule of projected fees
6
in relation to a planning application excluding the possible fees incurred in
7
an appeal, isn't that right? And what I'm asking you, Mr. Sweeney, is who
8
provided for you the figure of 40,000 pounds strategy consultancy fee in
9
relation to a planning application?
11:32:57 10
A.
I don't know.
11
Q. 313
And can you speculate as to how that figure was arrived at?
12
A.
There seem to be very bald figures put in there generally.
13 14
There's a
contingency of 100,000 also I see. Q. 314
11:33:28 15
But you agree with me that a strategy consultancy fee of that order is -anticipates a contribution to the political system?
16
A.
It seems to be the same.
17
Q. 315
Yes.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 316
It's now half eleven, Sir.
As the earlier payments?
I propose to move on to a new topics.
11:33:45 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
So we'll take a ten minutes break.
22 23
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK
24
AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:
11:34:10 25
26
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
27 28
MR SANFEY:
I wonder if I could just address the position of Mr. Paul Monahan?
29 11:50:59 30
Chairman, after Mr. Monahan gave his evidence earlier in the week, you made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:51:04
11:51:19
50 1
certain observations and said that you would give Mr. Monahan a further
2
opportunity in the course of this week to give additional evidence to the
3
Tribunal. And I had said that we would meet with Mr. Monahan and advise him
4
and take instructions and so on.
5 6
Now, can I say Mr. Chairman, we have done that.
7
considering his position.
8
opportunity for Mr. Monahan to give evidence this week anyway because
9
Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Dunlop had to be taken.
11:51:37 10
And Mr. Monahan is
I should say, it appeared that there wouldn't be an
So the present position is that
we hope to meet with Mr. Monahan and determine his position early next week.
11
And if we were to ask the Tribunal at that time for an opportunity for him to
12
give further evidence, we would make that clear to the Tribunal at the earliest
13
possible opportunity
14 11:51:49 15
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
Thanks fine.
16 17
MR SANFEY:
I'm grateful.
Thank you, Sir.
18 19 11:51:59 20
Q. 317
MR. QUINN: Thank you Mr. Sweeney.
Mr. Sweeney, just before the break we were
dealing with the period June 1991 and if I could have 8927, please.
In August
21
1991 there appears to have been a meeting between Monarch representatives and
22
Anglo Irish Bank.
23
of this meeting.
24
working on it", that presumably is Phil Monahan.
11:52:28 25
And just if you look at the -- this is a handwritten note But if you look under the third line heading "sewer.
"PM
"Said to be on Minister's
desk awaiting approval."
26 27
That I presume is the contract document hadn't been received back by the
28
minister in relation to the Carrickmines sewer and the minister had to give
29
approval for the sanction of the funds for the construction of the sewer.
11:52:41 30
And
that somebody is updating the bank at that time, that is to say August 1991 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:52:46
11:52:59
51 1
it's an unsatisfactory letter I accept.
But would you accept that it does
2
appear to show that somebody from Monarch is advising the bank that the
3
document is on the minister's desk awaiting approval?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 318
And I think in September 1991, at 3326.
There was a meeting attended by you,
6
Mr. Lafferty, McCabe and Messrs. Lynn. And again, under the heading Cherrywood
7
"ES advised F McCabe that consideration was being given towards submitting an
8
outline planning application to bring forward construction of the sewerage
9
system", isn't that right? This was a strategy being devised at this stage
11:53:26 10
that is to say September 1991, to advance the construction or expedite the
11
construction of the sewage system that you would lodge a planning application?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 319
And you were advising there your planner that consideration was being given to
14
that.
11:53:46 15
And again, on the 25th of September 1991, at 3341.
There's a further
meeting between Monarch Properties Services Limited representatives and
16
representatives of experts retained by the company.
17
to 3342, which is the very last paragraph.
And if we could just go
18 19
Under the heading Carrickmines Valley sewage system "ES requested that a letter
11:54:05 20
be sent to each of the directors requesting assistance and having the
21
Carrickmines sewage system sanctioned."
22 23
I take it that you are requesting that a letter be sent to Mr. Glennane and
24
Mr. Monahan that they provide assistance in trying to have that constructed?
11:54:19 25
A.
26
No, Chairman.
What that means is a letter to the directors of each of the end
users mentioned in the previous paragraph.
27
Q. 320
Oh, I see, I'm sorry.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 321
In other words that the people who might take up options on the site.
A.
Yes.
11:54:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:54:37
11:54:53
52 1
Q. 322
That they might put exercise some influence in having the matter expedited?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 323
Yes.
Now, that takes us then I think to the end of November 1991 and at this
4
stage between September and November 1991, Mr. McCabe has put in a further
5
submission during the display period.
6
was the 3rd of December 1991.
And at 8095, I think there is a further meeting
7
held on the 25th of November.
Under the heading "Cabinteely zoning submission
8
to be lodged further meetings with O'Herlihy on Tuesday."
9
stage you had retained the services of Mr. O'Herlihy in relation to the matter,
11:55:18 10
I think the final date for submission
isn't that right, and he was PRI consultants, is that correct?
11
A.
Yes, it would be around about that time.
12
Q. 324
Yes.
13 14 11:55:31 15
And I think at this
And these led on to the road shows and the briefings and the videos that
we've heard about, isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 325
And at 3522.
On the 3rd of December 1991, Mr. Lafferty is sending you a
16
memorandum advising you that himself and Mr. Richard Lynn had met Ms. Coffey,
17
Fianna Fail councillor for Dun Laoghaire, in connection with the Cabinteely
18
scheme.
19
any shopping development outside Dun Laoghaire.
11:55:59 20
And while she stated that she liked the scheme she would not support And they were able to tell
her that you were considering development in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 326
And again, would it be fair to say that whilst you did go on to develop both
23
the Bloomfield site and the Pavilion site, that it was a strategy at this time
24
to advise local councillors that you were not neglecting Dun Laoghaire.
11:56:18 25
you were going to develop Dun Laoghaire.
26
That
And try and calm their fears in
relation to the development of Cabinteely at the expense of Dun Laoghaire?
27
A.
Yes, this became a particular bone of contention with some councillors.
28
Q. 327
Yes.
29
A.
Who were very protective of Dun Laoghaire town centre.
Q. 328
But there was a benefit from Monarch's point of view at this time in promoting
11:56:36 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:56:42
11:56:59
53 1
their presence in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
The benefit at that time was to be towards the Cherrywood scheme.
3
Q. 329
Yes.
And in fact, I think you sought contributions from GRE at some stage in
4
relation to your outlay in Dun Laoghaire, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 330
And you sought it on the basis that this would be of benefit to the Cabinteely
7
project, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 331
Now, I think then at 2129, to return to your statement and dealing with 1992.
11:57:14 10
You there set out the involvement of Monarch in 1992, isn't that right? And
11
you say "This year also saw the planning stages for a road show in respect of
12
the lands at Cherrywood to explain the merits of the Monarch scheme to the
13
community. Bill O'Herlihy, public relations was involved in this and also
14
conducted staff training in meeting public representatives I think."
11:57:35 15
"In media/public relations expertise", isn't that correct.
Sorry.
And you say "As
16
part of this road show I would have met certain public representatives to lobby
17
in respect of the development in Cherrywood as part of this process I can
18
recall having lunch in the Shelbourne with Mary Flaherty TD, dinner with
19
Senator Councillor Don and Maeve Lydon in Kielys in Donnybrook and lunch with
11:57:54 20
Councillor Tom Hand at a Chinese restaurant in Sandymount."
21
A.
Yeah.
22
Q. 332
And you deal with the other areas the Phoenix Park race course, the Blackrock
23
baths, the golf course and hotel resort in Donegal and the science conferences
24
in Hong Kong and Singapore."
11:58:11 25
Isn't that right? They were all projects that
you were involved in at that time?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 333
Just in relation to your meetings with Mary Flaherty, Don Lydon and Tom Hand,
28
can I ask you just in relation to Mary Flaherty, she has given evidence to the
29
Tribunal that you had asked her to have a word with her colleagues and seek
11:58:24 30
their support.
Would that be fair, a fair representation of what happened
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
11:58:30
11:58:53
54 1 2
between you? A.
No, Chairman.
That was near enough what happened but what my recollection of
3
what happened at that lunch was that we discussed the success, if you like,
4
that we had in Finglas shopping centre, of which she was very helpful to us.
5
And I didn't ask for any introductions but I simply said that I would be
6
meeting various councillors and would I have her permission to ask them to
7
contact her for basically a reference to sound our praises, hopefully.
8
was my recollection of it.
9
Q. 334
I see.
A.
She certainly did.
11
Q. 335
Yes.
12
A.
But I must say, she did not introduce me to anyone.
13
Q. 336
Now, at 2183.
11:59:16 10
14
That
And did she give that permission to you?
Again, you deal with that early period in late '91 early '92.
And you say "That Monarch started a road show with video models drawings and
11:59:38 15
perspectives of development taking it on public display over six or seven
16
consecutive weekends at various schools and other locations around the
17
Cherrywood area.
18
show and many of these were trained in media/relations where Bill O'Herlihy has
19
come from so that they could deal with the general public.
11:59:53 20
Each member of the Monarch Group was involved in this road
At the same time
a lobbying exercise was started with politicians and councillors, especially
21
those who were local and near the Cherrywood area including Donal Marren, Larry
22
Lohan, Larry Butler, John Barrett, Frank Smith, Don Lydon, Eamonn Gilmore.
23
This was co-ordinated by Richard Lynn and many of the Monarch staff were given
24
certain councillors to contact for their support.
12:00:13 25
I would have contacted
Flaherty, Don Lydon and Tom Hand in this respect."
Isn't that right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 337
Now, we do know that the councillors, if I could have 7144.
That is to say
28
Councillors Lydon and Hand.
29
department of Dublin County Council a motion which if successful would have
12:00:37 30
On the 4th of May 1992 lodged with the planning
improved the zoning on the lands, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:00:40
12:00:56
55 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 338
Now, you were assigned these two councillors you've told us in your statement.
3
Can I ask you, your involvement with these councillors and in particular any
4
involvement you may have had which led to the tabling of this motion by them?
5
A.
Yes.
I met them I think one for lunch and one for dinner.
And basically, I
6
was trying to explain Cherrywood to them.
7
attention on the science and technology end of it.
8
those meetings we didn't talk specifically about Cherrywood.
9
social and it was talking about travel and talking about this that and the
12:01:34 10
other.
11 12
I have to say that at It was pretty
And then at some point we would have talked about Cherrywood but not
an awful lot of it. Q. 339
13 14
And specifically having a bit of a
Do you know how Councillors Hand and Lydon came to table this motion, Mr. Sweeney?
A.
Not specifically.
Q. 340
Who would have asked them to table the motion, do you know?
16
A.
Yes.
Most certainly it would have been Mr. Lynn.
17
Q. 341
Yes.
And did Mr. Lynn advise you that he had been successful in asking these
12:01:52 15
18 19 12:02:08 20
gentlemen to table a motion? A.
Not that I recall specifically but certainly I would have become aware of it.
Q. 342
Can I ask you how the -- how these two particular councillors were assigned to
21
your allocation of councillors that you would lobby?
22
A.
I can't say specifically but there was the luck of the draw.
23
Q. 343
Yes.
24 12:02:32 25
26
But from what you say Mr. Lynn also would have lobbied them at this
time? A.
Yes.
Q. 344
When you spoke with them you didn't speak with them in the context of putting
27
in motions?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 345
Did they ever ask you for any contribution towards the cost of putting in this
12:02:45 30
motion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:02:45
12:03:00
56 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 346
Did you know that a motion had been lodged by Councillors Lydon and Hand in May
3
'92?
4
A.
Um, did I know that the time?
5
Q. 347
Yes.
6
A.
Um, I would have known at that time, yes.
7
Q. 348
Did it -- it didn't surprise you I take it therefore having regard to your
8
discussions with them that they were promoting a motion which would have been
9
beneficial to Monarch interest?
12:03:13 10
A.
Yes, yes.
You mentioned previous to that the video.
11
Q. 349
Yes.
12
A.
I just wonder, Mr. Chairman, has the Tribunal seen that video?
13 14
CHAIRMAN:
We haven't seen it.
12:03:27 15
16
Q. 350
MR. QUINN: I don't think we have, Mr. Sweeney.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 351
But we'll make efforts, you think it might be beneficial to the Tribunal's
19 12:03:35 20
deliberations? A.
Yes. I certainly think it would.
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll certainly look at it.
23 24
Q. 352
12:03:42 25
MR. QUINN: In any event, as it happened.
The two councillors that you were
detailed to canvass, lobbied -- lodged a motion which was -- which if sucessful
26
would have been beneficial to the Monarch interest.
Isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 353
The text of that motion, did you have any input into the text of that motion?
29
A.
No.
Q. 354
Who would have advised Councillors Hand and Lydon about the text of the motion
12:04:04 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:04:05
12:04:08
57 1
do you know?
2
A.
Again, I'm speculating.
3
Q. 355
Yes.
4
A.
It would have been Mr. Lynn.
5
Q. 356
Now, that motion came on for hearing I think on the 27th of May 1992.
When
6
the manager at 7203 produced his own report, DP92/44.
7
if successfully carried, would have result in the a zoning of the lands to a
8
new line of the Southeastern Motorway at a density of residential piped sewage
9
on an action area plan, isn't that right?
12:04:36 10
11
Which was a map which
A.
Yes.
Q. 357
And some of the, but not all of the agriculturally previously zoned land would
12
have now been included in the action area plan for residential development?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 358
This would have been a significant uplift on the rezoning of the Carrickmines
12:04:51 15
land if successful?
16
A.
Yes, this would have been very successful.
17
Q. 359
Did you know that the manager was proposing that the lands be rezoned as we see
18 19 12:05:02 20
on this map? A.
Yes.
Q. 360
Was there much discussion within the Monarch Group in relation to the manager's
21 22
proposals and how they might be dealt with on the day? A.
23 24 12:05:20 25
26
Um, the main discussion would have been on the proposal that Monarch were putting across.
Q. 361
Which was being --
A.
Which was.
Q. 362
Being spearheaded by Councillor Lydon's and Hand's motion which we saw a moment
27
ago?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 363
Do you know how Councillor Lydon and McGrath came to propose the manager's
12:05:32 30
proposal on the day? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:05:33
12:05:46
58 1
A.
No.
2
Q. 364
Had there been any discussion within the Monarch Group on whether or not the
3
manager's proposals ought to be voted upon or supported?
4
A.
Not that I can recall.
5
Q. 365
In any event, the manager's proposals were not successful but a motion by
6
Councillor Gilmore and O'Callaghan for a C zoning was successful.
7
right?
isn't that
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 366
Why it was successful or why they had brought such a motion?
A.
Why the manager's thing ...
11
Q. 367
Wasn't successful?
12
A.
Wasn't successful.
13
Q. 368
This was a major setback within the Monarch Group, isn't that right?
14
A.
Yes.
Q. 369
Did it take you by surprise that the manager's proposal was unsuccessful?
A.
Yes, it took me by surprise because I think anything supported by the manager
12:06:04 10
12:06:14 15
16
I could never figure out why that happened.
I could never figure that out.
17
and his professional planners ought to be given a lot more credibility than to
18
be turned down on a vote.
19
Q. 370
12:06:44 20
And I think at 3706.
This is a note, possibly of a telephone conversation,
with somebody within Anglo Bank in relation to the what had happened on the
21
27th of May.
Possibly a conversation, a note of the conversation between you
22
and the note taker.
You'll have seen this in the brief?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 371
Do you recall having this conversation?
A.
I do.
Q. 372
And I think you were there advising the note taker of what had actually taken
12:07:03 25
26 27
place, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 373
And you were advising that the C zoning had in fact been successful?
A.
Yes.
12:07:14 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:07:14
12:07:30
59 1
Q. 374
2 3
on -- held at one house to the acre, isn't that right? A.
4 5
But that the residential zoning because of Sean Barrett's motion, had been held
Yes.
I tried to bring him down gently there, Chairman, by saying that there
was good news and bad news. Q. 375
And he concludes the note by saying that you were absolutely -- it was
6
absolutely inevitable that this will get the residential, presumably
7
residential zoning and that you would explain later.
8
manuscript entry there?
9 12:07:50 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 376
What were you going to explain to him later about the residential zoning that
11 12
you couldn't have told him at the time? A.
13 14
Do you see the very last
Well, it seems to have been a very short conversation and obviously, I kicked it a bit into touch.
Q. 377
12:08:11 15
And then I think on the 6th of July you advised Ansbacher of the situation, isn't that right? At 3768.
And again, you again highlighted the fact that
16
you had got the commercial zoning and that the residential zoning was -- you
17
were querying I think the procedures adopted on the day.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 378
And I think we know that Mr. Lydon at a follow-up meeting on the 12th of June
12:08:33 20
'92.
At 3743 queried the procedures adopted on the day, isn't that right?
21
A.
Yeah, I found that out but I didn't recollect that.
22
Q. 379
You didn't recollect that at the time?
23
A.
No, I knew that there was something funny about the manager's report getting
24 12:08:49 25
26
knocked. Q. 380
Now, so there matters lay as of May '92 you had the C zoning but you were back to square one in relation to the residential zoning.
27 28
JUDGE FAHERTY:
29
to me now.
12:09:05 30
Mr. Quinn, could I just ask Mr. Sweeney something that occurs
Mr. Sweeney, we know from the records that when the vote on the
manager's map was unsuccessful, the motion that Monarch had before them, the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:09:13
12:09:22
60 1 2
council, tabled by Mr. Hand, the late Mr. Hand and Mr. Lydon was withdrawn. A.
Yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
aware that the manager was putting a proposal on the table?
6
A.
Can I ask you.
You've already told Mr. Quinn that you were
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
9
terribly dissimilar to your motion?
12:09:34 10
A.
At that time and not extraordinarily dissimilar to -- not
Correct.
11 12
JUDGE FAHERTY:
13
Monarch about what would happen either of the manager's proposal was accepted
14
or not accepted?
12:09:49 15
A.
Was there any discussion -- contingency plan discussed within
Not in advance, Chairman, but I can say that I asked the same question as you
16
just did afterwards.
And I was told that it became -- the people became aware
17
that the motion had no chance because of the manager's thing going down.
18
therefore, why make things worse is the sort of thing.
And
19 12:10:16 20
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Fine, Mr. Quinn.
21 22
Q. 381
23 24 12:10:29 25
MR. QUINN: So the next matter or the thing of interest that arises, Mr. Sweeney, I think is the November 1992 General Election, isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 382
And again there were disbursements made in relation to that election, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 383
There were two withdrawals and the Tribunal has been unable to find the cheques
29 12:10:47 30
of the source of the payments. of November 1992, at 3875.
One is for a sum of 10,000 pounds on the 17th
And the other is a sum of 5,000 pounds on the 19th
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:10:56
12:11:18
61 1
of November 1992, at 3917.
The 5,000 pounds cheque is at 8546.
2
you, Mr. Sweeney.
3
either of those, the proceeds of those cheques?
Can I ask
Do you know anything about the ultimate destination of
4
A.
Sorry, could you repeat again?
5
Q. 384
The first payment appears to be by way of cheque on the 17th of November '92
6
for 10,000 pounds.
And it's at document No. 3875.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY:
I think these are cheques written to Allied Irish Bank plc in
9
fairness to the witness.
12:11:33 10
11
Q. 385
12
MR. QUINN: Yes.
They appear to be written to the bank on which they are
drawn, Mr. Sweeney.
13
A.
Yeah, I did she these in the brief.
14
Q. 386
Yes.
A.
But I have no knowledge.
16
Q. 387
Who within Monarch would have knowledge of the ultimate payee of those cheques?
17
A.
Well the accountancy department would.
18
Q. 388
Was there any discussion, to your knowledge, at board level or otherwise, in
12:11:40 15
19
connection with 15,000 pounds worth of funds being made available to anybody
12:12:07 20
within Monarch during the election of 1992, November '92?
21
A.
Was there any discussion?
22
Q. 389
Yes.
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 390
Can you assist the Tribunal in any way in relation to those cheques?
A.
No.
Q. 391
The cheques were attributable to the Cherrywood stock.
12:12:18 25
26
Can you think of
27
anything as the project leader in relation to the Cherrywood development that
28
would require a 15,000 pounds expenditure in the middle of the election in
29
1992.
12:12:37 30
A.
What does "Cherrywood stock" mean? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:12:40
12:12:49
62 1
Q. 392
2
Yes.
You can take it when I say" Cherrywood stock" it's a cost in relation to
the Cherrywood development.
3
A.
Okay.
No, I can't.
4
Q. 393
Can you speculate?
5
A.
No, I can't, no.
6
Q. 394
Would you agree with me that it's unusual that there would be such large
7
disbursements by way of two cheques at that time attributable to the Cherrywood
8
project?
9
A.
Would I think it's unusual?
Q. 395
Yes, yes.
11
A.
Well looking at it now, no, I don't think it's unusual.
12
Q. 396
Why not?
13
A.
Well I have no reason to say that it's unusual.
14
Q. 397
But it's a -- looking at the books and records of Monarch Properties Services
12:13:07 10
12:13:25 15
Limited.
16
One doesn't see the payee of those cheques, isn't that right, or the
beneficiary of those funds?
17
A.
The beneficiaries are Allied Irish Bank.
18
Q. 398
Well, I mean, I suggest to you that they were cheques written for the purpose
19 12:13:46 20
21
of putting somebody in funds.
Isn't that right?
A.
Well I don't know.
Q. 399
Did you -- did the Monarch Group, Monarch Properties Services Limited have
22
borrowings with Allied Irish Bank in November '92?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 400
And do you think that that 15,000 was applied towards those borrowings?
A.
I don't know.
Q. 401
If it weren't applied towards those borrowings would you agree with me that it
12:14:01 25
26 27
would be an unusual way to treat the funds of Monarch Properties Services
28
Limited in 1992?
29 12:14:20 30
A.
I couldn't say whether it was unusual or not.
Q. 402
Yes.
One would normally I -- you gave evidence yesterday, Mr. Sweeney, of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:14:21
12:14:38
63 1
procedures that you put in place in relation to the payment of invoices etc.
2
A.
Exactly.
3
Q. 403
The payments are designated promotions and cash in the books of Monarch
4
Properties Services Limited?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 404
And one -- presumably procedures were in place so that an auditor or an officer
7
of the company would know where the funds of the company were being
8
distributed, isn't that right?
9
A.
12:14:58 10
Yes, I presume when it came to the end of the fiscal year that that the auditor would be questioning that sort of thing.
11
Q. 405
Yes.
12
A.
I'd be -- I wouldn't be surprised, no.
13
Q. 406
No.
14
And you wouldn't be surprised that he might question these two payments?
You a would be astonished if he didn't question them? They wouldn't be
found in the general promotions account if they were in relation to the
12:15:19 15
payment -- if they were assigned to the repayment of interest on a loan
16
outstanding, isn't that right? Maybe that's an accountancy point that should
17
be taken up with somebody else.
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 407
But what I'm surprised at, Mr. Sweeney, is that you're not surprised there
12:15:37 20
should be two such large payments without any designation in the books and
21
records of the -- of Monarch Properties Services Limited.
And that they
22
should be assigned to the costs associated with the Cherrywood lands.
23
A.
Well I -- I'm not surprised because I can't see the whole thing in context.
24
Q. 408
I'll try and put it in context for you maybe by putting document No. 3877 on
12:16:07 25
the screen, Mr. Sweeney.
This is a -- an extract from Monarch Properties
26
Services Limited's journal accounts.
27
account" and you will see there a series of payments at this time, which we'll
28
be coming to in a moment, which were made to candidates in that election.
29 12:16:29 30
And it's under the heading "promotions
A.
I see that.
Q. 409
And in the middle of those payments you will see these two payments about half Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:16:34
12:16:53
64 1
way down the page you will see "AIB cash 10,000.
2
see that?
AIB 5,000 cash."
Do you
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 410
Does that help you, Mr. Sweeney, in coming to a view in relation to these
5
payments?
6
A.
In coming to a view?
7
Q. 411
As to whether they are unusual payments or unusual withdrawals from the books
8 9 12:17:09 10
and records of Cherrywood? A.
Well I would expect the accountancy guys to be able to answer that.
Q. 412
You feel that Mr. Glennane and his staff would be able to tell the Tribunal
11
what those payments were in respect of?
12
A.
I certainly don't know.
13
Q. 413
But you don't know.
14 12:17:22 15
16
And you say there was no discussion in relation to these
payments at the time. A.
No.
Q. 414
Would you as a director of the company have to sign off on the books and
17
records of Monarch Properties Services Limited at year end?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 415
And you would have signed off on the accounts in relation to these?
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 416
And you would have signed off on these payments as a director of the company?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 417
And can you not tell the Tribunal what these two payments were in relation to?
24
A.
Well they were never brought to my attention.
Q. 418
Had you -- had you stumbled across the document on screen when you were signing
12:17:32 20
12:17:43 25
26
the books and records of Monarch Properties Services Limited as director, would
27
you have raised or queried with the accounts department in relation to those
28
payments?
29 12:18:04 30
A.
I may have.
I can't positively say.
Q. 419
But would you have had had you seen those payments as we see them there now on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:18:09
12:18:15
65 1
screen?
2
A.
I don't know for sure.
3
Q. 420
Would you have raised a query in relation to them, Mr. Sweeney?
4
A.
I don't know for sure.
5
Q. 421
Does it surprise you that Mr. Glennane doesn't know what they were in relation
6 7
to? A.
Yes.
8 9 12:18:26 10
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Quinn, would you mind.
Would you go back up to the top
of the document I want to see the heading?
11 12
MR. QUINN: 3877.
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Could you increase the heading?
12:18:33 15
16
MR. QUINN: To get a designation one has to go to the previous page which is --
17 18
JUDGE FAHERTY:
19
you.
12:18:44 20
Just before you do that, Mr. Quinn, I'm sorry to interrupt
There is a reference there to journal.
transaction.
And then there's the word
Is that cheque number? Or maybe Mr. Sweeney might help us.
21
you see the very top.
22
there's a number.
Journal is first.
And then there's something and
23 24 12:18:58 25
MR. QUINN: It's a transaction number I think.
I don't believe it's a cheque
number because we have the cheque in relation to one of them.
26 27
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Just could I look at the cheque for the a moment.
28
really I point I just want to ...
29 12:19:13 30
MR. QUINN: 8456 on the screen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
That's
If
12:19:13
12:19:16
66 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Thank you very much.
2 3
MR. QUINN: That's the cheque for 5,000.
We don't have the cheque for 10,000.
4 5
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Do we know the number of that cheque?
6 7
MR. QUINN: Yes, the cheque No. is 7102 I think.
8 9
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
11
MR. QUINN: Yes.
And in relation to the 10,000 it's 7055.
12
to the one on screen, it's the last of the centre columns at 3877.
12:19:35 10
But in relation
13 14
JUDGE FAHERTY:
All right.
Thanks very much.
12:19:52 15
16
Q. 422
17
MR. QUINN: In any event, Mr. Sweeney, you can't advance the Tribunal's inquiry in relation to these payments.
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 423
And you say there was nothing unusual about the payments?
A.
Well I can't comment on that.
Q. 424
Well you were a director of the company.
12:20:03 20
21
You signed off on the books and
22
records of Monarch Properties Services Limited as a director.
23
books and records as certified by you, Mr. Sweeney.
24
input in relation to the payments.
They are your
You may not have a direct
But I'm asking you to comment as a
12:20:21 25
director and as somebody who had responsibility in relation to the payments and
26
the keeping and books and records of the company as to whether or not you see
27
anything unusual about those two payments?
28
A.
29 12:20:43 30
Well if I may say so, Chairman, the first time I saw these internal accountancy documents were a short time ago in the brief.
Q. 425
What I had asked you, Mr. Sweeney, was if you saw anything unusual about the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:20:47
12:20:56
67 1
payments?
2
A.
If I had known.
3
Q. 426
Yes.
4
Had you seen the document on screen when you came to write your name as
a director to the books and records of the company --
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 427
-- would you have raised a query in relation to those payments?
7
A.
Well I may have or I may not have.
8
Q. 428
There were two fairly large round sum payments at that time.
9
that they weren't in relation to the repayment of interest to Allied Irish
12:21:14 10
Banks, are you saying or is it your evidence to the Tribunal that there was
11 12
nothing unusual about them? A.
I did in my recollection I did query payments in the accounts but they were
13
generally payments that were out of my own field of expertise.
14
said yesterday, related to accountancy and legal.
12:21:45 15
16
And assuming
And, that as I
I generally queried those.
I was also quite content about the construction side of it. Q. 429
Uh-huh.
Well, would you have a necessity on the construction side of
17
Cherrywood to make disbursements in November 1992? There was no planning in
18
place.
19 12:22:04 20
There was nothing being constructed in November '92 in Cherrywood?
A.
No.
Q. 430
So whatever they were in relation to, it wasn't in relation to construction.
21
Isn't that right?
22
A.
No.
23
Q. 431
That required a 15,000 pounds payment in November '92?
24
A.
No, no, no. I'm not saying that.
Q. 432
Where do you think those payments went, Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
I have no idea.
27
Q. 433
Well can you not speculate as the project leader or the person with overall
12:22:19 25
28 29 12:22:42 30
But there were construction things going on at the time.
responsibility for the Cherrywood site in November '92? A.
Um, I could speculate but I don't know what it was.
Q. 434
Well speculate? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:22:43
12:23:09
68 1
A.
Well I really don't know what it was. So ...
2
Q. 435
Well you were a director of the company, so you're in the best position to
3
speculate in relation to what the payments may have been in relation to.
4
A.
Well, I can't speculate on it.
5
Q. 436
Nobody brought them to your attention?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 437
They wouldn't appear to have been properly written up in the books and records,
8 9 12:23:18 10
I don't know what they were for.
isn't that right? A.
In the books and records?
Q. 438
Yes.
That is to say it doesn't appear from anything that has been discovered
11
to the Tribunal that the ultimate payee of those cheques is identified, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
It's just Allied Irish Bank?
14
Q. 439
Yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 440
They appear to have been cheques written, I suggest to you, for the purpose of
12:23:32 15
16 17
putting somebody in cash.
And indeed, one of the cheques has a designation
18
"cash" written after it and you see on the screen.
19
pounds?
You see the one for 10,000
12:23:48 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
They both have.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Do you see on the left AIB 10,000 cash?
24 12:23:55 25
CHAIRMAN:
They both have.
26 27 28
MR. QUINN: And so does the -A.
So they must have been for cash then.
Q. 441
MR. QUINN: Yes.
29 12:24:05 30
Well do you have any idea who within Monarch Group would
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:24:10
12:24:25
69 1
have required 15,000 pounds in cash in the middle of that local -- General
2
Election?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 442
Does that raise any -- or help to raise any queries in your mind Mr. Sweeney,
5
in relation to the payments, the fact that they have a cash designation?
6
A.
No but it appears that they were cash.
7
Q. 443
Yes.
8 9 12:24:45 10
Was it usual, for example, to write cheques to cash for such large sums
within the Monarch Group? A.
I don't know.
Q. 444
Yes.
11
I would have thought it was.
And what in Cherrywood would in 1992 would require the expenditure of
15,000 pounds in cash?
12
A.
In Cherrywood?
13
Q. 445
Yes.
14 12:25:03 15
16
In connection with Cherrywood.
What in connection with Cherrywood in
November 1992 would require a 15,000 pounds cash expenditure? A.
I can't think of anything.
Q. 446
Who within Monarch would be the best person to ask for an explanation in
17
relation to that, Mr. Sweeney?
18
A.
The accounts department.
19
Q. 447
Mr. Glennane?
A.
Mr. Glennane.
21
Q. 448
Mr. Glennane doesn't know.
22
A.
Well Mr. Monahan.
23
Q. 449
Mr. Monahan is dead, Mr. Sweeney, unfortunately.
24
A.
Yeah, God rest him.
Q. 450
Anybody else?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 451
So here we have, as we see it on the screen, a promotions account, general
12:25:14 20
12:25:33 25
Anybody else?
28
promotions account in connection with Cherrywood.
29
cheque payments to the political representatives in that election, in November
12:25:56 30
1992.
Which contains all of the
And in the middle of those we have these two cheque payments to Allied Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:26:02
12:26:21
70 1
Irish Banks with the designation "cash" isn't that right? And you say that
2
that does not cause you any concern or doesn't come as a surprise to you.
3
A.
I have to keep repeating myself here.
4
Q. 452
No.
I don't know about those cheques.
But had you known about them when you signed off on the accounts having
5
regard to the -- where they were assigned and the designation given to them and
6
the lack of supporting documentation.
Would you have found it surprising?
7
A.
I did not know about them when the accounts were signed off.
8
Q. 453
Yes.
9 12:26:44 10
But had you known about them would you have raised queries in relation
to why these two cheques had been written? A.
I may or I may not have was my answer, for the third time.
11 12
CHAIRMAN:
13
think, well certainly the total would make them the second biggest item in that
14
list.
12:27:10 15
Would you -- does it not surprise you, given your experience in
business, that there is no identity of the person or persons who benefit from
16 17
Mr. Sweeney, would you, given the large amounts involved and I
these cheques? A.
Well it does surprise me now.
18 19 12:27:27 20
CHAIRMAN: A.
Yeah.
But I didn't see it at the time.
So ....
21 22
CHAIRMAN:
23
I know you can't be certain now.
24
A.
But had you -- this is the question -- had you seen it at the time.
Yes.
12:27:37 25
26
CHAIRMAN:
27
you noted them at the time and seen the designation "cash" in both cases.
28
were not told as to who was to benefit from these cheques or the -- these cash
29
amounts.
12:28:02 30
No one can.
As to what your reaction would have been.
But had
Is it -- do you think it likely that you would have raised a query
as to what they were for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And
12:28:03
12:28:18
71 1
A.
Yes, I think it would be likely but I don't know whether I would have or not.
Q. 454
MR. QUINN: Now, if I could have 1582 please.
2 3
This is a list supplied,
4
Mr. Sweeney, by Monarch in relation to payments to the political system during
5
that election.
6
Election.
And that is to say the General Election and the Seanad
Did you know that payments were being made at that time?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 455
And was that discussed at board level?
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 456
And was there agreement as to the amounts that would be paid by the company?
A.
There was general agreement. Again, to repeat what happened in the previous
12:28:33 10
11 12
one, it was generally discussed but the amounts weren't discussed specifically.
13
Q. 457
And who had the overall responsibility for the determining the amounts?
14
A.
The amounts appeared to me to have been determined by, in the main, requests
12:29:04 15
16
from people. Q. 458
They range from 1,000 to 2,000.
And we know some of the people who had been
17
unsuccessful in the General Election were also in receipt of further funds for
18
the Seanad election.
19 12:29:21 20
A.
Yes, I've seen this list.
Q. 459
Yes.
21
Isn't that right?
Did you know of the list at the time? Did you know that these payments
were being made at the time that they were being made?
22
A.
I knew that payments were being made to various councillors and politicians.
23
Q. 460
Did you know that they were being written up in the books and records in
24 12:29:39 25
26
relation to general promotions Cherrywood? A.
Yes, I knew that they were being allocated under Cherrywood.
Q. 461
And again, I don't want to bog you down on detail, unless you require me to do
27
so but I think you've accepted that they were part of the accumulation of the
28
costs of the Cherrywood site.
29 12:30:05 30
A.
Yes, at that time.
Q. 462
Yes.
Isn't that right?
And that was a board decision, presumably? Now, if I could bring to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:30:08
12:30:29
72 1
your attention to further payments.
If I could have 3889.
There were two
2
payments I think made in November '92 to the leaders of Fine Gael and Fianna
3
Fail, isn't that right? One in the sum of 2,500 and the other in the sum of
4
5,000.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 463
Did you know that those payments were being made?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 464
And at 3904, we see the payment request in relation to the cheque to the leader
9
of Fine Gael, and that cheque is at 3905.
12:30:40 10
to the leader of Fianna Fail.
And then at 3894 we have the cheque
And we have an accompanying letter of 18th
11
November 1992 at 3891.
Did you have any input, Mr. Sweeney, into the text of
12
that letter that's now on screen?
13
A.
No.
14
Q. 465
Did you know that such a letter had been written?
A.
At that time, no.
16
Q. 466
When did you come to know that such a letter had been written?
17
A.
When I saw the brief.
18
Q. 467
Does it surprise you that the cheques, the letter accompanying the cheque
12:31:01 15
19
speaks about the assistance provided by the members of that party in relation
12:31:18 20
to the rezoning of the lands?
21
A.
It doesn't surprise me, no.
22
Q. 468
Now, I think that you were to have an involvement in relation to those payments
23
in that there were invoices raised for them, isn't that right at 4317?
24
there is a document dated the 29th of June '93.
12:31:49 25
The --
Which sets out the basis of a
figure of 20,307 pounds which includes fees to Noel Smyth but also includes
26
these contributions of 2,500 and three?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 469
And I think that that figure of 20,370 then was contained in an invoice dated
29 12:32:15 30
the 29th of June '93, at 4302 and invoice No. 2066, isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:32:15
12:32:28
73 1
Q. 470
This was part of the 15,500 third party costs that we dealt with before lunch
2
which was the future projection limitation of payment, isn't that right?
3
18,500 I should have said.
Sorry.
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 471
And then I think there was a further invoice raised then in relation to
6
management fees.
Isn't that right? At invoice No. 2062.
Which is the 29th
7
of June '93 and these invoices were submitted, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 472
And you got involved when GRE raised issues in relation to those invoices.
12:32:52 10
Isn't that right? I think on the 7th of July '93.
If we could have 4303,
11
please.
Invoice No. 2062, which contained the sums to the party leaders was
12
queried, isn't that right? And it says the writer of that letter.
13 14
This that is to say Mr. Baker in a letter to you says under heading paragraph 3
12:33:17 15
invoice No. 2062.
"This matter relates to the additional management fee. And
16
should therefore include the contributions of 2,500 and 5,000 included in
17
invoice 2066.
18
No. 2062 to be passed for payment."
If you should arrange confirm this I shall arrange for invoice
19 12:33:34 20
What was the special management fee?
21
A.
Where is that?
22
Q. 473
Do you see at paragraph No. 3.
23
A.
Additional management fees?
24
Q. 474
Yeah.
12:33:52 25
Effectively what Mr. Baker is saying to you there, Mr. Sweeney is that
you have included a sum for 7,500 in that invoice but in fact it should have
26
been included in another invoice which related to special management fees.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 475
Isn't that right?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 476
You'll recall that?
12:34:04 30
Heading invoice No. 2062?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:34:06
12:34:16
74 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 477
And I think that you had occasion then to write back to him on the 13th of July
3
1993, at 4314.
If we look at the third paragraph.
4 5
You say that "As regards invoice No. 2062 in your reference to the two payments
6
of 2,500 and 5,000 you will note that these sums were bona fide to the parties
7
concerned.
8
have been disbursed through the additional management fee.
9
therefore feel that they could not be written out in the way that you suggest."
They therefore would not rank within the payments envisaged which And I would
12:34:36 10
11
That seems to imply, Mr. Sweeney, that fees written out under the heading
12
"special management fee" are fees which are not bona fide paid to third
13
parties, isn't that right?
14 12:34:55 15
A.
Well that's not right.
Q. 478
Well you tell the Tribunal now, Mr. Sweeney, what that -- what the special
16
management fee was.
17
A.
Well there was a number of fees being presented to GRE --
18
Q. 479
Uh-huh.
19
A.
-- for 50 per cent input into the joint venture.
12:35:22 20
headings.
They came under various
I was at pains to try to make sure that Monarch weren't going to be
21
at any loss in this.
22
was becoming increasingly and more increasingly involved from a management
23
point of view.
24
tried to negotiate and I did negotiate with GRE that they would recognise the
12:35:46 25
26
And Monarch, as you'll notice from the build up to this,
And I was very anxious to try to get that money back.
So I
input being put in by Monarch to achieving the zoning and the progress on the development.
So all of these were headings.
27 28
What Martin Baker, of GRE, would have indicated to me at various times, would
29
have been that they preferred one heading rather than another.
12:36:17 30
matter to me what heading, so long as we got the money. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And it didn't
12:36:24
12:36:43
75 1
Q. 480
Yes.
But you advised Mr. Baker in that letter that they were bona fide
2
payments.
And therefore, weren't payments that were envisaged within the
3
additional management fee heading, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yeah.
5
Q. 481
You agree with me, Mr. Sweeney, that that implies that payments envisaged under
6 7
I think possibly that Mr.--
the heading additional management fee were not bona fide payments? A.
I don't accept that for a moment.
8 9
CHAIRMAN:
12:37:06 10
fee, if you like, for labour supplied by Monarch.
11 12
Well I think, I mean, it could mean that the management fee is a
parties.
It wouldn't involve third
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 482
MR. QUINN: As a result of your negotiations, you issued two new invoices were
13 14 12:37:24 15
issued, isn't that right and the fees were ultimately paid? Or 50 percent of
16
the fees were ultimately paid?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 483
Now, if I move on to 1993 and if I could have 8129, please.
19
is reverting to your statement, Mr. Sweeney.
12:37:49 20
You set out, this
And you say that under the
heading 1993 development submissions for the -- sorry.
2129, I'm sorry.
21 22
You are setting out here what, from your statement what's happening in 1993
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 484
And you say meetings in Brussels Metropole Hotel re science park for
12:38:09 25
Cherrywood.
I also attended a science park conference in Montpelier, France
26
also represented was Donal Marren from Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council. Science
27
park proposals for Prague science park and Tallaght shopping centre Prague.
28
As part of these I would have been present at meetings involving Ambrose Kelly,
29
Liam Lawlor, Frank Dunlop and Philip Brendan O'Mara, Philip Monaghan and these
12:38:30 30
would have involved discussions regarding a proposal -- sorry regarding a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:38:34
12:38:50
76 1
possible purchase of the Alpha Building in Prague and we dealt with that
2
yesterday, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 485
This is what was going on in 1993.
And I think that in July 1993 you had a
5
meeting I think with the manager, isn't that right? If we could have 4312.
6
And at this stage, Mr. Sweeney, you were formulating your proposal in relation
7
to the possibility of a science and technology park on the site, isn't that
8
right?
9 12:39:08 10
A.
Yes.
Q. 486
And would it be fair to say that the strategy here was to put forward to the
11
planners a planning gain which might be of -- have an attraction to them which
12
would facilitate their attitude towards accommodating an uplift in the rezoning
13
of the lands?
14
A.
12:39:35 15
16
Yes, I may say though, Chairman, that that wasn't the very first start. They'd been working on the science park for two years in advance of that.
Q. 487
17
Did the manager know that you had been promoting the concept of a science park prior to this meeting?
18
A.
The meeting was when?
19
Q. 488
July 1993.
A.
Um, I can't say for sure but I would believe he would.
Q. 489
But just to put it in context, the strategy at this time, Mr. Sweeney, is to
12:39:49 20
21 22
bring the planners on board in relation to the -- the Carrickmines area, isn't
23
that right?
24 12:40:07 25
A.
Yes.
Q. 490
And the carrot, so to speak, from their point of view, is to put forward
26
something which would improve the prospect of job re creation in the area?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 491
And the science park was being formulated as something that would achieve that
29 12:40:22 30
end, isn't that right? A.
Yes, I have to say that every time the science park was put forward it was an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:40:26
12:40:40
77 1 2
open door both to councillors and to the public and to anyone. Q. 492
3
Yes.
But your proposals at this time related to a possibility of industrial
zoning on the site, isn't that right?
4
A.
Yes because a science park doesn't come under --
5
Q. 493
Yes.
6
A.
-- the category of industrial.
7
Q. 494
Yes.
And we see there from that memo where you're discussing the matter with
8
the county manager.
9
within his county would -- is something that would have attraction to him.
12:40:59 10
And obviously anything that would promote job creation
Isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 495
And you had, as you -- throughout this year and earlier I think you as you say
13
had been promoting the concept of a science and technology park.
14
picked up on this idea internationally and you had decided that this might be a
12:41:17 15
very good location for such a park.
You had
Isn't that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 496
Would it be fair to say that there were two areas of progress at this stage
18
vis-a-vis the rezoning.
19
in relation to the Development Plan which was under review and there was also
12:41:34 20
There was the question of convincing the councillors
the question of convincing the planners themselves in relation to the lands?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 497
And was one of the difficulties at this stage the fact that there was no
23
industrial zoning on the map at this time? In other words, that what was on
24
display or what was under review were the amendments, the 1992 amendments, so
12:41:57 25
to speak.
So, in other words, since industry wasn't included in the '92 plan
26
it wasn't something that was likely to come back before the current council.
27
Isn't that right?
28
A.
The industrial had been put forward by the planner earlier.
29
Q. 498
Yes.
A.
And they had been --
12:42:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:42:14
12:42:25
78 1
Q. 499
That's way back in 1990 and that was knocked?
2
A.
So in this form it was kind of trying to bring it back again.
3
Q. 500
Yes but there was a legal impediment as far as the manager was concerned I
4
think, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 501
I understand?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 502
So you were negotiating with the manager on the concept of putting in some
9
industrial zoning on the site.
12:42:36 10
And at councillor level you were seeking to
reverse the density in relation to the residential zoning?
11
A.
Not to reverse it, to increase it it.
12
Q. 503
To increase the density?
13
A.
From one to four.
14
Q. 504
When I say reverse, yes.
A.
Yes.
Q. 505
-- that limited density to one house per acre.
12:42:48 15
16
To reverse a decision --
17
prepared.
18
by Mr. McCabe on the 30th of July 1993.
19
sought to have an industrial zoning put on the lands.
12:43:09 20
If we look at 4321.
And I think submissions were
There were a series of submissions prepared
Can you advise or help
the Tribunal, Mr. Sweeney, as to whether any of those submissions were lodged
21
in 1993?
22
A.
Could I see the date of that?
23
Q. 506
30th of July 1993.
24
A.
That to me looks as if it is a submission.
Q. 507
Yes.
12:43:28 25
One of which at least related --
26
4321.
There were three different submissions, one of which we know for certain
wasn't submitted.
27
A.
Oh,.
28
Q. 508
And we're not sure if either of the other two were submitted, Mr. Sweeney.
29 12:43:47 30
I'm just wondering if you may or may not know whether or not it was submitted. A.
There are three letters. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:43:49
12:44:00
79 1
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Three drafts I think.
2 3
Q. 509
MR. QUINN: Three drafts.
4
gone there in.
5
did go in?
And one of them may have gone in or may not have
I'm just wondering can you assist the Tribunal if any of them
6
A.
Could I have the hard copies and I might ...
7
Q. 510
Yes.
I won't delay you now.
8
They are at pages 4321.
9
sent is at 8556 to 8558.
I'll get them to you over lunch Mr. Sweeney.
The second is at page 7221.
To 7223 and the one not
12:44:26 10
11
Now, Mr. Sweeney, we move on in the early part.
12
But if I just go back a little bit to -- I had start in the July '93 with that
13
meeting with the manager in relation to the possibility of the science and
14
technology park.
12:44:43 15
I've slightly jumped ahead.
And you agreed with me that you had the difficulty of trying
to get industrial zoning at this stage of the review of the plan because of
16
what had happened in May of '92.
17
1990, in 1993, you came to be involved with Mr. Dunlop in connection with the
18
site.
19
But at some stage and possibly in March
Isn't that right?
A.
In March?
Q. 511
Of 1993.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 512
Now, your counsel has taken Mr. Dunlop through -- your counsel has taken Mr.
12:45:03 20
23
Dunlop through your evidence or what your evidence would be in relation to
24
that.
12:45:28 25
And you were here yesterday and you heard his examination of Mr. Dunlop
and you heard Mr. Dunlop's replies?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 513
And just in a broad sort of a way, there is enormous difference between your
28
recollection of what happened and Mr. Dunlop's recollection of what occurred in
29
relation to his appointment to this project, isn't that right?
12:45:42 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:45:42
12:46:11
80 1
Q. 514
And in a moment, you are going to give your recollection of what transpired,
2
Mr. Sweeney.
3
Monarch have suffered the reversal in May '92.
4
March '93.
5
either before the summer or after the summer.
6
in November '93, isn't that right? It comes back before the council on the
7
11th of November '93, as it happens.?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 515
Yes.
12:46:30 10
But in the first instance, we are at a situation where the -We have moved forward now to
The review of the draft '91 plan is coming forward at some stage, In the event it comes forward
You have lobbied it and you have told us about your efforts with
Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand.
And we know that Mr. Lydon and Mr. McGrath had
11
proposed a manager's proposals which would have been assistance.
12
your astonishment had been unsuccessful in May '92?
And they to
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 516
That had been proceeded by a fairly detailed campaign involving PR consultant
12:46:47 15
Mr. O'Herlihy, the road show and your efforts to deal with the concerns of
16
those objecting and local residents.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 517
Now, if we could have 4041.
19
documents Mr. Sweeney.
12:47:06 20
this in some detail.
This is -- and you will have seen it in the
And I have no doubt that you will have gone through
But it may in some way assist you.
This is a telephone
21
attendance taken within Mr. Dunlop's office.
22
9:55 on that morning, that Monday morning, at ten to ten Mr. Lawlor's secretary
23
appears to have rang to say and to advise Mr. Dunlop that he had arranged a
24
meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch House at five o'clock for that very same
12:47:29 25
day.
And you will see there that at
Do you see that attendance?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 518
Now, Mr. Monarch -- Mr. Lawlor was somebody well known to you.
You had been
28
dealing with him since 1987 and had quite a substantial amount of dealings with
29
him in relation to Tallaght.
12:47:44 30
A.
Isn't that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:47:45
12:48:06
81 1
Q. 519
2
And had Mr. Lawlor been involved in any of the strategy or the campaign or the lobbying which had taken place in the lead up to the May '92 vote?
3
A.
No.
4
Q. 520
Had he been involved post May '92 and prior to March '93?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 521
Does it surprise you that Mr. Dunlop's office would produce a document which
7
purports to show and a meeting being arranged by Mr. Lawlor with you for Mr.
8
Dunlop?
9
A.
Does it surprise me?
Q. 522
Yes.
11
A.
Well I can see it.
12
Q. 523
I can accept that it exists.
13
A.
Yeah.
14
Q. 524
But from what -- does it surprise you that Mr. Lawlor was in a position or that
12:48:29 10
12:48:39 15
a document exists which purports to show that Mr. Lawlor was in a position to
16 17
arrange a meeting between Mr. Dunlop and yourself? A.
18 19
No.
Because I -- I've -- I believe that Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor met and
between them decided that Mr. Dunlop was going to be brought on to the team. Q. 525
12:49:07 20
Okay.
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
And this may have been my fault.
asked you was Mr. Lawlor involved in the period up to May '92.
21
When I
You said no.
But could he have been involved without you knowing about his involvement?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 526
And when I asked you had he been involved after May '92 and before March 1993.
24
You said no.
12:49:30 25
extent that he had discussions with Mr. Monahan in relation to Mr. Dunlop, at
26 27
But you now believe that he must have been involved to the
least? A.
Yes.
28 29 12:49:41 30
JUDGE FAHERTY:
And just before you go on.
You'd agree, Mr. Sweeney.
Earlier this morning you told -- Mr. McCabe reported to you that Mr. Lawlor had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:49:48
12:49:56
82 1 2
some involvement in a meeting with him on the 5th of December '91? A.
Oh, yes.
3 4
JUDGE FAHERTY:
5
correct?
6
A.
Regarding the plans for the Carrickmines area is, that
Yes.
7 8
JUDGE FAHERTY: So pre '92 he had an involvement and certainly a recorded
9
involvement on the 5th of December 1991.
12:50:04 10
A.
Not with you directly.
I didn't notice that.
11 12 13
JUDGE FAHERTY: A.
But do you accept that?
Yes.
14 12:50:07 15
JUDGE FAHERTY:
You didn't demur when Mr. Quinn put it to you earlier today
16
that Mr. McCabe reported to you I appreciate, I don't think you were at the
17
meeting?
18
A.
That's quite correct.
Q. 527
MR. QUINN: Now, you -- you have advised the Tribunal that it was your belief
19 12:50:21 20
21 22
that Mr. Lawlor met with Mr. Monahan and it was decided that Mr. Dunlop would
23
become involved.
24 12:50:36 25
Is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 528
And that was a strategy, presumably, being devised at that stage in relation to
26
the rezoning? A strategy being devised between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Lawlor?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 529
At what stage -- and leaving aside your first meeting with Mr. Dunlop now,
29 12:51:01 30
Mr. Sweeney. A.
At what stage did you become aware of that strategy?
The strategy? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:51:02
12:51:12
83 1
Q. 530
Of involving Mr. Dunlop in the project.
2
A.
When Mr. Monahan phoned me or talked to me about it.
3
Q. 531
Okay.
4 5
Well you better tell the Tribunal then what Mr. Monahan said to you
Mr. Sweeney. A.
6
He asked me to go and meet with Mr. Dunlop with a view to bringing him on to the team, that would assist in the lobbying of councillors.
7
Q. 532
That Mr. Dunlop would assist in the lobbying of councillors?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 533
Did he tell you how he came to suggest that Mr. Dunlop be brought on board?
A.
No.
Q. 534
Did he tell you, for example, that he had -- it was at the suggestion, as you
12:51:33 10
11 12
imply, of Mr. Lawlor?
13
A.
Not that I can recall.
14
Q. 535
That it was Mr. Lawlor.
A.
Well he may have mentioned that he had met him.
16
Q. 536
That he had met Mr. Lawlor?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 537
So we now have a situation some time prior to you meeting with Mr. Dunlop of a
12:51:49 15
19
But I had to assume that. Why do you assume that it was Mr. Lawlor?
discussion between you and the late Mr. Monahan, at which Mr. Monahan advised
12:52:04 20
you that having discussed the matter with Mr. Lawlor, he would like you to take
21
Mr. Dunlop on board?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 538
To assist with the lobbying of councillors?
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 539
Did you know of Mr. Dunlop at this time?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 540
You had, I think, previously engaged the services of at least two PR
12:52:15 25
28 29 12:52:27 30
consultants.
Isn't that right?
A.
Um, ...
Q. 541
Mr. O'Herlihy and I think you had some in-house PR consultants and others? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:52:32
12:52:39
84 1
A.
Yes, Pembroke.
2
Q. 542
Yes?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 543
And I think you have told us this morning that Mr. Lynn was interfacing with
5
councillors in relation to what had taken place to date.
Isn't that right?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 544
So what was it that Mr. Monahan told you Mr. Dunlop would add to the efforts
8 9 12:53:07 10
with councillors? A.
He didn't say anything specifically.
Q. 545
Did you discuss with Mr. Monahan the terms of which you would engage Mr.
11
Dunlop?
12
A.
Generally.
13
Q. 546
Well how long was Mr. Dunlop to be engaged for?
14
A.
Until the vote.
Q. 547
Okay.
16
A.
That was left up to me within various parameters.
17
Q. 548
Well what were the parameters?
18
A.
The parameters would have been -- well the fee was 4,000 a month.
12:53:19 15
19
And that
arose really from the previous employment of Mr. O'Herlihy, who tended to pan
12:53:50 20
21
How was he to be paid?
out that amount per month. Q. 549
Can I take it that at this stage, as a Director of Monarch Properties Services
22
Limited, that you could counter sign the payment of any amount of money within
23
the Company? I'm not saying that you would have done so.
24
have done so if you wished?
12:54:11 25
A.
Counter sign?
26
Q. 550
Well you could have sanctioned or authorised the payments.
27
A.
I think that's not quite accurate.
28
Q. 551
You don't think you could have sanctioned payments?
29
A.
Any amount of money.
Q. 552
Well within reason.
12:54:24 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
But that you could
12:54:25
12:54:38
85 1
A.
Within reason.
2
Q. 553
Yes.
3
But most of these things were within reason.
If we -- you were the person who was responsible, I take it, for
engaging professionals on this project?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 554
In fact, if we could have 2971, please.
6
This is at a meeting held way back on the 13th of March 1990 under the heading
7
"professional engagement and payments".
8 9
"At the outside Eddie Sweeney indicated that the procedures for engaging
12:54:55 10
professionals was through himself and PL."
Who is P L? Pat Lafferty is it?
11
A.
Pat Lafferty.
12
Q. 555
"The method of arranging payments to professionals was through DC", which
13 14
presumably is Dominic? A.
No.
Q. 556
Mr. Clarke is it?
16
A.
Damien Clarke.
17
Q. 557
"And PL to countersign". Who is PL, Mr. Lafferty?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 558
Was that the procedure in relation to Cherrywood?
A.
That had been the procedure for a considerable time.
21
Q. 559
Yes.
22
A.
And it was intended to be the procedure and --
23
Q. 560
So all other things being equal, you would place an ad or source a PR firm --
12:55:07 15
12:55:18 20
24
you would engage that professional firm or people within the professional firm
12:55:38 25
and the payments would be arranged through DC, PL to counter sign?
26
A.
Um, that would relate mainly, Chairman, to construction professionals.
27
Q. 561
Well it doesn't say construction professionals on the document we have on
28 29 12:55:59 30
screen, Mr. Sweeney. A.
But DC and PL were involved in nothing other than --
Q. 562
Construction. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:56:00
12:56:15
86 1
A.
-- than construction.
2
Q. 563
I understand.
So now you knew that Mr. Dunlop, did you have any say in the
3
circumstances under which Mr. Dunlop came to be retained? In other words, did
4
you have any input into whether or not Mr. Dunlop ought to be retained?
5
A.
I was asked to go and meet him.
6
Q. 564
Yes.
7
A.
To bring him on to the team.
8
Q. 565
Yes.
9
A.
Yes.
Q. 566
By the time.
11
A.
No.
12
Q. 567
Did you raise with Mr. Monahan the prospect of maybe re-engaging Mr. O'Herlihy,
12:56:21 10
13 14 12:56:33 15
The decision had been taken?
You had no input into the decision, isn't that right?
for example? A.
No, I didn't.
Q. 568
Did you raise with Mr. Monahan the fact that Mr. Lynn may be upset since he was
16
carry carrying out that type of function?
17
A.
No, I didn't.
18
Q. 569
Did you ask Mr. Monahan if he had discussed or considered the decision with
19 12:56:52 20
21
others, that is to say other than with Mr. Lawlor? A.
No, I didn't.
Q. 570
Did you discuss with Mr. Monahan the success of Mr. Dunlop in other projects or
22
in this type of activity?
23
A.
No.
24
Q. 571
Or his background in this sort of activity?
A.
No, I knew nothing about his background.
26
Q. 572
Yes.
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 573
Yes.
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 574
And that was explained to you at the time?
12:57:03 25
12:57:19 30
You did not know Mr. Dunlop or you did not know of Mr. Dunlop? It was explained to me he was a PR consultant. But he was being retained for the purposes of lobbying councillors?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:57:21
12:57:31
87 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 575
And you were to bring him on board, isn't that right?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 576
Was there any good reason why Mr. Monahan himself would not have contacted Mr.
5
Dunlop?
6
A.
He may well have, I don't know.
7
Q. 577
Yes.
But certainly as far as your conversation with Mr. Monahan is concerned,
8
it was in the context of a direction to you by Mr. Monahan that Mr. Dunlop be
9
brought on board to assist in lobbying councillors in relation to this matter?
12:57:48 10
A.
Yes.
11
Q. 578
This is your final chance in the review of the '83 Plan, isn't that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 579
It was a critical period in relation to the lands in question and increasing
14 12:58:01 15
the zoning density on the lands? A.
Yes.
16
Q. 580
Very crucial period from Monarch's overall financial situation?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 581
These lands had to be developed.
19
Permission had to be gained on the lands so
that some of the lands could be sold off and reduce the indebtedness of
12:58:17 20
Monarch?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 582
And the strategy as outlined to you and directed to you by Mr. Monahan was that
23
Mr. Dunlop be brought on board.
24
somebody ring Mr. Dunlop so that you could meet with him and talk to him about
12:58:32 25
26
Now, did you ring Mr. Dunlop or did you have
his possible engagement? A.
My recollection having looked at all of the brief and the diaries and the thing
27
is that Mr. Monahan asked me to meet him on the 8th of March at five o'clock
28
but for some reason, I couldn't do that.
29
day.
12:58:58 30
Q. 583
So it was deferred to the following
And --
Sorry, apologies.
I'm interrupting you now, Mr. Sweeney, and I shouldn't and
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
12:59:02
12:59:12
88 1
I'm sorry. But you are saying that your recollection has been improved by the
2
documents contained in the brief?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 584
That it wasn't always your recollection that you had been involved in hiring
5 6
Mr. Dunlop. A.
7
No.
Isn't that right?
In fact, in my statement, Chairman, I have to apologise for that.
when I did the statement in ...
8
Q. 585
2003 I think.
9
A.
In '03.
Q. 586
Yeah.
11
A.
I did it without really thinking of the importance of Mr. Dunlop.
12
Q. 587
Yes.
13
A.
And I had nothing in terms of any paper.
12:59:25 10
14 12:59:39 15
That
I had been away from Monarch for six
years. Q. 588
16
You are now giving an explanation, Mr. Sweeney, of why your statement was incorrect?
17
A.
Yes and I'm sorry.
18
Q. 589
And I think in your interview to the Tribunal you were also incorrect in your
19 12:59:52 20
recollection in relation to this matter. A.
That was in?
21
Q. 590
In 2000.
22
A.
Did I say that?
23
Q. 591
Yes.
24
June 2000.
I think you -- I think you -- and I can open it if necessary to you.
But I think you were of the view that you might not have been involved in the
13:00:05 25
26
Isn't that right?
appointment of Mr. Dunlop at that time? A.
Yes, it's possible.
27 28 29
CHAIRMAN: A.
All right.
It's one o'clock.
Sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
Sorry.
13:00:12 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
13:00:12
13:00:42
89 1 2
CHAIRMAN: A.
It's one o'clock.
We'll adjourn until two o'clock.
Yes.
3 4 5
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
13:00:49
14:03:39
90 1
THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:
2 3
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney, please.
4 5
Q. 592
Good afternoon, Mr. Sweeney.
6
A.
Good afternoon.
7
Q. 593
We were dealing before lunch with your involvement with Mr. Dunlop.
8
1993, but just before I get to that and maybe to short circuit matters
9
somewhat.
14:03:59 10
In March
You recall or your evidence in relation to the two cheques for 10
and 5,000 pounds in November 1992 made payable to Allied Irish Banks which had
11
the designation "cash" you recall that before lunch?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 594
Now, you'll have seen similar type cheques in the brief for '93, '94, '95 and
14
'96.
14:04:18 15
Can the Tribunal take it that your evidence is the same in connection
with those cheques?
Namely, that you can't offer any explanation in relation
16
those cheques and it's more or less the same.
That is to say your evidence as
17
it was in relation to the cheques that we dealt with before lunch?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 595
And is it your evidence effectively that these are matters for the accounts
14:04:36 20
department and in particular Mr. Glennane?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 596
And possibly Mr. Lynn?
23
A.
I don't know about Mr. Lynn.
24
Q. 597
Okay.
14:04:52 25
Now, just to revert to your meeting then with Mr. Dunlop.
advised the Tribunal I think before lunch that you had this conversation with
26
Mr. Monahan.
27
were initially to meet him on the 8th.
28
you met him on the 9th.
29 14:05:08 30
You've
You were to meet Mr. Dunlop.
Your recollection is that you
You couldn't meet that appointment and
Is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q. 598
And it would appear from the telephone attendance that maybe Mr. Lawlor Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:05:11
14:05:23
91 1
organised the meeting insofar as Mr. Dunlop is concerned.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 599
And now would you tell the Tribunal your recollection of that meeting with Mr.
4 5
Dunlop? A.
Yes, the meeting was held in his office in 25, Upper Mount Street.
And I
6
explained to him that we wished to employ him as a PR consultant to assist with
7
the lobbying of Cherrywood.
8
of Cherrywood.
9
per month.
14:06:25 10
We discussed the project briefly.
He was aware
And we discussed and agreed fees in the amount of 4,000 pounds
Mr. Dunlop requested that an up front payment be made.
And that
was also agreed.
11 12
A success fee was also brought up by Mr. Dunlop.
13
was beyond my scope.
14
in relation to the detail of the meeting or the detail of Cherrywood, I have
14:06:58 15
And I said that I was, that
And that it had to deal with Mr. Monahan on that.
posted that to a subsequent meeting with the executives, some executives of
16
Monarch, which would be Richard Lynn and Phil Reilly.
17
Q. 600
You -- sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
18
A.
And as I recall, that was the extent of the meeting.
19
Q. 601
That's a fairly detailed recollection of what transpired at the meeting,
14:07:26 20
Mr. Sweeney, isn't it?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 602
You didn't always have that detailed recollection of what transpired at that
23 24
meeting.
Isn't that right?
A.
It was helped dramatically by the brief.
Q. 603
Yes.
26
A.
And all of the information.
27
Q. 604
Yes.
14:07:36 25
28 29 14:07:53 30
So
What was it within the brief that allowed you to give such detail that
you had obviously forgotten? A.
Well, the various figures were there.
The fact that I went back to the
office, as I recall now, and reported to Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan what had Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:08:01
14:08:26
92 1
happened.
I then subsequently reported to our joint venture partner, GRE.
2
Q. 605
Did Mr. Glennane know that you were going to meet Mr. Dunlop?
3
A.
Oh, I don't know.
4
Q. 606
When you originally recalled that meeting I think you had a recollection that
5
He certainly knew of it later.
Mr. Lawlor was at the meeting, isn't that right?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 607
You say that when you met with the Tribunal legal team in 2000 you didn't tell
8 9
them that Mr. Lawlor was at the meeting? A.
No, I would have said that Mr. Lawlor was at several meetings.
Q. 608
Yes.
11
A.
Yes, certainly he was at subsequent meetings.
12
Q. 609
Now, Mr. Dunlop was paid an up front payment, isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 610
Did you agree the amount of up front payment?
A.
Yes.
16
Q. 611
So you agreed a monthly retainer and an up front payment?
17
A.
I agreed the monthly retainer.
18
Q. 612
Yes.
19
A.
And I think he then requested an up front payment which we then agreed.
Q. 613
Yes.
21
A.
It was.
22
Q. 614
And the monthly retainer was 4,000?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 615
So he was getting little in excess of six weeks fees up front, sorry six months
14:08:41 10
14:08:58 15
14:09:10 20
14:09:25 25
I'll come to the subsequent meetings.
And I think the up front payment was 25,000 pounds?
fees up front.
26
A.
Approximately, yes.
27
Q. 616
And this was in March.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 617
So you were paying him up to October?
A.
Exactly when, yes, I suppose so.
14:09:33 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:09:38
14:09:56
93 1
Q. 618
And I think the vote was in November, isn't that right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 619
So really in essence you were paying him effectively the entire of his payment
4
up front, save for one month, namely, October or November?
5
A.
A very big portion of it.
6
Q. 620
Yeah.
7
Now, there's nothing in writing between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in
relation to that agreement, isn't that right?
8
A.
No, you but I would have taken notes at the time.
9
Q. 621
And are you surprised Monarch have been unable to produce those notes in
14:10:06 10
discovery to the Tribunal?
11
A.
Well it would be helpful if they did but I am surprised.
12
Q. 622
They did exist at some stage?
13
A.
I always take notes of things like that.
14
Q. 623
Who would have sanctioned the payments?
A.
The payments --
16
Q. 624
That is to say the up front payments, if we could have 4051.
17
A.
I would have.
18
Q. 625
You would have sanctioned that payment?
19
A.
I would have reported that to accounts and said this had been agreed.
Q. 626
The admittance advice that we see on screen here, Mr. Sweeney, is initialled
14:10:20 15
14:10:34 20
21
Monarch Properties Services Limited.
22
A.
At the bottom?
23
Q. 627
Yes.
24
A.
It's PC, I think that's --
Q. 628
Mr. Clarke is it?
26
A.
Pat Caslin.
27
Q. 629
Caslin, yes.
28
A.
There were two PCs.
14:10:50 25
29 14:11:04 30
Do you recognise who initialled that?
There was Pat Caslin and Pat Cooling. I'm not too sure
which one that was. Q. 630
I'm sorry, Mr. Sweeney.
What direction would you have given Mr. Caslin in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:11:09
14:11:20
94 1 2
relation to that payment? A.
I don't know if I spoken to Mr. Caslin.
I would certainly have spoken to
3
Mr. Glennane and told him. He would have transmitted the same information to
4
Pat Caslin.
5
Q. 631
Do you recall discussing the matter with Mr. Glennane?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 632
Do you recall telling him that Mr. Dunlop had been retained?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 633
And do you recall telling him that you had, at Mr. Monahan's suggestion, spoken
14:11:30 10
with Mr. Dunlop.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 634
Sorry.
13
A.
And that was after the meeting.
14
Q. 635
I accept it was after the meeting.
14:11:38 15
But after the meeting and before the
payment, are you saying you had a conversation with Mr. Glennane where you
16
discuss with Mr. Glennane the terms in which Mr. Dunlop had been retained?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 636
Including the payments per month and the up front payment?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 637
And you would have directed Mr. Glennane to release monies to Mr. Dunlop on
14:11:52 20
21
foot of that agreement?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 638
And either you directly to Mr. Caslin or through Mr. Glennane, directed that
24
that payment as we see on screen, for the 15,000 and also if we could have
14:12:12 25
4062, a further payment for 10,000, be released?
26
A.
I didn't differentiate between 15 and 10,000.
27
Q. 639
Yes.
28 29 14:12:34 30
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney, why was it necessary to issue two separate
remittance advices and two separate cheques to Mr. Dunlop? A.
I've noticed that.
Q. 640
Yes.
I've no idea.
It may have been at his request.
That request would have been made, would have to have been made to you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:12:38
14:12:45
95 1
at the meeting.
Isn't that right?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 641
Do you think it might have been made subsequently?
4
A.
Well I don't understand it.
5
Q. 642
Now, if we look at 4045.
We see the entries in relation to the possible
6
meeting on the 8th.
7
meeting perhaps with Messrs. Lynn and Reilly for 5:15 on the 9th.
8
are no further meetings entered as I can see it on that diary with you or any
9
representative of Monarch between the 9th and the 12th.
14:13:18 10
11
A possible meeting with you at 11:30 on the 9th.
And a
But there
Isn't that right?
A.
No.
Q. 643
So it's -- if there were -- if it were Mr. Dunlop's desire to receive two
12
cheques, that would have been -- would have had to have been communicated to
13
you perhaps at that meeting on the 9th which you say it took place on the 9th?
14
A.
Not necessarily, Mr. Chairman.
Q. 644
Was Mr. Dunlop on the telephone to you after your meeting with him on the 9th.
16
A.
No, not that I recall.
17
Q. 645
Yes.
18
A.
Yes, to set up the --
19
Q. 646
Yes.
A.
-- the agreement.
21
Q. 647
Yes.
22
A.
But after this agreement was set up, I didn't have an awful lot to do with it
14:13:37 15
14:13:53 20
23 24
It's a surprise to me to see that it's two cheques.
But you were the one who had contact with him, isn't that right?
for some time. Q. 648
14:14:06 25
Yes.
Did you say that -- do you think that it was Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly that
gave the direction that two cheques issue?
26
A.
I wouldn't think so, no.
They wouldn't be --
27
Q. 649
The amount of 25,000 as being an up front payment, was that agreed with you?
28
That sum.
29
up front payment but the precise amount that there be an up front payment.
14:14:25 30
In other words, not just at agreement in principle that there be an
Was that agreed at that meeting? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:14:27
14:14:45
96 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 650
As a matter of probability would you agree with me that Mr. Dunlop must have
3
sought the two cheques at that meeting at that time?
4
A.
No, he didn't.
5
Q. 651
He didn't.
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 652
And who would Mr. Dunlop have contacted after you had spoken with him and asked
8 9 14:14:46 10
for two cheques to be made payable to him? A.
I don't know that.
Q. 653
Did you, other than Mr. Reilly and Mr. Lynn, did you give any any other contact
11
They must have been in contact some how or other.
names within the company?
12
A.
Did I give him contact names?
13
Q. 654
Yes.
14
People that he might be able to contact in relation to monies which he
was alleging were due to him.
14:15:07 15
Namely, 25,000 so that he could give the
direction that had been given to him in two separate cheques?
16
A.
Not that I recall.
17
Q. 655
So that's why I say to you, Mr. Sweeney, that as a matter of probability the
18 19 14:15:22 20
direction of the two cheques was given to you at your meeting with him? A.
No, it certainly was not.
Q. 656
And can you give any explanation as to how Mr. Dunlop dealing fresh with a
21
company, could have asked for two separate cheques be issued to him and the
22
person he had negotiated those cheques with was the only person he had contact
23
with at that time?
24 14:15:43 25
A.
No, I'm surprised myself.
Q. 657
But in any event, you believe it was at Mr. Dunlop's request that the two
26
cheques were issued?
27
A.
That's one explanation and one explanation that I can ...
28
Q. 658
It might have been to facilitate Monarch Properties Services Limited that they
29 14:16:01 30
decided to issue two cheques? A.
I don't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:16:02
14:16:14
97 1
Q. 659
Certainly there was no invoice for these cheques?
2
A.
I noticed that.
3
Q. 660
Yes.
4
So the cheques issued in the absence of an invoice on your instruction
after your discussion with Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
Yes, it was very quick.
6
Q. 661
Yes.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 662
Now, then I think you had a meeting with Mr. Dunlop or at least you are noted
9
Almost immediately?
as having a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 18th of March.
14:16:27 10
7971.
If I could have
Do you recall a meeting with Mr. Dunlop on the 18th of March?
11
A.
Not specifically.
I'd a number of meetings with him after that.
12
Q. 663
We'll deal with the meetings as we come to them in the brief, Mr. Sweeney.
13
But this was a meeting some six days after the cheques were drawn, isn't that
14
right?
14:16:54 15
A.
Where is that?
16
Q. 664
The bottom left hand corner.
17
A.
Question mark?
18
Q. 665
Yes.
19
A.
I don't know if that was a meeting or not.
14:17:09 20
You see Eddie S, you?
And I would like to know if I have
got that in my diary.
21
Q. 666
Yes.
22
A.
Well not from that I don't.
23
Q. 667
Okay.
24
You don't believe you met him so soon after your initial meeting?
If we could have 4133.
Monarch Properties Services Limited did
receive I think an invoice dated the 10th of April 1993 from Mr. Dunlop.
14:17:28 25
Do
you see that invoice?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 668
Now, you had dealings with Mr. Lawlor going back to the Tallaght development.
28
You had no contact with Mr. Lawlor in relation to Cherrywood but you knew as a
29
result of your conversation with Mr. Monahan that at his, at Mr. Lawlor's
14:17:49 30
suggestion, you were now being instructed to involve Mr. Dunlop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't that
14:17:53
14:17:59
98 1
right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 669
So you knew that Mr. Lawlor was now involved in the strategy concerning
4
Cherrywood?
5
A.
Well I knew he was in the background.
6
Q. 670
Yes.
7
A.
He had made that introduction.
8
Q. 671
Yes.
9
A.
I met with Mr. Lawlor several times after that.
Q. 672
Did he?
11
A.
Frank Dunlop was present.
12
Q. 673
Yes.
14:18:15 10
Did you speak to Mr. Lawlor after you spoke with Mr. Dunlop? At meetings at which --
Would it be fair to say that after Mr. Dunlop's involvement in March '93
13
and up until November '93, Mr. Lawlor came back into the picture so to speak as
14
a strategist or an advisor in relation to the Monarch Group in relation to
14:18:34 15
Cherrywood?
16
A.
I don't recall him talking about strategy or anything like that.
17
Q. 674
Well what involvement did he have?
18
A.
Well the only clear involvement I can recall was about Prague which was really
19 14:18:46 20
in his head at some point. Q. 675
I think that starts around September '93?
21
A.
I think it may have been earlier.
22
Q. 676
You think it was earlier? But the big project as far as you were concerned at
23 24
this stage was Cherrywood, isn't that right? A.
Certainly, yes.
Q. 677
Do you recall receiving that invoice that we see on screen, Mr. Sweeney?
26
A.
I've signed it so I've ...
27
Q. 678
You have' approved it for payment?
28
A.
Ivor' said "okay."
29
Q. 679
Yes.
14:18:58 25
14:19:17 30
That means that the accounts department could issue a cheque on foot of
it, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:19:18
14:19:43
99 1
A.
I'd say so.
2
Q. 680
And it appears to have been paid on the 1st of June 1993?
3
A.
I don't know when it was paid.
4
Q. 681
We -- you do know that the Tribunal cannot find a cheque to Mr. Frank Dunlop &
5
Oh, there, yes.
Associates of the 1st of June 1993 in the sum of 12,100 pounds?
6
A.
There seems to be great confusion about all of these cheques.
7
Q. 682
There shouldn't be confusion, would you agree with me, Mr. Sweeney?
8
A.
Well I can't add to it.
9
Q. 683
Well there shouldn't be confusion.
14:19:55 10
This is a retainer of a PR consultant for
a development company, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 684
There should be no confusion.
There should be correspondence.
We should see
13
your memo of your meeting in terms of which Mr. Dunlop was retained.
14
should see invoices, isn't that right?
14:20:08 15
16
A.
Yes.
Q. 685
But there is confusion and you heard Mr. Dunlop's evidence in relation to that
17
invoice yesterday.
18
Isn't that right?
19 14:20:19 20
We
A.
I did.
Q. 686
Yes.
21
He didn't think that that invoice had issued from him.
In any event, would it be fair to say that you treated this as a Frank
Dunlop & Associates invoice that ought to be certified as being payable?
22
A.
Obviously.
23
Q. 687
But in fact, what you should have been certifying for payment was an invoice
24 14:20:39 25
26
for 25,000 pounds.
Isn't that right?
A.
Yeah, exactly.
Q. 688
Now, the services being provided there were public affairs strategy and its
27
implementation, isn't that right? That's what you certified as being payable?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 689
Not lobbying of councillors?
A.
No.
14:20:57 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:20:57
14:21:26
100 1
Q. 690
And I think you drew a certificate.
If I could have 4142.
2
payments certificate, 80884.
3
April '93.
4
the 1st of June '93.
5
to the invoice we saw a moment ago?
This is a
Which appears to have been drawn on the 10th of
Do you see that -- sorry.
The 1st of June -- which was paid on
Isn't that right? Which would suggest that it's related
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 691
Are you certifying the payment or are you certifying that it should be paid in
8 9 14:21:45 10
that certificate? A.
It looks as if I am certifying the payment.
Q. 692
That it should be -- well the certificate.
If we could go back to 4133.
11
Your certificate on the invoice is "okay" and your initials.
12
right?
Isn't that
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 693
And a moment ago you said that based on that, that a cheque should issue, isn't
14:21:58 15
that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 694
Now, if we go to 4142.
This is a payments certificate.
18
certificate to anybody that would wish to see it.
19
fact been made by Monarch Properties Services Limited?
14:22:11 20
Is this a
That this payment had in
A.
This looks as if it's trying to provide the paper back up.
21
Q. 695
For somebody else?
22
A.
To the payment that they had been made or part of the payment that had been
23 24
made. Q. 696
14:22:30 25
Yes.
In other words in, this is a certificate to a third party that payment
had been made of 12,100 pounds to Frank Dunlop & Associates and that payment
26
was effected on the 1st of June '93.
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 697
If I could have 4133 again.
29 14:22:53 30
Isn't that right?
Are you saying, Mr. Sweeney, that a payment of
12,100 pounds was paid to Frank Dunlop & Associates on the 1st of June 1993? A.
No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:22:54
14:23:20
101 1
Q. 698
Now, I think you -- we have a -- Mr. Dunlop has produced.
If I could have
2
4204.
This is a copy invoice No. 834 dated the 19th of May 1993.
3
of 15,000 pounds in respect of public affairs consultancy services.
4
that right? Do you recall seeing the original of that invoice?
For a sum Isn't
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 699
That invoice appears to have been paid per Mr. Dunlop's records by way of two
7
cheques on the 19th of May and the 17th of September in the sum of 7,500 pounds
8
each.
9
A.
14:23:45 10
Um, can I say, Mr. Chairman, all of these invoices are all very mixed up. what I'd agreed was 25,000 be paid up front.
And
There seems to be an attempt
11
here retrospectively, to provide invoices and back up to cover that.
12
is getting very confused.
And it
13 14 14:24:05 15
CHAIRMAN:
Well we're equally confused.
A.
Yeah.
Q. 700
MR. QUINN: There's no reason why Mr. Dunlop couldn't have provided to you and
16 17 18 19 14:24:14 20
why you couldn't have certified a 25,000 pounds payment to him by this date? A.
None at all.
Q. 701
And yet your certificate certifies a much lesser sum as having been paid to him
21
and having been paid to him on a date when it wasn't paid, isn't that right, on
22
the 1st of June '93?
23
A.
That's why I think it's very confusing.
24
Q. 702
Yes.
14:24:33 25
And Mr. Dunlop has said that the invoice of the 10th of April '93 wasn't
one of his invoices even though it appears to be one of his invoices, isn't
26
that right?
27
A.
Which one?
28
Q. 703
That's the one on the 10th of April 1993.
29 14:24:48 30
4133.
pounds. A.
Yeah, I heard that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
For the sum of 12,100
14:24:49
14:25:06
102 1
JUDGE KEYS:
Mr. Sweeney, I wonder could I just ask you one question.
2 3
Why would you okay a payment in June of '93, that's the 1st of June '93.
4
can't remember the sum.
5
Why would you okay that payment when you'd already come to an agreement with
6
him for a payment of 25,000 which he had been paid already? If the terms of
7
the agreement in relation to his remuneration is correct as described by you at
8
the meeting on the 9th of March?
9
A.
14:25:36 10
I think it's 4133.
I
For, was it 12,000? 12,100.
Well, Chairman, because it fell within the amount of the 25,000.
And it seems
to try in some way to reflect the fact that the 25,000 was split into two
11
payments.
12 13
JUDGE KEYS:
14
this, he was paid 15,000 and 10,000 very shortly after the meeting of the 9th
14:25:53 15
16
Yes but my understanding was, and I'm subject to correction on
of March. A.
Yes.
17 18
JUDGE KEYS:
19
terms of the agreement you had reached with him.
14:26:01 20
A.
That meant he was fully paid up to October or November on the
Yes.
21 22
JUDGE KEYS:
23
now sanctioned a further payment of 12,100.
24
agreement which you had reached with him in relation to remuneration? In fact
14:26:18 25
But does that not contradict the
you're paying him more than what you said you had agreed on the meeting on the
26 27
Isn't that correct? And yet before November had come, you had
9th of March. A.
Yes but I would have thought that that was to back up the previous payments.
28 29 14:26:34 30
JUDGE KEYS: A.
Of the 12 and the 10 and the 15?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:26:35
14:26:47
103 1
JUDGE KEYS:
2
see what other ones are put to you.
3
A.
But -- how can that be? I mean, wasn't there other -- well we'll
Yes.
4 5
JUDGE KEYS:
6
this was being done all retrospectively then?
7
A.
But it seems rather strange to me, did you not -- you thought
I think it was an exercise to get the paperwork in order.
8 9 14:26:56 10
JUDGE KEYS: A.
In order.
Yes.
11 12
JUDGE KEYS:
I see.
13 14
Q. 704
14:27:03 15
MR. QUINN: If we could have 4219, this is a certificate that 10,000 be paid to Mr. Dunlop on the 26th of May '93 and we see a cheque at 4221 made payable to
16
Frank Dunlop & Associates in the sum of 10,000.
17
Mr. Sweeney.
Isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 705
That's nine months.
14:27:26 20
We're now up to 35, 000,
So that's going to take us beyond the relevant date.
Isn't that right? And take us outside the contract period?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 706
Now, Mr. Dunlop says he never received that cheque.
23 24
You heard his in evidence
that regard. A.
I heard that, yeah.
Q. 707
Can you assist the Tribunal in any respect in relation to this cheque?
26
A.
No.
27
Q. 708
Did you authorise this payment?
28
A.
No.
29
Q. 709
Who would have authorised that payment?
A.
I don't know.
14:27:36 25
14:27:49 30
The payment is there.
I didn't authorise it.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:27:52
14:28:10
104 1
Q. 710
2
If we could have 4209.
Did Mr. Glennane authorise the payment, Mr. Sweeney?
You see the top right hand corner of the ...
3
A.
That's Mr. Glennane's signature.
4
Q. 711
Yes.
5
Does that imply that he had something to do with the issue of that
cheque?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q. 712
And he knew that Mr. Dunlop had been retained and he would have known the
8 9 14:28:18 10
circumstances under which he had been retained? A.
Yes.
Q. 713
And he would have known that by issuing that cheque to Mr. Dunlop he was paying
11
Mr. Dunlop outside the period of his contracted, that he was now being paid
12
35,000.
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 714
Well in any event, you can't assist the Tribunal in any respect in relation to
14:28:38 15
that cheque or how it came to be written or how it may have fallen into
16
somebody else's hands?
17
A.
No.
18
Q. 715
Did you know that by June 1993 Mr. Dunlop had received 35 -- or was per the
19
books and records of Monarch Properties had received 35,000.
14:28:56 20
take the invoice for 12,100 into account, he had received 47,100 pounds?
21
A.
Yes, he seems to have been doing very well.
22
Q. 716
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop has an entry for an eight o'clock meeting with you, at 4266.
23
For the 28th of June 1993.
24
on the 28th of June that Mr. Dunlop might have attended?
14:29:24 25
A.
26
Do you recall a meeting an eight o'clock meeting
I can't recall it specifically but that would fall into the category of meeting at that time.
27
Q. 717
Yes.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 718
Was that in connection Cherrywood?
A.
Yes.
14:29:34 30
In fact, if you
Would you have an early morning meeting with Mr. Dunlop?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:29:35
14:29:54
105 1
Q. 719
Who would have attended that meeting other than yourself and Mr. Dunlop.
2
A.
I can't really say.
3
Q. 720
Who was in the habit of attending those meetings between yourself and Mr.
4 5
Dunlop? A.
6 7
Well, it could have been Richard Lynn, Phil Reilly, Noel Murray.
All of them
had inputs into ... Q. 721
8 9
But it could have been a number of people.
They would all have -- they would all have attended from time to time meetings between you and Mr. Dunlop?
A.
Yes, they would all have inputs into the lobbying.
Q. 722
And would there have been minutes taken of those meetings?
11
A.
Notes, yes.
12
Q. 723
Those meetings should be noted and there should be minutes available for those
14:30:04 10
13 14 14:30:14 15
meetings? A.
Notes, yes.
Q. 724
Yes.
16
Who would have attended with Mr. Dunlop? Would Mr. Lawlor have attended
those meetings?
17
A.
It's possible.
18
Q. 725
In relation to the lobbying at Cherrywood?
19
A.
Yes.
Q. 726
Could you give the Tribunal a flavour of the type of conversation one would
14:30:26 20
21 22
Mr. Lawlor did attend briefly at some of those meetings.
hear at those meetings? A.
Yeah.
I think we'll be saying how are things going and then people would give
23
a short description of how they were getting on with the lobbying and that's
24
the sort of thing, it would be a monitoring meeting.
14:30:49 25
Q. 727
Yes.
You recall --
26
A.
There wouldn't be a long meeting, now.
27
Q. 728
Yes.
You recall earlier this morning, Mr. Sweeney, that you indicated that in
28
the run up to the, I think it was the '92 vote, you had been assigned an
29
allocation of councillors.
14:31:08 30
A.
I think Councillor Lydon and Hand and Flaherty?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:31:09
14:31:24
106 1
Q. 729
2
Had there been an allocation of councillors to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Reilly and Mr. Dunlop and indeed perhaps yourself and maybe Mr. Murray?
3
A.
To a loose extent, yes.
4
Q. 730
And who were the councillors assigned to Mr. Dunlop?
5
A.
That I don't know.
6
Q. 731
Yes.
7
A.
If you recall.
8 9 14:31:34 10
11
That was very much up to Mr. Dunlop.
If you would take on board my role was really to set him up
and do it. Q. 732
Yes.
A.
And hopefully gain the result at the end.
Q. 733
And was he bringing back a positive feedback to the meetings in relation to his
12
efforts at lobbying?
13
A.
The meetings were positive.
14
Q. 734
Yes.
14:31:57 15
And all three, that is to say well all four, and everybody at those
meetings were updated at each meeting on the extent of the lobbying of the
16
individual people assigned to the lobbying.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 735
There's an -- on the 1st of July 1993.
19
Eddie Sweeney, Monarch.
14:32:19 20
Isn't that right?
At 4266, there is a 12:30 meeting for
Could you have had a meeting on the 1st of July with
Mr. Dunlop? That's on Thursday the 1st of July.
21
About midway.
Bottom left hand corner.
You see 12:30 Eddie Sweeney?
22
A.
I could have but I have no recollection.
23
Q. 736
Again, that would be a meeting similar to the one you have described?
24
A.
No, I think the one I've described would be the early morning meetings.
Q. 737
Okay.
14:32:41 25
If we could have 4277.
Mr. Dunlop appears to have come in into
26
possession of a cheque from Monarch for 7,500 pounds on the 1st of July 1993.
27
Do you see that?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 738
That remittance.
14:33:04 30
Again, do you see Mr. Glennane's signature on the top right
hand corner of that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:33:05
14:33:10
107 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 739
Does that signify that Mr. Glennane would have known that that cheque was
3
written?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 740
And did you ask Mr. Glennane to write that cheque?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 741
Mr. Dunlop would now have an additional 42 -- he would this in fact have a
8
42,100 excluding the 12,100 which he may or may not have been paid.
9
that right?
14:33:28 10
Isn't
A.
Uh-huh.
11
Q. 742
He would have been paid substantial monies at this stage?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 743
Did you give Mr. Dunlop that cheque at that meeting on the 1st of July?
14
A.
I never gave Mr. Dunlop any cheques.
Q. 744
Did Mr. Glennane ever attend any of those meetings?
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 745
Did anybody at those meetings give Mr. Dunlop a cheque?
18
A.
No.
19
Q. 746
Did Mr. Dunlop ask for money at that meeting?
A.
No.
Q. 747
So are you saying that the timing of the meeting and the issuing of the cheque
14:33:42 15
14:33:54 20
21 22
are just coincidental?
23
A.
If the meeting did take place.
24
Q. 748
Yes.
A.
Then it was definitely coincidental.
Q. 749
If we could have 4319.
There's a further meeting at ten o'clock.
27
I think Monarch again.
You see the top left hand corner, Mr. Sweeney for the
28
26th of July? Do you recall that meeting? It's the last entry on the Monday.
14:34:03 25
26
29 14:34:34 30
A.
At 12.
Q. 750
It's 12. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Eddie and
14:34:34
14:34:49
108 1
A.
I thought. Yeah.
2
Q. 751
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop at 12 on a Monday in July?
3
A.
I can't recall the actual meeting.
4
Q. 752
There's 30th of July.
5
On the same page.
The on the following "Friday 11:00
Eddie/Monarch."
6
A.
I see that.
7
Q. 753
Would Mr. Lawlor have attended those meetings?
8
A.
I can't recall that meeting.
9 14:35:01 10
MR. SHIPSEY:
Chairman, sorry.
If I can just give some assistance here in
11
relation to this.
I mentioned yesterday that we had made discovery of
12
Mr. Sweeney's diary.
13
Mr. Quinn has been referring to, entries in Mr. Sweeney's diary.
And there are in respect of some of the matters that
14 14:35:19 15
Now, some of them, at least two of the three that have been mentioned so far,
16
include not only Mr. Lawlor, LL, FD but also Mr. Ambrose Kelly.
17
Now, that might give some assistance as to what the purpose of the meeting was.
18 19
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
I suppose --
14:35:34 20
21
Q. 754
MR. QUINN: If Mr. Ambrose Kelly was, is signified as having been present at
22
the meetings, Mr. Sweeney, does that suggest that it was a meeting in relation
23
to the Prague project?
24 14:35:49 25
A.
Well certainly you would jump to that conclusion.
Q. 755
Did Mr. Ambrose Kelly have any involvement in relation to Cherrywood at this
26
time, that is 1993?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 756
And he had no involvement in relation to Cherrywood at any stage --
29 14:35:59 30
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Quinn, perhaps you would take from Mr. Shipsey the diary.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And
14:36:05
14:36:22
109 1
where you are putting to the witness an entry in Mr. Dunlop's diary.
You
2
might just see if there is a similar entry in Mr. Sweeney's diary and put the
3
content of that to him as well.
(diary handed to Mr. Quinn)
4 5
Q. 757
6 7
relates to solely to Prague? A.
8 9
MR. QUINN: So where there is an Ambrose Kelly entry, we can take it that it
Well it certainly might have related to Prague.
Again, I can't recall
exactly. Q. 758
14:36:46 10
You have no entry in your diary for the 30th of July, isn't that right? Now, the next entry that Mr. Dunlop has for you is an entry for ten o'clock on the
11
20th of August.
At 4974 and there is no entry in your diary for that.
12
that signify to you Mr. Sweeney, that no such meeting took place?
13
A.
It's possible it could have been deferred or whatever.
14
Q. 759
Yes.
14:37:09 15
The next entry you have, Mr. Dunlop has is a ten o'clock meeting on the
27th of August.
And you have a ten o'clock meeting for FD on the 27th of
16
August.
17
was in connection with Cherrywood?
There are no other entries in your diary.
18
A.
Could you just repeat that one.
19
Q. 760
Okay.
14:37:29 20
Does
On the 27th of August.
Does that mean that it
If we could have 4327, please.
On Friday the
27th of August Mr. Dunlop has a ten o'clock meeting for E Sweeney.
And your
21
diary for Friday the 27th of August has a ten o'clock meeting for FD, which I
22
suggest to you is Frank Dunlop.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 761
Now, there is no other entry in your diary.
A.
It coincides --
26
Q. 762
That it coincides and that it was a Cherrywood meeting?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 763
You also have an entry in your diary for the 25th of August for a ten o'clock F
14:37:48 25
29 14:38:06 30
Dunlop meeting.
So does that mean --
But we know from Mr. Dunlop's diary on screen that he had
Nora appointment at 9:30 that morning.
Can we take it that that meeting
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:38:11
14:38:34
110 1
didn't take place and may have been deferred to the 27th?
2
A.
I don't really know.
3
Q. 764
Mr. Dunlop's, if I could have 4365 Mr. Dunlop's next entry for a meeting with
4
you is an 8:30 meeting for the 14th of September.
You have no entry in your
5
diary for that day.
6
is it possible that you did have an entry early morning meeting with Mr. Dunlop
7
on the 14th of September in relation to Cherrywood?
Having regard to the timing of the meeting, Mr. Sweeney,
8
A.
It's possible.
9
Q. 765
And that would have been attended by the other representatives?
A.
It's really hard to say who was at any of these meetings.
14:38:54 10
11
conglomeration of different people.
12
them.
13
Q. 766
14 14:39:08 15
Yes.
There was such a
It certainly wouldn't have been all of
But it would have been Mr. Lynn presumably and Mr. Reilly would have
been vital -A.
Yeah.
16
Q. 767
-- because they were lobbying, like Mr. Dunlop?
17
A.
Yes, I would have been hoping that there would have been a co-ordination effort
18 19 14:39:22 20
21
between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Dunlop. Q. 768
Did Mr. Lawlor have any lobbying functions?
A.
No.
Q. 769
Now, on the 17th of September, Mr. Dunlop, again on the same page, Friday the
22
17th of December.
23
that on the screen? And you have an entry --
24 14:39:37 25
A.
December is it?
Q. 770
Sorry.
26
September.
He has an eight o'clock meeting for Eddie S.
The 17th of September 1993.
Do you see
And you have an eight
o'clock meeting in your diary for FD/RL/PR?
27
A.
Yes , that would coincide.
28
Q. 771
Frank Dunlop, Richard Lynn and Philip Reilly?
29
A.
Yes.
Q. 772
Now, on the 17th September Mr. Dunlop again had a cheque drawn in his favour in
14:39:51 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:39:58
14:40:16
111 1
the sum of 7,500 pounds, at 4366.
Do you see that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 773
That's -- did Mr. Dunlop ask for a cheque in that sum that the meeting?
4
A.
No.
5
Q. 774
Again, are you saying that it was coincidental that there was a meeting
6
attended by Mr. Dunlop on this -- which happened to be on the same day that a
7
cheque in his favour was drawn for 7,500 pounds?
8
A.
I didn't have any conversation with him about cheques.
9
Q. 775
Would Mr. Reilly or Mr. Lynn have had any conversation with him about cheques?
A.
No.
Q. 776
If we are still dealing with Mr. Dunlop's retainer, we are now up to 50,000
14:40:37 10
11 12
pounds by September 1993.
Isn't that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 777
Did you know that Mr. Dunlop by the end of that meeting on the 17th of
14:40:52 15
September 1993 had received 50,000 pounds from the group?
16
A.
I don't think I did.
17
Q. 778
Are you surprised that he had received such money from the group?
18
A.
Well I knew that around about this time he was given a success fee.
19
Q. 779
Yes.
A.
Mr. Monahan.
21
Q. 780
When did he first seek the success fee?
22
A.
He first -- when did?
23
Q. 781
Mr. Dunlop first seek the success fee?
24
A.
At the first meeting.
Q. 782
Yes.
26
A.
He asked for a success fee and I said that that was beyond my scope and --
27
Q. 783
Did you raise the issue of the success fee with Mr. Monahan?
28
A.
No, he raised it with me.
14:41:20 20
14:41:31 25
29 14:41:46 30
Who approved the success fee, Mr. Sweeney?
He said that a fee had been agreed.
prior to -- some time around about then. Q. 784
Around about September 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Some time
14:41:48
14:41:54
112 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 785
And you had discussed it with Mr. Monahan?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 786
And had you discussed it about Mr. Glennane?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 787
And had Mr. Monahan and/or Mr. Glennane sought your views on whether or not Mr.
7 8
Dunlop was worth a success fee? A.
9 14:42:11 10
No, it was the other way about.
It was Mr. Monahan informed me that a success
fee had been agreed with Frank Dunlop. Q. 788
Who had agreed it?
11
A.
Mr. Monahan.
12
Q. 789
And how much was the success fee for?
13
A.
50,000.
14
Q. 790
Were you surprised?
A.
I wasn't surprised, no.
Q. 791
Was Mr. Dunlop advising you on the success or otherwise of his lobbying
14:42:22 15
16 17 18
campaign at this stage? A.
19 14:42:42 20
He was channelling at, mainly through Mr. Lynn, but did report at the meetings that things were going okay.
That was about it.
Q. 792
But the meeting of the 17th of September, an eight o'clock meeting --
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q. 793
-- in the morning on the run up to a most crucial vote in relation to
23 24 14:42:53 25
Cherrywood? A.
Yes.
Q. 794
You, the most senior person within Monarch Properties dealing with the
26
Cherrywood site in attendance, this would have been one of the crucial
27
meetings.
Isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 795
Did Mr. Dunlop tell you who had indicated to him, that is to say what
14:43:10 30
councillors had indicated to him, that they would support the proposals in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:43:14
14:43:29
113 1
relation to Monarch?
2
A.
Not that I recall.
3
Q. 796
And any discussion on which councillors were being approached by which
4 5
lobbiests? A.
6 7
Simply that things were going okay.
No, no discussion on that.
I wouldn't have been particularly interested in
that. Q. 797
Can I ask you, Mr. Sweeney.
Just listening to your evidence.
8
in-house lobbiests, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.
9
and both of whom had been involved previously.
14:43:48 10
Both of whom knew councillors What extra did Mr. Dunlop
bring to Monarch by way of lobbying that was disclosed at any of these meetings
11
to date.
That is to say up to September 1993?
12
A.
What did he bring to the party?
13
Q. 798
Yes.
14
A.
I suppose a third experienced lobbiest.
Q. 799
But you had two experienced lobbiests, isn't that right?
16
A.
We had two and now we had three.
17
Q. 800
Yes.
18
A.
I presume he was doing the same as the others.
19
Q. 801
Now, at 4387.
14:44:07 15
You had to
14:44:39 20
Exactly.
You had two experienced lobbiests.
But what extra did Mr. Dunlop do?
You will see an 88 -- 8:15 Monarch meeting.
Which although in
under Tuesday the 28th, there is an arrow pointing to the 29th of September
21
1993 and again, I should tell you that there is no entry in your diary for that
22
date, Mr. Sweeney.
23
A.
Uh-huh.
24
Q. 802
But it's possible that a meeting did take place between maybe Mr. Dunlop
14:44:58 25
Then it's possible I may not have attended that meeting.
Mr. Reilly and/or Mr. Lynn?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 803
Did any other senior person attend those meetings other than yourself,
28 29 14:45:11 30
Mr. Sweeney? A.
I think Noel Murray might have attended some of them.
Q. 804
Yes.
When you weren't able to attend Mr. Murray you think might have stood Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:45:16
14:45:21
114 1
in?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 805
Did he ever attend a meeting attended by you?
4
A.
Yes, he did.
5
Q. 806
Did Mr. Lawlor attend any of these meetings do you think?
6
A.
No.
7
Q. 807
Now, on the 8th of October, at 4561, Friday the 8th of October.
8
has a ten o'clock entry for Eddie S.
9
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop on the 8th of October?
14:45:42 10
And there is no entry in your diary.
A.
The 8th of October at ten o'clock?
11
Q. 808
Yes.
12
A.
I don't recall that.
13
Q. 809
No.
14
A.
Yeah.
Q. 810
You don't recall that meeting.
16
A.
No.
17
Q. 811
Then there is a telephone attendance, at 4587.
14:45:55 15
Mr. Dunlop
It's a ten o'clock meeting on the 8th?
Where you rang Mr. Dunlop re a
18
meeting for the 14th of October.
19
meeting might be about if we look at the entry at 207 where Mr. Lynn has rang
14:46:15 20
And we get some indication of what that
asking if Mr. Dunlop would be available for a meeting with Mr. Pat Field.
21
I think Mr. Pat Field a director of GRE at the Royal Dublin on the 11th.
22
Sorry.
23
meeting.
24 14:46:32 25
At 11 or 12 o'clock on the 14th.
And Mr. Dunlop's confirming the
A.
Yes.
Q. 812
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Pat Field and possibly Mr. Sweeney in
26
the Royal Dublin on the 14th of October?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 813
There is, I should say to you, an entry in your diary for 12 o'clock for F
29 14:46:55 30
And
Dunlop on the 14th of October. presumably Mr. Lynn.
You also have a 9:30 entry for RL, which is
Is that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:46:57
14:47:09
115 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 814
And you have an 8:15 entry for KOS.
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 815
Did you meet Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan on Thursday the 14th of October at 8:15?
5
A.
It seems very early for ....
6
Q. 816
Now, you also have an entry for the same day under the heading Ongar stud.
7
Ongar vote.
8
October 1993?
9
Could that be Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan?
Was there a vote in relation to a Monarch property on the 14th of
A.
Yes.
Q. 817
Had Mr. Dunlop any involvement in relation to that vote?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 818
Mr. Dunlop was retained in relation to Cherrywood and Ongar.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 819
And I think there was some rezoning going on in relation to Somerton.
14:47:24 10
14:47:37 15
Was Mr.
Dunlop retained in relation to that also?
16
A.
I don't recall that he was involved in Somerton.
17
Q. 820
So he had two projects for Monarch at this time?
18
A.
Yes. Though there was really only one project because the Ongar one was pretty
19 14:47:57 20
well straight forward. Q. 821
Now, on the -- just to, for completeness I should put up Mr. Dunlop's entry for
21
that date, the 14th of October, at 4577.
22
Mr. Dunlop in evidence yesterday.
And Mr. Shipsey dealt with that with
23 24
Now, at 4665, there is an eight o'clock entry for Eddie S.
14:48:25 25
Do you see that,
for the 2nd of November?
26
A.
Yes
27
Q. 822
And there is nothing in your diary for the 2nd or indeed the 3rd of November.
28
There's another entry for eight o'clock on the third of November.
29
that, Mr. Sweeney? Just top right hand corner Monarch.
14:48:42 30
A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Do you see
14:48:42
14:48:57
116 1
Q. 823
There is no entry in your diary for either the 2nd or the 3rd.
2
A.
Yeah.
3
Q. 824
Now, just in relation to the -- to those entries.
Do you think that Mr.
4
Dunlop may have met representatives of Monarch other than yourself at the
5
meeting on the 3rd but that he would have met you at the meeting on the 2nd?
6
A.
I can't say.
7
Q. 825
He seems to be making a distinction there in his diary entries between meetings
8 9 14:49:21 10
with you and meetings with Monarch, isn't that right? A.
Oh, well yes.
Q. 826
And coincidentally, Mr. Sweeney, at 4633, Mr. Dunlop presents an invoice for
11
yet another payment, this time in the sum of 15,000 pounds which now brings his
12
payments to 65,000 pounds.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 827
And you certified that invoice.
14:49:41 15
Do you see that invoice?
Because I think that's your signature or your
initials on the left?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 828
You certified it for payment?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 829
And you met with Mr. Dunlop on the same day.
14:49:53 20
dated the 2nd of November '93.
And the cheque at 4634.
Is
As matter of probability, Mr. Sweeney, Mr.
21
Dunlop must have presented that invoice to you at that meeting on the 3rd -- on
22
the 2nd of November '93.
23
A.
I don't think so.
24
Q. 830
So you think it's coincidental that on the same morning that you met Mr. Dunlop
14:50:12 25
I don't think he ever presented me with anything.
you would have received from him an invoice which you paid on the same day?
26
A.
Certainly I didn't receive any invoices from him.
27
Q. 831
At 4633.
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 832
And the invoice we know was paid on the 2nd of November.
A.
Yes.
14:50:38 30
You certified the invoice, isn't that right?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:50:38
14:50:50
117 1
Q. 833
So you must have received it and paid it on the same day, isn't that right?
2
A.
Well it's been paid.
3
Q. 834
Yes.
4
But it was certified for payment on the day that it was received, which
was the 2nd of November?
5
A.
Well if you go back to that.
6
Q. 835
Yes.
7
A.
It doesn't really say when I certified it.
8
Q. 836
I accept that.
9
A.
It is dated that.
Q. 837
So are you saying that you --
11
A.
I may not have received it on that day.
12
Q. 838
So you think that this might have been an invoice that was received within
14:51:04 10
13 14 14:51:15 15
4633, please.
But it's dated the 2nd of November?
Monarch after the payment had been made? A.
Yes.
It certainly may have.
Q. 839
Now, you were certifying a payment on foot of an invoice for a contractor who
16
was purporting to provide media and communications training for '93 and '94,
17
isn't that right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 840
Which he was suggesting was a VAT exempt activity?
A.
Yes.
Q. 841
Mr. Dunlop never provided media and communications training.
14:51:34 20
21 22
Did he,
Mr. Sweeney?
23
A.
Not to Monarch he didn't.
24
Q. 842
Well to any of the Monarch Groups?
A.
No.
Q. 843
So you were certifying there a payment which effectively was a VAT free payment
14:51:44 25
26 27
to a supplier whom you knew from previous invoices was supplying a vatable
28
activity?
29 14:52:03 30
A.
Can I short circuit that.
Q. 844
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:52:03
14:52:31
118 1
A.
By saying that when I agreed the payment -- when I agreed with Mr. Dunlop the
2
4,000 was to be exclusive of VAT.
3
as far as I was concerned from that point on, all payments should have
4
attracted VAT because VAT would have been of no importance to Monarch.
5
Q. 845
6
Yes.
The 25,000 was a payment on account.
And
But why did you certify a payment to Mr. Dunlop which was VAT exempt in
November '93?
7
A.
I don't recall even noticing that it was VAT exempt.
8
Q. 846
If we take your theory a moment ago, Mr. Sweeney, that you did not receive that
9 14:52:58 10
invoice on the 2nd of November, that you got it subsequently? A.
Yes.
11
Q. 847
After the cheque had issued?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 848
That would mean you would have needlessly certified the payment after the
14
cheque had issued, isn't that right? Because the cheque had issued on the 2nd
14:53:10 15
of November.
16
A.
Yes, I noticed that.
17
Q. 849
So somebody would have had to sanction the issue of the cheque on the 2nd of
18 19
November? A.
Yeah, the accounts would have issued the cheque.
Q. 850
Yes but they would have issued a cheque in the absence of an invoice?
21
A.
That's possible.
22
Q. 851
And subsequently, you would have sanctioned an invoice for a cheque that had
14:53:22 20
23 24
issued? A.
Yes.
Q. 852
And who would have sanctioned the cheque on the 2nd of November?
26
A.
The accounts would have.
27
Q. 853
Who within accounts would have?
28
A.
I would have said any senior member, include Mr. Glennane.
29
Q. 854
But why would it have been necessary for you to certify the invoice if the
14:53:34 25
14:53:54 30
cheque had issued? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:53:56
14:54:09
119 1
A.
To keep the paperwork correct I suppose.
2
Q. 855
But isn't that the one thing that's absent here, Mr. Sweeney?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q. 856
Is paperwork?
5
A.
I must agree, it's very confusing and I can't figure it out.
6
Q. 857
And highly unusual.
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q. 858
And very confusing.
9
A.
Yes. And I have to say, that didn't apply in the construction end.
Q. 859
Yes.
11
A.
Which I was dealing with on a day-to-day basis.
12
Q. 860
But you're dealing here now with Mr. Dunlop and you're certifying his fees,
14:54:24 10
13 14 14:54:33 15
isn't that right? A.
Yes.
Q. 861
You within, Monarch are taking responsibility for certifying Mr. Dunlop's
16
retainer, isn't that right?
17
A.
I took responsibility for agreeing with him the brief and the amount.
18
Q. 862
And you certified his payments?
19
A.
And after that it seems to me that the payments got into a very confused state
14:54:50 20
21
and there was all sorts of paperwork flying around to try and sort it out. Q. 863
Aren't you the most senior man within Monarch, Mr. Sweeney, that's dealing with
22
Mr. Dunlop at this time? You have retained him, albeit on the direction you
23
say of Mr. Monahan.
24
sanctioning and certifying his invoices.
14:55:12 25
A.
26 27
You have had meetings with him.
Isn't that correct?
Well if he had invoiced properly, then everything would have been fine.
But I
can't make head nor tail of the trail of paper that's there. Q. 864
But you were the one person within Monarch that had primary responsibility for
28
this supplier.
29
assistance to the company?
14:55:33 30
You have been
A.
Isn't that right? This professional that was providing
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:55:34
14:55:54
120 1
Q. 865
And you were certifying his invoices?
2
A.
Yeah but once the invoices were within the threshold of the agreement that I
3 4
had made, then that, that would have been okay. Q. 866
But why didn't you raise with Mr. Dunlop the issue of proper accounting and the
5
provision of proper invoices so that he could be properly paid, isn't that
6
right?
7
A.
8 9
Well I should have.
I wouldn't have been wanting to start a fight with
someone who is just about to help us in a lobbying exercise. Q. 867
14:56:12 10
Were you not curious as to why Mr. Dunlop was supplying all of these different invoices?
11
A.
I didn't see a lot of these until the end.
12
Q. 868
But you were certifying them, isn't that right?
13
A.
Some of them.
14
Q. 869
You were certainly certifying this one as being payable even though it doesn't
14:56:21 15
contain a VAT amount, isn't that right?
16
A.
Yeah and I didn't understand that.
17
Q. 870
You can't understand why Mr. Dunlop would submit a fee for works which he says
18 19
were VAT exempt, works that were not done by him, isn't that right? A.
14:56:44 20
21
Yes.
I would have assumed in that invoice that the 15,000 would have included
VAT. Q. 871
Under normal circumstances, Mr. Sweeney, we should be looking there on the 2nd
22
of November 1993 at an invoice for either the month of October or indeed the
23
month of November for the sum of 4,000 pounds plus VAT being the retainer for
24
that month in relation to the provision of lobbying services to Monarch
14:57:03 25
Properties Services Limited in connection with the rezoning of Cherrywood
26 27
lands. A.
28 29 14:57:25 30
Isn't that right?
Yes, it does seem to me, Chairman, that within the umbrella of a very simple agreement, all the payments got very confused.
Q. 872
And in fact, if we go to 4634, Mr. Sweeney.
And we look again at the cheque.
If you look at the reverse of the cheque, you see that it's date stamped in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:57:30
14:57:55
121 1
bank on the 2nd of November 1993.
2
of November, the cheque was drawn on the 2nd of November and the cheque appears
3
to have been negotiated on the 2nd of November.
4
according to his diary, on the 2nd of November.
5
assist the Tribunal in any way in relation to those sequence of events?
6
A.
7
So it was the invoice was raised on the 2nd
And you met with Mr. Dunlop,
Do you think that you can
Well I can understand the sequence of events but I did not receive an invoice from him personally on the 2nd of November.
8
Q. 873
The 2nd of November was nine days off the vote, isn't that right?
9
A.
Uh-huh.
14:58:17 10
11
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Quinn, in fact I understand the vote was
12
scheduled for the 3rd of November.
13 14
MR. QUINN: And was adjourned to the 9th.
14:58:26 15
16
JUDGE FAHERTY:
Yes.
If my recollection is correct.
17 18
MR. QUINN: Yes, that's correct, Judge.
19
understood it on the 2nd when you met with Mr. Dunlop?
14:58:37 20
A.
This was on the eve the vote as you
Well I understood the vote was on the 11th.
21 22
JUDGE FAHERTY:
23
the records are correct of the County Council was on the agenda for the 3rd of
24
November.
14:58:49 25
It was indeed, Mr. Sweeney, did take place on the 11th.
If
A.
It had been deferred.
Yes, I understand now.
Q. 874
MR. QUINN: And you were putting Mr. Dunlop on that day in funds to the tune of
26 27 28
15,000 pounds by drawing a cheque drawing a cheque which had no VAT element
29
insofar as the invoice was concerned.
14:59:09 30
A.
Isn't that right?
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
14:59:15
14:59:39
122 1
Q. 875
Now, at 4690.
2
entry.
3
Monarch/Eddie.
On the 9th of November Mr. Dunlop has a 12.00 or an 11.00
If you just look at the 9th, which is Tuesday about midway down Do you see that?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 876
Do you recall meeting Mr. Dunlop on that date and I tell you there is no entry
6
in your diary for that date?
7
A.
Well I can understand the logic of it though being immediately before I think.
8
Q. 877
Yes.
9
A.
Vote?
Q. 878
The vote was on the following Thursday, isn't that right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q. 879
A an entry in your diary D day?
13
A.
D day.
14
Q. 880
And we see Mr. Dunlop's diary on the 11th equally and the word Monarch written
14:59:48 10
15:00:13 15
on it.
Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 881
Now, there were subsequent invoices.
I think you may have phoned looking for
18
Mr. Dunlop on the Friday, that's the day following the vote, at 4699.
19
again on the Monday the 15th.
15:00:37 20
At 10.50 at 4707.
further invoices appear to have been raised.
21
dated the 6th of December 1993.
22
have seen that.
23
1993 at 4772.
24
it's in the sum of 31,371.94, do you see that?
15:01:07 25
26
And
But in any event, two
A copy of an invoice at 4768
In the sum of 22,296.94 was raised.
And then there is a further invoice dated the 6th of December Which again is invoice No. 955 as that one on screen is.
A.
Yes.
Q. 882
And again, Mr. Sweeney, that's an invoice that's okayed and certified for
27
You'll
And
payment by you, isn't that right?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 883
Can you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which you came to certify
15:01:19 30
that invoice for payment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:01:24
15:01:46
123 1
A.
I've looked at this and it appears that the accounts were very anxious to get
2
paperwork to cover all the monies that had been expended in Frank Dunlop's
3
favour.
4
what had been paid to him.
5
Q. 884
6 7
Why were you involved in getting the paper together Mr. Sweeney? Why not Mr. Glennane or Mr. Lynn or Mr. Reilly? Why you?
A.
8 9
And that these were again a retrospective paper exercise to justify
Well it would have been at the request of the accounts department. would have been at their behest.
Q. 885
15:02:06 10
But it was a request to you because Mr. Dunlop as a contractor fell under your jurisdiction so, to speak, within the company.
Is that correct?
11
A.
Yeah, it was more or less go and get invoices from the guy.
12
Q. 886
Because he was your -- your retainer.
13 14
So it
Isn't that right? You had retained
him. A.
Yes.
Q. 887
You were responsible for him within the company?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 888
Yes.
18
A.
Within the agreement that had been made.
19
Q. 889
Yeah.
A.
Yes.
21
Q. 890
And you had responsibility to produce the paperwork to the accounts department?
22
A.
Not only for our own particular reasons but also for our partner.
23
Q. 891
Claim against GRE.
24
A.
Yeah.
Q. 892
For 50 percent of his contribution.
26
A.
Yeah, who would be very lost to pay without the paperback up.
27
Q. 893
And in fact we see that, Mr. Sweeney, if we look at the paperback up.
15:02:17 15
15:02:28 20
15:02:41 25
He more or less fell into a category of a contractor, isn't that right?
28
first of all produce, based on those invoices three certificates.
29
with the one dated the 1st of June '93, which is at 4142.
15:03:07 30
You,
We dealt
Where you certified
that Mr. Dunlop had been paid on the 10th of April '93. A sum of 12,100 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:03:12
15:03:51
124 1
pounds.
2
had been paid on the 14th of December '93 on foot of invoice No. 1251, 60,500
3
pounds.
4
as having been paid a sum of 32,371.94 on the 6th of December '93 on foot of
5
invoice No. 955 and I'll put that document on screen in a moment, Mr. Sweeney.
6
I'll come back to that document.
7
moment.
8
Properties and forwarded to GRE seeking 50 percent of the 25,000 up front
9
payment, isn't that right? And we see that at 4819.
15:04:45 10
11
And if we could have 4846.
There's a certificate that Mr. Dunlop
And then there was a third invoice where you had certified Mr. Dunlop
I just don't have the reference on it at the
But on the 29th of June 1993 invoice No. 2064 was raised, by Monarch
A.
Yes.
Q. 894
That's invoice number -- there are three different types of invoices here,
12
isn't that right? There's Mr. Dunlop's invoice raised on Monarch.
13
there's Monarch's invoice raised on GRE.
14 15:05:00 15
A.
Yes.
Q. 895
So it's quite confusing.
And then
So what I'm talking about know--
So when are we're talking about Monarch's
16
relationship with GRE, Monarch would normally raise an invoice with GRE and
17
they would back that invoice up with third party invoices?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 896
In this case Mr. Dunlop's invoice to Monarch?
A.
Yes.
15:05:16 20
21 22
There were two.
There was Dunlop's invoice to Monarch and Monarch's
subsequent invoice to GRE. Q. 897
Now, that document on screen, which is the invoice of the 29th of June '93.
23
Was the subject -- was forwarded for payment to GRE.
24
if we could have 4822.
15:05:48 25
And on the 7th of July,
Mr. Baker wrote to you following on a meeting which
you had with him on the 29th of June, isn't that right? You had some regular
26
contact with Mr. Baker, isn't that right?
27
A.
Yes.
28
Q. 898
And these sort of issues between Monarch and GRE would be trashed out between
29 15:06:02 30
you, isn't that right? A.
Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:06:02
15:06:25
125 1
Q. 899
And you had a meeting with him I think in May '93, isn't that right? Because
2
we see from that letter under item No. 4 invoice No. 2064.
3
advises you that at the meeting in May he agreed the appointment of Mr. Dunlop
4
but only on the basis that it was 4,000 per month with no success fee.
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 900
Sorry.
7
That Mr. Baker
The 7th of May 1993 I think is the date of that meeting, isn't that
correct?
8
A.
Sorry, am I looking at something here?
9
Q. 901
Yes.
15:06:43 10
Item No. 4.
Although it says meeting in May.
In fact I understand
from Mr. Shipsey and indeed I understand from the documentation as well that
11
that meeting may have taken place on the 7th of May.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 902
So you had retained Mr. Dunlop as far back as March on the instructions of
14 15:07:02 15
16
Mr. Monahan. A.
Yes.
Q. 903
And then you had a meeting the following May.
On May 7th.
7th with
17
Mr. Baker and you advised Mr. Baker that you had retained Mr. Dunlop.
18
a meeting in your diary for the 7th of May E S/MB in Dublin.
19 15:07:21 20
That's
A.
Yes.
Q. 904
So at that meeting you are advising Mr. Baker of third party costs effectively
21
being incurred.
22
isn't that right?
And you're going to recover some of those costs from GRE,
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 905
And you're advising Mr. Baker that Mr. Dunlop has been retained, isn't that
15:07:36 25
right?
26
A.
Yes.
27
Q. 906
And you advise him of the terms of his employment?
28
A.
Yes.
29
Q. 907
Namely, that it would be 4,000 per month but you must have also advised him
15:07:45 30
that Mr. Dunlop was looking for a success fee and Mr. Dunlop said he wouldn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:07:50
15:07:58
126 1
pay a success fee, isn't that right?
2
A.
No, that's not correct.
3
Q. 908
Okay.
4
A.
What happened there was I advised him a that a success fee had been requested
5
and that I had said that it was out of my control and that's why I said there
6
was no success fee and that we really meant it to be at that moment in time.
7
The fact that he said there was no success fee means that I had said to him --
8
Q. 909
9 15:08:21 10
That there was no success fee at that stage.
He was envisaging a success fee
that stage? A.
No, he wasn't.
11
Q. 910
I see.
12
A.
He was just noting the fact that there was no success fee.
13
Q. 911
And now he had received, having been advised or appraised of Mr. Dunlop's
14
appointment.
15:08:35 15
He had now received an invoice for half of 25,000 pounds which
had been received by Mr. Dunlop and he is querying that invoice.
He is
16
reminding you of the meeting that you'd had.
17
difficult to understand an invoice for 25,000 pounds in which you employ -
18
which would employ over six months work when Mr. Dunlop was only appointed in
19
May.
15:08:55 20
21
And he goes on to say I find it
Isn't that right?
A.
Yes.
Q. 912
And I think you responded -- I think you responded to that letter in
22
correspondence on the 13th of July '93.
23
paragraph on that page you say.
If we look at 4825.
The very last
24 15:09:13 25
Your item No. 4, invoice No. 2064.
"I am prepared to cancel invoice 2064 and
26
re issue invoice 2068 for April, May June and July if you feel that you should
27
pay only on a monthly basis.
28
engaged from April and requested that part of their payment be up front before
29
they would take on the assignment.
15:09:41 30
Please note that Frank Dunlop & Associates were
That is the reason why the payment by us
of 25,000 to date" Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:09:44
15:10:03
127 1
A.
Yes.
2
Q. 913
And I think there were subsequent correspondence between you.
And on the 28th
3
of September 1993, at 4817. By the 28th of September you had again met with
4
Mr. Baker, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes, I must say I was in constant communication with Mr. Baker.
6
Q. 914
And he refers to that meeting.
7
A.
Both by phone and by letter.
8
Q. 915
And although there's no entry in your diary, that letter of the 28th of
9
September suggest that is there may in fact have been a meeting on the 27th of
15:10:21 10
September, isn't that right? Because he says "With reference to your letter of
11
the 2nd of September and our meeting on the 27th of September".
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q. 916
And then he under the heading F Dunlop he says "a retainer of 4,000 per month
14
from April to December '93 inclusive, plus a success fee of 50,000 pounds."
15:10:38 15
So by 27th of September 1993 Mr. Dunlop had been given a success fee of 50,000
16
pounds, isn't that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q. 917
And I think there followed then in December and January '93 and early '94 a
19
series of correspondence where you sought to recover 50 percent of the fees due
15:10:59 20
to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? And that correspondence relied on the
21
certificates which we have seen earlier.
I put up two of the certificates.
22
And the third of the certificate is at 4773.
In the sum of 32,371.94.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q. 918
And those certificates were forwarded on the 15th of December 1993 at 4848 by
15:11:20 25
Mr. Caslin, isn't that right?
26
A.
That 32 is wrong.
27
Q. 919
Yes.
That should be 31, isn't that right? There had been I think -- you had
28
spoken to Mr. Baker on the 14th of December Because if we look at 8608 in
29
correspondence between Mr. Caslin and Mr. Binge.
15:11:46 30
He says "I understand that
Eddie Sweeney is spoken to Martin Baker in the last few minutes and that Martin Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:11:51
15:12:02
128 1
has confirmed that the situation is that he just requires copies of the third
2
party invoices to enable payments to take place acknowledging that we cannot
3
make payments of this order without having received half from yourselves."
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q. 920
And then the response to that was a letter which we have seen at 4848.
6
Forwarding the Dunlop invoices or sorry certificates that we have seen there.
7
And it all culminated in correspondence I think in a further letter on the 16th
8
of December '93 at 4853.
9
Dunlop invoices which he, Mr. Caslin, had certified as having been true copies
15:12:33 10
Where again Mr. Caslin attaches copies of the Frank
of the originals. "My original certified copies are in the mail to you today."
11
Presumably he forwarded the various invoices that we see from Mr. Dunlop, isn't
12
that right?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q. 921
And ultimately I think on the 20th of December 1993.
15:12:50 15
A cheque in the sum of
52,030 pounds as we see at 4815, was drawn by GRE and in favour of Monarch
16
Properties Limited.
Effectively putting them in funds for 50 percent of the
17
Frank Dunlop & Associates payments to date?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 922
Now, just to go back to the retainer of Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Sweeney.
15:13:21 20
And I
listened with care to what your counsel had to say to Mr. Dunlop in his
21
cross-examination and I may be incorrect in this and if I am, please correct
22
me.
23
that you had not used the words that Mr. Dunlop had ascribed to you, namely,
24
that you had said to him that he had to do what had to be done or words to that
15:13:45 25
But I did not understand him to suggest to Mr. Dunlop, that Mr. Dunlop --
effect.
Are you saying that you never used those words?
26
A.
I don't recall using those words.
27
Q. 923
Yeah.
28
A.
I have to say that the very first time, Chairman, that I came across those
29 15:14:09 30
I know that it is your case that --
words was six or seven weeks ago.
And my immediate reaction was to set in
place legal advice to be able to take steps to redress what I regarded as a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:14:16
15:14:36
129 1
slight on my character.
2
privilege of the court I couldn't do that but I was outraged to see that
3
speech.
4
Q. 924
And I discovered that because it was within the
And that was only a few weeks ago.
Not to put a tooth in it, Mr. Sweeney.
Mr. Dunlop's evidence to this Tribunal
5
was to the effect that you, in particular, and Monarch in general, knew that he
6
was about to bribe councillors when he was retained, isn't that right?
7
A.
That is absolutely ludicrous.
8
Q. 925
Yes.
9 15:14:57 10
11
You agree with -- I'm not going it to go into detail of what you said
what he said but you don't believe what he says you said, isn't that right. A.
I certainly don't.
Q. 926
You do agree I suggest to you -- I suspect Mr. Sweeney, that there were unusual
12
features of Mr. Dunlop's relationship with Monarch?
13
A.
From what point of view?
14
Q. 927
Well we'll go through them.
15:15:16 15
You already had a lobbiest in-house.
You had
two in fact; Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, when Mr. Dunlop was retained?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q. 928
Mr. Dunlop's retention was as a result of the suggestion of Mr. Lawlor.
18 19 15:15:43 20
Mr. Lawlor, that is to say at that time a TD and a former councillor himself. A.
Yes, I understand that.
Q. 929
Who had not been involved, you say, in any strategy in relation to Cherrywood
21
up to that point?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q. 930
Mr. Lawlor attended some of the meetings.
24
A.
Yes.
Q. 931
That took place subsequently.
15:15:44 25
26
relation to the project.
27
now 1993?
28
A.
29 15:16:02 30
Mr. Dunlop's involvement was late in the day in
It had been going on I think since '89.
And it was
He didn't really have any involvement in the project except for that introduction.
Q. 932
Yes.
No, that's Mr. Lawlor but Mr. Dunlop's involvement with the project was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:16:07
15:16:22
130 1 2
late -- was late on in the project? A.
3
Yes.
And it was at a point where I may say that the other two lobbiests had
tried and failed.
4
Q. 933
And the previous PR consultant had been involved, isn't that right?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q. 934
And you had in-house PR consultants.
7 8
isn't that right? A.
9 15:16:37 10
You had Pembroke PR and at that time,
Yeah, Pembroke PR would have handled the openings of shopping centres and stuff like that.
Q. 935
11
Yes.
Mr. Dunlop's appointment was not done by the project leader, namely,
you, isn't that right?
12
A.
Say that again.
13
Q. 936
His appointment didn't come about as a result of any suggestion by you as
14 15:16:50 15
16
project leader? A.
No.
Q. 937
There are major controversies between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in relation to
17
his appointment and the terms of his appointment?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q. 938
The invoices don't tally.
15:17:04 20
Isn't that right? The invoices in relation to the
payments don't tally?
21
A.
No, they don't.
22
Q. 939
Mr. Dunlop alleges that in the case of one of the cheques for 10,000 pounds he
23 24 15:17:18 25
didn't receive the benefit of the proceeds of that cheque. A.
Yeah, so I heard.
Q. 940
And it would appear from the reverse of that cheque.
26
That it was negotiated
with two publicans in Lucan?
27
A.
Yes, I saw that.
28
Q. 941
The only payment that was made on foot of an invoice was a same day payment on
29 15:17:42 30
the 3rd of November 199 -- or the 2nd of November 1993. A.
That was the 15,000? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Isn't that correct?
15:17:43
15:17:55
131 1
Q. 942
Yes.
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q. 943
The payment was made on a day that you met with Mr. Dunlop but on a day in
4
which Mr. Dunlop did not raise with you any issue concerning money?
5
A.
No, he didn't raise any issues with me about money or invoices.
6
Q. 944
That invoice itself was not a correct invoice.
That is to say that it
7
purported to suggest that the works or the services being provided were VAT
8
exempt, isn't that right?
9 15:18:12 10
A.
That's correct.
Q. 945
Yet the works being provided by Frank Dunlop & Associates as per the previous
11
invoice were not VAT exempt?
12
A.
No.
13
Q. 946
It was understood between you that VAT would be payable on any fees that he was
14 15:18:27 15
16
to receive? A.
Yes, that was the arrangement.
Q. 947
One of the invoices, that is to say the invoice of April 1991 for 12,100
17
pounds.
18
correct invoice from him?
19 15:18:47 20
Is now being queried by Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right? As being a
A.
Yes.
Q. 948
Although marked paid in June 1993, and certified by you for payment, no cheque
21
in the sum of 12,100 pounds can be found in relation to that payment.
22
A.
I noticed that.
23
Q. 949
There are no memos or records of the meetings that you had either initially
24 15:19:12 25
with Mr. Dunlop or subsequently as I have detailed them here? A.
Well there were records of the meetings.
26
Q. 950
But they are no longer in existence?
27
A.
No.
28
Q. 951
Your evidence and your account of the circumstances under which Mr. Dunlop came
29 15:19:37 30
to be retained, differs now from that given previously to the Tribunal.
And
I'm not going to go into detail in how it differs but you accept in a broad way Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:19:43
15:19:54
132 1
that it does differ?
2
A.
Yes, it does.
3
Q. 952
And in fact your evidence now in relation to the circumstances under which Mr.
4
Dunlop came to be retained is a very detailed recollection of what transpired.
5
Isn't that right?
6
A.
7 8
Well I've had the benefit now of all of the brief and it did open up my memory substantially.
Q. 953
9
In your diary, Mr. Sweeney, you have an entry I think for a one o'clock meeting in Sandymount with Mr. Tom Hand for the 13th of December 1993, isn't that
15:20:27 10
right?
11
A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
12
Q. 954
And I think you had a 4:30 meeting with Kevin O'Sullivan on the same day, isn't
13 14 15:20:39 15
that right? A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
Q. 955
On the 17th of December 1993.
16
I think you have an entry in your diary to
phone Don Lydon re lunch, is that's correct?
17
A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
18
Q. 956
And also you have an entry for Tom Hand for the 17th of December 1993, that's
19 15:20:57 20
21 22
the same day? A.
If it's in my diary, yes.
Q. 957
In his interview with the Tribunal Mr. Dunlop said.
If I could have page 575,
Mr. Sweeney. Just looking at the answer at question 7.
23 24 15:21:31 25
He says "Eddie Sweeney actually said at the meeting in the presence of Liam Lawlor that an awful lot of people had already been looked after and they were
26
ungrateful bastards like you know every time a difficulty arose or they got
27
pressure from -- there was one man in particular who was orchestrating things P
28
Doyle I do not know his first name but he lived in the area."
29
comment to make in relation to that Mr. Sweeney? Did you ever say in the
15:21:57 30
Do you have any
presence of Mr. Lawlor or indeed at any stage to Mr. Dunlop, that there were a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:22:01
15:22:13
133 1
lot of people who had to be looked after?
2
A.
No.
3
Q. 958
Did you ever say to Mr. Dunlop that disbursements had already been made in
4
relation to councillors?
5
A.
No.
6
Q. 959
Messrs. Lydon and Hand had been very -- very helpful to the Monarch Group by
7
December '93, isn't that right?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q. 960
And they'd been very much associated with the project in September '93, isn't
15:22:52 10
that right?
11
A.
Both of those councillors were very much pro-development and pro Monarch.
12
Q. 961
And if I could have 2199.
13
Just to return just to your statement, Mr. Sweeney.
And just taking the fourth paragraph.
14 15:23:08 15
You say "The next contact with Liam Lawlor was in 1993/1994 during the
16
Cherrywood campaigns when he advised on zoning strategy with public relations
17
consultant Frank Dunlop, who was employed as a consultant around the time that
18
the second Cherrywood rezoning was attempted by Monarch.
19
of when exactly or who appointed Frank Dunlop but can recall that some of the
I have no knowledge
15:23:32 20
late Liam Lawlor/Frank Dunlop meetings were related to the promotion of a
21
number of developments in the Czech Republic especially the Alfa project in
22
Prague."
23
given evidence on.
24 15:23:45 25
And you go on to deal with the Prague connection which you have
A.
Yes.
Q. 962
But the earlier portion of that statement Mr. Sweeney suggests that Mr. Lawlor
26
was very much involved in the Cherrywood campaign in that he advised on zoning
27
strategy in '93 and '94?
28
A.
By that I meant that he had arranged the introduction of Frank Dunlop.
29
Q. 963
That was the extent of his involvement in the zoning strategy?
A.
Yes, in looking back on it, that's about it but then it kind of drifted into
15:24:06 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
15:24:12
15:24:24
134 1 2
Prague. Q. 964
3
And again, if we could have 2200, please.
Under the heading Frank Dunlop and
Bill O'Herlihy.
4 5
"You say spanning a period of about one and a half years I would have met Frank
6
Dunlop about six times.
7
proposed development in Prague and some of the meetings would have concerned
8
Frank Dunlop's role as public relations advisor in relation to land rezonings
9
particularly in Cherrywood to which he was introduced some time after the
15:24:40 10
Some of the meetings would have been about the
services of Bill O'Herlihy were no longer required (the road show).
11 12
I can recall no part in any agreement with either Bill O'Herlihy or Frank
13
Dunlop for the services that they provided to Monarch but I believe that such
14
consultancy agreements would probably have been formalised in writing.
15:24:59 15
I
personally however at no time negotiated any agreement, agreed any payment or
16
certified or recommended any payments to Frank Dunlop or Bill O'Herlihy
17
whatsoever.
18
appointments."
Philip Monahan or Richard Lynn would have dealt with such
19 15:25:12 20
I think you have resiled from that contribution to the Tribunal this afternoon,
21 22
Mr. Sweeney? A.
Yes, if I could explain again.
At the time that I did that, I didn't have any
23
information at all on Monarch files or any contact with Monarch personnel.
24
And I regret it, but I didn't afford it the importance that I have seen in it
15:25:39 25
now since the brief and since the accusation that was made against me by Mr.
26 27 28
Dunlop. Q. 965
It's now almost half three I was going to go on to another topic, Sir.
Would
it be fair to say perhaps half eleven on Tuesday?
29 15:26:02 30
CHAIRMAN:
Yeah.
Half eleven on Tuesday.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
And how long approximately more
15:26:07
15:26:17
135 1
do you think you would have?
2
MR. QUINN: I would hope to finish with the witness by lunchtime.
3 4
CHAIRMAN:
And then there is some cross-examination in the afternoon?
5 6
MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney --
7 8
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Sanfey, Mr. Redmond and ....
9 15:26:21 10
11
MR. QUINN: I don't know how long Mr. Sanfey or Mr. Redmond are likely to be or indeed Mr. Shipsey.
12 13
MR SANFEY:
14
at very most.
I won't have very much, Mr. Chairman.
I think 15 or 20 minutes
15:26:40 15
16
CHAIRMAN:
All right.
17 18
MR. QUINN: And I understand Mr. Redmond will be the same.
19
eleven or do you want to say half eleven on Tuesday?
So not before
15:26:42 20
21
CHAIRMAN:
Well we'll say not before half eleven.
22 23
MR. QUINN: Yes.
Okay.
24 15:26:46 25
CHAIRMAN:
Tuesday.
Thank you.
26 27
THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
28
TUESDAY, 4TH JULY, 2006, AT 11:00 30 A.M.
29 15:27:47 30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 662
Related Documents
Mahon Tribunal Transcripts June 2006
June 2020 0
Mahon Tribunal Transcripts July 2006
June 2020 0
Convenio Mahon
May 2020 3
Kaylyn Mahon
October 2019 5
June 2006
July 2020 15